Breaking it Down
Here's the Danielle's breakdown and remix of a little bit of Farrah and a little bit of John Monroe rapping about Sudan.
In the first place, the definitional quandary surrounding the atrocities in Darfur requires and provides occasion for revisiting the conditions that produced the official UN distinction between "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" in the first place. In other words, we must consider the historical rupture and singularity of the Holocaust, the need for a timely and global response, and the state of international relations and international governance before WW2. Before WW2 any country in the world could do what ever it wanted to its people. Yes, they could kill people in their country if they did not discriminate and there was no law preventing it. The reason is the issue of internal sovereignty. After WW2 the principle of Prohibition of Genocide was added. There are only 3 principles commonly agreed on: no genocide, slavery or piracy. The rest of international laws are formed under general customs and treaties. That is why there are human rights organizations that have treaties against the kinds of things happening in Sudan. The problem is if the country does not sign the treaty, unless it becomes a custom they are not bound by the rules. According to international law the case in Sudan is considered ethnic cleansing not genocide. That is what the teacher said strictly looking at the law. Also since it is groups that are attacking are not supposed to be affiliated with the government it is just militias attacking people. It is almost more of a civil war but only one side has weapons and can fight.
Ok, I took Farrah's comprehension of the Prohibition of Genocide, and followed it a little more in-depth. I first looked at Britannica's definitions of both Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide. Here's what I found:
Genocide- the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race. The term, derived from the Greek genos (“race,” “tribe,” or “nation”) and the Latin cide (“killing”), was coined by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-born jurist who served as an adviser to the U.S. Department of War during World War II.
Ethnic Cleansing- the attempt to create ethnically homogeneous geographic areas through the deportation or forcible displacement of persons belonging to particular ethnic groups. Ethnic cleansing sometimes involves the removal of all physical vestiges of the targeted group through the destruction of monuments, cemeteries, and houses of worship.
So then I just grabbed what the UN had defined "genocide" because I guess I'm not really understanding why the UN is dragging their feet.
Article Two of the convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
• Killing members of the group
• Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
• Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
• Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
• Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
• The convention also imposes a general duty on states that are signatories to "prevent and to punish" genocide.
Upon my investigation, it has been made clear that as a general rule of thumb, the prohibition of genocide is an Ius Cogens. In laymen's terms:
A principle of international law which cannot be set aside by agreement or acquiescence. So, in modern use, as laid down by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), "a peremptory norm of general international law." Example of jus cogens are slavery and piracy. (Oxford English Dictionary)
The United States and United Kingdom are pushing for U.N. sanctions against Sudan, and that Sudan has banned the media from reporting on war crimes in Darfur.
"The move is likely to increase an already existing skepticism in the international community about the seriousness of Khartoum to bring Darfur war criminals to justice," but perhaps this also creates an opening to talk about what to do next, and how to direct attention to the prevention of further atrocities. Indeed, the response to historical genocides has perhaps been overburdened with "punishment," a half-concept that completes another half-concept equally embedded in human relations, "sin."
The reporters in the U.S. have generally been saying "OK" but the U.N. has been saying "no" to see if additional peacekeeping troops will work. I also noticed that the U.S. has placed sanctions in China.
Let JM fill your cup with some brutal facts in closing:
-The genocide in Darfur is now in its fourth year.
-Close to 500,000 people have been slaughtered.
-2.5-million people have been displaced from their homes.
-4-million now depend on the outside world for survival.
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.