Darfur, the economics of oppression
By Anne Bartlett
Nov 15, 2006 — Economy and brutality are all too frequently intertwined. From the hyperinflation of 1920’s Germany and the subsequent rise of the Nazi party through to dynamics of colonialism, the struggle for economic power is almost always writ large across the relationship between the oppressors and the oppressed.
Darfur is no exception. Today in Darfur, balance of power lies not with the people of Darfur nor with the millions of people worldwide who are appalled at genocidal master plan being enacted by National Congress Party (NCP). It lies not with SPLM and the Southerners who, god knows, have suffered enough themselves. It lies not, apparently, with the international community despite its endless posturing in the face unremitting carnage. It lies instead with Omar Al-Bashir and his geopolitical allies in the business of genocide.
And a business it is. A disgusting world of trade-offs for arms, oil deals, a burgeoning security sector, extravagant business trips, lush well-appointed offices, large houses, private fleets of vehicles, banquets of food and so on. All paid for on the back of murder, brutality and the resource deprivation of its citizens, many of whom are no more than a stone’s throw away.
If Al Bashir’s role in this conflict is transparent, then China’s is rather less so. Publicly playing a diplomatic game of “non-interference” or “lets sit on the fence”, it has abstained on the 1706 vote on the grounds that it cannot interfere in Sudanese affairs. But behind the scenes, it has quietly coordinated its position with the tyrants and torturers of the Sudanese government, lobbying to prevent anything happening which might be against NCP interests. All this, while it continues to expand its neo-colonial economic reach cross Africa, exerting more influence than any diplomatic words could ever do. Resource deficient in terms of energy products, China now has its fingers in oil markets across the continent – Angola, Chad, Congo, Libya the Central African Republic, Sudan and Nigeria to name but a few. And where it doesn’t have control within the oil industry, China is handing out loans, driving up dependence and leading to concern once again over spiraling levels of debt.
China, besides buying two-thirds of Sudan’s oil exports, is also the major investor and supplier of arms. These transactions are not without consequence. As Roger Winter has recently pointed out, oil from Abeyi, extracted under contract by the Chinese and others is fuelling the war in Darfur and is undermining the increasingly fragile Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The sale of arms is also being used to exterminate Sudanese civilians.
In light of these developments, it should come as no surprise that the recent Africa–China summit in Bejing was chosen as the location for Al-Bashir to reiterate his refusal of a UN peacekeeping force. Holding on to the coat-tails of his new found friend, he used well rehearsed arguments about re-colonization and threats to sovereignty by the UN, (which of course sidestepped his neo-colonial relations with China and the fact that thousands of UN personnel are already in Sudan for other purposes).
Yet if history can tell us of the economics of oppression, it also contains some clues about how to challenge it. In 1921, Mohandas K. Gandhi launched the Homespun campaign in India. The idea was that members of his movement would spin and weave their own cloth (khadi), thereby restoring dignity to the unemployed and hitting hard at the imports of Lancashire textiles. It was both a symbolic and actual campaign to highlight colonial oppression and India’s claim for independence. It was also an exercise in claim-making and most importantly an attempt to shift the balance of power from those at the apex of the colonial machinery back to the common man.
Over recent years little has moved the powers “that be” over the plight of the people of Darfur. The AU, in the words of its soldiers “is useless”, due to a deficit of resources and an impoverished mandate. The U.N. and the West, despite its rhetoric, has produced little, if any change for the beleaguered people of the region.
While the techniques used by Gandhi would be difficult to implement in the contemporary world, the lessons are plain: “We must be the change we wish to see”. For those countries such as China who support and facilitate genocide, we must persuade them to take a different course. We must persuade them that support for countries such as Sudan who commit violence against innocent men, women and children is not acceptable. We must steer countries away from abuse and brutality – however disguised – towards a path that recognizes human rights.
The power to make this change lies in each and every one of us, every time we decide which products we wish to buy; every time we decide which stores to patronize. There is a huge network of citizens of conscience who now support the people of Darfur, across many countries, across many markets. And if we cannot appeal to the human rights sensibilities of the countries concerned, we must speak a language that they understand: the modern-day language of the market.
* Anne Bartlett is an academic who lives in the USA. She can
be contacted at [email protected]