Remembering genocide, ignoring genocide
By Kai Stinchcombe, The Stanford Daily
January 4, 2005 — The U.S. and several allies are pushing for a special Holocaust memorial session of the U.N. on Jan. 24, three days before the 60th anniversary of Auschwitz’s liberation by Soviet troops in 1945. But as members of the international community honor the Holocaust’s memory, they are ignoring its lesson.
A round of hollow, hypocritical never-againning this January would be par for the course in our dysfunctional international system. In this scenario, the United States reminds its European allies that they didn’t mind U.S. military power so much when America saved Europe from fascism, and says international terrorism is the new global menace. France talks about international law and soft power, making excuses for never doing anything helpful for the world. Everyone goes home patting themselves on the back.
The scenario is gross, but much more so while genocide is literally ongoing in the Darfur region of western Sudan. Though it would trivialize the Holocaust to compare it to anything going on in the world today, the best way to memorialize its victims is through the sort of self-critical moral reflection that could have prevented the slaughter of 12 million Jews, Slavs, Poles, Roma, handicapped people, and gays and lesbians 60 years ago. As the Holocaust taught us, genocide is a threat to our collective humanity, and always requires action.
Sudan is not going to stop the genocide on its own. Flush with oil revenues and eagerly armed by greedy weapons dealers and see-no-evil politicians, the government is intent on driving its black minority off their land. The only hope for Darfur is a U.N. Security Council resolution establishing a no-fly zone over Southern and Western Sudan, beefing up the African Union force already there with more international troops, and establishing a mandatory and enforceable arms embargo on Sudan.
As U.N. peacekeeping operations go, it would be a relatively straightforward mission. A number of countries could contribute to on-the-ground forces, and militias on horseback are not difficult targets for modern militaries. With western financial and logistical support, the African Union could provide most of the troops.
Enforcement of the no-fly zone would be key to protecting the peacekeepers and disrupting helicopter and gunship attacks and “barrel bombs,” loads of shrapnel dropped from transport planes.
Though some modernization has been paid for by oil revenues, Sudan’s air forces are in disrepair and lack serious combat capabilities. It would take U.S. or other Western air power, but losses could be avoided. In order to avoid excessive patrolling, enforcement of the no-fly zone by retaliation against aircraft on the ground would have to be authorized by the U.N.
Yet with P5 Security Council members deeply invested in Sudanese oil and arms sales, there has been little response so far. Britain and the United States would have to push hard to get such a resolution through the Security Council. After messing up so badly in Iraq, Bush is not an ideal messenger to call for international intervention. But this time, he has justice on his side, and may be able to use the occasion of Holocaust memorials to shame Europe into taking action.
What can we do to help? Step one is convincing Bush. It’s very easy to write a letter to the White House. And I think Bush might actually listen. Politically, it’s a no-brainer: Liberals love stopping genocide, evangelicals love it when Bush saves lives in Africa, neo-imperialists love using the military, capitalists would love stability in oil-rich parts of Sudan, intellectuals love working with the U.N., and Black activists would be happy to see Africa on the agenda for once. Bush envisions himself as a transformative, visionary president, answerable to God and history, and this would fit well within that framework.
For the resolution to actually pass the U.N., step two is making Darfur a moral issue that the international community can’t say no to. If it’s Bush the cowboy unilateralist proposing yet another intervention, it would be very easy for the France and Russia to dismiss. Congress has already passed a unanimous resolution on Darfur, but another one, strongly and vociferously backed by key Democrats, would strengthen Bush’s hand internationally.
The key phrase in Holocaust memorials is “never again.” Unfortunately, up to and including the Rwanda genocide, the international community has struck out. Kosovo was the first time we did the right thing. Let’s make sure the world knows it was a change of heart, rather than a change of skin color, that got us involved.
It’s time to take action in Darfur.
Kai Stinchcombe is a graduate student in political science and president of the Stanford Democrats. E-mail him at [email protected].