Explore
Gaia Soulmates
 Advertising keeps Gaia free! Interested in sponsoring us?

No Fly Zone in Darfur?

Posted on Aug 10th, 2007 by Cinc : Mr. President Cinc
 

I was asked to write a letter to my senator in favor of establishing a No Fly Zone in Darfur [see http://www.lifenets.net/dev/?q=node/15&refid=45 ]

I don't support such a petition, which might seem strange since I'm running for US president as a Buddhist (which at least suggests compassion). Indulge me, as I try to make my feelings clear.

I had seen the movie Hotel Rwanda three times at the theater (I don't watch DVDs; I actually pay for a ticket and sit in a movie house). It would have been easy at that time to point out that even a token intervention by the western powers would have prevented the Rwandan genocide. But...I am not one to let my buttons be pushed quite so easily. I waited, digested what I saw, did a little research, and came up with:


  • I believe Bill Clinton lied when he said he didn't know about the scale of the genocide as it was unfolding. [I hope to go down in history as the first US president who didn't lie and actually kept in mind the good of humanity at large.]
  • I believe Bill Clinton withheld US intervention simply because our interests were not significant in that country, and he didn't want to risk another Somalia-like disaster (remember Black Hawk Down?).
  • I remember hearing a song at the end of Hotel Rwanda, with this interesting line: "Why not a United States of Africa?" [Well, why not?]
  • I remember being proud of seeing Africans themselves counterattacking against the genocide, when the Tutsi tribe's Rwandan Patriotic Front entered Rwanda and started kicking some ass.


We have several issues to consider here, and I hope no one opts for the simplest, knee-jerk solutions. It would be easy for us to feel good about ourselves by sending in US or NATO or UN forces (which of course would be mostly US forces anyway, right?). Hurray for the benevolent White Man, rushing to the aid of the hapless Black Man. All the Dem/Pubs could agree with that sentiment, especially if we don't end up suffering any casualties.

But let's think for a moment. For one thing, the perpetrators and the victims in the Darfur conflict are Muslims. I would like to offer a challenge to Muslims worldwide to arrive at a religious solution to this crisis. Perhaps non-Sudanese Muslims might decide to withhold their interventions and opinions, deciding instead that this should be regarded as an internal affair most properly handled by the Sudanese themselves. That itself would be a novel approach in this day and age: To decide to let each country decide its own internal affairs.

However, I suggest that there are profound theological issues at stake, which might rival in profundity those arguments for or against suicide bombing. I am sorry to say, those issues won't be resolved in time to be of help in Darfur. But, sooner or later, those issues will have to be resolved.

I believe that the African Union should step up to the plate, if it decides that to be appropriate. If there is to be a United States of Africa, sooner or later the AU will have to make some defining gesture. Some might argue that the AU is too financially strapped to make this commitment. If so, I guess it wouldn't be the first time "lack of money" was given as an excuse for inaction. Another old-standard used by organizations is: "Such-and-such is low on our list of priorities." But maybe the AU can rise above those old excuses.

Perhaps the African Union could appeal to Blacks in the United States for financial assistance. Maybe Colin Powell could be persuaded to lead and recruit a contingent of African American soldiers (inactive duty or retired, like himself) to serve in Dafur under AU command. Personally, I'd like to see American Blacks making more noise on this issue.

The AU could even press the issue of Muslim fighting Muslims as it addresses its member countries, many of which themselves are Muslim. In this and other ways, the AU has to become more creative and attack its issues with greater force, and not merely wait for outside assistance.

There are a lot of "reasons" to justify inaction on any number of issues. Maybe what's really important for us, as Americans, is to decide how we can best be of assistance. In the case of Darfur, my personal opinion is that we resist the temptation to be the gallant White knights charging to the rescue. The real issue that has to be addressed is the profound extent that US corporations and government agents undermine the entire African continent's forward progress by means of corrupting its officials. As your next president, I will address this issue front and center.

If we can stop corrupting African politicians, and stop our ever-expanding attempts at influence-peddling, we will do far more good than sending a few helicopter gunships to Darfur.

Steven Searle for U.S. President in 2008

I am the only candidate with a contract: "You wouldn't sell your house without a contract; why give your vote away?"

http://www.BestPartyAvailable.org/

bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

http://bpa-cinc.zaadz.com/blog

Access_public Access: Public 4 Comments Print views (544)  
katrinamae : I am here now with you.
3 days later
katrinamae said

Bold words, and I understand where you stand by reading them. I'm not sure if I get the logic behind having more American blacks making noise about Darfur. They're American: many don't identify with Africans except in the same way everybody else does - as humans.  Again, having Muslims “take care of it” seems like a similar issue - if it's only practical to help people in our “category,” we run the risk of remaining separated factions for longer, unable to form one cohesive human unit. That may sound idealsitic, but it is the truth (it may not happen in my lifetime, but what is time?). Besides, us asking Muslims to unite right now in the current state would be quite audacious, don't you think?
I completely agree that it is important for us to have faith in others' capabilities to rise up on their own, but there are unbelievable, unimaginable things happening to people every second in Africa, and maybe  a No-Fly Zone would just give those people much-needed hope to unite against their corrupt (understatement of the century) government. It would be a helping hand - not crutches to walk on.
You could be on to something here, though: the implications of a No-Fly Zone could be that the government gets pissed at us for doing it and takes it out on the people, inflaming the situation. That is my major concern, but I have already signed the petition, and run that risk. I feel as though I made that decision by imagining myself in their shoes - would I want help? I am not a weak person, a person who victimizes myself - I take responsibility for everything I create in my life. That said, I still feel strongly that I would want somebody to step in and do something until we could help ourselves.
I also agree on influence-peddling, a great way to put it. It puts us on a pedestal, with no leg beneath it, because no one else sees it as justified or that the U.S. way is always the right way. I don't see Darfur as us pushing influence, though. We are not shoving our ideals down their throat - we are genuinely trying to restore human rights and dignity back to innocent people, and that would be one of the most genuine acts of kindness, without an agenda, that our government has ever backed.

Cinc : Mr. President
3 days later
Cinc said

 

The first thing I want to say, Katrina, is “thanks for taking the time to write.” Your piece was thoughtful and passionate, and deserves the same kind of response from me. So here goes:


You're right. There is a lot I didn't say. I hope I may be forgiven, though, especially in light of trying to post at least one blog per week on Zaadz. So far, I've posted 143 pieces, which would equal a 300-page book if they were all downloaded. I've posted on a large number of topics, all with a common purpose: To convince people that they should support my independent candidacy for US president in 2008.


They're Americans


You wrote, “They're American: many don't identify with Africans except in the same way everybody else does - as humans.” I have to disagree with “they're Americans.” I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that most American Blacks don't think of themselves as “Americans.” To put a finer point on it, they might think of themselves as “Black Americans” or as second-class citizens who are trying to pull themselves up the economic ladder. Or they might identify with a variety of subgroups: For instance, many identify with being Muslim or even Black Muslim, or as members of their fundamentalist Baptist church, or (for the young) they might identify with being part of a rap culture.


Blacks living in America have found greater degrees of acceptance and more opportunities for advancement than in our more sordid past. But…and this is something they never forget, not for one moment…they - are - different. They are the “other.” They did not come to this continent to be able to own property; they came here as property.


I believe everybody should more fully appreciate their origins, their roots (to use an overworked word). It is impossible for anyone (or group) to move forward psychologically unless they've looked back by peering into their past. You are right when you say “many don't identify with Africans,” but what I'm saying is: They should. It is only to the advantage of the oppressor that he tells the oppressed that it's best to “forget all that and move on.” To be sure, the oppressor doesn't change his attitude about the oppressed due to the mere passage of time. He might no longer gaze upon the Black as a “jungle bunny from a Tarzan movie.” But neither does he look upon the Black as truly equal to himself.


The Need for Black America's Support


I did a quick search on google and found my suspicions to be correct: The support among American blacks for their brothers and sisters in Darfur is paltry. See the article titled “”Blacks MIA at Darfur Rally” - printed in Washington Informer, posted May 8, 2006. Here's the link:


http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=5e49e981e6cff5b76d36c11ec2473147


One is not fully human or fully conscious as a human being unless he feels sympathy for those who are most like him; for those from his “homeland.” Of course, we may move past that to become citizens of the world who embrace everybody equally. But unless we first come to know and embrace our own, we cannot be in a position to embrace everybody by reason of our shared humanity alone.


About Muslims

You wrote, “if it's only practical to help people in our “category,” we run the risk of remaining separated factions.” It's not being “practical” that crossed my mind; it's more a matter of being a necessary first step. One of the most basic tenets of the Quran is for Muslims (as a duty to God) to build the ideal community on earth. That implies a degree of unity which is not present in the Islamic world at present. And Muslims are painfully aware of this disunity within their own ranks.


So for me to ask “Muslims to unite right now in the current state,” isn't really audacious. It's just a gentle reminder of something they're already well aware of. Also, there are gentle and diplomatic ways to remind others of their duty. I get called on by non-Buddhists for my misbehaviors and sins of omission. But because my non-Buddhist friends are kind and compassionate in their words (and not “in my face”), I can more easily accept their critiques.


Also, Muslims would consider the source. Someone like me asking for their help, would score better than someone with perhaps a hidden agenda asking them (someone, for instance, like George Bush). You might be interested in my blog in which I propose, as President, to visit Iran and offer an Islamic prayer to a gathered crowd. The prayer is “Allahu akbar!” [God is great/greater/greatest], which even I as a Buddhist could offer. See http://bpa-cinc.zaadz.com/blog/2006/10/u_s_president_visits_iran


Possible Dangers, and Obligations of Past Sinners

I didn't address this in my blog, but there might be a real danger in a US-sponsored No Fly Zone. I mean, once we have a military presence in a country, it could be too easy to just decide to impose our own agenda. The temptation might be too great to create behind-the-scenes pressure on the Khartoum government simply because Sudan has oil.


I am curious as to why the European powers aren't stepping up to the plate, since they are primarily responsible (as former colonizers) for the mess in Africa. In Rwanda, it was the Belgians; in the Sudan, the British. Yet, I didn't see Belgium taking even token action to prevent the Rwandan genocide. And I don't hear anything from the Brits about they country taking initiative on its own to create a No Fly Zone.


Then there's the matter of Egypt stepping up to the plate. Karmically speaking, they owe the Sudanese a great deal due to having exploited them as a colony in the 1800s. And the fact that Egypt is Islamic makes me wonder out loud: “Why is it they can't put their money where their faith is?” And…it's not even their money! Since 1975, the US has been giving Egypt about $3 billion a year in mostly military assistance. So, some might argue, perhaps Egypt should use this out of gratitude to the US - and also by reason of being a good neighbor (Egypt, of course, is directly north of Sudan), good Muslims, and good humanitarians.


There are some sins that have to be atoned for directly by the sinners themselves. And if they don't, well then Africans will have to ask themselves someday why they themselves didn't do more. Only after such soul-searching, regret, and mourning, can real growth and consciousness occur in a people. Unfortunately (and this will seem cold to say), in order to have regrets later, there have to be massive deaths now. Yes, they are preventable deaths, but preventing those deaths would in fact cause death of another kind to occur: The death that occurs from an entire continent not being allowed to evolve due to our well-intentioned yet paternalistic intervention.


I hope this answers some of your concerns.


Sincerely,


Steve Searle

Ben : Alchemist
3 days later
Ben said

    Something that most people don't actually see is the relationship that Blacks in America and Africans have…which is basically non-existent.  It is very well known within the black community that Africans don't see us as brothers and sisters just because of our skin color, they see us as Americans. This makes us just as American as any White, Asian, or Latin American in their eyes. No matter how many times you call us African-American, it won't make us relate to Africans more simply because we're not African. And as far as connecting to our “Roots” goes, what you think blacks “should” do is almost impossible seeing as how there are barely enough records available to help those whose ancestors were slaves connect to any african family they might still have. It's also hard to find an “African” American who is of pure African ancestry at all. If we're going to connect and help people who we have descended from then lets help the Africans, Native Americans (who definately need it), Latinos, Asians, and Caucasians. It's just not that easy.
     Appealing to Egyptians or any other type of Muslim is going to prove beyond difficult as well. Even if they see that America, or America's leader, respects them. There are still differences that separate them that would make them say “it's not our problem”.  Would a sunni be quick to help a shiite in Iraq?  I don't think so, so why would the sunni and shiite in the Islamic Middle east help a Sufi (the Islamic Sect in Darfur) in Africa? It's too tough to get specific sects to help Darfur because they identify with them because in this world you either have one of 2 views: We're all the same, or we're all different. Either we all go in together or we get whoever we can, but asking a specific group is just going to spark controversy.
    I think you're more likely to rally support and force change through media control. If people are watching it everyday during dinner then it's always fresh in their minds. There are millions of Americans who are so invested in Iraq because it's always in front of them, but Darfur doesn't exist to them because they don't see it. If theres a way to direct attention to that disaster, then more Americans will come to the conclusion that something should be done.  No-fly zones? it's a gamble, but it could inspire change. In all honesty I think that we're going to have a lot of trouble getting anybody to worry about  Darfur in America or anywhere else, everybody seems to be a little too worried about their own problems.
However you are a step ahead of most candidates of any party…because you care about Darfur and most of them don't.

4 days later
cosmicbdog said

Dear friends… I came to this blog and found it interesting. Congratulations on running for President sir. I wish you all the success.

I really liked what Katrina had to say, “They're American: many don't identify with Africans except in the same way everybody else does - as humans.”


Lets help humans… and if that means helping the people of dafur because your humanitarian sphere of influence is able to stretch that far, than fantastic!

There's many matters… and many more matters than any one mind can possibly imagine to have an understanding of which an American government should probably not be trying to focus on when home is shaky territory.

I'm under a very strong discipline that before a cell can be of benefit to the cell beside it, it firstly needs to come from centeredness and stabilty… without that… isn't the cell just adding more chaos in the mix? 

No-fly zone? Lets learn from the Drug prohibition disaster of attempting to control or regulate something that cannot be controlled. Laws that cannot be enforced simply generate disrespect from those enforcing the laws, and those who must abide by them will rebel and make effort to ensure those forces don't continue.

You have to be a Gaia member to post comments.
Login or Join now!