Courrupt
07-12-2006, 03:06
Genocide is "The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group" (dictionary.com, Page 1). In Darfur, the Sudanese government has set up an Arab militia called the Janjaweed. The Janjaweed have committed several war crimes such as vandalism, assault, murder, and rape for the alleged cause of fighting the rebels. Thus, the conflict and violence in Darfur is in fact not genocide since it has not reached the level of systematic extermination of a whole or part of a specific group of people.
Kofi Annan in his statement that “I cannot call the killing a genocide even though there have been massive violations of international humanitarian law”
Peter Quayle, an expert of International Crime Tribune for the Former Yugoslavia, who declares, “Darfurians are targeted because of the possibility they shelter and sustain rebels. Outside the conflict zone they are unharmed”
Alex De Waal, a London Observer reporter, quoted:
“We will see that the story is not as simple as the conventional rendering in the news, which depicts a conflict between ‘Arabs’ and ‘Africans.’ The Zaghawa…are certainly indigenous, black and African: they share distant origins with the Berbers of Morocco and other ancient Saharan peoples. But the name of the ‘Bedeyat’, the Zaghawa’s close kin, should alert us to their true origins: pluralize in the more traditional manner and we have ‘Bedeyiin’ or Bedouins. Similarly, the Zaghawa’s adversaries in this war, the Darfurian Arabs, are ‘Arabs’ in the ancient sense of ‘Bedouin,’ meaning desert nomad…Darfurian Arabs, too, are indigenous, black, and African. In fact there are no discernible racial or religious differences between the two: all have lived there for centuries” (Alex de Wall, Page 4).
Yet, the US Senate, Congress, and Executive Branch believe there is a genocide in Darfur.
Whats yur opinion?
Kofi Annan in his statement that “I cannot call the killing a genocide even though there have been massive violations of international humanitarian law”
Peter Quayle, an expert of International Crime Tribune for the Former Yugoslavia, who declares, “Darfurians are targeted because of the possibility they shelter and sustain rebels. Outside the conflict zone they are unharmed”
Alex De Waal, a London Observer reporter, quoted:
“We will see that the story is not as simple as the conventional rendering in the news, which depicts a conflict between ‘Arabs’ and ‘Africans.’ The Zaghawa…are certainly indigenous, black and African: they share distant origins with the Berbers of Morocco and other ancient Saharan peoples. But the name of the ‘Bedeyat’, the Zaghawa’s close kin, should alert us to their true origins: pluralize in the more traditional manner and we have ‘Bedeyiin’ or Bedouins. Similarly, the Zaghawa’s adversaries in this war, the Darfurian Arabs, are ‘Arabs’ in the ancient sense of ‘Bedouin,’ meaning desert nomad…Darfurian Arabs, too, are indigenous, black, and African. In fact there are no discernible racial or religious differences between the two: all have lived there for centuries” (Alex de Wall, Page 4).
Yet, the US Senate, Congress, and Executive Branch believe there is a genocide in Darfur.
Whats yur opinion?