Wednesday, February 28, 2007

ICC is naming the mass murders in Darfur

The ICC is finally beginning to name names for a conflict that started on the 26th of February 2003, when the Darfur Liberation Front (DLF) claimed they attacked the headquarters of Jebel Marra District. On March 25th rebels took the town of Tine along the Chadian border around the time the Second Sudanese Civil War was ending. The rebels experienced heavy losses from air raids. On April 25th 2003, the Sudan Liberation Army and its joint partner attacked. This conflict is mainly between the Darfur region of western Sudan, mainly between the Janjaweed, and the agricultural non-Baggara people. The Darfur Peace Agreement was signed in May of 2006, but fighting still continues. Recently in January, President Al-Bashir and Bill Richardson have agreed to a cease-fire. The Save Darfur claims that they are going to try and improve humanitarian aid in Darfur. The World Health Organization has estimated over 50,000 deaths since the beginning, then—recently—the British Parliamentary Report has estimated over 300,000 deaths. Now the ICC is trying to bring some sense of justice into this abomination of human behavior.

2 comments:

Malika said...

The Darfur genocide is interesting and heartbreaking in many ways, at least to me.
1. In the case of Rwanda, the word genocide was never used. The situation in Rwanda was described as "acts of genocide." In the case of Darfur, atleast no one is shying away from admitting that it is genocide.
2. I think the Darfur conflict emodies something true, yet heartrbeaking. It has raged on for four years. I have often thought about genocides such as the ones in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and now Darfur, and cannot help but feel let down. I put a lot of faith in the political system, and the fact that such situations continue to arise and persist is rather disturbing.

zain said...

The worst thing about Darfur genocide is the nonchalance displayed by the International community. For heaven's sake, more than 200,000 people were killed and no one could take the initiative to stop the genocide. The excuse: sovereignty of states. I ask where the concept of sovereignty was, when the borders of Iraq were infiltrated. What happens to the 'noble' idea of sovereignty when the U.S. President openly claims that he would go into Pakistani territory without the consent of Pakistani authorities to 'hunt' Talibans. Sovereignty is an excuse, a very lame one, which we hear whenever a woman is raped in Kashmir, whenever a child is killed in Palestine. Yes, sovereignty is the blindfold that covered the eyes of international community, and made them blind to genocides in Rawanda and Bosnia. God knows how many are Darfurs would it need to awaken the dead conscience of the international community.