Armchair Pundits

A Response (Of Sorts)

Yesterday, the Star Tribune reprinted NY Times columnist, Nicholas Kristof's piece from June 5th entitled, A Policy Of Rape. The article rightly asserts how little attention the genocide in Darfur, Sudan has received from the Bush administration, citing a 142 day lapse between the President's mentioning of Darfur in public speeches.

Recounting, Mr. Kristof's article, Miranda's Musings, posits:

"Apparently, the Holocaust and Rwanda (among other atrocities) have taught us nothing. I would like one good reason why genocide isn't important enough to be discussed by the President of the United States."

Justifiably outraged with these writers, other fine minds have articulated the case for action in Sudan and are contemplating what might bring about such an intervention.

The White House's official stance regarding Darfur, Sudan is that a genocide is in fact occurring. The date on the President's statement is September 9th, 2004, and today the horrors of rape, mutilation, & genocide continue; hence, the great frustration with inactivity. Recently, President Bush reiterated his position regarding this in a meeting with South African President Mbeki.

While critiscm for a lack of intervention is warranted, it is far to easy to fault the United States and the Bush Administration for this deficiency. This is troubling on several accounts. First, the scope of this outrage is far to limited. Miranda would like "one good reason" --I would like somewhere between 191 and 194. I write this because the United Nations has 191 members and there are approximately 194 independant countries in the world depending on how you count; therefore, I would like to know why the world as a whole doesn't seem to give a damn about what is going on in the Sudan. The lessons of the Holocaust, Rwanda, etc. are not the United State's lessons alone. These are lessons that belong to the world and should be of specific eminence to those nations within whose borders such atrocitites occured. Targeting one's outrage at America alone seems to prove a rather contentious point in this day and age. That is, it seems to underscore the notion that the United States, is to be (or should be), the greatest force for moral good amongst the nations of the world.

This leads me to my second point. Such a notion of America's specialness in regard to such a calling or standard, cannot be ambivalent. Either we will seek to be a force for moral good or we will kow tow to Brussels (or whomever we're courting) in favor of what is popular world opinion. If we fail to respond to tyranny, then are we not abdicating the high calling our enduring peace, prosperity and potential affords? Of course such arguments, when concerning Iraq, have been met with scorn, as I'm sure they will be again, regarding this, but what is to be the guide for intervention?

We have essentially exposed a values problem. Are we to be the world's police? Conservative and leftist idealouges alike, argue the veracity of such a position, for it is inherently predicated on values. And whose values then are to be our guide? Secularists? Faith groups? Isolationists? When one side or the other doesn't like each other's values, they invent emoticon labels like "neo-con/right wing or leftist agendas." So, we are essentially engaged in, as Prager would say, the "other great war of our time, the values war." It would seem that any attempt at fulfilling such a calling--to not be ambivalent to tyranny & oppression, to the extermination of our fellow humankind--places us on a path that is not easily turned from once initiated. This is a path that polarizes people as the times reflect. Is it possible to legislate a consistent,values-based policy that defines a uniform commitment to action? It ought to be, but in the political milieu of our times, it seems unlikely. And that is troubling, because the toll in human suffering is enormous.

During my pre-Pundits blogging last summer, I referenced an excoriating article about the Sudan by another NY Times columnist, David Brooks. I dug it out of the deep recesses of my computer, as it seems particularly timely, in lieu of this discussion.

posted by Grisby @ 2:52 PM