On a day where a warrant was issued out of The International Criminal Court in The Hague for Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir, a term was used that is becoming more and more prevalent. In response to the warrant that detailed war crimes and crimes against humanity during the ongoing conflict in the Darfur region, a statement from the Sudanese government read as follows:“This decision is exactly what we have been expecting from the court, which was created to target Sudan and to be part of the new mechanism of neo-colonialism,”
They also dismissed the warrant saying it would “not be worth the ink it is written on” and that the ICC could “eat” it (Source: BBC).
The question that is raised in all this is exactly what role the Western world should and is even able to play in Sudan. Unfortunatly similar to the propaganda used by the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe, al-Bashir is playing up the past destruction of European colonialism to reflect the Western world, instead of himself, as the enemy. The term neo-colonialism essentially means: “They screwed us before and they’ll do it again.”
And who are we to say otherwise? At least that is what people in Sudan would say to Westerners. The truth is that there is nothing any Westerner, including myself, can say to combat this type of propaganda. In fact, anything we do say, no matter how well reasoned it is, is like blowing air into a fire to big to be blown out; it will only fuel the fire of anti-Europeanism.
This propaganda is so strong in fact that I have to take a step back and really evaluate the situation. Of course as an outsider I am biased. Even with my mind open as wide as it will go my criticism of another country in another part of the world will be conceived as biased and judgmental. This is the problem that members of the industrialized world face as we try and help the poorer nations of the world. But why?
The sad reality of the situation is that their propaganda, although false and misleading within the context of the current situation in the Darfur region and the atrocities committed by the al-Bahir regime, is grounded in truth. The Sudanese have every reason to mistrust the people that came to convert and colonize them; people that are just as foreign in their concept of the world as the geographically “othered” Africa is to us.
The warrant issued today is not useless. If nothing else it is a statement; a statement that however biased the Western world’s opinions might be; al-Bashir is a criminal. Whether or not this ruling is accepted in Sudan is inconsequential. Undoubtedly the question will be (and to some degree has already been) raised whether or not the ICC has the right to determine who is or is not a criminal in countries such as Sudan. Obviously rulings such as these must be monitored closely. It is always dangerous when a court is given too much power and is too liberal in handing out punishments. In this case however, the warrant is clearly justified, if not too light-handed as it does not accuse al-Bashir of genocide, although all signs have pointed to ethnic-cleansing on non-arab Sudanese in the Darfur region for quite some time.
With regards to “neo-colonialism” it is still up for debate whether this concept is wholly invented or if it exists. It is difficult for anyone reading this in a Western country to try and take an African perspective on this, but I would suggest that most of our conceptions of Africa involve some sort of idea of Western involvement in areas like the Darfur region of Sudan. Whether in a humanitarian sense or a more militaristic sense, the participation of the industrialized nations in the affairs of underdeveloped countries has become associated with terms like duty and obligation.
However altruistic these notions might be we have to remember that charity is often bundled together with derogation. In other words, the involvement of the Western world in African affairs can be seen as meddling or in a “we know what’s best for you” sense. This does not mean we should not be helping countries like Sudan. It just means that we should be aware that not all Africans are like Omar al-Bashir and that these people should have our respect and be treated equally to any Westerner. The Sudanese, as well as all Africans, have a point of view that should be heard and respected for its differences as well its similarities to ours. If it is not than we are doing nothing but fulfilling the neo-colonialist propaganda that keeps men like al-Bashir in power and fuels the genocide his propaganda conceals.
Will Grassby
2 comments:
Another good article, Will, and it's a problem that we in the West have been grappling with since the end of the second world war. From Korea and Vietnam to the present day examples of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as less obvious situations such as the one you highlight, where we are not physically at war.
You're absolutely right that our cultural imperialism (or neo-colonialism) is often seen as meddling, and we can lose sight of the events from the in this case African perspective. We have to remember that even something as basic as the political boundaries in Africa were very much drawn by Europeans as they retracted from the continent after WWII, after stripping many of the resources.
The only way we can ever resolve such conflicts, and essentially the problems associated with underdeveloped countries, is with a lead-by-example, made-in-Africa solution. Being a communications graduate, something I am a strong proponent of as a step in the right direction (by no means a 'solution') is Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D). The idea that through information and communication technologies (ICTs) can help foster 'development'. Institutions such as the Grameen Bank and microfinance, or the One Laptop Per Child Association, are beginning to provide necessary inroads in underdeveloped nations.
Russ
Excellent comments Russ on a good article. You blog journalists continue to impress with your choice of highly significant and relevant topics and excellent perspectives.
It would seem that the subsequent removal of aid organizations from Sudan by the so called 'leader' Omar al-Bashir well illustrates reasons why outsiders tend to offer opinions which might sometimes be considered attempts at neo-colonialism.
Some of the opinions might be be considered disgust for selfish individuals who think little of their responsibilities for their people. Others might simply be expressing an honest desire for social justice and accountability among political leaders - wherever they happen to be. Perhaps Canadians might want to evaluate their own leaders on these issues when selecting a party and candidate to represent them in the next election.
Please keep it up!
GHG
Post a Comment