Sudan and Neo-Colonialism in Africa

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

Responding to Anarchy and the Somalian Pirate Attacks

After reading about the latest in the recent string of pirate attacks in the Indian Ocean I found myself brooding over these events and trying to understand them on a different level. The most recent pirate attack involved the hijacking of an oil-tanker holding over 2 million barrels of oil that is estimated to be worth about $100 million US.

With that being said is it at all surprising the reports of the US taking military action against Somali pirates began surfacing this afternoon? After all, oil is the currency of the Bush administration.

For just a second however, let’s take a look at this from a different perspective. While in no way justifying piracy, the fact is that Somalia is a country that has been emblematic for anarchy and was last year named number 3 on a list of the top failed states in the world. With no defined governing body and lawlessness abiding throughout the country, who is there to condemn these actions? In a place where there are so many have-nots and no authority to turn to, is it any surprise that groups of people band together and take what it is they need?

Of course these pirates are not the have-nots of the Somali society and they are both well-organized and equipped. At the same time however they are not necessarily the blood-thiristy, eye-patched buccaneers the Western world might be familiar with. In fact, these pirates originated as a response to illegal commercial fisherman that had mined the Somali waters of a previously rich tuna-stock. In an article that appeared in The New York Times in September after a Ukranian ship loaded with arms was hijacked, the pirates are quoted as having no idea that ship had any arms on board and saying that “Killing is not in our plans...We only want money so we can protect ourselves from hunger.” Now, I am not one to believe a pirate word for word and I doubt very highly that these pirates would go hungry if they had not hijacked this ship; however their disposition is hardly that of a group of people looking for a fight. The crews aboard hijacked ships are kept safe and even treated to fine cuisine purchased off credit from local merchants who know that more than fair reimbursements will arrive when a ransom is negotiated for the ship’s safe return. What’s more is that these pirates have been rumoured to be pumping money in the economy of local Somali villages and even funding schools.

Now let’s put this back in perspective. Pirates are thieves. They have moved beyond a reactionary group against illegal fisherman to a multimillion dollar criminal organization that puts every ship passing through these waters at risk. They affect the international economy and with this attack against the MV Sirius Star they have attacked well outside Somali waters. It has reached a point where attacks are almost daily with 11 attacks to date this month alone. Clearly something has to be done to restore aquatic security in the Gulf of Aden and the surrounding area.

An Indian warship yesterday destroyed a large pirate-ship and, although no official numbers have arrived, likely killed pirates in the process. Can this be justified?
Can these pirates, who have not been proven to be involved in piracy with violent intentions, be legitimately shot at and killed? In my opinion this is merely seeking to conquer lawlessness with lawlessness. The sinking of ships and killing of pirates will not solve the causal problem behind piracy. These pirates have made up their own rules in the lack of any others and until a stable government is in place in Somalia other people will continue to follow this example.

As an anecdote I would like to mention an ironic twist involving one of the hijackings by Somali pirates. The Ukrainian ship that was hijacked on Sept. 25 was carrying a load of tanks and other arms to Kenya which were likely going to be sold illegally to Sudan for use in the ongoing war in the Darfur region through which over 250,000 people have died. In light of this, despite the high profile pirates have gained in the news recently, one has to ask oneself if they are truly the greatest threat to humanity. Perhaps their prominence in the news is due to the threat they pose against the sustenance of Western dominance through the disruption of commerce. When seen this way it is a little bit clearer why the US is all of the sudden taking things more seriously just two days after 2 million barrels of oil became involved.

Will Grassby