A thought came to me after watching the full two hour version of 'Ghosts of Rwanda' that it seems like there was a clear mismatch between what the individuals on the ground wanted to do and what the 'powers that be' were willing to do. Although I completely understand and feel that something should have been done to stop the killings happening in Rwanda, the fact that the U.S. and other powerful nations did not send in troops to intervene makes sense once one looks at the bigger context in which the 'genocide' was occurring. In class we talked about the situation in Sudan, and Kofi Annan, near the end of the documentary, says that he does not believe that the international community has the political will to stop another Rwanda. This statement makes perfect sense today when one looks at the current state in Darfur.
However, this leads to a bigger question, that does the international community have enough political will to engage in development of many of the African nations? I mean if history tells us anything, it is that the world turns away from Africa in the face of inhumane killings such as the ones going on in Sudan and the ones that occurred in Rwanda. So how can we expect that the world will start to look into African nations now and help them develop when in reality, the world didn't even help when the people of some of these nations were being slaughtered.
Some might answer that this is why the answer lies in NGOs, however although NGOs play and will continue to play a large role in development, some of these nations (Sudan and Somalia) need not just NGOs but actual governments coming in and stabilizing the country so that NGOs can operate. My question is that whether these actual governments will ever come in to stabilize these countries or will they continue to prove that the promise that U.N. made to the world after the Holocaust of "Never Again" is a false one?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've been thinking a lot along the same lines. On Thursday, I studied more of what happened in Mogadishu (the clip in the documentary was startling - I wanted to learn more) and watched Black Hawk Down.
ReplyDeleteAs Shannon said on Wednesday, Somalia was the first time that troops were dispatched to help with a humanitarian mission. The thinking was, I assume, that with the American military present, aid could finally start working. Such was not the case.
My point is that intervening governments, with or without all the political will in the world, are neither omniscient nor omnipotent.
Great comment Shashank! I have been reading a book with essays from several people about these kinds of issues. One of the authors stated that military intervention is never the way to go. She made a case for diplomacy and other means. Although I don't agree with her completely, it helped me understand why it wasn't good to send in military intervention. Like you, my heart says yes but my head tells me to think it over.
ReplyDeleteYou made the comment on how we turn our backs to Africa and we may not have the political will to engage in development in Africa. I wonder if this will remain the same from a national stance until Africa somehow becomes a higher priority. Maybe things will never change until we (the US) have a national interest in African nations.