Rwanda, Sudan and “the G-word”

Ten years ago today, one of the great tragedies of the 20th century – the genocide in Rwanda – began. As politicans, journalists and individuals reflect on the events a decade ago, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the tragedy is compounded by the fact that the US, French and Belgian governments knew what was going on and failed to prevent it. The Guardian points to recently declassified papers that make it quite clear President Clinton knew what was going on, had decided not to intervene, and therefore elected to deflect attention from the situation.

Samantha Powers exposed this story earlier in her brilliant “A Problem From Hell”, a harrowing account of genocides and America’s (non) response to them throughout the 20th century. In a sub-chapter titled “The G-Word”, she talks about the US State Department’s “dance” around the word genocide. State Department officials knew that if they characterized the atrocities in Rwanda as genocide, they would be mandated, as signatories to the UN Genocide Convention, to intervene. And since they weren’t going to intervene in a potentially bloody conflict in a part of the world where the US had no strategic interests, they didn’t use the word.

That may be an interesting backdrop to consider State Department Deputy Spokesman Adam Ereli’s comments yesterday against. When asked “Do you think it’s important to find out whether what is happening there suits your technical description of genocide?”, Ereli responded as follows:

“I think we have a good sense of what’s going on there. I think we’ve called it a humanitarian crisis. But I — I really hesitate to use the “G-word” at this point, not really having considered it in that light.”

Kofi Annan isn’t afraid to use the “G-word”. Speaking to the UN Human Rights Commission, he said “The risk of genocide remains frighteningly real.” His coordinator in Sudan, Mukesh Kapila, told press that “an ethnic cleansing campaign” was taking place in Darfur that was “comparable in character, if not scale,” to the Rwandan genocide.

Powers is aware of the parallels as well. She wrote a brilliant op-ed in yesterday’s New York Times, which notes:

“Again, the United States and its allies are bystanders to slaughter, seemingly no more prepared to prevent genocide than they were a decade ago. The horrors in the Darfur region of Sudan are not “like” Rwanda, any more than those in Rwanda were “like” those ordered by Hitler.”

One of the points Powers makes in her book is that the US government has avoided intervening to prevent genocides because it received insufficient pressure from the general public – if citizens didn’t care about genocides taking place, why put American troops at risk? Given the administration’s ongoing entanglement in Iraq and Afghanistan, it seems unlikely that anyone in the White House is going to use the g-word any time soon. Indeed, while the President’s statement today condemned atrocities in Darfur, it blamed these atrocities on local militias, not on the Khartoum government, and made no threat stronger than an unwillingness to normalize diplomatic relations with Sudan until peace is achieved.

So how do you pressure the US government? Well, there’s at least two tools we have. One is media. Bloggers are discovering that we’re effective at amplifying stories – like the Trent Lott/Strom Thurmond story – that the mainstream media might otherwise ignore. Increasingly, reporters and editors are looking to the blogosphere to see what issues people are talking about. So blog about Darfur – let the mainstream media know that you’re paying attention to this issue, and that you want to hear more about it.

Second, if you’re a US citizen, call your senator or representative. (If any of my non-US readers wants to offer similar instructions for other nations, please do so in the comments section.) Call their main number in Washington, identify yourself as a constituent, and ask to speak to someone on the Senator/Congressperson’s foreign policy staff. Ask her whether the Senator/Representative has a position on the situation in Darfur. Don’t be surprised (or angry) if the answer is “no”, or “tell me more about the situation.” If you get the latter response, take the opportunity to send her an email. Here’s the email I sent earlier today to one of Senator Kennedy’s staffers – feel free to steal as much of it as you’d like: