Kommentar

I Darfur gjentar det samme seg som i Rwanda: Mediene er helt passive. De rapporterer ikke. Stiller ikke politikerne og hjelpeorganisasjonen til veggs.

Akkurat som under det armenske folkemordet, Holocaust, Kamobodsja, Bosnia: folkemord er for brysomt. Det krever for mye av oss.

Jeg tror ærlig talt det er en hovedforklaring på at mediene er så tause. Det er ikke bare politikerne som blir stilt til ansvar hvis ordet «Genocid» blir brukt. Det blir også mediene.

Nicholas Kristof er en unik reporter, med hele verden som arbeidsfelt. Han bryr seg. Til tross for at han har sett mye fært, gjorde Darfur sterkt inntrykk:

In my years as a journalist, I thought I had seen a full kaleidoscope of horrors, from babies dying of malaria to Chinese troops shooting students to Indonesian mobs beheading people. But nothing prepared me for Darfur, where systematic murder, rape, and mutilation are taking place on a vast scale, based simply on the tribe of the victim. What I saw reminded me why people say that genocide is the worst evil of which human beings are capable.

On one of the first of my five visits to Darfur, I came across an oasis along the Chad border where several tens of thousands of people were sheltering under trees after being driven from their home villages by the Arab Janjaweed militia, which has been supported by the Sudan government in Khartoum. Under the first tree, I found a man who had been shot in the neck and the jaw; his brother, shot only in the foot, had carried him for forty-nine days to get to this oasis. Under the next tree was a widow whose parents had been killed and stuffed in the village well to poison the local water supply; then the Janjaweed had tracked down the rest of her family and killed her husband. Under the third tree was a four-year-old orphan girl carrying her one-year-old baby sister on her back; their parents had been killed. Under the fourth tree was a woman whose husband and children had been killed in front of her, and then she was gang-raped and left naked and mutilated in the desert.

Those were the people I met under just four adjacent trees. And in every direction, as far as I could see, were more trees and more victims—all with similar stories.

Norge burde føle et spesielt ansvar for Darfur, på grunn av våre dype involvering i forhandlingene i Sør-Sudan, mellom SPLA og Khartoum-regjeringen. Hilde Frafjord Johnson ytret bare generelle forhåpninger om at fredsavtalen også kunne bidra til en positiv utvikling i Darfur.

Nå skal Norge bidra til en FN-styrke som skal overvåke fredsavtalen. Likevel snakkes det ikke om Darfur. Oppmerksomheten rettes mot varmen soldatene utsettes for.

Tomm Kristiansen har hele Afrika som arbeidsfelt, og kan prioritere som han vil. Darfur var tema senest denne uken, men Kristiansen har mange agendaer, og ikke alle er like bra.

Norske medier ser ut til å elske naturkatastrofer og ulykker. Men de liker ikke politiske, styrte katastrofer.

FNs hovedforsamling vedtok i september ifjor FNs rett til å gripe inn i et lands indre anliggender, hvis de humanitære forholdene er for ille. Men så gikk de fem faste i Sikkerhetsrådet inn og vingeklippet fullmaktene til å gripe inn, sa Romeo Dallaire, øverstbefalende for FN-styrken i Rwanda under folkemordet, til BBCs Hardtalk idag.

Dette følger ikke norske medier med på, selv om det er her hunden ligger begravet. Når det ikke skjer noe i Darfur er det blant annet på grunn av slike forhandlinger, som skjer under normale forhold, dvs. ingen er interessert.

Men «genocid» er ikke dagligdags.

Darfur var i verdensnyhetene i 1984-1985, da en sultkatastrofe herjet. Men denne var et resultat av Khartoums likegyldighet overfor befolkningen. Utsulting er på sudanesisk et transitivt verb, slik «forsvinne» er det på spansk.

I kolonitiden behandlet heller ikke britene befolkningen i Darfur pent. De var redd for opprørsledere, og opprettet bare én skole for høvdingens sønner.

Da Sudan ble uavhengig i 1956, fortsatte politikken.

Khartoums etniske rensing av Darfur er rasistisk: både arabere og svarte er muslimer, men araberne ser ned på de svarte.

Voldtekt

Akkurat som i Bosnia er vold mot kvinner et våpen i krigen. Det rammer hele familien til den voldtatte kvinnen.

Indeed, the mass rapes in Darfur have been among the most effectiv means for the government to terrorize tribal populations, break their will, and driv them away. Rape is feared all the more in Darfur for two reasons. Most important, woman who has been raped is ruined; in some cases, she is evicted by her family an forced to build her own hut and live there on her own. And not only is the woma shamed for life, but so is her entire extended family. The second reason is that th people in the region practice an extreme form of female genital cutting, calle infibulation, in which a girl’s vagina is sewn shut until marriage. Thus when a unmarried girl is raped, the act leads to additional painful physical injuries; and the ris of HIV transmission increases

From the government’s point of view, rape is a successful method of control because it sows terror among the victimized population, and yet it initially attracted relatively little attention from foreign observers, because women are too ashamed to complain. As a result, mass rape has been a routine feature of village attacks in every part of Darfur, and it hasn’t yet gotten the attention it deserves.

Moreover, rape and killings are not just a one-time event when the Janjaweed attack and burn villages. Two million people have fled the villages, and most have taken refuge in shantytown camps on the edge of cities. The Janjaweed surround the camps and routinely attack people when they go outside to gather firewood or plant vegetables. In order to survive the victims must get firewood; but each time they do so they risk being raped or killed.

After a day last year of interviewing a series of women and girls who had been gang-raped outside Kalma camp, near Nyala, I asked the families why they were sending women to gather firewood, when women are more vulnerable to rape. The answer was simple. As one person explained to me: «When the men go out, they’re killed. The women are only raped.»

Volden er slik at det er vanskelig å fatte. Det skjer også noe med menn som oppfordres til å bruke sex som våpen. De forråes og blir best, slik som i Bosnia.

Sexual violence is also sometimes directed at men, with castrations not uncommon. At one roadblock, a mother named Mariam Ahmad was forced to watch as the Janjaweed emasculated her three-week-old son, who then died in her arms. But it is not clear that this is centrally directed policy.

Hvem er de skyldige?

Kristof roser Bush-administrasjonen fordi den la press på Khartoum, slik at fredsavtalen i sør ble en realitet. Kristne grupper i USA hadde i lengre tid fulgt med på konflikten, fordi den gikk ut over kristne i Sør-Sudan. Når det gjelder Darfur mannet Powell seg opp og kalte det som foregikk et folkemord. Men så var det stopp.

I en ny bok Kristof anmelder, får EU-landene enda dårligere karakter.

In its usual way of treating diplomatic matters, the European Union presented a spectacle of complete lack of resolve and coordination over the Sudan problem in general and the Darfur question in particular.

De som aktivt har beskyttet Khartoum, er Russland, og fremfor alt Kina, som får olje fra Sudan. For Kina betyr ikke menneskerettigheter noenting.

FN-administrasjonen/systemet selv ser ikke ut til å ha lært noe særlig etter Srebrenica og Rwanda, til tross for bindsterke rapporter.

The UN has been similarly ineffectual. At one level, UN agencies have been ver effective in providing humanitarian aid; at another, they have been wholly ineffectiv in challenging the genocide itself. That is partly because Sudan is protected on th Security Council by Russia and especially by China, a major importer of Sudanese oil China seems determined to underwrite some of the costs of the Darfur genocide just a it did the Cambodian genocide of the 1970s. But the UN’s 2_kommentar problem is that it i too insistent on being diplomatic. One of the heroes of Darfur is Mukesh Kapila, th former UN humanitarian coordinator for Sudan, who almost two years ago warned «The only difference between Rwanda and Darfur now are the numbers involved. But UN officials were disapproving of Kapila’s outspokenness, which they saw as breach of etiquette. And Kofi Annan, while trying to help Darfur, has been trapped i his innate politeness. He should be using his position to express outrage about the slaughter, but he seems incapable of the necessary degree of fury.

Det er en gjentakelse av Bosnia: helter på bakken, og feiginger og sabotører i New York.

Karakteristikken av Annan er treffende: han ser ut til å mangle det nødvendige raseri….

Akkurat som under Bosnia dukker det opp en rapportør som ikke greier å holde kjeft. I Darfur er det en afrikaner, Mukesh Kapila. Men slikt lærer ikke norske skolebarn: at FN kan ta feil, at det å forfekte sannheten kan være en ensom ting?

Det finnes noen andre helter der ute, kan Kristof fortelle: bl.a. en blogg som heter www.sleeplessinsudan.blogspot.com.

Ellers er det taust. Og Never Again! er blitt til One More Time.

Genocide in Slow Motion