The Toleration of Genocide in Africa: From Rwanda to Darfur

Abstract

Since 2003, the region of Darfur has repeatedly been in the headlines around the world, although from the end of 2008 onwards, its presence in the global public arena has noticeably declined. Civil war atrocities, mass flight, mass rape and genocide lead to demands for humanitarian aid, diplomatic conflict regulation and international military intervention, while at the same time they are frequently met with only silence on the part of the media and politicians, and with helplessness on the part of non-governmental and governmental organisations. The double moral standards of western politics is frequently the subject of criticism, with claims that the life of an African is less highly valued than that of a European or white person. A limited genocide in the Balkans, it is claimed, leads to far more decisive action than the far more extensive genocide in Rwanda, Darfur or elsewhere in Africa. At the same time, western military or even only civilian intervention in the conflict is repeatedly accused of being an expression of neo-colonialist and neo-imperialist arrogance and claims to power. This leads to disputes between supporters of different forms of international intervention, including by Europe and Germany, and advocates of allowing conflicts to unfold autonomously within and between the African states.

While only a small number of people demanded international military intervention during the Biafra War of 1967–1970, which took place during the period of the east–west conflict, and which claimed the lives of between two and three million war and genocide victims, the civil wars and genocides in Somalia (from 1991) and in particular in Rwanda in 1994 with around 800,000 deaths brought about a serious crisis in the credibility of the United Nations as an organisation responsible for securing world peace and protecting human rights. It gave rise to an extension of the instruments placed at the disposal of the UN for the (robust) preservation and consolidation of peace. However, at a secondary level, the African Union also lays claim to its responsibility for securing regional peace (Krohn, Vereinte Nationen, 4:167–172, 2008). Since July 2007, a hybrid UN-AU mission (UNAMID) has been operating, under great difficulties, in Darfur.

For years, the neighbouring states of Chad and the Central African Republic were also drawn into the Darfur conflict in Sudan due to cross-border refugee movements and fighting. For this reason alone, the UN Security Council could no longer remain inactive. However, to date, it has failed to find any effective, consensual concept for action. Selective humanism among the population as well as among the élite, together with conflicting interests between the great powers, make it more difficult for the global public and the community of states to act with conviction in the Darfur conflict.