BBC News Story: Warrant Issued for Sudan’s Leader
Civil Rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. once wrote that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.” How true this has been for the suffering people of Darfur! Yet, after six years of watching and documenting the ongoing genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, the international community has finally taken a small step further in condemning the conflict that has now brutally taken over 300,000 lives and has forced millions more into displacement camps. Last week the BBC reported that “The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued an arrest warrant for Sudan’s president on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur.” The judges’ spokesperson, Laurence Blairon, made the announcement saying that President Omar al-Bashir was under suspicion of being criminally responsible for “intentionally directing attacks against an important part of the civilian population of Darfur, Sudan, murdering, exterminating, raping, torturing, and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians and pillaging their property.”
This arrest warrant is still seen as significant because it is the first issued by the UN court against a sitting head of state. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, it is the “most dramatic development in the global move toward increased transnational justice since the end of the Cold War.” However, because the ICC is not a fully recognized world-policing force (the United States, for example, has been supportive but has yet to sign the court’s treaty), they are not in a position to enforce their arrest. Some have even described it as “toothless.”
Meanwhile, reaction to the verdict was swift and varied. While the United States and international human rights groups praised the move as a long-overdue call for justice, several Arab and African nations expressed concern that the warrant would only make the tension in Sudan worse. Indicted President Omar al-Bashir dismissed the charges as a plot of neo-colonialism and, in a retaliatory move, immediately expelled at least six foreign aid agencies from the country. This will be devastating for the already suffering population of Darfur.
So, once again, the world waits as Sudan’s president dismisses calls for his arrest, hoping neighboring countries will be brave (or embarrassed) enough to turn him in to The Hague’s ICC. The people of Darfur continue to languish while we wring our hands and more political posturing ensues. The Council on Foreign Relations writer Stephanie Hanson aptly notes that after the indictment, “Sudan holds its breath,” and that while some see this as a victory in a long wait for justice, “its ramifications for Sudan and its people will take months, if not years, to unfold.” And the words of Martin Luther King, Jr. continue to resound… Justice denied!
Principle Based Evaluation: When do global concerns trump national sovereignty? If we ignore genocide when we possess the tools to stop it, are we culpable? Difficult questions but ones in need of answers. What do you think?
To read the BBC's story Warrant Issued for Sudan’s Leader go to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/7923102.stm
For more information on the conflict in Sudan and the crisis in Darfur go to:
Crisis Guide for Darfur ~ http://www.cfr.org/publication/13129/
MacKenna Unger
said:
 |
What can we do? Justice really has been denied! Sudan has not ratified the ICC in the constitution, therefore is not subject to its decrees. Another important factor is that Sudan is an Islamic state that vehemently opposes America's unilateral action in the area, so no one is going to turn him in. It is a similar situation to Iraq in the sense that it is an authoritarian regime that is committing crimes against its people. I agree that justice has been denied in the fact that anyone who authorizes the killing of people should receive justice. However in reality i cannot see any viable source of action. What can we do?? |
Kayla Roberts
said:
 |
Government's Job? Those are very good points MacKenna. Is it really the United State's job to police the world? I honestly do not think that our military can be stretched across the world into every corner of persecution. It just isn't possible. On the other hand, the incredible lack of the value of life in countries like Sudan grieves my heart beyond words. I just do not think that America as a political force can really do much about it. However, I do believe that the Church as a whole should step in and do her job of discipling nations. I honestly do not know what that could look like today, but I know what Peter and James and John and all the other followers of Jesus did...they turned the world upside down. |
Jeremiah Surface
said:
 |
Can we keep Natioanl Sovereignty and yet uphold Global Laws? This situation goes far beyond the people of Darfur and Sudan, but will help define the way nations will deal with tyrants who do not care about human life in this postmodern world. So far America has found some of the answer through brute strength, but America is too thin to attempt more wars. It is impossible for the United States to be the policemen of the world. Yet is it ever possible to create an organization that can denounce another country, without unjustly taking away another countries rights? As an example, Sudan is currently apart of the United Nations and has agreed to the Universal Deceleration of Human Rights, which says "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance."(1) Sudan has been accused of allowing the Janjaweed, a national militia, kill based on religion and roughly 100 people are dying every day due to starvation and murders.(2) Clearly this goes against the UN's rules and regulations, but this has been disregarded until lately. The question I have is do we give the International Criminal Court or the United Nations the power to displace a nations leader? Although these atrocities are horrendous, how do we end them without giving power to an international organization who may use this power against America? If they can displace a leader from one country what stops them from displacing America's leaders if they deem us unstable and totalitarian? What is the solution to solving global problems and keeping national sovereignty? 1. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ 2. http://www.darfurscores.org/darfur |
