Posted on 02/23/2005 3:45:18 AM PST by Pharmboy
Photos don't normally appear on this page. But it's time for all of us to look squarely at the victims of our indifference.
These are just four photos in a secret archive of thousands of photos and reports that document the genocide under way in Darfur. The materials were gathered by African Union monitors, who are just about the only people able to travel widely in that part of Sudan.
This African Union archive is classified, but it was shared with me by someone who believes that Americans will be stirred if they can see the consequences of their complacency.
The photo at the upper left was taken in the village of Hamada on Jan. 15, right after a Sudanese government-backed militia, the janjaweed, attacked it and killed 107 people. One of them was this little boy. I'm not showing the photo of his older brother, about 5 years old, who lay beside him because the brother had been beaten so badly that nothing was left of his face. And alongside the two boys was the corpse of their mother.
The photo to the right shows the corpse of a man with an injured leg who was apparently unable to run away when the janjaweed militia attacked.
At the lower left is a man who fled barefoot and almost made it to this bush before he was shot dead.
Last is the skeleton of a man or woman whose wrists are still bound. The attackers pulled the person's clothes down to the knees, presumably so the victim could be sexually abused before being killed. If the victim was a man, he was probably castrated; if a woman, she was probably raped.
There are thousands more of these photos. Many of them show attacks on children and are too horrific for a newspaper.
One wrenching photo in the archive shows the manacled hands of a teenager from the girls' school in Suleia who was burned alive. It's been common for the Sudanese militias to gang-rape teenage girls and then mutilate or kill them.
Another photo shows the body of a young girl, perhaps 10 years old, staring up from the ground where she was killed. Still another shows a man who was castrated and shot in the head.
This archive, including scores of reports by the monitors on the scene, underscores that this slaughter is waged by and with the support of the Sudanese government as it tries to clear the area of non-Arabs. Many of the photos show men in Sudanese Army uniforms pillaging and burning African villages. I hope the African Union will open its archive to demonstrate publicly just what is going on in Darfur.
The archive also includes an extraordinary document seized from a janjaweed official that apparently outlines genocidal policies. Dated last August, the document calls for the "execution of all directives from the president of the republic" and is directed to regional commanders and security officials.
"Change the demography of Darfur and make it void of African tribes," the document urges. It encourages "killing, burning villages and farms, terrorizing people, confiscating property from members of African tribes and forcing them from Darfur."
It's worth being skeptical of any document because forgeries are possible. But the African Union believes this document to be authentic. I also consulted a variety of experts on Sudan and shared it with some of them, and the consensus was that it appears to be real.
Certainly there's no doubt about the slaughter, although the numbers are fuzzy. A figure of 70,000 is sometimes stated as an estimated death toll, but that is simply a U.N. estimate for the deaths in one seven-month period from nonviolent causes. It's hard to know the total mortality over two years of genocide, partly because the Sudanese government is blocking a U.N. team from going to Darfur and making such an estimate. But independent estimates exceed 220,000 - and the number is rising by about 10,000 per month.
So what can stop this genocide? At one level the answer is technical: sanctions against Sudan, a no-fly zone, a freeze of Sudanese officials' assets, prosecution of the killers by the International Criminal Court, a team effort by African and Arab countries to pressure Sudan, and an international force of African troops with financing and logistical support from the West.
But that's the narrow answer. What will really stop this genocide is indignation. Senator Paul Simon, who died in 2003, said after the Rwandan genocide, "If every member of the House and Senate had received 100 letters from people back home saying we have to do something about Rwanda, when the crisis was first developing, then I think the response would have been different."
The same is true this time. Web sites like www.darfurgenocide.org and www.savedarfur.org are trying to galvanize Americans, but the response has been pathetic.
I'm sorry for inflicting these horrific photos on you. But the real obscenity isn't in printing pictures of dead babies - it's in our passivity, which allows these people to be slaughtered.
During past genocides against Armenians, Jews and Cambodians, it was possible to claim that we didn't fully know what was going on. This time, President Bush, Congress and the European Parliament have already declared genocide to be under way. And we have photos.
This time, we have no excuse.
E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
Like that ever stopped much of anything. Congress spewed eloquent indignation against Saddam for over a decade. He still killed tens of thousands of people. Sometimes it takes military action. And then the same people will criticize you for it.
Which means they are worthless.
Mr. President, stop holding hands with Jacques and take care of business in Darfur. You will be judged as harshly as Bill Clinton if Darfur becomes Rhowanda.
And this guy, Kristoff, is one of those "same people"
Perhaps Mr. Kristoff should be making sure these photos are printed in European newspapers, and African newspapers, and brought before the U.N. Unless these African nations are ready to reform (fat chance) and take responsibility (fat chance), U.S. aid merely enriches the corrupt there and prolongs the abuse.
Colin Powell was admonished for calling this genocide. If the former colonial powers in Europe can't step up and call this for what it really is, how is America suppose to intercede and make it all better?
"Sometimes it takes military action. And then the same people will criticize you for it.
Which means they are worthless."
DB, I'm afraid you are right. I appreciate Nicholas Kristoff's efforts here, but I don't think one can blame the "complacency" of the American public for Darfur. For example, are we really going to haul people off to the ICC, an organization we don't even recognize?
If Bush moved against the Sudanese in any effective way, you are right, Kristoff and co. would start yelling "Imperialism, War Mongering, etc."
It is too bad that the left will not recognize Islamofacist terrorism for what it is, in Africa and elsewhere. It is too bad that Bush and co. won't call it by its name. But I don't see ANY of this as being due to inaction or uncaring on the part of the American public.
Why must we be the only coutry to be outraged and respond? The UN certainly isn't upset about it. This should be a UN job to promote action to stop this. Kofi et al are too busy protecting the malfeasants involved in sex scandals and oil skimming.
We have our hands full. We have already lost american lives trying to free two countrys from killer regimes. And all we get is slammed from the rest of the world.
Somebody needs to do something....yes, but are we the only people who can? How about those countries who have not committed troops to Iraq?
________________________________________
Exactly right, and it may be too late already.
""Americans will be stirred if they can see the consequences of their complacency.""
How is this our fault? Why are we always blamed?
No he won't be judged harshly by me. Darfur already IS Rowanda and I still won't say our sons should risk our lives there. We are not all powerful. We don't have the world of time and money. We must operate on the principle of economy (both in the use of force and of treasure). Iraq is just about as far as I am willing to go. And we are not really done in the middle east. There are plenty of other countries with money and military forces. They can do this job. We are busy fixing the problem that they ignored.
Damn right. We are not responsible for the actions of others. They are responsible for their own sins. France uses military power in Africa (Ivory Coast) without UN authorization and the world says NOTHING. We operate in our own backyard (e.g. Grenada) and are condemned. Cuba sent mercenary soldiers to Angola, and Cuba is held up as an example by the same people who want us to get involved in this tar baby. What is really desired is to distract us from our primary task - self preservation. Mullahs with nukes might just decide to incinerate New York. That makes it our business. Sudan is a very bad situation, hows about the EU take this one on. We're busy right now.
Technicolor motion pictures of a perfectly formed infant in the birthing process.... a process which is interrupted so the infant's brains can be vacuumed out and the skull crushed..... doesn't stop partial birth abortion profitiers, advocates and apologists here in the "cultured " USA.
The ACLU and our justice system defend, applaud and approve.
You're right...up to a point. The horific photos of baby murder are not distributed widely enough.
Thanks for clarifying. I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER going into Iraq for ourselves. We hope that our self-interest is enlightened, but we intend to be the judge of that. The US should make no excuses for itself where its own survival is the issue. Why Iraq is a survival issue is a long and complicated discussion, but I think in the end justified. There are MANY nasty places in the world that could stand a "cop" but that is not our job (thankfully). Certainly lets not side with murderous dictators, but lets look out for number one first.
I guess his opinion didn't count, because he is a notorious Christian.
If Americans are stirred into doing something by these photographs the New York Times will be the first to accuse us of trying to police the world and starting a new war without a coalition of cowards from Europe. Let the UN hadle it HA. As if they could.
It doesn't pass the "Global Test." (runs for the door...)
What is the US suppose to do? Shall we send in the military and destroy the government or, use the military to support the government and kill the people just like the government is doing now?
Muslims are killing Christians and taking their land in this civil war who's side shall we take and who do we kill because 10 years of politicans "discussing" this iss must come to an end.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.