Home › Blogs › redjenny's blog

Darfur and Iraq: The Politics of Naming

Thu, 2007-04-05 10:08 — redjenny

Despite the similarities between the conflicts in Iraq and Darfur, "the violence in the two places is named differently. In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What difference does it make?"

Perhaps if White westerners are perpetrators, we must name it "insurgency/counterinsurgency", but if the "bad guys" are Arabs, we name it "genocide" - this makes it a morality play, a simple story of good v evil.

As compared to the near blackout about Iraqi suffering in the American media, "newspaper writing on Darfur has sketched a pornography of violence... This voyeuristic approach accompanies a moralistic discourse whose effect is both to obscure the politics of the violence and position the reader as a virtuous, not just a concerned observer."

This also hides the devastation that could arise from military intervention in Darfur: "Why should an intervention in Darfur not turn out to be a trigger that escalates rather than reduces the level of violence as intervention in Iraq has done? Why might it not create the actual possibility of genocide, not just rhetorically but in reality?"

Terrible crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and genocide arise and are worsened in the context of war. War is the problem, or at least the catalyst. It is not the answer. "Strengthening those on both sides who stand for a political settlement to the civil war is the only realistic approach. Solidarity, not intervention, is what will bring peace to Darfur."

Read the full version of this post at Red Jenny's blog or The article by Mahmood Mamdani

Average rating
(0 votes)

Comments

Post new comment

Please solve the math problem above and type in the result. e.g. for 1+1, type 2.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.