Last week I wrote about the first part of the following quote. In the piece, I discussed reasons we went to War in Iraq, why we are still there, so on and so forth. It came to my attention that it was really long and so with Part II today, I will attempt to keep it considerably shorter. Now let’s address the 2nd sentence of the comment below.
I guess my problem is I can’t honestly justify attacking a country for its oil when there are so many worse countries and regimes around the world. The situation in Darfur is much worse than it ever was in Iraq, and we don’t do something about it why?
There are two ways to address this sentence about Darfur and that is to discuss why we don’t get involved in Darfur due to interests (or lack thereof) and also to address the utter hypocricy by those who use this as a counter argument for Iraq.
First, let’s answer the question. The hard and cold truth is we aren’t going into Sudan militarily because we have no interests there and because Sudan poses no threat to the outside world. If you think that justifying war in Iraq was difficult, wait until you have to justify war in Sudan. The reality, as cold and sad as it may be, is that Iraq and the Middle-East is of great interest and value to us and to the civilized world. First and foremost they provide the world’s energy needs. That is the only reason we have any relationship of a significant value with that part of the world. If they didn’t have oil or natural gas we would treat and view them no differently than we do Mali or Chad.
Today, admitting the fact that oil is a national interest and adding that it should be draws the gasp of millions people. But why shouldn’t it be, we need it, the world needs it, and the middle-east has it. But, people say, we are exploiting those people and making their lives worse. B.S., they and their governments are what determines whether or not their lives suck; how that money is used and spent is entirely up to them. I don’t see the UAEers or Kuwaitis complaining. But I digress.
I completely understand the desire some have for more action in Darfur. I have a great fascination for Africa, it is my favorite region to study. I wish so much that we had the means and justification to use force to end genocide and ethnic cleansing. I remember studying the Rwanda genocide and then watching Hotel Rwanda and just being so disgusted with the actions of the western World and the inaction of the UN. As I pondered those things, I realized the catch-22 the United States is in. On the one hand, we are the world’s most powerful and prosperous nation. Our people enjoy immense freedom and partake of democracy, don’t we have an obligation to help and defend those who can’t help and defend themselves? I wish the answer were ‘yes’ and in a perfect world, we would do so. But unfortunately, we just can’t do it. First, if we did start getting involved militarily, where does it end? Are we going to attack Sudan, then Uganda, Nigeria, Somalia, Eritrea, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, etc? We would be involved everywhere and undoubtedly, both sides of the conflict would wish we would go home.
Second, we have limited resources, just because we have the largest military in the world, doesn’t mean we have the ability to fight multiple wars on multiple fronts. Third, the entire world would be outraged and we would have no support. We can’t force democracy through the barrell of a gun, no matter how much we may want to. The sad reality is that there is only so much we have the ability to do and only so much we can legally do.
This brings me to the hypocricy of those that make comments like this. There are two hypocricies herein. First, they imply the argument that that we should leave Iraq to go stop a genocide in Africa, they try to come across as so compassionate and caring about human rights, yet they they either fail to realize or blatantly ignore the fact that if we leave Iraq too soon, we would inevitably have a human rights crisis created in Iraq. All of these people who say we need to get out of Iraq also claim to care about freedom and human life, yet are ok with us pulling out to make a political point and indicting Bush, all the while creating a major humanitarian crisis. Fixing one humanitarian crisis while creating another one does not sound like a productive move to me.
The second hypocricy is that people who make comments like this want us to think they would actually support military action in Sudan. This is utterly ridiculous. These people will yell and scream for us to leave Iraq and say that we should be helping in Sudan, if we actually did it and sent our military in there, they would call us murderers, empirialists, etc. Straight hypocricy.
Finally, as I said earlier I have great affinity for Africa. What is occurring in Sudan and other parts of that continent break my heart and is very sad. The U.S. does need to do more, but we also need to do more smartly. Throwing money at it won’t help. I personally believe that this should be a EU and UN matter. It was European countries who colonized that continent and they have a significant amount of blame on their shoulders. The UN needs to allow their peacekeeping forces to use force when necessary, just minor force. Peacekeepers are worthless if they can’t do anything to keep the peace. We also need to put much more pressure on the African Union. Most of the responsibility falls on the backs of those people and countries who surround Sudan.