Aid workers fear a new disaster as militia forces close in on a major Darfur city.
On a sunny April afternoon in 2006, thousands of people flocked to the National Mall in Washington, D.C., for a rally with celebrities, Olympic athletes, and rising political stars. Their cause: garner international support to halt a genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region.
“If we care, the world will care. If we act, then the world will follow,” Barack Obama, then the junior Illinois senator, told the crowd, speaking alongside future House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. That same week, then-Sen. Joe Biden introduced a bill in Congress calling on NATO to intervene to halt the genocide in Sudan. “We need to take action on both a military and diplomatic front to end the conflict,” he said.
Palestine seems like 60% of what I hear about in national news and on Lemmy. Ukraine, though, no so much. People can't use it to talk shit about Biden, after all.
The Kremlin is pumping social media full of anti-Biden propaganda, using Israel's genocide as a wedge to split the Democratic vote so they can get Trump elected again.
The honest answer is that I can only care about so many ongoing genocides at once before I go numb towards it. And I am more invested in the one happening two countries over. And the absurdly cynical one committed by a people who had plenty of genocides happen against them over the course of history.
@victorz - The "fast"/ big obvious ones are Darfur and Gaza, but there's also probably Oromia, slow genocide in West Papua, Western Sahara, Xinjiang, and I think Nagorny-Karabakh and Tigray could start up again at some point. There is obviously a genocidal component to the Tatmadaw's activities in Myanmar but right now they seem to be getting their asses kicked by the alliance which includes ethnic minority armies.
Then there are the more obscure genocides that are mostly only mentioned outside western and english-language news media, for example the ongoing slow genocide of the Baloch people in the Balochistan region.
In the US at least, our policy today doesn’t affect this genocide. Outside of Sudan, the important parties are Egypt, the UAE, and factions in Libya. Whereas in Palestine US missiles and funding to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars are directly involved, US policy today does not affect Sudan materially.
Still though, the UN and other international organs are documenting and attempting to aid. It’s just not disputed by far right fucks in our government.
Yeah probably. But what do we do? “Vote?” “Protest?” That’s just thoughts and prayers. We have very little control over our governments in the short term and no control of—or right to control—another country. What is there?
I mean, who is "they" in this case? NATO took an offensive action, potentially their only one in history, to disarm the Serbs and stop the genocidal side. It certainly wasn't ignored. Kosovo exists because of NATO involvement, and they've named streets and erected statues to that end even.
Some people put their politics ahead of genocide. They'll deny it's a genocide if it doesn't fit their agenda. They'll take an absolute stance if it does fit their agenda.
It's a tale as old as time. Chomsky is a very good example of this.
Sudan isn't popular because it's difficult to tie either side of the conflict to a specific political party. No one gets too many political points for speaking for/against.
Yeah, but gas prices are currently considered reasonable and tying those to politics is also a bit unfavorable now since everyone blamed the president when they were extra high but then it actually went back down and then no one knew what to do.
I was living in Hungary at that time, and of course ex-Yugoslavia being the southern neighbour, the news was non stop about it. However I have only learned of the genocide from watching Hotel Rwanda.
Prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, several conflicts were ongoing globally. Significant among them were:
Syrian Civil War - A devastating conflict since 2011 involving multiple factions and foreign interventions.
Yemeni Civil War - Starting in 2014, this war involves the Houthi rebels and the internationally recognized government, with significant Saudi and Iranian involvement.
Afghanistan Conflict - The long-standing conflict saw a significant shift with the Taliban's return to power in 2021 following the U.S. withdrawal.
Ethiopian Tigray War - A brutal conflict beginning in 2020 between the Ethiopian government and the Tigray People's Liberation Front.
Libyan Civil War - A multifaceted conflict ongoing since 2014 between various factions vying for control of the country.
These conflicts have caused significant humanitarian crises and geopolitical tensions, impacting millions of lives.
Although all of these had some kind of coverage in the news, the invasion of Ukraine completely shadowed all of these by a significant margin. Also take note that every single conflict listed above is from non-majority white countries fought by non-majority white combatants.
The genocide in Rwanda of course had some coverage but not remotely is provident as the genocide in Yugoslavia.
I'm not trying to be racial or anything like that. This is just the pattern that we see consistently in stuff like this. Military engagement in predominantly white countries has better coverage than in military engagements and predominantly non-white countries.