I recently noted David Cameron's weak response to the worsening situation in Darfur, Sudan. His reliance on UN-led action amounts to poseur multilateralism. I can't believe that it wins the approval of DC's neocon supporters - Michael Gove, Ed Vaizey, George Osborne and the like. I certainly hope not.
Nicholas Kristof's latest despatch for the New York Times (from Nyala, Sudan - subscription required) shows that the situation is continuing to deteriorate. He writes:
"The international community has delegated security to the African Union, but its 7,000 troops can't even defend themselves, let alone protect civilians. One group of 18 peacekeepers was kidnapped last month, and then 20 soldiers sent to rescue them were kidnapped as well; four other soldiers and two contractors were killed in a separate incident. What will happen if the situation continues to deteriorate sharply and aid groups pull out? The U.N. has estimated that the death toll could then rise to 100,000 a month."
His article notes that many natives of the region are only allowed to live/subsist in exchange for protection money or as slave labour. 'When will the world act?', he asks:
"Will President Bush and other leaders discover some backbone if the killing spreads to Chad and the death toll reaches 500,000? One million? God forbid, two million? How much genocide is too much?"
He recommends this blog - Sleepless in Sudan - from "a dazed and confused aid worker in Sudan".
James please excuse my ignorance.Who or what is Godwin's Law?
Posted by: malcolm | December 05, 2005 at 11:10
Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
This means that someone will eventually try and end any argument by comparing something or someone to Hitler or the Nazis. Such comparions are usually invalid and are taken as surrendering the argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Posted by: James Hellyer | December 05, 2005 at 11:37
Thank you James.I'll remember that.
Posted by: malcolm | December 05, 2005 at 12:03
The Libyan Army have now completely derteoysd Ras Lanuf oilfield in anticipation of a large NATO special force arriving to re-secure it. This after shooting down a plane several days ago carrying 82nd Airborne arriving to secure facility unaware that the Libyan Army had killed the NATO-al Qaeda Rats guarding it. That allows the Libyan Army to withdraw to defend the town. This is a MASSIVE blow to the NATO oil pirates and will significantly affect Libyas oil production and the world markets.
Posted by: Auth | July 10, 2012 at 06:20
James is playing a bsnsieus man and he's doing bsnsieus (big bsnsieus) in China. Does China have some shameful foreign policies? Hell yeah? Does America have shameful foreign policies? Absolutely. The fact is this: most of the entire world has bought into the capitalist framework, and every single one of us contributes to it everyday whether we realize it or not. You be hardpressed to find a person who doesn't buy stuff from China or from other nations who have atrocius human rights records. Its the nature of a world that is based on consumerism.Sorry about the diatribe, but while Newble has a worthwhile cause, its silly for us to get on James when he's simply working within a structure in which important things get ignored, and most of the society (including James) are unaware or don't take action. Newble's petition isn't going to do a thing, because the system isn't going to change. I'm not directing this at you specifically, but it would be entirely hypocritical if we point the finger at James and not at ourselves. Our entire society is guilty of apathy in the Sudan case and many others.
Posted by: Chad | July 10, 2012 at 12:36
as much. Indeed, I don't see why research is reeriuqd to prove that saying nasty things about other people on the Internet isn't a good thing to do, especially if you are a public servant. As for your other point, no, there is no mission, which is pretty cleat from what I said. Again, it's no more than common sense to say that if my elected representative is a twat, I'd like to know about it. Twitter cock ups might be one way that happens, so fair enough. The point is that many politicians use twitter and other social media tools, and the majority have no incidents like this. Those politicians find it useful, and it provides another channel for interaction with their electorate. Your previous comment said we should stop encouraging them . Why? Because one or two behave in an idiotic way? Because the entire political class is unable to use the Internet as well as you or I?I'll continue to support local politicians to experiment with new technology, if it's ok with you. Many are interested, and enjoy it when they get stuck in, and realise the benefits while having mature appreciation of the risks. I don't see why the actions of one twerp in Birmingham should mean the end of online innovation in politics and democracy.
Posted by: Vraja | July 10, 2012 at 16:59
I don't understand the terms of doing it well'. Who's sense of doing it well' are we meiursang this against. It there some kind of system for meiursang effectiveness? Some polls or research available?Twitter strikes me as not being about transparency at all. It's as much a place to construct identity as any other media platform. But you make an interesting point in that it's better to have such lapses in judgement out in the open. So if that's the mission, to sell twitter as an engagement tool to politicians and then wait with relish for the moment they expose themselves, that sounds quite progressive and radical. Count me in.
Posted by: Mamusch | July 10, 2012 at 22:12
Yes and no. Do local politicians need soppurt to help them get the most of these tools, of course.But was it a lack of understanding of Twitter that got Cllr Compton into trouble here? I don't think so the problem here was him, and his appalling sense of humour.
Posted by: Marlo | July 11, 2012 at 05:20