Oil and Darfur
The root of the conflict in Darfur appears to be fueled by the thirst for oil. Racism is certainly a factor, but oil is apparently a major economic factor for the longevity and intensity of the conflict, even if a speculative one.
On the Save Darfur Coalition page about this conflict, there is nothing about the role of oil.
Why does the Coalition not care to emphasize this issue? Do they believe this is not a factor as others claim it is? The coalition notes that the attacks are coming from “government-backed militias.� But what about the issue of a corporate backed government? What of the lure for the profits for those controlling the oil reserves? Though some feel it is important to note that much of the oil is speculative, that is not apparently whether there is a significant amount of oil, but exactly how much.
Has the coalition forgotten the economic root of the brutality in Sierra Leone? The root cause of diamonds had to be addressed for any guarantee of long-term stability.
Why is Darfur any different?
6 comments
I recently read somewhere (Atlantic?) that an oft overlooked aspect of the Darfur crisis is the change in climate (not coming out for or against global warming). Because of drought like conditions the Nomads, who are Arab, were being fenced out of lands by the Farmers, the Black Africans - mostly of the Fur tribe. Thus the Arabs started fighting the Blacks over land and grazing rights. I thought it was an interesting point (if it is true).
Yep, that was in the Atlantic.
You can follow this even a bit further- the article (written about a year and a half ago) cites our reliance on oil. But back in the mid-80’s (I think it was ‘87 but I don’t feel like checking right now…) Pres Clinton added Sudan to the list of countries we couldn’t do business with. It would be very difficult (and foolish) for any American oil interest to even try- although they’re salivating over the prospect.
So who’s buying all of Sudan’s oil and financing the genocide in Darfur? India, Russia, a bunch of other countries out that way. But mostly China. Most favored nation trading status China. Veto power in the UN China. Just discovered private automobiles and need gas to fuel them China.
The problem appears to be rather complicated. Rallies are politically correct and very nice for the PR, but what are the practical solutions? I’m still waiting to hear a single one.
Judi,
No doubt that even if we do get off oil, we and others still suffer have the problem of others who don’t, and China is quickly emerging as a worst offender. I mean, they are really bad.
But I think we are better positioned to be a force for good (and international survival) if we ourselves are off oil.
You’re absolutely right, of course. Our reliance on petroleum leaves us as morally in the gutter as any other oil-guzzling nation. To cut our dependence would leave us on higher ground, but our hands would still be tied- in every practical sense.
The question that should be asked but so rarely is, is why China and the rest of the key world commerce players with whom we freely and happily trade are being given a pass as accomplices in Sudan. The US could switch over to wind power next month and the world’s oil providers would find willing buyers in a heartbeat and yes, the genocide in Darfur would merrily continue according to schedule.
The question then becomes do we do something, or don’t we. To actually effect change would mean going in reeeal deep and taking on the part of the world that is not only allowing, but truly benefiting from African genocide. Or do we get ourselves off oil (a great idea in any scenario) and watch the show with clean hands? Y’know, I don’t like either option.
Judi,
The U.S. has given China a pass for all sorts of nastiness since Nixon opened that door. China is never properly called out on her misdeeds by the U.S. Never. Every president fell into the same trap, at least for the first bulk of his regime. Left, Right, it didn’t matter. Even the big anti-Communist, Reagan, had the audacity to call China a “so-called” communist country despite their authoritarianism. The U.S. relationship with China has always been paramount for all successive presidents. And her power and appetites grow exponentially.
We do not have a chance to reign in China’s outrageous behaviors until we curb our own. But China must be convinced to behave more responsibly. Among other misdeeds, they are taking over Africa.
It’s egregious.
Leave a Comment