Never Again

After the Second World War, the world was stunned by the atrocities of the Holocaust and vowed, “Never again.” After Rwanda in 1994, the world was stunned with the slaughter of a million lives and vowed, “Never again.” And now, 15 years later, how does the world respond to a genocide that has claimed the lives of 300,000 people and displaced more than 2.5 million in Darfur? While the International Criminal Court has indicted the president of Sudan, Omar El-Bashir, the Arab League has rushed to support him. This Arab reaction is shamefully self-interested and dangerously lays the ground open not for “never again” but instead for “once more.”

The first question to ask is why Arab countries would take such a stance in the first place. Their position comes down to the issue of self-preservation. Let’s face it—it’s not as if the Arab countries are completely democratic. If Bashir is prosecuted, other Arab leaders fear that they might also be charged with criminal acts against their people. It’s true that, during the Arab summit on Mar. 30, the Arab League demanded that Israeli officials be put on trial for atrocities they committed against the people in Palestine and Lebanon. But this act still does not excuse its exoneration of Bashir.

The Arab League defends its stance by alleging that the ICC is politicized and that indicting Bashir is a cheap shot at destabilizing Sudan and grabbing its resources, particularly oil. Such a claim, free of substantial evidence to back it, seems to be taken from a James Bond movie and appears to be little more than conspiracy theory. Nor is it consistent with the Arab League’s recent decisions—when Lebanon demanded an international investigation and tribunal for the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri earlier last month, Arab leaders welcomed the beginning of the tribunal at Lahay and the transfer of jurisdiction from the Lebanese justice department to the international judges. No mention was made of the ICC’s political ambitions then.

All this hypocrisy casts the Arab world in a very negative light. But, while the Arab reaction was perhaps expected, the nonchalance with which the great Western powers have dealt with the matter is at least as disturbing, given their official opposition to Bashir’s acts. Rather than boycotting the Arab summit, Secretary General Ban Ki Moon appeared and delivered only a brief denouncement of Bashir regarding his expulsion of 13 aid groups from the country. Indeed, the Western response has on the whole been lacking. Reaction from world leaders was limited to calls for the Sudanese government to respect the ruling of the ICC, so that Bashir was left to roam freely among the different Arab nations. He even fulfilled his Muslim pilgrimage requirement once the Arab summit was over.

Although it would be foolish for the great powers to intervene militarily in Sudan, they can and should take steps in order to make sure that a criminal does not remain head of state. They can start by placing economic sanctions on Sudan, boycotting its merchandise, and placing an arms embargo on the country. At a later stage, they can sever diplomatic ties with Sudan or call for a G8 summit to discuss further steps. They should not consider a military operation, mainly because it will lead to a very costly long-term commitment. But they should increase the presence of the UN peace-keeping forces in Darfur to ensure that a second genocide does not take place.

While it is a shame that Arab leaders have supported Bashir, it is more alarming to see the Western world’s leaders sit idly by as Bashir roams free, still in power of the people he once massacred. We can only hope that our leaders’ inaction will not lead to another “never again” moment.


Elias A. Shaaya ’12, a Crimson editorial writer, lives in Greenough Hall.