« On Arabic, Training, Provincialism and Stereotypes | Ramadan and Bad Tempers Among The Drinking Classes »


October 18, 2005

Banging on about Dar Fur

A comment from a little ‘dialogue’ at Zenpundit which I thought I might expand on here, or rather a reply to a comment from some illiterate twit named Eddie banging on in half-informed ignorance about Dar Fur. The conversation may be found here, where Zenpundit’s core comments are reasonable.

My quoting and commentary on the Eddie comments.

I don't like word games. Nor do I like being accused of being confused or somehow illiterate.

Well, if you don’t like word games nor being accused of being confused and illiterate, then don’t play them and try not to be a confused idiotic git.

Whether you want to call them jihadists, Islamo-fascists, Arab mass murderers, etc etc.... the National Islamic Front leadership in Khartoum is bad news, not only for their own people, but for us. Their murderous campaigns in the South, in Darfur (and likely soon, in the east) have cost millions their lives and threaten to destablize the entire region, especially if Eritrea or Chad gets involved. Increasingly, their militias (like the Janjaweed in Darfur and the alphabet soup of scum in Southern Sudan) are getting more difficult to manage, leading to rampages like the little slaughter across the border in a refugee camp in Chad.

Yes, yes, the Government of Sudan isn’t a bunch of nice people – that’s not news mate, although you really should update your banging about, the National Islamic Front was Hassan at-Turabi’s outfit and Hassan and Omar had a nasty falling out some four years ago.

Now our dear Omar is a nasty little military dictator, but it is rather clear he’s a mere opportunist. If the Islamists such as at-Turabi are up, he’s an Islamist, else, he’s the next thing. What counts here is Omar and Clan, not ideology.

The civil war in the south has been going on nearly continuously since independence until just recently. Like all civil wars it has produced some singularly unenlightening behaviour all around. Civil Wars do tend to be “murderous” (else they’d not be wars, eh?) and destabilizing (why else would anyone care?).

However, none of this (for anyone who’s been paying attention for the past bloody 50 goddamned years) is bloody news nor even new.

Eritrea and Ethiopia are already involved and will be – not for reasons of “Arab” murderers or other stupid bigoted phrases, but reasons of state.

Let me enlighten. There is this thing called water. You may be aware that in fact there are water issues in the Nile basin. You might even be aware that there are tensions (natural, nothing to do with Arabs or non-Arabs) between up river riparians and down-river riparians. Further, the Ethiopian highlands generate a very large percentage of flood season input to the Nile, but the highlands want to develop dams that will impact the downriver interests (Sudan and Egypt).

State interest. One can dress it up in moral clothes to fool the naïve and the gullible, but the reality is cold state interest is at play in the East.

Of course also ethnic tensions as well, old or newly fabricated.

Then of course there are the issues of the rents generated by the newly developed oil sector. Again one can dress this up in moral clothes, but the reality it is it is about elite interests and the cold game of fighting over rents controlled by a central authority.

As to the militias, well, if a bunch of tribal nomads with AK are a militia…..

What I find amusing is that the Fur and the Zaghaoua provided troops (quite happily) to the ‘alphabet soup scum’ you gleefully attack.

Another case of simple minded black and white (to be moderately ironic) thinking that gets everything wrong.

The NIF fought a "holy war" (also known as jihad) against the South, partly due to the various reasons you listed, but even more so because of their attempt to impose Sharia on the South. They were able to enlist the help of the Fur and other Muslim tribes, as this was a holy war against the infidels in the South. Though they've considerably cooled the "jihad" and "islamic" rhetoric, don't be fooled like the CIA is. They're now waging a "jihad" against the Fur and others in Darfur, mostly on the pretext of their (understandable) rebellion but also because a dangerous mix of tyranny, Arab supremacy and Islamic fundamentalism was created to form the bonds that bring the Janjaweed together.

Holy war also known as Jihad….

You just learn that?

As for being “fooled,” for someone who has zero clue as to what is going on (although I do like your blundering about with these oh-so-authoritative accounts on something you know nothing about) this is rather absurd.

The reality is there has been a split between the military dictator and the Islamist party, and indeed some of the Dar Fur parties have been chatting with at-Turabi – the real Islamist. Your amusing just so story about this being Islamic fundamentalism on one side and not the other becomes ever more amusing in that context.

Fabulation is fun, but it is not analysis.

Keep in mind our "reformed" (heh) old buddy Libya is up to its old tricks in Africa, especially Sudan/Chad, stirring up conflict and instability. I can't blame the NIF enough, but Khadafi and co. deserve some too.

Qadhdhafi.

Well Qadhdhafi does lots of things, but that’s hardly news. Tchad is part of his neighborhood, of course he is looking at his interests. However, with the French interest there and his having gotten his nose bloody last round, I am unmoved.

Now this is the best part:

"Bloody ignorant" is your assumption that there is no Arab-African conflict here. While it is not as crystal clear as the media and blogs make it out to be, it does very well bloody exist. There was (may well still be) a dedicated campaign of rape by Arab Janjaweed (there have been a few Africans in the mix) of African women, intended not just for the sake of ravaging your enemy but to wipe his bloodline off the face of the earth. MSF and others have noted this, and some members of the staff that performed that exhaustive investigation were arrested by the Sudanese for it. They know full well if the true extent of what they're up to and what they've accomplished were ever to be understood by the int'l community (especially Americans), there would be hell to pay. That's why the African Union archive of tens of thousands of photos, videos and evidence has not and probably will never be released to the public.

Indeed, bloody ignorant is your posturing here.

The “Janjaweed” (here’s a clue, the word is not even proper Arabic) are in fact African – and Arab. False dichotomy, saying there are “Africans” mixed in is pure nonsense. Further to that, they’re virtually all quite as black as the Fur, the Zaghaoua and others.

The Baqqara nomads are nothing more than local nomadic tribes that have Arabised, that is taken on Arabic speech (a rather creolized dialect I would add) and identity.

Rape, well rape is not something new in warfare, and systematic rape is as old as warfare itself. The bleating on about this as if it is some new and horrible innovation by “Arabs” is stupid.

I leave the rest of your prattle aside.

Across the world, in Iraq, in Indonesia and in Sudan... Muslims are slaughtered by other Muslims in somtimes self-proclaimed "jihads" that are intended to punish them severely for not following the jihadist's line of thinking or plan of action. Hence, the NIF in Sudan is wiping out the Fur and others because of their insufficent dedication to the NIF cause, as evident with their growing dissatisfaction that led to the rebellion in 2003.

And?

Xians slaughter Xians across the world as well: in Northern Ireland they did a bang up job as well.

What’s the fucking point?

Ah, the supposed Jihad angle.

Yes, indeed, the bloody minded takfiri crowd of whack job extremists does have a charming habit of killing those they consider “blacksliders” – no news to me mate, its been many years since I first saw a Mosque of Sufis machine gunned in Northern Sudan for the “crime” of being sufi by takfiri whack jobs. Don’t pretend to tell me about this, you ignorant idiot.

However, this has fuck all to do with Dar Fur, despite your fabulations.

Instead of halting this "jihad" or "mass murder" or "genocide", America seems intent on pumping Sudan for counterintelligence information and spreading the myth that 5,000-10,000 poorly trained and lightly armed AU troops with a minimal mandate will be able to halt the killing. By tolerating this betrayal of not only our ideals but our very long-term security interests, we're not only abandoning the many victims of the National Islamic Front and their proxies but endangering ourselves.

Whatever. Blundering into Western Sudan is not going to help anything.

Posted by The Lounsbury at October 18, 2005 12:37 PM
Filed Under: MENA Fringe

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2101


Comments

Here we go again. I'm sure the Sudanese government would be greatly flattered to know that they have the ability, let alone desire and organisational capacity to destabilise the whole region.

I am not blessed with Lounsbury's patience but I will address the following issues.

- The imposition of sharia on the south is not and never was the root of conflict between the north and south. In addition to L's clarification, I think you will find that there has been a peace treaty signed between the two where the issue of imposition of sharia was domesticated VERY early in the negotiations as it was agreed that it would not be imposed on non -Muslim areas so hardly a deal breaker. That is even more of an indication that Omar and Co indeed have very few unbending ideological principles other than oppurtunistic ones.

- The statement that the Sudanese government is afraid that if the Americans realise the conflict for what it is there would 'be hell to pay'. American offical reaction to conflicts around the globe is mercurial and not directly proportional to extent of tragedy (contrast NATO reaction to ethnic cleansing in Serbia and Rwanda and Burundi). The Sudanese government has been under various sanctions over the past two decades and does not have much to lose so maybe Eddie should put his big American stick away.


- 'Insufficent dedication to the NIF cause'. If Eddie thinks that the NIF is some bearded religious fundamentalist organisation that will unleash its wrath on others that do not conform then he is seriously and somehow touchingly deluded. The NIF is undergoing a case of two legs good four legs better and the relaxation of many public order laws such as consumption of alcohol, enforcing hijab etc has been loosened to accomodate the more 'outward looking' Khartoum business community and the foreign oil company workers that have taken up residence.


- The Sudanese government has the highest proportion of senior officials from the 'African' west of the country and this is an indication of the fact that Omar and Co's agenda is to further their own interest and prolong their stay in power irrespective of who they align with.

The tottering coalition government of Sudan probably will get away scot free with this. Thank God that at least in blogging circles the punishment of crimes is swifter. Come to think of it, I shall post this on Zenpundit's site as well.

Posted by: Meph at October 26, 2005 12:30 AM

blessed with Lounsbury's patience: I don't often get this line. It is unique.

Posted by: The Lounsbury at October 27, 2005 11:58 AM

Comment Subscription

Email Address: