If you don't think the US should have intervened in Rwanda, you are an isolationist and I can respectfully disagree. But I, for one, am for preventing genocide.
Would I rather see a country's neighbors/close allies help them work out the issues? Yes, but in the case of Sudan, Chad and Ethiopia are not, well, that stable themselves, and Sudan's best buddies in the Muslim world have got other fish to fry.
Would I rather see an international body led by some progressive country with no interests in Sudanese oil lead the intervention? Sure, but I don't see Denmark stepping up to the plate. I'm a U.S. citizen, so I'm going to pressure the U.S., which is the biggest contributor to the UN, to do something: preferably, to pressure the UN to send peacekeepers there.
All of this is not to say that there might not be all kinds of back-door politics at work. Of course, Israel has interests in Sudan, as does the U.S. No one has clean hands. That just means that any intervention needs to be well policed by people like those on this list.
Jo Ellen Green Kaiser joellen at tikkun.org
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]On Behalf Of Yoshie Furuhashi Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:30 PM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] MPug Rats Out Yoshie To Cooper
On 5/3/06, Max B. Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:
> If the demonstration is a bad idea because of effects on the negotiations,
> the religions of its backers is irrelevant. If there is some evidence
that
> the leaders had malign intentions, perhaps from mind-reading, that would
be
> relevant. The identities of the backers in and of themselves is
irrelevant,
> unless you could establish they are agents of the Mossad.
>
> If U.S. intervention in Darfur is against the interests of Jews, chances
are
> it's against the interests of everyone else, so why dwell on Jews?
Evangelical Christians supporting a US military intervention in Sudan under the Bush administration -- no surprise there. Neo-conservatives (Jewish and non-Jewish) supporting a US military intervention in Sudan under the Bush administration -- no surprise there. But other Jewish leaders? I was surprised to hear of this (I first learned it from Louis Proyect's posting to the Marxism list <http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2006w17/msg00158.htm>).
Then, I looked into the "Save Darfur" campaign website and learned of the coalition's origin: "The Coalition began on July 14 when the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and American Jewish World Service organized a Darfur Emergency Summit at the CUNY Graduate Center in Manhattan featuring Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize-winner Elie Wiesel. Mr. Wiesel inspired the group with his impassioned remarks about the suffering being inflicted on Darfurians: 'How can I hope to move people from indifference if I remain indifferent to the plight of others? I cannot stand idly by or all my endeavors will be unworthy'" (at <http://www.savedarfur.org/about/>). Then, I look into signatories of the coalition's unity statement: <http://www.savedarfur.org/about/signatories>. There are others involved here, but the main force are established Jewish organizations. Then, I learn from a Washington Post article that "Organizers rushed this week to invite two Darfurians to address the rally after Sudanese immigrants objected that the original list of speakers included eight Western Christians, seven Jews, four politicians and assorted celebrities -- but no Muslims and no one from Darfur" (Alan Cooperman, "Groups Plan Rally on Mall To Protest Darfur Violence: Bush Administration Is Urged to Intervene in Sudan," Washington Post, 27 April 2006: A21).
Like many Jewish and non-Jewish leftists, I've spent quite a bit of time arguing against the myth that Jewish communities rooted for the Iraq War, by promulgating poll results that show higher levels of Jewish opposition to the Iraq War than the US average. Here's a new development: establishment Jews (who aren't neo-cons or other sorts of right-wing fringes) standing side by side with many Christians and only a few Muslims, taking leadership for a new US military intervention (on its own or through NATO) in a predominantly Muslim country.
It boggled my mind (in a way predictable evangelical involvement didn't): how could the Jewish leaders involved in this believe that this is good for Jewish communities? ?? ???
Later again, I looked into the speakers list and learned of a heavily Democrat lineup -- Pelosi, Obama, Sharpton, etc. -- and it made some "sense" in a narrow electoral sense; and I thought of Israel's stance toward Sudan, the way the Darfur conflict has been framed by the media, and other factors that may have led to this new development and make "sense" psychologically; but over all I still don't think that the Jewish leaders' initiative and central leadership in this campaign squares with material interests of ordinary Jews.
Hence my response: "Should we laugh or should we cry?"
-- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk