Natsios on Darfur

Joseph Loconte

Joe Loconte

If there is a single foreign policy issue that shocks the conscience of activists and politicians of all dispositions, it is the ongoing humanitarian tragedy in the Darfur region of Sudan. Since fighting broke out between rebel groups and government forces in 2003, it is estimated that over 250,000 civilians have been killed, mostly at the instigation of the Arab supremacist regime in Khartoum. More than 2 million people have been displaced from their homes and hundreds of thousands languish in refugee camps. Meanwhile, the survival of Sudan as a state seems to be at risk.

Former U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan, Andrew Natsios, warns that the 2005 peace agreement that ended the horrendous civil war between Arabs in the north and Christians and animists in the south shows signs of unraveling. Writing in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Natsios argues for a policy of vigorous U.S. engagement with the Sudanese government to shore up the peace agreement: “Although U.S. policymakers must never forget what happened in Darfur . . . those who focus on the region’s past run the risk of compromising the entire country’s future,” he writes. “During the critically important year ahead, Washington should pursue a prudent and nuanced but aggressive policy of engagement—this is both good policy and the right thing to do.”

Mr. Natsios makes an earnest and intelligent appeal, but the behavior of the Islamist regime is not peripheral to the crisis; it is the overriding cause of the human suffering that has brought the country to the brink of collapse. It is problematic, at best, to believe that a government as violent and treacherous as that of Omar al-Bashir will respond to anything short of targeted, multilateral sanctions and the real threat of military intervention. It is no mere coincidence, for example, that Sudan submitted to the peace accord in 2005—shortly after the United States had toppled the dictatorships in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nevertheless, Mr. Natsios’s article, “Beyond Darfur: Sudan’s Slide Toward Civil War,” offers an informed and thorough look at the crisis.

Christian leaders, Catholics and evangelicals, have been deeply involved in various aspects of both conflicts—including mediation, refugee resettlement, humanitarian assistance, and political activism. They would do well to read what probably represents the U.S. State Department position, and then make their own views heard, loud and clear. 

Fodder, Good and Evil, Leadership, War and Peace, Mon 16 Jun 2008

Commenting is not available in this section entry.

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.

Leo Tolstoy

Site Services

Search:

Advanced Search

Member Login

Join the Site

Forgotten your password?

Send this Article to a Friend

Print this Article

Print without Comments

Recent Articles

Redefining Democracy, Ethics, and Evangelicalism

A New Kind of Culture War

A European Challenge to Anti-Americanism

Religion, Politics, and Public Opinion

Lives of Adventure, Fulfillment, and Service

The X-Files and the Enlightenment Myth

How to Vote for the President

Humanitarian ‘Impulses’ vs. Convictions

Putin’s Brezhnev Doctrine

The U.N.’s Human Rights Charade

Featured Resource from the Fellows

Cover image via AmazonThe Rise of Global Civil Society: Building Communities and Nations from the Bottom Up by Don Eberly.

A sweeping and hopeful overview of the extraordinary new forces that are prying open closed societies and cultivating democratic norms across the globe.

Gleanings Quick Links

The Real Digital Revolution: Social networking is changing the marketing landscape: “Brand advertising can’t stretch the truth anymore or try and gild the lily. Because if it does, we’re going to find out about it, find out that you’ve been lying to us all along about extras that don’t work and specials that aren’t special. And our reaction is not going to be pretty.” (Alan Wolk, AdWeek; h/t: Ryan Moede • 2008 08 27)

Après Lewis: ‘As it turns out, Tim Keller’s “The Reason for God” (2008), the book recommended by my friend, is the best of the “Mere Christianity” wannabes. Mr. Keller argues that the usual objections to Christianity—that it is a straitjacket, that there cannot be just one true religion—are themselves the product of a particular (secular Western) point of view. He then builds an affirmative case for Christianity, suggesting that the Big Bang and our appreciation of beauty are clues pointing to God and that Christ’s resurrection was so unlikely both to Greeks and Romans (who viewed the material world as weak and corrupt) and to Jews (who expected any resurrection to come at the end of time) that it cannot be dismissed as the clever marketing strategy of a new religion. If this sounds a little like N.T. Wright, it isn’t accidental: Mr. Keller draws liberally from him, as well as Lewis, Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga (a professor at Notre Dame) and others. “The Reason for God” is as sensible and winsome as one would expect from the pastor of a latticework of churches that draw more than 5,000 attendees in New York City every Sunday, most of them young, single, urban professionals. But it too is no “Mere Christianity.” It does not have the original arguments or the magical prose of Lewis’s classic.’ (David Skeel, Wall Street Journal2008 08 15)

Alexander Solzhenitsyn: the line within: ‘Solzhenitsyn was far from endorsing the thesis of the “banality of evil” as Hannah Arendt had expounded it. Nor did he see totalitarianism as the ultimate source of the evil that it promotes. Rather totalitarian government is the great mistake, made for whatever noble or ignoble purpose, of putting the final goal before the present dilemma. It is this which gives evil intentions the same chance as good ones, which enables the criminal and the psychopath to compete on a level with the saint and the hero. Yet even in totalitarianism the evil belongs to the human beings, and not to the system. This is the remarkable message that Solzhenitsyn, crawling from the death-machine, carried pressed to his heart.’ (Senior Fellow Roger Scruton, in openDemocracy2008 08 11)

Atheism and Evil: Could it possibly improve things to believe that the long pain of human evolution was set in motion by chance alone? The atheist view of the world is actually rather bleaker than that of Jews and Christians: Suffering under the weight of evil is meaningless, and so is any struggle against evil. Everything in the atheist’s world begins and ends in randomness and chance. Few atheists seem to be as rigorously honest as Friedrich Nietzsche, who warned that if God is dead, it is wishful thinking to hold that reason alone can confer “meaning” on life. Reason has been outmoded by chance. (Michael Novak, First Things: On the Square2008 07 29)

Christopher Nolan’s Achievement: The Dark Knight (2008 07 22)
Unplanned Parenthood (2008 07 21)
What makes a supervillain? (2008 07 19)
Pope’s Speech at Barangaroo (2008 07 17)
Hollywood’s Hero Deficit (2008 07 17)

more . . .

Other Resources

Cover image via AmazonJohn Newton: From Disgrace to Amazing Grace by Jonathan Aitken.

A new biography based on previously unpublished papers.