I just wanted to pose a question before I head to bed. My query is based upon the incredible book that I'm reading right now, Dancing in the Glory of Monsters by Jason Stearns, which documents the endless cycle of violence in the Congo. Stearns discusses the fact that, even years after the Congolese War, communities mourn the senseless killing of their kinsmen. Sadly, however, the tragic victims go without justice. Often, their bodies are unburied, heaping in mass graves under ruin and rubble.
Is an unsteady peace under yesterday's unsteady military leaders worth the gross miscarriage of justice that the innocent face? It makes me sick that heartbreaking stories go unheard, senseless animosities remain commonplace, and the people of the Congo still die for no reason just for the sake of maintaining a somewhat superficial balance. Even if the war is officially "over", the Congo is so far away from true peace. I believe that to gain actual peace there, we must first listen to the stories of the persecuted (and believe me, people on all sides of this conflict have been persecuted) and seek understanding. Those who inflicted unimaginable crimes MUST be punished. Then, after justice is attained, the Congo has a chance at peace.
PLEASE feel free to post your opinions as well!
As an educational tool, this is very concise and informative. But as an issue, it is not relevant to the West, especially America. Our general attitude toward conflict like this is
ReplyDelete"Okay, how will this affect me?"
This is generally true of any given time, but especially during times of economic instability. When we cannot feed our own children here, we tend not to want to feed children overseas.
Is this bad? Yes. But it's also true. That's why Libya isn't as much of an issue to the average voter, and foreign aid is one of the first things to be cut, even though it makes up roughly 1% of the American budget.
Human rights are important, but we as a whole can't do very much until we fix our problems at home.
Oh, I forgot: in the case of Rwanda, a nation which fought in both Congo Wars, the answer is yes. It goes back to the global recession: if it means a better market for jobs and products, peace IS more important than justice. Rwanda does not have justice, and yet President Kagame has not been voted out.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Because Rwanda is attracting corporate investors from Wall Street and Harvard Business School. In their opinion, Free Speech is a small price to pay to put food on the table, especially since they are just now getting a decent supply of food.
Sorry about the book I just wrote about your article, I needed to get that out.
I totally agree that this is not an exclusively Western or American problem that we are responsible for dealing with. I was talking more on an international scale, saying that international organizations (the United Nations and more specifically the International Court of Justice) have to address if we have any chance of peace.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the USA running any "justice missions" in the Congo or any such area, I agree that we just have too much going on at home right now. However, that's what I believe world organizations are for. And I am truly convinced that with justice comes stability (both political and economic) that will lift Rwanda out of the poverty that it currently faces.
By the way, I appreciate the lengthy comment; you have a lot of great insight! And I would highly recommend "Dancing in the Glory of Monsters" by Jason K. Stearns if you're at all interested in this matter-it's concise and brilliantly written.
ReplyDelete