| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa: Subsaharan |
| Hidden war that claims 1,000 lives a day |
| 2004-12-11 |
| For background, see here The Democratic Republic of Congo yesterday accused Rwanda of invading its eastern jungles and pledged to deploy 10,000 troops in response, as the scale of human suffering in the Africa's third largest country was laid bare. A new report found that 1,000 people are dying in Congo every day in the wake of its last war, which ended - on paper at least - with a treaty two years ago and is considered the world's worst conflict since 1945. The turmoil threatened to deepen still further yesterday. If there has been a large-scale incursion by Rwanda, the danger of a new regional war engulfing central African would be acute. An estimated 3.8 million people from a population of 60 million have been killed in six years of fighting, meaning that the conflict dwarfs every other humanitarian emergency, including that in Sudan's Darfur region. The fighting in this anarchic swathe of Africa has, according to the International Rescue Committee, a New York-based aid agency, created hunger and disease on an unprecedented scale. The mortality survey by the IRC also shows that 500,000 died between January 2003 and April this year. Richard Brennan, one of the report's authors, said: "How many innocent Congolese have to perish before the world pays attention?" The overwhelming majority of deaths were caused by starvation or disease. The war has wrecked schools and hospitals, leaving millions without the most basic health care. Children have borne the brunt of the suffering. The IRC survey found that Congo's mortality rate for children under the age of five was 70 per cent higher than the African average. The report said that Congo was suffering "by far the deadliest war in the world since World War Two", adding: "International engagement is typically lacking in Congo and hundreds of thousands of innocent people are dying as a result." |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #16 Zimbabwe, Angola, Namibia and Chad had all deployed troops in the country by the close of 1998. The main objective of all the warring parties was to loot Congo’s immense mineral wealth. Gold and diamonds flowed into the coffers of all the governments involved. So long as there is financial incentive involved, don't count on any of these bloodthirsty parasites giving a hot damn about the cost in terms of human life. While early colonial influences and their arbitrary national boundaries have done Africa no great favors, the tribal mindset that persists to this day is what continues to cripple the dark continent. Leaders consider their nation's assets to be personal property and act accordingly. Until the African people cease to cooperate with such corrupt leadership and begin killing these tribal chieftains, nothing is going to change. However brutal it might sound, AIDS is going to end up curing a lot of Africa's problems. The common philandering male (along with a lot of very unfortunate innocent women) will finally be exterminated and a new behavioral profile will emerge for anyone who wants to survive. Lack of substantial change in African politics has generated a global attention-span fatigue rivaled only by the Palestinian cause. At some point, the outside world must commit to full scale military intervention (the UN does not count) or simply back away slowly and let the meltdown proceed on its own. Only when enough of those who perpetuate stone-age tribal thinking are dead will there be any chance for progress. While I detest the notion of so much innocent life being lost, it represents expectable collateral damage caused by the continuing existence of such malign leadership. The African people need to begin killing their corrupt leaders or settle for being killed by them. No realistic alternatives exist, short of global powers routinely decapitatng corrupt African governments until the local elitist class is depopulated. When African populations stop cheering on their war-criminal leaders, only then will some sort of progress begin. Until that time, bloodshed on a massive scale is the only thing to expect. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-12-11 6:40:30 PM |
| #15 "Even if the EU came up with troops (of dubious quality) they would still need Air America to take them to the war zone." Al Franken owns an airline? Sheesh... |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-12-11 5:38:48 PM |
| #14 Even if the EU came up with troops (of dubious quality) they would still need Air America to take them to the war zone. The EU does not have a credible air lift or even sea lift capability. While there is truth to the latter assertion, the former is not. European troops are good; when compared to nearly all African forces, superior (even the Greeks :p). The 'quality issue' lies in the chronic UN forces' problems regarding mandate, command and control, and ROE. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-12-11 5:08:19 PM |
| #13 Great idea! MS can live off the administrative fees, his son can take kickbacks, and the rest of us can park anywhere we want with diplomatic immunity. Count me in! |
| Posted by: Tom 2004-12-11 5:05:31 PM |
| #12 I think all RBers left right and Aris should get together and form a committe to examine a way to start to get ready to make changes in the baseline propostion that the UN is essentialy a pretty damn good way to make a living. With this committee we might, no will, get permanent funding. I nominate MS to chair the self-sustaining committee on getting lotsa money from elsewhere. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-11 4:52:52 PM |
| #11 Hey Mike! Time's money and Life is short! Look! They're easy questions and I'm not the critical sort. We need to move on the the next 10. So hurry. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-11 3:49:33 PM |
| #10 Even if the EU came up with troops (of dubious quality) they would still need Air America to take them to the war zone. The EU does not have a credible air lift or even sea lift capability. |
| Posted by: Douglas De Bono 2004-12-11 3:47:49 PM |
| #9 What do you think the UN should do? 1. Ignore the problem until the NGOs start really screaming. (Already done) 2. Guilt-trip the Europeans into coughing up more money and troops. Settle for extra money in lieu of European troops and hire Angolan Boy Scout troop instead. Pocket difference. 3. Appropriate 40% of funds earmarked for Congo as 'administrative costs'. 4. Hold "Malaise in Congo" conferences in Paris and Brussels (be sure to get generous shopping-discount for conference-goers and spouses). 5. Blame the US for inaction. 6. Repeat until ennui sets in, or NGOs need new fund-raising campaign. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-12-11 12:37:15 PM |
| #8 How about a viable threat to bomb the crap out bof the agressors,MS.Otherwise to quote Gromky"ZZZZZZ" |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-12-11 11:45:54 AM |
| #7 What do you think the UN should do? Maybe their peacekeepers can stop raping babies long enough to keep some peace. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-12-11 11:38:12 AM |
| #6 Mike what would be the best way to create a more effective and vital UN? Would more money help? Or would a deep seated conviction be better? Do you think losing the powder puff blue would help? Or is the tradition to strong. Let's talk silver patterns now, I am fond of Stratevari, should the UN cafeteria settle on one or spread out the patterns in hope of spreading good cheer? Do you think UN licesne plates are a good thing Mike? Should I be allowed to buy one? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-11 11:23:06 AM |
| #5 Maybe Mike, confess that it can't do a thing and drop all pretense that it has any influence upon the situation. |
| Posted by: Don 2004-12-11 10:02:15 AM |
| #4 no bots/autocommenters, please |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-11 9:18:56 AM |
| #3 The U.N. is on the case, I'm sure...ZZZZZ... What do you think the UN should do? . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-12-11 9:06:25 AM |
| #2 unfortunately, except for the "bloody frontier of Islam clashes", I'm suffering a real 'African vs, African' clash attention fatigue. The African countries seem almost beyond help, when I see them allow ZimBobWe to operate as a welcome AU member, I wanna puke |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-11 8:58:21 AM |
| #1 The U.N. is on the case, I'm sure...ZZZZZ... |
| Posted by: gromky 2004-12-11 5:29:23 AM |