Article

2003-06-04 East/Subsaharan Africa

Aid workers under attack from militia in âkilling fieldsâ

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-06-04 02:34 am|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 To hear the African-American Studies academics talk, Africa is a gem of cooperative love and harmony in tune with the land....I guess when you're buried after getting hacked to death with a machete by a rival tribe, you do get in touch with the land. Conrad was right, this is the Heart of Darkness

Posted by Frank G 2003-06-04 07:46:38|| 2003-06-04 07:46:38|| Front Page Top

The UN Security Council has ordered an emergency intervention force into Bunia led by France, but with a sizeable British contingent.

To what end?
Until Africa throws away its backward, tribalistic ways and warring culture, there's no saving it.
OOOPS!
That was racist and politically incorrect.
My bad.

Posted by Celissa 2003-06-04 08:41:21|| [www.celissasblog.com/weblog.php] 2003-06-04 08:41:21|| Front Page Top

#3 There's nothing racist about your observation, Celissa. I'm sure many people of African origin and current residents would agree with you.

However, intervention forces can work, and not just for the duration of their deployment. Take Sierra Leone, in '92.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-06-04 09:16:38|| 2003-06-04 09:16:38|| Front Page Top

#4 '02, not '92. MY bad.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-06-04 09:17:33|| 2003-06-04 09:17:33|| Front Page Top

#5 europe moved past its own tribalistic ways in part THROUGH its warring culture - wars against external enemies cemented national loyalties, in place of regional/ethnic/tribal ones. Also they had national linguistic standards, lots of time to build up their economies given low popular expectations, wars that thrashed out boundaries, etc. African states have artificial colonial boundaries, official languages are english or French (which are great for communicating with the outside world, but not so good for building up a nationalism to replace tribalism) lots of civil wars but few interstate wars, the example of wealth in the rest of the world that creates pressure for more modernization than some of these societies are ready for, etc.

Whether Celissas observation is racist or not depends on whether she is aware of the obstacles to state building in Africa. Which in turn depends on how much she knows about the process of state building in Europe. Too many people who make snide remarks about Africa and elsewhere dont really know much European history, and so dont know quite how Europe (and by extension European settler states) got to be the way they are.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-06-04 10:27:11|| 2003-06-04 10:27:11|| Front Page Top

#6 I'd hardly call it racist to observe that Africa as a whole has proven remarkably incompetent when it comes to establishing stable societies. The fact stems from a number of factors, including the ideologies into which the leadership was educated. Whether Christian or Muslim or animist, Bantu or Nilotic or North African Arab, hardly anybody seems to do it well. The occasional exception - Uganda prior to Idi, Kenya, Somaliland, Liberia prior to Sergeant Doe, a few others - suggest that it can be done, that there are competent people to be found, and that there's always somebody waiting in the wings to undo it. Africa as a whole is probably at the development point Europe was sometime between Merwig and Charles Martel. There will be more Emperor Freddies, Idis, and Bob and Graces for them to go through until eventually there are more Kenyas than Burkina Fasos.

That being said, there's a qualitative difference between near-anarchic political development and eating pygmies.

Posted by Fred 2003-06-04 10:55:11|| 2003-06-04 10:55:11|| Front Page Top

#7 Consider central Europe between 1618 and 1648: up to half of the population killed; marauding bands slaughtering civilians while spreading disease and starvation; foreign powers (France, Sweden)profiting mightily from the destruction, and doing everything to fan the flames of war; the battered hulk of an artificial state (the Holy Roman Empire) decaying past recognition -- gee, sounds a lot like the DR Congo at present. (OK, no cannibalism -- but it was still a heart of darkness.) Yet with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, the mass bloodshed was ended and the modern system of state sovereignty and diplomacy emerged. So I still hold some hope for Africa -- but not much.

Posted by closet neo-con 2003-06-04 11:11:48|| 2003-06-04 11:11:48|| Front Page Top

#8 teh european state system had already gone pretty far by 1618, particularly on the Atlantic seaboard. The next 150 years still involved quite a bit of warfare,(the several greate power wars, the northern wars, the russo-turkish wars) if not as bad as 1618-1648 and largely carried out by mercenaries (not unlike Africa) There was also the Fronde rising in France, peasant revolts, the Chemielnicki uprising, and uprisings in the Hapsburg lands. All of which culminated in the bloodshed of the French revolution (virtually a civil war, really) and the revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. Europe didnt really settle down till 1815. And since they have suffered some extraordinarly bloody civil wars - Spain and Russia. And the Africans still havent been able to match WW1. and for ethnic butchery Africa cant match the 3rd reich.

But the state system was pretty much stable by 1815, and in the western seaboard by 1648, and sustained economic growth was a factor by the mid-18thc.

Id say the hundred years war was particularly signicant in cementing national identity in France and Britain. And again, there are many factors, including globalization and the relatively open world system (as compared with say, 1618, that work against state building today. So its actually pretty amazing that Uganda, kenya, etc have gotten as far they have.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-06-04 11:49:44|| 2003-06-04 11:49:44|| Front Page Top

#9 Nicely stated, Liberalhawk. But Africa's real political/economic success stories are Botswana, Namibia, and Mauritius -- certainly not Kenya. Unfortunately, AIDS is destroying all the gains made by Botswana and Namibia, whereas Mauritius is as much South Asian as it is African

Posted by closet neo-con 2003-06-04 12:00:39|| 2003-06-04 12:00:39|| Front Page Top

#10 I suspect that AIDS will have the same effect on Africa that syphillis did on Europe during the time period you have been discussing. There will be large population die offs followed by a general tightening of public and private morality, Victorianism if you will.

Posted by 11A5S 2003-06-04 12:18:38|| 2003-06-04 12:18:38|| Front Page Top

#11 The big difference between mediaeval Europe and modern Africa is one of precedent. The "source code" for peaceful, affluent society is freely available. All that's needed is the will of the majority to implement it, plus (usually) a catalyst from outside to start things off...

Posted by Bulldog 2003-06-04 14:11:17|| 2003-06-04 14:11:17|| Front Page Top

#12 thats a mixed blessing, bulldog - they want 21st c Europe/America - but dont want to go through, say 17thc europe (aristocratic, modernizing, centralizing, autocracy, with no mass mobilization) to get there. Charles Tilly had a great book on this years ago, mainly a discussion of early modern europe, but with implications for modern LDC's.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-06-04 14:35:15|| 2003-06-04 14:35:15|| Front Page Top

#13 By the way, anyone notice who the NGOs are who have been getting killed? Local ones, that's who. So where is OxFam? Where is the International Solidarity Movement? Where are all those human shields? I promise you, there are no NGOs running around in white SUVs in the Congo loaded up with "committed progressives." No glamma and interviews on Euro TV in the Congo, just hard, dangerous work. Which is why they ain't there.

Posted by R. McLeod 2003-06-05 00:25:13|| 2003-06-05 00:25:13|| Front Page Top

01:17 R. McLeod
00:36 Mike Kozlowski
00:25 R. McLeod
00:17 R. McLeod
23:37 R. McLeod
22:10 Frank G
21:51 Watcher
21:47 Watcher
21:40 Watcher
21:38 Watcher
20:21 Dan Darling
20:20 Dan Darling
20:12 Paul Moloney
19:47 Fred
19:46 Fred
19:29 Dan Canaveral
19:27 Dan Canaveral
19:04 Scott
19:00 tu3031
18:41 tu3031
18:39 tu3031
18:35 Scott
18:30 Frank G
18:21 Steve White