You can’t reason with evildoers; instead they must be hunted down and defeated. What we need to do is make distinctions between friends and enemies so we can tolerate friendly regimes, but be specifically intolerant of regimes that abuse human rights.

As a lot of us already know, Janjaweed militias that appear to be receiving support from northern Sudan are murdering the people in Sudan’s Darfur region on a massive scale. From time to time I hear accounts of atrocities in Darfur that enrage me. I once read an account of a young Sudanese boy who, refusing to change his religious beliefs, was nearly burned to death and then left for dead by thugs who had just murdered his friends.

In other accounts I have read of helicopter gunships being used on refugee camps to mow down hospitals and orphanages. If this isn’t enough to make your blood boil I don’t know what will. How has something so intolerable been tolerated for so long?

What is preventing us from fixing the problem? For that we have to look at the international politics surrounding the situation.

Conventional thinking would suggest we look to the United Nations to fix these kinds of problems. Therein lies the problem. There is a difference between what the U.N. is doing, and what the U.N. ought to be doing.

Ideally the United Nations is supposed to be an institution where all of the countries in the world get together, discuss solutions to problems, agree upon a solution that is in the best interests of everyone and then do it. However, there are problems with how this plays out in reality.

First of all, despite their ideals, the discussions they have are often not always predicated on universal moral principles. The United Nations is predicated on a Rawlsian political structure, meaning it treats all nations as morally equivalent whether or not they actually are.

The U.N. treats rogue states, anti-Western elements, Islamic theocracies and communism as the moral equivalent of Western societies and ideologies of freedom and justice.

To demonstrate just how bad it is, look at the U.N. Human Rights Commission. It is the ultimate case of the fox guarding the hen house. Sudan and other rogue states are on the very commission that is meant to stop human rights abuses like those occurring in Darfur.

Secondly the U.N. seems to never want to take action, but instead thinks that everything can be solved with more talking. As a result, the U.N. vaguely resembles a legislative body of senile old fools who deliberate endlessly while letting the outside world fall apart.

The Rawlsian notion of blind tolerance is not prone to leading to actions against human rights abusers. You could negotiate with these regimes endlessly, but in the end their objectives will still be the same, and so no amount of talk will do any good. The U.N. has had many resolutions condemning Sudan for the situation in Darfur, but still hasn’t taken direct action against the Janjaweed.

What we need to do is recognize this situation for what it is. Burning innocent children to death is evil pure and simple, and the people responsible are evildoers. You can’t reason with evildoers; instead they must be hunted down and defeated. What we need to do is make distinctions between friends and enemies so we can tolerate friendly regimes, but be specifically intolerant of regimes that abuse human rights.

Secondly we shouldn’t be afraid to assert our national sovereignty and act independently of the United Nations. Though I understand Bush is not exactly the best president in history, I must applaud him for doing this when he acted independently of the U.N. in dealing with Iraq. Now if only we could do the same with the Darfur crisis.

Though it would prove problematic to invade Sudan, it might be a good idea to destroy Janjaweed bases with airstrikes. Additionally, through the National Endowment for Democracy (or NED) we can help the people in Darfur realize their own freedom.

This organization currently has 23 programs directed towards helping the people in Sudan, and uses government funding as well as private donations to continue its work.

More meaningless U.N. resolutions will not save the people in the Sudan. Unlike the U.N., the Pax Americana has had a much better track record when it comes to keeping the peace.

If we really want to end the killing we should destroy the Janjaweed in the Sudan. We cannot afford to let the status quo continue when millions of lives are at stake, and we should do this sooner rather than later as we may be their only hope.

> Comments