Genocide, A Priority or Not?
Nicholas D. Kristof - a journalist I greatly respect, especially because of his knowledge of China - tries to explain why some global leaders, and especially the leaders of G-8 countries, don’t seem to be too concerned about the massacres taking place in Darfur right now, and not about genocide in general.
He does a fairly good job both explaining the reasoning of the G-8, and US President George W. Bush especially: the main idea seems to be that ‘genocide’ have only resulted in 10 to 12 million deaths, whereas many famous diseases have killed and continue to kill many millions more. It’s easier to invest in fighting said diseases than it is to, say, bring peace to Darfur.
As Kristof points out, however, genocide is something done by human beings. Diseases are - generally - not. Diseases are reasonably random, genocide is not. Diseases can strike at anyone, regardless of race, religion, wealth; genocide, however, is always aimed at a particular people. Additionally, what makes genocides so horrible is that a government purposefully tries to wipe out a specific people, a specific ‘nation’ (old sense of the word). The victims are killed because of what they are and / or where they live.
Of course, Kristof makes the mistake of including the events of 1915 in his short list of historical genocides (the Armenian ‘genocide’ was no such thing since there is no convincing and conclusive evidence that the Ottoman government tried to purposefully wipe out the Armenian population), and I find it regrettable and disappointing that the journalist I respect so much buys into the notion that it’s a non-disputed event (at least, he doesn’t mention the fact that it’s a hotly disputed ‘genocide’), but his general point certainly stands; suffering caused by governments is always different, and in a way more significant, than suffering caused by ‘nature.’
As an aside, I’m happy to see that Nicholas got a blog at the NYT as well. He’s not a journalist anymore - well, not just a journalist - he’s now also a columnist and a blogger. Welcome to the blogosphere Nicholas.
You of all people have no credibility writing about this topic.
Arbeit macht Frei! Auswitch!
Proudly presents MvdG: Genocide a priority?
Looks who is talking, our neo friend of the Netherlands.
And Managing Chief Editor of a blog.
Ever heard about what ‘editing’ means? Or do you simple disgrace or ban your readers.
And for God sake, don’t start writing about Turkey, where you never lived. I am a proud Turkish citizen, daughter of a 4 star general, but we don’t discuss like you.
Ara is right: you don’t have any credibility about this issue.
Ara… The same "Ara" as in armenews.com?
Who is deceitful enough to smear the reputation of 120 million Turks in order to get the votes of 600,000 Armenians living in teh USA? Who gives a politician to act judge and jury on a subject they know nothing about? Are Christians so biased that they won’t allow Turks to defend themselves?
It sounds like Kristoff avoids discussing the hardest part of why genocide is not a priority: because it’s become a political issue as opposed to a humanitarian one.
Ozlem, nothing you wrote above makes any sense, and actually, it just makes you sound a little bit crazy. What’s your point? And what does who your father is have to do with anything? If, according to your logic, Michael can’t write about Turkey because he’s "never lived there" (which is your presumption), then perhaps you shouldn’t write about Michael because you’ve never met him.
Well said Kemal! I always respect logical thought…Ara and Ozlem, what makes your opinions so credible? Accusatory language will not get you anywhere but will only make you look like a fool!
Guys, you’d have a point if getting somewhere was the goal in the sense you understand it. Michael clearly has quite a fan club, let him enjoy it.
Mr. Kristof seems to express surprise at the indifference of the world’s leaders to ongoing genocides. I cannot share his surprise. Consider these words written just last year by a "Jacob Chinitz" (A rabbi, if I am not mistaken):
"At the time when the term ["genocide"] was originated as a necessary [concommitant to] world recognition of the Holocaust, we thought it a moral, decent acknowledgement by the world of Jewish suffering. Now it has become a political football, with others than Jews claiming credit for being massacred in order to achieve political advantage."
(see: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380790609&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull )This happens to be a true statement whether we like it or not. Many of these people involved in the movement to label the 1915 events a "genocide" undoubtedly think they are doing a great service to mankind. But I see a repeat of Aesop’s fable of "the little boy who cried wolf". Legislatures around the world have been cajoled into branding the Armenian Tragedy a "genocide" in spite of the fact that these legislators themselves really know nothing or next-to-nothing about the history and culture of Turkey at that time - much less about the context in which the Armenian Tragedy occurred. The question that seems to have escaped Kristof, in my view, is : "have we gained or lost by allowing ‘genocide’ to become a political football used to gain political advantage?". And why are now surprised that governments have become num to "genocide" - since when did we require them to look at "genocide" in a responsible way? Isn’t it about time to recognize that we have pre-conditioned our statesmen to view genocide as a "political football used for political advantage"?
Ozlem, I do NOT believe a word you’re saying. Why don’t you tell us where you grew up and where you got schooling so that we can begin to take you seriously as opposed to being a fake. Be specific, not generalities like a "proud Turkish citizen" or "daughter of a four star general" - THAT’s a giveaway for someone who is trying to pose like a Turk but is not.
Too offended that some Armenians have been banned from this site? Agree with Ara? Girlfriend, if you’re going to pose as a proud Turkish daughter of a four star general, you’re going to have to do better than that :))))
Selin; of course that Ozlem is not a Turk. And uninformed as well (I’m in Turkey three months, perhaps four, a year for instance. And those who know the Turkish political debate actually know that it can get very passionate, but that you’re not allowed to say everything, etc. So this person indicates that either he doesn’t know Turkey or that he’s lying; in both cases, it’s not a Turk but a radical Armenian or possibly Westerner).
BTW: send me an e-mail lütfen.
I have noticed there are others on this sight who seem to have Turkish names but do not sound like one… or at the right moment, some how they appear and say very dramatic and racist comments… it sounds all a bit staged…
I am glad others have noticed as well. I did not want to say anything as it sounds a bit silly…
Nevber,
That doesn’t sound silly at all,
Armenian AG supporters are deceivers and forgers by nature…
So now Mvd is telling who is a Turk and who not…
haha, do I have to proof something..)))
Yes I think you do Ozlem because you really do not sound like one. You are not in a capacity to decide who can write about this or that subject. As a matter of fact no one is if you favour freedom of speech. If you really want to do something constructive, go lobby for Turkey about these genocide allegations by say joining the group armeniangenocidedebate.com or other groups in facebook if you are not already a member.
Well said Kemal.
Nice quote Connolly.
And for "Ozlem", all I will say is,
It is a common strategy for racists to pose as the people that they are racist towards in order to sound more credible when spouting racist comments.