G8 urges end to Darfur killings

[gottaB]

On the last day of their US summit, G8 leaders have called on Sudan to disarm militias in its western Darfur region.

Blaming the rebels for massive human rights violations, they urged both sides to respect the ceasefire.

The statement came as the G8 leaders and their counterparts from six African countries began talks on issues affecting the African continent.

G8 urges end to Darfur killings....

***

Also see Sudan: Big country, big problems, an analysis by Mark Doyle of the political and diplomatic aspects of the Darfur crisis.

***

If you choose to watch the videos from Hilary Anderson, have a tissue handy.

[jayavarman]

1. About time

It's past time for the lens of global attention & concern to swing toward Darfur.

[MaineDem]

2. Darfur is top news all around the world - except in the US

How disgusting! Our press really sucks.

[gottaB]

3. I must say the New York Times has been most disappointing

20 years ago I remember following the civil war in Sudan in the Times, even if the day's news was buried on page 17 or whatever.

Now, you're right. The US press has been remiss. Most of what you see are brief wire reports and editorials. Without detailed background reporting, those pieces would tend to lack impact or meaning for the US readership. There's almost no context.

To their credit, the New York Times has published a few stories, as have the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. But it's not much compared to, for example, coverage by the Guardian or the Financial Times. Considering how important the Sudan has been to the Bush* Administration and the State Dept., that's just remarkable.

In the realm of broadcasting, the US media shouldn't even pretend to inform people about the world. The BBC is by far the preeminent source for news of the world. (Actually I don't have cable so I can only judge CNN by the stories they put online, but from what I've seen they pretty much suck.)

Well, I try to wrack my brain around it. Two recent editorials stick in my mind, Darfur starvation will be televised ... eventually by Andrew Stroehlein, and Human rights on trial by Nick Cohen.

One thing that strikes me at the moment is the herd mentality. Last week a DUer, Cocoa perhaps, commented on the fact that Richard Holbrooke had mentioned the genocide in Darfur to Charlie Rose and Rose had quickly changed the subject to, I don't know, one of the leitmotifs of the newsweek. What really blew my mind was that Holbrooke had just finished explaining to Rose why Clinton's refusal to intervene in the Rwandan genocide represented the greatest mistake he made as President, indeed, a colossal foreign policy blunder for the US with abject ramifications.

Gee, do you suppose that means the Sudan's worth a discussion? Nah. Not on the Charlie Rose show. Regular viewers will of course recall how much airtime Rose gave to covering the Rwandan genocide. It seemed like he gave it a decent retrospective--and yet, what lesson did learn from it? What did talking about genocide back in March accomplish? Perhaps if he had it on his radar back then, who knows? Anyway, it's a disgrace.

So I'm not especially surprised that the Darfur crisis hasn't punctured the wall of hagiography this week. Disgusted, but not surprised.