Talk:International response to the Darfur conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (nations and regions): African military history task force

[edit] Declarations of Genocide

I reverted the change by User:Joan-of-arc that added the words "even though they have acknowledged mass murders have occurred against the non-Muslim population" under the list of institutions who have not declared Darfur a genocide for two reasons:

1. The residents of Darfur are primarily Muslim, so the second half of the statement is factually inaccurate (or at least irrelevant, since the question of genocide is one of targeted murders of those who are Muslim)
2. The purpose of the list is to catalogue notable organizations who have not declared the situation genocide -- regardless of whether they have also "acknowledged mass murders." It's true that both of these organizations have done this, but it was my hope that other notable organizations that have not declared it to be genocide would be added to the list. ivan 18:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I will submit to removing the bold, though I think it does help in clarity. Nonetheless, I have changed back a second time the edits made by User:Joan-of-arc, per my explanations above. ivan 21:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Your facts appear lacking and your POV is showing, ivan:

• Firstly the genocide is the killing of non-muslims not muslims.

You are factually incorrect. USA Today: "Rebels in Darfur, made up largely of Muslims from several non-Arab tribes, resisted what they saw as neglect by the Arab-dominated central government. Militias, drawn from Arab tribes, tried to crush the rebellion." Slate: "Khartoum argues that it's not a genocide, just a land dispute, and the real culprits aren't the Janjaweed but the Darfur rebels, African Muslims who are trying to settle scores with the government by killing its Arab Muslim sympathizers." New York Review of Books: "The killing in Darfur, a vast region in western Sudan, is not a case of religious persecution, since the killers as well as the victims of this genocide are Muslim." Who are the Janjaweed attacking? Fur and Zaghawa people -- who, as you'll note if you read the Wikipedia entries, are Muslim. The Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations Secretary-General (PDF), United Nations, 25 January 2005, states: "The various tribes that have been the object of attacks and killings (chiefly the Fur, Massalit and Zaghawa tribes) do not appear to make up ethnic groups distinct from the ethnic group to which persons or militias that attack them belong. They speak the same language (Arabic) and embrace the same religion (Muslim)" (p. 129). Please stop trying to contribute to an article if you don't know the most basic facts about it. ivan 23:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• Secondly, the qualification is needed for the two parties who have not yet declared genocide, because otherwise readers are led to think these two dont acknowledge the mass killings.

The point is to list all relevant parties who have not declared genocide, irrespective of whether they have acknowledged or not acknowledged anything else about the conflict. I will try to make this clearer in my revisions. ivan 23:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• This article is not about your "hopes" of who could be added to the shorter list. it is about the facts of an important world situation. Joan-of-arc 05:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

See above. I find the accusation pretty galling from someone who can't muster the basic facts about the situation. ivan 23:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

thank you for your clarifying edits to this article in the declarations section. i think the section reads better now. try to keep cool ivan. i dont wish to waste your or my time with a lenghty debate on who is being killed. i agree with you that muslims who sympathize with non-muslims are also being killed. lets not lose sight of the big picture here. Joan-of-arc 17:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

One should be cautious about trying to add their own "big picture" when editing (WP:NPOV) Wikipedia.--Kitrus 08:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added two other citations of important organizations (Amnesty and MSF) who have not declared genocide (to my knowledge -- both of those reports are old). However, the citation for the second one is pretty tenuous; a citation in a column on a website. If anyone has more reliable information or more up-to-date statments, feel free to replace these. ivan 22:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)