Liberaal Silver Meikar Vabadusest ja inimõigustest

Obama hakkab vägivalla vältimiseks kasutama rohkem vägivalda?

Jaanuaris suurvõimu juhiks saava Obama poliitikast aimu saamiseks on kasulik lugeda Demokraatliku Partei võtmeisikute arvamusartikleid. Clintoni teise administratsiooni (1997-2001) riigisekretär Madeleine K. Albright ja kaitseminister William S. Cohen kirjutasid International Herald Tribune´is ÜRO genotsiidivastase resolutsiooni 60. aastapäevaks pühendatud artiklis: „We are keenly aware that the incoming president's agenda will be daunting from day one. But preventing genocide and mass atrocities is not an idealistic addition to our core foreign policy agenda. It is a moral and strategic imperative.“

Autorite sõnul on genotsiidi tagajärg pikaajaline ebastabiilsus, kuid selle mõju ulatub toimumiskohast märksa kaugemale. Näiteks mõnes Aafrika riigikeses toime pandud jubedused toovad kaasa põgenikelaine, soodustavad inimkaubandust ja rahvusvahelist terrorismi jne. Just seetõttu on USA jaoks oluline reageerida juba siis, kui on tekkimas oht genotsiidi toimumiseks. Vajadusel ka sõjaliselt: „Yes, we must understand that preventing mass killings may eventually require military intervention, but this is always at the end of the list of intervention options, not the beginning.”

Artiklis mainitakse nimeliselt vaid Darfuri, kuid julgen loota, et uus administratsioon hakkab tähelepanu pöörama ka sellele, mida saadab sõjaväeline hunta korda oma rahva vastu Birmas, aga ka Hiina Rahvavabariigi poliitikale Tiibetis. Birma kunstlik humanitaarkatastroof omab genotsiidi tunnuseid ja Tiibetis toimuvat nimetatakse vähemalt kultuurigenotsiidiks. Kas need ei ole siis eelhoiatused, mis nõuavad rahvusvahelise kogukonna sekkumist: “We must learn to recognize the early warning signs of genocide and move quickly to marshal international cooperation, to bring diplomatic and economic pressure to bear against those who violate the norms of civilized behavior.”

Just kui selle kinnituseks mõistis Hiina Rahvavabariik eluks ajaks vangi Tiibeti NGO aktivisti, kes rahvusvahelisele meediale edastas informatsiooni Tiibetis toimuva kohta. Tundub, et eesmärgiks on kasutada täielikku infosulgu, mis võimaldaks Tiibetis rahulikult “toimetada”. Nagu Darfuris või 1994. aasta Rwandas, kus teated massimõrvadest jõudsid rahvusvahelisse meediasse liiga hilja…

Tibetan NGO worker given life in jail

AFP BEIJING (Reuters) – A Chinese court has jailed a Tibetan who worked for a non-governmental organization for life for passing on information about the situation in the restless region to the outside world, a rights group said. Wangdu was given the sentence last month, the International Campaign for Tibet said in a emailed statement, quoting a report in a regional Tibetan newspaper published on November 8.

Six other Tibetans were also given long prison terms, it said.

"The sentences are unprecedented in their severity for Tibetans accused of passing on information to people outside Tibet," the group said.

"This new development indicates a harder line approach to blocking news on the current crackdown in Tibet and also appears to represent a challenge to NGOs working on the plateau."

Chinese troops marched into Tibet in 1950 and the region's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, fled into exile in 1959 after a failed uprising against Beijing's rule.

Mountainous and remote Tibet was rocked by anti-Chinese protests earlier this year, which China blamed on the Dalai Lama, whom it brands a separatist. He has repeatedly denied the claims.

Rights groups say hundreds remain in jail following the protests where they are subjected to harsh treatment and even torture.

Still, the government expects the region's economy to grow 10.1 percent this year, the official Xinhua news agency said, faster than the national average, though tourist numbers will be down due to the unrest.

"To cope with the challenges, the local government published a series of regulatory measures to keep the economy growing steadily and rapidly," it quoted Tibet's governor Qiangba Puncog as saying.

---

Never again (Genocide)
Madeleine K. Albright and William S. Cohen
Some we see; others remain invisible to us. Some have names and faces; others we do not know. They are the victims of genocide and mass atrocities, their numbers too staggering to count.

This month was the 60th anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. It has been 20 years since the United States became a party to the treaty. Despite six decades of efforts to prevent and halt systematic campaigns of massacres, forced displacements and mass rapes, such atrocities persist. Why are we still lacking the necessary institutions, policies and strategies?

It is not because the public doesn't care. We have seen a surge in interest in this country, galvanized by the crisis in Darfur and driven in large part by students and faith-based organizations. And it is not because our leaders do not care. Over the years, many champions in Congress and successive administrations have demanded more action to stop genocide.

When we were in the Clinton administration, we experienced firsthand the challenges of responding to such crises, sometimes because the political will was lacking, but more often because the American government simply does not have an established, coherent policy for preventing and responding to mass atrocities.

Moreover, a lack of dedicated resources for prevention and the absence of bureaucratic mechanisms allowing rapid analysis and response have impeded timely action. What is needed is a national blueprint to prevent genocide and mass atrocities.

Barack Obama should demonstrate at the outset of his presidency that preventing genocide is a national priority. No matter how one calculates American interests, national borders today provide little sanctuary from international problems. Left unchecked, genocide will undermine American security.

First, genocide fuels instability - usually in weak, undemocratic, corrupt states. It is in these states that we find terrorist recruitment and training, human trafficking and civil strife.

Second, genocide and mass atrocities have long-lasting consequences that go far beyond the states in which they occur.

Refugees flow into bordering countries and then across the globe. The need for humanitarian aid can quickly exceed the capacities and resources of a generous world. The international community, including the United States, is called on to absorb displaced people and to undertake relief efforts. And the longer we wait to act, the higher the price tag.

Third, America's standing in the world is eroded when we are perceived as bystanders to genocide. Yes, we must understand that preventing mass killings may eventually require military intervention, but this is always at the end of the list of intervention options, not the beginning.

We must learn to recognize the early warning signs of genocide and move quickly to marshal international cooperation, to bring diplomatic and economic pressure to bear against those who violate the norms of civilized behavior.

Success will require that the president summon political will not only during a crisis but before one emerges. This means taking on inertia within the government, investing political capital, doing the heavy lifting of persuasion. It means fending off critics and cynics.

It means taking risks.

We are keenly aware that the incoming president's agenda will be daunting from day one. But preventing genocide and mass atrocities is not an idealistic addition to our core foreign policy agenda. It is a moral and strategic imperative.

Madeleine K. Albright, the U.S. secretary of state from 1997 to 2001, and William S. Cohen, the U.S. secretary of defense from 1997 to 2001, are the co-chairmen of the Genocide Prevention Task Force.