Pablo, Ken, Cornelius, Gloria & All,
I quite agree that it is necessary sometimes for force to be used or for a willingness to use force to be shown in the pursuit of progressive and transformative changes; i also equally agree that caution shoud be the watch word, and that we must weigh the cost of the use of force.
However, it is also equally important to note that where intrnsigence and impunity has been demonstrated, and the threat of the use of force is either not quickly manifested, or convincingly demonstrated, then what results is an unduely long potraction of the crisis, during which the situation almost always deteriorates. Unfortunatley, the outcome of such half measures is actually costly violenve. This is what the situation in Ivory Coast is confirming, it is what history has repeatedly confirmed over time and space.
It is better not to threaten to use force at all, if one was not actually prepared to use it, because it will only worsen the situation. Then those who have demonstrated impunity get emboldened and are given room to mobilise divisively to the detriment of the cause. Nature indeed abhors a vacum!
Regards,
Jaye
From: kenneth harrow <harrow@msu.edu>
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2011 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - A Report From Abidjan
pablo
first of all, your third paragraph echoes what us greybeards, cornelius and i, were arguing initially, issuing words of caution. sure we can root for one side, but even if it is the winner, the real question is what price are you willing to pay for a democratic result to be vindicated. i for one, grandfather twice over, do not favor do or die solutions.
gloria is right when she says there has to be some willingness to engage in force for a democratic solution to come about, or for a progressive solution to come about. but that has to be weighed against the cost in lives. i very much agree that if we cannot critique those we like (like obama, say), then we are not useful in our political claims. your phrase "morally unpalatable" rings well.
let's imagine that the cambodian genocide was instigated by people who opposed a corrupt elite ruling class; we can say the same for the cultural revolution under mao. how many cambodians had to die before we could concede that the ideals were betrayed by the actions.
etc. old arguments.
secondly, i too, out of curiosity, checked on Gary L Busch, aka Gary K. Busch. interestingly at one point he was arguing that Trafigura got a bum rap in cote d'ivoire. amazing, an apologist for the worst corporate example of neoliberal destruction in terms of the global south. here's the link for those interested: http://calumcarr.blogspot.com/2010/05/dr-gary-k-busch-some-background.html
as for his presentation of himself as an oldtime labor activist, etc, he also advertises himself as an academic. where might that academic appointment be, i wonder. google is silent on the question
ken
On 4/3/11 3:27 PM, Pablo Idahosa wrote:
> I agree, Ken. I checked this Gary L. Busch guy out. He has an interesting webpage that looks to me as if he is a warmed over ultra-lefty. So many of these unsubstantiated assertions do sound groundless and shohttp://calumcarr.blogspot.com/2010/05/dr-gary-k-busch-some-background.htmluld be treated with care. However, having skyped a friend of mind in Abidjan ( I think all of us can do this to the extent that people still have access to the internet under these appalling circumstances), at the very least, she confirmed that yesterday she heard lots of helicopters flying overhead and lots of shooting. At who, she cannot for sure say.
>
> On another matter, why is it we question the outcome of reports against those whom we support, or the procedures they are claiming to uphold? To be sure, it is always so hard to confirm causalities, and typically the number of 800 looks too round and neat. Yes, once it comes out of a source, it goes wire-viral, recycled, and everyone picks it up, whether someone is, or some people are, there to have known or witnessed as close up as is possible. I doubt, though, whether the figure, exaggerated or underestimated, is wrong in its substance, and it is likely to have been perpetrated by people supporting Outrra, who may or may not have been soldiers, though this matters not one way or the other whether they soldiers. Once certain things are set in motion, in circumstances like these, terrible consequences follow.
>
> I do not believe it is morally unpalatable to withhold support for those in whose name procedural democracy is invoked, but who are willing to see others, innocents, die for it/them. Unwittingly, some of us become cheer leaders for belligerents who are not worthy of support, even if the procedures they claim to be supporting are.
>
> Pablo
>
> On 03/04/11 7:25 AM, Yona Maro wrote:
>> By Dr. Gary L. Busch 2/4/11
>> Apr 3, 2011 - 10:59:25 AM
>>
>> Much of the news reports represent a wilful misrepresentation of the facts. The United Nations Mil-24 helicopters overflew Gbagbo-army positions in the West of the Ivory Coast and bombed and strafed a corridor into the cities for the rebel army. The point troops of this 'rebel army' were not Ivorians of the Force Nouvelles but Nigerian troops (mainly from the Mobile Police - the "Kill and Go") and Burkinabe Special Forces lent by President Campaore for the attack. These UN helicopters and a strong force of mercenaries entered cities like Daloa and Bondou and began killing large numbers of civilians as the pro-Gbagbo forces withdrew. Later, bands of Liberian adventurers (fighting for neither Ouattara nor Gbagbo) entered the cities to loot and plunder.
>>
>> Hundreds were killedat Daloa and Bondou by the invading forces. There were more than 800 civilians killed in Duekoue the next day by Ouattara's soldiers, even though there were over a thousand UN peacekeepers looking on.
>>
>> This was repeated in the drive for Abidjan where the UN has continued to use its helicopters with deadly effect and the UN Representative, Choi, has given the UN forces the right to 'shoot at will'. Seven pro-Gbagbo forces have been killed by the UN (mainly by Pakistani and Senegalese troops in the UNOCI) and scores of others have been shot at but no one yet knows the total. The French have moved out of their base in Port Bouet and are patrolling Abidjan streets, blocking off main roads and shooting at military and civilian targets. They say they are protecting foreigners who might be targets but it appears they are protecting them before they were endangered.
>>
>> The reason for this military initiative was twofold. April 1 is the day that the cocoa buyers (Noble and others) promised to pay Gbagbo for their cocoa stocks which were locked up in the Ivory Coast. They said they didn't care who was President, they wanted their cocoa. That made it imperative for Ouattara and the rebels to take the Port of San Pedro which is an important cocoa export port. The second reason is that April 1 was the day on which the Ivory Coast would have passed the deadline for paying its regular interest payment on its international debt which had been delayed by Gbagbo since his funds were cut off. To succeed in this the French and the UN decided on a covert (barely concealed) attack on the government of the Ivory Coast.
>>
>> Many of the soldiers loyal to Gbagbo were overwhelmed by the force and mechanisation of the attack and surrendered or took off their uniforms and fled. The battle now rages in Abidjan where the UN and the French continue their assault. However, the civilian population is reorganising itself and taking up arms. It remains to be seen if this UN and French attack will succeed in the face of a large and aroused population. The fat lady has not sung her final aria. Expect many civilian deaths. That is the UN way.
>>
>>
>> Source:Ocnus.net 2011
>>
>>
>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
>> For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>> For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
>> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>
>
-- kenneth w. harrow
distinguished professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
east lansing, mi 48824-1036
ph. 517 803 8839
harrow@msu.edu
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2011 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - A Report From Abidjan
pablo
first of all, your third paragraph echoes what us greybeards, cornelius and i, were arguing initially, issuing words of caution. sure we can root for one side, but even if it is the winner, the real question is what price are you willing to pay for a democratic result to be vindicated. i for one, grandfather twice over, do not favor do or die solutions.
gloria is right when she says there has to be some willingness to engage in force for a democratic solution to come about, or for a progressive solution to come about. but that has to be weighed against the cost in lives. i very much agree that if we cannot critique those we like (like obama, say), then we are not useful in our political claims. your phrase "morally unpalatable" rings well.
let's imagine that the cambodian genocide was instigated by people who opposed a corrupt elite ruling class; we can say the same for the cultural revolution under mao. how many cambodians had to die before we could concede that the ideals were betrayed by the actions.
etc. old arguments.
secondly, i too, out of curiosity, checked on Gary L Busch, aka Gary K. Busch. interestingly at one point he was arguing that Trafigura got a bum rap in cote d'ivoire. amazing, an apologist for the worst corporate example of neoliberal destruction in terms of the global south. here's the link for those interested: http://calumcarr.blogspot.com/2010/05/dr-gary-k-busch-some-background.html
as for his presentation of himself as an oldtime labor activist, etc, he also advertises himself as an academic. where might that academic appointment be, i wonder. google is silent on the question
ken
On 4/3/11 3:27 PM, Pablo Idahosa wrote:
> I agree, Ken. I checked this Gary L. Busch guy out. He has an interesting webpage that looks to me as if he is a warmed over ultra-lefty. So many of these unsubstantiated assertions do sound groundless and shohttp://calumcarr.blogspot.com/2010/05/dr-gary-k-busch-some-background.htmluld be treated with care. However, having skyped a friend of mind in Abidjan ( I think all of us can do this to the extent that people still have access to the internet under these appalling circumstances), at the very least, she confirmed that yesterday she heard lots of helicopters flying overhead and lots of shooting. At who, she cannot for sure say.
>
> On another matter, why is it we question the outcome of reports against those whom we support, or the procedures they are claiming to uphold? To be sure, it is always so hard to confirm causalities, and typically the number of 800 looks too round and neat. Yes, once it comes out of a source, it goes wire-viral, recycled, and everyone picks it up, whether someone is, or some people are, there to have known or witnessed as close up as is possible. I doubt, though, whether the figure, exaggerated or underestimated, is wrong in its substance, and it is likely to have been perpetrated by people supporting Outrra, who may or may not have been soldiers, though this matters not one way or the other whether they soldiers. Once certain things are set in motion, in circumstances like these, terrible consequences follow.
>
> I do not believe it is morally unpalatable to withhold support for those in whose name procedural democracy is invoked, but who are willing to see others, innocents, die for it/them. Unwittingly, some of us become cheer leaders for belligerents who are not worthy of support, even if the procedures they claim to be supporting are.
>
> Pablo
>
> On 03/04/11 7:25 AM, Yona Maro wrote:
>> By Dr. Gary L. Busch 2/4/11
>> Apr 3, 2011 - 10:59:25 AM
>>
>> Much of the news reports represent a wilful misrepresentation of the facts. The United Nations Mil-24 helicopters overflew Gbagbo-army positions in the West of the Ivory Coast and bombed and strafed a corridor into the cities for the rebel army. The point troops of this 'rebel army' were not Ivorians of the Force Nouvelles but Nigerian troops (mainly from the Mobile Police - the "Kill and Go") and Burkinabe Special Forces lent by President Campaore for the attack. These UN helicopters and a strong force of mercenaries entered cities like Daloa and Bondou and began killing large numbers of civilians as the pro-Gbagbo forces withdrew. Later, bands of Liberian adventurers (fighting for neither Ouattara nor Gbagbo) entered the cities to loot and plunder.
>>
>> Hundreds were killedat Daloa and Bondou by the invading forces. There were more than 800 civilians killed in Duekoue the next day by Ouattara's soldiers, even though there were over a thousand UN peacekeepers looking on.
>>
>> This was repeated in the drive for Abidjan where the UN has continued to use its helicopters with deadly effect and the UN Representative, Choi, has given the UN forces the right to 'shoot at will'. Seven pro-Gbagbo forces have been killed by the UN (mainly by Pakistani and Senegalese troops in the UNOCI) and scores of others have been shot at but no one yet knows the total. The French have moved out of their base in Port Bouet and are patrolling Abidjan streets, blocking off main roads and shooting at military and civilian targets. They say they are protecting foreigners who might be targets but it appears they are protecting them before they were endangered.
>>
>> The reason for this military initiative was twofold. April 1 is the day that the cocoa buyers (Noble and others) promised to pay Gbagbo for their cocoa stocks which were locked up in the Ivory Coast. They said they didn't care who was President, they wanted their cocoa. That made it imperative for Ouattara and the rebels to take the Port of San Pedro which is an important cocoa export port. The second reason is that April 1 was the day on which the Ivory Coast would have passed the deadline for paying its regular interest payment on its international debt which had been delayed by Gbagbo since his funds were cut off. To succeed in this the French and the UN decided on a covert (barely concealed) attack on the government of the Ivory Coast.
>>
>> Many of the soldiers loyal to Gbagbo were overwhelmed by the force and mechanisation of the attack and surrendered or took off their uniforms and fled. The battle now rages in Abidjan where the UN and the French continue their assault. However, the civilian population is reorganising itself and taking up arms. It remains to be seen if this UN and French attack will succeed in the face of a large and aroused population. The fat lady has not sung her final aria. Expect many civilian deaths. That is the UN way.
>>
>>
>> Source:Ocnus.net 2011
>>
>>
>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
>> For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>> For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
>> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>
>
-- kenneth w. harrow
distinguished professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
east lansing, mi 48824-1036
ph. 517 803 8839
harrow@msu.edu
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment