The Democratic race for the nomination is heating up. The President gave another press conference. One death, Anna Nicole's, has dominated the headlines day after day. Dozens of deaths each day in Africa? Er, not so much.
Here's what's not getting attention: The U.S. special envoy acknowledged that 2.5 million people in Darfur refugees are in danger of renewed Janjaweed attacks he described as a "blood bath," yet withdrew the Administration's characterization of Darfur as "genocide."
The Sudanese government has prevented a human rights mission from entering the country and is not doing enough to protect aid workers, according to reports. In other words, the situation is deteriorating rapidly.
Now the situation in Chad is getting worse. OXFAM reports that 50,000 people have been displaced by violence. As the Voice of America reports:
An international aid agency is warning today (Thursday) that eastern Chad is on the verge of becoming another Darfur. OXFAM says attacks on villages have displaced tens of thousands of Chadians, leaving them with little water and no sanitation. The warning comes as the UN Security Council nears a decision on sending a peacekeeping force to the region.
Despite this, the words "Africa" and "Darfur" weren't mentioned in the President's press conference. The Democratic candidates haven't been talking about it much, either, perhaps out of fear that Americans are becoming tired of foreign entanglements.
Why is the word "genocide" important, and the Administration's backtracking in its use tragic? Because genocide is recognized as a unique moral crime requiring urgent response. (There's more on the significance and history of the word "genocide" in my review of the movie "Screamers," here.)
Here's an irony: I wrote about the JonBenet Ramsey case a while back because I felt it represented something important and unhealthy that happens to women and girls in our culture. Somebody snidely responded "Write about Darfur." (I already had, many times.) Now Anna Nicole's nanny has testified that she underfed her baby daughter to make her slimmer and "sexier."
Thatwas the point of my JonBenet story. JonBenet and Anna Nicole's daughter both reflect a profound societal sickness. That sickness pressures women toward self-hatred if they don't conform to an abstract beauty standard, and causes some parents to mistreat their children in the name of "sexiness."
But these are exceptional cases, children whose stories illustrate a social problem through their exaggeration rather than their commonality. A suffering child in Africa, on the other hand, is far from unique. Each of these children is a tragedy, but the attention of our leaders and our media isn't where it should be.
One starving baby with a celebrity Mom? Read all about it. Hundreds of thousands of them in Africa, sheltered in grim refugee camps with millions of adults? Well, you know what they say: Out of sight, out of mind.
(ACTION ITEMS: You can support the Save Darfur coalition to raise political awareness on Darfur and Chad, or you can contribute to InterAction if you want your dollars to support direct aid. And if you're a Democrat, keep raising the issue with your political leaders.)