The present, rampant ‘last minute’ approach of showing much concern to conflicts and victims of conflict, after conflicts have occurred or erupted into violence, property, environment and life have been lost and or devastated, as if we have all along not been around to do something to prevent the same from happening or to move quickly to prevent them from escalating, is “a management by crisis approach” and therefore outdated.
The present, rampant ‘last minute’ approach of showing much concern to conflicts and victims of conflict, after conflicts have occurred or erupted into violence, property, environment and life have been lost and or devastated, as if we have all along not been around to do something to prevent the same from happening or to move quickly to prevent them from escalating, is "a management by crisis approach” and therefore outdated.
A good example is how the international community irresponsibly handled the conflict in Rwanda in 1994 before it culminated to genocide. Another example is the handling of the recent conflict in the Darfur Region of Western Sudan between the Arab militia known as the Janjaweed and the indigenous black Sudanese.
A prompt and earlier intervention would have prevented thousands of people from dying. It also could have prevented thousands from fleeing to Eastern Chad as refugees. The present sympathy and concern for the same is unfortunately not different from ‘shedding crocodile tears’. Similar irresponsibility occurred soon after the general elections in Kenya in December 2007.
The international community intervened to de-escalate the conflict after hundreds of people had died and much property had been lost, accompanied by a situation of thousands of internally displaced people (IDPs) and others fleeing to neighbouring countries as refugees.
The election crisis in Zimbabwe is another case in point. What was done by both the people inside the country and the international community as a whole leaves much to be desired! Even after the formed ‘government of national unity’ did not readily materialise, the international community, especially the African Union, the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the United Nations Security Council simply let it go by abdicating.
Zimbabweans were continuing to suffer from such preventable diseases as cholera while the world simply watched. Even when inflation in the country reached 2,000%, the world simply watched while the majority of the country’s population suffered from famine and could not even afford obtaining essential commodities.
God could not Himself have come down from heaven with angels, cherubims and seraphims around Him, to rescue and help the people of Zimbabwe. His nature is to use willing people, who are here on earth, like you and me, to rescue and help them.
Those who read the Bible know that God requires us to "speak up for the rights of the poor and destitute” (Proverbs 31:8 – 9). He even says that "if a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered” (Proverbs 21:13).
Although Zimbabweans cried out enough about their plight and so did the media, it took the international community unnecessarily long to come to their rescue. It is not proper for the international community to continue being half -hearted or complacent.
Whereas it was Zimbabweans or Congolese or Darfurians the other day, it could be us or you tomorrow. As a Christian, I find it helpful and decenct of us all, irrespective of our different faith inclinations, to do to others what we would wish them to do to us if we were in their situation (Luke 6:31) and to love others as we love ourselves (Luke 10:27).
The delay by the international community particularly the United Nations Security Council and the African Union, to de-escalate conflicts should also be addressed. Wherever respective governments fail to prevent massacres of innocent people or support the same, peace keeping troops should be sent promptly.
There should be an adequate, standby peacekeeping force funded by the United Nations Security Council, to counter situations of authorities sending inadequate numbers of troops and resources, which do not match the magnitude of conflict situations. Postponing or stalling the same for whatever reason is a repetition of the international community’s abdication and complacency, it showed in Rwanda in 1994, resulting in the now much regretted genocide.
Letting some Governments in power to get away with it by encouraging them to form Governments of ‘national unity’ after they have rigged elections or behaved in a manner reminiscent of rigging elections; after they have failed to announce the results of the same in time, or after they have intimidated, maimed or killed political opponents is a cause of conflicts and gross violation of human rights and a total abuse and disregard of democratic principles. History will record such Governments as nothing less than a compromise of democracy.
The fact that the concept of good governance is standard and universal so means the same applies to democracy. There should be no such scapegoats who bend the principles and standards of democracy to African or European or American or Asian democracy.
The litmus test should be whether the principles of democracy have been adhered to or not during elections. Likewise, no human being should be allowed to persecute his/her people with impunity, using state machinery.
Nor should anyone be allowed to do anything he or she wants to fellow human beings, under the pretext of doing it according to the needs of his/her country, unmindful of how what he or she does affects them and the basic human rights in the particular country. Peace education is the right remedy to address such absurdity.
The tendency by some parties in conflict to refuse to talk to each other for the reason that the other party has done unbearable things to them or has committed unforgivable atrocities unnecessarily prolongs conflicts, causing untold suffering to the majority.
It is an outdated and shortsighted way of handling conflicts, which should be done away with. For it is based on sheer arrogance, which does not in any way benefit the suffering people in conflict, their relatives and friends.
Depending on convening national or regional conferences to resolve conflicts, after conflicts have erupted into violence, to the extent of even using tactics of threatening to impose sanctions against a particular country is not in any way good enough. Similar moves in the past, have hurt the majority, leaving the targeted leaders unscathed and or unaffected.
They get away with it by draining the concerned countries’ Treasury, central banks or foreign reserves to ensure continuity of their life styles, pushing them to oppress and exploit their people more. Therefore, sanctions fan or worsen conflicts; they increase the majority of people’s suffering instead of alleviating or eradicating it.
They are even relatively costly and therefore outdated, and a waste of time too. Instead, why can’t emphasis be put on peace education provided through formal and informal teaching in educational institutions, prisons, work places, villages, meetings, seminars, workshops and conferences, including various ways of preventing conflicts and enabling all communities to know their rights, know how to demand accountability and proper delivery of service?
Peace treaties and declarations, which, though, are a step in the right direction, are signed without corresponding actions to ensure implementation of the same.