Genocide in Sudan

I set aside time this week to study the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Africa.

Sudan is the African continent's largest country.  It encompasses some 2.5 million kilometers, stretching from the sands of the Sahara to the banks of the Nile.  It is home to some 35 million people.  The vast majority of the population lives in the Muslim dominated north.  Ever since Sudan gained its independence from British-Egyptian rule, it has been embroiled in a religious battle between the northern Arab Muslims and the southern black Christian population.  Needless to say, the presence of oil reserves in the southern region exacerbate the conflict.  Hard-line Islamists are not eager to relinquish any political autonomy to the local population.   Violence erupts as rebel groups take up arms to seek independence from the Arab dominated government in Khartoum, who consistently denies them access to education, jobs and political power.

Part of the problem in Sudan is the government's relationship with neighboring Uganda.  Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has long supported insurgent groups in southern Sudan.  His government is fearful that Sudan is determined to "Islamize" Africa.  Museveni has paid particular attention to the work of the Sudan People's Liberation Army.  Yet, he has his own internal turmoil.  A rebel organization known as "The Lord's Resistance Army" (LRA) terrorizes northern Uganda with bands of abducted children warriors.  These gangs have also developed connections with insurgent groups in southern Sudan, where LRA leader, Joseph Kony has set-up secret camps.

The region is smoldering with violence, focused primarily on power and oil.

Another factor is the presence of Christian organizations in southern Sudan, largely financed by conservative religious groups in the United States.  Franklin Graham (Billy Graham's son) heads up a ministry known as "The Samaritan's Purse."  They have a hospital in southern Sudan that is frequently a target in the ongoing skirmishes.  Rev. Graham believes that the U.S. Government has a moral responsibility to overthrow Sudan's President Omar Hassan al Bashir.  "We see burned out villages, mutilated bodies, families torn apart and religious persecution equal to that of the Holocaust," he said.

On September 6, 2001, President Bush appointed former U.S. Senator John Danforth as Special Envoy to the region.  Five days later, the World Trade Center was attacked.  The saga took a new turn when it was revealed that Sudan had been an incubating ground for Osama Bin Laden and al Qaeda.

Conflict mediators from Atlanta's Carter Center met with Franklin Graham in hopes that the evangelist (who enjoys a close friendship with Mr. Bush) could urge his Administration to keep moving forward in negotiating a peace settlement for Sudan.  At first, Rev. Graham was reluctant, but after further deliberation, he agreed that we should "give peace a chance."  One of Colin Powell's major achievements during his tenure as Secretary of State was brokering the Sudan Peace Act and the subsequent cease fire.

Peace initiatives, however, prove fragile in Sudan.  Uganda's insurgent groups continue to have a strong presence in southern Sudan.  They believe that their interests are best served when the region is in turmoil.  Joseph Kony (LRA) fuels the resentment of marginalized rebel groups in southern Sudan who were not invited to the Peace Table, namely the "Sudan Liberation Army" and the "Justice and Equality Movement."  Their followers live in the Darfur region in western Sudan.  When they began attacking Sudanese Government posts in that region, President al Bashir contracted a well-organized Arab Muslim militia (known as the Janjaweed....."guns on horseback") to crush the rebellion. 

The result has been nothing short of genocide.  Since 2003, between 200,000 and 400,000 residents in Darfur have been slaughtered.  An equal number have been displaced and are continually subject to starvation and disease.  Despite all efforts to secure peace in the area, the region remains a tinder box.

The world recently marked the Tenth Anniversary of the Rwanda Genocide, a shameful episode in human history when 800,000 human beings were lost in 100 days.  I have had to do a lot of soul-searching this week.  Why has it taken me (and so many of my Western colleagues) this long to fully grasp the magnitude of the tragedy in Sudan?  Can this violence be stopped?  Must we hold the Sudan Government in Khartoum accountable for the atrocities?  Are southern rebels also guilty of human rights abuses?  Are there any "nonviolent" options available to the international community that can mitigate this catastrophe?  

In the meantime, the Sudanese Government has been waging war on its own people in the south for over twenty years.  An irregular militia has been ethnically cleansing a region the size of Texas right before our eyes.  There is no concrete assurance that the violence will end.

What is the world's moral responsibility?

Global Warming

Stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God."  Job 37

Yesterday, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R- California) announced a plan to address global warming by setting goals to reduce California's emission of green house gasses.  He will be directing the state's Environmental Protection Agency to initiate policies that will effectively reduce carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide to pre-2000 levels by 2010.  The plan calls for subsequent controls to reduce "greenhouse" gasses to below 1990 levels by 2050.  "California will be a leader in the fight against global warming," Governor Schwarzenegger said.  "We have no choice but to meet this challenge.  We must leave a better world for our children and their children."

Mr. Schwarzenegger joins a growing list of state and local officials who are not only voicing their concerns, but taking specific actions to address changing weather patterns, shrinking wildlife habitats, invasive animal and plant species, and rising sea levels....attributed to the effect of global warming.

Mayor Greg Nickels of Seattle, for example, became alarmed that Washington state residents were wearing shorts in January.  What troubled the mayor were not the shorts, but the unusually warm temperatures!  Many nearby ski resorts were having to limit their operation, or close, due to 80 days of record high temperatures.  While concerned about the financial impact of the ski industry on the local economy, he was more concerned about the level of the surrounding snow pack. Meteorologists contend that the snow pack is less than one third of the normal  mass for any time of the year....and it has been progressively dwindling for three decades.  These trends are already seriously impacting Seattle's drinking water supply and hydroelectric power.  Mayor Nickels decided to go on a mission.  He attended the U.S. Conference of Mayors and challenged his colleagues across America to adopt standards that by 2012 will  reduce heat-trapping gas emissions to levels that are 7% lower than those recorded in 1990. (This challenge is the so-called Kyoto Protocol ) As of today, 132 mayors (both Republican and Democrat) have signed on.   In fact, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said, "The projected rise in sea levels now threatens the very existence of my city."

Reporter Michael Christie (Reuters) wrote a syndicated article last week that forecast the upcoming  hurricane season.  He writes, "If hurricanes again pound the U.S. this summer, their roar is likely to be accompanied by the din of another storm, an angry debate...over the impact of global warming." You'll remember that last year, 15 tropical storms spawned nine hurricanes in the Atlantic that brought some $45 billion in damages.  While some contend that hurricane activity follows certain decade-long cycles, most scientists agree that warmer waters and increased moisture are fueling the intensity of these storms.  "The environment in which these hurricanes form is clearly changing," said Kevin Trenbert, a climatologist with the national Center of Atmospheric  Research.

The debate over Climate Change will continue.  In the meantime, the warning signs are all around us and continue to increase.  It was really weird seeing those photos of Mount Kilimanjaro this winter without its recognizable snow cap.  Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairperson of the Inter-Governmental Panel of Climate Change said recently, "We have just a small window of opportunity and it is closing rather rapidly.  There is not a moment to lose."

Stem Cell Research

The House of Representatives passed a bill this week that would allow federal funds to be used for embryonic stem cell research.  A similar bill has broad bipartisan support in the Senate.  Embryonic stem cells have the potential to grow into any cell, or tissue in the human body.  This research holds great promise for the treatment of disease.

Some 3,000 Americans die every day from maladies that scientists believe can be successfully treated, even cured, through this technology.  Diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer and AIDS are only a few of the conditions that are being studied.  Embryonic stem cells were recently coaxed into retinal cells to stop macular degeneration that invariably results in blindness.

These measures are strongly opposed by  religious conservatives.  President Bush has indicated that he will veto the legislation when it reaches his desk.   They contend that the research crosses a dangerous ethical line.  Ever since geneticist James Thomson first isolated human stem cells in 1999, critics have argued that these cell "colonies" constitute a distinct, self-integrating human organism.  Others argue that the culture has not developed sufficiently to make such claims.   In 2001, federal funding was limited to stem cell lines that already exist.  Most researchers contend that these lines are now seriously contaminated because of exhaustive experimentation.  While research on adult stem cell lines has proved beneficial, scientists believe that only embryonic stem cells have the best potential to grow into any desired tissue.  We need further "informed" debate on this issue.

An insightful article in the June issue of Discover magazine contains David Duncan's interview with Harvard embryologist Doug Melton.  Dr. Melton has a personal interest in stem cell research because both his children have diabetes.   Inaccurate monitoring and treatment often lead to early death.  Needless to say, he believes that time is of essence.  When asked why conservative groups vehemently oppose this research, Melton suggests that there has always been a certain fear of "doing something where we don't know all the consequences."  And yet, he reminds us that science has always coaxed us beyond our comfort zones.  There was a time, for example, when surgery was considered abnormal.  Many believed that it violated the body as a "sacred vessel of the soul."  There were similar concerns that the use of antibiotics was a human intervention into the natural order of things.

Dr. Melton would also have us consider the fact that there is a phenomenon known as "natural abortion," or miscarriage.  It is believed that out of every 100 fertilized eggs, 20 actually go on to produce a baby.  In other words, most fertilizations fail.  "That presents some challenges," he says, "to the theory that life begins at fertilization."  His detractors contend that natural abortion is "God's will."  Melton counters, "So, why is not God's will to have a person like me wanting to work on human embryonic stem cells?"  These embryos are kept in frozen storage units and are routinely discarded once couples have decided to discontinue fertilization efforts.

We all know someone who desperately needs this research to go forward.  And, yes, standards and safeguards can and should be established.  I was moved by remarks made by U.S. Representative Jo Ann Emerson ( R - Missouri ) in a New York Times article.   She tells of a young constituent who was paralyzed in a car accident at age 16.  He asked that she reconsider her opposition to stem cell research.  "I later wrote to Cody's family," she said, "telling them that after hearing his story, I just could not do what he asked.  I have regretted writing that letter ever since."

I feel Doug Melton sums up the debate quite well.  "What is natural and what is anti-natural," he says, "always changes with time...We can't allow ourselves to live in a society where we become so afraid of the unknown that we won't attempt new things."   He contends that every generation has been challenged to live on the edge of what is possible.