 |
|
Flak seeks writers to write reviews, essays and interviews for its Opinion section. Special emphasis on short,
timely takes on major works.
No pay. Some glory. Lots of editorial back-and-forth, and a nice-looking clip for your files.
Check out our guidelines for details or contact editor James Norton.
|
Sign up for Flak's weekly e-mail updates:
|
|
|
 The View from Johannesburg
by Cynthia Schweer
South Africa understands the fear of living beneath the tyranny of
an unethical regime. Apartheid left its scar on this country; South Africans are
just emerging from the almost 50 years during which
a political body dedicated to putting down a
racial majority asserted an all-encompassing power. But in the decade since the first post-apartheid elections in 1994,
a lively democracy has flourished in South Africa, where election day is a national
holiday and people turn out in droves and form long lines to vote. Thus
one might assume that South Africans — and for that matter, other parts of the
developing, democratized world that have undergone similar changes — would have been
solidly behind the United States during
its quest to "bring democracy to the Iraqi people." But this is not the case.
The media reported world opposition to the US-led coalition against Iraq, but
it focused largely on anti-American sentiment from
the European and Arab world. Less widely publicized were the increasingly vocal
and adamant voices of dissent from developing countries. A glance at South Africa's
newspaper headlines reveals the depth of opposition: "The Dead, the Dying and the
Damaged," screamed the Mail & Guardian, a left-leaning weekly, in reference to the
soldiers and civilians of Iraq. "Liberated Afghans now Weep for Iraqis," reported
the more conservative Star daily, careful to ensure that the term 'liberated' appear
in quotations. and there was "After Iraq It's Africa" on the front page of the
Sowetan, an Africa-focused newspaper published in the township of Soweto.
The opposition was fierce here, and understandably so. Sugar-coated references to
"Operation Iraqi Freedom" only reinforce the fear that a single world power
can inflict dominance on unsuspecting nations whenever it pleases. Rather than
focusing on the tactical strategies of war or on accounts of military victories, the
South Africans to whom I spoke were concerned about Iraqi civilian casualties,
the absence of weapons of mass destruction and, most of all, the "illegality" of a
war that was never sanctioned by the United Nations, much less the world.
During last month's opening of the Africa Conference on Elections, Democracy and
Governance, a four-day event co-hosted by the African Union and South
Africa's Independent Electoral Commission, South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki,
said that "the prospect facing the people of Iraq should serve as
sufficient warning that in future we too might have others descend on us, guns in
hand to force-feed us [with democracy]." He continued with, "If the UN does not
matter ... why should we, the little countries of Africa that make up the African Union,
think that we matter and will not be punished if we get out of line?"
African countries with functioning democracies are clearly interested in the
continued development of the democratic process within their governments. However,
they want it on their own terms, not through force-feeding by the first world.
Some of the strongest support for international institutions comes from the
developing world, largely because of the overwhelming belief that the growth of
democracy in their own governments will be served and protected not by the
actions of a benevolent world superpower, but rather by participation
in and support for a strong world democracy. this light, the South African
reaction against the war is really no surprise at all.
E-mail Cynthia Schweer at cynthia_schweer@yahoo.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All materials copyright © 1999-2007 by Flak Magazine |
|
|
|
