tniqh gkalnbehp abmoytdu vziqp neqru sxnwv ohicdryul

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I accept the criticism. But I never stated Romanians and Slowaks were Gispies. It was a list. Gisies (AND/OR Slowaks--etc.

Best from Budapest,

Miklós Vámos

Lisa R,

There is still a chance to protect Darfur's civilians from a further round of violence, hunger and displacement, but only if government and rebels resume peace negotiations. This means stepping back from rhetorical confrontation and empty threats of military action. Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir knows that US and British saber-rattling is moralistic hyperventilation, and he has called their bluff. Finding a solution hinges on a sober assessment of what is practical, not on making Darfur a guinea pig for "the duty to protect" or a test case for a new global moral consciousness. …. The Genocide Intervention Network, set up by US students, aims to build a permanent anti-genocide constituency, using Darfur as its first case. …. This is surely legitimate. The knock-down argument against humanitarian invasion is that it won't work. The idea of foreign troops fighting their way into Darfur and disarming the Janjaweed militia by force is sheer fantasy. Practicality dictates that a peacekeeping force in Darfur cannot enforce its will on any resisting armed groups without entering into a protracted and unwinnable counter-insurgency in which casualties are inevitable. The only way peacekeeping works is with consent: the agreement of the Sudan government and the support of the majority of the Darfurian populace, including the leaders of the multitudinous armed groups in the region. …[T]here is a workable alternative to philanthropic imperialism. They're called peace talks…. The immediate root of today's crisis in Darfur is the breakdown of the political process. Violence escalated after the peace talks, which ended in the Nigerian capital Abuja on 5 May, concluded with the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement by the Sudan government and one rebel faction, headed by Minni Minawi. Two groups - the Sudan Liberation Movement of Abdel Wahid al Nur (the largest group) and the Justice and Equality Movement - didn't sign, and the smouldering war promptly re-ignited. .. The breakdown did not happen because the peace agreement was faulty, but because the political process was brought to an abrupt and premature end when Minawi signed. I was part of the African Union mediation team and was present in the final negotiating session when Wahid declared the DPA's security arrangements "acceptable" and the wealth-sharing provisions "95% acceptable." He stalled because his party was offered far fewer executive and legislative posts than it wanted, and because his group was given an ultimatum of signing without time to examine the options. The outstanding differences between him and Khartoum were small and could have been accommodated with modest flexibility on both sides. The disaster of the DPA was that the book was closed on 5 May and those who failed to sign were shut out of any further formal negotiation. All the high-powered mediators left Abuja. For a month, I stayed behind and continued to facilitate negotiations between Wahid and the Sudan government. We came agonisingly close to an agreement - had we found a formula for providing an additional $100m for immediate compensation for victims of the violence, I believe we might have closed the deal. But, prevented from revisiting the DPA's text, I had only the tiniest room for manoeuvre. Wahid did agree with Khartoum on a comprehensive ceasefire, including withdrawal of forces to designated zones of control, demilitarisation of displaced camps and humanitarian supply routes, restriction of the Janjaweed leading to ultimate disarmament, and much more robust mechanisms for monitoring and reporting violations. But that counted for naught when he was given the "take it or leave it" option on the whole package. When that last-chance mediation failed, Khartoum insisted that the rebels who hadn't signed up should be expelled from the Darfur ceasefire commission. The AU's greatest error was to acquiesce in this decision, which has left its troops branded as pro-Khartoum by many Darfurians

Lisa R,

It's late, true; but allow me to revert to your question about Sudan, especially in light of the joint letter signed by eminent Europena thinkers and authors, including Umberto Eco,Günter Grass,
Jürgen Habermas and Václav Havel, among others, and the cold shower given by Hosni Mubarak to Ban Ki Moon about UN peacekeeping forces reinforcing AU forces in Darfur. This is what Alex de Waal, the author, with Julie Flint, of Darfur: A Short History of a Long War and an adviser to the African Union mediation for the conflict in Darfur had to say: >

Anju Chandel,

I shall certainly try to read Amartya Sen's article on "Identity and Violence : The Illusion of Destiny", just as I have read many, many of his works including "Social Choice and Individual Values" and his more mathematical works.

I am myself of Indian origin and have travelled all over the world (more than 30 countries, having been an international civil servant in no less than 3 international organisations). Being a person who tries with all his might to be a good Muslim (which requires me to also be a good Christian, Hindu, Jew, Buddhist because, as the Holy Quran says, every people and every society has received The Message from God), I deplore what happened in Gujrat, the province from which my father originates; but that does not negate what you claim about India being an example of multi-cultural harmony.

May I invite you, in turn, to read the article "The Six Burdens of Sanity" , a lecture delivered by Dr Salman Akhtar at the inauguration of Delhi University's Centre for Psychoanalytic Studies in 2006? Dr Akhtar is lecturer at Harvard Medical School, professor of psychiatry at Jefferson Medical College and training analyst at the Philadelphia Psychoanalytis Institute. The article treats of schizophrenia/terrorism, identity and sanity, both individual and collective.

Oscar Wilde once quoted: "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." ...

If we understand the core of this saying we would understand why a human kills another human being?

For better understanding I suggest you read Amartya Sen's "Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny".

The other option is you come to India and learn how our nation is 'safe for diversity'!

Mr. Vamos,

In my opinion, I think the reasons for war are alot more complex than people not just understanding each other. Granted lack of understanding does play a major part. But all the other variables will be present as well in some form or fashion.
Some of those other variables or reasons are just plain greed, hate for others who are different be it their skin color, their religion or their politics. The reasons for war and terroristic acts know no end. Where would you send the Bin Ladens, the Saddams, the David Dukes, Jim Jones, Hitlers, the Stalins, etc.. Just look in about every country and you will find one of these people. If not now, then in their history. People follow leaders for right or wrong. All the people I mentioned and the ones like them rely on their followers. The war in the Middle East is extremely complex. But it has all the above ingredients plus a host of more for good measure. I despise war. Period. And I really mean it when I say that I just wish that we as humans could all live together in peace. But as long as people subscribe to any political/religious ideology we will always have violence and wars. And then we are all humans too. With all those negative emotions and thoughts that make war possible in the first place.

It's the caveman in us that causes this strife. For most of our history on this earth we've lived in fear...fear of the more malevolent aspects of nature, and fear of those who are not in our tribe, clan or small town. Those who were not actively helping us to get along by cooperation in these relatively small groups were against us...they were our competitors for food stuffs, prime hunting and living areas. So we are hard-wired with an US vs. THEM mentality. Fast forward to the last few thousand years where our small clans and villages have grown to be states and countries. Our caveman hard-wiring has not caught up with our relative civilization and socialization. It's still US vs. THEM for resources, but now on a grand scale...with huge military machines at our disposal and with nukes to boot. We must eventually EVOLVE past our caveman ways to view everyone on this small planet as our own clan or the wars and genocidal activities will only continue. It would be a huge paradigm shift for everyone, and I honestly hold no hope to see it in my lifetime (or ever?).

Let me get this straight. In 2007, your panel is still trying to figure out why the twangy-twangy tobacco-chewing Appallachian hillbilly Nascar Neanderthals of the U.S. south enslaved, hated, despoiled, gang-raped, lynched and continue to kill black fellow citizens? For answers, how about power, money, and free sex from slaves.

This has been my belief all my life - understanding brings civility. Thank you for saying it in such an enligthened manner. Having traveled all over the world I have experienced that to meet, work with and truly try and understand each other is the key to universal harmony. But the key is to teach everyone to try and understand.

An utterly ridiculous notion. There’s no stronger hatred than hating the enemy you know. Particularly if they are your economic or social or organizational superiors. Unless they’re family. Whom you’re likely to despise even more.

Sure, let's all sit around, sing Kumbaya, hold hands and try to understand the enemies we face. Just don't turn away to reach for a flower, as your enemy will slit your throat.

Aletha,

I would wish that your prescription of forgiving, firgiving, forgiving was valid. But it is not.

Many scientific studies, in Evolutionary Biology, Anthropolgy and Zoology, Artificail-Intelligence assisted tests of Game Theory hypotheses, etc. show that some version of tit-for-tat is the best survival strategy. For one particular specie, the bonobo ape, which avoids all violence and resorts to submission-simulating tantric dances to manage occasional outbursts of aggressiveness, it has been demonstrated that their survival is threatened because they have not, in an evolutionary sense, developed enough aggressiveness. There also seems to be a stunningly high proportion of 'gays' or homosexuals among them.

Yes, you forgive and, in subsequent encounters with the same antagonist, you watch if the his behaviour has improved, If not, you prepare to retaliate, in the third, fourth or subsequent encounter. Even when the antagonist is too strong for you, you submissively endure his assaults while building up your retaliatory capacity. At the appropriate time, you retaliate successfully. There would then be a chance of improving his behaviour. This methodology is termed, by Game Theorists, the "optimal penal code' to eleicit behaviour that maximizes the payoff for all parties in conflict.

During the Fifth Round of negotiations last year for nuclear disarmament (involving both non-nuclear countries that are enriching nuranium to improve nuclear technology either for peaceful purposes or for weapons and those super-powers who want to have a nuclear-weapon cartel) many experts proposed a phased 'optimal penal code' strategy to make the world nuclear-weapons-free. Guess who scuppered the proposal? The memebers of the nuclear club. of course, led by the USofA!.

Just becuase people live together/ are in relationship, it doesn't mean they "know" each other.
On that note - the reason that people fight and kill each other is because they are right, or want to prove they are right. It is the nature of human being always to want to be right at any cost. Even when they are wrong, they are 'right.' So what is missing is acceptance of ourselves and each other. To give up being right. Because it just isn't worth it to kill others over our opinions of what is right. It kills us emotionally while we are living.
You can see even on this discussion the need to be 'right' and how people argue to be right.
There is actually no right or wrong. You guys are not wrong. Everyone's experience is valid, even if it's anger and upset over the discrimination and killing of a particular ethnic group. We have to push past that to accept others and forgive forgive forgive.
Only then will people stop killing. Keep on forgiving.
Peace!

Holy crap! Many of the comments above are filled with misunderstanding. Vamos should be in fear.

Lisa R, I love you. You single? Anyway, I think this whole thing about not knowing the enemy should be given some credence, but other factors are the primary motivation for this violence. Did Cortez and his crew slaughter indigenous Aztecs just because they didn't understand them? Did the Christian Crusaders kill Muslims because they didn't understand them? The way I see it, the motiviations are power and resources. The Shia were opressed and now want the power they desired for hundreds of years. And to my second point, in Iraq, the power is granted to those who control the resources. They are greedy and malevolent and vengeful. Everybody wants some. To kill in the name of God, whichever one you worship, is barbarous. The Koran may not have the 10 commandments, but if you have ever studied it as I have, it teaches the exact same principle. Every religion except for the Ik tribe in Africa does. They commit gericide...if you get old or sick, you can be killed for you posessions. But I digress...If you pervert religion and use it as an excuse to kill, you are a savage. We cannot change human nature and brainwashed fanatics unless we kill them. So be it.

Lisa R,

You ask me to explain what is happening in Sudan. In his posting to the comment on this same issue by Rami Khouri, one WAPO reader asks another reader who had posted his comment "Can you substantiate that "oil-lust" comment?

What's happening in Sudan/Darfur is oil-grab or oil-lust. Yes Arabs too, just like Americans and non-Arab Muslim Africans from Darfur, lust for easy oil riches rather than the hard work that us Indians dedicate ourselves to as a means of securing our modest but adequate and dignified sustenance. Both American mega-corporations and Chinese ones are lusting for Darfur's oil. Arabs (mostly but not exclusively Muslim)and non-Arab Africans (also mostly Muslims) are aligned severally to the Cinese and the American corporates (i.e. even among the Arabs, some feel more affinity to American corporations, while on the non-Arab African side, certain tribes are ready to accommodate Khartum's affinity to the Chinese. Hence the massacre but not genocide which has a very well-defined meaning. Alexis de Vaal has an excellent analysis of te situation which he published in The Guardian of UK, but unfortunately, I m not motivated enough to lokk up the exact reference for you.

Mohamed MALLECK,

I know there are many Muslims living peacefully around the world but could you please explain such things as what's happening in Sudan? Israel has received hundreds of Muslim refugees because no Muslim country will accept them.

Mr. Miklos Vamos writes " Similarly, those who knew well the pre-war state of Iraq and its neighborhood would have had no doubt that even if the whole country were destroyed, Al Qaeda would not disappear, and the world would not be a safer place."

Well, that is simply not true. Pre-2003 American invasion Iraq as well as "its neighbourhood" may have been in turmoil post-1979, but pre-1979, the peoples of the region had been living in peace. One country, Iran, had been struggling to assert its national pride by resuscitating the aborted 1953 surge of national pride to take control of their country's oil resources, and as a result did undergo some unrest which the mothers of the fallen martyrs sought to soothe by placing flowers in the guns that had been aimed at their fallen. However, Satan had designed a more cynical scenario -- it leveraged the tyrant the CIA had just installed in Baghdad to attack Iran.
That's how we ended up with the post-1979, pre-2003 purportedly 'home-grown' turmoil.

People CAN, indeed live and let live even when they have differences. Fascists don't, and the fascists don't have as prefix Islamo.

Muslims every where, from the country of my ancestors, India, to Indonesai, Philippines, South Africa and even Trinidad and Guyana, live and act harmoniously in the knowledge that the UMMA is one and indivisible. The hiccups are only transitory, even if inflamed by others.

It is ridiculous to say people kill each other because the don't know each other. On the contrary many if not most kill those who they know very well. Husbands and wives kill each other. Parents kill their children. Children kill their parents. People routinely kill their neighbors because they covet something their neighbor owns. Brother kills brother as the first recorded murder was by a brother. Every homicide detective knows to look first at the family, friends and acquaintances of the murdered person. Respectfull, Mr. Vamos, it is just plain silly to say we kill most of the time because we don't know other people. On the contrary most killing is done because someone knows you have oil, or land, or gold, an insurance policy, or a beautiful daughter. They kill because they indeed do know you very well. They want what you've got and are willing to take it by force.

Why? Well, since this has been happening since before 1900, before there was the modern state of Israel, before Israel gained the disputed territories in a defensive war in 1967 one really must ask why the Arabs have such an issue with Jews having self-determination.

I have a question for you, why did Yasser Arafat's uncle become the head of the Arab SS?

Lisa R: "There are countless examples in Isreal where Palestinians who worked with Jews for years if not decades have gone on to murder those same Jews."

Why stop there? Question is WHY? Question always is WHY? WHY?

Miklos, please study up on the subject before commenting because the historical facts on the ground put lie to your pretty and naive fantasy. There are countless examples in Isreal where Palestinians who worked with Jews for years if not decades have gone on to murder those same Jews.

well once again a Hungarian is trying to solve the worlds problems and such he calls romanians and slovaks gypsies you should first look in your back yard my friend because Budapest is not that diffrent than Bucharest or Bratislava.THER ARE Gypsies all over the world including the U.S.but i know Hungary doesnt have any only Romania and Slovakia perhaps you should read the earliear post by Stelucia again and again you might just learn a thing or two

Stating that ethnic Romanians and Slovaks are Gypsies is racist but no surprise here, the writer is a Hungarian!!!!

Ethnic Romanians and Slovaks are not Gypsies. Romanians and Slovaks are of Caucasian race speaking a Latin derived(Romanians) and Slavic(Slovaks) languages while Gypsies, irrespective where they live in Eastern Europe, are of Indian race and their languages (because there are many) are related to those spoken on the Indian subcontinent.

That is a Fact the US government lied to all of us, but it is time to call them on it since they are playing the same tune once again. Let’s make one thing clear Iraq is a miss not because of Sunni and Shiat issues, which came after the invasion. If you look at most of the Arab world, countries like Egypt, Syria, Jordon; Sunni and Shiat have been living together for a long time. When there is no functioning government and economy things will get out of hand. Even natural disasters can cause chaos like what happen in New Orleans.

No misunderstanding involved. Except on the part of the American people, who were lied to every step of the way.

The US government can read the geological surveys about the size of the oil pool. That is all they need to know, and all they care about.

"President Bush, for instance, should pack his belongings for a one-year sabbatical in Baghdad. Let us talk about the nature and purpose of the war"

I bet He would not know how to get there!
I think there is some true to what you are saying, hate and prejudices comes from lake of knowledge and ignorance. If the US government took the time to read the history of Iraq they would not be in this situation.