“The genocide in Darfur can be ended [by] the actions of U.S. citizens,” said John Prendergast, senior advisor with The International Crisis Group, in his lecture Wednesday night.  Prendergast is a celebrity among activists, having made frequent trips to the Darfur region accompanied by such stars as Don Cheadle and Angelina Jolie. In addition, he has co-authored several articles about the genocide with Cheadle.

 “With every passing day, the Bush administration desecrates the Genocide Convention,” Prendergast said, referring to the document adopted by the United Nations General Assembly which defines the crime of genocide and states the responsibility of the world to act against it. Two years ago the Bush administration, in the run-up to the election, officially declared the situation in the Darfur region to be genocide.

“Signatories [of the Genocide Convention] are impelled to prevent and punish the crime of genocide,” Prendergast explained. “We have yet to see one punitive measure against these perpetrators of genocide in Darfur.”

Prendergast summarized the current administration’s strategy as “a policy of gentle persuasion similar to the Reagan administration’s handling of apartheid-era South Africa,” employing incentives for good behavior instead of punitive measures and applied pressure. 

He advocated synthesizing the leniency of this current policy with the force called for by the Genocide Convention: military intervention with or without the consent of the Sudanese government. 

Prendergast noted that the “gentler” approach is the one espoused by many international organizations, including the European Union, the Arab League, the United Nations and the Bush administration. Meanwhile, the call for more saber-rattling is coming from civilian social activists.  

Prendergast presented a clear path for both the United States government and for citizens looking to have their voices heard. For frustrated activists he identified a need for “collectively raising the temperature” by contacting congressmen. He stressed that it only takes 20 minutes out of a week: ten to write one concerned letter and ten to convince a friend to write another. 

His suggestion for United States policy was a set of sanctions with economic, political and military components. 

Economic and political sanctions, while they would not materially debilitate the Khartoum regime,  would be detrimental to its image-conscious leaders who are, he said, “looking to play ball internationally.”  On the military side of things, he proposed creating contingency plans for the ejection of the African Union and other aid workers, and then letting the Sudanese government know about them. This, he said, would serve the dual purpose of preventing the lack of preparation the world experienced in the case of the Rwandan genocide, and of presenting a clenched fist to the Sudanese government.

When asked what sources of support would have the greatest impact, he later identified two key demographics for the Review: “Jewish groups weighing in on Darfur in the ‘never again’ theme and evangelical Christians.”  He added that student groups should “look to make alliances with faith-based groups to increase the potential of their message in Washington.”

Some Oberlin student groups have already made those alliances, some of which brought Prendergast to Oberlin that night.  The talk was sponsored by Students Taking Action Now: Darfur, the Middle Eastern Students Association, the Office of Religious and Spiritual Life and the African American Studies department, among others.

Overall, Prendergast was optimistic that things could change for the better. This positive outlook, however, didn’t lessen the urgency of the issues he presented in his talk.

 “The situation is deteriorating very rapidly and we continue to cling to the same policy,” he said.  The primary message of the evening was that things could change, but only if activists — student and otherwise — make them change.