Fifteen local chiefs and three staff from Médecins Sans Frontières among the dead in assault on clinic
At least 22 people, including 15 local chiefs and three members of staff of the medical charity Médecins Sans Frontières, were killed in an attack on a town in the Central African Republic, officials said on Sunday.
The attack on Saturday was in Nanga Boguila, about 450 km (280 miles) north of the capital Bangui. Some 2,000 French and over 5,000 African peacekeepers are struggling to halt waves of violence that have gripped the country over the last 18 months.
Twenty years after Rwanda, we now watch Christian militias targeting the Central African Republic’s Muslim minority and rival militias in Southern Sudan dismembering the peace process that John Garang brought to fruition.
A salutary reminder that, for all the Global South’s achievements, it has yet fully to overcome the curse of ethnic rivalries.
Quite true, however I am not sure why the Global South would be singled out – doesn’t the same comment apply with equal force to the Anglican Communion?
Note also that neither the Anglican Communion or the Global South have any presence in the Central African Republic. There is no Anglican Province there (some confuse it with the Province of Central Africa, which is located roughly 1,000 miles away!). I am sure there are some Anglican missionaries operating there, but it would not be easy. The only neighbouring countries with an Anglican presence are South Sudan (strife torn), Congo (Anglican church there is struggling to build a presence within its own territory) and Cameroon (miniscule – one diocese in a nation of 22 million people). The CAR is the closest thing to an “Anglican-free zone” in Christian Africa.
Re South Sudan, it seems a trifle unrealistic to call this “the curse of ethnic rivalries”. Yes there are ethnic aspects, but South Sudan is on the fault-line of Muslim and Christian spheres in Africa – there is a very strong religious aspect to the war that is going on. It is going to be ugly because the Muslims are losing the long-term battle for Africa and they are desperate. Apart from encouraging ++Bul and his people to convert to Islam, I don’t know what the Global South can do about that.
Also, I question how accurate it is to say that John Garang brought a peace process to fruition. He was a rebel leader who forced the government of Sudan to agree to terms, essentially through winning a war. Good on him, but its difficult to describe that as a peace process, in the sense of e.g. Northern Ireland. To put it bluntly, the Sudanese government was forced to agree to a political process that would inevitably lead to partition of its country. Further fighting was inevitable, and I expect John Garang understood that, although we will never know.
Michael,
I stand corrected as to the CAR. I suppose I was (sloppily) using “Global South” as a shorthand for the Christianized Africa that is often held up as the paradigm of fidelity to the Gospel (which, in the case of many individuals, it is). But if adhesion to the Gospel had taken such root, then majority Christian countries like Kenya or Rwanda or South Sudan (which is, I believe, 60% Christian) ought to be able to surmount such frequent recourse to the sword.
Unlike Nigeria, where much of the violence occurs on the Christian-Muslim fault line, the present-day crises in the Central African Republic and South Sudan appear to involve violence by (however nominal) Christians against Muslims and violence between different groups of Christians and Animists respectively (I’ve seen nothing about South Sudan to suggest that the conflict is between Christians and Animists). As to Garang, it was war that forced Khartoum to negotiate, but it was surely Garang who kept the peace talks going and ultimately secured the right of the South to secede.
I suppose I would like those of us who consider ourselves to be as much with the Global South as not, to avoid the temptation to treat Africa as a continent somehow suffused by the Gospel in contrast to the decadent West, when aspects of our fallen nature are so evident in both. It also makes me suspicious about the ability of African governments to administer (for example) legislation designed to criminalize same-sex behavior in a pastoral manner. If more fundamental aspects of the old Adam have yet to be purged from the body politic, why should we imagine such legislation to be animated solely by Christian concerns?
[blockquote] “I suppose I was (sloppily) using “Global South†as a shorthand for the Christianized Africa that is often held up as the paradigm of fidelity to the Gospel (which, in the case of many individuals, it is).” [/blockquote]
Who holds up Christianized Africa as a paradigm of fidelity to the gospel? I can’t off-hand think of anyone that does, so we appear to be discussing a counter-factual.
However, I *can* think of many cases where Anglicans in the west look to African [i]Anglican leaders[/i] as paradigms of fidelity to the gospel. That’s a different issue.
[blockquote] “But if adhesion to the Gospel had taken such root, then majority Christian countries like Kenya or Rwanda or South Sudan (which is, I believe, 60% Christian) ought to be able to surmount such frequent recourse to the sword.” [/blockquote]
Ahhh, interesting judgment to make on them. You are currently located in the United Kingdom, if I recall correctly, and before that the USA? Both of them majority Christian countries I believe, and where Christianity has had centuries to take root?
Pardon me for asking, but how many millions of people have been slaughtered by those long-standing majority Christian countries in just the last 100 years, and in wars against other majority Christian nations to boot? An unkind person might suggest that the only reason Britain and USA are not engaged in so many wars right now has nothing to do with any better grasp of Christianity, but simply to do with being rich. Or to put it another way, enjoying the fruits of their last victories.
Yet you want to judge the Africans because they are Christian, yet have a fraction of the wars which we European Christians have!
[blockquote] “Unlike Nigeria, where much of the violence occurs on the Christian-Muslim fault line, the present-day crises in the Central African Republic and South Sudan appear to involve violence by (however nominal) Christians against Muslims and violence between different groups of Christians and Animists respectively (I’ve seen nothing about South Sudan to suggest that the conflict is between Christians and Animists).” [/blockquote]
Let’s assume all that is accurate – what conclusion do you draw from it?
[blockquote] “As to Garang, it was war that forced Khartoum to negotiate, but it was surely Garang who kept the peace talks going and ultimately secured the right of the South to secede.” [/blockquote]
Of course he kept the “peace” talks going – dictating terms to your opponent is what all war is aimed at. He is a victorious war leader who got what he wanted because his opponents had to grant it to him, at least in the short term. That’s not a criticism, just reality. If he hadn’t died in a plane crash, he would be the one fighting the current battles.
[blockquote] “to avoid the temptation to treat Africa as a continent somehow suffused by the Gospel in contrast to the decadent West”[/blockquote]
As I wrote above, I can’t think of anyone who believes that (although I am sure you can find a few people if you look hard enough). On the other hand, it is rather common to see African [i]Anglican leaders[/i] treated as being suffused by the gospel in contrast to decadent western [i]Anglican leaders[/i]. That may or may not be entirely accurate, but the point is that its a different concept to what you are putting forward – conflating nations with churches.
[blockquote] “It also makes me suspicious about the ability of African governments to administer (for example) legislation designed to criminalize same-sex behavior in a pastoral manner.”[/blockquote]
Why would anyone expect any government to act “in a pastoral manner” in the first place?
[blockquote] “If more fundamental aspects of the old Adam have yet to be purged from the body politic” [/blockquote]
I am getting a disturbing picture that you might actually believe that “fundamental aspects of the old Adam” have been purged from our western body politics. Now I don’t believe that for a moment, so why would I expect to find things any different in Africa?
[blockquote] “why should we imagine such legislation to be animated solely by Christian concerns?” [/blockquote]
Indeed – has anyone suggested that legislation against homosexuality in Africa is “animated solely by Christian concerns”?