Part-Time Pundit

Columns and Commentary by John Bambenek

The Words You Are Looking For Are “I’m Sorry”

*sigh*

Can no one apologize anymore? Two words: “I’m sorry”. How about “I apologize”?

Related Posts:

  • Quote from me Featured in “School Reform News”
  • Eugenics in Champaign
  • DI Column Up: Lent and the Carnival
  • MercatorNet article up: Unsuitable for Children
  • First Letter to the Editor in DI
  • August 24th, 2005 Posted by John Bambenek | National | 3 comments

    Coalition for Darfur: Genocide and Statistics

    Cross-posted from Coalition for Darfur

    Genocide and Statistics

    Last week, International Studies Quarterly published a study
    by Matthew
    Krain
    , an Associate Professor of Political Science at the College
    of Wooster, examining “the effectiveness of military action on the
    severity of ongoing instances of genocide and polititcide.”

    According to the press
    release

    The study reveals that only overt military
    interventions that explicitly challenge the perpetrator appear to be
    effective in reducing the severity of the brutal policies. Military
    support for targets, or in opposition to the perpetrators, alters the
    almost complete vulnerability of unarmed civilian targets. And these
    interventions that directly target the perpetrators were not, on the
    whole, found to make matters worse for those being attacked … He
    finds that even military intervention against the perpetrator by a
    single country or international organization has a measurable effect
    in the “typical” case.

    When a single international actor challenges the aggressor, the
    probability that the killings will escalate drops while the
    probability that the killings will decrease jumps. Each additional
    intervention by another international actor raises the chance of
    saving lives.

    In the introduction to the study, Krain
    notes

    Policy makers faced with situations like those in
    Rwanda or Bosnia, Kosovo or Darfur, are forced to rely on past
    experience with interventions in other types of internal conflicts,
    often with disastrous results. This study is a step toward a better
    understanding of the effectiveness of potential responses by the
    international community to genocides and politicides.

    Krain goes on to examine various intervention methods of dealing with
    on-going genocides and politicides (the “impartial intervention
    model,” the “witness model,” the “bystander model,” etc…) and notes
    that not one of them is capable of reducing the severity of such
    situations.

    After conducting a statistical analysis of the various models, Krain
    concludes

    Policy maker concerns that intervention on the
    behalf of target populations will escalate the killing appear to be
    unfounded.

    The only overt military interventions that appear to be effective in
    reducing the severity of genocides or politicides are those that
    explicitly challenge the perpetrator

    He then discusses
    his finding as they relate to Darfur, writing

    Intervention against the Sudanese government and the Janjaweed within
    the first year of the genocide would likely have had a measurable
    effect on the severity [2003] of state-sponsored mass murder in the
    following year.

    Kraine does not claim that military
    intervention is the “only” option. In fact, he notes that “policy
    makers have a range of options available to them in the face of an
    ongoing genocide or politicide” and that his study “only examines one
    of those options.”

    Keeping that in mind, it is hard to argue with Kraine’s basic
    conclusion

    If actors wish to slow or stop the killing in
    an ongoing instance of state-sponsored mass murder, they are more
    likely to be effective if they oppose the perpetrators of the
    brutal policy.

    Related Posts:

  • Coalition for Darfur: Darfur in the Dark
  • MSM Refuses to Take Genocide in Darfur Ad
  • Coaltion for Darfur: Plagued by Techincalities
  • Coalition for Darfur: A Meaningless Pledge
  • Coalition for Darfur: What It Is All About
  • August 24th, 2005 Posted by John Bambenek | Sudan, United Nations | no comments

    Democratic Party Crackup Coming: Stay-Tuned

    At the Daily Kos, they’re upset with the DLC. They don’t think the DLC is Left enough and they’re tired of it. So a few days ago they had this to say:

    Two more weeks, folks, before we take them on, head on.

    No calls for a truce will be brooked. The DLC has used those pauses in the past to bide their time between offensives. Appeals to party unity will fall on deaf ears (it’s summer of a non-election year, the perfect time to sort out internal disagreements).

    We need to make the DLC radioactive. And we will. With everyone’s help, we really can. Stay tuned.

    I’m not sure whether this is childish ranting or the real McCoy but it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out. This is a similar attitude displayed by MoveOn when they said, “We bought it, we paid for it, it’s ours”. (About the Democratic Party).

    Related Posts:

  • Big News Coming Up
  • Radio Interview on Extreme Wisdom
  • I’ll Be Liveblogging “Can Freedom of the Press Survive Media Consolidation” Talk May 10-11
  • Eugenics in Champaign
  • Where in the World is John Bambenek?
  • August 24th, 2005 Posted by John Bambenek | National, Politics | no comments