As the Democratic presidential primary campaign limps on, and the cacophony of focus-grouped sound bites strikes a fevered pitch, the candidates are making surprisingly little noise about Darfur.
The Bush administration is continuing its militarization of U.S.-African relations this year.
A response to Kevin Funk and Steve Fake: Divestment will help to end the Genocide in Darfur.
A response to Daniel Millenson: The divestment movement from Sudan still makes clear “the failures in our intellectual culture”
The divestment movement from Sudan makes clear “indication of the failures in our intellectual culture”
From rallying and letter writing, the Save Darfur movement is now taking a page from history and looking to divestment to end the atrocities in Darfur.
The latest UN resolution may well be a turning point in stopping genocide. But much hinges on political will.
It’s amid the U.S. government’s contradictory posturing and less-than-humanitarian geopolitical motives that the activist movement addressing Darfur operates.
With its investments in Africa, China is going where no other investors dare. But, Akwe Amosu asks, will this investment lift all African boats or only the luxury yachts?
It’s painfully clear, as the blood spills on both sides of the Chad border, that the consortium of international oil companies and their allies at the World Bank won’t let anything stop a drop of oil from flowing to global markets.
Are the United States and China heading toward an economic and military showdown or a peaceful convergence of interests? Two prominent China scholars, James Nolt and Bonnie Glaser, go head-to-head to answer the question.
Talking Points for the Time-Crunched
How about kicking UN peacekeeping up a notch? A rapid response unit is needed now more than ever.
The U.S. gets an opportunity in February to end the genocide.