Professor Krauss Examines Religious and Ethnic Aspects of Conflict in Sudan
The concept of Pan-Arabism and Islamism as the origins of the genocide and violence in Sudan is the topic of an article by Professor Michael I. Krauss appearing in TCS Daily. Professor Krauss and J. Peter Phan, his co-writer, examine the violence by Islamic fundamentalists against fellow Muslims.
Professors Kraus and Phan are co-writers of two other articles appearing in the past month in TCS Daily. Links to those articles, as well, appear below.
Iraq and Darfur: Common Roots, TCS Daily, April 4, 2006. By J. Peter Phan and Michael I. Krauss.
"Since mid-2004, when the humanitarian crisis in the Darfur region of Western Sudan burst into the spotlight, journalistic explanations of the unfolding catastrophe have been riddled with inaccuracies based on hasty generalizations (to say nothing of politically correct wishful thinking). Since the perpetrators of the violence -- "Islamic" militias supported by the government in Khartoum -- and its victims are both dark-skinned Muslims, reports inevitably downplayed the religious and ethnic dimensions of the conflict, ascribing it instead to competition for land and water resources between sedentary farmers and nomadic herdsmen. As a result of this superficial analysis, not only have some shied away from calling the crisis by its real name — genocide -- but its true origins in the twin ideologies of Islamism and pan-Arabism have been obscured."
Descent into Dhimmitude, TCS Daily, March 27, 2006. By J. Peter Phan and Michael I. Krauss.
" While most media accounts of the 'cartoon jihad' focused on the publication of the cartoons, and on the ensuing violent reaction by some Muslims -- who were depicted by the much of the press as victims! -- few reporters have ventured to describe the increasingly hostile climate that Muslim extremists had succeeded in creating in Denmark before the publication."
Divesting Moral Authority, TCS Daily, March 6, 2006. By J. Peter Phan and Michael I. Krauss.
" Criticism of specific Israeli policies or even of the State of Israel is not itself proof positive of hatred of the Jewish people -- else most Knesset debates could surely be termed 'anti-Semitic.' But when a hypercritical attitude is applied to no one but Israel, the conclusion is different. As Norman Podhoretz has noted, the application to Israel of a double standard -- indeed a standard that is often diametrically opposed to that employed with respect to any other country in the world -- inescapably anti-Semitic."