Letters to the editor

Divestment would hurt Sudanese

The University of California has attempted over the years to
uphold itself as an institution that values both social and
political consciousness. Divesting from apartheid South Africa in
1986 was an excellent example of this high moral standard.

Today, the university is asked to do the same with Sudan on the
grounds that the Sudanese state is involved in a campaign of
“genocide” in the region of Darfur, one that pits Arabs
against black Africans.

Indeed the tragedy of Darfur for us Sudanese is and shall remain
a deep scar for years to come.

But describing it as genocide, i.e. the intentional eradication
of a particular ethnic group, is questionable.

This for some may be a matter of semantics and in some sense it
does not matter what it is called as all parties responsible for
crimes and atrocities should be held accountable.

This includes both the Sudanese government and the rebels, as
they are responsible to the Sudanese people before anyone else for
what has occurred.

But the roots and causes of the conflict are complex and
intertwined.

Portraying it in simple racial terms is simply inaccurate and
misleading.

Let us consider the following. Investigative reports by the
United Nations, the European Union and the African Union have all
admitted to widespread atrocities but have not declared that a
genocide is taking place.

When Colin Powell first visited the region, he declined to
describe it as a genocide. However, several months later, in
Congress, he said it was genocide.

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Danforth,
remarked in an interview with the BBC in July 2004 that the U.S.
administration described Darfur as genocide for internal
consumption during an election year.

Should such a crime, that shall remain associated with the name
of Sudan, be used for political opportunism?

If divestment from a foreign government is to be tied to the
crime of genocide, as proposed to the UC Board of Regents, should
not these reports be considered, especially given recent
questionable decisions by the current administration?

Should the U.S. government be the sole moral compass of the
public, as the divestment proposal suggests?

By this standard, the UC could have not divested from apartheid
South Africa.

Currently in Abuja, Nigeria, a round of peace talks is taking
place, between the new Sudanese Government of National Unity and
the Darfur rebels.

Many of us in the Sudanese community are looking hopefully for
the signing of a peace agreement soon.

A vote in favor of divestment at this time, I fear, would
complicate matters as the rebels may feel emboldened to delay any
agreement.

This fact should not be underestimated, especially if we
consider a recent article by pan-Africanist writer Abdul-Raheem
Tujadeen, a harsh critic of the Sudanese government.

The title of his Dec. 15, 2005, article is straightforward:
“Darfur rebels are the major obstacle to peace.”

It is therefore my hope that this matter be carefully
considered. At minimum it should be delayed to the end of the peace
talks.

I am fully aware, given the narrative propagated to describe
this conflict that the regents may indeed vote in favor of
divestment.

But at the end of the day it is the people of Sudan ““ not
the Sudanese government, not the rebels, not members of the UC
divestment campaign, not the UC Regents ““ who will feel the
effects of this decision.

What Sudan needs is help, not divestment.

Isma’il Kamal UC Davis, history and international
relations

Dining halls should cater to beliefs

I was deeply troubled to learn that a campus as diverse as UCLA
still doesn’t cater to the dietary needs of its religious
students. (“Food on the Hill excludes Jewish, Muslim
faiths,” Jan. 17).

I attempted to live in on-campus housing as a freshman nearly
six years ago, but had to leave mid-quarter because I was strictly
kosher at the time.

The university should not force students to choose between their
religious values and their desire to have a college experience.

Living on campus is an important feature of college life and an
opportunity for students to meet people from other cultures and
backgrounds.

This opportunity is denied to UCLA’s religious
community.

I still wonder about how different my college experience would
have been if I had the chance to live on campus as a freshman. Six
years after the fact, I’m still upset that I
couldn’t.

Rachel Makabi Former Daily Bruin senior
staff