The Tanzanian government under President
Julius Nyerere, with no help from western nations, kicked Idi Amin out of
Uganda. Amin was a thorn in the side to Britain, a loose cannon. At the time,
Tanzania was one of the world’s poorest nations and the cost of the operation
was a setback to the nation’s growth. I had no idea of this until my mate
Emanuel told me about the enduring cost to the nation.
Idi Amin is probably best remembered for
booting out most of the South Asian people who had drifted into Uganda over the
years. Most of them were Indian. They had ninety days to get out and 27 200
ended up in the UK, 6000 in Canada, 4500 went to India and some 2500 to Kenya.
It seems the world was more accommodating to refugees in those days, although
it has to be said that the British Commonwealth tended to look after its own!
Amin’s rule was typical for guys of his ilk.
Human rights abuses, ethnic persecution, extrajudicial killings, corruption,
nepotism, political repression and gross economic mismanagement. When the
Tanzanian army were close to catching him he fled to Libya, (good old Gadhafi,
now there’s a fella for you) and he lived out his days in Saudi Arabia.
Presumably the Saudi government weren’t too concerned that as many as half a
million met an early demise at the hands of Amin! They gave him humanitarian sanctuary
yet are happy enough to stone women for adultery and lop heads off!
Among my childhood pastimes, playing
cowboys and Indians with my mates was a favourite. Nobody wanted to be an
Indian, because they ended up dead – how inglorious! We had no idea what Native
Americans were, because nobody told us. It seemed a natural thing to shoot them!
That’s what sanitised history does for you! In the movies the Native Americans
were called ‘savages’, a title that we, the misinformed, happily accepted. But
hang on, who were the savages? Our hero, William Cody, otherwise known as Buffalo
Bill, had the job of exterminating the bison, otherwise known as buffalo – yes,
exterminating! He was working for wealthy New Yorkers and the US Army with the
plan to starve the indigenous inhabitants, Native Americans, into submission forcing
them onto reservations!
So back to Tanzania, I witnessed the
beginning of the Rwandan genocide trials and the difficulties that were faced
establishing the terms of reference and finding judiciary prepared to do the adjudicating.
Some were threatened, some lawyers were murdered and the length of the trials
meant that the people involved could not see the trials to conclusion because
it would tie up their lives for too long.
Atrocities and genocide are nothing new, going
on since man first noticed his neighbour was different and if you look at
history, it is inappropriate for any of us to point the finger at another because
several fingers are pointed right back to our own ancestors! After seeing the
difficulties and expense of the Rwandan trials, which is a huge factor. So who pays to bring modern offenders to
account? Prime example: what’s going to happen when the Syrian crisis ends? Atrocities
have abounded in that particular conflict and it is a fair guess that Bashar
al-Assad will not want it to end because when it does, he will face some
accountability, perhaps by his own people. But then there are his underlings who
carried orders or those who acted without sanction, what happens to them? How
many of them did inhuman acts without their boss’ authority? What about
al-Assad’s cohort Vladimir, he’s not lily white either, but who will knock on
his door to arrest him? Are innocent civilians killed by erroneous drone
strikes atrocities or collateral damage? Who judges?
Part of the resolution of any conflict, is
figuring out what triggered it and who gave the relevant order to start
proceedings? Example: The Holocaust. Historically, the Jewish reputation for
making money has made them a target, not so much because of religion but
because of envy. So what the charismatic Hitler did was stir public sentiment
against Jews, which became populist. To mount his war, Hitler did not need to
attack Jews, but because he had the power and it was a popular move it was
opportunistic at the time. He recruited a bunch of deranged perverts, and sadists,
including the odd drug-befuddled to do the job. Just how it was carried out is
history, but if Hitler had not committed suicide, what would have happened to
him? Then again, what punishment would have been good enough? Revenge may be
sweet but we all die only once and a simple death somehow does not equate to
the horrific torture and deaths of millions.
No question, the world would be a better
place if there was no Boko Haram, no Isis, no Palestine/Israel conflict, no
Russian intrusion into Ukraine, no China vs Taiwan or Tibet, no North Korean sabre-rattling,
no Syrian war, no other civil wars, no starvation. All these crises have
leaders who don’t understand the basic principles of harmony, negotiation or
conflict resolution. They all want to be perceived as strong leaders with a
certain amount of mongrel, because they’re all scared that they will be usurped
by some other moron with even more mongrel. So often, live by the sword, die by the sword plays out.
It is wrong to suppose all conflict is
religion-based. Boko Haram, Isis, Taliban and others are certainly religious bigots.
But look at the rag-tag lot, who would want to be like them? Are they filled
with happiness? Do the find life fulfilling? Do any of them ever smile? No they are hate-based and
it is hatred that is their overriding cause. Example: Why does North Korea hate
the USA? Of course it is ongoing resentment from the Korean War and all those
bombs! Instead of allowing time to heal the past, it is in the best interests
of Kim Jong Un and the regime to cause those wounds to fester because the last
thing he wants is change, the regime is sitting pretty at the expense of the
people!
Peace is elusive, difficult to forge and
maybe mankind has evolved with too many aggression genes. Was Darwin right? Survival
of the fittest might well mean blitzing the opposition, after all the world’s
natural resources are already stretched. Hang on! Surely we can be better than
that! The possibilities of life within peace are worth striving for. But doesn’t
that come by spreading wealth? Money isn’t necessarily the silver bullet, but
equity just might be.
In Yemen, a child dies of starvation every
ten minutes. The principle antagonist is Saudi Arabia. Britain, has taken
advantage of the situation by selling weapons and ammunition to the Saudi
government! Has been doing so for a long time, reaping millions in the process!
Yes, if Britain doesn’t provide the firearms and ammo, some other country will.
But remember those old western movies where the baddie sold firearms to the Indians? It’s the same thing. Key word: morality.
A personal philosophy: Every action causes
a reaction. A little example: If a leader complains about the media taking the
piss, of course the media will continue to take the piss. If the said leader
stopped targeting the media (acting responsibly would do no harm either), how
would the media react? Yep, nothing to report. ‘Turning the other cheek’ was a
metaphor for this very thing. Exception: Should North Korea manage to fire a
nuclear warhead at the USA, USA’s early warning would fire up, and likely they
would destroy it, but if the device did get through, the retaliation would be
devastating for both countries. No winners! No sense!
Any solutions to what’s going on? Unlikely.
Egos, accumulation of wealth, and a craving for power are potholes on the road
to peace. Too many issues, no consensus.


