Where's US help for the people of the Congo -- and media coverage of this horror?

By Brandon Taylor

November 20, 2004 | American government and media have faithfully portrayed the United States as an international political Superman. Among its rightful duties, which are many indeed, lies the moral obligation of political interference in foreign policy. When other countries suffer under the shadow of dictatorship and cruelty, the United States will illuminate their hopes with its beacon of freedom and extinguish the Lex Luthers of the world.

When Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany swept parts of Europe at the time of WWII, the United State's military influence contributed to the annihilation of Nazi power. A more recent example is that of America's involvement with Iraq. Based on an apparently faulty assumption that weapons of mass destruction were being held within the country's boundaries, President George W. Bush approved an official search for the deadly weapons along with military action aimed at "liberating" the people of Iraq from the inhumanity of Saddam Hussein's regime. Not to mention, Iraq is a large foreign producer of "black gold," otherwise known as oil.

Liberating a people bound by the cords of dictatorship is certainly a noble cause. Merciless acts of violence were performed under the reign of Saddam. He had taken his power and control far beyond the limits of morality. His supremacy had to stop.

As terrifying as it was, the immensity of suffering and carnage resulting from Hussein's regime does not adequately compare to that of the death, carnage and suffering found within the Democratic Republic of Congo, formerly known as Zaire. An estimated 3.3 million people have died in the Congo since 1998 in a conflict that has involved at least six African nations. More than 2.5 million people have been driven from their homes and many of those are beyond reach of humanitarian agencies.

Ethnic controversy between the Hutu and Tutsi tribes, both residents of Rwanda, has existed for years. Due to the fall of the Hutu-dominated Rwandan government in 1994, former members of the Rwandan military fled to the Congo in the wake of ethnically motivated massacres by the Hutus that left an estimated 800,000 people dead. The former Rwandan military members assisted Laurent Kabila, current president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, in overthrowing the authoritarian reign of Mobutu Sese Seko in 1997. War broke out the following year on Aug. 2, 1998, when President Kabila attempted to expel the same Rwandan military forces that had fought to establish his political position. Tutsis residing in Congo, known as Congolese Tutsis, as well as the governments of Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda relied upon the Rwandan military for protection against hostile armed groups operating out of the eastern part of the country.

By the end of 1998, the Congo government had lost control of more than one third of the country to a Tutsi-dominated rebel organization called Congolese Rally for Democracy (CRD). With support from Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda, the Tutsi rebels fought to dispose of President Kabila and gain control of the Congo government. President Kabila has defended his country with aid from Zimbabwe, Chad and Nambia.

This catastrophe has been ongoing for six years in reality, but not in American media. According to some journalists, reasons for lack of coverage on such a tragic affair consist of the social, political and geographical distance of Congo from the United States and the danger of sending reporters into such a remote location. It is true the Democratic Republic of Congo and the U.S. do not share a rich past of economic, political or sociological relations. However, if part of the media's responsibility is to inform the public of world issues, they have failed to do so in regard to the Congo.

Regardless of the relation between America and any other country, news as awful and horrific as a population roughly the size of Chicago being eradicated within six years is newsworthy. When more than 340 people, including 155 children were killed in the violent conclusion of a 62-hour hostage standoff in a Beslan, Russia school, articles covering the issue could be seen adorning the pages of newspapers nationwide. Three hundred and forty people are a minute fraction compared to 3 million.

Television journalists risk their lives entering the field of battle during a time of war. However, they continue to put themselves in danger in order to keep the public well informed. Since the Vietnam War, journalists have been among the many who brave the monstrosities of combat. They have valiantly strived to educate American media consumers of the reality of war. The conflict in the Congo should not be any different. If the media felt it was an important issue to cover, journalists would be there.

The millions of people whose lives have been lost in the Democratic Republic of Congo deserve to be recognized. They are fellow neighbors in this vast locality called earth. They are people with lives, families, love and hope. American media has made them invisible and the government has yet to attempt to "liberate" a people who have suffered in greater numbers and greater capacity than any other current population. The Congo has become a cry for help that Superman has failed to heed.

NW
MS