How is Darfur’s conflict related to globalization?
The entire scenario concerning Darfur’s modern conflict is principally the outcome of one important event. Indeed, the economical catalyst of the conflict was an American transnational oil corporation (TNC). In other words, one could say that globalization is at the root of those reckless conflicts. Darfur is torn between the economical pressure done in the oriental world and the positive political pressures done in the occidental world to end hostilities. Yet, Sudan ’s elite chose money over life. One could argue that such a capitalist mentality has reached Africa because of the power of globalisation that spread the American culture all over the globe. The fact that the black gold has gained such a huge importance in our society of consumerism makes the value of this rare natural resource hit the ceilings. It then becomes even more tempting for powerful ones to take advantage of the global demand, despite the penalized population of their own country.
One could also notice that the phenomenon of globalization is two sided. The oil market allowed Sudan to build economical alliances with oriental countries and directly contribute to their economical development. Khartoum provided them the energy they needed and Pékin had large investments that kept Sudan ’s economy going. In other words, they contributed to each other’s economical development.
Finally, one could refer to the repercussion the conflict had over other worldwide current affairs to explain how it impacted globalization. Indeed, the oil-related economical conflict of 1992 between Sudan and the United-States encouraged Sudan to support Iraq and international terrorists such as Ben Ladden. (Angsthelm, 2007, par. 53) It changed the political alliances different countries and changed the United-States international political stand. On the other hand, the United-States, as a response, came with economical sanctions: No exports towards Sudan, no imports from Sudan , no financial transactions allowed. (MINEFI, 2005, p.4-5)
The entire scenario concerning Darfur’s modern conflict is principally the outcome of one important event. Indeed, the economical catalyst of the conflict was an American transnational oil corporation (TNC). In other words, one could say that globalization is at the root of those reckless conflicts. Darfur is torn between the economical pressure done in the oriental world and the positive political pressures done in the occidental world to end hostilities. Yet, Sudan ’s elite chose money over life. One could argue that such a capitalist mentality has reached Africa because of the power of globalisation that spread the American culture all over the globe. The fact that the black gold has gained such a huge importance in our society of consumerism makes the value of this rare natural resource hit the ceilings. It then becomes even more tempting for powerful ones to take advantage of the global demand, despite the penalized population of their own country.
One could also notice that the phenomenon of globalization is two sided. The oil market allowed Sudan to build economical alliances with oriental countries and directly contribute to their economical development. Khartoum provided them the energy they needed and Pékin had large investments that kept Sudan ’s economy going. In other words, they contributed to each other’s economical development.
Finally, one could refer to the repercussion the conflict had over other worldwide current affairs to explain how it impacted globalization. Indeed, the oil-related economical conflict of 1992 between Sudan and the United-States encouraged Sudan to support Iraq and international terrorists such as Ben Ladden. (Angsthelm, 2007, par. 53) It changed the political alliances different countries and changed the United-States international political stand. On the other hand, the United-States, as a response, came with economical sanctions: No exports towards Sudan, no imports from Sudan , no financial transactions allowed. (MINEFI, 2005, p.4-5)