Darfur versus Rwanda
The aftermath of the Rwandese crisis led to the emergence of the term genocide. The US and other powers vowed to intervene in case ‘genocide’ occurred again. However, the Darfur crisis, albeit occurring at a slower rate than the Rwandese one went unabated. Both crises have some similarities and differences. First, the Rwandese genocide was about ethnic hatred. The Hutus and the Tutsi minority were embroiled in a battle to determine who was superior to the other. The conflict started when the Hutus felt that their fellow countrymen, the Tutsi did not deserve to live in the same land. On the contrary, the Darfur crisis was about resources. The Sudanese government, based in the north was exploiting the resources of the south without any development to the southern region. The SPLA/SPLM, a rebel movement against the north, engaged the government in the clamor for reasonable access to the revenue sourced from these resources that primarily composed of oil. Another difference is that the Rwandese crisis was more participatory and more extremist and had more casualties within a limited period of time. On the contrary the Darfur crisis had more casualties on the overall with many dying of hunger and starvation as an unprecedented result of the civil crisis.
The similarity between both crises is that they occurred during times of political transition (Straus, 2006). They were largely due to one party feeling that the other was overrunning their interests. In Rwanda, the increased influence of the Tutsi in government led the Hutus to react to extremist proportions that focused on extermination. The Darfur crises similarly occurred in the period of political liberation for the southern Sudanese who had been marginalized by the north after President Gaafar Nimeiry declared all Sudan a Muslim state in 1983. Both crises also did not receive any outside intervention and were left to simmer by themselves.
References
Straus, S. (2006). Rwanda and Darfur: A Comparative Analysis. Genocide Studies and Prevention, 1(1): pp. 41-56
