Being/Becoming Global Citizen

Throughout this book we see three characters go through their development within the humanitarian sector. They each has distinct stories and changes throughout the book but the one that was the most interesting to me was that of Heidi. She, in my opinion had one of the most fascinating developments throughout the course of this book. Compared to seeing the stories of two men, her gender and how that played a role in the book was captivating.

Heidi was so lost in the beginning of the book that going abroad to do something bigger than herself was what she needed at the time. The chance to recreate herself was her draw to essentially fleeing the country (Postlewait, 1991: p 30). She seems to find herself almost immediately once she leaves the United States. We this even more on page 95 when Heidi, in a tourist location, feels out of place even though visibly that is where she belongs within the country. She grapples with her gender about 1/3 of the way through her journey as she is figuring out relationships and things of that nature (Postlewait, 199: p 104). It is interesting to note that for Heidi the relationship aspect of her journey is a large part of the story but cannot be said for the men of this book. Gender roles for men typicall stay the same around the world with varying degrees. But, it is typically that men can do whatever they want without judgment but women have to navigate being sexually liberal and vocally assertive. This is not always accepted in other countries. It is interesting to note that the main Heidi was with in Mombasa had this emotional tie to her but in the end was only interested in money and that Heidi felt guilty for pondering prostitution. This is just something that men in the aid sector do not have to worry about while for Heidi it is something that carries out throughout the book. Further, in America, though she is a straight, white female she was not living this incredibly lavish life after left her husband. But, when she went abroad with stipends and things like that she suddenly was living a lifestyle she thought she wouldn’t really experience again. She didn’t notice her privilege until she went abroad which is quite fascinating. By the end of the novel, Heidi is back in New York and starts to slip into her mundane lifestyle from before. She finds that being around other people from ‘the field’ is what keeps her going (Postlewait, 1991: 284). She found herself while overseas and needs a connection to that former life to keep her getting out of bed each day.

I agree wholeheartedly with my classmates in the assertion that Heidi is in her misfit stage not at the end but right from the beginning of her journey. She does not seem to follow the typical path of the MMMM and I think that has a lot to do with her journey in the states before she goes overseas. We see her living a mundane life trying to fit the model of a good wife. She is just going through the motions of life trying her best to please her husband by doing things like going out with his friends (Postlewait, 1991: p 3). As she goes on I think she goes to the mercenary portion next; she needs to make money because she is severely lacking in funds but still wants to make a difference. Next would be the missionary stage because once she is more into making that difference in the world wherever she has ended up. This is when her work really begins and you see the emotional toll that the work she does has. Last, is the mystic phase when Heidi is fully immersed in her life abroad. She is fully invested to the cause of humanitarian work and that shows in her writing.

It is so important to understand the jouney of humanitarian worker in the MMMM model because it gives us insight into how aid workers may navigate their experiences (Murphy, 2013). For Heidi, she was living behind a mask while in the states but once she left she could finally present a side of herself that felt the most right. As Goffman suggests, it is the context of our situation that explains our behaviors and for Heidi the context was not being in America (Goffman, 1959).

If I were to meet Heidi I would have many questions for her as there are times, since being back from South Africa, that the only time I feel home again is when I am talking to people that have also lived in Cape Town or gone to a shockingly different country. I would definitely ask her in more detail how her gender impacted her experiences in different countries for the reasons mentioned earlier. Last, I would ask her how the long term transition back to the states was. It is something that isn’t talked about really. We always talk about the beginning of the transition but never the long term effects of coming home. Overall, it would be amazing to pick her brain a little bit but for now all we have are her words.

Cain, K., Postlewait, H., & Thomson, A. (2006). Emergency sex: (and other desperate

measures): True stories from a war zone. London: Ebury.

Goffman, E. (1959). Retrieved from http://www.studymore.org.uk/xgof.htm

Murphy, T. (2013, June 12). Book Review: Missionary, Mercenary, Mystic, Misfit. Retrieved from http://www.humanosphere.org/basics/2013/06/book-review-missionary-mercenary-mystic-misfit-2/

Crisis Caravan gives an incredible insight into the faults with the humanitarian aid sector. We have discussed it in class in great detail and even gotten to speak with some aid workers but there is something so captivating and compelling about reading the tales from the ground. As discussed in class, it is hard to separate politics from aid work but it is an interesting dichotomy to discuss.

When we think of aid work we think of two things: natural disaster relief or medical care in war zones. We imagine people with red crosses on their backs rushing into foreign countries to help the poor orphan children whose lives have been disrupted by their country’s backwards ways of life. Because of this it is hard to imagine aid work not having some sort of political agenda. Polman refers to aid as a “permanent part of military strategy,” alluding at the fact that she does not think that there can be a separation between people’s innate wanting to help those less fortunate and the political agendas that fuel this world. Aid work is a tricky thing to say is apolitical. There are times when it can, indeed, be apolitical like in the case of natural disasters. There is not political force to fight against; it is just nature that has disrupted the lives of those impacted by the disaster. So, on the surface it would appear that natural disaster aid work would be one of the few forms of aid work that can be seen as apolitical. But, digging deeper into this we may still see hints of politics in this kind of work. For example, which countries do Americans flood into when natural disasters occur? America tends to send aid to countries that either have the potential to be political allies or are already political allies such as Israel. In other cases, America virtually ignores countries or territories such as Puerto Rico. Dichotomies such as this is what makes it hard to say that there is a such thing as apolitical aid. There are situations in which it is clear that aid work in certainly not apolitical. This is the case in aid when it comes to wars. The Cold War exposed a lot of this practice. When the Soviet Union and the United States were locked in the cold war aid work became a pawn (Polman, 103). The Peace Corps, created during the Cold War, was a way of getting into non-allied countries to try to spin global approval in the favor of America (Rieffel, 2003). This shows that even if the Peace Corps was going into a country to help with something like natural disaster relief there will always be those political undertones at the core of the organization (Whittall, 2015). Further, I think it irresponsible for humanitarian aid to attempt to be apolitical 100% of the time. If an organization is going into a country locked into war, like Afghanistan, and they are only treating medical injuries occurring but not trying to address why these injuries are occurring then that are truly doing more harm than good. The phrase ‘hearts and minds’ seems to be an idea that is to try to break down national barriers but in a way adding the minds part keeps those barriers up. When we focus on people’s minds and how they operate that just brings back the idea that we are different by these different identifiers thus causing more ethnocentrism. It is like one of those “well why doesn’t their mind think in the same way that mine does?” situations. It feeds into the fact that it is hard to have apolitical work because if someone is in a war zone then the minds of some may be geared towards violence and then what is an aid organization to do?

Addressing the issue of the Peace Corps in relation to the idea a force multiplier it is absolutely fair to look at as such in regards to the purpose of its creation. The Peace Corps, at its’ root, was made to form those connections globally in order to have more global partners that viewed the United States as a strong ally to potentially have. It is easy, thinking of such a powerhouse aid organization, to then lump all American aid forces as aid multiplier. This view point comes from multiple critiques on aid work in general. For example, Polman outlines, on page 146, how after 9/11, billions of dollars for aid were sent to Afghanistan. While this sounds like an incredible thing, there were no aid workers who were actually willing to go into the country to do work on the ground, nor were the funds being tracked meaning they could not ensure that the funds were actually being allocated to aid work. Knowing these details, it is easy to look at this ‘donation’ as just a ploy to bring Afghani opinion into the favor of the United States after the disruption to society in the Middle East that America has caused. When looking within the United States and whether or not those can be seen as political tools/ force multipliers I think the answer is absolutely. Often times, we see politicians doing work for minorities during the campaign trail to gain the favor of minorities and then when they are elected all the care for them seems to go out the door. It is interesting to think of because if, with America, we can’t even do work for each other out of the goodness of our hearts with no ulterior motives then how can we expect the same to happen abroad?

Crisis Caravan ultimately left me with a lot of questions if that wasn’t evident in the post above. It is a critical look at the aid sector but a perspective that needs to be taken. Ultimately, I don’t think it is possible for aid work to ever be 100% apolitical nor do I think it should get to that point. But, something has got to change; what that is exactly is still up for debate.

Polman, L., Waters, L., & Polman, L. (2011). The crisis caravan: Whats wrong with

humanitarian aid? New York: Picador.

Rieffel, L., & Rieffel, L. (2016, July 28). Reconsidering the Peace Corps. Retrieved from

https://www.brookings.edu/research/reconsidering-the-peace-corps/

Is humanitarian action independent from political interests? – Sur – International Journal on

Human Rights. (2015, September 01). Retrieved from https://sur.conectas.org/en/is-humanitarian-action-independent-political-interests/

“In giving voice to suffering we can sometimes moderate it, even aestheticize it (Dawes, 8).”

That the World May Know: Baring Witness to Atrocity written by James Dawes dives deep into humanitarian aid and tells the stories of aid workers and their experiences in this sector. Dawes takes the task of standing on the outside and explaining what it is that goes on in the aid sector. As he states in the very beginning, “This book is about those who decided to do something. It is about their struggle to make sense of the things they’ve seen, the price they have paid for their commitments, and what difference – if any – they feel they have made” (Dawes 1). By “doing something” Dawes means to go and help those that are vulnerable and need it (Listoe).

In one story, it is claimed that there is a moral imperative to act. We have talked about in great length in class what the humanitarian imperative and the importance of getting involved and aiding others (SOC 376). But, how does someone know what is actually good for the victim? Dawes asks these questions which made me reflect on our class discussions and also Letters Left Unsent by J., which I had just recently read. Dawes, and J., question how we know when it is our place to go in and offer aid (J). Dawes focuses greatly on work that is done from the wealthier global North going in to “save” the poorer societies in the global south. He also explores the idea of how one then chooses to talk about it and what the results of doing so are.

How does reading this book inform or otherwise impact how you are dealing with the assignment to create a PSA video about some issue we have discussed in class?

As well as telling many stories about humanitarian aid workers, That the World May Know also impacts the reader’s perspective on how you tell these stories. Earlier in the course we were given the task to great a PSA video. My group focused on what members of the Elon Community think it means to be a global citizen. We wanted to hear their unique opinions and make the viewer of the PSA think about the question, and how they perceive what a global citizen is. After reading Dawes’ book, I believe there are some flaws in our PSA. There may be many conflicting opinions over what a global citizen is because it is a has a different meaning for everyone. Someone may not know what a global citizen is and not be able to express it. However, I don’t think it is too touchy of a subject that it would cause a lot of controversy like some of the stories and conversations that Dawes mentions. He goes into the idea in his book that telling certain stories and experiences can impact others and be traumatic. Everyone has different experiences and it is important to respect and understand that. I think that that is why many PSA’s can be difficult because they surround hard topics, and many of the issues we have discussed in class can be controversial to some. It can be challenging to know whose responsibility it is to spread these messages and which stories are worth possible consequences.

I think that it is important that stories of these tragedies and hard issues are told. Dawes reflects on how telling stories of these events keep them alive and recognized. I think that is why our PSA’s are important. Even if it may be controversial, someone has to say it, it is just important to make sure one is saying it in the right way. Dawes also talks about the media and its role in how people view humanitarian aid and different crises. The media can play a positive or a negative role in telling the stories of crises. When the public only hears about a crisis from one perspective it is what they are going to believe, so if told correctly the media can inform people and hopefully benefit those that were impacted.

Image of a riot against humanitarian aid.

References:

Dawes, James. That the World May Know: Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

J. Letters Left Unsent. Evil Genius Publishing, 2014.

Listoe, Daniel. “That the World May Know: Bearing Witness to Atrocity .” Comparative Literature Studies, Penn State University Press, 5 Mar. 2009.

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen”

From Dawes we learn that words matter, language matters.  On page 223 he quotes Hong Ying,

“Everything I narrate / seems to have lost its meaning.”

And then on the next page this from Gilbert Holleufer, 

“The language disincarnated, it disembodied reality, and they [the affected community] know it.  They know we are disembodying their reality, we are dissolving it into words. ….Humanitarian language is part of the threat they have.”

Reflect on how the media depicted the humanitarian crisis that you researched for class (or any of the others presented by your classmates).  What language was used to describe the situation and the lives of those in the affected community? How does this language affirm -or not- the points Dawes is trying to make?  

_______________________________________________________________________________

What may not come as a surprise is the heavy use of the word crisis when describing the conflict in Venezuela. When researching what exactly has left the Latino country in such unrest, I was led from a leadership dispute, to a myriad of issues. The headlines don’t detail just one, but multiple crisis including: economic, political, migrant, and GBV. The accompanying articles often also provide graphic imagery of starving children and violent protests. What is interesting though, is that this dedication to highlighting what’s wrong in Venezuela has only recently begun. I first thought that because many of the articles I had found were recent publications- that these issues were recent as well. But when looking at a timeline of Venezuelan history, I realized that wasn’t the case at all. There are blatantly significant stages of worsening recorded by respectable sources for the past ten years. Venezuela had not only been collapsing for some time, but by 2014 was in a fully-fledged economic and political “crisis”. So why then are the problems of Venezuela being so forcefully propagated now? I won’t pretend that I truly know enough about the situation or about humanitarian aid work to answer this as fact- but from both the research I have done, and Dawe’s explanation of the use of language, I have two theories.  They go hand-in-hand, the first being that the many crisis in Venezuela progressed to the point at which they’re at now because the world choose to ignore them. The second being that because the country is now in such complete turmoil, the language and propaganda has to be especially aggressive. Had we have sent help when the problems were first rooting, we may have had different narrative, and a different outcome.

So, what was the media saying in the earlier stages of Venezuela’s collapse? In almost every case, news coverage formally recognized Venezuela’s declaration of recession but dismissed the idea that it would get significantly worse. The United States media blamed the downturn as a consequence of socialist policies and over-spending. Diego Moya-Ocampos, senior political risk analyst for the Americas at HIS stated: “We have no concerns over Venezuela’s capacity to pay in the one-year outlook”. It was also a widely accepted expectation for the country to use the remains of the government savings to bring the country back to break-even. But if you look at the data being released at the same time as these dismissive news-breaks, to expect anything of the sort was completely unrealistic. It is popular information that Venezuela is home to the world’s largest oil reserves, and so if they were capable of operating the market efficiently, they have the potential to become incredibly powerful. This assumption unfortunately masked the reality of Venezuela’s vulnerability. In this case it is difficult to apply Dawes argument against humanitarian language, because little is said. The first quote,

“Everything I narrate / seems to have lost its meaning.”

… is interesting to consider in the context of 2014 Venezuela. What was being said had not “lost meaning” but rather re-assigned it. What was publicized wasn’t necessarily the whole truth and so there wasn’t much to consider. However, the second quote…

“The language disincarnated, its disembodied reality, and they [the affected community] know it.  They know we are disembodying their reality, we are dissolving it into words. …. Humanitarian language is part of the threat they have.”

…is very much true, in a different context than Dawes intended I think, but true nonetheless. The reality of Venezuelan citizens was very much disembodied, disconnected, and honestly destroyed. What was happening was being ignored, and the humanitarian language that should have been assigned to the situation was lacking.

(This is an example of the news response during early stages of the crisis)

(These are the more recent headlines)

On the other hand, media releases coming from Venezuela were even more misleading. While the citizens, businesses, and associates of the country recognized and vocalized the problems occurring- the government worked alongside the media to control what was published about both their economic and political faults. Though the world was never “Blacked-out” from the country’s issues, most TV and radio channels are either owned by the government or subject to self-censorship. Jon Allsop, from Columbia Journal stated, “The government frequently discredits negative reporting as propaganda invented by a hostile world media, pushing counter-narratives that flat-out deny the existence of many of the country’s problems.” I wouldn’t consider this as an excuse for the dismissive nature of the United States and other world leaders, but it certainly didn’t support any sort of call to action.

Looking to the present publications concerning Venezuela- the first and most important change, is the tone taken to describe the situation. Whereas before it felt as though I was reading about simply foreign news, not a real crisis, and no call for concern- the more recent writing is graphic, and argues for immediate aid. (I’ve attached a particularly graphic NY Times post at the bottom) One thing that the media is getting absolutely right is the tense with which they speak about the state of Venezuela. While they may not have well-enough publicized the problem as it developed, new writing does recognize that the country’s political and economic system isn’t collapsing but has rather collapsed. Unfortunately, though saying this is accurate, the depth to which they push the idea is rather sensitive. The articles have begun to predict the problems in Venezuela so horrifically, it may seem to some that they are beyond repair. Writers should caution themselves against painting a picture so fervent, that the cry for help is lost. Much like Dawe’s argues when quoting Hong Ying, neither an emotional evocation or analytical presentation will move people to help. Your words must connect on a human level to inspire humanitarian action. I think that the best way to do this is to use as much conversation as possible from the Venezuelan citizens themselves. There cannot be a more accurate way to tell someone’s story than simply have them tell it themselves. When considering who has the right to speak on a situation, or represent the victims of a crisis it largely depends on the state of that crisis and position of those victims. We ignored the beginnings of Venezuela’s disintegration, and their government continues to muffle their voices. I think we owe it to them, to speak on their own behalf for if it was not their right to do so before, it most certainly is now.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/world/americas/venezuela-children-starving.html

Below are some of the most recent pictures of the Venezuelan crisis, such images as these are what is being so included in nearly all recent articles (even if the articles aren’t about rioting/protest)

Allsop, Jon. “Venezuela’s War on the Press.” Columbia Journalism Review, CJR, 25 Jan. 2015, www.cjr.org/the_media_today/venezuela_crisis_maduro_trump.php.

Constable, Simon. “Doomed Venezuela: This One Number Shows Just How Bad It Is.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 8 Mar. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/simonconstable/2019/03/08/doomed-venezuela-this-one-number-shows-just-how-bad-it-is/#2470fcac48a8.

Nagel, Juan Cristóbal. “Venezuela’s Political Crisis Hits the Streets.” Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy, 13 Feb. 2014, foreignpolicy.com/2014/02/13/venezuelas-political-crisis-hits-the-streets/.

Shaffer, Leslie. “Is Venezuela Headed for a Default?” CNBC, CNBC, 8 Dec. 2014, www.cnbc.com/2014/12/07/is-venezuela-headed-for-a-default.html.

Specia, Megan. “What Is Happening in Venezuela and Why It Matters.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 30 Apr. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/world/americas/venezuela-crisis.html.

staff. “Venezuela Profile – Timeline.” BBC News, BBC, 25 Feb. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-19652436.

Question:

One of the first wisdoms of sociology is that everything is connected to everything else.  Anthropologists call this cultural integration. When doing a functional analysis the social scientist looks at the social phenomena in question and probes deeply into not only the obvious and manifest functions that are present -what the phenomena in question is intended to do and what impacts on the major institutions and groups of the society- but also and aggressively the many unintended (both positive and negative) latent consequences of this phenomena. On page 16 Dawes asks, “How do we weigh the unforeseen and often unforeseeable negative results of our humanitarian interventions?”  Does Dawes offer any answers to this important question?  What are your answers to this question?

Everything is connected to everything else. We as humans are mirrored neurons; a social species connected through each other and define each other. To put this simply: “I am because you are”, our actions simultaneously communicate with each other dictating the next course of action (SOC 376:2-18). This helps explain why in sociology most of what happens we are unaware of and we take our present actions and explain them in the future. All parts of society work together to complete a viable culture in something called functionalism. For this assignment, we were asked to read “That the World May Know” and complete one question in response to our learnings from the novel. Regarding this novel, the social phenomena in question would be the integration of stories and how they are interpreted. Below I attached a video to help describe a functional analysis to those who have not taken an Introduction to Sociology class prior to this course.

Through symbolic interactionism we know that meaning is created not inherent, meaning we cannot decide how one reacts to the stories we tell. This is particularly relevant in the section of the novel entitled “Genocide”, in which the Rwandan individuals interviewed claimed, “they were anxious about the kind of stories being told, about them being turned into stories” (Dawes, 27). In order to maintain their humanity, those affected by the Rwandan genocide did not want to become characters overshadowing the mass terror that they and their country experienced. We begin to question how meaning is created, but more importantly how it is sustained within people. Within symbolic interactionism we know that literature turns experiences into beautiful works of art, however, this may be misinterpreted as trying to uplift the reality of the situation. Sociologists must be careful to avoid the process of reification; turning an experience, such as the genocide, and condensing it into something tangible. This also applies to the use of language and its effect in symbolic interactionism. Within the novel language is the main topic describing that “from using language as a precise tool for the objective, agent-neutral measurement to using it as a form of emotional exhortation and moral coercion” (Dawes, 80).

Functionalism is the process of understanding the connection between all parts of society. This can be found within “That the World May Know” when Dawes describes in the “Integration” section that he “examine[s] how their different organizational goals shape their language practices and how these, in turn, either amplify or diminish their capacity for dealing with state-sponsored violence” (Dawes, 77). Under functionalism, we are able to explore the latent and manifest functions that help evaluate the social phenomena. The latent functions are those, in this circumstance, representing the unforeseeable effects. For example, a latent effect of writing about those affected by the Rwandan genocide; is the dehumanizing of that group of people.

Dawes asks the question “how do we weigh the unforeseen and often unforeseeable negative results of our humanitarian interventions?” (Dawes, 16). When participating in humanitarian aid one is unsure how their actions will affect a particular situation; going back to symbolic interactionism. With the possibility of negative effects, one begins to question why themselves or another would enter into this sector, “it is a question asked frequently of people involved in humanitarian work. It is a question they frequently ask themselves” (Dawes, 117). Perhaps Dawes is answering the larger question with a series of smaller, more personal questions. Through questioning the origin reasoning as to why one becomes a humanitarian, the possible negative results become blinded. Dawes offers another answer to the question when he states that “it may have been the consequence-blind feeling of purpose that comes from simply trying the faith we cling to because it is the basis of our will to act or the confidence that comes from immersion in an institutional culture that performs effectiveness in its very architect” (Dawes, 74).  After this quote, Dawes continues to explain how he was enlightened to the idea that perhaps the problem at hand is a lack in education in situations. In the “Storytelling” section it is exclaimed that people want to be genuine and tell the truth, however, I do not believe he offers one concrete answer to the social phenomena.

References

Davis, Daniel, director. Three Founding Sociological Theories. YouTube, YouTube, 31 May 2013, www.youtube.com/watch?v=paA61KfOcEc.

Dawes, James. That the World May Know. 2007.

SOC 376: “How to Become Global Citizens”

#1.) Review what Dawes says about General Dallaire in the chapter titled Genocide and how he describes Dallaire’s reaction both in the moment and now in the years afterward to the genocide and the part that he played.  What are your reactions in general and more specifically through the lens of the Dunant/Nightingale philosophical debate?

In this chapter titled, Genocide, Dawes delves into deeply personal stories and testimonies of the Rwandan genocide. The chapter covers the timeline of the Rwandan genocide and how Tutsi and the Hutu’s tribal rivalry resulted in the fasted and largest killing of the twentieth century. It follows several different accounts of this harrowing tragedy that barely made it to the surface of media during the killings. One of the unique things Dawes does in the chapter is uncovering how Westernized the reactions are after finding out about these accounts. He notes how one author wrote a love story between a Rwandan woman and French-Canadian man fall in love only to have her captured and raped during the period of the genocide and then eventually killed by her captives after being mutilated. The book was praised and the reactions to those who actually experienced and knew the atrocities that were committed during the genocide were not to be used to craft love stories. From the Dunant perspective on how to tell the story of such magnitude Dawes states, Rwanda, the Balkans, and elsewhere, have catalogued the many ways stories designed to shake us out of our self-absorption and apathy can fail” (Dawes pg. 10). There is a multitude of literature available on the genocide of Rwanda and along with this, media sources were relaying information to major news centers and governments. Despite efforts to voice the alarming amount of deaths and mutilations going on through ethnic cleanings, there were no actions taken by governments or NGO’s to assist the Rwandans in desperate need. However, on the other side of the argument if it weren’t for the attempts of those in Rwanda recording what they experienced and attempting to relay it to anyone who could make a change to their current situation. Even though the Hutu were attempting to silence the people in Rwanda through killing those involved in media and new outlets the stories that the survivors possess is unmistakably invaluable towards those affected and carrying out the story of what happened.

General Dallaire was stationed in Rwanda by the Canadian military to protect and report upon what was happening. His experiences during the time deployed under the United Nations as a peacekeeping force during January of 1994 still haunt him to this day. In an interview on his expierences, Dallaire states,” The impact of the trauma of Rwanda had physically affected my brain and had put me in a state where there was no capability left of any desire for life, any desire to even consider life. I was even debating whether I should exist as I held on my shoulders, and still today, the belief that as commander of the mission in Rwanda I had failed the Rwandans” (USHMM). General Dallaire in the midst of the over 800,000 killings committed by the Hutu’s in less than a year, his warnings and pleas for help were ignored by national governments across the globe. In his hearings with the ICTR to sentence the Hutu’s involved for war crimes and genocide, Lawyer Peter Erlinger attacks him in cross-examination simply trying to state that this was a war due to the Hutu and Tutsi’s involvement as political parties. However, the Hutu’s overthrew the government through warfare and installed themselves into power making them not an official political party with no division of votes or government for the Tutsi. However, despite Daillare’s and so many other survivors horrible experiences outlined in the chapter, Dallaire has committed himself to battle media oppression of this matter and serving as a voice to those in need and affected. Even though he still battles with the regrets of yesterday and fear of tomorrow, Daillare transformed into J.’s perspective through all 4 m’s. Upon his initial deployment from the UN, he is simply tasked with keeping communication lines open and help those in need not knowing of the dangers ahead and resembling the missionary phase. As soon as the killings begin and he is attempting to battle the Hutu’s he shifts into the mercenary phase followed by his initial departure and recovery from what he experienced shifting him into the misfit stage. For six or seven years he could not think about Rwanda and spent most of his time in therapy however through his books and interviews has transformed into a voice for Rwanda and the need there finally putting him into the mystic phase.

Works Cited:

“A Good Man in Hell: General Roméo Dallaire and the Rwanda Genocide.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2002, www.ushmm.org/confront-genocide/speakers-and-events/all-speakers-and-events/a-good-man-in-hell-general-romeo-dallaire-and-the-rwanda-genocide.

Dawes, James. That the World May Know Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Philg. “Florence Nightingale Opposed the Red Cross.” Philip Greenspun’s Weblog, 5 Nov. 2010, philip.greenspun.com/blog/2010/11/05/florence-nightingale-opposed-the-red-cross/.

“…it’s not about changing the world; it’s about changing the square meter you’re standing on.”  This quote is an incredibly powerful one who’s central theme has come across many times in this course. We often talk about the scale of aid that different organizations have and whether it is too much or too little. Another quote that seems to relate to this one, that the Center for Leadership really pushes, is that of “think globally, act locally.” This idea is that we can think of broad scale problems but at the end of the day it is most important to enact change in areas that fit in your scope; sometimes this means staying in our own backyards. When we try to act too large then we end up stretching ourselves too thin, thus causing burnout, or we end up doing more harm than good. And, there are cases where the best thing is to stop, reassess, and then go again. That is my sentiment on the video.

For background, the video is one that has stuck in my head since we first watched it (SOC 376: 2/2019). It shows a man trying to throw starfish back into the ocean as the tide is falling but in the process he ends up killing a lot of those starfish. Another man comes up and after the first man leaves the second tries to pick up where the other left off and ends up also killing the starfish prematurely. In this situation, with the quote in mind, this is one of those cases where changing the square meter that one stands on means not doing anything. The first man never took the time to really stop and process what he was doing and thus he kept doing the same thing over and over again which meant causing more harm. His sentiments and heart were in the right place but we saw throwing as the best solution when maybe walking to and from the ocean would have been the place. He was trying to change the square meter he was standing on but only went through one step. The quote can make it sound like we only have one shot to change the world we live in but humanity is amazing in that we do have chance after chance (maybe if we slow down global warming who knows I think we are running out of chances but I digress). The man in the video used one chance, and another, and another. But, he never stopped to look at his process to find another way. This is a big problem in the sector, I feel, is that there are groups that know what they are doing is not working but instead of thinking it is them causing the problem it is like they assume that the community is just not ready to receive help and that’s why their tactics aren’t working. Further, the problems facing aid workers today extends far past just natural disaster relief; we have wars, civil wars, genocides, political corruption, the list goes on. The aid sector was not designed for that and they are currently running themselves ragged trying to help everyone without the right tools (Gahrib, 2017). It is like they are constantly throwing starfish in the ocean but they aren’t looking back to see if the starfish made it because there are so many others that need help.

As for Dawes, I think his response would be rather similar to mine. This quote is one that he uses to explain how aid worker can stay sane in the sector. They see so much widespread hurt and pain, especially in war zones, that there has to be something for them to look at to feel as if they are still making a difference. The quote reminds aid workers that even if they are working in one small village in a region of wide spread war they are still making a difference. I like the example Dawes uses when comparing the work of the aid sector to that of politicians: you go in with all the optimism of the world and then once you’re in you realize you have to narrow your focus on smaller things (Dawes, 2007). Even with the smaller things in mind you are still making a difference. The atrocities that aid workers see are emotionally and psychologically damaged so as Dawes implies that quote could be the only thing to get them through. Dawes follows this throughout that chapter explaining the impact of in indirect ways. The aid workers have to see things in perspective to truly get through their times.

Arcaro , Tom. “Humanitarian Crises Around the World.” SOC371. SOC371, Elon, NC

Dawes, James. That the World May Know Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Gharib, Malaka. “Humanitarian Aid Is ‘Broken,’ Says Former U.N. Official.” NPR, NPR, 22 June 2017, www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/06/22/533639073/what-s-wrong-with-humanitarian-aid.