To commemorate the 10-year anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, the United Nations declared yesterday, April 7, to be the first “International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda.” The United States—which, along with the rest of the world, sat idly by while 800,000 Rwandans were slaughtered—has plenty to reflect upon. History has not looked kindly upon our inaction. In recent years former Administration officials, including Madeline Albright and President Clinton himself, have personally apologized for their failures.

But reflection and apologies are cheap. At this very moment our nation again sits idle in the face of yet another African genocide, as a campaign of whole scale ethnic cleansing racks the troubled nation of Sudan. The crisis demands strong leadership and urgent action. Will President Bush rise to the challenge, or will he repeat the sins of his predecessor?

For the past twenty years, the Sudanese have suffered through an intractable civil war. But the current wave of violence is different. It’s not a religious conflict—all the parties are predominantly Muslim—but rather a conflict rooted in long-simmering ethnic and regional tensions. It began approximately 14 months ago, when the Arab-dominated Sudanese government in Khartoum became embroiled in hostilities with two black African rebel groups based in the vast western region of Darfur. In order to undermine potential rebel support, Khartoum is prosecuting a brutal ‘scorched-earth’ policy against Darfur’s Blacks. Khartoum has armed nomadic Arab militiamen, the Janjaweed, who are carrying out the atrocities in conjunction with official Sudanese government forces.

The reports are truly shocking: women raped, villages burned, children slaughtered. The violence has already left an estimated 30,000 dead—approximately 1000 individuals are currently being killed each week—and displaced nearly a million Africans. A lucky hundred thousand refugees have managed to flee into neighboring Chad—itself one of the world’s poorest nations—where the United Nations is currently rushing to settle them in camps before the May wet season makes vehicle transportation all but impossible. But another 700,000 refugees are still trapped in Darfar where they continue to be victimized by roving militias and strafed by Sudanese military jets. With the crops burned, and new ones unable to be planted, international agencies are warning that Darfur may soon suffer serious famine as well. Meanwhile, Khartoum denies international humanitarian groups access to the region.

With the notable exception of New York Times columnist Nicolas Kristof—who has devoted his last three pieces to the issue—and an excellent op-ed in Tuesday’s New York Times by Harvard’s own Samantha Power, the Sudanese crisis has largely been ignored by the Western press. Our leaders have also remained silent. Unfortunately, this comes as little surprise. Compared with the latest dour dispatches from Iraq and the recent revelations in the post-9/11 drama, the troubles of some little known African nation hardly makes for big news.

But the issue’s decided obscurity means that Bush can expect to face little political heat should he choose to look the other way and can likewise expect to receive little credit should he take a strong stance. Absent such political incentives, a strong Bush stand on Sudan is unlikely; it would demonstrate real principle and genuine compassion.

What should the Bush Administration be doing to address the crisis? In her op-ed, Power argues that intervention is not an all or nothing affair—a choice between invasion and inaction—a point, she notes, that is often lost on the Bush administration. To begin with, the President must publicly acknowledge and condemn the atrocities. Bush broached the issue during a phone conversation with the Sudanese President two weeks ago, but a forceful public denunciation would mean more. Intense international pressure may yet persuade the Sudanese government to call off its deadly campaign. Regardless, Power asserts that ten thousand peacekeepers are needed in Darfur to secure the situation. Khartoum would first have to agree to such a mission, a concession that would require additional U.S. leverage. For example, we could threaten to extend sanctions that we are already imposing on Sudan as punishment for their terrorist connections.

In the meantime, other nations, most importantly those in the E.U., must not sit back and wait for the United States to take the lead. In the face of such egregious crimes against humanity, every country has a responsibility to speak out and to act according to its means; U.S. inaction is not an excuse. That African leaders and Muslims leaders have remained silent is especially unconscionable.

Mukesh Kapila, the former United Nations humanitarian coordinator in Sudan, recently called Darfur “the world’s greatest humanitarian crisis.” He added, “I don’t know why the world isn’t doing more about it.” Unfortunately, reasons for inaction—cowardice, callousness and indifference—are myriad; justifications are not. Our leaders can no longer plead ignorance. The Bush Administration must act now or face the harsh judgment of history.

Sasha Post ’05 is a social studies concentrator in Adams House. His column appears on alternate Thursdays.