Since the mid 19th century, Sudan has been a centre of genocide and crimes against humanity which have gone largely un-noticed by the western world. This small frontier zone between the Arab and African worlds has been in a state of civil conflict for almost 23 years as the Arab Janjaweed militia – with the support of the Sudanese army and air force – has engaged in an ethnic war against the African minorities, killing upwards of 400,00 people [1].
However, amidst all the chao, anarchy, and international sanctions, Sudan was ranked as the world’s 17th fastest growing economy in 2006 and has consistently experienced significant GDP growth [2] – 5.2% growth in 2009, 4.2% in 2008 – which has been fueled almost entirely by immoral trade agreements with The People’s Republic of China.
Since the discovery of oil sands in the province of Darfur, Beijing has invested “millions in [Sudanese] infrastructure” such as “building pipelines, roads, and airfields in oil producing regions” [1]. This investment assures that China can import the majority of Sudanese oil – about 80% of the nation’s yearly output, valued at more than US20$ billion – and creates a stable trading relationship in which Sudan can easily pay not only for vital food imports, but also for new Chinese military hardware [1].
Hmm… I didn’t know Sudan made mounted machine guns!
For many years, “most major oil companies [have] regarded the country as too unstable for investment” [1], but it would appear that China has successfully found a way to extract oil in hostile countries: simply supply the local genocidal regime with tanks, helicopters, machine guns and grenades!
Not only that, but China has “consistently blocked efforts at the UN” to have Sudan’s actions classed as genocide, which prevents the victims suffering in Sudan from receiving much needed protection. China’s “public position is that it abides by all UN arms embargoes” and claims it has “told Sudan’s government not to use Chinese military equipment in Darfur” [3].
In order for military action to be taken by the UN security council, all of the P-5 countries – US, UK, France, Russia, China – must all agree, otherwise one of these five may veto the proposal and impede any action to be taken.
Now although China could argue that it has not directly supported the genocide in Darfur, it’s “economic self-interest” [1] has only fueled the bloodshed. By freely selling arms to a military regime, a choice was made in Beijing that cheap oil is worth the lives of thousands of human beings.
Ultimately this becomes a question of how far companies – not only in China but also the rest of the world – are willing to go in order to maximize profits. There have been countless cases of unethical treatment of workers in huge factories to cut costs, or exporting products containing known carcinogens to unregulated countries in order to simply sell a by-product. But are we beginning to push the limits of maximization to the extent that human lives are sacrificed to save a few dollars on each barrel of oil? If we haven’t stopped destroying wild habitats in order to plant a few more acres of corn, what is there to stop us from clearing out entire human communities in order to cut costs while filling up our cars?
[1] – http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/04/06/2003355508
[2] – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudan
[3] – http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7503428.stm
