A Leauki's Writings
Published on March 30, 2009 By Leauki In War on Terror

The Arab League is the remnant of an empire and is one of the last remaining imperialist entities in the world. Dozens of non-Arab nations and tribes live under Arab rule, usually without their existence as peoples being acknowledged, often with no civil rights, and too often as slaves.



During the so-called decolonisation of the 1950s and 1960s and between the world wars European powers decided for some reason to hand over power over Berbers in North-Africa and black Africans in the Sudan, as well as Kurds and Assyrians in Syria and Iraq to Arab governments. This was considered "decolonisation" by the UN and essentially replaced the masters without freeing the slaves.

Since then the world has essentially ignored this vast empire and calls for "ending imperialism" are never directed at the Arabs, who rule over North-Africa and almost the entire middle east, but at Israel, the only non-Arab nation in the region not ruled by Arabs.

Only the Jews had a lobby powerful enough and only Israel became independent of Arab imperialism, but at a very high price. Israel and Jews are demonised all over the Arab world but enjoy considerably popularity among the other peoples ruled by the Arabs.



Note that this has nothing to do with Islam, as Islam does in no way demand Arab rule over other peoples and in fact the Quran doesn't speak too highly of the Arab people.

"The Arabs of the desert are the worst in unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah hath sent down to His Messenger but Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise." (9-97)


Slavery is a real issue in the Arab world and the UN have not done anything to fight it. Several former slaves have become well known abolitionists.

Look at this man:

For you he is a black man from Africa. If you know more about him, you know that he is a Dinka from southern Sudan. For many Arab governments and many Arabs he is a slave, the property of another human being. In fact he is a former slave from Sudan.


In Mauritania about 20% of the population live as slaves, according to the South African Institute of International Affairs. The country suspended her diplomatic relations with Israel last month because of humanitarian concerns regarding the Gaza conflict. The president of Mauritania managed to say so with a straight face. And people applauded him for his stand for the rights of the oppressed.

And in the Sudan the black population (Nubians, Fur, Massalith, Dinka and other tribes) are at best non-citizens, usually seen as slaves, and at worst the victims of genocide. At the same time Israel is demonised for defending herself against a similar destiny. (I assume we can safely say that Israel and the Jews would not be the only non-Arab people under Arab control that would not be treated like non-citizens, slaves, or genocide fodder.)

Even in northern Iraq Sunni Arab tribal leaders still keep black slaves as personal servants (but not as labourers).

Former slave Simon Deng describes it best:

"While the life of a slave is like hell, there is no shame in being a slave; it is not a choice. There is only shame in being a master".



Or look at this prison cell:

For you this is as a prison cell much too small for even the worst offender, a crime against humanity. For Saddam Hussein's government it was the correct place to store Kurds (plural) before they were executed.

The UN didn't care about this. And so-called anti-imperialists in the western world were still busy trying to find out if there is some remaining guilt the US or Britain could have for slavery and torture, two problems that can be savely ignored if done by Arabs to Africans or Kurds.


There are too many issues in the "Arab world", and the fact that it isn't really an "Arab" world is the least of them. However, the problems will not go away. Slavery is still a real issue, as is genocide and even civil rights. Kurds are people too, as weird as it might sound to someone who does not realise that it actually needs to be said.

I am not saying that Arabs shouldn't live all over the "Arab world". But I am saying that the peoples they rule ought to have a say in how their countries are run. Their native languages must be recognised and become official languages (and revived where necessary). And the governments of those mixed countries must be either monarchies (where the state is defined by the monarch and not by it being "Arab") or real democracies where all nationalities and religions are recognised. Israel grants the same civil rights to Jewish and Arab and other citizens, why can "Arab" countries not do the same with their Berber, African, Kurdish, and Assyrian populations?

Paraphrasing Simon Deng's statement I think it is fair to say that being an Arab in a country that also recognises non-Arabs as human beings and citizens is perhaps not a choice, but it is definitely no shame; whereas being an Arab in a country that enslaves or murders non-Arabs and not speaking up is a shame.



on Mar 30, 2009

Incidentally, the differentiation "black" and "white" is meaningless.

African cultures are just as diverse as all other cultures in the world and Somalis and Ethiopians (as well as Ethiopian Jews) are just as black as Nubians and Bantu. Nevertheless the first are Cushites and as such their ancestry and culture are more closely related to Ethipians, who are Semites like Jews and Arabs, and the third and fourth are completely unrelated to each other or to Cushites and Semites.

Kurds are essentially Iranians and Jews are as closely related to Arabs as is possible and are still the most popular target of Arab racism.

The "black" tribes in Sudan are all related to each other, from Nubians in the north via Fur in the west to Dinka in the south. And they pretty much share a destiny too, Berbers in North-Africa are normally subject to cultural oppression rather than race-based oppression, i.e. if they are willing to "be" Arabs, they should be fine and would just lose their culture and history rather than their freedom or lives.

All of it is unacceptable.

Arabs have neither the right to take away the Berbers' culture and language, nor the Dinka's freedom or the Fur's lives. And while I doubt that it will happen I still hope that the UN will one day see it the same way and act.


on Mar 30, 2009

I agree with everything you've said...I usually do but for some minor, very minor stuff.

What you've written is true, and it is tied into the old thing where one person feels 'entitled' (for whatever reason) to own another or exert power over him/her.

It never ceases to amaze me how people let them get away with their crap. It's probably because the peoples in those countries live in such terror of them.

Have any of the Amnesty type organizations ever run a laundry list of their violations of human rights (as they do every 10 minutes or so about Israel)?

Why does the world put up with it? It doesn't care a damn. Too much on their own plates.

Here's the kicker: They've spread out. Take a look at their behavior in Europe, and Scandinavia, Chicago...etc.

But don't worry...they're "Coming soon to a theater near you."


on Mar 30, 2009

It never ceases to amaze me how people let them get away with their crap. It's probably because the peoples in those countries live in such terror of them.

The world doesn't care and that's why people in the middle east are so afraid of the Arabs. They know that nobody will help them if they fight back. Even Israel knows it, but Israel is strong enough to fight back on her own.


Have any of the Amnesty type organizations ever run a laundry list of their violations of human rights (as they do every 10 minutes or so about Israel)?


Who would care about that? It's indeed true that people only care about evil when the Jews can be blamed. I sometimes wish that Bashir, the dictator of Sudan, would turn out to be a Jew. The world's condemnation of Israel for the genocide in Darfur would be worth it if that genocide ended.

But on the other hand I don't see why the Jews should take the blame.


Why does the world put up with it? It doesn't care a damn. Too much on their own plates.

The world doesn't have too much on their own plates. The world has time to condemn Israel for fighting back against those people. The world, for some reason, WANTS this to happen. That's why the world supports the Arabs in their wars.

If it hadn't been for George Bush actively fighting a war against an Arab government and if it weren't for Israel remaining independent and one step ahead of the genocide-to-come, there would be no opposition to the Arabs whatsoever.

I don't know why the world puts up with it. But I assume there are three reasons: ignorance, oil, and the safety of fighting injustice when the oppressor is someone like Israel who doesn't hurt people who protest. It's safer to demonstrate against Israel or the US than against slavery in Sudan. You can choose the evil you want to fight, and some evils are just so much nicer and easier to handle than others.