Phnom Penh Post, Issue 17 / 02, January 24 - February 7, 2008American actress Mia Farrow, known predominantly for her film career involving over 50 films such as Rosemary's Baby and a handful of Woody Allen classics, was in town last week on a campaign to raise awareness about the atrocities that have been on-going in the Darfur region of Sudan in Africa. Her Dream for Darfur campaign has been stopping in places where mass murder has taken place to honor victims and survivors. She spoke to Post publisher & editor-in-chief Michael Hayes about why she was in Cambodia.
Post: Why are you here in Cambodia?
Farrow: We came to Cambodia as it was the last on our list of countries or communities that has experienced genocide or mass atrocities.
We lit a symbolic torch on the Darfur-Chad border several months ago and then took it to Rwanda and there the Rwandan survivors participated and really shaped a ceremony there that was meaningful to that. It was extraordinarily powerful. The US ambassador attended and Congressman Donald Payne, one of our finest, spoke as did the head of the survivors group there. Hundreds of Rwandans were there and they passed the flame from survivor to survivor all the way from the school where a massacre occurred-I think 5,000 people were killed-to a grave site which had been a garbage dump where perhaps a 100,000 died.
We went to Armenia, Sarajevo, Berlin and here we are in Cambodia.
I'll speak for myself. I gave up on governments addressing the issue of genocide. My government, the United Nations and all the nations of the world abandoned the Rwandans, abandoned the people of Sarajevo, abandoned the people of Cambodia in their darkest hours. They were abandoned. And so we were hoping to gather a constituency of... what more powerful civic base could there be in the world then that of the survivors....We wanted to journey into communities that have experienced genocide to gather a civic base to position itself towards ending the on-going genocide in Darfur.
Post: Was this your idea?
Farrow: It wasn't my idea...we conspired to do this. Last March, together with my son, I wrote a piece called "Genocide Olympics" and that sort of triggered a lot of things. Among those things was Dream for Darfur because "Genocide Olympics" seemed a very provocative title and perhaps misrepresented what we really hoped for... The piece "Genocide Olympics" made the link, I think, for the American public between what is happening to the people in Darfur and China's complicity on that-the fact that China is basically underwriting the atrocities in Darfur to the tune of roughly $2 billion a year going into Khartoum's coffers. Some 70 percent of that, according to Human Rights Watch, is used in the expensive business of genocide's unique style-the purchase of Antonov bombers, attack helicopters, the steady flow of arms and ammunition, all of which is used against a civilian population in Darfur. And this for a country that has no self-defense need for any armed force.
Post: How has your experience been here in Phnom Penh? I understand you had some problems this morning.
Farrow: First of all, the people of Phnom Penh have been extraordinarily supportive in all kinds of ways...The trouble we experienced this morning...none of it come from the people themselves. Our intention was to have a ceremony which is again is to light the flame. Each time we say this prayer...It's intended to represent those who perished, all those who were lost but also to celebrate the courage of those who survived, and the commitment that we share for an end to mass atrocities everywhere. So far our flame lighting ceremonies have gone very smoothly and very movingly. The reasons are best known to themselves. Our permission to have this ceremony on the sight of the memorial was revoked. Yesterday we found that out....So we restructured our ceremony to eliminate the flame and make the flame a flower. As we were not allowed on the premises of the genocide museum we would leave our flowers just to honor the victims and the survivors, but then the streets were cordoned off so it was impossible to get anywhere near the genocide museum. ...So, I don't know, there were 60-80 armed police everywhere. So we came with our flowers and we had thought that we would just put them at the feet of the soldiers but Theary [Seng], I mean it is after all her family that was lost here, [she] did not want to put the flowers on the ground, did not want to see them trampled, so we stood there for perhaps 40 minutes while she spoke to the officers, the policemen saying 'Look then, we just want to put our flowers outside the memorial. We were forbidden to go within the memorial but we won't we will leave them at the gate. I don't want flowers to honor my parents left trampled on the ground.'
And then she said 'Could just Mia and I , two women, go? You can escort us if you like to leave our flowers there and we would gather them in a bouquet and take them there.' But all of this was denied and in the end we gathered the flowers-a big handful-and gave them to one of the policeman and we left.
There was a press conference afterward and someone said 'Did you feel you failed?' And Theary most openly said 'No'. And I think all of us shared this, not at all, because it isn't about success or failure. We came to honor the victims and the survivors and that is a matter of the heart and we did that. We did that.
Post: On the bigger picture concerning Darfur, how do you assess whether you are making a difference?
Farrow: We would assess it by whether the people on the ground, in Darfur, are actually experiencing any relief, and they are not. If anything things are worse. So what we know that the UN peace force was deployed but you know that it was reduced from the prescribed number. UNAMID. Just last week, I think, it deployed. But not the 27,000 recommended in previous resolution nor the 26,000 in UN Resolution 1769 but rather some...I don't even think the 9,000 are there yet which is a scant expansion of the UN force of 7,000 that is there, so unsupported and, not their fault, but ineptly. They were under supported in every way and really there was just a change of hats.
The government of Sudan has ...I mean if you look at that UN Resolution 1769, and I looked at three incarnations of it, and you can see where some of its sharpest teeth were removed, at leaving the composition and capabilities in the hands of the government of Sudan. And they have used that to make sure that this force is not as effective as it could be. And you have heard Jean-Marie Vahannah (sp?) say 'Do we send in a force that is not capable even of protecting itself, let alone the people?'
Post: So the original numbers of 26,000, were those not offered by UN member states or did Sudan say no?
Farrow: They were offered...It was in the resolution that said it should be a predominantly African [operation]...The government of Sudan has insisted that it be exclusively African. And that of course limited the numbers. Countries that have volunteered-Sweden, Norway, others-have been refused, denied access. So what we're really left with...I think the only countries that are in are Egypt, perhaps Pakistan. I'm not sure. I'm not on steady ground here but only two countries other than African countries were accepted. But I don't think the people of Darfur have been super happy about Arab countries coming in since the perpetrators have been Arab.
Post: Suppose readers learn of your presence here, and say 'Geez, I want to do something.' What would you tell them to do?
Farrow: I'm not Cambodian and...I wouldn't presume to say what the Cambodians should do...I would say support our humanitarians who are risking their lives every day to do what the world has turned away from, sustaining the lives of over four million people, two and a half million in camps, others exist in makeshift camps across Darfur, unable to sustain themselves. There is no protection for them and there is no protection for the aid workers. Attacks upon aid workers have risen 150 percent in the last 12 months, so those who are there dedicating ...their days and hours and resources to sustaining these fragile lives are really to be supported... but I don't know what Cambodia can do in terms of what political weight you may or may not have.
We do know, there is of course a partnership with China, and this is the moment to say 'Please China, do everything in your power. Use your extraordinary leverage with your close business partner, Sudan, to bring an end to the suffering, to stop the aerial bombardment of civilians and admit the peacekeeping force, of the sort outlined in the Resolution that they themselves signed, without the blockade.' And the blockades are enormous. Just for you, I mean it's water rights, it's where they can have their barricades, restrictions on what sort of vessels can land at Port Sudan, what sort of vessels can land at A-Fashir. There's a lack of helicopters, which is an appalling lack of support of the international community. But Khartoum retains control of communications...all these things make it very difficult for the force to be effective.
Post: Why are you here in Cambodia?
Farrow: We came to Cambodia as it was the last on our list of countries or communities that has experienced genocide or mass atrocities.
We lit a symbolic torch on the Darfur-Chad border several months ago and then took it to Rwanda and there the Rwandan survivors participated and really shaped a ceremony there that was meaningful to that. It was extraordinarily powerful. The US ambassador attended and Congressman Donald Payne, one of our finest, spoke as did the head of the survivors group there. Hundreds of Rwandans were there and they passed the flame from survivor to survivor all the way from the school where a massacre occurred-I think 5,000 people were killed-to a grave site which had been a garbage dump where perhaps a 100,000 died.
We went to Armenia, Sarajevo, Berlin and here we are in Cambodia.
I'll speak for myself. I gave up on governments addressing the issue of genocide. My government, the United Nations and all the nations of the world abandoned the Rwandans, abandoned the people of Sarajevo, abandoned the people of Cambodia in their darkest hours. They were abandoned. And so we were hoping to gather a constituency of... what more powerful civic base could there be in the world then that of the survivors....We wanted to journey into communities that have experienced genocide to gather a civic base to position itself towards ending the on-going genocide in Darfur.
Post: Was this your idea?
Farrow: It wasn't my idea...we conspired to do this. Last March, together with my son, I wrote a piece called "Genocide Olympics" and that sort of triggered a lot of things. Among those things was Dream for Darfur because "Genocide Olympics" seemed a very provocative title and perhaps misrepresented what we really hoped for... The piece "Genocide Olympics" made the link, I think, for the American public between what is happening to the people in Darfur and China's complicity on that-the fact that China is basically underwriting the atrocities in Darfur to the tune of roughly $2 billion a year going into Khartoum's coffers. Some 70 percent of that, according to Human Rights Watch, is used in the expensive business of genocide's unique style-the purchase of Antonov bombers, attack helicopters, the steady flow of arms and ammunition, all of which is used against a civilian population in Darfur. And this for a country that has no self-defense need for any armed force.
Post: How has your experience been here in Phnom Penh? I understand you had some problems this morning.
Farrow: First of all, the people of Phnom Penh have been extraordinarily supportive in all kinds of ways...The trouble we experienced this morning...none of it come from the people themselves. Our intention was to have a ceremony which is again is to light the flame. Each time we say this prayer...It's intended to represent those who perished, all those who were lost but also to celebrate the courage of those who survived, and the commitment that we share for an end to mass atrocities everywhere. So far our flame lighting ceremonies have gone very smoothly and very movingly. The reasons are best known to themselves. Our permission to have this ceremony on the sight of the memorial was revoked. Yesterday we found that out....So we restructured our ceremony to eliminate the flame and make the flame a flower. As we were not allowed on the premises of the genocide museum we would leave our flowers just to honor the victims and the survivors, but then the streets were cordoned off so it was impossible to get anywhere near the genocide museum. ...So, I don't know, there were 60-80 armed police everywhere. So we came with our flowers and we had thought that we would just put them at the feet of the soldiers but Theary [Seng], I mean it is after all her family that was lost here, [she] did not want to put the flowers on the ground, did not want to see them trampled, so we stood there for perhaps 40 minutes while she spoke to the officers, the policemen saying 'Look then, we just want to put our flowers outside the memorial. We were forbidden to go within the memorial but we won't we will leave them at the gate. I don't want flowers to honor my parents left trampled on the ground.'
And then she said 'Could just Mia and I , two women, go? You can escort us if you like to leave our flowers there and we would gather them in a bouquet and take them there.' But all of this was denied and in the end we gathered the flowers-a big handful-and gave them to one of the policeman and we left.
There was a press conference afterward and someone said 'Did you feel you failed?' And Theary most openly said 'No'. And I think all of us shared this, not at all, because it isn't about success or failure. We came to honor the victims and the survivors and that is a matter of the heart and we did that. We did that.
Post: On the bigger picture concerning Darfur, how do you assess whether you are making a difference?
Farrow: We would assess it by whether the people on the ground, in Darfur, are actually experiencing any relief, and they are not. If anything things are worse. So what we know that the UN peace force was deployed but you know that it was reduced from the prescribed number. UNAMID. Just last week, I think, it deployed. But not the 27,000 recommended in previous resolution nor the 26,000 in UN Resolution 1769 but rather some...I don't even think the 9,000 are there yet which is a scant expansion of the UN force of 7,000 that is there, so unsupported and, not their fault, but ineptly. They were under supported in every way and really there was just a change of hats.
The government of Sudan has ...I mean if you look at that UN Resolution 1769, and I looked at three incarnations of it, and you can see where some of its sharpest teeth were removed, at leaving the composition and capabilities in the hands of the government of Sudan. And they have used that to make sure that this force is not as effective as it could be. And you have heard Jean-Marie Vahannah (sp?) say 'Do we send in a force that is not capable even of protecting itself, let alone the people?'
Post: So the original numbers of 26,000, were those not offered by UN member states or did Sudan say no?
Farrow: They were offered...It was in the resolution that said it should be a predominantly African [operation]...The government of Sudan has insisted that it be exclusively African. And that of course limited the numbers. Countries that have volunteered-Sweden, Norway, others-have been refused, denied access. So what we're really left with...I think the only countries that are in are Egypt, perhaps Pakistan. I'm not sure. I'm not on steady ground here but only two countries other than African countries were accepted. But I don't think the people of Darfur have been super happy about Arab countries coming in since the perpetrators have been Arab.
Post: Suppose readers learn of your presence here, and say 'Geez, I want to do something.' What would you tell them to do?
Farrow: I'm not Cambodian and...I wouldn't presume to say what the Cambodians should do...I would say support our humanitarians who are risking their lives every day to do what the world has turned away from, sustaining the lives of over four million people, two and a half million in camps, others exist in makeshift camps across Darfur, unable to sustain themselves. There is no protection for them and there is no protection for the aid workers. Attacks upon aid workers have risen 150 percent in the last 12 months, so those who are there dedicating ...their days and hours and resources to sustaining these fragile lives are really to be supported... but I don't know what Cambodia can do in terms of what political weight you may or may not have.
We do know, there is of course a partnership with China, and this is the moment to say 'Please China, do everything in your power. Use your extraordinary leverage with your close business partner, Sudan, to bring an end to the suffering, to stop the aerial bombardment of civilians and admit the peacekeeping force, of the sort outlined in the Resolution that they themselves signed, without the blockade.' And the blockades are enormous. Just for you, I mean it's water rights, it's where they can have their barricades, restrictions on what sort of vessels can land at Port Sudan, what sort of vessels can land at A-Fashir. There's a lack of helicopters, which is an appalling lack of support of the international community. But Khartoum retains control of communications...all these things make it very difficult for the force to be effective.
No comments:
Post a Comment