SODOM & GOMORRAH: There’s been much talk over the last several years about a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. The consensus is, if Palestine were to break off from Israel and form a separate state, then the Palestinians could determine their destiny and the Israelis theirs. Sudan proves the consensus wrong.
Last year, according to Matt Gregory writing at Technorati, a “historic happening occurred” that caused everyone to celebrate the flourishing and growth of democracy, etc., etc., etc.
The historic happening was the formation of a new state in Africa: South Sudan. Following a horrific conflict, groups in southern Sudan broke away from the Khartoum government and established their own independent country.
According to the traditional, progressive interpretation of the world, such a move would foster peace. If the groups in South Sudan were able to determine their own course, they would do so. If the groups in Sudan proper could determine their future without interference from others, there would be an end to the conflict.
Everyone was happy, including the genocidal dictator. Things couldn’t be better, except that some pointed out that a two-state solution should be adopted with the Israel-Palestine conflict too.
Today, less than a year later, things don’t look so cheerful. South Sudan and North Sudan are crossing into each other’s territories and fighting. From what it looks like, both sides are suggesting the other is at fault. No doubt an example of the flourishing beauty of democracy and so forth.