I knew things have been bad in the Congo but not this bad. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22781603/ Congo conflict claims 5 million lives in 10 years Report cites war, disease and malnutrition; most conflict deaths since WW2 updated 8:56 a.m. CT, Tues., Jan. 22, 2008 KINSHASA, Congo - War, disease and malnutrition are killing 45,000 Congolese every month in a conflict-driven humanitarian crisis that has claimed 5.4 million victims in nearly a decade, a survey released on Tuesday said. The International Rescue Committee (IRC), which carried out the study with Australia's Burnet Institute, said Democratic Republic of Congo's 1998-2003 war and its aftermath had caused more deaths than any other conflict since World War II. "Congo's loss is equivalent to the entire population of Denmark or the state of Colorado perishing within a decade," George Rupp, president of the aid group, said in a statement. The findings were published on the day Congo's government and warring eastern rebel and militia factions were due to sign a cease-fire in the hope of halting fighting in the east which has raged on since the nominal end of the war. Rupp said that although Congo's war formally ended five years ago, "ongoing strife and poverty continue to take a staggering toll." "The conflict and its aftermath, in terms of fatalities, surpass any other since World War II," he added. Malaria, diarrhea, pneumonia and malnutrition, aggravated by conflict, were the top killers in Congo, the survey said. "Most of the deaths are due to easily treatable and preventable diseases through the collapse of health systems and the disruption of livelihoods," said IRC director of global health programs Richard Brennan, one of the survey's authors. Congo has the lowest spending on health care of any country in the world at an average of just $15 per person per year. "If you're in the United States, we spend $6,000 per person per year," Brennan said. The study was conducted between January 2006 and April 2007 in 14,000 households in all the country's 11 provinces. It updated previous surveys which estimated the toll from Congo's war at around 4 million. Hopes for peace The IRC said an estimated 727,000 people died in excess of normal mortality during the latest survey period. Children under the age of 5 were the hardest hit, accounting for nearly half of all deaths despite making up 19 percent of the population. Before the latest survey, humanitarian workers had estimated that more than 1,000 people a day were dying in Congo. "Since our last study in 2004, there's been no change in the national rate, which is nearly 60 percent higher than the sub-Saharan average," Brennan said. But in the east, where rebel groups, local militia, and Congo's own army prey on civilians with impunity, the mortality rate is 85 percent higher than the sub-Saharan African average. The vast former Belgian colony's 1998-2003 war sucked in its neighbors, as foreign armies and rebel groups vied for control of the country's rich natural resources. The conflict wrecked infrastructure already weakened by decades of neglect and corrupt leadership and forced millions to flee their homes. A 2003 peace agreement led to the formation of a transitional government and multi-party elections were held in 2006, won by President Joseph Kabila. Rupp said he hoped the peace deal for the east, due to be signed on Tuesday by the government, Tutsi rebels and Mai Mai militias, could finally draw a line under Congo's crisis. "We hope this week's peace agreement in North Kivu will mean an end to the hostilities and a restart of reconciliation and recovery efforts," he said. The IRC called for security reforms, increased spending on basic services like health care and continued support for the 17,000-strong United Nations peacekeeping mission in Congo. "Recovery from conflict is clearly a protracted process, particularly when it's on the back of decades ... of economic and political decline," Brennan said. "There are no quick turnarounds ... So the international community needs to be in there for the long haul," he added.
yet the U.S. will continue to ignore it, because they can't reap any benefits from helping the region out.............dog crap > U.S. foreign policy.......
I don't think it's bad foreign policy. The US is not a charity organization after all. It just makes them hypocrites for spewing this stuff about interfering in the middle east for "humanitarian" reasons. Of course, it's incredibly unfortunate that so many people believe in this...
We dont help out allies who cant benefit us. Like other colonies, Congo should suck it up and improve on ur own. Its not like Congo is 90% desert, it is the Largest African country with the most Natural resources on the contient.
Its another example of not caring because its black on black crime. Africa has been exploited for thousands of years and used by england,belgium, france and other countries. It's really a shame that this type of ''pimping'' has existed and once someone has used and abused africa, their gone.
and u stick to shutting the hell up, braaaah.....the U.S. only interferes when there is something that can benefit the U.S........ exactly......
sadly some things never change......Africa has been exploited by just about everyone on the face of this earth, but somehow the mother of all humanity is still pushed to the back.......
Sudan is the largest country in Africa. It's funny how a lot of people in the US both inside and outside the government are quick to call the situation in Darfur a genocide, but ignore the millions that have died in the neighboring Congo. At least Dikembe Mutombo is doing something about it.
That's true that the Congo doesn't get the same coverage as Darfur even though the situation is as bad if not worse. One problem I think is that there doesn't seem to be a genocide, at least an organized one, going on in the Congo but a lot of killing by several groups so its hard to focus on one single group as the victim and one group as the victimizer. At the sametime their is a larger context to Darfur in regard to tensions between the West and Islam, in terms that there is greater interest in the West and what's going on in Islamic countries, whereas the conflic in Congo doesn't relate to what's going on outside of Africa. Good call on Dikembe Mutombo Foundation but outside of individual giving to foundations what do y'all think should be done or can be done about what's happening in the Congo?
Doesnt matter if they have all the diamonds and oil in the world. Lack of education, unity, tools etc prevent that from happening. Especially when countries "pimp it" for its resources and contribute to them fighting against each other. Iraq was better off with Saddam than the Congo and Darfur are today. US gov't doesnt give a damn and should stop calling itself humanitarians. Red Cross and other outreach orgs are humanitarians.
I think I started similar thread a year ago when exactly the same news story was covered by NYT. Actually there are resources to steal from Congo. We didn't intervene there because the lobby groups for those resources are not as powerful and well organized as the oil lobby. That's why we intervened in Sudan but not Congo.
I am not sure if there are oil in Darfur. But I am sure there are a lot in Sudan. The point is to use Darfur as an excuse to influence Sudan.