Letter to the Times:

Sir, I had the pleasure of hearing Niall Ferguson, author of Empire, talk about his book at the time of its release last winter. One of the refreshing aspects of his talk and his book was his ability to examine British imperial politics without the presumption or assumption of imperial guilt. How disappointing then, to find his review of Samantha Power's book, A Problem From Hell, (Culture, July 6)so full of accusations of America that he refused to apply to Britain. Ferguson agrees with Power that America is guilty of not doing more to prevent genocide since the conclusion of the Second World War. Since genocide has occurred, and since Americans have declared "Never again,' I guess we Americans are guilty as charged. But take a closer look at the examples cited in Power's book, and commended by Ferguson as valid cases of American failure, and some curious questions arise. For example, the Khmer Rouge slaughtered over a million Cambodians in the 1970s. Power and Ferguson apparently believe that America allowed this to happen, in their opinion because America was traumatized by their failure in Vietnam. As an aside, I have to wonder what their opinion was of America's presence in Vietnam, and whether they would have supported America's return to Southeast Asia a year after their departure. But more to the point, Power correctly describes the Khmer Rouge as a client of China. Before blaming America, wouldn't it be more appropriate to accuse first, the Khmer Rouge of killing a million people, and second, their patron, an international nuclear armed power with 3 million men at arms, for not stopping it? Likewise with Rwanda. Before attacking America for not interfering, shouldn't someone first say the actual killers are at fault? And then second, shouldn't anyone note that France, a nuclear power with half a million men at arms and a long history in the immediate region, should have been the more appropriate entity to halt the slaughter, instead of being, as many allege, complicit in its occurrence? The important mistake, certainly made by Ferguson, and apparently also by Power, is to implicitly cede all power and authority to America to right the world's wrongs. Is Britain responsible for the Turkish slaughter of Armenians? If not, why not? They were the world's imperial master when it occurred, with troops and a history of almost frenzied activity in the region. The answer is no. Britain could not then, as America cannot today, stop tribal madness and ethnic slaughter before it occurs. Genocide, a crime against all of humanity, is a failure by all of humanity as well. It is not that America did not do enough in Rwanda or Cambodia. It is that all of us did not do enough. Britain could have sent troops and air power to either place, as could have Nato, Russia, China and Japan. Nobody did. Could America have done more? Undoubtedly. So could we all. To say 'Let the Americans do it' is to say that you will not. What does that make of you? When British and French soldiers began the genocide of American Indians, a practice continued by American settlers and soldiers, America alone was assigned the burden of guilt. It was the same when British ships carried slaves to the New World. Although Brazil and the Caribbean islands received large numbers of slaves (although not as many as the Islamic states), it is America that carries the legacy of slavery. By writing this, I do not wish to absolve America from its crimes and/or sins. As an American, I want it to do all it can to eliminate genocide from the face of the world. It is because I love my country that I want her to be just. But the rest of the world cannot sit on the sidelines. If Niall Ferguson, a young, intelligent and progressive historian, cannot see this, then what has his history shown him?