1 Covering Darfur: The Guardian vs. Le Monde

2 Background Historical and economic resonance Britain’s colonial ties with Sudan -From colonial master to US ally British interest in Sudanese oil industry -BP & others invested in oil industry France’s colonial history in North Africa -Viewed African nations as partners French interest in Sudanese oil -TOTAL holds the largest oil concessions

3 Analysis Guardian (83 stories) Elite British newspaper since 1821 Comprehensive international news coverage Liberal or left-of-center stance Critical of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq Le Monde (92 stories) French newspaper of record since 1944 Analysis and commentary Moderate or left-leaning Criticized for supporting French government policies

4 The Guardian Major actors Sudanese government: Unlawful & brutal regime Janjaweed: Criminals backed by Sudanese gov’t Rebels: Victims of atrocities committed by Sudan gov’t & Janjaweed UN: Active but ineffectual UK government: Active mediator US: Aggressive power w/ threats of sanctions & military intervention AU: Most appropriate mediator

5 The Guardian Use of Contested Words Genocide, ethnic cleansing, humanitarian crisis, militia puppet-master Causes of Crisis Unequal access to natural resources Ethnic tension btw. Arab elites & black Africans

6 The Guardian Framing Blaming Sudanese gov’t & Janjaweed Description of atrocities: scorched-earth campaign, murder, torture, rape, etc. Inclusion of voices from displaced victims, rebel soldiers, foreign aid workers Ending the conflict: Providing logistical support for African Union Indictment to international criminal court

7 Le Monde Major actors Sudanese gov’t: Villain & perpetrator of atrocities Janjaweed: Allies of Sudanese gov’t, initiated a reign of terror with murder, rape, etc. Rebels: Victims & perpetrators of atrocities UN: Incompetent French gov’t: No active role, focus on humanitarian assistance through EU US gov’t: Protector of the Darfurians, inactive in spite of “genocide” claim, semantics game, delayed reaction to Darfur crisis AU: An African solution to an African problem

8 Le Monde Use of Contested Words Restoring peace in Darfur Humanitarian crisis, crimes against humanity Sudan exploits and arms Arab tribes, reign of terror Extermination campaign, politics of burning the ground Causes of Crisis Armed insurrection against Sudan gov’t & gov’t response of arming militant Arabs Janjaweed in search of profits in Darfur

9 Le Monde Framing Labels Darfur crisis as civil war: Janjaweed vs. Darfuris / Arabs vs. Africans Blames Sudan gov’t, Janjaweed & rebels for atrocities Describes atrocities: Burning the ground, Janjaweed as villains alleged for murder, rape & destruction Avoids labeling the crisis “genocide” or “ethnic cleansing” Depends heavily on news agencies (55%): Lack of voice from displaced victims & rebel soldiers Uses analysis vs. giving the facts: Focuses more on diplomacy rather than what is happening in Darfur

10 Comparison The Guardian Initially, resonates with US view of ethnic cleansing & calls for UK intervention Later, supports non- military option & presents AU involvement as solution Describes US/UK as unwilling to intervene while UN is inefficient Provides historical references Treats rebels as victims Le Monde Challenges US view of ethnic cleansing & genocide Frames Darfur crisis as civil war/ethnic strife, thus presents AU involvement as a solution Describes UN positively Omits voices of rebels, Darfurians Relies heavily on wire services

11 Making Sense of the Findings European coverage of African conflict Both dailies focus on Darfur as humanitarian crisis The Guardian is more active in covering what is happening on the ground than Le Monde Solution to Darfur crisis? Both dailies converge in supporting peaceful solution by presenting AU as the best mediator instead of UN sanctions/intervention