Burundi’s president,
Pierre Nkurunziza, has threatened to fight any African Union (AU) peacekeepers
imposed on his country in his most confrontational comments yet amid a mounting
political crisis.
The AU said this
month it was ready to send 5,000 peacekeepers to protect civilians caught up in
months of violence, invoking for the first time powers to intervene in a member
state against its will.
“Everyone has to
respect Burundi borders,” Nkurunziza said on Wednesday in comments broadcast on
state radio.
“In case they
violate those principles, they will have attacked the country and every
Burundian will stand up and fight against them … The country will have been
attacked and it will respond,” he said, in his first public response to the AU
plan.
Other government
officials have already said any peacekeepers arriving without Burundi’s
permission would violate its sovereignty.
More than 220,000
people have fled since the crisis erupted in April, triggered by Nkurunziza’s
bid for a third term.
Opposition groups
took to the streets saying he was violating constitutional term limits. But he
pointed to a court order allowing his campaign and was re-elected in a disputed
July vote.
A failed coup,
continued clashes and gun attacks in the central African state have unsettled a
region where memories of the 1994 genocide in neighbouring Rwanda are still
raw.
"Burundi
President Threatens to Fight African Union Peacekeepers."
The Guardian. N.p., 30 Dec. 2015.
Web. 4 Jan. 2016.
This article
discusses a still active crisis in Burundi. This author has a bias towards the
people of Burundi, not the president. This bias is evident in the uses of words
such as threatened and imposed. This authors attitude toward the African Union
is quite interesting. The author chooses to point out that this is the first
attempt by the AU to use their powers to intervene. This choice also leads to a
small bias that implies that they have failed in helping situations before.
This crisis in Burundi has been going on for months. I think it is a good thing
that the AU has tried to intervene, however the fact that the president can
turn that offer down says something about this union. If the African Union is
there to help countries in difficult situations, which the presidents are
causing, those said presidents should not be able to make a statement that ends
those efforts.
Good job Amy on your response. I think you efficiently identified the bias that this article has even if it is very subtle. Although, when you used the word interesting to describe the attitude toward the African Union I thought that word choice was vague. You went on to explain the attitude but with the word interesting I did not know how to take the next few sentences. Also the last part of your critique is more of your opinion on the situation rather than critiquing the article, although I do agree with you. On the whole it was nicely done!
ReplyDelete