Famine And Foreigners Ethiopia Since Live Aid

`No outsider understands Ethiopia better than Peter Gill. He combines compassion with a clinical commitment to the truth. He writes with verve and an eye for telling detail. The result is a major contribution to the compelling story of this remarkable nation.'---Jonathan Dimbleby --

For the past thirty years-under both Emperor Haile Selassie and President Mengistu Haile Mariam-Ethiopia suffered continuous war and intermittent famine until every single province has been affected by war to some degree. Evil Days, documents the wide range of violations of basic human rights committed by all sides in the conflict, especially the Mengistu government's direct responsibility for the deaths of at least half a million Ethiopian civilians.

We see famine and look for the likely causes: poor food distribution, unstable regimes, caprices of weather. A technical problem, we tell ourselves, one that modern social and natural science will someday resolve. To the contrary, Jenny Edkins responds in this book: Famine in the contemporary world is not the antithesis of modernity but its symptom. A critical investigation of hunger, famine, and aid practices in international politics, Whose Hunger? shows how the forms and ideas of modernity frame our understanding of famine and, consequently, shape our responses.

A fresh look at two centuries of humanitarian history through a moral economy approach focusing on appeals, allocation, and accounting.

The Promise and Perils of " Silence" or " Temoignage" During Humanitarian Crises provides readers with a nuanced study of what happens when historical and 21st century medical humanitarian communities, armed with their idealistic rhetorics, choose whether to speak out or remain silent during various military or medical crises. The author uses a series of case studies from the late nineteenth century to the early twenty-first century to illustrate the politicized nature of these decisions. Unlike some that focus on the prescriptive need to follow certain universal medical humanitarian principles during crises, this book highlights the precarious nature of what some scholars call “medical advocacy/witnessing” or what the French call “témoignage.” The author argues that regardless of whether we are talking about lack of action during colonial crises or the Holocaust, it is oftentimes the lack of political will that determines how like “neutrality” or “impartiality” are interpreted. The book also acquaints readers with some of the challenges that have been recently posed to the “new” humanitarian Doctors Without Borders personnel, who have witnessed the targeting of medical hospitals and clinics. What researchers call the weaponization of medical care affects many in need living in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, or Syria. The author concludes the book by underscoring the point that it is the presence or absence of political will, and not the inherent epistemic value of medical humanitarian principles, that dictates when this advocacy succeeds or fails.

The media reporting of the Ethiopian Famine in 1984-5 was an iconic news event. It is widely believed to have had an unprecedented impact, challenging perceptions of Africa and mobilising public opinion and philanthropic action in a dramatic new way. The contemporary international configuration of aid, media pressure, and official policy is still directly affected and sometimes distorted by what was--as this narrative shows--also an inaccurate and misleading story. In popular memory, the reporting of Ethiopia and the resulting humanitarian intervention were a great success. Yet alternative interpretations give a radically different picture of misleading journalism and an aid effort which did more harm than good. Using privileged access to BBC and Government archives, Reporting Disasters examines and reveals the internal factors which drove BBC news and offers a rare case study of how the media can affect public opinion and policymaking. It constructs the process that accounts for the immensity of the news event, following the response at the heart of government to the pressure of public opinion. And it shows that while the reporting and the altruistic festival that it produced triggered remarkable and identifiable changes, the on-going impact was not what the conventional account claims it to have been.