Kyiv “isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilised and relatively European city … where you wouldn’t expect that to happen” — Charlie D’Agata, CBS correspondent.
See this link I found last week? It is filled with similar quotes preaching that I should shed a tear for Ukrainian refugees specifically because they are not poor and are Caucasian. Is it just me who failed to see the relevance?
Call it that age-old stereotype — that the “West” is the best.
Hmmm. Well, honestly, I can’t say I haven’t ignored this. I leave the preaching to my parents and my pastor. “No prizes for heroism are worth it” as my dad often says.
Besides, exam season is round the corner too. Truthfully, I spent too long writing this article. I realised less waffle was needed for what might seem so obvious.
At the very worst, these quotes are a cheap shot, a sneak diss, an ‘indirect’, at non-European countries. Sure, you might question my credibility. After all, I’m a product of my environment — a card-carrying member of a first-world country, having the luxury of writing this very article at 3AM.
And yet, the harmful stereotype of a civilised “us” and an uncivilised “them” that is unworthy of mainstream media attention will still far outlive this war.
Insecurities are loud. Should my concern for civilians only exist because we both “watch Netflix and have Instagram accounts” or have “blue eyes”? I only have one of those things (trivial things…). And yet, here they are being cheaply used as political tools because why not? It’s just getting old now.
Therefore, let me take a little time to address two key issues I have with this divisive stereotype. It is not rooted in heroism, blacktivism or any ism really.
It’s just a quick stroll through my thought process as young person witnessing this unfold in the palm of my hand, live from TikTok. Might as well put my BSc in International Relations and History to good use while I’m here too.
- What does it even mean to be civilised?
This label of “civilised”, placed on a pedestal by certain journalists is really just identity politics getting in the way of reality.
The engagement of people with an issue is greatly influenced by how much they can relate to those involved. I suppose this is practical — we might “love thy neighbour” next door but family will always come first, no? Well, that and money talks.
Still, the “civilised” is just another invented social category, a result of our human programming to group up with others we believe are like us. Obviously, 7 billion people don’t believe the same thing.
Now you know why politics exists. Diversity of thought manifests into a tribalism of groups of unlimited size competing for the spotlight — that’s why people try to destroy each other on Twitter.
It can be summed up in one word — diaspora. Whether it’s grassroots movements like BLM to the loose brotherhood of democracies that formed NATO or the Islamic ‘ummah’– it’s all about a wider community scattered across the globe that rally in support of a common cause.
The “West” or even just “Europe” itself is a diaspora — an elite members club of “civilised” gentlemen on both sides of the Atlantic who are now assembling (in spirit) against the big bad Russia.
Being verbally excluded from this club only becomes problematic when it is used to carelessly champion the identity of the Ukrainian civilians. It only distracts from what they are: casualties of war.
I really do not know how those optics were meant to work in the multicultural societies we live in. Should Africans like me only care about this war because of the African and Asian students that were trapped in Ukraine by border patrol? Granted, racism is just primitive behaviour that unfortunately managed to squirm its way into a crisis like this (will people not rest?).
However, let us not have double standards — ideally, our shared humanity is enough empathy towards ALL victims of this war and other wars. Surely this would be the ‘civilised’ thing to do?
Of course, I said “ideally”. Politics is beyond just moral objections and its ‘to each their own’ on how people connect with global issues. Reputation is a currency.
2. Does war not happen in Europe?
“It’s really horrifying. The news every day, it’s just, it’s almost unfathomable. For our generation, it’s very alien to see this [war] in Europe”
— Prince William on Ukraine
See, I was raised on news reports from thousands of miles away on the Gaza strip and Afghan sands, right after the Water-Aid adverts. So, I kind of understand where his perception comes from.
Still, take a glimpse into the past once in a while and suddenly Europe doesn’t look so alien to war.
Even before Ukraine, there were Russian incursions in Crimea, Georgia, and Chechnya, 2008 onwards. Nuclear weapons were being waved around then too.
Even Prince William’s generation lived through the brutal wars in the Balkans that contained the first and worst genocide in Europe since World War Two. I could mention the last one thousand years. The clash of crowns and conquerors — from Rome to Agincourt to the Western Front Wilfred Owen mused about to scrambling for Africa overseas. Logically speaking, war comes before conquest.
A LOT of conquest.
Now you may just wave your hand dismissively and call this “history”. Reputation is a currency, remember? The “civilised” narrative is lucrative.
However, history is the birthplace of stereotypes. The history of Europe is also the history of rough transitions from clans to kingdoms to imperial constructs. Even then civil and independence wars. So “rough” is putting it mildly.
How do you think songs like Rule Britannia came about?
*Sigh* There’s no decision-making process here. No need for optics.
No need for long-winded explanations to redefine the global pecking order based on someone’s idea of superiority. War does not discriminate, nor should we.
