Email 
Print 
Teddy Bear Arrested in Sudan
Written by: Andrew Stroehlein
Reuters and AlertNet are not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author's alone.
The stuffed animal, a UK citizen of Chinese origin, was taken into police custody after it emerged he had the same name as a child who had entered the toyshop where he was working. If found guilty of the offence, the teddy bear could face 40 lashes or possibly even be thrown into a room with an overly playful puppy.
Reaction from around the world has been swift.
“We are outraged that a British bear has been treated in such an inursine fashion”, read a statement from the UK Foreign Secretary. “We have not seen such maltreatment since the mass exodus of teddy bears from Darkest Peru in the 1950s.”
Condemnation also came from countries that have traditionally been closer to Khartoum in the recent past. After mass protests in Beijing in which the Sudanese flag was burned, China recalled its ambassador to Khartoum, and its foreign ministry issued an unusually harsh statement.
“This bear was born in Guangzhou, and we consider the actions of the Sudanese government an attack on all Chinese plush toys”, it read. “The teddy bear must be released unharmed immediately.”
A source within China’s permanent representation to the UN, speaking on condition of anonymity, said his country was drafting a new Security Council resolution that “would be so tough, it would make the Americans and the British seem like the champions of sovereignty”. He said they wanted to give the UN/AU hybrid force for Darfur a revised mandate to “shoot anything that moves as long as it’s connected to the government.”
But a police spokesman in Khartoum defended the state’s actions, saying, “This bear has committed a most serious offence. The Sudanese government must be firm in demonstrating that it can easily divert the world’s attention away from its failure to implement the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and its continuing instigation of devastating chaos in Darfur.”
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
12 responses to “Teddy Bear Arrested in Sudan”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content in this article, including by framing or by similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
Journalist Andrew Stroehlein is Communications Director for the International Crisis Group, the conflict resolution organisation, where he promotes responsible coverage of current and potential conflicts and helps draw attention to forgotten wars around the world.
29 Nov 2007 20:10:56 GMT
Hardly bears thinking about.
Of course, the three bears with their honey-soup bowls were sharing their food out to the locals, or so one should hope.29 Nov 2007 20:12:59 GMT
This article was allegedly written by - Journalist Andrew Stroehlein. (He) "is Director of Media and Information for the International Crisis Group, the conflict resolution organisation, where "HE PROMOTES RESPONSIBLE" coverage of current and potential conflicts and helps draw attention to forgotten wars around the world." I can't imagine a less responsible piece of "journalism" - I suggest he either takes his journalism skills to a little known trade magazine somewhere or finds a subject that his fatuous and immature attitude suits, farting perhaps.... Grow up Mr Stroehlein or better still, shut up.
29 Nov 2007 21:17:02 GMT
Iâm fairly sure itâs called âsatireâ. Look it up. The text has a very serious point, too, though I admit the message could easily be lost on those prone to self-righteousness.
30 Nov 2007 19:39:45 GMT
Get a life richard lewis.
03 Dec 2007 16:52:14 GMT
Teddy bear countries world wide should release a new teddy bear for the Christmas season pre-named "Muhammed". Not only would it shut up the overly hypocritic nation of sudan but it would easily make a couple million.
04 Dec 2007 13:22:51 GMT
Ofcource the world is going in an irrational manner in all aspects.At the same time one should be aware present religious resurgence era not to hurt any one's sentiments a the same time Innocents should not be victims.True free inquiry rational Educational systems can help mankind not to fall into mutual destruction.
05 Dec 2007 16:16:59 GMT
Oooooh, what a vicious tongue you have when criticised, has Mr Lewis hit a nerve one wonders? Surely satire requires a little more wit and intelligence than you have shown in this Mr Strohelien, I doubt the concept is lost on the previous contributor. Self rightousness on the other hand appears to be your midle name having looked back on your other efforts at journalism; seemingly a collection of the rather inept musings of a jaded hack filled with sniggering, public school humour. A trade magazine may not be your calling, its true, Private Eye I would say may be too high brow(!) How about Viz????
05 Dec 2007 19:58:17 GMT
Thank you for reviewing my earlier efforts at journalism. I accept the accusation of "jaded hack" with honour.
I guess I could have just written: "all the attention on this poor teacher is only playing into Khartoum's game of manipulating the international media to forget the government-driven death of hundreds of thousands and the very real potential for even more horror if the regime is allowed to continue ignoring its commitments to the north-south agreement", and left it at that. But that has been said so many times and so often ignored. Would anyone have noticed? Presenting it in a different way has at least got some people agitated, if not concerned.06 Dec 2007 09:50:44 GMT
What was all the fuss about a bear called Mohammed. It could have been Mohammed the Pooh!
06 Dec 2007 23:27:16 GMT
Gee, who would have thought that teddy bears could arouse such fervour. But I do find that Andrew Stroehlein's last point is a good one. With so many "politically motivated" speeches being thrown at us, the total is mind numbing to say the least. The question of "who is telling the truth" (if anyone) is also of prime importance. The net result is the mouthing of phrases, that are complete in their horror, but that no one listens to.
It is quite obvious that only the unusual or outrageous will get through the lead curtain of the majority of consciousnesses. It reminds me of the "scientists" in the 50's-60's calmly talking about nuclear "overkill". There were enough nukes around to kill the human population many times. They had no remorse about the total extinction of the human race, their only interest was that "we" could kill the same people more times than "them". So teddy bears, are civilisation threatening beasts (as was mickey mouse, and other capitalists)? Or not? It doesn't matter - blame the messenger and ignore the subject of Darfur, as have Lewis and Cox. I wonder what Winnie-the-poo would have made of it all?09 Dec 2007 10:51:28 GMT
I found Andrew Strohlein's article an amusing way of making a serious point. I can see that some people might not like it, but I am really mystified by the extreme reaction of "Richard Lewis" and "David Cox." Richard, rather than childish name-calling, why not explain what is so "irresponsible" about his journalism? And David, you say that Andrew's fairly mild response shows a "vicious tongue" and then proceed to accuse Andrew of being an "inept.. jaded hack" lacking wit or intelligence. Sounds more like Andrew has hit *your* raw nerve! Richard and David: what is your point? That humor is never warranted? That Sudan is unfairly criticized? More informed opinion and less name-calling please!
09 Dec 2007 21:15:51 GMT
Simply put, I enjoyed it.