Genocide - Essay Example

Summary

According to Leo Kuper, the word genocide is new while its concept is ancient. Humanity always nurtures conceptions of social difference between different people in the society, creating some sense of the in-groups versus out-groups and hierarchies of desirable and undesirable, good and evil, and the superior and inferior. Historically, people always had a name for themselves that differentiated them from the others. The people then would be against those that they considered being of lesser quality in any way. Great differences in religion, customs and language made the others be viewed as less human- pagans or even animals.

An example of cultural tradition is that of the Old Testament in the Bible. One commentator stated that the book depicts God as a sadist and His followers as genocidal killers. The first illustration is the book of Genesis (6:17-19) where God destroyed all humankind except Noah and his family. Another illustration points to the prohibition of intermarriages with people of different religious practices as it will ‘contaminate’ His followers (George, 1994). The followers are to be holy, separated by their neighbors who practiced idolatry. At times the only way to stay apart was by destroying the idolatrous neighbors (1samuel 15:2-3). The Lord declares that He will punish the Amalekites for opposing the Israelites and commands them to kill every one of them, including their animals.

In Numbers 31, the Lord is angry with Moses for sparing the Midianite women and the Israelites go back and kill them and only spare virgin girls for “obvious reasons.” According to the prehistory of genocides, women and children were usually spared as they were viewed to be weak and hence couldn’t defend themselves. They were also seen as sources of future offspring for the dominant group. Ben Kiernan,a Yale scholar, identifies Rome’s siege and razing of Carthage towards the end of the Third War (149-46 BCE) as ‘The First Genocide”. Rome was out to suppress Carthage because they were a threat to them. More than half the population of the Carthage perished in the genocide.

The followers of Jesus Christ also happened to be Rome’s victims. They were persecuted and killed due to their religious beliefs that were different from those of the Romans. In the 19th Century, Genghis Khan led his people to the gates of Western Europe and exterminated all the nations that existed there (George, 1994). Apart from cultural and religious beliefs, hunger for fame, power and wealth also contributed to the early genocides dating from around 1492, when Caribbean Indian discovered Christopher Columbus.

Overview

Vendee Uprising

In 1789, the inspiration of American counterparts led the French revolutionaries to overthrow King Louis XVI and established a “Rights of Man” order. Their actions elicited opposition in their homeland and abroad. European armies aligned themselves at the French borders waiting to attack the revolutionary government. In March 1793, the Vendee revolted against the central government after the execution of King Louis. When the Vendeans rose against the central authority, it was undergoing a rapid radicalization (Israel, 1999). The events led to a ferocious civil war that was termed genocide against the Vendeans. The Vendee experienced early victories against the central government because they had all their people involved, irrespective of age and gender. The government in return decided to exterminate all Vendeans, including children and those who supported the government.

Around 150,000 people were killed in the genocide. The Vendee uprising was not initially recognized as genocide, but recent debates had people acknowledging it. However, some people still regard it as a mass killing of the Vendean civilians.

Zulu Genocide

Shaka Zulu of the Zulu kingdom led his people in an expansion campaign between 1810 and 1828. The Zulu armies attacked present-day South Africa and Zimbabwe and laid it to waste. The targeted areas faced massive destruction and dispersal such that little historical evidence was left. Shaka’s gender-sensitive strategy was unique compared to the rest. In conquering the Butelezi clan, he incorporated all the men to his clan so as to expand his military and killed the women, children and elderly who he considered to be weak and useless (Israel, 1999). Shaka also aimed at destroying his enemies totally. He claimed that women could bear children who later on the turn against him (become enemies).

Shaka’s actions are considered genocidal as his policies were meant for complete destruction. The term that the Zulus adopted, izwekufa is derived from Zulu izwe (policy, people, nation) and ukufa (to die, death). The term is thus genocidal in its meaning and etymology.

Genocide Naming

Raphael Lemkin came up with the name genocide in a period of four years. He supported his campaign against genocide with a lengthy book (Axis Rule in Occupied Europe). He was able to wage a successful campaign that was intended to persuade the new UN to draft a convention against genocide. Lemkin is said to be a loner who antagonized the people he met. He was very preoccupied with the genocide that he opposed other initiatives for human rights like the Declaration of Human Rights. The genocide framework has faced a lot of criticisms due to its ambiguities (Omer, Anita & Mary, 2002). Lemkin was obsessed with the issue of mass killings throughout his campaigns and had to find a concise and memorable word t describe it. He settled for one with Greek and Latin origin: Greek-“genos” meaning tribe or race, and Latin-“cide” meaning killing. Genocide was the intentional mass destruction of nationals due to their collective identity.

The UN Convention defines genocide as a crime against the law of nations. Sit has a technical definition that is highlighted in three articles. The first article talks about the time of committing genocide and considers it unlawful both at war and during peace. The second article talks about the group that is destroyed and considers it unlawful whether it is in part or in whole. The third article talks about various actions that are regarded as genocidal such as conspiring to commit genocide and are regarded as unlawful and punishable.

What defines genocidal intent?

Most scholars agree that intent defines genocide. However, what is it that defines intent? Intent has to be differentiated from motive. The motive is considered irrelevant the moment prosecutors are able to prove that it was intentional and not accidental. Partial or total destruction of a group legally is regarded as intentional and thus genocidal, regardless of the motive of destruction, so long as it is done intentionally (Alex, 2001). There is also the issue of hard and soft framing. Intent combines specific and constructive intent. Specific intent means “where actions with predictable results are taken over an extended period of time, and the consequences of these actions regularly confirm their outcome.” Constructive intent refers to scenarios where no harm was intended but perpetrators ought to have realized its likelihood. Hunting and killing people and subjecting them to physical and mental harm is regarded as genocidal, whether it was intended for or not.

The question of genocidal intent is thus less relative, so long as harm was caused on people of a certain group with a collective origin. Perpetrators ought to be careful of the consequences of their actions and not just carry them out and later on claim unintentional harm. Human life is dignified and ought to be respected and guarded by all means. Careless actions that jeopardize people’s lives should be shunned, condemned and punished.

Can Genocide be justified?

The utilitarian form of genocide is the most justified and celebrated. Such indigenous groups do not exploit their land and thus are susceptible to confiscation of territories or annihilation. The groups may rebel the colonial authority leading to genocidal forms (Alex, 2001). Haiti, Bolivia and Mexico are examples of “genocides by the oppressed.” Genocidal assaults that are aimed at moral revenge are less condemned and thus often welcomed. For instance, allied nuclear-bombing and fire-bombing of Japanese and German cities are justified on the grounds of ‘they started it.” Massacres of Jewish civilians is another example of the genocide of the oppressed that is celebrated by Arabs and Palestinian supporters.

Another case of genocidal justification is on the grounds of legitimate defensive. Examples include the refusal of Turkish to acknowledge the Armenian genocide because the Armenian rebellion aimed to undermine the Ottoman state, Rwanda genocide whereby the Hutus were pre-empting the genocide they had suffered in Burundi and the invasion of USSR in Germany as a defensive war against the Bolshevik. Genocide on the basis of self-defense can be justified because the same could happen on the other group if they just allow perpetrators to torture them and kill them. The perpetrators should face it all unless their target is on a group that poses a threat to them or the nation as a whole.