Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, racial, religious or

national group.
While precise definition varies among genocide scholars, a legal definition is found in the
1948 United Nations Convention on the revention and unishment of the Crime of
!enocide. "rticle # of this defines genocide as $any of the follo%ing acts committed %ith
intent to destroy, in %hole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such& 'illing members of the group( causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of
the group( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in %hole or in part( imposing measures intended to prevent births
%ithin the group( )and* forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.$
Coining of the term genocide
+he term $genocide$ %as coined by ,aphael -em'in .19//019192, a olish34e%ish legal
scholar, in 1945, firstly from the !ree' root g6nos .789:;2 .family, tribe or race 3 gene2(
secondly from -atin 3cide .occido<to massacre, 'ill2.
=n Noah 1955, -em'in made a presentation to the -egal Council of the -eague of Nations
conference on international criminal la% in >adrid, for %hich he prepared an essay on
the Crime of ?arbarity as a crime against international la%. +he concept of the crime,
%hich later evolved into the idea of genocide, originated %ith the e@perience of the
"ssyrians massacred in =raA on 11 "ugust 1955. +o -em'in, the event in =raA evo'ed
$memories of the slaughter of "rmenians$ during World War =. Be presented his first
proposal to outla% such $acts of barbarism$ to the -egal Council of the -eague of
Nations in >adrid the same year. +he proposal failed, and his %or' incurred the
disapproval of the olish government, %hich %as at the time pursuing a policy of
conciliation %ith NaCi !ermany.
=n 1944, the Carnegie Dndo%ment for =nternational eace published -em'inEs most
important %or', entitled "@is ,ule in Fccupied Durope, in the United Gtates. +his boo'
included an e@tensive legal analysis of !erman rule in countries occupied by NaCi
!ermany during the course of World War ==, along %ith the definition of the term
genocide. -em'inEs idea of genocide as an offense against international la% %as %idely
accepted by the international community and %as one of the legal bases of the
Nuremberg +rials .the indictment of the #4 NaCi leaders specifies in Count 5 that the
defendants $conducted deliberate and systematic genocide<namely, the e@termination of
racial and national groups...$ -em'in presented a draft resolution for a !enocide
Convention treaty to a number of countries in an effort to persuade them to sponsor the
resolution. With the support of the United Gtates, the resolution %as placed before the
!eneral "ssembly for consideration. Hefining genocide in 1945, -em'in %rote&
!enerally spea'ing, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a
nation, e@cept %hen accomplished by mass 'illings of all members of a nation. =t is
intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction
of essential foundations of the life of national groups, %ith the aim of annihilating the
groups themselves. +he obIectives of such a plan %ould be the disintegration of the
political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the
economic e@istence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security,
liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.
Genocide as a crime under international law
=n the %a'e of +he Bolocaust, -em'in successfully campaigned for the universal
acceptance of international la%s defining and forbidding genocide. +his %as achieved in
1948, %ith the promulgation of the Convention on the revention and unishment of the
Crime of !enocide.
+he CC! %as adopted by the United Nations !eneral "ssembly on 9 Hecember 1948
and came into effect on 1# 4anuary 1911 .,esolution #J/ .===22. =t contains an
internationally3recogniCed definition of genocide %hich %as incorporated into the
national criminal legislation of many countries, and %as also adopted by the ,ome
Gtatute of the =nternational Criminal Court, the treaty that established the =nternational
Criminal Court .=CC2. +he Convention .in article #2 defines genocide&
...any of the follo%ing acts committed %ith intent to destroy, in %hole or in part, a
national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such&
.a2 Killing members of the group(
.b2 Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group(
.c2 Heliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its
physical destruction in %hole or in part(
.d2 =mposing measures intended to prevent births %ithin the group(
.e2 Lorcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, Article II
+he first draft of the Convention included political 'illings, but the UGG, along %ith
some other nations %ould not accept that actions against groups identified as holding
similar political opinions or social status %ould constitute genocide, so these stipulations
%ere subseAuently removed in a political and diplomatic compromise.
+he Convention %as manifestly adopted for humanitarian and civiliCing purposes. =ts
obIectives are to safeguard the very e@istence of certain human groups and to affirm and
emphasiCe the most elementary principles of humanity and morality. =n vie% of the rights
involved, the legal obligations to refrain from genocide are recogniCed as erga omnes.
When the Convention %as drafted, it %as already envisaged that it %ould apply not only
to then e@isting forms of genocide, but also $to any method that might be evolved in the
future %ith a vie% to destroying the physical e@istence of a group$. "s emphasiCed in the
preamble to the Convention, genocide has marred all periods of history, and it is this very
tragic recognition that gives the concept its historical evolutionary nature.
+he Convention must be interpreted in good faith, in accordance %ith the ordinary
meaning of its terms, in their conte@t, and in the light of its obIect and purpose.
>oreover, the te@t of the Convention should be interpreted in such a %ay that a reason
and a meaning can be attributed to every %ord. No %ord or provision may be disregarded
or treated as superfluous, unless this is absolutely necessary to give effect to the terms
read as a %hole.
!enocide is a crime under international la% regardless of $%hether committed in time of
peace or in time of %ar$ .art. =2. +hus, irrespective of the conte@t in %hich it occurs .for
e@ample, peace time, internal strife, international armed conflict or %hatever the general
overall situation2 genocide is a punishable international crime.
0 UN Commission of D@perts that e@amined violations of international humanitarian la%
committed in the territory of the former Mugoslavia.
Intent to destroy
=n 199N the Duropean Court of Buman ,ights .DCB,2, noted in its Iudgement on Jorgic
v. Germany case that in 199# the maIority of legal scholars too' the narro% vie% that
$intent to destroy$ in the CC! meant the intended physical3biological destruction of
the protected group and that this %as still the maIority opinion. ?ut the DCB, also noted
that a minority too' a broader vie% and did not consider biological3physical destruction
%as necessary as the intent to destroy a group as a social unit %as enough to Aualify as
genocide.
=n the same Iudgement the DCB, revie%ed the Iudgements of several international and
municipal courts Iudgements. =t noted that =nternational Criminal +ribunal for the Lormer
Mugoslavia and the =nternational Court of 4ustice had agreed %ith the narro%
interpretation, that biological3physical destruction %as necessary for an act to Aualify as
genocide. +he DCB, also noted that at the time of its the Iudgement, apart from courts in
!ermany %hich had ta'en a broad vie%, that there had been fe% cases of genocide under
other Convention Gtates municipal la%s and that $+here are no reported cases in %hich
the courts of these Gtates have defined the type of group destruction the perpetrator must
have intended in order to be found guilty of genocide$.
In part
+he phrase $in %hole or in part$ has been subIect to much discussion by scholars of
international humanitarian la%. +he =nternational Criminal +ribunal for the Lormer
Mugoslavia found in Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstic - Trial Chamber I - Judgment - IT-98-
!"##$% ICT&8 !" 'ugust "##$% that !enocide had been committed. =n Prosecutor v.
Radislav Krstic - '((eals Chamber - Judgment - IT-98- !"##)% ICT& * !$9 '(ril "##)%
paragraphs 8, 9, 1/, and 11 addressed the issue of in part and found that $the part must be
a substantial part of that group. +he aim of the !enocide Convention is to prevent the
intentional destruction of entire human groups, and the part targeted must be significant
enough to have an impact on the group as a %hole.$ +he "ppeals Chamber goes into
details of other cases and the opinions of respected commentators on the !enocide
Convention to e@plain ho% they came to this conclusion.
+he Iudges continue in paragraph 1#, $+he determination of %hen the targeted part is
substantial enough to meet this reAuirement may involve a number of considerations. +he
numeric siCe of the targeted part of the group is the necessary and important starting
point, though not in all cases the ending point of the inAuiry. +he number of individuals
targeted should be evaluated not only in absolute terms, but also in relation to the overall
siCe of the entire group. =n addition to the numeric siCe of the targeted portion, its
prominence %ithin the group can be a useful consideration. =f a specific part of the group
is emblematic of the overall group, or is essential to its survival, that may support a
finding that the part Aualifies as substantial %ithin the meaning of "rticle 4 )of the
+ribunalEs Gtatute*.$
=n paragraph 15 the Iudges raise the issue of the perpetratorsE access to the victims& $+he
historical e@amples of genocide also suggest that the area of the perpetratorsO activity and
control, as %ell as the possible e@tent of their reach, should be considered. ... +he intent
to destroy formed by a perpetrator of genocide %ill al%ays be limited by the opportunity
presented to him. While this factor alone %ill not indicate %hether the targeted group is
substantial, it can 3 in combination %ith other factors 3 inform the analysis.$
CC! coming into force
"fter the minimum #/ countries became parties to the Convention, it came into force as
international la% on 1# 4anuary 1911. "t that time ho%ever, only t%o of the five
permanent members of the UN Gecurity Council .UNGC2 %ere parties to the treaty&
Lrance and the ,epublic of China. Dventually the Goviet Union ratified in 1914, the
United Kingdom in 19N/, the eopleEs ,epublic of China in 1985 .having replaced the
+ai%an3based ,epublic of China on the UNGC in 19N12, and the United Gtates in 1988.
+his long delay in support for the !enocide Convention by the %orldEs most po%erful
nations caused the Convention to languish for over four decades. Fnly in the 199/s did
the international la% on the crime of genocide begin to be enforced.
Gecurity Council responsibility to protect
UN Gecurity Council ,esolution 1JN4, adopted by the United Nations Gecurity Council
on #8 "pril #//J, $reaffirms the provisions of paragraphs 158 and 159 of the #//1 World
Gummit Futcome Hocument regarding the responsibility to protect populations from
genocide, %ar crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity$. +he resolution
commits the Council to action to protect civilians in armed conflict.
Criticisms of the CPPCG and other definitions of genocide
>uch debate about genocides revolves around the proper definition of the %ord
$genocide.$ +he e@clusion of social and political groups as targets of genocide in the
CC! legal definition has been criticiCed by some historians and sociologists, for
e@ample >. Bassan Ka'ar in his boo' +he Goviet =nvasion and the "fghan ,esponse,
19N93198# argues that the international definition of genocide is too restricted, and that it
should include political groups or any group so defined by the perpetrator and Auotes
Chal' and 4onassohn& $!enocide is a form of one3sided mass 'illing in %hich a state or
other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and membership in it are defined
by the perpetrator.$ While there are various definitions of the term, "dam 4ones states
that the maIority of genocide scholars consider that $intent to destroy$ is a reAuirement
for any act to be labelled genocide, and that there is gro%ing agreement on the inclusion
of the physical destruction criterion.
?arbara Barff and +ed !urr defined genocide as $the promotion and e@ecution of policies
by a state or its agents %hich result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group %hen
the victimiCed groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics,
i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality.$ Barff and !urr also differentiate bet%een
genocides and politicides by the characteristics by %hich members of a group are
identified by the state. =n genocides, the victimiCed groups are defined primarily in terms
of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. =n politicides the
victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political
opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Haniel H. olsby and Hon ?. Kates, 4r.
state that $... %e follo% BarffEs distinction bet%een genocides and Epogroms,E %hich she
describes as Eshort3lived outbursts by mobs, %hich, although often condoned by
authorities, rarely persist.E =f the violence persists for long enough, ho%ever, Barff argues,
the distinction bet%een condonation and complicity collapses.$
"ccording to ,. 4. ,ummel, genocide has 5 different meanings. +he ordinary meaning is
murder by government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial, or religious group
membership. +he legal meaning of genocide refers to the international treaty, the
Convention on the revention and unishment of the Crime of !enocide. +his also
includes non3'illings that in the end eliminate the group, such as preventing births or
forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group. " generaliCed meaning of
genocide is similar to the ordinary meaning but also includes government 'illings of
political opponents or other%ise intentional murder. =t is to avoid confusion regarding
%hat meaning is intended that ,ummel created the term democide for the third meaning.
" maIor criticism of the international communityEs response to the ,%andan !enocide
%as that it %as reactive, not proactive. +he international community has developed a
mechanism for prosecuting the perpetrators of genocide but has not developed the %ill or
the mechanisms for intervening in a genocide as it happens. Critics point to the Harfur
conflict and suggest that if anyone is found guilty of genocide after the conflict either by
prosecutions brought in the =nternational Criminal Court or in an ad hoc =nternational
Criminal +ribunal, this %ill confirm this perception.
International prosecution of genocide (ad hoc tribunals)
"ll signatories to the CC! are reAuired to prevent and punish acts of genocide, both in
peace and %artime, though some barriers ma'e this enforcement difficult. =n particular,
some of the signatories < namely, ?ahrain, ?angladesh, =ndia, >alaysia, the hilippines,
Gingapore, the United Gtates, Pietnam, Memen, and Mugoslavia < signed %ith the
proviso that no claim of genocide could be brought against them at the =nternational
Court of 4ustice %ithout their consent. Hespite official protests from other signatories
.notably Cyprus and Nor%ay2 on the ethics and legal standing of these reservations, the
immunity from prosecution they grant has been invo'ed from time to time, as %hen the
United Gtates refused to allo% a charge of genocide brought against it by Mugoslavia
follo%ing the 1999 Kosovo War.
=t is commonly accepted that, at least since World War ==, genocide has been illegal under
customary international la% as a peremptory norm, as %ell as under conventional
international la%. "cts of genocide are generally difficult to establish for prosecution,
because a chain of accountability must be established. =nternational criminal courts and
tribunals function primarily because the states involved are incapable or un%illing to
prosecute crimes of this magnitude themselves.
Nuremberg rials
+he Nuremberg +rials %ere the t%o sets of trials of NaCis involved in World War == and
+he Bolocaust. +he trials %ere held in the !erman city of Nuremberg from 1941 to 1949
at the Nuremberg alace of 4ustice. +he first and more famous of these trials tried #4 of
the most notorious leaders of NaCi !ermany( it lasted from November #/, 1941 to
Fctober 1, 194J.
!ormer "ugoslavia
+he term ?osnian !enocide is used to refer either to the genocide committed by Gerb
forces in Grebrenica in 1991, or to ethnic cleansing that too' place during the 199#31991
?osnian War .an interpretation reIected by a maIority of scholars2.
=n #//1 the =nternational Criminal +ribunal for the Lormer Mugoslavia .=C+M2 Iudged
that the 1991 Grebrenica massacre %as an act of genocide.
Fn Lebruary #J, #//N the =nternational Court of 4ustice .=C42, in the ?osnian !enocide
Case upheld the =C+MEs earlier finding that the Grebrenica massacre constituted genocide,
but found that the Gerbian government had not participated in a %ider genocide on the
territory of ?osnia and BerCegovina during the %ar, as the ?osnian government had
claimed.
Fn 1# 4uly #//N, Duropean Court of Buman ,ights %hen dismissing the appeal by
Ni'ola 4orgic against his conviction for genocide by a !erman court !Jorgic v. Germany%
noted that the !erman courts %ider interpretation of genocide has since been reIected by
international courts considering similar cases. +he DCB, also noted that in the #1
century $"mongst scholars, the maIority have ta'en the vie% that ethnic cleansing, in the
%ay in %hich it %as carried out by the Gerb forces in ?osnia and BerCegovina in order to
e@pel >uslims and Croats from their homes, did not constitute genocide. Bo%ever, there
are also a considerable number of scholars %ho have suggested that these acts did amount
to genocide$
"bout 5/ people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in
genocide during the early 199/s in ?osnia. +o date after several plea bargains and some
convictions that %ere successfully challenged on appeal only ,adislav Krstic had been
found guilty of complicity in genocide in an international court. +hree others have been
found guilty of participating in genocides in ?osnia by !erman courts, one of %hom
Ni'ola 4orgic lost an appeal against his conviction in the Duropean Court of Buman
,ights. Geveral former members of the ?osnian Gerb security forces are currently on trial
in ?osnia and BerCegovina indited on several charges including genocide.
Globodan >ilosevic, as the former resident of Gerbia and of Mugoslavia he %as the most
senior political figure to stand trial at the =C+M. Be died on 11 >arch #//J during his
trial %here he %as as accused of genocide or complicity in genocide in territories %ithin
?osnia and BerCegovina so no verdict %as returned. +he =C+M has issued a %arrant for
the arrest of ,adovan KaradCic and ,at'o >ladic on several charges including genocide
but to date they have evaded arrest and remain at large.
,%anda
+he =nternational Criminal +ribunal for ,%anda .=C+,2 is a court under the auspices of
the United Nations for the prosecution of offenses committed in ,%anda during the
genocide %hich occurred there during "pril, 1994, commencing on "pril J. +he =C+,
%as created on November 8, 1994 by the Gecurity Council of the United Nations in order
to Iudge those people responsible for the acts of genocide and other serious violations of
the international la% performed in the territory of ,%anda, or by ,%andan citiCens in
nearby states, bet%een 4anuary 1 and Hecember 51, 1994.
Go far, the =C+, has finished nineteen trials and convicted t%enty five accused persons.
"nother t%enty five persons are still on trial. Nineteen are a%aiting trial in detention. +en
are still at large. +he first trial, of 4ean3aul "'ayesu, began in 199N. 4ean Kambanda,
interim rime >inister, pleaded guilty.
International prosecution of genocide (International Criminal Court)
+o date all international prosecutions for genocide have been brought in specially
convened international tribunals. Gince #//#, the =nternational Criminal Court can
e@ercise its Iurisdiction if national courts are un%illing or unable to investigate or
prosecute genocide, thus being a $court of last resort,$ leaving the primary responsibility
to e@ercise Iurisdiction over alleged criminals to individual states. Hue to the United
Gtates concerns over the =CC, the United Gtates prefers to continue to use specially
convened international tribunals for such investigations and potential prosecutions.
Harfur
+he on3going conflict in Harfur, Gudan, %hich started in #//5, %as declared a $genocide$
by United Gtates Gecretary of Gtate Colin o%ell on Geptember 9, #//4 in testimony
before the Genate Loreign ,elations Committee.)4/* Gince that time ho%ever, no other
permanent member of the UN Gecurity Council has follo%ed suit. =n fact, in 4anuary
#//1, an =nternational Commission of =nAuiry on Harfur, authoriCed by UN Gecurity
Council ,esolution 11J4 of #//4, issued a report to the Gecretary3!eneral stating that
$the !overnment of the Gudan has not pursued a policy of genocide.$ Nevertheless, the
Commission cautioned that $+he conclusion that no genocidal policy has been pursued
and implemented in Harfur by the !overnment authorities, directly or through the
militias under their control, should not be ta'en in any %ay as detracting from the gravity
of the crimes perpetrated in that region. =nternational offences such as the crimes against
humanity and %ar crimes that have been committed in Harfur may be no less serious and
heinous than genocide.$ =n >arch #//1, the Gecurity Council formally referred the
situation in Harfur to the rosecutor of the =nternational Criminal Court, ta'ing into
account the Commission report but %ithout mentioning any specific crimes. +%o
permanent members of the Gecurity Council, the United Gtates and China, abstained from
the vote on the referral resolution. "s of his fourth report to the Gecurity Council, the
rosecutor has found $reasonable grounds to believe that the individuals identified )in the
UN Gecurity Council ,esolution 1195* have committed crimes against humanity and %ar
crimes,$ but did not find sufficient evidence to prosecute for genocide.
Genocide as a crime under municipal law
Gince the Convention on the revention and unishment of the Crime of !enocide
.CC!2 came into effect in 4anuary 1911 about 8/ member states of the United Nations
have passed legislation that incorporates the provisions of the CC! into their
municipal la%.
Genocide in history
+he preamble to the CC! not only states that $genocide is a crime under international
la%, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civiliCed
%orld$, but that $at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on
humanity$.
Hetermining %hich historical events constitute genocide and %hich are merely criminal
or inhuman behavior is not a clear3cut matter. Lurthermore, in nearly every case %here
accusations of genocide have circulated, partisans of various sides have fiercely disputed
the interpretation and details of the event, often to the point of promoting %ildly different
versions of the facts. "n accusation of genocide is certainly not ta'en lightly and %ill
almost al%ays be controversial. ,evisionist attempts to deny or challenge genocides
.mainly the Bolocaust2 are, in some countries, illegal.
#tages of genocide and efforts to prevent it
Lor genocide to happen there must be certain preconditions. Loremost among them is a
national culture that does not place a high value on human life. " totalitarian society, %ith
its assumed superior ideology, is also a precondition for genocidal acts. =n addition,
members of the dominant society must perceive their potential victims as less than fully
human& as Qpagans,R Qsavages,R Quncouth barbarians,R Qunbelievers,R Qeffete
degenerates,R Qritual outla%s,R Qracial inferiors,R Qclass antagonists,R
Qcounterrevolutionaries,R and so on. =n themselves, these conditions are not enough for
the perpetrators to commit genocide. +o do that<that is, to commit genocide<the
perpetrators need a strong, centraliCed authority and bureaucratic organiCation as %ell as
pathological individuals and criminals. "lso reAuired is a campaign of vilification and
dehumaniCation of the victims by the perpetrators, %ho are usually ne% states or ne%
regimes attempting to impose conformity to a ne% ideology and its model of society.
0 >. Bassan Ka'ar
=n 199J !regory Gtanton the president of !enocide Watch presented briefing paper called
$+he 8 Gtages of !enocide$ at the United Gtates Hepartment of Gtate. =n it he suggested
that genocide develops in eight stages that are $predictable but not ine@orable$.
+he Gtanton paper %as presented at the Gtate Hepartment, shortly after the ,%anda
genocide and much of the analysis is based on %hy that genocide occurred. +he
preventative measures suggested, given the original target audience, %ere those that the
United Gtates could implement directly or use their influence on other governments to
have implemented.
Gtage Characteristics reventive measures
1.
Classification
eople are divided into $us
and them$.
$+he main preventive measure at this
early stage is to develop universalistic
institutions that transcend... divisions.$
#.
GymboliCation
$When combined %ith hatred,
symbols may be forced upon
un%illing members of pariah
groups...$
$+o combat symboliCation, hate symbols
can be legally forbidden as can hate
speech$.
5.
HehumaniCation
$Fne group denies the
humanity of the other group.
>embers of it are eAuated
%ith animals, vermin, insects
or diseases.$
$-ocal and international leaders should
condemn the use of hate speech and ma'e
it culturally unacceptable. -eaders %ho
incite genocide should be banned from
international travel and have their foreign
finances froCen.$
4.
FrganiCation
$!enocide is al%ays
organiCed... Gpecial army
units or militias are often
trained and armed...$
$+he U.N. should impose arms embargoes
on governments and citiCens of countries
involved in genocidal massacres, and
create commissions to investigate
violations$
1.
olariCation
$Bate groups broadcast
polariCing propaganda...$
$revention may mean security protection
for moderate leaders or assistance to
human rights groups...Coups dO6tat by
e@tremists should be opposed by
international sanctions.$
J.
reparation
$Pictims are identified and
separated out because of their
$"t this stage, a !enocide Dmergency
must be declared. ...$
ethnic or religious identity...$
N.
D@termination
$=t is $e@termination$ to the
'illers because they do not
believe their victims to be
fully human.$
$"t this stage, only rapid and
over%helming armed intervention can
stop genocide. ,eal safe areas or refugee
escape corridors should be established
%ith heavily armed international
protection.$
8.
Henial
$+he perpetrators... deny that
they committed any crimes...$
$+he response to denial is punishment by
an international tribunal or national
courts.$
=n a paper for the Gocial Gcience ,esearch Council Hir' >oses criticises Gtanton
approach concluding&
=n vie% of this rather poor record of ending genocide, the Auestion needs to be as'ed %hy
the $genocide studies$ paradigm cannot predict and prevent genocides %ith any accuracy
and reliability. +he paradigm of $genocide studies,$ as currently constituted in North
"merica in particular, has both strengths and limitations. While the moral fervor and
public activism is admirable and salutary, the paradigm appears blind to its o%n
implication in imperial proIects that are themselves as much part of the problem as they
are part of the solution. +he UG government called Harfur a genocide to appease
domestic lobbies, and because the statement cost it nothing. Harfur %ill end %hen it suits
the great po%ers that have a sta'e in the region.
0 Hir' >oses