Genocide in Srebrenica and the Birth of R2P In 1995, three years of systematic ethnic cleansing by the Bosnian Serb forces culminated in the town of Srebrenica with the androcide of over 8,000 Bosnian Muslims. The Dutch peacekeepers from the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), charged with protecting the safe area, were ill-equipped to deal with the Serb takeover and watched as women were raped, children were murdered, and men and boys were gunned down. In one of the worst acts of genocide since the holocaust, the international community’s response mirrored that of the peacekeepers on the ground in Srebrenica—watch and wait. By the time NATO forces intervened to force peace talks, nearly 100,000 people were dead from the civil war, 65% of whom were Bosniaks. While conventions have been in place since WWII to define war crimes and genocide and allow prosecution of those who commit these acts, the United Nations response to these atrocities has been sporadic and disorganized. The massacre in Srebrenica shined a spotlight on the failures of the international community to prevent mass atrocities. We needed an international guideline to systematically and effectively respond to civil war and intrastate conflict. Out of this was born the idea of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Humanitarian intervention was by no means a new topic—its rhetoric has been around since the mid 1800s. However, in trying to codify the “right to intervene” there was a controversial
The analysis of the genocides that took place both in Rwanda and Sudan’s Darfur region exhibit some similarities as well as differences. The character of violence was similar in both cases, but in Rwanda the violence was more intense, participatory, and extraordinary. The violence in these two places took place in an environment that had experienced civil wars. It was a period of political transition which was further aggravated by ethnic nationalism and a conflict of ethnic populations that were living in close proximity. However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on
In A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, Samantha Power creates a comprehensive understanding of American involvement in cases of genocide. Power utilizes various case studies in order to discuss America’s long-running policy of inaction—through these case studies, Power provides information that aids the reader in understanding the context surrounding the genocide. With the case studies, Power explains why America consistently fails to stop genocide. Throughout the book, Samantha Power effectively argues that “The United States had never in its history intervened to stop genocide and had in fact rarely made a point of condemning it as it occurred” (XV).
The Bosnian Genocide began in April of 1992 and ended in 1995. It was a war between the Bosnian Muslims, the Croats, which are Catholics, and the Serbs, which are Orthodox Christians. It occurred in Bosnia-Herzegovina where the population was about 3.8 million. The Bosniaks made up 44 percent of the population, the Serbs 31 percent, and the Croats 17 percent. The country is only about the size of West Virginia. The Bosniaks were treated unfairly and inhumanely during this span of three years.
Kosovo, a region in Yugoslavia, was one example of America’s success in policing atrocities, acts of aggression and humanitarian crisis created by foreign governments. In 1997,
The Bosnian Genocide was very horrific. Men and boys were tortured and women of Muslim race were raped and sent out of the country, this led to another war in Srebrenica. An estimated of 100,000 people were killed altogether and it displaced more than two million people. This was the largest genocide since the Holocaust. (“Bosnian Genocide”) In the aftermath of the Second World War, the Balkan states of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Slovenia and Macedonia became part of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia.
Raphael Lemkin described genocide as "acts of barbarism that should be outlawed, even in times of war". Lemkin is right. Genocide is a cruel vicious act that I do not wish upon my greatest enemies. It is torture and death. A lot of people think genocide is a thing of the past. After all it is 2014 already. We are so much more advanced and connected then back during the time of the Holocaust. A genocide started just 22 years ago and it was during the Bosnian War. The Bosnian Genocide was atrocious because it classified and dehumanized a religion, it allowed for the extermination of a people based on religion and the murderers denied they ever committed a crime and tried to cover the deaths up.
Concentration camps took the lives of approximately 10,000 people. Many women were being taken to the camp to be raped and tortured for weeks and sometimes months until they became pregnant. An estimated total of 20,000 rapes happened between 1992-1995. Reports of rape and mass killings had slowly been communicated to the world. The pictures and videos of what was going on definitely got the world's attention. The U.S. government was shown all the proof of what had been going on yet they still chose to do nothing. Soon after the UN established six safe areas. These safe areas were to be protected with international peacekeepers. These peacekeepers had very few weapons and could only fire when it involved self defense. Sadly they were highly ineffective. One of the UN safe areas, Srebrenica, soon began to fall. With that, the Croatians and Bosniaks joined powers to move Serbian forces away from the Krajina region. With the Croatians and Bosniaks powers combined, they were able to push out Serb forces, along with 200,000 civilians, out of Krajina and into other Serb dominated areas. It created one of the biggest refugee populations in Europe (“Bosnia and Herzegovina”). The defeat of Bosnian Serbs forces soon made people realize they need to make changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as soon as
After these two genocides, one may look at the past and ask, how could this death and destruction possibly happen again? The bad part is that it is happening again in the Darfur region of Sudan. This region is “about the size of Texas” (DarfurScores, par. 1) and “five thousand die every month”
The Bosnian Genocide was the worst act of mass killings since the Nazis destruction of 6 million Jews. It resulted in a 100,000 deaths of both mostly Bosniak Muslims and Croatians. The horrific events that took place in Bosnia are currently shown in the Middle East today through dehumanization, nationalism and imperialism. These factors are what make the Bosnian Genocide recurrent for Muslims in history.
However, starting in 1994, NATO led air strikes (“GENOCIDE – BOSNIA”), thereby deterring the Serbian movement. Even so, Srebrenica became bombarded with shells by Serb troops led by Ratko Mladic in July 1995, a date that has since been associated with the name “Bosnian genocide ” (“GENOCIDE – BOSNIA”). Many have drawn parallels between the brutal actions of this genocide with the Nazi actions of the Holocaust: shootings killing thousands, forcibly relocating residents, concentration camps, and for females—rape (“Bosnia-Herzegovina 1992-1995”). Men and men were separated in this torture process and while men were sent to concentration camps, women were sent to rape camps (Krkljes). The genocide violated many UN Declaration of Human Rights articles including Articles 3, 7, 5, 13, and 15. Article 3 was violated because non-Serbs were deprived of the right to life; Article 5 violated since genocide is an example of inhumane treatment; Article 7 violated because non-Serbs were discriminated against; Article 13 violated since Bosnian Serbs drove out Bosnian Croats and Bosniaks; and Article 15 violated since “ethnic cleansing” stripped non-Serbs of their home in
The nations of the world should have responded more firmly to the genocide and set out troops. Rather than claim neutrality, they should have attempted to intervene as international human rights should be a national interest. However, this did not occur and should be a lesson learned for countries worldwide to prevent future massacres. In the future, rather than worrying about diplomatic relations and economic relations with countries who are committing war crimes, they should put humanity above wants and help out those who are put through disastrous
It is vital that world powers who can make a large impact take a stand in these events so that millions of innocent civilians do not die. If these world powers would have provided more economic, military, and health-based aid to those being oppressed in the Bosnian genocide, several atrocities could have been avoided, such as the one that occurred in Srebrenica. If nations play a more responsible role in the overall prosperity of the world, it will drastically impede future acts of violence and will lower the amount of unnecessary deaths. Moreover, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) needs to continue to indict and prosecute those who were responsible for the mass
The video “On our Watch,” provides the viewer with detailed accounts about the first genocide of the 21st century. The images of death and destruction in Darfur, coupled with the startling murder and rape statistics, clearly suggests that the United Nations (UN), an organization designed to maintain international peace and security failed to protect the people of Darfur from the Janjaweed militias or the corrupt Sudanese government. Although, the UN and the world had embraced the slogan “Never Again,” after 800,000 innocent civilians were slaughtered in Rwanda, history would repeat itself in Bosnia, Darfur, and Chad. Sudan’s campaign of genocide, its economic and political ties with China and Russia, combined with failed peace talks, as well
Much recent discourse surrounding humanitarian intervention has focused on the responsibility to protect (R2P). Prevention is a key component for good international relations and few would say it is not important, but as evidence to date would show prevention is very ineffective, the legality of military intervention still needs to be debated, as to date there is no consensus. For any intervention to be legitimate, whether unilateral or multilateral, it must comply with international law. So as not to cause any confusion, any situation in which an “intervention” is done with the permission or by request of the state being intervened, should be considered humanitarian assistance as state sovereignty is not breached. This paper will
The United Nations, with its rigid moral and political limitations against force, has become a benchmark of peace and a social achievement of modern times. From war torn Europe, the United Nations developed from five major powers with an initial goal to prevent the spread of warfare through peaceful means and to establish and maintain fundamental human rights. Through the past fifty years, this organization has broadened its horizons with auxiliary organizations from peace keeping missions to humanitarian aid, to economic development. However, in a modern example of ethnic cleansing, the UN faces new a new role as a bystander as its power is bypassed by NATO forces. The UN, however, promises to be an