International Community Is Culpable For The Rwandan Genocide

If nations knew that there would be consequences to their calculations of profit from the genocide, that would cause them to lean towards the right and not the wrong. Taking away the benefits of any alliance or trade, to the ones that cause genocide would intensify the seriousness of their atrocities. Together, every member of all diplomatic nations, must have the right to intervene in military interventions. Solving the issue before it happened would have been helpful when the Serbians manipulated Bosnians by feeding the children cookies, and assuring them not to be afraid. The United Nations should have not been deceived by these actions, nor abandoned 25,000 Bosnians gathering in a United Nations base, wanting protection. Not only did the Unite Nations ignore this situation, but they claimed to not have any information about the Rwandan genocide that cause the deaths of 800,000 individuals. Therefore, we must hold our leaders accountable to their promises to alleviate the issues, otherwise they should be denied not to hold that

Throughout the 20th century, numerous acts of genocides have attempted to bring the complete elimination and devastation of large groups of people originating from various particular ethnicities. With these genocides occurring in many regions of the world, the perpetrators often organizing such crimes, have historically been larger and more powerful than the victims themselves. Often being the government and its military forces. However, the lack of international response associated with these genocides, further contributed to the devastating outcomes. On April 6,1994, the fastest killing spree of the century took place in Rwanda against the Tutsi minority population. With many warning signs having already been proclaimed prior to the start of the Rwandan genocide, I believe that with international interference, this bloodshed could have ultimately been prevented.

In Rwanda, the IC was not concerned with stopping the genocide just like in Darfur. This makes the two cases similar. These comparative claims are accurate although the claims need some close scrutiny. For instance, the comparisons do not provide the degree of similarity and differences in the two instances. Form the international perspective, we are not able to tell in what way the response in Rwanda is different or similar to what took place in Darfur (Straus).

With over eight hundred thousand to one million deaths, the Rwandan genocide is undoubtedly one of the most sad and shocking examples of the lack of intervention by not only the US and the UN, but by other countries as well. The ongoing tensions between the Hutu, the largest population in Rwanda, and the Tutsi, the smaller and more elite population is what eventually lead to the Rwandan genocide. The killings began quickly after President Habyarimana 's plane was shot down. After hundreds of thousands of deaths, the US did not intervene in Rwanda because being a landlocked country with no natural resources to benefit the US, there was no economical benefit, and the risk of sending in troops simply outweighed the rewards. The aftermath of the genocide has not only impacted those who lived through it, but it has also impacted future generations as well. At the end of the genocide, the ICTR was formed by the UN to find justice. The Rwandan genocide has shocking similarities between the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide as well. Overall, the Rwandan genocide was a terrible event that escalated far beyond what it should have if there had been intervention from other countries and the UN.

The final reason why the United Nations is to blame for Rwanda’s Genocide is because of the fact that they ignored evidence of planned genocide and abandoned Rwandans in need of protection. The United Nations failed trying. The independent report, commissioned by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan ( who was in charge at the time of the Rwandan Genocide), says the UN peacekeeping operation in Rwanda was hopeless from the start by an poor consent and destroyed by the Security Council's unwillingness to strengthen it once the slaughters, murders and rape began. UN officials, together with Annan and then-Secretary-General

Even with this very clear definition of genocide the United Nations Security Council still proved ineffective in preventing the genocide that occurred in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi people. There are a number of theories as to why the U.N. was so inefficient in preventing the genocide such as : there was little political will to intervene from Western countries, the tragedy which had recently occurred in Somalia, and the overlooking of early warning signs.

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

Abimbola, Olaifa and Danjibo Dominic. The 1994 Rwandan Conflict: Genocide or War? International Journal on World Peace. Vol XXX No. 3(2013). 31-54. Print.

Historians do not lie when they say, “History always repeats itself”. Sadly for Rwanda, history did repeat itself with the Rwanda Genocide. Instead of one leader controlling the actions of a powerful military force, Rwanda was a complete chaotic mess, with mass killings of their own people. As Hintjens says it was “one of the highest casualty rates of any population in history from non-natural causes.” Explaining the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda and The Order of Genocide both discuss and write about the pre genocide, social friction, prime factors of the genocide, and the reasoning of killings from both sides.

In today’s world, it is of the utmost importance to learn from mistakes of the past. Certain events, especially tragedies that could have been avoided, hold within them the lessons and wisdom that should be used to prevent similar disasters. The 1994 Rwandan genocide resulted in over 800, 000 deaths of the Tutsi people, at the hands of the Hutu; the genocide, and the international response to it, is a lesson about the humanitarian responsibilities, successes, and shortcomings of the United Nations.

Rory Carroll, author of The Guardian article “U.S Chose To Ignore Rwandan Genocide”, explains the moves the U.S could have made to prevent the situation from getting worse. America’s president at the time, Bill Clinton, chose not to act. Instead he covered up the truth by saying it was an “act” of genocide, not a real one. It was this lie that jeopardized possibly thousands of more lives, and would tear families apart. Rwanda was deemed a place that would not help America in anyway, with no money or resources that could be collected, so the choice was to not help them. It was a selfish move on America’s part, the things we gain, no matter small or big, should never be more important than innocent lives being taken away, and it is crucial to remember that. People argued that, if we did intervene, troops would have been lost making the country face with the question of whether or not our own should be put on the line for others. It is human nature to want to save yourself or family over strangers, but it is important to realize that we are one world, one world that requires the help of others to save ourselves, no matter the

The Rwandan genocide is a grim reminder of how the world failed to protect hundreds of thousands of civilians. The conflict between the Hutu’s and Tutsi’s resulted in the massacre of 800,000 Tutsi’s in 100 days. Following the Second World War, the UN was created to constitute the obligation to protect; it is an attempt at a mutual effort to encourage international peace. How could the world allow such an atrocity to transpire without any retribution from anyone? The media undoubtedly functioned as an essential factor to the world for not understanding exactly what was developing in Rwanda. There was an ignorant notion of turning away from the atrocity because it was “far away”. The Clinton Administration was in charge during this conflict and

Over “the 100 day period from April 7th to mid-July 1994 500,000-1,000,000 Tutsi natives were murdered by the Hutu population of Rwanda” (Wikipedia Rwandan Genocide). This horrific event in human history is indeed categorized as genocide. What was the reason for the United Nations inaction in responding to Rwanda? Is the structural realist right in saying that in a world of anarchy and state sovereignty states must provide for their own defense and protection? Are the realist claims right that the Rwanda genocide proves the inherent weakness of international institutions like the UN?

The Rwandan genocide was different than many others that occurred during the 20th century. The genocide unraveled before the eyes of national media. This meant that journalists and News reporters would cover the events in person. This was, until the violence became too intense and all foreigners were encouraged to leave immediately. But still there are many people guilty of being bystanders, including France, Belgium, and the United States. After refusing to send any more help despite the warnings about the Hutu’s plan for

The UN should have definitely taken more action to prevent the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. The UN has the resources and manpower but it seems that the UN is only motivated by monetary gain. Based on the reading, the UN stated “We will recommend to our governments not to intervene as the risks are high and all that is here are humans.” (Dallaire & Beardsley, 2003. p. 121) indicates that the members of the UN only take action if it’s in their best interest. In my opinion, the UN should disregard any gain and put human life at the top of their priorities. If they had done so during 1994, the civil war might not have become a genocide, saving the lives of