Boston, Massachusetts, US
Posts: 9
The Genocide Convention and 'A Problem from Hell'
Raphael Lemkin, the main who coined the term “genocide” and stood up for what he believed no matter the cost, was avery influential man. In the film Watchers of the Sky Lemkin says, “crime should not be punished by victims but should be punished by law.” This quote is especially important, because it's something that has happened for many years. Victims shouldn't have to hold the perpetrators accountable for what they have done. They shouldn't have to remind people of the atrocities committed. Raphel Lemkin's point was that there should be policies in place to hold people accountable when they commit war crimes, and that victims need someone to stand up for themselves, because after all they are the victims. The establishment of this law is so important because it is the first step to as a world trying to stop future genocides from ever happening. For this same reason it's so important to actually act upon the laws put in the palace to punish perpetrators and nations. The world needs to know that there have been many genocides throughout history, and many have been purposefully hidden; hopefully with more rules put in place, it becomes harder to commit war crimes such as genocide.
There are many issues revolving the Genocide Convention, but a big one is that of sovereignty. Nations have supreme control over their states or countries, which makes it difficult or even impossible to intervene when they're committing such horrendous crimes. Limits on sovereignty should've established, because no one nations should have supreme rule over their nation, especially if they commit genocide. It's difficult to say who should have a say in what rules should be put in place, but I think with individuals such as Samantha powers and Rapahel Lemkin that have such immense power, we are in good hands. Individuals who don't give up and are set on correcting the world's wrongs influence many organizations and other people to contribute to the cause. Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world, and the ultimate rule comes up to the government, and what they decide they should do. Article VII says, “Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.” Once again, individuals don't have much say in the matter of accusing or bringing up war crimes to attention, but if they can get the attention of the people, protests, organizations, and media could cause a real change.
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Posts: 8
Genocide Convention
The establishment and enforcement of international in regard to genocide is vital to cease further ethnic tension and get proper and fair justice for the victims. With a proper definition of genocide as a crime against humanity, it can help quell any further violence from erupting from such actions. Because the UN can arrest the perpetrators and deal justice without crossing over into unnecessary violence or revenge. A proper investigation that can only come under the law leads to closure for any victims and proper punishment gives them justice. This definition under the law also gives way for further historical analysis of war crimes of the past to help prevent war crimes of the future.
The issue of sovereignty is the most difficult philosophical question when any international law is to be enacted. The UN has so much power that any overstep into a member nation could lead to its collapse. Due to past cases of large countries such as the US and USSR using smaller countries such as Vietnam as proxy wars leading to generational issues the issue of sovereignty cannot be dismissed. However when it comes to genocide, nations should be willing to give up some sovereignty to allow for some investigation by the international community. Every nation that joins the UN knows that it is giving up some sovereignty for the political power the comes with being a UN member nation, so some freedoms to sovereignty must be given up if a nation is accused of genocide.
People such as, Lemkin, Henry Morganthau, Romeo Dalliare and Samantha Power; allow for a more in formal investigation into claims of genocide. However unfortunate even though genocide is now a crime there are still genocides happening today. Genocides in the modern age are committed in a way to specifically get around the genocide convention, and exploit international law, political connections, and economic insentives. So, people such as Samantha Power, investigative journalists, are the only ones who can enter a country and report on the reality to the masses, because individuals are not subjected to the entangled economic and political alliances that stop countries from preventing genocide.
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Posts: 10
Where does it end? The Genocide Convention and 'A Problem from Hell'
The effects of the Genocide Convention are seldom felt throughout historical events due to the reluctance of perpetrator nations in allowing the UN workers to do their job. Within a country's borders, that country is allowed to do as they please due to their sovereignty as a nation-state. UN soldiers are not to engage in combat with any military forces of any country to appear as an international authority that doesn't take sides, thus they are unable to act effectively within any given state. Perpetrator nations will continue to blow off the warnings because they are aware that no other nation would dare commit ground forces to meddle with international affairs. To fix this, there should likely be an upper limit on how much power an individual nation has over their citizens. As the Genocide Convention notes, intentionally causing harm to members of a group is constituted as genocide. To avoid this, there should likely be a line drawn at the point of sovereignty where intentional harm to citizens in general is acceptable. An international intervention on these premises can be justified with the reasoning of preserving human rights. The problem now is still how to enforce the ruling. Powerful nations such as the United States seem like contenders, but they may be unwilling to give up soldiers for such a cause. Thus, the best course of action may have to be some combined peacekeeping force of multiple countries with a size proportional to the individual country's population or military budget. Perhaps a relatively small price to pay to prevent future atrocities.
Individual efforts can help a great deal predominantly in making it public when a genocide is present or imminent. Samantha Power is a great example of this, performing journalism covering the struggles of the Bosniak people. The efforts of individuals are important, as they unfortunately are usually the only way to make the governments of the world care about an issue, but the individual efforts can only go so far. To really make a difference, both the individual and the government must work together, as the government has far more resources and political power.
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Posts: 9
The Genocide Convention and 'A Problem from Hell'
Raphael Lemkin, a prominent figure in which we look up to, to this day has put his efforts into resolving the issue of genocide throughout the world, to create the renowned Genocide Convention, one that the world deems as extremely important. Because of this attribution, we can protect the lives of innocent people and give justice to victims that have fallen due to excruciating circumstances. Lemkin's assertion, "Crime should not be punished by victims but should be punished by law," underscores his conviction that the responsibility for addressing genocide should rest on the shoulders of the international legal system rather than individual survivors. However, even with the many years that the Genocide Convention has existed, and even with the many efforts that have been put into it to fully enact it, the effects of it remain extremely limited; almost as if it doesn’t exist at all.
The idea, and the issue of sovereignty has been a prominent factor in deciding what the next actions are when dealing with a global issue. Because of countries desire to stay sovereign, the UN or NATO are unable to fully pick a side nor fully aid the side being oppresed--not only do they have to remain neutral, but they are unable to fully involve themselves within issues like civil war, or genocide.
To address this challenge, modification of sovereignty norms need to be enacted in order to allow for greater international intervention in cases of genocide. This could involve the establishment of mechanisms for authorized intervention by regional or international bodies, such as the United Nations Security Council, when states fail to protect their populations from genocide. However, such measures raise complex questions regarding the balance between sovereignty and intervention, as well as concerns about potential abuse of intervention powers.
Individuals such as Lemkin, Henry Morgenthau, Romeo Dallaire, and Samantha Power play crucial roles in holding perpetrators of genocide accountable and advocating for meaningful action to prevent future atrocities. Their efforts, whether through legal advocacy, diplomatic pressure, or public awareness campaigns, contribute to shaping international responses to genocide and ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their crimes. While the role of nations in preventing, stopping, and punishing genocide is undeniably important, the efforts of individuals and human rights organizations serve as a vital complement, often driving political will and mobilizing public support for action against genocide. Ultimately, addressing genocide requires a multi-faceted approach that leverages the collective efforts of individuals, states, and international institutions to uphold the principles of justice and human dignity.
Lemkin means that the bodies of government should hold themselves accountable rather than be held accountable by the people they did wrong. This is shown by the one of the conventions stating that even the ruler has to be held accountable to the rules and be punished the same if he violates them. This international law is an important step because it does not matter whether or not a government is held accountable unless they themselves do it. If they deny it happened or if they deny that it was not a big deal, then they are doomed to repeat it again. This is because they do not see anything wrong with that. They just see it as a slap on the wrist but nothing more than that because they did not see if it was wrong for themselves. The enforcement of this law is even more important for many reasons, one being that if this rule is ignored or not abided to, what is stopping them from not listening to the other rules. All rules should be followed, it should not be picked and chosen. The effects remained limited though since it is very difficult to enforce. Furthermore, sovereignty of a nation limits what they convention could really do since they cannot overstep. The ways to punish are difficult since there is the possibility of conflict. Obviously, armed resolutions will only lead to more conflict. Embargos and such things can work but that can raise tenstions. On top of the possiblity of war, it is harming the people of the nation who most of the time had nothing to do with the crimes. Sovereignty is the main threat of conflict when it comes to punishment and enforcement. The convention cannot overstep and take away the general, for example, by abducting them. They would need permission from the state. Limits on sovereignty should be established but it would be difficult to do so without taking the free will of a nation. Once the limits are taken, is it really their own nation anymore? This question alone would cause resistance. Individual like Lemkin play a huge part in holding people accountable for the crime of genocide since they can entirely on this one topic without being distracted. They also are the people and have nothing to gain except protection without diminishing anybody else’s. Nevertheless, both organizations and the people are important as shown with creation of the geneva convention since lemkin received help. Lemkin could not have done it without assistance. It eases the burden and shows that it is a group effort instead of an individual.
