The world has been reduced to a global village due to the vast interconnectedness occasioned by massive technological advancements that support real-time interactions. Therefore, as a result, human beings become affected by what happens within and outside their countries because any negative or positive happening has impacts on trade balances, value or devaluation of the local currency, and growth or destruction of the transport network.
However, as countries across the world interact more closely, so is the normalization of the infringement of human rights that leads to genocide. Genocide is termed as the perpetuation of criminal acts with the intent to destroy in whole or in part national, racial, or religious groups. The UN-General Assembly on 11th December 1946 described genocide as a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, and such a denial entails shocking the conscience of humankind and whose punishment should be a matter of international concern (Hinton, 2005). The reactions, actions or inaction of the global community to several occurrences that constitute genocide across the world are tell-tale signs that the world is normalizing genocide by shifting the description or quantification of what constitutes genocide based on circumstances. This is thus a recipe for an eventuality such as decriminalizing genocide based on the impacts and which nation is affected.
Therefore, this paper, in view of the ongoing violent events and structures shaping the world today, will delve deep into what modern genocide activities are and how genocide has been normalized across the globe due to factors such as competition for supremacy in geopolitical alignments, shifting quantification on what constitutes genocide, difficulty on enforcement of anti-genocide policies and continued perpetuation of stratification and identify labels to create crises.
Geopolitical Supremacy
In the recent past, the understanding of genocide and its impacts indicates that there has been evidence of celebration instead of condemnation of genocide activities, for example, in the Russian–Ukrainian war, which began after Ukraine’s revolution of dignity in which Ukrainians were seeking renewal of the state system, defense of democratic ideas and the refusal to submit to the pro-Russian regime, which was a claim for fundamental rights and expression of genuine concerns and whose violation amount to deprivation of human rights.
However, the events in the Russia-Ukrainian War have ensued since 2014 and escalated in 2022 are classic examples of genocide acts that expose the insincerity that the global community addresses this issue with. This is because the Russia-Ukraine war divided the global community between allies of Russia and allies of Ukraine, with each side offering support in the form of military weapons and medical aid (Etkind, 2023). As a result, the war exemplifies what genocide is, but instead of condemning genocide as a crime against humanity, the various countries take cheering sides for geopolitical alignment purposes.
Also, in the Israel-Hamas war, which has left scores of civilians hurt and thousands as hostages, there are countries such as the USA and other Western countries that are in support of Israel, while most Muslim countries have pledged their support for Palestine. This, therefore, goes against the principle of unity in condemning genocide and preservation of lives and livelihoods when countries take sides in cases where there are clear violations of the sanctity of human lives (Hintjens, 2001)
Quantification of Genocide
In recent times, the world has also been divided, with some countries advocating for the human rights of the members of the LGBTQ community, and others are involved in harming, maiming, and killing them for going against what they describe as normal human tendencies, some countries have also passed constitutional laws to criminalize association and belonging of people to such groups (Nellans, 2020). These killings have been overlooked, yet genocide is described as the intent to destroy a group in whole or in part (Hinton chapter 22, pg. 420). Arguments have been advanced that the number of victims so far does not fit the description of genocide, however there is also no defined figure of people that should die before a criminal act is described as a genocide activity
Further, the rise and growth of terrorist groups such as al-Qaida and al-Shabaab committing atrocities across the world are instances of perpetuation of ignored genocide activities that continue to be underlooked and denied the required attention due to the divide created by nations that support and fund such activities and those against such dangerous acts as well as the controversy of figures of casualties recorded and whether they can be regarded as genocide acts Hinton Chapter 22 pg. 422), relative to where the attack happens, who is affected, and their position and influence among other global nations.
Difficulty of Enforcement
Despite genocide being an international crime, some countries such as the US, China, India and Russia are not members of the international crimes court, and this impedes progress in the eradication of genocide because countries such as the USA have been involved in military operations in Iraq where over a million people were killed and in Afghanistan where about 71,000 civilians died. Further from 2014 china has been on the spot for exercising abuse of human rights on the Uyghurs as well as other religious and ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, the inhumane activities included suppression of religious practices, forces abortions, forced sterilization, forces labour and political indoctrination. Amnesty International described these acts as a form of cultural genocide. (Hinton chapter 22 pg. 422)
Therefore, the difficulty to hold these countries to account in the modern-day world has only served to normalize genocide as the countries are not at risk of their leaders being prosecuted at the International Criminal Court due to their claim of sovereignty.
Stratification and Identity Labels
The categorization and classification of those who are exposed to or are victims of genocide into groups such as religious, national and ethnic groups creates a gap in the identification of genocide activities because for it to be declared a genocide, an individual must be placed in either of these categories. Yet, the violence happens to individuals that this grouping up of people takes away their dignity as separate individuals and thus, specific details and data is not available to successfully combat genocide activities at the group and individual levels (Hintjens, 2001).
This was the case in Rwanda when individuals were classified by their identity as either Tutsi’s or Hutus. The grouping has been used in the current world to perfectly normalize violent acts instead of judging people by the content of their character. These physical differences continue to be used to depict certain groups as worthy of the violence meted on them or to justify why anyone labelled as the victim is justified to be eliminated or discriminated. It is a societal construct to sanitize evil and demonize a specific population of individuals (Malkki, 1995)
The identity labels are still very much in use in the modern world and are characterized by the rise of pressure groups such as the “black lives Matter movement,” whose aim is to fight police brutality and racism against black people. This was in response to continued attacks and killings of black people in the US, and it represents an attempt to refuse the perpetuation of a silent and gradual genocide among black people, which eventually would have become normalized by a killing of a black person here and there or a discrimination of a black individual by the local criminal justice systems (Helps, 2018).
Conclusion
The indifference to genocide exhibited by countries in the world despite the global interconnectedness and growing dependence among countries creates a vacuum and reason for worry now and in the future due to the failure to unite and condemn genocide as a global and punishable crime. This inaction glorifies and normalizes genocide intentions and activities, thus setting a very dangerous precedence going into the future.
Therefore, there is an urgent need in light of the current happenings in the world for countries to pull together and implement strict interventions that shall be adhered to by every member of the global community for the prevention of genocide. Some of these measures to avoid the current normalization of genocide in the world entail genuine concern for the lives of humanity by all through expressed political goodwill and continuous condemnation of even the slightest forms of genocide, as well as the tightening of the enforcement rules on perpetrators of genocide(Totten, 2011), and this would include implementation of reforms to ensure that all countries that have not ratified their membership with the international crimes courts happens so that all global members are subject to similar rules of engagement.
Further, an entire criminalization of forms and intents of genocide apportioning collective responsibility will result to strengthened ties and a consultative nature of international relations activities and monitoring of places that genocide actions are at a high risk of erupting across nations instead of the current situations where countries wait for violence to erupt so that they can pick sides to support due to either global or regional supremacy wars (Totten, 2011). Thus, any evidence of a possible occurrence of any violation of human rights, which is the catalyst for further genocidal acts, shall receive the attention it deserves, and the unity shall be used to mitigate and eliminate other than the current situation where the same is ignored.
Finally, to criminalize the normalization of violence, the global community should rally together to immediately offer to help the victims of genocidal acts instead of the current situation where nations rush to impose sanctions on food and medical aid or close borders, thus making the victims more vulnerable to their oppressors. Therefore, a unified approach on how to respond in events of political upheaval and cultural or religious genocide in nations should be collaborated to achieve the main aim of preventing death and safeguarding properties, and this will deter the selfish interests of nations who take advantage of such activities to further either social, religious or political agenda.
References
Etkind, A. (2023). Ukraine, Russia, and genocide of minor differences. Journal of Genocide Research, 25(3-4), 384-402.
Helps, D. (2018). “We Charge Genocide”: Revisiting black radicals’ appeals to the world community. Radical Americas, 3(9), 2-24.
Hintjens, H. M. (2001). When identity becomes a knife: Reflecting on the genocide in Rwanda. Ethnicities, 1(1), 25-55.
Hinton, A. L. (2005). Genocide and modernity. A companion to psychological anthropology: modernity and psychocultural change, 419-435.
Malkki, L. H. (1995). Purity and exile: Violence, memory, and national cosmology among Hutu refugees in Tanzania. University of Chicago Press.
Nellans, L. (2020). A Queer (er) Genocide Studies. Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal, 14(3), 7.
Totten, S. (2011). The state and future of genocide studies and prevention: An overview and analysis of some key issues. Genocide Studies and Prevention, 6(3), 211-230.
write