Examines the "politics of indifference" demonstrated by the international community to the genocide & other atrocities committed during the 1992-1995 wars in Bosnia from a geographic perspective. After summarizing the geopolitics of the former Yugoslavia & the relations among its primary ethnic groups -- Croats, Muslims, & Serbs, territorial dimensions of the ethnic cleansing that developed in Bosnia-Herzegovina after it achieved independence in 1992 are explored. International law on genocide & ethnic cleansing is reviewed, highlighting its spatial & geopolitical aspects, which, in turn, help explain the difficulties encountered in attempting to prosecute these acts as war crimes. Figures, References. K. Hyatt Stewart
The moral acceptability of four methods of getting rid of unwanted groups -- genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced assimilation, & expulsive secession -- is examined. After considering one group's motivations for desiring the removal of other groups from its national boundaries, several examples of groups who have attempted to get rid of such unwanted groups are presented. Although genocide is differentiated from ethnic cleansing, it is contended that both practices are morally unacceptable forms of removing unwanted groups. Forced assimilation, however, is deemed an acceptable method of getting rid of unwanted groups; nevertheless, it is claimed that such practices must respect collective rights & not infringe on the unwanted group's economic, linguistic, & religious freedoms. Despite some similarities between ethnic cleansing & expulsive secession, it is stated that the moral acceptability of such measures is largely influenced by the expelled group's capacity to become economically & politically viable. J. W. Parker
The question of whether "average war criminals," defined as everyday citizens who were raised in cultures that expressed hatred for members of other cultures or ethnic groups & committed various war crimes, should be held accountable for war crimes committed by their states is addressed. The ability of Aristotle's typology of evil -- moral weakness, wickedness, & brutishness -- to account for average war criminals' behavior is examined; it is argued that average war criminals are either preferentially or perversely wicked. However, an analysis of cognitive & noncognitive understandings of wickedness revealed that perverse wickedness ultimately functions as a form of preferential wickedness. Even though average war criminals, particularly those who were involved in ethnic cleansing in the Balkans & Kosovo, had no choice in being born into cultures that espouse hatred toward certain racial & ethnic groups, it is maintained that these individuals are morally responsible for war crimes since they preferred to participate in ethnic cleansing. It is concluded that the international community has a moral obligation to at least censure average war criminals. J. W. Parker
As Yugoslavia disintegrated in the 1990s, strong political pressures buffeted the Clinton administration. Daily images of death & destruction fueled public sentiment for the administration to "do something" to end the deepening violence & ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. The White House chose to steer a middle course, trying to satisfy a public that wanted the administration to take action, but with memories of the ill-fated U.S. intervention in Somalia still strong, did not want to commit U.S. ground forces. 1 Map.
Discusses the present state & potential achievements of the body & discourse in modern society. It is argued that scientists & historians have rejected certain social & cultural phenomena by disavowal of the premises on which the phenomena are founded (eg, UFO [unidentified flying objects] hysteria does not exist since UFOs do not exist). Such rejection has limited the scope of these fields. The concept of boundary violations is fundamental to the postmodern perspective, & it is suggested that these border crossings have been traditionally viewed as threatening & dangerous. Further, the rigid definitions of boundaries have led to extremist religious & political actions such as ethnic cleansing & national isolationism. Even the liberal proponents of multiculturalism are engaged in the separation of people (through cultural categorization) & the rejection of border crossings, a situation exacerbated by modern communication technologies. 2 References. T. Sevier
An examination of the changing boundaries of UN Security Council interventions during the 1990s supports UN Secretary-General Kofi A. Annan's contention that there is a "developing international norm" to protect civilians threatened by genocide or ethnic cleansing. Competing theories of the relationship between power & norms are assessed in relation to humanitarian interventions. The significant expansion of the boundaries of legitimate intervention that occurred in Somalia & northern Iraq is pointed out. Although the material power of Western states was instrumental in those cases, a materialist based explanation is seen as inadequate because it fails to consider changed normative context at the domestic level in Western states. Ways in which norms constrain the behavior of states are discussed & the Rwanda case is used to illustrate the moral limits of new norms of protection. The impact of 11 September 2001 on the likelihood that states will use force to protect humanitarian values is explored. Evidence from Afghanistan & Iraq suggest that states will articulate humanitarian rationales to legitimize the use of force against terrorist threats. J. Lindroth
In this reprint from Parameters Autumn 1999 edition, the author asserts that the demise of empires has left the US without a national cause, and craving a new American mission. The author briefly traces the fall of 11 empires in the 250 year history of the US; the French, British, Mexican, European, Japanese, & German empires, as well as the empires of ideology in Korea & Vietnam. He goes on to argue that since America destroyed the old world, & had no vision with which to replace it, the US is perversely supporting oppression rather than taking the leadership role to amend borders peacefully & prevent ethnic cleansings, genocide, & violence. The author asserts that US national security goals should focus on international border issues & support for universal human rights -- with the understanding that sovereignty is the privilege of a just & successful state. The author proposes the formation of a Union of Democratic Nations that would act based on a majority, rather than unanimous, vote & whose purpose would strengthen the mission of a nation "condemned to lead". J. Harwell
Examines conceptual differences between racism & Islamophobia. The historical significance of Islamophobia is emphasized through Orientalist representations of Islam that racialize the category of Muslim, along with contemporary discourse in international politics based on fears of the Islamization of Europe. Possible comparisons between Islamophobia & anti-Semitism are suggested, noting that Islamophobia is articulated in religious terms, while anti-Semitism has evolved into prejudice against "a people." Characteristics of Islamophobia are described, & examples of Islamophobic discourse are analyzed to highlight the danger of conceptual inflation that goes beyond the racism paradigm, eg, conceptualizations of Bosnian Muslims that led to the demand for "ethnic cleansing." It is contended that Islamophobia is best viewed as a fear or hatred of Muslims, rather than an ideology, making it important to distinguish it from racism even though certain facets of their definitions & expressions coincide. A look at comparative research on Islamophobia & racism focuses on the varied contexts in which Islamophobia is expressed, as well the association between Islamophobia & the politics of integration or multiculturalism. 15 References. J. Lindroth
"Vanessa Holzers contribution is set in the context of the arguably most tangible global risk, namely armed conflict. It is obvious that armed conflict per se as well as any proliferation of armed conflict poses risks for the respective state or region and the international community as a whole. This is mirrored for instance by UN Security Council resolutions defining mass movement of refugees as threat to international peace and security. Moreover, also the consequences for individuals affected by armed conflict must be dealt with adequately. Holzer argues that the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees remains the crucial international legal framework for the protection of persons fleeing from persecution. Although persecution has frequently occurred during armed conflict, as the example of "ethnic cleansing" highlights, the Refugee Convention has only to a limited extent been applied to persons escaping from armed conflict. As Holzer's analysis shows, the Refugee Convention's refugee definition must be interpreted in light of international human rights law and international humanitarian law with regard to claims for refugee status based on experiences during armed conflict. In doing so, certain persons fleeing from armed conflict will fall under the refugee definition. This definition requires a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Holzer shows that the argument that such an interpretation of the refugee definition would mean to 'open the floodgates' to large numbers of displaced persons is unfounded from a political and legal perspective. By extending the scope of application to certain victims of armed conflict, the legal regime for the protection of refugees mitigates the risk for the protected individual. It provides protection which is not available through the country of origin in these situations." (extract
"The question at hand seems relatively simple and straightforward: whether and to what extent the protection and promotion of human rights is necessary for efforts to address conflict and build peace. The issue has been much debated over time. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights forcefully associated the protection of human rights with the prevention of violent conflict, stating that 'it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law' (UN 1948, preamble). Yet in 1996, an anonymous author in Human Rights Quarterly accused the international human rights movement of prolonging the war in Bosnia Herzegovina. There, human rights activists had rejected pragmatic deals that could have ended the violence and, from hindsight, were no worse than the eventual agreement in rewarding ethnic cleansing and aggression. In that author's view, it made 'today's living the dead of tomorrow' by pursuing a perfectly just and moral peace that would bring 'justice for yesterday's victims of atrocities' (Anonymous 1996, 259). Since then, the idea that the normative nature of human rights standards may complicate the practical demands of peacemaking has been a recurrent theme in discussions on the relationship between human rights and efforts to address violent conflict. This is especially the case when the latter is conceived of in terms of conflict settlement or resolution. Questions of definitions and objectives are thus key. Also relevant are the time frame, context and level of intervention one focuses on, though few authors on the subject make this explicit. In addition, narrow perceptions and generalizations abound in this debate as people working on human rights, peace and conflict have been grouped into categories of 'human rights activists' and 'conflict resolvers' as if these were homogenous and coherent clusters of actors. In this chapter, the authoress argues that considering human rights and conflict transformation in conjunction deepens one's analysis of what is involved in moving from violence to sustainable peace. It is informed by the idea that the two fill 'gaps' in one another, in that each contributes to a better understanding of the other by highlighting elements that are relatively under-explored in the theory and practice of each separate field. For conflict transformation, which will be the main focus here, the perspective of human rights forces a greater emphasis on structural conditions, especially the role of the state, systems of governance and issues of power in generating, escalating and transforming violent conflict. Considering human rights in relation to conflict transformation, moreover, highlights the need to employ a holistic, multidimensional understanding of human rights that does not reduce them to their legal foundations. This chapter suggests that conflict transformation, because of its explicit grounding in social justice, and hence inherently normative foundation, may provide a more nuanced and fruitful conceptual space for thinking about human rights, conflict and peace than conflict resolution and conflict management. Placing constructive social change at its core, conflict transformation acknowledges the need for addressing power imbalances and recognizes a role for advocacy and the importance of voices that challenge the status quo. Its concern with direct, structural and cultural violence is thus also highly relevant from a rights perspective. In order to place these ideas in context, the chapter will briefly comment on literature that has been published on human rights and approaches for addressing conflict and building peace (section 2). Section 3 proposes a framework for understanding the relationship between human rights and conflict transformation, using the metaphor of an iceberg, with its graphic image of things visible connected to matters unseen. It also introduces four dimensions of human rights that need to be taken into account in processes to build a just and sustainable peace. Section 4 discusses some of the practical implications of adopting a human rights perspective on conflict transformation. Nepal, South Africa, and other countries where the authoress has worked over the past 15 years, are used as illustrative examples throughout sections 3 and 4. Finally, section 5 concludes and points to some areas for further research." (excerpt)
