Filed under: FAQ - NAIA
Article 2 of the Genocide Convention defines genocide as
“any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) eliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
Recent estimates suggest that the number of deaths in Darfur has reached between 400,000 and 450,000, which is more than one tenth of the population of the region. The vast majority of victims are black African Sudanese.
While the United Nations has chosen not to attach the term “genocide” to what is happening in Darfur, many humanitarian groups, and even the American government, have used genocide to describe the situation.
The difficulty lies in the fact that officially calling the conflict in Darfur “genocide” would legally require action on the part of the international community. Whether it is due to lack of information, lack of political will, or lack of resources, it is clear that the United Nations is extremely hesitant to officially call Darfur a genocide. What we DO know, is that people are dying, and at an alarming rate.
One further thought: A crime is a crime; why does it have to be called “genocide” to be an atrocity against mankind that should be met with an international response?
- sara
1 Comment so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
[...] Is it really genocide? [...]
Pingback by Never Again is Again: Stand Up Against Genocide in Africa April 4, 2007 @ 6:52 am