Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social impacts of world war 2
Social impacts of world war 2
Consequences of the Rwandan genocide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social impacts of world war 2
The biggest war the world has ever seen was World War II. What was one factor that led to such a quick escalation? Genocide. Over 45 million people were murdered during this tragic time. The question is: was it the allies responsibility to intervene? The answer: No. The Global Community has no responsibility to intervene in states committing genocide.
Christian:
Intervening in countries facing genocide costs hundreds of millions of dollars. History clearly shows the cost to intervene, take WWII for example or the Rwanda genocide, or the Somali genocide. All of these genocides costs interventionists $400 million or more, “ Each of the more than 220 Tomahawk missiles fired by the U.S. military into Libya, for example, cost around $1.4 million… Spent between $280,000 and $700,000 for each Somali saved” (Valentino). $280,000 is a ton of money to save one person, and given these high costs, it could cost up to $7 million dollars to save ten people. They are not saving that many lives by deciding to intervene either, “Scholars have estimated that the military mission there probably saved between 10,000 and 25,000 lives,”(Valentino). 10,000-25,000 lives and the U.S. spent $7 billion to intervene
…show more content…
In some cases this intervention in other countries could cause the situation to become far worse. In Darfur two rebel movements took up arms against the Sudanese government over a lack of protection from invading nomads and the marginalization of the area. “Saddam responded to the domestic uprisings with extreme brutality, killing perhaps 20,000 Kurds and 30,000-60,000 Shiites, many of them civilians” (Valentino). An intervention of Saddam’s brutality was attempted and after 100 hours the US withdrew forces. The intervention was entirely unsuccessful, even with foreign aid. And in retribution Saddam brutally killed tens of thousands of people, many of which were
World War II, known as the largest armed conflict in history, began in Europe in the 1930s and led to effect many people. The war resulted in not only the involvement of more countries than any other war but also introduced powerful, new, nuclear weapons that also contributed to the most deaths. As Hitler rose to power in 1933 the Holocaust began, his quest for the ‘perfect’ race resulted in the use of concentration camps, which would help to create the largest genocide of people in history.
They don't want to send their troops or help with food and necessities because of the possible financial impact to their own country. However, once the people committing the genocide multiply and pose a threat to more countries, the international community must help in order to prevent the genocide from entering their own countries. The world didn't get involved in both the Holocaust and the Bosnian genocide until the German empire and the Serbs in Bosnia, respectively, became very powerful and dangerous to the surrounding areas. The only way to prevent genocide is to destroy it on impact and not wait for six million to perish senselessly.
A total of 11 million people died during the Holocaust. The Holocaust was started by the Nazi’s in the 1930’s. It was were about six million Jews were killed. Misinformed individuals theorize that the Holocaust is not a form of genocide but they are misguided. The Holocaust should be considered an example of genocide based on the UN’s definition, the stages of genocide and the specific evidence provided in the memoir Night.
Genocide is a pressing issue with a multitude of questions and debates surrounding it. It is the opinion of many people that the United Nations should not get involved with or try to stop ongoing genocide because of costs or impositions on the rights of a country, but what about the rights of an individual? The UN should get involved in human rights crimes that may lead to genocide to prevent millions of deaths, save money on humanitarian aid and clean up, and fulfill their responsibilities to stop such crimes. It is preferable to stop genocide before it occurs through diplomacy, but if necessary, military force may be used as a last resort. Navi Pillay, Human Rights High Commissioner, stated, “Concerted efforts by the international community at critical moments in time could prevent the escalation of violence into genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.”
If you could stop a murder, would you? What about a serial killer? How about genocide, would you stop it? Throughout history there have been many attempts to stop genocide such as international laws being put into place, but all of these attempts have been in vain because genocide has been a recurring issue throughout modern time. Cases such as the Bosnian “ethnic cleansing”(Document I) just goes to show that Genocidal acts cannot be stopped.
“Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, independent, and indivisible.” (Webster Online Dictionary) These rights are taken away during genocide. Throughout history genocides have taken place time and time again from the Armenian genocide of 1915, to the Darfur genocide starting in 2003, and is still in progress today. Genocide is a barbaric practice that dehumanizes people and takes away their basic human rights ; American Foreign policy should be to intervene in foreign affairs when human rights violations are evident.
- Specifically state to the reader if there was U.N. intervention, could genocide have been avoided?
The Rwandan Genocide was a terrible event in history caused by a constantly weakening relationship between two groups of people. The country of Rwanda is located in Africa and consists of multiple groups of people. Majority of Rwanda is Hutu, while a smaller amount of people are Tutsis. The genocide started due to multiple events that really stretched the relationship between the two groups to its end. One of the starting factors was at the end of World War 1. Rwanda was a German colony but then was given to Belgium “who favored the minority Tutsis over the Hutus, exacerbated[exacerbating] the tendency of the few to oppress the many”(History.com). This created a feeling of anger towards the Tutsis, because they had much more power then Hutus.
One could begin with the issue of genocide. In 1994, between half a million and a million members of the Tutsi tribe were slaughtered by Hutu tribal militias. Even though this massacre was widely covered by the news, the United States did nothing to help stop the killing. President Clinton offered an explanation to survivors in Kilagi for this. He said that he ?did not fully appreciate the depth and the speed with which [the survivors] were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror.? (Kelly)
Genocide is a reality that no one can ever conquer or vanish if they are working alone or do not look at the consequences upon taking choices of action. We as Americans feel it is our duty to only take a course of action if we know and are fully aware of the actions being made against the people, or if we are being affected directly. If it does not affect us and we do not know about it then obviously we cannot do anything about it.
When 1937 arrived, Japanese soldiers raided China’s capital of Nanking and began to mass murder citizens. A sole leader of the Japanese Imperial Army was non-existent. There were many of people in power such as generals who allowed these behaviors to occur. Baron Koki Hirota, Foreign minister at the time, proceeded to do nothing while being well aware of the Japanese’s persecution of the Chinese. These unsympathetic murders of those who were thought to be Chinese soldiers as well as woman, children and elderly. This massacre lasted between the 1937 and 1938. Within this time 300,000 Chinese citizens were viciously killed. This genocide is called Rape of Nanking because of raping the woman before killing them. Most likely this group was selected because the second world war happened in Asia. This was significant because a country was able to kill half the population of another. I believe the reason of this Genocide was for Japan to take advantage of China while expand Japan. Most likely the Japanese wished to exterminate China’s entire population.
Humanitarian intervention can be defined as the right or duty of the international community to intervene in states with certain causes. The causes can be that the state has suffered a large scale loss of life or genocide due to intentional actions by its government or even because of the collapse of governance (Baylis, Owens, Smith 480). One of the main arguments in the article was president Obamas decision not to bomb Syria after many of his Allies and people believed he would’ve after making so many plans and decision to carry out the bombing. Obamas decision can be expressing in some of the key objections to humanitarian intervention. For example, the first key is that states do not intervene for primarily humanitarian reasons. This means that humanitarian intervention would be unwise if it does not serve the states national interests. President Obama did not want to risk taking a shot while there were United Nations inspectors on the ground completing work (Goldberg
Kofi Annan’s life experiences that influenced him to work for the UN started when he went to a Methodist Boarding school, he was taught that "suffering anywhere concerns people everywhere." He then went on to study at four different colleges and got a masters degree in International Relations. He got a job with the UN as a budget official, and slowly worked his way up. For 9 years, he was an assistant Secretary General for 3 different organizations. While doing so, the Rwandan Genocide took place, and Annan was highly criticized for the way he handled it. He took responsibility for his actions. This lead to him finally being voted in to be the new Secretary-General, where he stayed for 10 years.
...gue that the Bosnian crisis is a prime example of why humanitarian intervention is a flawed and unsuccessful option. Critics argue that, even though the UN prevented hundreds of thousands of Bosnians in besieged towns from starvation, it did little or nothing to stop Bosnian Serbs from shelling these areas and ethnically cleansing them of Muslims. Furthermore, others claim that NATO’S degrading of Serb military capability from the air did nothing to save those civilians trapped in UN-created safe areas. In 1995 at least 7,414 Muslim men were rounded up in a Screbrenica enclave and systematically killed in the worst war crime of the whole war. However, while such examples may indicate that humanitarian interventions are not a legitimate option, there are also positive aspects that in some cases, compensate for, and override these negative flaws.
When considering the concepts of human rights and state sovereignty, the potential for conflict between the two is evident. Any humanitarian intervention by other actors within the international system would effectively constitute a violation of the traditional sovereign rights of states to govern their own domestic affairs. Thus, the answer to this question lies in an examination of the legitimacy and morality of humanitarian intervention. While traditionally, the Westphalian concept of sovereignty and non-intervention has prevailed, in the period since the Cold War, the view of human rights as principles universally entitled to humanity, and the norm of enforcing them, has developed. This has led to the 1990’s being described as a ‘golden