No abstract
The question of how mass atrocities end has been dominated by a normative approach regarding how they ought to end. Arguing that an evidence-based approach to terminate mass atrocities might offer profound insights into theories of mass atrocities as well as policies designed to prevent or end their occurrence, this article outlines the key questions and approaches needed for an evidence-based study of atrocity endings. It draws on theories of genocide, political violence and civil war termination, and presents initial insights from case studies, including the killing of civilians in colonial German Southwest Africa, the Soviet Union, the Nigerian civil war, the Guatemalan civil war, the Nuba Mountains of Sudan and Bosnia-Herzegovina. IntroductionThe field of genocide and mass atrocities studies has produced significant contributions to knowledge of where, when and why campaigns of large-scale, one-sided violence occur, but offers relatively few explicit examinations of the political, social and military dynamics of the de-escalation of violence. This simple question remains unexplored: how do mass atrocities end?Answering this question will require study of the dynamics of endings in multiple cases and will not likely produce a single theory of termination. 1 This article serves a more modest role; it sketches out the starting point for an evidence-based study of endings. It begins with a brief overview of why both 'mass atrocities' and 'endings' need to be problematized and explores how various theories of genocide and civil war might inform a study of atrocity endings. The second half draws on short case studies to introduce three broad scenarios for endings. (1) Perpetrators change their policies because of outside influence, rise of moderates or resistance. (2) Perpetrators carry their plans to fruition; leaders decrease use of lethal violence in order to normalize conditions for a range of reasons. (3) The most rare ending is that perpetrators are defeated by interested parties or so-called humanitarian interventions.
This essay poses the question, who is the subject of atrocities prevention? Borrowing a rhetorical and argumentative model from Jacques Ranciere’s work on the subject of human of rights, the essay explores the conceptual frameworks for the subjects of atrocities and queries their relevance to the specific context of prevention. The concepts that dominate work on mass atrocities were articulated in relation to atrocities that were underway or had concluded; they are a poor fit for prevention. New work on prevention, like that on ‘factors of restraint’ or resilience,’ suggest revisions to the concepts and cases that currently dominate study of mass atrocities. Crucial amongst these concepts that require adjustment are how we address the subject of atrocities prevention.
No abstract
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.