Ethnic cleansing

Résumé du document

Mass violence and extreme problems have characterised the 20th Century. The ethnic cleansing in Rwanda and in Sudan only marks the most extreme recent cases. Unlike some types of warfare, genocide is always a state-organized crime. More precisely, ethnic cleansing has been defined as "the elimination of an unwanted group from society, as by genocide or forced migration." This definition is inherently broader than that of genocide alone, and thereby includes mass killings and forced civilians' removals in far greater number. The U.S. State Department, in a recent report on Kosovo, concluded that ethnic cleansing "generally entails the systematic and forced removal of members of an ethnic group from their communities to change the ethnic composition of a region." The latter definition is seemingly too narrow to be a useful descriptor of a majority of situations which are encompassed in the broader definition.

Extraits

[...] Actually, all international actions depend on the ethic of the international actors. Secondly, international organisations have inherent problems that could impeach effective action. For instance, the UN is confronted to a financial crisis partly due to the expansion of its tasks and tough sees its performance and quickness degrading. Moreover, regional organisations could refuse any intervention especially when it deals with ethnic cleansing because they could dread the spill-over effects of this situation in their territories due to the presence of several members of ethnic groups involved in that conflict. [...]

[...] Whatever, parties with non-violent methods are potentially more efficient in changing the dynamics because even if they take sides, they pursue goals with peaceful means. They constitute an alternative approach for a community wishing to end violence without any violent action such as an armed conflict with those who break human rights. In that situation of imminent ethnic cleansing, the first and more important task for the international community is to identify the population or group concerned by the ethnic cleansing and the perpetrators of crimes in order to negotiate and start mediation with the latter. [...]

[...] All those proposals are easier to say than done. Indeed the prevention of that kind of conflict faces major problems. First, the fear of intervening when matters are changing and when the conflict or the ethnic cleansing break out make international actors reluctant to act and tough restrain their will of being involved in that situation because they know that there is a danger of increasing tension if an international action is lead. As a matter of fact, governments of major states are disinclined to get involved with internal conflicts when they do not concern their own state interest. [...]

[...] Ethnic cleansing, then, may involve death or displacement where a population is identified for removal from an area. The common element in all ethnic cleansing is the exclusion of minorities from the mainstream society based on ethnicity or rather the ethnicisation of difference: ethnicity is a resource for exclusion politics, political manipulation, and vested interests. Moreover, it seems important to note that ethnic cleansing and state-failure are closely linked: failed states and multi ethnic ones are more disposed to become genocidal states than others. [...]

[...] Coordinators can propose to the political power two variants of power sharing. On the one hand, a federal system in which ethnic group leaders could work together and in which exists the devolution of power to ethnic groups with minority vetoes on particular issues. Or on the other hand, a parliamentary system with proportional representation that can insure all groups a voice in political decision process. Moreover the mediators should promote the establishment of institutions capable of advocating and protecting human rights at both local and national stage of the society. [...]