The argument in Sudan began in February of 2003 when the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) accused the government of oppressing black Africans in favor of Arabs. There are two distinctive sides to this conflict: the first is mainly made of the Sudanese military and the Janjaweed, which is a Sudanese militia, compiled largely from the Afro-Arab Abbala tribes. The other side is a combination of several rebel groups, including the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement which are principally composed of non-Arab Muslim groups Fur, Zaghawa and Masalit.
Although the Sudanese government refuses to admit that it supports the Janjaweed, it is accused of supplying them with financial aid and taking part alongside the Janjaweed in attacks targeting civilians. The government has also been accused of covering up mass killings and other acts of evidence tampering, as well as arresting, and otherwise retaining journalists, to keep coverage of the situation at a minimum.
In May 2006 the Sudanese government and the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army signed a peace agreement, although many in the organization did not support the act. Then, on August 31, 2006, the UN Security Council approved Resolution 1706, which stated that a UN troop of 26,000 soldiers were be placed in Sudan to administer the unprepared African Union Mission in Sudan peacekeeping force of just 7,000 soldiers. However, the Sudanese government would not allow this resolution and immediately initiated a major attack in the region, claiming that the UN forces were foreign invaders. In March 2007 the UN brought charges against the Sudanese government for violating in Darfur and decided it was critical to take immediate action to protect the civilians. On July 14, 2008, ten charges of war crimes were filed against Omar al-Bashir, Sudan’s president. The International Criminal Court accused that al-Bashir “”masterminded and implemented a plan to destroy in substantial part” three tribal factions based solely on their ethnicity. On March 4, 2009 the ICC sent out a warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest. In February 2009 the UN troops sent to Sudan tried to convince Justice and Equality Movement to sign a peace agreement with the Sudanese government. However, violence only increased in Sudan after the warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest was made.
There is a lot of controversy regarding if the situation in Sudan is truly genocide. Genocide is defined as “ the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.” Unfortunately, investigators have been unable to produce solid evidence that a genocide has occurred in Sudan. The chief prosecutor of the UN case regarding Sudan, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, claims that he has presented more than sufficient evidence against al-Bashir,yet two of the three judges voted against Sudan’s situation being considered genocide. Ocampo will have another chance in front of three new judges later this year. Regardless, the Sudanese government has rejected any claim of genocide and is currently refusing to cooperate.
When the Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana, and Cyprien Ntaryamira, the Hutu president of Burundi were killed after their airplane was shot down, the genocide was triggered, though the Tutisi’s had nothing to do with the event.
The Rwandan Genocide began in 1994 when one of Rwanda’s most prevalent ethnic groups, the Hutu’s, caused between 800,000 and 1,000,000 deaths, most of which were those belonging to the Tutsi ethnic group. The killings lasted approximately 100 days, from April to July. The killings were well planned and were carried out by a militia of about 30,000 Hutu men. Some sources, including Rwandan Prime Minister Jean Kambanda, say that the genocide was openly discussed in cabinet meetings. The government helped fund the Hutu militias in their killings of Tutsis, as well as published various kinds of propaganda motivating and encouraging acts of genocide.
The international response was a failure. Most countries entered the country, evacuated their citizens, then left. Although the United Nations agreed, in May, to send in 5,500 troops, they were not actually sent until months after the genocide ended. France was the only notable country to intervene; on July 22 French troops entered Rwanda and set up a “humanitarian zone” which saved tens of thousands of lives during the last month of the genocide. In late July the US did finally step up and assist in the relief efforts.
Wow. This really seems to be more of a project than my own, at least fact wise. In your research of the topic, what have you found to be the most prevalent cause of genocide? …I guess that would also go with the question, how would you define genocide after your research?
i think the general cause is just a yearning for power. at least for the 2 african genocides i’ve focused on they have derived from cliams of being mistreated for years and finally gained enough muscle power to force the government to concede.
i think genocide is pretty well defined as the purposeful elimination of a ethnic, racial, religious or national group, whether that elimination is of the entire group or just factions.