A resurgence of violence eerily similar to previous ethnic cleansing efforts in Sudan raises the question of how to stop history from repeating itself.
Sudanese civilians fleeing the violence waiting to enter a Refugee Camp at the Chad border.[1]
“I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart.” Anne Frank, The diary of a young girl[2]
Amid the most historically prominent period of genocide and ethnic cleansing, a teenage girl was determined to have faith in the good of humanity.[3] After the world learned of the atrocities occurring under the German Nazi regime, humanity, on an international scale, vowed never to forget and refused to permit history to repeat itself.[4] Yet, in the previous two decades alone, mass human atrocities have persisted and humanity’s response to these events has been incongruent with the promise it once made.[5]
Following the Holocaust, the world became increasingly interconnected through globalization.[6] Despite this evolution, humanity seems to have only grown further apart.[7] In the modern era, where information is accessible at the click of one button, it seems flawed that atrocities like genocide remain relatively unnoticed and largely disregarded by the international community. The persistence of human atrocities is especially concerning as it reveals the inadequacy of the resolutions the United Nations (UN) implemented to prevent these occurrences.[8]
A recurrence of ethnic cleansing and violence, suspected to be genocide, has been underway for months in Darfur, a region of western Sudan.[9] This resurgence mimics the mass atrocities that took place in Rwanda, Syria, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, and Ethiopia.[10] However, the prospect of civilians in Darfur receiving protection from the international community is implausible.[11]
Having witnessed the emergence of past atrocities, modern society should recognize both the indicative signs and devastating consequences of mass genocide. With such a clear conception of their repercussions, how is it that these atrocities continue to occur without international intervention? This question is a major point of contention in the UN, with no clear consensus or potential solution on the horizon.[12] The UN’s creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) clearly established jurisdiction in the international arena for war crimes and mass atrocities.[13] Although the ICC allows for the prosecution of the international war crimes giving rise to mass genocide, securing justice for the victims may be difficult as the ICC is structured as a court of “last resort” and typically faces extreme enforcement challenges.[14]
Historically, the UN has placed a Western model of thinking at the forefront of its decision making, prioritizing the values and opinions of nation-states founded on European-based principles.[15] With respect to the issue of international intervention, the historical precedent is clear: state sovereignty outweighs the prospect of international intervention.[16] The power of state sovereignty is held in the highest regard by Western states, which frequently results in turning a blind eye to human rights abuses in order to preserve their existing governmental systems.[17] The fear of impeding state sovereignty repeatedly jeopardizes developing nations susceptible to mass atrocity.[18]
Failing to hold accountable those responsible for atrocities, in the name of protecting and upholding the value of sovereignty, allows for history to repeat itself time and time again.[19] The lack of accountability for actors committing mass atrocities and failed enforcement efforts call into question whether it is truly a matter of inability, or perhaps just a lackluster commitment on the part of humanity to fulfill the promise it once made.[20]
Without a meaningful shift in the Western understanding of sovereignty and its importance in the international arena, there will continue to be incidents like those in Darfur and Rwanda, with no real remedy for those forced to endure injustice.[21]
[1] Photo: Emma Farge & Khalid Abdelaziz, At Least 87 Buried in Sudan Mass Grave, Including Women, Children, UN Says, Reuters (July 13, 2023, 10:58 AM), https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/least-87-buried-mass-grave-sudans-west-darfur-un-2023-07-13/.
[2] Anne Franke et. al., The Diary of a Young Girl, 358 (1958).
[3] See id. (“I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart.”)
[4] 28th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly, United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/conferences/liberation-nazi-camps (last visited Sep. 22, 2023) (“Speakers from all regions of the world stressed that never again should another Holocaust happen.”).
[5] Patricia A. McKeon, Note, An International Criminal Court: Balancing the Principle of Sovereignty Against the Demands for International Justice, 12 St. John’s J.L. Comm. 535, 537 (1997) (describing the debate over establishing accountability for war crimes in the international system and the use of State sovereignty as a defense, stating that “[t]he question of whether individuals can be held accountable for violations of international law, regardless of their rank or political position, has been debated since the Nuremberg trials”).
[6] John W. Head, Addressing Global Challenges Through Pluralistic Sovereignty: A Critique of State Sovereignty as a Centerpiece of International Law, 67 U. Kan. L. Rev. 727, 774 (2019) (discussing globalization and impact interconnectedness has had on the international legal landscape).
[7] Id.
[8] McKeon, supra note 5, at 537 (describing shortcomings of the international criminal accountability measures in place).
[9] Farge & Abdelaziz, supra note 1 (describing the recent resurrection of the genocide activity in Sudan).
[10] Irene R. Lax, A State of Failure: The Sacrosanctity of Sovereignty and The Perpetuation of Conflict in Weak and Failing States, 26 Temp. Int’l & Comp. L.J. 25, 49 (2012) (describing the ways the international system has fallen short in preventing and providing retributivism for mass atrocities of the past).
[11] Id.
[12] Id.
[13] How the Court Works, International Criminal Court, https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works (last visited Sept. 22, 2023).
[14] Id.
[15] Lax, supra note 10, at 47-48 (describing the regard of sovereignty to the Eurocentric model and nations while contrasting its lack of importance for non-Western States).
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Id.
[19] McKeon, supra note 5, at 563 (describing the lack of effectiveness of the methods in place perpetuated by the Security Council).
[20] Id. (“The reluctance of the United Nations or any individual state to bring the accused into custody again reflects the strength of the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention. Here, the principles of non-intervention are clashing directly with the need for international justice. The lack of indicted individuals in custody suggests that the principles of sovereignty have prevailed.”).
[21] Lax, supra note 10, at 67 (describing the importance in a shift of thought model concerning sovereignty by the influential State actors that can have a real impact on the procedure).
Commentaires