Blog 8: Categorizing Political Violence

Cameron Warr

PlSc 150

Kirk Hawkins

Blog 8: Categorizing Political Violence

                In an attempt to better classify political violence, political scientist have formed a way to categorize acts of violence into a specific category. These categories are revolution, interstate conflict, civil war, terrorism, and genocide. According to David Samuels, genocide is a “deliberate and coordinated effort to eliminate all members of particular ethnic, religious, or national group through mass murder.” [1] David Samuels also says that genocide is much different than civilian deaths in international or civil war because a genocide deliberately targets every man, woman, and child. There are generally three reasons why genocide takes roots, those are; ethnic divisions, ongoing warfare, and permissive international environment.

                                As stated in the definition, genocide must take roots with a division of an ethnic, religious, or national group. In the early 1990’s, there were three main tribes in Rwanda; the Hutus (85%), the Tutsis (14%), and the Twa(1%). [2] In the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries, Rwanda was a Belgian colony. The Belgian administrators in charge of Rwanda gave preference to the Tutsis and awarded them with the few benefits that they could. This allowed the Tutsis, even with them being a minority, to have political power until after the country had gained its independence in 1962. [1] In the early 1990’s, a Hutu rebellion caused a period of civil war until the United Nations intervened and the President demanded a cease fire. The tensions remained calm until the President’s plane was shot down by unidentified attackers, which was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

David Samuels wrote that in order to have genocide, it is necessary that ongoing warfare be present. With the death of the Hutu president fresh on the minds and in the hearts of Hutu citizens, violence broke out almost immediately. Many politically strong Hutu leaders launched plans to destroy the entire Tutsi population under the cover of a war. And thus began the mass murder of upwards of one million Tutsi. Men and women were killed at roadblocks set up by the Hutus, entire families were killed at a time, and women were brutally raped time and time again. [2]

Although the bulk of the crime and guilt lays at the feet of the Hutus in Rwanda, many international countries feel shame as well for not helping to prevent the crime at hand.  Many countries like the United States, France, and Belgium were aware of the plans for the massive slaughter of the Tutsi people, but did nothing to prevent them. [2] These countries indirectly aided this genocide by creating a permissive international environment.

                With the elements of an ethnic division, ongoing warfare, and a permissive international environment, the Hutu clan successfully completed one of the most brutal genocides in history. Using the definition given by David Samuels in correlation to the knowledge that we have on the mass murder in Rwanda in 1994, it is clear that David Samuels definition of genocide is both accurate and holds true, at least in this individual case study.

Works Cited:

[1]-         Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. 2. 1. New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2013. Print.

               

[2] -        BBC, . "Rwanda: How the genocide happened." BBC News. N.p., 18 2008. Web. 9 Nov 2012. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1288230.stm