Preventing Genocide

Advice for Obama with grappling with a problem from hell

by 'Lexington,' The Economist, December 11, 2008

A FEW years ago, Lexington visited a shabby church in Rwanda. Inside was a memorial to a massacre that took place within its walls in 1994. The most upsetting sight was that of small skulls which, unlike the larger ones around them, were mostly incomplete. Babies’ jawbones tend to break off when clubbed.

Preventing genocide is what one of Barack Obama’s advisers calls “a problem from hell”. But this week a group called the Genocide Prevention Task Force published some helpful guidelines for the president-elect. It is a serious group, led by Madeleine Albright (a former secretary of state) and William Cohen (a former defence secretary). And its report is steeped in good sense.

For a start, it avoids definitional traps. What, after all, is genocide? The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is hopelessly vague, talking of “inflicting on [a] group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. Read literally, that could include almost any atrocity. Gérard Prunier, a historian of Rwanda and Darfur, prefers a stricter standard: a deliberate attempt to destroy a racial, religious or political group in its entirety.

Ms Albright and Mr Cohen sidestep this muddle by using the word “genocide” colloquially, as shorthand for the deliberate mass-murder of civilians. They then suggest ways to prevent it. First, the president should make this an explicit goal of his foreign policy. This is not only a moral obligation, says Mr Cohen, but will help keep America safer. Genocide can cause a state to collapse, and failed states make good boltholes for terrorists.

For about $250m a year, the authors of the report reckon America can detect the early rumblings of genocide and silence them. The directorate of national intelligence should monitor every trouble spot for signs that men with guns or machetes are about to kill lots of unarmed people, and report regularly on its findings. In high-risk countries, American aid dollars should address the conditions that make genocide more likely, such as ethnic discrimination, armed insurgency and leaders who whip up hatred to cement their own grip on power.

When the signs suggest that mass-murder is being planned, diplomats should warn the would-be perpetrators of dire consequences if they proceed. If all else fails, America should send in the marines, but the authors hope that the mere threat of this will usually be enough. Finally, since America cannot monitor or police the world alone, Ms Albright and Mr Cohen call for the creation of a global network to share information and act together to prevent genocide.

Optimists think Mr Obama is just the man to put all these noble thoughts into practice. He is hardly an expert on the world’s hellholes, but he surrounds himself with experts. Susan Rice, his pick for ambassador to the UN (a post that will now carry cabinet rank) was a cog in the machine that kept America out of Rwanda, and is determined not to repeat that mistake. Samantha Power, a member of Mr Obama’s transition team, is a former war correspondent in the Balkans, the author of a Pulitzer prize-winning book on genocide and a professor at Harvard. Mr Obama’s favourite think-tank, the Centre for American Progress, houses the Enough project, which aims to put the “never” into “never again”. The head of the Enough project, John Prendergast, is a perceptive Darfur-watcher and has also written a book on genocide. He says Mr Obama has recruited a “dream team” to prevent genocide. He singles out the forceful Hillary Clinton and James Jones, a respected general who will be the next national security adviser.

All this is encouraging. But in his quest to deliver the world from evil, Mr Obama will face several roadblocks. From the moment he assumes office, the economic crisis, health-care reform and Iraq will gobble up nearly all his time, energy and political capital. Whatever Mr Cohen says about the national-security benefits of genocide prevention, a report that a massacre might be about to occur in a poor and obscure place is unlikely to shoot to the top of the presidential in-tray. And will Mr Obama really be ready to send in the marines if deterrence fails?

Curbing the atrocities that are known about is hard enough. Mr Obama will probably push for negotiations to end the war in Darfur. The leading killers on both sides are likely soon to be indicted by the International Criminal Court, which should concentrate minds and provide an American peace envoy with an opening. Mr Obama will also give a jolt to the peace process in eastern Congo, where mass graves have recently been found. But given America’s commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, there will be few American boots to patrol other war zones.

Easier said than done

And the trickiest challenge will always be the unexpected. Bill Clinton is often blamed for failing to stop the killing in Rwanda. He could have sent troops or at least jammed the radio broadcasts that told the killers where to go and whom to kill. But he had seen a humanitarian military intervention in Somalia go bloodily awry the previous year, so he did not. He said afterwards that he had not understood soon enough what was going on in Rwanda. Ms Power retorts that he “could have known...if he had wanted to know”. But that is easy to say with hindsight. The Rwandan genocide was the quickest on record. Even experts did not realise just how well-organised and systematic the killing was until nearly half the victims were already dead. Mr Clinton could in theory have wrenched his mind away from all the other crises in the world and grasped the Rwandan situation in time to save many lives. But in practice, how many presidents are that flexible?

Perhaps Mr Obama will do better. But even a quick brain, a legion of good advisers and the loftiest of intentions are no guarantee. The next genocide may erupt in a place or in a manner that no one predicts. And American interventions to crush murderous governments do not always go as planned. Ask George Bush