Analysis Of Hotel Rwanda

As well established in the film Hotel Rwanda, genocide often is sprouted from a separation of people. As established in the article by Sarah Glazer, the Holocaust did have the different groups—Jewish, Gypsies, homosexuals, and communists. She goes on to reference the fact that modern day genocides tend to include a conflict in which both sides are being killed. (Glazer, 692). However, what is constant throughout all examples is the separation and differences between people. For example, in the Rwandan genocide, the people were separated by Hutus and Tutsis. The only difference between the two was established by the Belgians, and had to do with nose width and differing tones of skin. However, in the scene where the journalist was referring to the two women, he says, “They could be twins.” This goes to show that the separation can be a social construction. As I previously stated, a huge structural condition for genocide is the separation of people. Another thing that can be associated with the condition is a build up to conflict. For example, after Belgium put the Tutsis in power it could be seen that when the Hutus gained power …show more content…
According to the United Nations, non-intervention refers to the idea of respecting another State’s sovereignty by not getting involved in their business. On the other hand humanitarian intervention may lead to a desire to infiltrate a state’s sovereignty to provide aide to its people. The UN also provides that the UN should, “prevent the outbreak of armed conflict between states” (General Assembly, 68). However, on the side of humanitarianism, Glazer argues, “…genocidal countries could indeed threaten the United States because they often become breeding grounds for terrorism and disease” (Glazer, 689). This is the strongest argument for humanitarian intervention, and this is where the thick of the debate between the two can be