Rwanda Genocide Analysis

1161 Words 5 Pages
In the words of Raphael Lemkin, genocide is a, “systematic, planned replacement of the culture of the oppressed with the culture of the oppressor.” It refers to violent crimes committed against national, ethnical, racial or religious groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group. 1 Lemkin first introduces the word to describe the Nazis murder and destruction of the Jews. Since the Holocaust, genocide has been established to be an international crime, which enforced nations “undertake to prevent and punish.” Although the push for laws and punishments to be made for genocide have been made, preventing genocide remains a challenge that nation and individuals continue to face. 2 Years of ethnic hostility brings Rwanda to a downfall. …show more content…
The Rwanda genocide was an ethnic issue that created a lot of social tension with Rwanda. The Tutsi people were brought out because of their own rebel group who had to fight off with the Hutu people (eventually becoming victors of that war). The aftermath of the Rwanda Genocide was disastrous, and they lacked adequate food and clean water. Outside the capital, whole families and communities had been destroyed. Livestock had been killed and crops laid to waste. Everywhere there were ditches filled with rotting bodies. 7 Both had build-ups that would eventually lead to the conclusion of genocides for both of them. The mass killing of the Tutsi people from the Hutu people which ended up killing in an estimated amount of 800.000 people. The second great similarity that I find is that both were falsely accused of effecting their societies in proportional ways. The entire Tutsi population was blamed for the country’s increasing social, economic, and political pressures. The Hutu people who believed that they shouldn’t treat the Tutsi people harmfully would also be convinced by these false …show more content…
To understand the word atrocity we must know what it mean first, it is an appalling, cruel, or brutal act or situation. If we look at the Rwanda Genocide it would be described as a mass atrocity because of the mass proportions of the deaths in Rwanda. For an atrocity to be considered an act of genocide it would simply have to be a deliberate act against an ethnic, religious, etc. group. Genocide is defined by the deliberate intention to kill and severely harm groups of ethnic & religious groups. Characteristics of the genocide are brutal, cruel, deliberate, and cold-blooded. I don’t see why you want to, for example, erase an entire group of people (Christians) in the Great Persecution. Or why would you even think about massacring the people who live in your own nation and are your people (Tutsi) and even rape the women. Genocide explained for the Rwanda genocide is that the Hutus began slaughtering the Tutsis in the African country of Rwanda. The world has defined the Rwanda genocide to be a genocide, the Hutus had the deliberate intention to kill and murder the Tutsis and it went on for weeks, if that doesn’t show that they had the full intention to mass murder these people I don’t know what will. The Christians in ancient Rome aren’t a confirmed genocide by the world but I find evidence that the Romans persecuted the Christians deliberately and targeted a religious group which means it has

Related Documents