He likes to look at how in times of political turmoil small factions of independence militia via for control and how the resulting chaos leads to an overturn of political structures . Misha Glenny words things very interestingly in his book because even though he is pro-independence movements, when talking about genocide he doesn’t ever refer to the party being exterminate as the enemy or even as a different government, country name being used, he rather interestingly refers to them in terms of races, an example of this is when he is talking about the different way in which Balkan Jews were exterminated . He mentions how like in criterion C of the UN definition of genocide that some 50,000 odd Jews were marched out of their homes and into Croatian camps depending on where they’d originally lived, he also mentions how live hoods, such as stores were destroyed in nightly raids . However, does mention how genocide can quickly escalate from one race to another problem race and in the case gypsies were also forcibly removed to these camps as well . What Glenny tries to make a point of is that forced removal can be at times just as deadly to a race as physical extermination can be, that this is just of an effective tool of genocide as a guns or poison gas . Glenny shows throughout his book …show more content…
Where as, Glenny focuses on how there are many different types of genocide but more to the point on how independence movements aka cross-cultural warfare is brought about by one group wanting to have more control of governmental and economical power over all other races. Though both of these authors are writing about cross-cultural interaction, me writing about their parts about genocide, clearly both are giving only a fragmented look into the history of genocide and it is through reading both these materials that we as outsiders can gain a glimpse into the lives of those affected by genocide more