[[link removed]]

2024 WORD OF THE YEAR: GENOCIDE (AS IN, GAZA)  
[[link removed]]


 

Juan Cole
December 29, 2024
Informed Consent
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Genocide does not necessarily mean the destruction of a nation
accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is
intended to signify a coordinated plan aiming at the destruction of
the foundations of the life of national groups. _

, “Genocide,” Digital, Midjourney, 2024

 

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – The word of the year was certainly
“genocide.” It was alleged of Israel’s Gaza campaign by South
Africa in a case brought before the International Court of Justice
[[link removed]],
and this charge was also lodged by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty
International, Doctors
[[link removed]] without
Borders, and the UN Special Committee
[[link removed]] to
investigate Israeli practices.

In addition, at least 14 countries
[[link removed]] have
requested the International Court of Justice to allow them to
intervene on behalf of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel,
including Ireland, Spain, Belgium, Mexico, Türkiye, Nicaragua,
Colombia, Libya, Egypt, Cuba, Palestine, Chile, the Maldives, and
Bolivia. Spain, Mexico and Türkiye are in the G20.

On the other hand, the most powerful man in the world, Joe Biden
[[link removed]],
insisted that what Israel is doing in Gaza is not genocide. In fact,
most US politicians of both parties have either issued similar denials
or have just been quiet on the issue. US so-called cable “news”
has barely mentioned Gaza at all this year, despite the daily carnage
wrought by the Israeli military there, and typically does not invite
on as commentators guests that might use the “G-word.” I did a
database search in broadcast transcripts. CNN mentioned on December 6
that the US State Department had denied an Israeli genocide in Gaza.
On November 1, CNN anchors reported that a UN official had resigned,
calling Israeli actions in Gaza a textbook case of genocide. On May
24, CNN reported on the South Africa case against Israel at the ICJ
for the crime of genocide. In January CNN reported two or three times
on the ICJ case pursued against Israel for the alleged Gaza genocide.
These six or so mentions seem to be the extent of CNN broadcasting on
the genocide issue for the entire year, and mostly they covered
denials or things that other people said.

Many of those contesting the charge of genocide against Israel do not
understand the current technical definition of the term. It does not
require killing millions of people. It cannot be excused by
war-fighting, since the laws of war require that everything possible
be done to minimize civilian casualties. If a country cavalierly
throws aside this requirement and deliberately and consciously adopts
rules of engagement allowing a hundred civilian casualties for each
high-value militant killed, as both Israel’s +972 Mag
[[link removed]] and the New
York Times
[[link removed]] say
Israel has done, that course of action could fall under the heading of
genocide.

Polish attorney and academic Raphael Lemkin
[[link removed]],
of Jewish heritage, coined the term “genocide.” It is from the
Greek _genos_ or people, race, or tribe, and the Latin _-cide_,
having to do with killing. (The modern Greek is γενοκτονία
(yenoktonía), from _genos_ and ktonia, which means ‘killing.’
In my view it would have been better to have an all-Greek term rather
than a Greek-Latin hybrid.) Lemkin used it in his 1944 book, _Axis
Rule in Occupied Europe_. He also invoked it at the Nuremberg war
crimes trials and worked to get the 1948 Genocide Convention passed
and ratified, in which he succeeded by 1951.

In _Axis Rule_, Lemkin wrote,

* “New conceptions require new terms. By “genocide” we mean
the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group. This new word,
coined by the author to denote an old practice in its modern
development, is made from the ancient Greek word genos (race, tribe)
and the Latin cide (killing), thus corresponding in its formation to
such words as tyrannicide, homocide, infanticide, etc. Generally
speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction
of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members
of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of
different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations
of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the
groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be
disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture,
language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of
national groups, and the destruction of the personal security,
liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals
belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national
group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against
individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the
national group.
The following illustration will suffice. The confiscation of property
of nationals of an occupied area on the ground that they have left the
country may be considered simply as a deprivation of their individual
property rights. However, if the confiscations are ordered against
individuals solely because they are Poles, Jews, or Czechs, then the
same confiscations tend in effect to weaken the national entities of
which those persons are members.”

In contemporary Ireland, government officials are pushing back against
Lemkin’s emphasis on intent and a “coordinated plan,” which are
almost impossible to prove. They argue that genocide should be defined
not by the intentions of the perpetrator but by the harms experienced
by the victim.

This Google Books ngram shows how the use of the term skyrocketed
after 1945:

_Google Books Ngram for “Genocide.”_

Unfortunately, the mentions may be increasing so much because the
crime is becoming more common. In 2009 and 2010, the International
Criminal Court issued 
[[link removed]]warrants against then
dictator Omar al-Bashir of Sudan that included 3 counts of genocide
because of his brutal repression of the Fur people in the western
Darfur province.

In this century, as Alexander Wentker
[[link removed]] points
out, genocide is increasingly being litigated at the International
Court of Justice, which was established by the United Nations to
adjudicate disputes between member states. Gambia has filed a case
against Myanmar (Burma)’s military junta for genocide against the
Rohingya Muslims. Nicaragua filed a case against Germany for abetting
Israel’s Gaza genocide, but the ICJ judges turned it back on the
grounds that Germany has a robust judiciary that can decide this
matter itself. Nicaragua, undeterred, is interested in prosecuting
Britain and Canada for complicity in the Gaza genocide, which Wentker
suggests may help explain the Labour government’s tepid announcement
that some 14 weapons export licenses were being withdrawn from firms
selling to Israel.

As South Africa noted
[[link removed]] in
arguments before the ICJ, Article II of the Genocide Convention says,

* “In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following
acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial
or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated
to bring about its
physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”

This language was adopted into the Rome Statute that underpins the
International Criminal Court.

The ICJ judges have taken special interest
[[link removed]] in
the Israeli destruction of hospitals and their displacement of
pregnant women to unhealthy rubble and tents, noting that “The WHO
has estimated that 15 per cent of the women giving birth in the Gaza
Strip are likely to experience complications, and indicates that
maternal and newborn death rates are expected to increase due to the
lack of access to medical care.” The point is that these actions
might constitute “Imposing measures intended to prevent births
within the group.”

_Juan Cole [[link removed]] is the founder
and chief editor of Informed Comment. He is Richard P. Mitchell
Professor of History at the University of Michigan He is author of,
among many other books, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace amid the Clash of
Empires
[[link removed]] and The
Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
[[link removed]].
Follow him on Twitter at @jricole
[[link removed]] or
the Informed Comment Facebook Page
[[link removed]]. 
_

_Informed Consent sheds light on how war, climate change and
globalization are shaping our world.  Drawing on insights of expert
journalists, activists, and academics, we strive to publish deep
geopolitical analysis that's readable for a general audience.  And
unlike most foreign-policy oriented publications, our editorial line
isn't dictated by beltway think tanks or corporate boards._

* Genocide
[[link removed]]
* War on Gaza
[[link removed]]
* Israel
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]