Finding a Place for Atrocity Prevention amid New Security Challenges
Experts discuss the growing desire of the policy community to make atrocity prevention a national and international priority.
Experts discuss the growing desire of the policy community to make atrocity prevention a national and international priority.
The fourth anniversary of the Syrian civil war is this week, and the statistics showing the human toll of the conflict are bleak. Nine children are killed in Syria every day. 6-percent of the population has been killed, maimed, or wounded. Life expectancy has fallen by 27-percent, from 75.9 years to 55.7 years. And 3.3 million Syrians have fled and are living as refugees in neighboring countries; 7.6 million people are internally displaced.
On the fourth anniversary of the uprising in Syria, the Museum calls for effective and sustained efforts to end the horrific suffering of the Syrian people, who are in the midst of the largest humanitarian crisis since World War II and facing the threat of genocide.
As one of the 20 countries most likely to experience the start of a new episode of state-led mass killing, according to our statistical risk assessments, Yemen demands our attention. In recent weeks, several countries have shut their embassies in Sanaa, and the UN has continued to warn of the potential for civil war.
Simona Cruciani works on information management, early warning, and risk assessment in the United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. She joined the Office in July 2008, after having served in United Nations field operations in Burundi and Sudan. In Burundi, Cruciani served in the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations ONUB as an Electoral and Civil Affairs Officer. In Sudan, she worked as Civil Affairs Officer for UNMIS. Cruciani’s focus has primarily been on supporting human security, democratization and human rights in conflict and post-conflict situations. She owns Master’s Degrees in Contemporary History, International Affairs and Public Health.
The Early Warning Project strives to use the best methods to assess risks of mass atrocities around the world, so we are happy to see a new paper (PDF) from the Good Judgment Project (GJP)—a multi-year, U.S. government-funded forecasting experiment that's set to conclude later this year—getting lots of press coverage this week. As Kelsey Atherton describes for Popular Science (here),
Over the past several months, Haiti has slipped into a political crisis that threatens to get worse in early 2015. As the International Crisis Group summarized in its 1 December 2014 edition of Crisis Watch,
In an effort to shine a light on the largely underreported and forgotten situation in the Nuba Mountain region of Sudan, the Museum worked with award-winning filmmaker Andrew Berends to support the production of Madina’s Dream, a documentary exploring the human dimensions of life in this troubled region.
Human rights groups and the United Nations have been warning that Burundi’s elections in 2015 could spark a genocide, but the Early Warning Project’s risk assessments so far indicate that Burundi is not at especially high risk of state-led mass killing. To explore this discrepancy, I asked a handful of experts for their views on this case. While all of the sources I interviewed agreed that the UN was right to be concerned, they disagreed on how severe the risk is and how a new episode of state-led mass killing might come about.
In a small but meaningful gesture, the photographs on the cover of the UN’s new framework of analysis for assessing the risk of genocide and other mass atrocities go beyond what I call the genocide canon—the cases of Armenia, the Holocaust, Rwanda, Srebrenica, and, of late, Darfur that are typically cited to prick people’s conscience and spur action by policymakers—to include images from East Timor, Guatemala, and Cambodia [see below; captions are on page ii of the document].
Find information on historical cases of genocide and other atrocities.