A REPORT ON GENOCIDE By Jane Springer

This report purposes to provide some preliminary information to the readers about the book
Genocide (authored by Jane Springer) which highlights the genocide history worldwide.
Springer answers key questions surrounding the topic of genocide, such as; the meaning of
genocide, where it has been witnessed, and the people under threat of genocide. This book also
honors genocide victims by ensuring that their stories remain unforgotten.
The author starts by expounding on some of the controversies surrounding the definition of
genocide. Springer (2006) observes that this inhumane practice is not alien because the term
itself is some generations old. Thus, genocide refers to the massacre or attempted massacre of an
entire populace or ethnic group. With raging debate on its definition, genocide has become a
heavy word used to describe different types of direct and indirect massacre; including the current
unwillingness by industrialized countries to supply lifesaving anti-retroviral drugs to patients of
HIV/AIDS in poor countries. Springer (2006) gives an overview of the history of genocide with
individual accounts through time; from the earliest incidences to the current crisis in Darfur. The
main difference between earlier acts of genocide and modern genocide is that it used to be a
more acceptable part of conquest, something to be proud of, and nothing to hide (Smith as cited
in Springer 2006). The development of the human rights concept made the massacres to an entire
people morally unjustifiable with genocidal acts becoming more hidden in the 19th and 20th
centuries.
Springer (2006) holds that it may take centuries for their ordeals to be exposed and even much
longer for them to be listened to, acknowledged and accepted. This is depicted in the history of
colonialism -an extension of one countrys power beyond its boundaries and peoples, and the

settlement of and control over that land and people (Hochschild as cited in Springer 2006)
Europes conquest of North and South America is the most widespread interrelated sequence of
worlds genocide history where an unimaginable 95 percent of North American natives were
massacred. This series of genocides include the conquest of the Aztecs in the current Mexico and
the complete extermination of the Arawaks/Tainos in the Caribbean and the Beothuks in
Newfoundland. Evidence exists where British authorities intentionally distributed smallpox
infected blankets and other items to the natives of the current the United States.
Springer lets us understand that genocide only happens with extensive preparation and planning
by the perpetrators/ instigators. The perpetrators harbor reasons for wanting to exterminate a
particular people. A government/influential group may want new settlers to possess the land
belonging to people already living there. Moreover, a government, group or corporation may
want to develop an area where indigenous people live. A government/ group may also feel
threatened by another political, ethnic or social group and thereby seek to ensure its control by
exterminating the offending group. Genocides occur anywhere and everywhere. Springer (2006)
observes that genocide usually occurs during war or under the cover of war as was witnessed in
the Holocaust and Armenian genocide. Wartime actions on civilian enemies can also be classified
as genocide. (Smith as cited in Springer 2006). Civil war can be used as an excuse not to
intervene and help the victims whereby a conflict is dismissed as a clash between opposing
groups inside a sovereign nation. Moreover, a government may justify killing a people under the
guise of fighting terrorism. Genocide may also occur in a time of political/social upheaval. A
society moving from authoritarianism to being a democracy is a possible candidate for genocide,
given that such a situation that often sets off a power struggle (Fein as cited in Springer 2006).

Extensive planning and organization involves a withdrawal of the rights of the targeted group.
The group is then steadily excluded from society by making it impossible for them to school,
marry or earn a living. The planners succeed in withdrawing a peoples rights by promoting an
us-them situation premised on old conflicts, racism or ethnocentrism and making it seem
natural or right. Soon the group is not just humiliated and criticized, but dehumanized as well.
The gist of this is that if the targeted group is not human, then it can be exterminated without
remorse. Springer (2006) brings to our attention a conspicuous kind of hate language often
employed in genocide where the targeted people can be described as savages, rats, pigs or
cockroaches. These eases things since many people can easily imagine killing such animals than
fellow humans. Most of these cases dehumanize a people in order to justify their extermination.
Euphemism makes the flip side of hate language whereby the explicit words are substituted with
mild, vague or less embarrassing words or phrases. This is usually used in genocide to conceal
the massacre as was the case in the 1990-91Gulf War (though not a genocide) where the term
collateral damage (dead civilians) was popularized. Additionally, going to work was a term
popularly used to refer to going to exterminate Tutsis (Hirsch 1995). Massacres are extremely
discouraging if one must decide to do them, even to a beast. However, if one must obey the
authorities orders, if they are properly prepared, if they feel pushed and pulled to see that a
massacre will be total and devoid of disastrous consequences for them, they feel relieved and
reassured and set out to do it without worry (Hatzfeld 2005).
If perpetrators feel they would be punished, then most genocide would not take place. However,
numerous past examples where perpetrators have gotten away with genocide influence others
that that they will too. Springer (2006) explains why in some cases, there were many reasons for
not responding to genocide. First, the perpetrators could be key allies/trading partners. Second, a

country may be of inadequate strategic interest to care about. This is depicted in a statement by
Western bureaucrats to General Romeo that: We recommend to our governments not to
intervene as the risks are high and all that is here are humans. (Dallaire 2003). Forgetting the
extermination is part of the extermination itself. Thus, solving genocide involves ensuring that its
events are remembered and talked about; that the history of the genocide is recorded, discussed
and passed on. It is vital not to just remember the victims, but to comprehend how and the
reasons for the genocides occurrence in order to prevent a recurrence. Remembering is also
necessary as it helps survivors and the victims as a whole in the journey towards recovery from
their trauma (Baudrillard is cited in Minow 1998).
Many survivors would want to forget what happened to them and to their lost loved ones. Many
also suffer from the guilt that they survived where others died. Some are left insecure
indefinitely. Anxiety, depression, and withdrawal may make it hard for people to relate to them in
a way that is good for their recovery. This trauma that affects some people at the individual level
can affect a whole society as well. Hence, a process of telling and re-telling the tales is vital. This
is key reason for the establishment of the truth and reconciliation commissions in many past
affected nations. In as much as nothing can compensate for the immense losses during genocide,
the recognition that a crime took place is an important first step. Thus, the process paying
reparations itself can serve as an important part of the healing journey, since it offers survivors
with an opportunity to tell their experiences. The only real obstacle to reconciliation is that when
the perpetrators leave the proceedings, they drive away to their fancy houses as the victims go
back to their shacks. Therefore, bringing the truth out and acknowledging the genocide is an
important part of healing. However, in the absence of reparations and equal opportunities for
victims in the postgenocidal social setting, reconciliation becomes impossible.

The genesis of racist ideas, the methods or weapons used in a particular genocide are all
connected to arms dealers, corporations or government somewhere that help supply or prop up
the perpetrators. This encourages them to continue their actions and implies that they can
continue with impunity, slaughtering more and more victims. Prosecuting the perpetrators from
past genocides and bringing out all evidence publicly are vital in helping to prevent future
genocides. Individuals should be committed to mobilizing political will and speaking out against
racism, discrimination, sexism and persecution at all levels. They must refuse to ignore genocidal
massacres, refuse to use ethnic stereotypes and refuse to participate in any type of bullying. It is
also important to study our own and other peoples histories, and to develop a background for
understanding and analyzing current situations and conflicts. Governments should choose to
focus on halting or preventing genocide. This may demand a big commitment, or only require
withdrawing support to genocidal regimes. Small, less powerful governments should not just
wait for big governments to make a move. They can decide to begin the process and make a
difference. Finally, risking troops to ensure that perpetrators are arrested, disarmed and
immobilized could be an option by governments. Non-governmental organizations, including
UN agencies can be among the first to gather evidence of genocidal crises. The media too should
also be among the first to draw attention to an emerging genocide situations. They are obligated
to publicize the situation and aid in mobilizing assistance to potential victims.
As the Springer winds up, I would also recommend a Tsunami-like response as was displayed
during the worldwide response to the South Asia tsunami in December 2004. There should be a
similar big hearted response to genocide since it is a disaster too. People should not be more
likely to help victims of a natural disaster than those of a human-made disaster like genocide
because they see the victims differently.

Bibliography
Dallaire, R 2003, Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda .Toronto:
Vintage.
Hatzfeld, J 2005, Machete Season: The Killers in Rwanda Speak. New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux.
Hirsch, H 1995, Genocide and the Politics of Memory: Studying Death to Preserve Life. London:
University of North Carolina Press.
Minow, M 1998, Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass
Violence. Boston: Beacon Press.
Prendergast, J 2005. Ripples of Rwanda's Genocide Still Rock the Eastern Congo, Globe and
Mail, 2(32-33).
Reeves, E 2005. Darfur in the Deepening Shadow of Auschwitz, Bosnia, Cambodia, Rwanda.
Available at www.sudanreeves.org.