DOWNLOAD Genocide in Our Time - NewFoundations

and the general degradation of public services werelikely to cause the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqiinfants in the coming months."CONNECTIONS AND COMMONALITIESBETWEEN GENOCIDE AND MODERN WARAlthough, as noted above, there has been atendency to differentiate between genocide and warfareas distinct forms of collective violence, there are in facta number of connections between them. First, modernwar often creates political, organizational, and psychologicalconditions that are highly conducive to theoutbreak of genocide. Second, the techniques of modernwar — specifically, the targeting of noncombatants withvery destructive weapons — tend to blur the line betweengenocide and war. Third, there is evidence that similarpsychological and social processes operate in bothforms of mass killing. Each of these connections isbriefly examined below.MODERN WAR EXPEDITES GENOCIDELeo Kuper has noted that "international warfare,whether between 'tribal' groups or city states, or othersovereign states and nations, has been a perennialsource of "" genocide. Referring to the Armeniangenocide of 1915 and the Nazi Holocaust against theJews, Vahakn Dadrian observes that "It is no accidentthat the two principal instances of genocide of thiscentury coincided with the episodes of two globalwars. "~ Civil wars also create the potential for genocide,as was the case with "auto-genocide" in Cambodiabetween 1975 and 1978. "Several dimensions of modern war expeditegenocide. First, by posing a dire threat to the society,war serves, according to Dadrian, as "a cataclysmicagent of disequilibrium entailing manifold crises. . . . ""The threat of disruption not only is blamed on theexternal enemy but also can be blamed on membersof a minority group within the society. The minoritygroup may be accused of collaborating with the enemyor used as a scapegoat for the frustrated aggression. , ofthe dominant group, especially when the war beginsto go badly. Second, during modern war, the government,whether democratic or totalitarian, becomes morecentralized and powerful, using censorship and propagandato increase support for its belligerent policies. ~This can diminish popular resistance to intensifiedruthlessness against enemies, both external and internal.Third, the government at war can utilize the militaryforces — men who have been trained to kill in theservice of their nation — for the perpetration of geno-cide. This occurred in both the Armenian genocide"and the Holocaust. ~ Fourth, just as conditions of warsignificantly increase the power of the genocidalgovernment, they also tend to increase the vulnerabilityof the targeted victim groups, which tend to be, asDadrian notes, "isolated, fragmented, and nearly totallyemasculated through the control of channels of communication,wartime secrecy, the various sections of thewartime apparatus, police, and secret services, and theconstant invocation of national security. "~ Finally,modern war creates a climate of moral and psychologicalnumbing or desensitization that increases populartolerance of cruelty, whether directed against anexternal or internal enemy. '4BLURRING OF TIIE LINE BETWEENWAR AND GENOCIDEGenocide and warfare have been differentiated ona number of grounds. Morally, genocide is universallyregarded as unequivocally evil, while warfare is widelyregarded as a necessary and valid "continuation ofpolitics, " to paraphrase Clausewitz. Also, the two formsof mass killing may be distinguished with respect tothe relation between ends and means. While both usesimilar means — mass killing — the end or goal is quitedifferent. Genociders aim to kill for the sake of killing;in war, killing is done in order to end the war. Hadthe Nazis not lost World War II, for example, theywould have continued their genocide against the Jews.In contrast, the Allies immediately discontinued thepractice of firebombing cities when the enemy surrendered.Finally, there is an apparent difference in thenature of the victims. The victims of genocide areusually defenseless members of a minority group, whilethe victims of war are generally citizens of a societyengaged in armed conflict.Nonetheless, on close examination these differencesbecome narrower or blurred. With respect to themoral dimension, one of the traditional criteria for a"just war" has been the careful discrimination betweensoldiers and civilians." The deliberate targeting ofcriterion. As Lewiscivilians violates this importantMumford has observed, "in principle, the exterminationcamps where the Nazis incinerated over six millionhelpless Jews were no different from the urban crematoriumsour air force improvised in its attacks bynapalm bombs on Tokyo. .. our aims were different, butour methods were those of ""mankind's worst enemy.Leo Kuper, in a discussion of "the changing nature ofwarfare, " notes how, in the Second World War,"Germany employed genocide in its war for domination." He goes on to say, however, "but I think theterm [genocide] must also be applied to the atomic124 GENOCIDE