60 years after the UN Convention - Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

colonialism and genocide 77
biography, fi nally, has been published recently (Cooper 2008). And
indeed, this tribute to Raphael Lemkin is absolutely justifi ed and long
overdue. Lemkin was a true pioneer of genocide studies since his activities
were not limited to the struggle for an international law binding
on all states and requiring them to ban the persecution and extermination
of ethnic, national or religious groups. Rather, Lemkin
contributed extensively to the transfer of the originally legal concept
of genocide to the social sciences. 5 Especially the cultural dimension
of genocide was of great interest to him.
Moreover, Lemkin dedicated a huge amount of his time and energy
to the compilation of a global history of genocide (Docker 2008: 85-
96). Only recently have historians realised the signifi cance of Lemkin’s
historical scholarship (Schaller and Zimmerer 2008). Whereas
Lemkin’s unpublished papers on the Armenian genocide and the
Holocaust have gained at least some scientifi c attention, his studies on
colonialism and especially on European rule in Africa have been neglected
(Jacobs 1992, Jacobs 2003, Schaller 2004c, Stone 2005), which
is rather surprising given that Lemkin ascribed great signifi cance to
colonialism when he articulated his concept of genocide in 1944.
The importance of colonialism for Lemkin’s thinking is proven by
the fact that several manuscripts on European colonialism in the various
‘new worlds’ can be found in his unpublished papers. Some of
them are devoted to European rule in Africa.
In the historiography of colonialism and among historians of Africa
in particular, the question of whether mass violence like the brutal
suppression of indigenous resistance through massacres, deportations,
scorched earth policies and the internment of non-combatants and prisoners
of war in concentration camps should be seen as genocide is discussed
controversially. Whereas most serious historians agree that the
Herero and Nama fell victim to genocide in former ‘German Southwest-Africa’
in 1904-08 dissent increases when it comes to the question
of whether the situation coloniale as such – characterised by the destruction
of indigenous institutions, forced labour and cultural suppression –
is genocidal. Especially in the case of Belgian rule in Central Africa historians
debate whether it is appropriate to speak of a ‘Congo Holocaust’
(Nzongola-Ntalaja 2002: 20; Hochschild 1999: 2, 25). However, these
questions are not relevant to genocide scholars and historians alone. It
is not least their political, legal and fi nancial dimensions that render
them so controversial and explosive. Since the end of the Cold War,
5 Unfortunately, Lemkin’s social-scientifi c studies of genocide have never been published
and are still kept in several archives in the United States (Elder 2005).