14 May 2002
Dobriansky Urges Genocide Prevention, Intervention
(May 13: closing remarks to U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum symposium)
(2980)
In remarks to a gathering at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in
Washington May 13, the State Department's Paula Dobriansky urged the
nations of the world not only to bring the perpetrators of genocide to
justice but also to stop genocide with the principled use of force and
to prevent genocide through the spread of democracy and the rule of
law.
Dobriansky, the under secretary of state for global affairs, was
speaking at the conclusion of the symposium on genocide prevention,
morality, and the national interest, an event organized by the
museum's Committee on Conscience.
Comparing genocide to terrorism in its "total, reckless disregard for
human life and human suffering," Dobriansky said that those who
perpetrate either should be hunted down. "It is in every country's
interest, not just the interest of the United States, to prevent
genocide and mass murder," she said.
She suggested that the world must enact a long-range strategy to
prevent genocide and terrorism from occurring in the first place by
creating societies that embrace and protect individual rights and
liberties. The best tool to establish such societies, she said, is
through the spread of democracy and respect for human rights, because
"cultures inculcated with democratic values do not provide much of an
audience for genocidal tyranny."
If prevention fails, however, Dobriansky said, the crucial first step
in responding to a mass humanitarian violation "is to detect it early
and preempt it through international action." If diplomacy does not
work, then "the principled use of force by the world's democracies is
critical to protecting human rights -- to stopping genocide, or as we
have seen recently, to changing regimes like the Taliban which abuse
their people and promote terror against the world."
In cases where the international community is too late or has failed
to intervene, steps must be taken to bring the perpetrators of
genocide to justice, she said.
"If the domestic judicial system does not have the ability or the will
to administer justice, then other options must be considered including
international criminal tribunals, such as those established for the
crimes in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, or creative ad hoc
mechanisms such as the special court for Sierra Leone."
Dobriansky said it is both unrealistic and inappropriate for the
United States to try to create "mirror images" of itself in other
countries, "[B]ut we should never be afraid to stand up for universal
rights, for the defense of victims, and for what is ultimately in our
national interests."
Following is a transcript of her remarks:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Office of the Under Secretary for Global Affairs
Washington, D.C.
CLOSING REMARKS OF PAULA DOBRIANSKY, UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR
GLOBAL AFFAIRS, TO THE U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
COMMITTEE ON CONSCIENCE SYMPOSIUM ON GENOCIDE PREVENTION, MORALITY AND
THE NATIONAL INTEREST
Monday, May 13, 2002
Thank you, Mr. Zeidman for that kind introduction. Congratulations on
your new position as Chairman of the Holocaust Memorial Council of the
Museum's Governing Board. It is a real honor for me to be here at the
Holocaust Museum, a place that has significant meaning and impact on
all those who visit here. I'm also pleased to be the closing speaker
for this thoughtful and timely symposium on genocide prevention,
morality, and the national interest. I applaud the Committee on
Conscience at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum for bringing
together the eminent speakers you have assembled today. Thank you,
Jerry Shestack and Jerry Fowler, for organizing this important
discussion. A dialogue on how to prevent the types of horrific crimes
against humanity that are documented in this museum is not only
welcome but needed.
I know that earlier today, you heard from experts and officials about
promotion of the national interest through prevention of genocide in
the future. I understand that the discussion was lively, thoughtful,
and substantive. An underpinning of today's discussion was that it is
in every country's interest, not just the interest of the United
States, to prevent genocide and mass murder. In this day and age with
modern communications and television everywhere, it is increasingly
difficult to claim ignorance about cases of mass killings around the
world. We must prevent genocide from happening in the first place, and
by we, I mean countries around the world -- including the United
States. Where, sadly, it occurs before we are able to stop it, we must
hold those responsible accountable for their actions. I look forward
to seeing a summary of today's proceedings from which we can all learn
ways to handle this enormous challenge.
When we speak about the commission of genocide, we must refer to the
Genocide Convention of 1948. Genocide, according to the definition
established in the convention, means: "any of the following acts
committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, national,
ethnic, racial, or religious groups, 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 to prevent births within the group; (e)
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Genocide, in other words, is a crime against a group sharing a common
identity. But when we discuss the prevention of genocide, I think that
it is essential to speak in terms of the individual. The bloody
history of genocides through the ages can each be traced back to a
common moment -- the moment when a man, woman, or child is not thought
of as an individual, but as simply part of a group, as a statistic,
not a human being. We have seen that once a person's individuality is
lost, it becomes much easier to lose all conception of him or her as a
human being -- to see individuals as something less than human, useful
only as scapegoats for a society's problems. This is the kind of
phenomena we saw all too often in the 20th Century -- from Europe to
Asia to Africa.
Therefore, strategies to prevent genocide in the 21st Century must
focus on empowering the individual, on asserting the value of each
human being. Protection of all people can be achieved through the
protection of each person. Creating societies that embrace and protect
individual rights and liberties can help safeguard the world from mass
crimes against humanity. And the best tool to establish such societies
is through the spread of democracy and respect for human rights, both
vigorously secured by the rule of law, recognizing that prevention of
future genocide is bolstered by seeking full accountability for
genocide committed in the past and by laying the groundwork of freedom
against genocide in the future.
America's commitment to promoting democracy throughout the world is
not new, of course. It has been a hallmark of our foreign policy for
years, and, from the first days of the Bush Administration, it has
been a fundamental principle in our agenda. But after the horrific
attacks of September 11, the worldwide need for democracy and the rule
of law took on even greater significance. The September 11 attacks
were brutal reminders of the power of radical leaders to captivate and
control their followers. We all paid an incalculable price in
individual lives that day because of the actions of these hateful
groups. It is in that sense that terrorism and genocide have something
in common: the total, reckless disregard for human life and human
suffering.
The response against those who perpetrate terrorism, like those who
commit genocide, should be a full-fledged effort to hunt them down.
The United States and its allies did that to the Nazi perpetrators of
the Holocaust, albeit belatedly, and we are doing it now to the
architects of global terrorism. While this helps stop further
violence, we must also enact a long-range strategy to prevent genocide
and terrorism from occurring in the first place. That strategy for the
enduring prevention of genocide and terrorism should be rooted in the
spread of democracy and the rule of law.
Genocide is a product of tyranny and totalitarianism. It is made
possible by despots who have the power to villainize and abuse a group
while striking fear in the hearts of anyone who would dare to
challenge them. Where a foundation of democracy exists, we find that
extremism is unable to take root. By foundation, I mean the rule of
law; citizen access to government; an open and transparent government
process; economic freedom; separation of powers among independent
branches of government; religious freedom; a vibrant and independent
media; and a universal respect for human rights. This foundation
provides the very freedom that snuffs out the roots of extremism. And
with that freedom comes a cultural atmosphere in which people cherish
their liberty and are more likely to stand up to protect others whose
liberty is threatened.
Arguably, the most effective deterrent to tyranny comes from the rule
of law, which is so inherent to a democratic system of government.
Pierre Prosper, the United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes
Issues, has aptly characterized the rule of law as "a wall of reason
and humanity against savagery and brutality." The rule of law offers
an effective bar to crimes against humanity because society is
governed by laws and not men. A system of written law checks
tyrannical impulses while guarding the people against arbitrary
exercises of power. The rule of law brings all people, under the laws
of the land and subjects them to the jurisdiction of the courts.
Despots are not above the law, and minorities are not beneath its
protection. Accountability is important to a society struggling with
reconciliation and rebuilding, and also within the international
community, to send the message that such action will not go
unpunished. The rule of law establishes a judicial system to punish
and stop criminal activity before it escalates to mass crimes. Through
these safeguards, genocide can be effectively stopped in its earliest
stages.
Other democratic institutions can also thwart the forces that give
rise to genocide. Citizens who are allowed active, participatory roles
in their own government generally do not fall prey to the tyranny
which often leads to genocide. Tyranny exploits feelings of
powerlessness, luring the disenfranchised by the promise of power. By
contrast, political participation empowers people with the knowledge
that they control their own destinies and the destiny of their nation.
Such an environment is a poor breeding ground for extremism and
intolerance.
Likewise, the shadows and concealment on which perpetrators of
genocide depend are absent in governments that are open and
transparent. Without these cloaks, it is far more difficult to commit
crimes against humanity. Moreover, leaders who would abuse their
authority are not likely to survive the public scrutiny that comes
with democracy.
In addition, totalitarian regimes consolidate power in the hands of a
scant few. Democratic governments disburse power among co-equal
branches of government, each maintaining independence and having the
ability to check abuses of the others. This decentralization of power
greatly decreases the chances that an authoritarian regime can come to
power in the first place or engage in genocide.
Democracy is also predicated on economic freedom that places minimal
barriers on a person's ability to realize his full economic potential.
Countries that establish free economic systems yield a "democracy
dividend" of a more prosperous and developed society. This prosperity
then robs would-be tyrants of their power to draw in the poor and
desperate. As Franklin Roosevelt said, "People who are hungry and out
of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made."
Finally, genocidal forces can be thwarted by a democracy's basic
respect for human rights and the acceptance of equality among all
people. Despots who would squelch fundamental liberties and devalue
individuals have no place in a democracy. What's more, genocide tends
to be a progression of offenses against a disfavored group, starting
with simple deprivations of liberty or property and building to
ultimate mass murder. Governments where protection of human rights is
institutionally ingrained check this progression early on.
Where democratic institutions flourish, a byproduct is a democratic
culture in which the people, as well as the government, become
guardians of human rights. A country's democratic institutions foster
in its people an appreciation for the value of the individual. As a
result, cultures inculcated with democratic values do not provide much
of an audience for genocidal tyranny. Not only do democratic cultures
tend to produce more educated people less likely to succumb to
agitating propaganda and dictatorial control, they also produce
citizens who are more likely to resist any encroachments on the rights
of their fellow citizens. In healthy democratic cultures, the
protection of individual freedom is not exclusively a function of the
government but becomes the responsibility of all citizens. The silent
acquiescence of the majority that genocide depends on is not to be
found in democratic cultures.
The encouragement of democracy and the rule of law, while not a
perfect guard, is an effective preventive measure against genocide.
The United States has long been engaged in assisting efforts to
strengthen the administration of justice -- within both civil and
military institutions -- worldwide. We are looking to the
international community as well to enhance its efforts in this field.
But these are forward-looking and proactive steps. At the same time,
we must consider reactive measures that, while they may not prevent
genocide from occurring in the first place, can minimize and
ultimately end it once it has begun. The crucial first step in
responding to a mass humanitarian violation is to detect it early and
preempt it through international action. We should be vigilant in
identifying patterns of violence that may signal the beginning of
genocide. In this regard, it is essential that we form public-private
partnerships with other sources like non-governmental organizations --
groups who are on the ground and who can provide information from
remote locations. Once such a crisis has been detected, we can then
marshal our diplomatic resources to encourage countries to deal
swiftly and justly with humanitarian crimes within their borders.
If this fails, we should also be prepared to encourage other countries
to act and to use our voice at the United Nations and in the United
Nations Security Council to step up the pressure on non-compliant
countries. However, sometimes well-meaning diplomacy serves only to
extend suffering. The principled use of force by the world's
democracies is critical to protecting human rights -- to stopping
genocide, or as we have seen recently, to changing regimes like the
Taliban which abuse their people and promote terror against the world.
In the past, there has been a tendency to dismiss acts of genocide
because they were occurring far away from our shores or because they
reflected long-standing historical clashes between different ethic
groups or cultures. September 11 taught us many important lessons, but
one of the most important is that we ignore events and developments
overseas at our own peril. The world today is a smaller place because
of mankind's advances in technology, communications, and
transportation.
I believe it was asked earlier in one of today's panels whether the
CNN effect ultimately hurts or helps the cause. Whichever side of the
argument one comes down, the effect is undeniable and cannot be
ignored. I think that whenever the media or other groups highlight
acts of genocide, repression, and extremism, that it is a positive
development. Such evils cannot last long amid the international
spotlight. The more information we get about a far-off country's
repressive rule, the greater the imperative for democracies like ours
to prepare policies that prevent the worst from happening. We cannot
fashion other countries into mirror images of the United States. Such
a goal is unrealistic; in fact, it is inappropriate. But we should
never be afraid to stand up for universal rights, for the defense of
victims, and for what is ultimately in our national interests.
In cases where we are too late or have failed to intervene, we must
react to genocide by bringing its perpetrators to justice. Justice is
crucial to the process of healing and of building a strong, vibrant
society built on the rule of law. The survivors of genocidal violence
must be allowed to resume their lives with the knowledge that they
will not be harmed further and that their tormentors will never again
have the right to walk freely among society. We must endeavor to make
real the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Commit a crime, and the earth
is made of glass. There is no such thing as concealment."
If the domestic judicial system does not have the ability or the will
to administer justice, then other options must be considered including
international criminal tribunals, such as those established for the
crimes in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, or creative ad hoc
mechanisms such as the special court for Sierra Leone. I recently
spoke to the Rwandan Ambassador, a group of Rwandans and friends of
Rwanda, gathered to commemorate that country's horrific genocide.
Though the scars of that dark time will always be there, the knowledge
that justice was being delivered at last was a source of some healing
to them.
Emerson also once said "Every evil to which we do not succumb is a
benefactor." Tragically, there have been far too many genocides to act
as our teachers, to show us the need for creating environments where
individual lives are valued. Lessons of inhumanity have been written
in the blood of innocents. But through places like the Holocaust
Museum and conferences like this, we are learning from our past how to
make the oft-repeated words "Never again" a reality for all time.
Thank you.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
