Example collocations logo

Genocide in sentence

441 examples of Genocide in a sentence

The Holocaust began with words, not mass killings We must remember how the poison of anti-Semitism and racism, projected through mass media, and through entire political, cultural and educational systems, led a continent into mass violence and genocide.
UNESCO was created 70 years ago for this purpose, and it leads a global program for Holocaust education and genocide prevention, working with governments and teachers to instill this history in classrooms.
Genocide cannot be defended on the grounds of pluralism.
The next big step was the emergence of the concept of humanitarian intervention after the genocide in Rwanda and the Balkan wars in the 1990’s.
Following the end of the Rwandan genocide, the heavy burden of rebuilding a devastated society was borne by the country's women.
The Armenian genocide accompanied the demise of Ottoman power.
From India’s point of view, US indulgence of Pakistan became overt hostility when the US sent the Seventh Fleet into the Bay of Bengal in support of the Pakistani genocide in Bangladesh in 1971.
Clinton, meanwhile, shamefully abandoned Somalia after the deaths of American soldiers in Mogadishu – and did nothing in the face of Rwanda’s genocide.
In April, Britain’s secretary of state for international development, Priti Patel, equated Kiir’s “scorched earth policy” and tribal targeting to acts of genocide.
On the one hand, the fact that an international tribunal has pronounced on the responsibility of a state in the matter of genocide is an undeniably positive development.
Although the Court ruled that genocide had taken place, it decided that Serbia was not responsible under international law.
According to the Court, the Bosnian Serb generals who were guilty of this genocide, the various Mladic’s and Kristic’s, were neither acting as Serbia’s agents nor receiving specific instructions from Belgrade.
The genocide could not therefore be imputed to Serbia, even if the Serbian government was paying salaries to Mladic and his colleagues, as well as providing them with financial and military assistance.
Nor was Serbia guilty of complicity, because, though it exercised considerable influence over Mladic and his people, it did not know, at the moment when the genocide was taking place that such a crime was being committed.
Having “absolved” Serbia from the principal crime, the ICJ offered a sort of “consolation prize” to Bosnia, affirming that the killings in Srebrenica had the character of genocide – a conclusion already reached by the ICTY.
Moreover, according to the ICJ, Serbia violated international law by failing to prevent genocide, because, though it could have thwarted the massacres, it did not, and subsequently did not help the ICTY arrest Mladic (who, notoriously, is still hiding in Serbia).
To decide whether Mladic acted on Serbia’s account when he was planning and ordering the Srebrenica massacre, the Court demanded proof that Serbian officials sent him specific “instructions” to commit this act of genocide.
More importantly, the ICJ’s decision that Serbia is responsible for not having prevented a genocide in which it was not complicit makes little sense.
According to the Court, Serbia was aware of the very high risk of acts of genocide and did nothing.
But Serbia was not complicit, the Court argued, because “it has not been proven” that the intention of committing the acts of genocide at Srebrenica “had been brought to Belgrade’s attention.”
The fundamental problem with the ICJ’s decision is its unrealistically high standard of proof for finding Serbia to have been legally complicit in genocide.
And if former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic were alive, he would be absolved of the charge of genocide.
By destabilizing the region, the war enabled the rise of the Islamic State, which at its height occupied a substantial slice of Iraqi territory, beheading its opponents, attempting genocide against the Yazidi minority, and spreading terrorism around the world.
But the run-up to the plebiscite has been fraught, with Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide in Darfur, seeking to delay, disrupt, and overshadow it.
Military capability is also needed to meet the global responsibility to protect citizens at risk of genocide and other mass-atrocity crimes if no lesser option is available and if intervening will do more good than harm, as would have been the case in Rwanda in 1994.
Terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, genocide, poverty, hunger, global warming, huge natural disasters, and the spread of deadly diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis all exemplify global challenges that require multilateral solutions.
What exactly are we doing if we insist on Turkey’s acknowledgement that the Armenian genocide did take place as a condition of its membership in the European Union?
For example, when Western countries discouraged their oil companies from dealing with Sudan’s government because of its inadequate response to the genocide in Darfur, China was quick to buy up the country’s oil.
For example, failure of management reform would fuel demands by the US Congress to withhold America’s contributions to the UN budget – a policy that would greatly undermine America’s own interests, such as the planned expansion of the mission to stop genocide in Darfur.
After the war and genocide in Rwanda, for example, the country’s government required that all development partners work according to the government’s agenda.
BackNext