Genocide meaning

There is little doubt Russia is committing war crimes in Ukraine. Do they amount to genocide?

At the same time, this “magical” power of the word, its unique ability to link current events to the most infamous crimes in human history, means that the debate over its use matters politically regardless of whether it should morally. “That’s a problem because the world needs to pay attention to crimes that are horrific, but just don’t happen to meet the legal definition of ‘genocide.’” In these cases, war crime prosecutions can depend on international authorities that may lack the power or will to actually conduct a serious criminal investigation — see, for instance, how few perpetrators have been prosecuted for crimes during the Syrian civil war. At the same time, she cautions, there are many reasons Germany has not changed its policy on oil and gas sanctions — ranging from a desire to hold some sanctions in reserve in case Russia threatens escalation, to the fact that such a move would cause real economic pain for German citizens. In fact, the invasion itself is clearly one big war crime: International law prohibits wars of territorial conquest, which fall under the crime of “ aggression.” But as of right now, few are joining Biden and Finkel in concluding that a genocide is clearly taking place in Ukraine. In the post-Holocaust world, people committing genocide rarely provide “smoking gun” proof of their thinking — a written-down order or meeting record detailing a plan to exterminate the target group. Though all agree that Russian soldiers have engaged in intentional mass killings, they argue that there’s limited evidence of a systemic plan to exterminate the Ukrainian people. While a handful of experts on war crimes have come to the same conclusion as the president, most experts and international authorities are still unsure. (Russia has denied its soldiers are responsible for the killings in Bucha; on Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said reports of the atrocities there were “fake.”) In the Russian case, establishing that Russian soldiers intentionally killed Ukrainian civilians is not enough to prove genocide. “It’s become clearer and clearer that Putin is just trying to wipe out even the idea of being Ukrainian,” he told reporters.

Between the lines: Even if charges of genocide — or war crimes or crimes against humanity — are brought against an individual, a trial can not be held in the ...

- While countries may want to ensure they have enough evidence, there are also often political and economic concerns at play. The declaration came five years after Myanmar's military intensified its bloody campaign in Rakhine State. - "It's also just sort of hard to discern what intent is," he adds. "You begin to piece together remarks that suggest intent." (President Clinton later expressed regret for this.) The third and main challenge is proving intent. Don't forget: The U.S. and other countries publicly avoided using the term "genocide" in 1994 — even as thousands of Rwandans were being killed every day — after the Clinton administration decided not to intervene. - When it comes to intent, Finkel argues there's been a shift in Russian rhetoric from focusing on what Moscow initially claimed was the "de-Nazification" of Ukraine to "de-Ukrainization." - What happened in Bucha is "not an outlier," Finkel tells Axios. "It's just the tip of the iceberg." - Russia has repeatedly denied it targets civilians and rejected the reports of the atrocities in Bucha. Putin on Tuesday called the reports "fake." Calls to label Russia's actions as genocide have grown louder since reports and images emerged of mass graves and bodies of civilians strewn in the streets of Bucha, a suburb of Kyiv. - Under the Convention, genocide is defined as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

When President Joe Biden declares Russia's Ukraine war "genocide," it isn't just another strong word.

In comments Tuesday, Biden accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of trying to "wipe out the idea of even being a Ukrainian." Other world leaders have not gone as far. Atrocities and targeted campaigns against groups continue around the world, however, and the so-called responsibility to protect is seldom invoked. It's been a main reason leaders limit themselves to angry statements and humanitarian aid. But longstanding U.S. opposition to the International Criminal Court, over worries that U.S. troops could face prosecution there one day, complicates such prosecutions. Just 13% think the U.S. shouldn't be involved at all. He cites history, when Ukraine was part of the Russian empire, and later of the Soviet Union. He called the modern border dividing Russia and Ukraine "our great common misfortune and tragedy." Putin has called his military campaign in Ukraine one of de-Nazification. The International Criminal Court already has started an investigation. That's partly because of a genocide treaty approved by the U.N. General Assembly after World War II, signed by the United States and more than 150 other nations. Lemkin dedicated his life to having genocide recognized and criminalized. The advocates pushed for something that would make the world not just condemn but actually prevent and ensure prosecution for future genocides.