SSRN id728438.pdf

Aperçu du fichier PDF ssrn-id728438.pdf - page 2/30

Page 1 23430

Aperçu texte

William C. Bradford, Acknowledging and Rectifying American Indian Genocide
Sadly, the promise of “Never again!” has been broken seriatim. A train of genocides in
Timor, Cambodia, Iraq, Bosnia, Rwanda, Congo, and now the Darfur region of Sudan4 is written
in blood upon the pages of post-World War II history. Why, sixty years after the liberation of
Auschwitz, does genocide remain “too much with us”?5 Anthropologists conclude that mankind
is atavistic, and that genocide will bedevil us for so long as resources are finite upon earth and
contending human collectives battle over them.6 Lawyers advise that enforcement of the
prohibition of genocide requires effective rules and institutions, and that above all perpetrators
must be apprehended and brought to justice.7 Political scientists explain inactivity in the face of
genocide as a rational response to an absence of actionable interests: simply put, what happens to
peoples in far-flung corners of the Earth is inconsequential so long as it does not threaten the
physical security or economic well-being of the West.8 Perhaps all or none are correct; at any
rate, Kuwait is spared, but Bosnia is bled white before it is rescued, and Rwanda and the Sudan
are left to burn. “Never again!” is at best a bromide quaffed to assuage the consciences of those
made uncomfortable, but not too uncomfortable, by the reprise of mass murder motivated by
hatred of a targeted group. Lemkin’s contribution to the lexicon of law and moral philosophy is
a bust.
Can we do better? Is it possible to reinvigorate our commitment to eradicating the
ultimate crime or, at the very least, to punishing and, better still, deterring would-be perpetrators?
If the lessons of Nuremburg have been smothered under a mountain of Srebrenicas—a village in
Bosnia where, in 1995, Bosnian Serb forces machine-gunned 8000 Muslim men and boys for the
crime of being Muslim9—what reason is there to repose our hopes in the International Criminal
Court, a permanent tribunal with the jurisdiction to punish the authors of genocide? Unless we
can awaken the moral indignation that encouraged the Allies to hang the architects of the
Holocaust by the necks until they were dead, how will we inspire the contemporary community


See (chronicling the ongoing genocide against non-Muslim Sudanese by governmentbacked Islamic paramilitary groups).
See William Wordsworth, The World is Too Much With Us (1807).
See, e.g., Thomas Robert Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798); KONRAD LORENZ, ON AGGRESSION
See, e.g., William Bradford, In the Minds of Men: A Theory of Compliance with the Laws of War, 37 ARIZ. ST. L.J. 1243
(2005) (summarizing various theories of international legal compliance). The United Nations Security Council has created ad
hoc tribunals to prosecute perpetrators of international crimes, including genocide, committed in the former Yugoslavia and
Rwanda, and several individuals have been convicted. See, e.g., Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstic, Case No. IT-98-33-A,
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (Appeals Chamber) April 19, 2004; Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu,
Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Judgment, Sept. 2, 1998.
See William Bradford, The Western European Union, Yugoslavia, and the (Dis)Integration of the EU, The New Sick Man of
Europe, 24 B. C. INT’L & COMP. L. J. 1 (2000).
For a discussion of the Srebrenica massacre, see DAVID ROHDE, ENDGAME: THE BETRAYAL AND FALL OF