National Interest And Sovereignty Paper Essay

The United Nations failed Rwanda, in a time of need they abandoned the Rwandan people giving them no physical protection. Sadly, things go wrong with the slaughter of almost 800,000 Rwanda people, left defenseless in a country where no one outside cared. U.N. troops were present as only “peace-keepers.” The dispute was between the Hutus and Tutsis people could of been controlled if the U.N. changed their position, but the result could bring more consequences. This conflict between the two social groups in Rwanda,was left to be resolved on its own with many lives lost.

The Sovereignty Solution is the book of choice that was evaluated. This book presents to the readers a radical way to deal with strategy – a persuasive, credible and clear contention recommending a basic and significant move in the way Americans characterize their nation 's strategy. The authors perceive that despite their considerations and recommendations are not the truly the ultimate solution, they may in any event awaken some truly needed debate relating to the issue. All through the content, the authors construct their case for the radical move in procedure in a terse and reasonable form. In the book The Sovereignty Solution by Simons, McGraw and Lauchengco, the fundamental subject is that American individuals need to distinguish what truly makes them American, and as Americans, they need to perceive their qualities and embrace them. The authors offer accentuation to the requirement for America to go against new policy when managing different nations: respect the sovereignty of the United States and the United States will respect yours.

Throughout the 20th century, numerous acts of genocides have attempted to bring the complete elimination and devastation of large groups of people originating from various particular ethnicities. With these genocides occurring in many regions of the world, the perpetrators often organizing such crimes, have historically been larger and more powerful than the victims themselves. Often being the government and its military forces. However, the lack of international response associated with these genocides, further contributed to the devastating outcomes. On April 6,1994, the fastest killing spree of the century took place in Rwanda against the Tutsi minority population. With many warning signs having already been proclaimed prior to the start of the Rwandan genocide, I believe that with international interference, this bloodshed could have ultimately been prevented.

In the case of the Rwandan Genocide, the Hutus and Tutsis resented each other due to this innate behavior, and Belgium amplified it further. However, these wired tendencies can be disposed of with nurturing. Therefore, it is essential in such cases that the different groups find a middle ground because a distinction between “us and them” only develops into further discrimination. Hence, it is pivotal to spot signs of genocide as a means to prevent it. Secondly, the lack of international response during the Rwandan genocide serves to highlight the significance of outside intervention.

In 1994, genocide unfolded in Rwanda claiming the lives of more than 700,000 Tutsi massacred at the hands of Hutu extremist, while the entire world stood by and watched. Some would argue this event was a result of civil unrest between the Tutsi and Hutu stemming from ancient

Nevertheless, they failed to prevent this ridiculous genocide because of their lack of attempt and lack of effort to stop it. On the fourteenth-anniversary of the genocide, the UN’s thoughts go out to the victims who have been traumatized, hurt, or dead during Rwanda’s Genocide. Quote UN secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon’s message “It is often those who most need their rights protected, who also need to be informed that the Declaration exists -- and that it exists for them.”- This message was a little too late after hundreds of thousands of people have been brutally massacred in the genocide in Rwanda. Though the UN seemed to have convinced the people in Rwanda that they were doing their best to stop this, nevertheless, the UN is respectively responsible for their inability to keep peace among the ethnic tribes (Hutus and Tutsis). (M2PressWIRE, 2008)

The United States is classifies as a Democracy, what classifies as a democracy is many things. Included in Democracy is Popular Sovereignty, which defines as the principle that the authority of a state and its government is created and sustained by the consent of its people, through their elected representatives (Wikipedia, 2016). Incorporated of Popular Sovereignty is Represented Democracy, elections are free and fair, the people participate in the political process, high quality information is available, and more. What stands out as this upcoming election is the people participate in the political process. Over the years, voter turnout has been all over the place. It is our rights as people to vote, this is Suffrage. Many citizens fail on

This investigation studies two of the causes of the 1994 genocide of Rwanda. The two causes are examined in order to see to what extent each contributed to the genocide. The social and ethnic conflicts between two Rwandan groups called the Hutus and the Tutsis caused violent disputes and riots. The assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana is often thought of as the event that sparked the mass murders. Did the assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana influence the Rwandan genocide of 1994 more than the ongoing social and ethnic conflicts?

With this conceded class distinction came the fight for reigning ability, and amidst this power vacuum, Rwandans fell victim to conflicting groups and crime, the eventual building blocks that lead to the massacre of 800,000 civilians. The origins of this ethnic loathing and in turn ethnic genocide can be secured to European colonialism, where those who arrived to colonize and yield the wealth of western knowledge, instead carried racist beliefs. Through this haunting event in history, when foreign governments unfittingly place their ideologies in unknown territory, revealed is how uninvited nations can destabilize a state by stimulating ethnic warfare, causing it to collapse and crumble through conflict.

In this paper I will examine the United Nation Security Council attempts at intervention in Rwanda. I will point out the interventions

In 1994, Rwanda’s population was made up of three ethnic groups, the Hutus, the Tutsi, and the Twas. Hutu extremists blamed the Tutsi for their country’s social, economic, and political problems. Because of this, The Hutu extremists decided to kill the Tutsi and the Hutus who were opposed to the extremists. “In the early 1990s, hutu extremists within Rwanda’s political elite blamed the entire Tutsi minority population for the country’s increasing social, economic, and political pressures.” This shows that human rights are being violated because one ethnic group decided to blame a minority population for their country’s growing problems. The extremists decided they wanted control back and because of this they felt it was justified to kill as

Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, ethnic, political, or cultural group”. In Rwanda for example, the Hutu-led government embraced a new program that called for the country’s Hutu people to murder anyone that was a Tutsi (Gourevitch, 6). This new policy of one ethnic group (Hutu) that was called upon to murder another ethnic group (Tutsi) occurred during April through June of 1994 and resulted in the genocide of approximately 800,000 innocent people that even included women and children of all ages. In this paper I will first analyze the origins/historical context regarding the discontent amongst the Hutu and Tutsi people as well as the historical context as to why major players in the international

Genocide is one of the evillest moral crimes any ruling authority such as a government can commit against its people and it happens more than we think. A general definition of Genocide is the intention to destroy or murder people because of their race, beliefs, or even political and economic status. As we have been taught in this course Raphael Lemkin, created the term ‘Genocide’ 1944. Lemkin combined the ancient Greek word ‘genos’ which means race and the Latin word ‘cide’ which translates to killing. There are many examples of genocide in the world but the most recognizable is that of the Holocaust and how the German powers that be sought and attempted to kill all Jews. A recent example is the Rwandan Genocide in 1994 where the assassination of Juvénal Habyarimana caused a violent reaction resulting in mass killings. In efforts to reduce Genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (UNCG) was adopted by the United Nations in 1948 and was placed in force in 1951. On July 1, 2002 the International Criminal Court (ICC) came into force. The ICC not only accepted the UNCG’s definition of Genocide but expanded it to include crimes against humanity such as enslavement, deportation, torture, rape, enforced disappearance and apartheid. There have been many organizations created throughout the world to defend and prevent genocide and even communities, religions and even colleges are forming organizations and these are just some examples of how

The analysis of the genocides that took place both in Rwanda and Sudan’s Darfur region exhibit some similarities as well as differences. The character of violence was similar in both cases, but in Rwanda the violence was more intense, participatory, and extraordinary. The violence in these two places took place in an environment that had experienced civil wars. It was a period of political transition which was further aggravated by ethnic nationalism and a conflict of ethnic populations that were living in close proximity. However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on

Sovereignty Sovereignty refers to ultimate and absolute authority designated to either an individual or an institutional body. The term sovereignty could be contested due to the fact that there is no universally agreed definition. Thomas Hobbes defined what he considered the basis of a political body as 'the most high and perpetual.' (Hobbes, quoted in Heywood, 1997, p26.)