With reference to the Rwandan genocide, critically examine the contributions of strategic approaches to explaining the phenomenon of genocide.
Understanding the phenomenon of genocide is extremely important for policy-makers and academic alike so that we can better understand why such atrocities occur with the aim of preventing them in the future. It is therefore necessary to critically evaluate current theoretical approaches to expose weakness and strengths allowing the academic discipline to progress shedding new light on the phenomenon. Until more recently the “first generation” political science literature explaining mass killings has traditionally focused on sociological and psychological approaches, looking at group divisions, regime
…show more content…
Through combining the central arguments of Valentino and Barnes, two eminent advocates of a strategic understanding of mass killings, I will apply a strategic framework to the case of Rwanda. This will highlight its explanatory value in explaining the first causes of genocide and instrumental reasons for its development at the elite levels. Through this analysis, I will also expose weaknesses in the strategic perspective as it lacks important sociological and psychological explanations for the mass killing, failing to provide a comprehensive explanation for the Rwandan genocide. I will conclude that the study of the Rwandan genocide would ultimately benefit from a more holistic approach encompassing strategic, sociological and psychological …show more content…
3). First, genocide tended to be explained as a result of deep social divisions which allowed for the development of hatred between groups. This claim was discredited due to the existence of numerous societies throughout history characterized by social stratification which do not fall victim to genocide. Jim Crow South in the USA was one of the mostly openly racist and divided societies yet no genocide occurred (Valentino, 2011). Furthermore, genocides occur in homogenous societies and, further still, deep social divisions are often the consequence of the process of genocide (Valentino, 2005, pp. 16-22). Secondly, a common explanation of genocide as occurring following national crises and as a result of scapegoating a particular group, cannot be substantiated since national crises are common and genocide is comparatively rare (Valentino, 2005, p. 26). Thirdly, some academics claim regime type explains mass killings; genocide was more likely where there were totalitarian governments. Valentino dismissed the explanatory relevance of this claim noting the numerous societies with totalitarian regimes that do not follow a path of genocide. (Democracies?) (Valentino, 2005, pp.