IAGS2017 Session 2

Day 1, 10 July 1330-1500 Session 2

Genocide Prevention II

Location W332, Level 3, Forgan Smith
Chair Deborah Mayersen; University of Wollongong
Climate Change and Mass Atrocity Prevention
Authors Stephen McLoughlin, Liverpool Hope University
Pedram Rashidi, University of Queensland
Abstract While climate change has begun to attract attention amongst genocide scholars, the relationship between climate change and mass atrocities has been largely overlooked. However, we know that circumstances involving desertification and protracted droughts have been a contributing factor to cases of mass violence in the past. We also know that climate predictions suggest more frequent cases of desertification and drought (and other extreme weather events), in many temperate regions where further stress will induce mass displacement. One of the great policy challenges for governments and communities in the 21st century will be how to manage climate change-induced displacement. This presentation makes a contribution to this challenge by conducting a review into two clusters of research. First, it examines IPCC reports to chart the established links between climate change and conflict. Second, we review literature within the field of comparative genocide studies to evaluate the extent to which such scholarship has considered climate change as a potential driver for genocide and other mass atrocities. The purpose of this is to investigate the current status of knowledge on the relationship between climate change and mass atrocities, in an effort to highlight ways that research that research into mass atrocity prevention can be informed by the growing impacts of climate change.
Biography Stephen McLoughlin is a Lecturer in International Relations at Liverpool Hope University. His research interests include mass atrocity prevention, the role of the UN in conceptualising and carrying out prevention, the causes of genocide and mass atrocities, and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Stephen is particularly interested in why it is that mass atrocities do not occur in places where the risk factors associated with such violence are salient. His publications include the monograph, The Structural Prevention of Mass Atrocities, published with Routledge; and the journal article, ‘From Reaction to Resilience in Mass Atrocity Prevention: An Analysis of the 2013 UN Report The Responsibility to Protect: State Responsibility and Prevention, recently published in Global Governance.

With a Master’s degree in material science (physics), Pedram Rashidi gained over 12 years experience in the Iranian and Australian energy industries, both in research and practice, before commencing a PhD on global environmental governance. This research at the University of Queensland (UQ) draws on his experience in the (renewable) energy sector and long-time interest in the philosophy of science and energy policy. Analyzing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports within their institutional context and with regards to their policy implications, Pedram has critically investigated the nexus between knowledge production and policy making in the climate change discourse. Graduation in the program is anticipated for February 2017. Pedram intends to continue his investigation of global environmental governance, as well as the implications of climate change for other areas of International Relations, such as violent conflict.
Building Capacity for Responding to and Preventing Mass Atrocities in Indonesia: Challenges and Opportunities
Authors Ririn Tri Nurhayati, University of Queensland
Abstract Most studies on Indonesia and human rights have viewed Indonesia negatively because of its serious problems in dealing with human rights issues in the past. With the end of the New Order authoritarian regime in 1998, Indonesia began to develop a democratic political system and is currently recognized as the third largest democracy in the world. It is acknowledged that with the Reformasi, there have been positive efforts to promote human rights norms by ratifying international human rights instruments and harmonizing domestic regulations in accordance with international standards. However progress has been slow and there are challenges related to the protection of the population. Some critics in particular highlight the lack of willingness of the Government of Indonesia to address past human rights violations. This paper aims to explain the current progress by assessing two relevant factors. First, it is important to understand the power politics within the decision-making bodies in central government. And second, it is useful to assess the on-going normative discourse regarding human rights, order and justice perceived by the governmental institutions. While acknowledging impediments within state-actors, it is also important to see the significant role of non-state actors including NGOs, academics, think tanks and their networks in advocating the promotion of discourse to prioritize justice, which will become the basis for building capacity to respond and prevent the occurrence of genocide and mass atrocities in the future.
Biography Ririn Tri Nurhayati is a lecturer at the International Relations Department, Gadjah Mada University. She finished her undergraduate study at Gadjah Mada University in 1997. She earned M.Si degree at Gadjah Mada University in 2001 and MA degree in Waseda University, Japan in 2003. Her areas of expertise are international politics, international law and international humanitarian law. Currently she is pursuing doctoral study at the School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland and working on research on Sovereignty and Responsibility in Indonesia. In April 2016, she published an article written collaboratively with Richard Devetak and Tim Dunne, with the title "Bandung 60 Years On: Revolt and Resilience in International Society" in the Australian Journal of International Affairs.

Genocide of Indigenous Peoples in Australia

Location W349, Level 3, Forgan Smith
Chair Dirk Moses; University of Sydney
‘Just a little sacred site’: Memorialising Tasmanian Aboriginal Trauma at Wybalenna and Oyster Cove
Authors Celeste Thorn, Deakin University
Abstract Sites of genocide, traumatic history, and ‘difficult heritage’ have increasingly become mass tourism attractions under the emerging ‘dark tourism’ phenomenon. While the site of Myall Creek in New South Wales, and Risdon Cove in Tasmania are perhaps the most recognised and visited sites of Aboriginal trauma, there are other sites that demonstrate the attempted destruction of Tasmanian Aborigines that are far more obscure. This paper focuses on the indigenous sites of Wybalenna on Flinders Island and Oyster Cove, south of Hobart. These locations were integral to the attempted destruction of Tasmanian Aborigines. In 1833, Wybalenna was the settlement that much of the remaining Indigenous population (an estimated two hundred) were forcibly removed and by 1847 only forty-seven Aborigines were still alive. This scant number were sent back to the Tasmanian mainland and ‘re-settled’ at Oyster Cove, under deplorable living conditions. Today, Oyster Cove is particularly symbolic for Indigenous Tasmanians, who view the site as emblematic of their survival. Wybalenna, as the site of trauma, is not used for the same purposes. At Wybalenna, the chapel and graveyard are all that remain of the Aboriginal settlement with a plaque and recently erected memorial. Batten and Batten have observed that Wybalenna is an insular place of reflection for Indigenous people rather than a site of education. This paper explores the possible rationale of this choice and questions whether this delineation is a cultural choice or perhaps driven by convenience of location and investigates the difficulty in using memorials to foster reconciliation attempts.
Biography Celeste Thorn (B.A., Hons. History) is a PhD candidate at Deakin University, Victoria. Her thesis is a comparative analysis of sites of trauma that are embedded in much larger processes of destruction, exploring the contested and politicised nature of memorialisation and commemoration. Celeste is the Academic Co-ordinator for Deakin University’s Contemporary Histories Research Group, and a sessional tutor of undergraduate History units. She has a forthcoming chapter in an edited collection Unsettling Place and Space in 2017.
Sorry Seemed to be the Hardest Word: Public Opinion of the Apology to the Stolen Generations and its Effect on Transitional Justice
Authors Eliott Hull, University of Amsterdam
Abstract Transitional justice (TJ) is often seen as being either a punishment for a perpetrator or a process to repair the relationship between perpetrators and victims. Often ignored are the general public, here used to mean those who are neither victim nor perpetrator. This paper seeks to address this oversight in one specific case by examining the changes in public opinion towards the apology to the Stolen Generations in Australia between 1997-2008. Here, the general public is the non-Indigenous public of Australia, most of whom were not in involved in the policies that led to the Stolen Generations. Public opinion is examined by an analysis of Letters to the Editor in major Australian newspapers during this period, and the Sorry Books, a primary resource of grassroots apologies made by the general public in 1997. Prime Minister John Howard’s refusal to apologise became a symbol of the Australian government’s poor attempts to reconcile past colonial injustices and the current social inequalities suffered by the Indigenous community, and is therefore highly relevant to the TJ process. The paper will argue that opinion towards the apology fluctuated drastically between its suggestion in 1997 and its delivery in 2008, due to fluctuating political opinion, and changes in attitude towards reconciliation with Indigenous Australians. It will conclude that while the apology was an important step in reconciliation, and was believed to be so by many of the general public, its actual and perceived effects on the transitional justice process for the Stolen Generations have been negligible.
Biography Having studied history all my life, I studied for my bachelor’s degree at the University of Sussex, graduating in 2015. In my second year, I was accepted onto the Junior Research Assistant programme, an undergraduate research scheme. I worked with Dr Caroline Sharples and completed a project entitled ‘The Holocaust Outside The History Classroom’ which examined the role of UK museums in Holocaust education. In my final year, I wrote my dissertation on US recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the age of the War on Terror. In the same year, I was accepted onto the Masters in Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Amsterdam. I am currently finishing my thesis on public opinion of the apology to the Stolen Generation, on which I will base my presentation. My interests in the field of genocide studies fall mostly in the aftermath of genocide, with a focus on apology, memory and recognition.

Understanding and Recognition of Genocide

Location W431, Level 4, Forgan Smith
Chair Ahmed Ziauddin; International Crimes Strategy Forum
Political Accountability over US Inaction on Genocide: A ‘Sold’ Game?
Authors Eyal Mayroz, University of Sydney
Abstract Domestic political accountability is a primary instrument of democratic representation; a control mechanism for rewarding or punishing elected representatives based on their performance. Yet, deliberate ‘failures’ by US administrations to translate into action manifest expressions of public support for strong policies on genocide have never been held to account by the citizenry. Why was this? Were victims of genocide left to their own because of genuinely insurmountable challenges faced by otherwise willing interveners? Or were policymakers and publics in the US recycling expressions of concern and condemnation, and sending humanitarian aid to mask deliberate failings of the former and ease the consciences of the latter? I have developed a methodology to study how US policymakers have interpreted public attitudes regarding action on genocide, and how they have used these interpretations, ostensibly, to try to gain domestic legitimacy for their preferred policies and avoid being held to account for inaction. Investigating legitimation by deliberate framings of information, I looked at how different administrations have endeavoured to represent to the public genocidal, or alleged genocidal events (‘crisis’, ‘conflict’, ‘civil war’, ‘tragedy’, ‘disaster’, ‘genocide’, ‘ethnic cleansing’, etc.); set public agendas; control the discussion of alternative policy options; articulate the relevance of moral imperatives to formulation of US policies; and assign responsibility (or blame) for actions or inaction. In my presentation I will apply the methodology to the policymaking process of the US policy on Darfur during 2004, both before and after the announcement of the official US genocide determination on the crisis.
Biography Dr Eyal Mayroz is a Lecturer in the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney, Australia. His research has covered relationships between politics, ethics and the Law in the prevention of mass atrocities; focus on influences of US public opinion and the media over American foreign policy on genocide. His upcoming book is titled ‘Ever Again?’ America’s Failure to Halt Genocide, From Bosnia to Darfur. Eyal’s background in counter-terrorism drives his new research project: Empathy vs. Fear: Rethinking the Role of the Citizenry in Atrocity Prevention. Eyal is a member of the Genocide Prevention Advisory Network, an international network of experts on the causes, consequences, and prevention of genocide and other mass atrocities.
Understanding ‘Genocide’: Contribution of the International Crimes Tribunals of Bangladesh
Authors M Sanjeeb Hossain, University of Warwick
Abstract The International Crimes Tribunals (ICTs) of Bangladesh were established in March 2010 under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973 [ICTA’73], a trailblazing domestic legislative instrument enacted in the early 1970s to prosecute the perpetrators of genocide and other international crimes. In the years ahead, it is likely that the ICTs will be remembered as the last definitive attempt to deliver justice to the victims of genocide during the war between Bangladesh (the then East Pakistan) and Pakistan in 1971. Out of the twenty-seven cases tried till date, the accused have been found guilty of ‘genocide’ in ten cases. The objective of this paper is to assess the contribution of the ICTs towards the understanding of genocide. This is achieved by exploring two interrelated topics. ‘Genocide’ defined in Section 3(2)(c) of the ICTA’73 embodies the content and spirit of the classical and widely accepted definition enshrined in Article II of the Genocide Convention (GC), with two points of departure. The first part of this paper evaluates the ICTA’73 definition of ‘genocide’ by taking these points of departure into consideration. It asks whether if the inclusion of ‘political group’ as a protected group violates the principle of legality and also what has been traditionally understood as genocide. This is followed by the second part of the paper which traces the understanding and development of genocide in the ten trials where the accused have been convicted of the crime.
Biography M Sanjeeb Hossain is a Commonwealth Scholar currently pursuing his doctoral studies at the Warwick Law School where he is also a Part-time Teacher of Constitutional and Administrative Law. Sanjeeb completed his MSc in Criminology and Criminal Justice from Oxford University and LL.B. from the BRAC Law School. He currently serves in the editorial board of Legal Issues and is a member of the International Crimes Strategy Forum (ICSF). Sanjeeb has in the past served as Researcher to the Chief Prosecutor at the International Crimes Tribunals of Bangladesh.
‘Genocide Recognition’ within the Framework of the UN: Meaning, Purpose, and Consequences
Authors Rayhan Rashid, International Crimes Strategy Forum
Abstract Recognition of genocide in reference to the UN and other intergovernmental bodies and governments is probably one of the most commonly advocated justice agendas advanced by various victims’ groups and justice-activists. This paper proposes to explore the notion in the context of the United Nations. While the organisation’s role as the guardian of international human rights, and its commitment towards prevention of genocide (a key objective of the Genocide Convention 1948), are quite straight-forward to pinpoint within its legal and institutional framework, its role or obligation (if any) towards recognising ongoing or past genocides is somewhat illusive. The three questions that I intend to ask are: What exactly is meant, and generally understood, by ‘genocide recognition’ and what such a recognition might entail in the context of UN’s engagement towards a given genocide? Does recognition matter in preventing, intervening, or prosecuting a genocide? Whether there are any express (or implied) provision, procedure, and practice within the framework of UN that can be taken as a commitment or obligation to recognise genocide? The arguments that frame the above lines of inquiry are: one, accurate determination of the nature of a humanitarian crisis is a prerequisite to addressing it in any form; two, the obligation of the State Parties to the Genocide Convention to prevent or prosecute a genocide is corollary to UN’s obligation to facilitate justice initiatives, whether international or domestic; three, recognition and acknowledgement are attributes of justice, essentially lending legitimacy to any justice initiative.
Biography Rayhan Rashid obtained his doctorate in socio-legal studies from the University of Oxford. He contributes his expertise in leading the research, documentation, and advocacy projects at the International Crimes Strategy Forum (ICSF), which he founded. ICSF is an independent global network of experts, activists, and researchers operating in the fields of justice, international crimes, and global terrorism. Rayhan Rashid has taught law at the University of Bristol and University of Buckingham.

Challenges Facing the ECCC

Location W426, Level 4, Forgan Smith
Chair Rebecca Gidley; Australian National University
Forced Marriage, International Criminal Law and Genocide in Cambodia
Authors Melanie O'Brien, University of Queensland
Abstract There is much debate over the definition of genocide, with legal scholars and practitioners restricted to the Genocide Convention (or Rome Statute) definition, and other scholars taking a broad interpretation of what constitutes genocide. One of the mass atrocity events subject to definitional controversy is the Khmer Rouge period in Cambodia. One of the crimes committed under the Khmer Rouge was forced marriage. Forced marriage was confronted in the Special Court for Sierra Leone, and is currently a significant portion of Case 002/02 at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). This paper will demonstrate the very different manner in which forced marriage can occur by comparing the Sierra Leone and Cambodian contexts: ‘bush wives’ vs 3rd-party imposed marriage. Using alternative theories of genocide definition such as Feierstein’s ‘genocide as social practice’, it will discuss how the specific context of the crime of forced marriage as it was carried out under the Khmer Rouge can contribute to our understanding of whether genocide occurred during their regime. In doing so, this paper will demonstrate how lawyers can use non-legal genocide theories to be more creative in their interpretation of statute definitions in order to expand current definitional limitations.
Biography Dr Melanie O’Brien is a Research Fellow at the TC Beirne Law School, and Researcher in the Asia Pacific Centre for Responsibility to Protect, University of Queensland (UQ), Australia. Her research examines the connection between human rights violations and the genocide process. Melanie sits on the IAGS Advisory Board and is co-convenor of the 2017 IAGS Conference at UQ. She is an Australian Red Cross QLD International Humanitarian Law Committee member, and is on the Editorial Boards of Human Rights Review and IAGS journal Genocide Studies and Prevention. She is the author of Criminalising Peacekeepers: Modernising National Approaches to Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (2017, Palgrave). Melanie’s previous work includes Anti-Slavery Australia (UTS); the ARC Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security (Griffith University); the National Human Rights Institution of Samoa; and the Legal Advisory Section of the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court. She is an admitted legal practitioner.
Gendering Mass Atrocity: The Progress and Challenges of Prosecuting Sexual and Gender-based Violence of the Khmer Rouge Era
Authors Theresa de Langis, American University
Abstract Mass atrocity tribunals are fundamentally an official historical account of events. Thus, what they include and exclude as evidence and crimes deeply impacts how we memorialize and learn from past conflicts. While the Khmer Rouge period (1975-1979) is regarded as an example where “rape is not inevitable in war,” a growing body of research is demonstrating the fallacy of this position and the links of patterns of abuse to other conflicts in the Southeast Asia region. This paper examines the successes and ongoing efforts of survivor-focused feminist advocacy to include the full spectrum of gender-based violence as part of the adjudications of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), today hearing alleged crimes against senior leaders of the Khmer Rouge state. While the court is hearing the charge of forced marriages and the enforced rapes within those marriages, excluded from proceedings are rapes outside of forced marriage, as well as forced pregnancy, sexual slavery, and myriad of other gender-based violations, most often committed with impunity. The paper conclude with a focus on the ECCC’s progress to date and challenges ahead in presenting the full contours of the Cambodian Genocide, with a view assessing justice served to survivors and precedent set for prevention. As we move forward into an ever more complex world, where sexual and gender-based violations are clearly integral to the radical ideologies of armed groups such as ISIS, leveraging the contributions of the ECCC may never have been more urgently needed.
Biography Theresa de Langis, PhD, is a senior specialist on women’s human rights in conflict and post-conflict scenarios. She has undertaken international assignments throughout Asia, including as acting deputy country director for UN Women in Afghanistan. Since 2012, she has been based in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where she has undertaken an independent feminist research, the Cambodian Women’s Oral History Project (www.cambodianwomensoralhistory.org), collecting testimonials of sexual- and gender-based crimes under the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime (1970-1979)—a little understood aspect of the mass atrocity. She has published a variety of academic and policy articles and is a frequent speaker at national, regional and global conferences related to human rights and women, peace and security. She has served as Technical Advisor to Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum on Gender, Genocide and Oral History. In 2016, she joined the faculty at American University of Phnom Penh as Associate Professor of Global Affairs and Humanities.
The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia: An Assessment
Authors Gregory Stanton, George Mason University
Abstract In 2006, twenty-seven years after the fall of the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, five of its leaders were brought to trial for crimes against humanity and genocide. The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) were built after lengthy negotiations between the Royal Government of Cambodia and the United Nations. A majority of judges are Cambodian, but convictions, acquittals, and other important decisions must be made by a supermajority that includes the ECCC’s international judges. The ECCC has used a combination of Cambodian criminal procedure, the procedures of UN tribunals, and the International Criminal Court. Over 500,000 Cambodians have attended the trials, which have been nationally broadcast by radio, television, and the internet. The ECCC and the Documentation Center for Cambodia have conducted extensive educational programs to inform Cambodians about the trials. This paper will be presented by the founder of the Cambodian Genocide Project in 1982, who also drafted the internal rules for the ECCC. He will assess the successes and shortcomings of the ECCC, and will speak about lessons learned for future prosecutions of crimes against humanity and genocide.
Biography Gregory H. Stanton is Research Professor in Genocide Studies and Prevention at George Mason University, Arlington, Virginia. Dr. Stanton is the founder (1999) and president of Genocide Watch (website: www.genocidewatch.com), the founder (1982) and director of the Cambodian Genocide Project, and the founder (1999) and Chair of the Alliance Against Genocide. He was the President (2007 - 2009) of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Dr. Stanton served in the State Department (1992-1999), where he drafted the United Nations Security Council resolutions that created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Stanton won the W. Averell Harriman award for "extraordinary contributions to the practice of diplomacy exemplifying intellectual courage," based on his dissent from U.S. policy on the Rwandan genocide. He wrote the State Department paper on ways to bring the Khmer Rouge to justice, and drafted the rules of procedure for the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

Film Session A

Location Moot Court W237, Level 2, Forgan Smith
Night and Fog (Nuit et brouillard) (1955)
Director Alain Resnais
Runtime 31 minutes
Abstract Called the greatest film of all time by director Francois Truffaut, this legendary documentary from 1955 was directed by Alain Resnais, one of the pivotal figures in the ‘New Wave’ that revolutionised French cinema in the 1950s. Though only thirty minutes in length, the film is devastating in its impact. Night and Fog refers to the arrival of prisoners in Auschwitz under the cover of darkness, and also the ultimate failure of the Nazis at Nuremberg to take responsibility for it. Written by Jean Cayrol, a Holocaust survivor, and poetically narrated by Michel Bouquet, its gruesome images seem like a surreal nightmare.
A Secret Genocide (2008)
Director Alexandre Dereims
Runtime 53 minutes
Abstract For 60 years, in the midst of the hostile South Burman jungle, the Karen people have fought a desperate war for survival. They are an ethnic minority in a country that does not tolerate difference; they also live amidst valuable ruby mines and teak forests. Since the Burmese capital was moved south from Rangoon, the military junta has targeted them for eradication. This is the powerful and haunting story of a secret genocide.