January 6, 2011

Lawrence Woocher, senior program officer in Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention, talks about the risk of genocide in Côte d'Ivoire and USIP's Genocide Prevention Task Force.

• Last week it was reported that an official from the Côte d’Ivoire warned the country was at risk for genocide as post-election turmoil continues. As we follow developments, what are the early warning signs of genocide?
• What mechanisms are in place for the U.S. and the international community to monitor and prevent genocides?
• What work is USIP doing on genocide prevention and civilian protection?

Last week it was reported that an official from the Côte d’Ivoire warned the country was at risk for genocide as post-election turmoil continues. As we follow developments, what are the early warning signs of genocide?

Warning of genocide is far from an exact science. However, based on studies of past cases, we can identify several risk factors. Virtually all instances of genocide occur in the context of significant political instability—i.e., a major internal conflict or an abrupt shift to a more radical or authoritarian regime. Having a history of genocide, an autocratic regime, and systematic discrimination led by the state are also associated with elevated risk of genocide. Once a country is recognized to be at relatively high risk, identifying near-term warning signs requires deeper understanding of the particular situation: who are the key players, what are their interests and perceived threats, what means do they have at their disposal, where do they draw their political and material support, etc. Observers should watch for signs of organization, preparation, and mobilization toward mass violence, recognizing that the nature of these steps may differ substantially from case to case. For example, mobilizing foot soldiers will look very different depending on whether leaders rely on youth gangs or official security forces to carry out attacks.

The current political crisis in Côte d’Ivoire combined with its history of identity-related conflict and reports of atrocities provide ample reason to be concerned about possible escalation of violence against civilians. At the same time, however, it is important to recognize that the term “genocide” is often invoked because of its rhetorical power—to raise public attention and rally political support. Most ethnic or religious violence does not amount to genocide. Nevertheless, the situation in Côte d’Ivoire merits close monitoring for signs that the political conflict could metastasize into large-scale targeted violence against civilian populations.

Back to Top

What mechanisms are in place for the U.S. and the international community to monitor and prevent genocides?

At the United Nations, the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide (former USIP senior fellow Francis Deng) has a mandate to provide early warning and recommend preventive actions. The Secretary-General has also appointed a special adviser to focus on the “responsibility to protect,” a concept endorsed by heads of state and government at the 2005 World Summit. The two special advisers issued a joint statement on Côte d’Ivoire last week expressing “grave concern” and calling special attention to reports of inflammatory speech and incitement to violence. Several other U.N. officials with human rights mandates, including the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, have raised concerns about alleged violations in Côte d’Ivoire and cited the possibility of individual criminal accountability. In addition, the mandate of the U.N. peacekeeping operation in Côte d’Ivoire includes the protection of civilians “under imminent threat of physical violence, within its capabilities and its areas of deployment.”

Several offices in the U.S. government will be monitoring the situation in Côte d’Ivoire with a focus on protecting civilians and preventing atrocities. The Obama administration appointed the first Director for War Crimes and Atrocities to work in the White House and coordinate policy across agencies to prevent mass atrocities and genocide. At the State Department, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, the Office of War Crimes Issues, and the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization are each important participants in discussions about atrocity prevention. Given the presence of a U.N. peacekeeping operation in Côte d’Ivoire, the Bureau of International Organization Affairs and the U.S. Mission to the U.N. will undoubtedly be playing important roles as well. Last but certainly not least, the State Department’s Africa Bureau is the central node for formulating and implementing U.S. policy toward the region, an especially important perspective given the roles of neighboring countries and regional organizations in efforts to resolve the crisis in Côte d’Ivoire.

Back to Top

What work is USIP doing on genocide prevention and civilian protection?

Following its role in convening the Genocide Prevention Task Force, USIP has been engaged in a variety of efforts on these subjects. We have organized several meetings for the genocide prevention adviser at the U.N. and supported the U.S. government’s implementation of many recommendations from the Albright-Cohen task force. Currently, USIP is organizing a series of seminars on the protection of civilians in partnership with the Brookings Institution and working with the National Defense University and others to develop scenario and simulation exercises of mass atrocity prevention situations. Both projects are designed to improve conceptual understanding and the effectiveness of prevention strategies by the U.S. government and other key actors.

Back to Top

Explore Further

• Genocide Prevention Task Force
• Regions and Countries: Côte d’Ivoire
• Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention