• Read the report
• Read the executive summary
• Read the Mass Atrocity Watch List
• Read our recommendations
• Read the definitions of mass atrocity crimes like genocide, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing

A NEW PARADIGM FOR PREVENTION

Is it possible to forecast where, and even when, the tragedies of genocide or ethnic cleansing might occur?

This report indicates that the answer is yes.

Just as a change in the barometric pressure can be one indicator of a coming storm, so can political instability, rising ethnic tensions, incitement to hate, and economic and political discrimination, among other factors, signal the potential for systematic violence against civilians on a mass scale.

The places where systematic slaughter of civilians is happening or could happen are, actually, fairly well known.

But knowledge alone is insufficient to save lives. Little good is achieved, for example, if scientists believe a hurricane is imminent but fail to communicate this fact to officials who can raise the alarm, evacuate those threatened, and coordinate necessary aid.

The recent tragedies of Darfur, Rwanda, Cambodia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina all bear witness to the international community‘s failure to prevent systematic mass atrocity crimes (defined here as ethnic cleansing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide). And yet, in the lead-up to each of these crises the warning signs were clear.

Going forward, the international community must heed such early warning signs, and be prepared to act quickly and effectively when the indicators show the potential for systematic atrocities.

This requires that international leaders adopt a new framework, one focused on prevention. A prevention framework would have two central components:

1. An early warning system to signal an escalation of the most serious human rights abuses against civilians based on characteristics of their identity such as race, ethnicity, tribal affiliation, or religion.
2. Well-coordinated and active diplomacy in the earliest stages of a brewing crisis, undertaken with the intention of averting an escalation of violence.

Such diplomatic actions – those well short of any military action – could be undertaken by the UN or individual or groups of member states and could include both “carrots” and “sticks.”

It is the contention of this report that once civilians are being attacked, the international community is obligated to protect them from systematic mass killing. BOX MUST BE ADDED

Working to prevent or avert tragedy is not only humane, it is pragmatic. In addition to the bloody toll in human lives and suffering, atrocity crimes can bring an increase in global insecurity and the potential for regional destabilization. Furthermore, the economic cost of an intervention is more burdensome once violence has escalated.

The task at hand is, admittedly, difficult. Great challenges accompany any effort to change long-standing grievances or to improve international collaboration on issues of peace. But genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity are the worst forms of mass barbarity. These are crimes that the international community is morally and legally obligated to address, not as an afterthought but as a priority.

This report calls for a new level of global and national leadership to prevent mass atrocity crimes, one marked by a willingness to act at the earliest stages to avert humanitarian catastrophe – rather than, as we have many times in the past, ignoring the warning signs and then watching as tragedy unfolds.

OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS
MASS ATROCITY CRIMES WATCH LIST 2008-09: 33 COUNTRIES AT RISK

The Mass Atrocity Crimes Watch List 2008-09 released in this report identifies 33 countries of highest concern regarding mass atrocity crimes, based on a range of indicators.

The Mass Atrocity Crimes Watch List proves the point that a “watch list” combining multiple available sources of data can be generated – and can serve a constructive purpose. Because mass atrocity crimes are not a theoretical topic, but real crises happening in real time, this watch list also provides one way to raise a flag of concern about specific crises where increased attention and preventive diplomacy can make a difference.

There are limitations to this – or indeed, any – such list. The Mass Atrocity Crimes Watch List is neither predictive nor definitive; massive violence could break out in countries not on this list, or not occur in countries listed. Circumstances vary greatly in countries that appear on the same “tier” of our list; in general, a list of this sort is meant to be used in conjunction with additional expert analysis of each individual crisis. Because this watch list is not a ranked list, countries in each tier are listed alphabetically.

Tier 1 Countries: Red Alert

We identify eight situations of highest concern. These countries appeared on each of the five expert indices used as a basis for this report and received the highest composite score on our watch list.

The international community should reassess efforts to date on these crises, and implement urgent, meaningful and effective diplomatic, peacemaking, and/or civilian protection strategies.

Tier 2 Countries: Orange Alert

The following are the 25 countries with the next highest composite scores.

In these situations, immediate investigation to assess possible attacks on civilian populations is urgently needed, followed by a plan of preventive diplomacy based on the specific analysis of each crisis. If diplomacy is ongoing, but stalled or failing, global leaders need to reanimate diplomacy and plan for civilian protection.

A description of the methodology used in preparation of the Mass Atrocity Crimes Watch List 2008 can be found in Appendix B of the full report.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

In the effort to create a meaningful prevention framework, this report makes broad recommendations, addressed to the UN Secretariat, to the UN Security Council, and to all national governments. These recommendations are explained in more detail in the full report.

Recommendation to the UN Secretariat: Expand the Capacity at the UN to Prevent and Respond to Mass Atrocity Crimes.

Within the UN, the Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide (OSAPG) and other special advisers (for instance on the “responsibility to protect”) have been authorized to lead the UN system on prevention of mass atrocity crimes.

To prioritize prevention at the UN, the UN Secretariat needs to strengthen the ability of the OSAPG to fulfill its mandate, supporting its efforts to gather information on early warning signs, recommend approaches, and encourage ongoing diplomacy to thwart a descent into mass violence.

Recommendation to member states: Support the work of the UN’s Office on Genocide Prevention, and designate a high-level official within your national government to address genocide-related issues.

The Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and related advisers need champions among member states. Such groups – sometimes called “friends” groups – exist on related issues.

These states, as a formal or informal group, would help the OSAPG forge a closer link to the UN Security Council and other UN bodies. One way to do this would be to have a group of member states request a regular monthly report by the OSAPG to the UN Security Council.

National governments could also adopt a prevention framework as official domestic policy, and at a minimum, designate a highest-level official to coordinate his or her government’s international response to potential and ongoing mass atrocity crises.

Recommendation to the UN Security Council: Debate Permanent UN Capacity to Protect Civilians.

If and when prevention fails, the international community needs to be prepared to act to protect civilians. This would require well-trained peacekeepers and logistical equipment to be at the ready. The idea of a permanent civilian protection capacity based at the UN has been discussed since the founding of the body. We recommend that it be revisited.