Course: Genocide and Group Hostility
Module 1: Genocide
How is genocide defined in international law, and what distinguishes genocide from other mass atrocities?
There are major differences in political contexts, distinctive features, and scope of the mass violence perceived as genocide. Nevertheless, one can identify certain common features of genocide. The formulations and established interpretation of the UN Genocide Convention will serve as a basis for discussion.
What is Genocide?
How is genocide defined in international law? What distinguishes the legal definition of genocide from other definitions of the crime?
According to the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, “genocide” refers to acts committed against a group, in whole or in part, with the intent to destroy it based on its religious, national, racial or ethnic identity. As an international crime, signatory nations agreed to “undertake to prevent and punish genocide”. Acts that constitute genocide, as specified by the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, include:
- Killing members of the group.
- Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.
- Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
- Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
The term Holocaust refers to the systematic mass killings of European Jews by Nazi Germany during World War II (1939-1945).
In line with the Nazi racial ideology, the Wannsee Conference in 1942 reaffirmed/sanctioned ex post facto the “Final Solution of the Jewish Question,” meaning the extermination of the Jewish people and their culture in Europe and beyond.
Approximately six million Jews were murdered in a systematic, bureaucratic, and industrially executed genocide. During the nazi rule in Germany and the Second World War, other groups were also targeted for persecution and extermination, including Roma people, people with mental disabilities, political dissidents, and homosexuals.
According to the legal definition of the crime, intent is central to identifying genocide. Without proof of the intent to destroy a group “in whole or in part” solely because of their identity, the acts of mass violence in question fall under crimes against humanity.
For further information about Lemkin’s original definition of the crime of genocide, check out David Crowe’s discussion on the topic (part of a larger conference on the Roma genocide during WW2).
There have been many definitions of genocide proposed throughout the years. They can mainly be distinguished between legal, sociological, political, and popular definitions, according to genocide scholar Ernesto Verdeja. In short:
- The international Genocide Convention contains the legal definition of the crime, adopted in response to the Holocaust. Major powers that negotiated the draft convention in the United Nations aimed to prevent such atrocities from recurring while deferring scrutiny from the treatment of minority groups in their own countries. Because of realpolitik, the wording of the convention is rather restrictive.
- Sociological definitions of genocides are usually broader, including targeted groups beyond the few outlined in the definition. There is usually less emphasis on the strict legal requirement to document a special intent.
- Political definitions are used to rally consensus and encourage specific responses, often with the goal of prevention or intervention. As Verdeja states, “many international organizations and governments will use the term genocide when what they really mean is large-scale violence against civilians.”
- Popular definitions often incorporate the emotional response to mass violence. When acts of violence are committed, the public tends to highlight their reprehension and immorality, calling for intervention so that they can be stopped.
Genocide vs. Other Mass Atrocities
Under international law and as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, mass atrocities occur in the form of genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and/or war crimes. What make genocide distinct from the other categories of mass atrocities?
According to the Rome Statute of the ICC, atrocity crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, and concern the international community as a whole. The ICC does not establish a hierarchy between the atrocity crimes.
- Crimes against humanity
Crimes against humanity include known acts “committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population”, such as murder, enslavement, deportation, torture, sexual violence and slavery, apartheid, and persecution. Most atrocities can often fall under the meaning of “persecution”, which could amount to genocide if the intent to destroy a group, in whole or in part, is demonstrated.
- War crimes
War crimes can include violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, such as breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. Individual responsibility for war crimes can be established if violations against members of a group take place in the context of an (international or non-international) armed conflict, regardless of whether the victims are combatant or non-combatant.
- Ethnic cleansing
While not recognized as an independent crime under international law, ethnic cleansing is considered to include coercive practices meant to render an area ethnically homogeneous by removing members of ethnic or religious groups. If the necessary criteria are met, these acts may amount to one of the recognized atrocity crimes. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm, spelling out the normative responsibility to protect people from atrocities and prevent them, expanded the concept of ‘atrocity crimes’ to include ethnic cleansing in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document.
Main Case
Despite the declarations of “never again” stated by various national and international human rights instruments in the aftermath of the Holocaust and the Second World War, atrocity crimes, including genocides, have been perpetrated globally in numerous conflicts.
Legal prosecution of genocide has happened in the aftermath of Rwanda, Srebrenica and Cambodia, and international courts are currently addressing Myanmar and Israel. Regarding prevention, institutional development has been much slower
The Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina
The dissolution of former Yugoslavia in the 1990s resulted in war and widespread mass violence targeting multiple ethnic groups. Much of this violence has since been recognized as atrocity crimes, which in the case of Srebrenica amounted to genocide.
In July 1995, approximately 8,000 Muslim men and boys were systematically massacred by Bosnian-Serbian soldiers in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica. The International Court of Justice in 2007 defined the Srebrenica massacre as a case of genocide, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) later upheld the same view by sentencing several individuals for the genocide in Srebrenica.
In Srebrenica, in July 1995, approximately 8,000 Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) men and boys were killed within two weeks by Bosnian Serb military forces. The massacre was in line with the political goal of Bosnian Serbs to establish an ethnically and religiously homogeneous national entity in Bosnia, regardless of the fact that the local population consisted of Bosniaks, Serbs (mostly Orthodox Christians), and Croats (mostly Catholics).
The Srebrenica massacre was decisive in provoking the NATO intervention that in turn led to the Dayton Agreement, which ended the Bosnian War in 1995.
Certain segments of the Bosnian Serb and Serbian population, largely politicians and political narratives, deny that a genocide took place. This is, for example, reflected in school curricula.
The role of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for the prosecution of the mass atrocities in Srebrenica will be discussed further in Module 4 – Restoration.
The Srebrenica-Potocari Memorial Center acts as a place of remembrance for the victims of the genocide in Srebrenica, and is dedicated to preserving history and combatting the ignorance and hatred which make genocides possible.
Other cases
The Rwanda genocide
The genocide in Rwanda took place between April and June 1994. The Hutu government, representing the majority population in the country, launched a planned genocide against the minority Tutsi population and moderate Hutus.
In 100 days between April and June 1994, between 500,000 and one million people were systematically murdered. Most victims were Tutsi, but also the minority Twa and politically moderate Hutu became victims of the genocide.
The mass killings were planned and organized by the Hutu-dominated agencies. Many of the perpetrators were ordinary people who killed their friends and neighbours within local communities.
The UN and major western democracies were heavily criticized for having failed to stop the mass murder. In 2000, the UN Security Council took responsibility for not having done so. The UN General Assembly, in 2014, formally classified the Rwandan massacres as genocide.
The Yazidi Genocide in Iraq
Genocide involves the intent to destroy a racial, religious, ethnic, or national group. The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria (2016) emphasized in the report “They Came to Destroy: ISIS Crimes against the Yazidis” that ISIS tried to destroy the Yazidi as a religious group, and has accordingly identified the Yazidi as victims of genocide. Additionally, the US State department has recognized the attack on Yazidi as genocide, while German courts have convicted ISIS members for genocide.
In August 2014, more than 6,000 Yazidi men and boys were massacred in the Sinjar region in northern Iraq. Women and children were captured, raped and sold as sex slaves. The Islamic State (IS) regarded the Yazidis as heretics and devil worshipers who had to be killed or forced to adopt a strict interpretation of Islam, with many being later killed.
The IS terror also affected several religious groups. However, no other group but the Yazidi was singled out and persecuted as systematically, with the stated intention of extermination because of their faith. The UN commission of inquiry referred to the Yazidi case as genocide.
ISIS is a terrorist group that follows a fundamentalist, Salafi-jihadist doctrine of Sunni Islam. The group has been declared a terrorist organisation by the United Nations. The group was defeated in 2019 on their unrecognised “state” territory inside Syria and Iraq. Fragments of ISIS are still carrying out terrorist activities.
Genocide or other mass atrocities?
Because of the strict legal definition of genocide, emphasizing the proven intent to commit genocide, only a few instances of mass violence have ever been identified as genocide by internationally recognized legal bodies. In recent years, cases like Myanmar, Ukraine, and Gaza have put the limitations of the Genocide Convention definition in sharp relief. The adjudication of these cases by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court will be discussed further in Module 2 – Prevention.
An ICJ ruling on a state’s duty to prevent genocide cannot, on its own, be enforced to end genocide. However, we will explore the possible measures taken in response to genocide and other mass atrocities in Module 3 – Restorative Justice.
The case of Rohingyas from Myanmar – ICJ
In 2019, Gambia accused Myanmar of targeted mass violence against Rohingya people and requested provisional measures of protection from the ICJ. The ICJ in 2020 ruled that Myanmar should take measures to prevent genocide from happening to the Rohingya. The validity of calling Myanmar’s actions against the Rohingyas genocide has been debated.
The Rohingya are an ethnic group to Myanmar (previously Burma), but since the 1980s, they have been officially labelled as illegal migrants by the Burmese government. The Rohingya have long been subjected to discrimination and persecution.
Following the attacks by Rohingya insurgents on Burmese authorities in late 2016, the Myanmar military and paramilitary groups began a large-scale campaign of killings and rapes.
Mass violence in 2017 sent more than one million Rohingyas to the Cox’s Bazaar refugee camp across the border in Bangladesh. In 2018, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights reported that Myanmar’s government organized and planned the intentional eradication of the Rohingya people, and that its officials could be potentially charged for ethnic cleansing and genocide.
The case of Palestine/Israel – ICJ and ICC
In the years following Hamas’ 7th October 2023 attack on Israel, Israel’s escalation of mass violence against Palestinians intensified. In late 2023, South Africa alleged that Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and initiated a case at the International Court of Justice. In January 2024, the ICJ found that there was a risk of genocide in Gaza, and urged Israel to prevent genocide, provide humanitarian aid, and to halt incitements to genocide in Israel.
In November 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for two Israeli and three Hamas leaders, having confirmed there are reasonable grounds to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed.
Following the assassination of Hamas leaders, the prosecutor’s office terminated its proceedings against them.
Israel’s mass killings and destruction of infrastructure in the Gaza Strip have led to numerous debates about whether or not these acts amounted to genocide, as well as about the validity of the definition of genocide in the first place. Here are some sources to learn more about this debate:
- Speri, Alice. 2024. “Defining Genocide: How a Rift over Gaza Sparked a Crisis among Scholars.” The Guardian. The Guardian. December 20, 2024. (link)
- Ambos, Kai, and Stefanie Bock. 2025. “Genocide in Gaza?” June 4, 2025. (link)
- Bronner, Luc. 2025. “In Israel, a Heated Debate over Accusations of Genocide in Gaza Slowly Emerges.” Le Monde.fr. Le Monde. September 19, 2025. (link)
- United Nations. 2025. “Gaza: Top Independent Rights Probe Alleges Israel Committed Genocide.” 2025. UN News. September 16, 2025. (link)
Gender and Genocide
While not mentioned in the legal definition of genocide, gender is an important factor that can affect the motivations, perpetration, and consequences of genocide. How does it influence how certain groups are mobilized and attacked during genocides?
The term “gender” denotes the social, cultural, and psychological aspects of one’s identity as opposed to sex, which is considered concretely physical and biological. While it is often used as a buzzword and a synonym for “women” in conflict, security, genocide, and atrocity prevention studies, gender encompasses multiple identities and the socio-cultural system they inhabit.
Women and children affected by genocide - Lamiya's story
Lamiya
As conflicts and mass violence have always been affected by gender dynamics, US philosophy professor Mary Anne Warren coined the term “gendercide” to refer to the deliberate extermination of persons of a particular gender.
Gendered violence and killings can be understood as components of genocidal acts, carried out with the intent to destabilize or eradicate populations. However, the term gendercide applies more broadly and is not confined solely to acts of genocide. Warren’s website gendercide.org provides multiple case studies (e.g. Rwanda and Bosnia-Herzegovina) where she argues that “gendercide” has taken place.
Gender-based violence targeting women often includes sexual violence and mass rapes with the goal of forced impregnation or stigmatization. Male-targeted violence, instead, may occur in conflict settings where adult and adolescent males are singled out as actual or potential combatants. While such killings are not always framed as gendercide, it can be applied in contexts such as the Srebrenica genocide, in which almost 8’000 Bosniak men and boys were systematically executed.
It is worth noting that, while Warren argues that the term gendercide can help with nuanced and complex analyses of genocides, others argue that it may obscure ways in which genocides are perpetrated, as proposed by Henry Theriault. According to this perspective, “gendercide” analyzes genocides only by their results, partially ignoring the intersecting factors and motivations which provoked them.
Sexual- and gender-based violence belongs under discussion on genocide as a strategy to destroy a group. In 2018, the Global Justice Center launched an in-depth legal analysis of the role of gender in genocide, leading to the report “Beyond Killing: Gender, Genocide, and Obligations Under International Law”.
An often overlooked gendered consequence of sexual violence in conflicts and mass atrocities are Children Born of War (CBOW). We will explore this in more detail in Module 3 – Restorative Justice.
Questions for reflection and discussion
- What distinguishes genocide, as defined in the UN Genocide Convention, from other mass atrocities?
- What role has gender played in past genocides? How can a gender perspective shed light on the consequences of genocide? How were women and men affected differently during the Srebrenica genocide?
- What are the necessary conditions to demonstrate genocide according to Article II of the Genocide Convention?
- How can different perspectives (legal, popular, etc.) affect and change the concept of genocide?
- Case study discussion: How would you argue, on the basis of the Genocide Convention, in favour of identifying the mass atrocities in Srebrenica in 1995 as a genocide? How were people affected similarly or differently in Srebrenica, compared to the Rwandan genocide and the Yazidi genocide?
For educators
- When teaching about genocide, be aware of the various definitions of this term.
- Make sure to clarify the definition of your choice to the students and make them aware that there are other ways to define the term.
- Students in higher education should also be taught about the difference between genocide and other mass atrocities.
- For more information and resources about inclusive citizenship education please see our For Educators page.
Additional Resources
Genocide and other mass atrocities
- ICHR topic page: Understanding Genocide and Mass Atrocities
- Website: Mass Atrocity Responses
- Hinton, Alexander Laban. 2012. “Critical Genocide Studies.” Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal 7 (1). (link)
- Jones, Adam. 2024. Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. 4th ed. London; New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
- Weiss-Wendt, Anton. 2018. A Rhetorical Crime. Rutgers University Press. (link)
Gender
- ICHR topic page: Gender and Genocide
- Asraph, Sareta. 2018. Beyond Killing: Gender, Genocide, and Obligations Under International Law. Global Justice Center. (link)
- Connellan, Mary Michele. 2018. “The Problem of ‘Protecting Vulnerable Groups.’ Rethinking Vulnerability for Mass Atrocity and Genocide Prevention.” In A Gendered Lens for Genocide Prevention. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. (link)
- Joeden-Forgery, Elisa. 2012. “Gender and the Future of Genocide Studies and Prevention.” Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal 7 (1). (link)
- Jones, Adam. 2008. “Gender and Genocide.” In The Historiography of Genocide, 228–52. Palgrave Macmillan. (link)
Case studies
