ON December 9, 1948, in the wake of one of the most heinous episodes in recorded history, the United Nations unveiled the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The world, still reeling from the unspeakable horror of the Holocaust came together with one voice, saying “never again”.
“Never again” they declared would the world be reduced to being little more than a helpless spectator as a country embarked on the systematic persecution, ethnic cleansing or genocide of a group based on their nationality, race, religion or ethnicity.
Such was their determination to set this crime above all other crimes - once referred to by Churchill as a crime without a name – that they even created a new word for it … genocide, which is a combination of the ancient Greek word genos (race or tribe) and the Latin word cide (killing).
Those world leaders who had seen for themselves, and who had lived through the horror of the Nazis, fervently hoped that this new treaty was going to be one of the most transformative and important pieces of legislation in our history.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer faces pro-ceasefire protests as he arrives into Glasgow
They said, “never again”, and they meant it.
December 9, 1948, changed everything, because from that day on, not only were states committed to having a legal obligation to criminalise genocide and punish the perpetrators for their involvement in the crime, but they were now also legally obliged to act if they became aware that there was a serious risk of genocide.
It would be more accurate however to say that December 9, 1948, should have changed everything, because in reality, the genocides didn’t stop, and in the intervening 75 years, atrocity crime and genocide have continued almost unchecked, including in the killing fields of Cambodia, Bosnia and Rwanda, Darfur, and the mountains of Sinjar, Myanmar, and many, many more.
Today, despite more than 150 countries being signatories to the Genocide Convention – making them legally obliged to act against those involved in genocide – and the Genocide Convention being part a central part of international law, we are still witnessing atrocities in Tigray and Darfur, Xinjiang, Ukraine, and Afghanistan, with others displaying the early warning signs of being at serious risk.
And it is especially poignant that in the lead up to the 75th anniversary of the Genocide Convention, many leading figures in international humanitarian law, including 36 UN experts, have argued that Israel’s response to the appalling Hamas attack of October 7 has exceeded what could be considered legal and proportionate.
Israel has a right to defend itself, but the collective punishment of the Palestinian people – happening right now – is beyond that.
As we mark the 75th anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the sad reality is that the noble ambition of its founders has been lost in a fog of political expediency and an uncanny ability of world leaders to ignore the blatant reality of what is staring them in the face.
In 2023, world leaders still roundly condemn atrocity crime, but because of the legal obligation the Convention places on states to act if they see or believe a genocide is taking place, or about to take place, they are extremely reluctant to call it a genocide.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf calls for war crimes probe after Palestinians stripped
To avoid having to adhere to their legal responsibilities, they find it easier to ignore the reality of what is happening, thereby fostering a widespread expectation of impunity among the perpetrators.
Sadly, in my experience, when a president, prime minister or secretary of state solemnly declares “never again”, what they are in fact saying is “I genuinely hope that this never happens again, but should it happen again on my watch, don’t expect me to do very much about it”.
I expect there to be much mutual back-slapping and lots of self-congratulatory speeches in the coming days as the world marks that truly momentous day in December 1948, but I think it would be worth taking a few moments to reflect on the reality just how far we have actually come in the last 75 years, and perhaps consider how the architects of the Genocide Convention would view what we have done to achieve their ideal of ridding the world of genocide.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here