Dairo
February Olubunmi 2010
Scheffer Reading Questions
Focusing on pp229-238, and the conclusion on p248
1. According to Scheffer, what are three of the problems inadvertently
created by Lemkins definition of genocide?
Genocide definition confines what is considered genocide. Scheffer says that abuses by
armed organizations committed on civilians are larger than the small
Governments do not want to step in unless events are labeled as genocide.
When events are labeled as genocide, governments find it hard to step in because they
fear that they will have to commit enough personnel to fully fix the issue.
2. What are some of the differences Scheffer points out between precursors
of genocide and indicators of genocide?
Precursors of genocide are the events that happen immediately before genocide or during
a genocide. These events are ones that can point to an inevitable legal judgment of
genocide. Political not legal, when the term precursors of genocide is used it doesnt
necessarily mean that all the actions that would be taken when genocide is occurring need
to be taken.
Indicators of genocide is a term that is used to describe the sociological, economic,
military, and diplomatic occurrences that may become genocide in the future.
3. How did focusing on the legal definition of genocide instead of
precursors of genocide hinder the U.S.s ability to respond to Darfur?
It hindered the U.S.s ability to respond to Darfur because since there was no clear cut
case of genocide, no action was taken. If they had instead focused on the precursors
instead of waiting for a definite ruling of genocide, they could have more effectively
helped the people in Darfur.
4. What are Scheffers motivations for creating the field of atrocity law?
His motivation was the creation of the new field atrocity crimes. In creating this new field
he realized that there needed to be law that covered the new field of atrocity crimes. This
law would not be solely about the responsibility of the state but also of an individual.
5. How does the field of atrocity law differ from Semelins genocide
studies?
They differ because genocide studies is about learning about what goes on to bring
about a genocide. It is more a social term. science However atrocity law is the law that
helps cover atrocity crimes. This is a legal term in that it deals with how to go about
prosecuting those involved in a genocide or responding to a genocide.
6. What benefits do you see in Scheffers argument? In other words, how
does his essay address weaknesses and build upon claims in Lemkin and
Semelins arguments?
The benefits I see in Scheffers argument is that he realizes the fact that there is
something lacking in the current legal definition of genocide and the steps we take in
Olubunmi Dairo
February 2010
figuring out if there is a genocide. In his new term and law he seems to cover that all. He
builds upon Lemkins arguments by filling in the gaps that were left out by the original
definition. He expands on Semelins argument because they both feel that the definition
of genocide is too ambiguous and not only that doesnt allow for enough action to be
taken. In his writing he goes as far as making a new term and a new law for this term.
To think about if you have spare time:
What is at stake for Scheffer?
What will precursors of genocide allow us to do?
They allow to act more effectively
Prevent lives from being lost
Give a little more leeway than the legal definition of genocide does
What does atrocity crime allow us to do?
It allows us to cover more crimes than formerly covered in Lemkins
definition of genocide
It has a new law has a broader, easier to determine definition it is easier
to say an atrocity crime is happening than to say a genocide is happening
Faster quicker response
Why would Scheffer leave genocide in his political definition but then take it out of his
legal definition?
He does because he feels that the political definition needs genocide to
Are these termsprecursors of genocide, atrocity crimes, massacres, social conflict,
genocideinterlinked? Are they trying to say the same things?
They are linked but not saying the same thing. Massacres can go under
atrocity crimes and so can genocide.
Precursors of genocide stands on its own because it is all about what
happen immediately before a genocide
Social conflict may be linked to atrocity crimes, however I dont think it
goes under the term