WAM: Book Reviews

Genocide studies have failed to develop a comprehensive and operative frame from which to regard reality. Such is Martin Shaw’s starting point in What is Genocide?

This critique is developed in the first part of the book in which Shaw argues that scholarly engagement with Raphael Lemkin’s concept of genocide has become increasingly narrowed in scope as a result of four main vices. Firstly, the distancing of understanding from Lemkin’s original conception of genocide as the social destruction of national groups has reduced the meaning of genocide to the mere physical extermination of groups. Secondly, and related, this has obscured the emergent contextual nature of genocide arising from inter-group struggle -war- leading later scholars to build their research on isolated elements of a social process. Thirdly, instead of focusing on general underlying processes, the strong influence of the Holocaust as the archetypical genocide has generated controversies in minor comparison issues between other genocide cases and the Holocaust. Finally, the atomization of research has led to the proliferation of minor theories that add little to the original concept of genocide.

Having convincingly analyzed the major flaws in recent research, the second part of the book attempts to build a sociological approach to genocide that draws on Lemkin’s original concept to recover it’s relevance for a better understanding of recent and potential cases of genocide. By defining genocide as social action, Shaw not only draws attention to perpetrators´ actions and definitions of reality, but also to the other involved actors including the actions, reactions and definitions of victims and bystanders and their interactions with perpetrators. In sum, Shaw argues that genocide is as a particular pattern of social action with its own rules and typical connections to other conflict structures in society.

This wider conceptualization of genocide unlocks the concept, permitting the development of practical working frames and the stimulation of comprehensive research on the different social processes involved. For example, potential victim groups can be trained in the recognition of genocidal patterns and in the mobilisation of social resources to counter hostile actions as soon as they are detected. However, this might pave the way for other explanations focused on less macro processes, such as Ervin Staub’s psychological approach; which Shaw shouldn’t dismiss so lightly when such normal (or abnormal) psychological processes underlie every social process. Indeed, parallels may easily be drawn between the social processes that lead to war and the psychological mechanisms involved in the creation and recognition of enemies.

Analysis of how genocidal groups mobilize their members and define their enemies leads us to what Shaw regards as a crucial neglected point: the close relationship between genocide and war. For Shaw, genocide is degraded war waged on improperly conceived groups of civilians by an armed faction. Civilians are equated to an enemy army and the need to destroy civilians derived from the support they offer to the enemy. Shaw argues that this killing of civilians (a well established category despite alleged ambiguities during combat) through military means is what makes genocide monstrous, and the main feature we should bear in mind when confronting any situation susceptible of being labelled as genocide.

This definition, while having the virtue of pointing accurately to the social context of genocide and allowing a fast recognition of on-going genocides, does not however give account of the passive and even cooperative attitude held by other civilian groups towards genocide. Those groups do not tend to be subjected to military discipline and are therefore less prone to regard other civilian groups in terms of military confrontation. A clear account of the role played by other civilian groups in genocide would complement this definition.

Shaw clearly states the need of a deeper sociological understanding of genocide. His critical evaluation of the main concepts guiding current research leaves no place for dissent. His call for a truly sociological understanding, for the use of a general instrumental concept, comes to fill much more than a cognitive need in social thinking.

He highlights the sheer need of a clear and operative concept that will allow us to detect, and therefore intervene in, genocide more readily. This can now be addressed from the standpoint of his work. Having failed to prevent genocides in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and denying its occurrence in Darfur, we cannot allow theoretical discussion on the accuracy of labelling the conflict as genocide or ethnic cleansing to prevent international action against killing of civilians from happening anymore.

What is Genocide? is a deep reflection on the theoretical origins and evolution of an essential concept for understanding today’s humanitarian crises. It provides the reader with a reliable overview of the main conceptual approaches in genocide studies, as well as with an inspiring new definition of genocide. Although on occasion it’s high level of abstraction makes it more suitable for social science students in their final year, it offers insight for scholars and researchers interested in new developments on the field.

Pablo Veyrat