Articles by Dr. Gregory Stanton
Could the Rwandan Genocide Have Been Prevented?
Dr. Gregory Stanton was a Foreign Service Officer in the U.S. State Department in the Bureau of International Organizations, Office of UN Political Affairs in 1994 at the time of the Rwandan Genocide. He was tasked by U.N. Ambassador, later Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright to interview the people who contributed to U.S. policy during the genocide. He won the W. Averell Harriman Award for 'intellectual courage" for his dissent from US policy during that genocide. After leaving the State Department in 1999 to found Genocide Watch, Stanton wrote this paper while at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. In it, he describes why the U.S. refused to call the Rwandan genocide a genocide for three months, why the U.S. led the U.N. to pull out 2000 U.N. peacekeepers in Rwanda near the beginning of the genocide, and how 800,000 Rwandans perished in a genocide that could have been prevented.
Malthusian Pressures, Genocide, and Ecocide
Elihu D. Richter MD,MPH, Rony Blum, PhD, Tamar Berman, MSc, Gregory H. Stanton, JD, PhD
INT J OCCUP ENVIRON HEALTH 2007;13:331–341
Historical models postulate that genocide cannot occur
without the ideology and decisions of its authoritarian
perpetrators and the indifference of bystanders. These
models do not address genocidal risks from ecocide.
Study objectives were to assess 1) the role of Malthusian
pressures in recent genocides, 2) the role of ecocide
and ecologic abuse in creating these pressures, and 3)
strategies for prevention and deterrence. Analysis of
reports, demographic studies, and time trends in
recent genocides and recent ecocidal events from ecologic
abuse suggests that Malthusian pressures and
zero-sum rivalries over water, arable land, or natural
resources by themselves do not lead to genocide.
September 11, 2007
"Ethnic Cleansing" is a Euphemism Used for Genocide Denial
"Ethnic Cleansing" is a euphemism invented by Slobodan Milošević and Serbian propagandists in the 1990's to cover up and deny forced displacement and genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo. It has now become the dominant term used by journalists, foreign ministry lawyers, the UN, and human rights groups to avoid using the term "genocide." Ethnic cleansing is not outlawed by any treaty or by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It is used to avoid the duty to prevent genocide in the Genocide Convention. It is a term that should be expunged from the legal and journalistic lexicon.
July 10, 2023
The Consequences of Denial
Speech given at commemoration of the 1971 Bangladesh Genocide held jointly by the Liberation War Museum in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and the Canadian Museum of Human Rights in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
September 21, 2022
The ICJ and the Issue of Lawful Representation in The Gambia v Myanmar
Ahead of the scheduled public hearings in The Gambia v Myanmar (the Rohingya genocide case) at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the University of Ottowa Human Rights Research and Education Centre, Canada, the Genocide Watch of USA and FORSEA release a comprehensive legal analysis. It focuses on the crucial question of who should lawfully speak for Myanmar before the ICJ as Myanmar's coup resulted in an unprecedented situation with no recognized government or even regime with effective control of the state.
February 18, 2022
Why Have We Failed To Prevent Genocide?
Outline of address by Dr. Stanton to the 8th International Symposium on Women and Genocide. Dr. Stanton assesses the successes and failures of the anti-genocide movement during the past twenty years. He makes practical recommendations about how to improve the effectiveness of the movement, and how to better prevent genocide.
October 26, 2019