TERMINOLOGY AND DENIAL
Why Genocide is the “ crime of crimes ”
Lonzen Rugira
The 1948 Genocide Convention defines the crime of genocide as “ acts committed with intent to destroy , in whole or in part , a national , ethnical , racial or religious group .” In Rwanda , the segment targeted for elimination was on ethnic basis and the intent was to destroy “ in whole ” since the entire Tutsi population was targeted for elimination . It is possible to say that prior to 1994 the intent had been to destroy the Tutsi “ in part ” with 1994 being the “ final solution ” to a persistent problem that had failed to be solved by the “ partial ” genocides . Some have called these “ trial ” or “ practice ” killings for the final act . In Burundi , for instance , the intent to destroy the Hutu population in 1972 was “ in part .” The genocidal government in Burundi targeted only a section of the Hutu population , namely a ) those among the male population who it perceived as able to defend the targeted group , starting with Hutu elements in the security forces ; b ) those who had received formal education ( the intelligentsia ) and wealthy Hutu businesspeople , who could potentially constitute a political force . In this zero-sum genocidal logic , the objective was to constrain the Hutu elite ’ s potential to challenge the elite Tutsi ’ s hold on power . In Rwanda , there was no such categorization , as the aim was to erase the entire Tutsi population from the surface of the earth .
The moral difference between genocide and other crimes
Raphael Lemkin , the Polish lawyer and key architect of the
04