2013•Journal of Genocide ResearchRequires access

Surmounting the myopic focus on genocide: the case of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Christian Axboe Nielsen

Open publisher page 28 citations

Abstract

This article surveys the use of the term ‘genocide’ before, during and after the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995. The article argues that although ‘genocide’ remains an important legal and analytical concept, an excessive focus on this term represents a misguided and counterproductive approach to the analysis of mass violence. Discussions revolving around a ‘genocide or not’ dichotomy do not further our understanding of the Bosnian war, and are in their essence more connected to desires for past and future international military interventions and to internal Bosnian political struggles than to a scholarly agenda. The ongoing obsession with the label of ‘genocide’ has distortive effects on international criminal justice, because anything less than a genocide conviction is counted as a ‘failure.’ Recent scholarly accusations that international legal findings of crimes other than genocide constitute ‘genocide denial’ are particularly troubling. In Bosnia, the disproportionate attention on genocide helps to perpetuate the zero-sum approach that has informed Bosniak–Serb political negotiations since the end of the war, and more recently the issue of ‘genocide’ has also aggravated relations within the Bosniak community. Ultimately, therefore, it may be more productive to move beyond what has become a myopic focus on genocide.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article surveys the use of the term ‘genocide’ before, during and after the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995. The article argues that although ‘genocide’ remains an important legal and analytical concept, an excessive focus on this term represents a misguided and counterproductive approach to the analysis of mass violence. Discussions revolving around a ‘genocide or not’ dichotomy do not further our understanding of the Bosnian war, and are in their essence more connected to desires for past and future international military interventions and to internal Bosnian political struggles than to a scholarly agenda. The ongoing obsession with the label of ‘genocide’ has distortive effects on international criminal justice, because anything less than a genocide conviction is counted as a ‘failure.’ Recent scholarly accusations that international legal findings of crimes other than genocide constitute ‘genocide denial’ are particularly troubling. In Bosnia, the disproportionate attention on genocide helps to perpetuate the zero-sum approach that has informed Bosniak–Serb political negotiations since the end of the war, and more recently the issue of ‘genocide’ has also aggravated relations within the Bosniak community. Ultimately, therefore, it may be more productive to move beyond what has become a myopic focus on genocide.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 28 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article surveys the use of the term ‘genocide’ before, during and after the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995. The article argues that although ‘genocide’ remains an important legal and analytical concept, an excessive focus on this term represents a misguided and counterproductive approach to the analysis of mass violence. Discussions revolving around a ‘genocide or not’ dichotomy do not further our understanding of the Bosnian war, and are in their essence more connected to desires for past and future international military interventions and to internal Bosnian political struggles than to a scholarly agenda. The ongoing obsession with the label of ‘genocide’ has distortive effects on international criminal justice, because anything less than a genocide conviction is counted as a ‘failure.’ Recent scholarly accusations that international legal findings of crimes other than genocide constitute ‘genocide denial’ are particularly troubling. In Bosnia, the disproportionate attention on genocide helps to perpetuate the zero-sum approach that has informed Bosniak–Serb political negotiations since the end of the war, and more recently the issue of ‘genocide’ has also aggravated relations within the Bosniak community. Ultimately, therefore, it may be more productive to move beyond what has become a myopic focus on genocide.

Key concepts: Genocide, Bosnian, Political science, Criminology, Law, Conviction, Politics, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Surmounting the myopic focus on genocide: the case of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina — Research Paper | ScholarLens