The analysis of the genocides that took place both in Rwanda and Sudan’s Darfur region exhibit some similarities as well as differences. The character of violence was similar in both cases, but in Rwanda the violence was more intense, participatory, and extraordinary. The violence in these two places took place in an environment that had experienced civil wars. It was a period of political transition which was further aggravated by ethnic nationalism and a conflict of ethnic populations that were living in close proximity. However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on using the genocide label to create domestic constituencies especially in the Rwandan case.
The Darfur case however, revealed that both of these strategies are not effective. Responding to the genocide in Darfur, the US officials declared the label genocide to be occurring. Thereafter, a politically civil-society coalition emerged so as to lobby the administration. The net outcome of these two scenarios however was the same in the absence of effective policies that could halt the genocide. The Rwandan genocide has always acted as the point of reference for similar genocides taking place around the world. Since the 2003 crisis in Darfur, a lot of comparisons have been made to Rwandan genocide. Observers have likened the Darfur genocide to what happened in Rwanda and of course giving it two connotations. First, the violence in the western parts of Sudan has been referred to another Rwanda, by basing their arguments on the nature of the violence. Since whatever was happening in Darfur is similar to the Rwanda case, it has also been referred to another Rwanda. The second connotation is based on how the international community responded to the violence. In Rwanda, the IC was not concerned with stopping the genocide just like in Darfur. This makes the two cases similar. These comparative claims are accurate although the claims need some close scrutiny. For instance, the comparisons do not provide the degree of similarity and differences in the two instances. Form the international perspective, we are not able to tell in what way the response in Rwanda is different or similar to what took place in Darfur (Straus).
Why the US and the UN what are the similarities and differences of how they acted in each situation.
The UN and the US government are accredited for deploring conflict situations as well as contributing humanitarian aid, and this is what these two organizations did in Rwanda and Darfur. However, the UN did not do anything to punish or prevent the genocides that took place in these two countries. The US government promised to support the peace talk’s agreement in Darfur and hold the perpetrators accountable for their acts. It never kept that promise since nothing has been done. So far, the UN’s Security...