The Moral and Legal Obligation of the UN During Genocide: The Case of Rwanda

Abstract

From April till June 1994, 800,000 people, mostly Tutsi, fell victim to a horrific genocide in Rwanda. This genocide was committed by the Hutu majority to cleanse the country of the hated Tutsi minority. There is a powerful debate between scholars of the pluralist international society and the solidarist international society about how the UN should respond in case of genocide. Solidarists argue in favor of humanitarian intervention and point to the legal obligation anchored in the 1948 Genocide Convention and the UN Charter. Pluralist scholars refute this argument and claim there is no legal framework for a humanitarian intervention. They also clash on the moral obligation of the UN. Solidarists emphasize justice and universal rights, whereas pluralists stress order and the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention.