Rawanda Genocide

The United States decision not to intervene in the Rwandan genocide was in direct violation of the standing U.S. policy at the time, the policy was to work in concert with the United Nations to actively intervene to prevent or halt any genocide that occurred in any country or countries (as stipulated in the adoption of the prevention and punishment of the crimes of genocide, 1988). Underlying this decision is a general philosophy of how to run a government. The United States government was created to serve a specific purpose or function, serving the people of the United States; it’s often claimed that a government's sole concern is national interest. As a result, the United States is under no obligation to prevent human rights violations unless it serves the narrowly defined national interests, directly benefiting United States security or economic goals. The United States repeatedly confirms that national interest is the lead concern when dealing with humanitarian efforts, as in the case of the Bosnia-Hercegovina “ethnic- cleansing” (the preferred titling of the Bosnia-Hercegovina events), the delay in reaction,

Some topics in this essay:
United Nations, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Rwandan Genocide, Gourevitch1998 United, United States', Mission Rwanda, Organization NATO, Rwanda April, , Bob Dole, human rights, definition genocide, genocide rwanda, immoral unjust, domestic politics, people population, academic policy, clinton administration, modern hutu, rwandan genocide,