Search

Begin New Search Topic Atrocities Author Kyra Fox

1. Risk of Mass Atrocities against the Rohingya Post-coup

Author:
Kyra Fox
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
The Rohingya—who experienced genocide prior to Burma’s 2021 military coup—are now at heightened risk of genocide and mass atrocities by the Burmese military, known as the Tatmadaw, and the Arakan Army, an ethnic armed organization in Rakhine State. Other vulnerable groups include the broader Muslim community and ethnic and religious minorities in areas where ethnic armed organizations and/or People’s Defense Forces are fighting the Tatmadaw. To prevent mass atrocities, the Tatmadaw should cease attacks on civilians and cede power so Burma can move toward a more diverse, representative, and credible democracy. The US and other governments should conduct a full mass atrocity risk assessment, provide rapid and flexible funding to civil society organizations responding to the crisis, and constrain and condemn the Tatmadaw.
Topic:
Genocide, Coup, Atrocities, and Rohingya
Political Geography:
Southeast Asia and Myanmar

2. Risk of Mass Atrocities in Cameroon

Author:
Kyra Fox and Andrea Gittleman
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
Cameroon currently ranks number nine of countries at risk of mass killing in the Simon-Skjodt Center’s Statistical Risk Assessment.1 The situation has deteriorated significantly since 2017, when Cameroon ranked 36th. After Anglophone civilians launched protests in late 2016 alleging marginalization by the Francophone-majority government, state security forces responded violently, allegedly arresting, beating, and shooting demonstrators.2 Clashes ensued, with security forces reportedly killing over 20 people in a 12-day period in largely peaceful protests in September and October 2017.3 Shortly after, Anglophone separatists began fighting for independence for the territory they referred to as Southern Cameroons or Ambazonia. The crisis emerged from the long-standing political grievances of the Anglophone community. Yet today, fighting between the two sides makes it difficult to discern motives. Security forces are reportedly targeting Anglophone civilians accused of supporting separatists. It is unclear to what extent security forces are also targeting the Anglophone linguistic and cultural identity. Meanwhile, armed separatists claiming to represent the Anglophone population are reportedly targeting civilians they perceive as supporting the government. This policy brief provides an overview of the risks of mass atrocities in Cameroon’s Anglophone regions and provides recommendations to the Cameroonian government, armed separatist groups, and international actors to prevent atrocities and protect civilians.
Topic:
Non State Actors, State Violence, Risk, Atrocities, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Africa and Cameroon

3. [How] Do External Actors Support Civilian-Led Atrocity Prevention?

Author:
Riva Kantowitz and Kyra Fox
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
This report presents external actors’ perspectives on how to most effectively support civilian-led atrocity prevention efforts. Recent studies suggest that civilians—working through civil society organizations, through less formal, local community mechanisms, or both—are not passive actors but, in fact, use a range of active strategies to prevent atrocities. External support can help or harm these efforts. We use case studies of three external actors—the US government, the Swiss government, and the former Nexus Fund—to understand how these external actors structure their processes to support civilian-led atrocity prevention efforts. These three actors share a stated commitment to help prevent mass atrocities, including through providing support to civil society. Their differences, including the size and scope of foreign assistance, the size of bureaucracies, the configuration of key staff roles, and the degree to which they single out atrocity prevention from other goals, allowed us to explore how these factors affected their support to civilian-led atrocity prevention. We put forward a framework, based on the conclusions from the research, to help external actors identify how to improve their support for civilian-led efforts in practice. The framework encourages external actors to engage with internal process questions such as, “How can we be more accountable to local communities?” and “What is our comparative advantage relative to other donors?” External actors should use this set of questions as a diagnostic tool to create holistic atrocity prevention strategies designed to support civilian-led atrocity prevention efforts. The report’s primary recommendation is that external actors commit their institutions to engaging thoughtfully with the different models and strategies presented, dedicating time and resources to studying their own systems and processes and thinking about how they may be re-imagined to support civilian-led work.
Topic:
Civil Society, Civilians, Atrocities, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Switzerland and United States of America