Search

Begin New Search Topic Atrocity Prevention Author Tallan Donine

1. Climate Change, Response, and Mass Atrocities

Author:
Tallan Donine, Madeleine Maclean, and Daniel Solomon
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
This paper aims to stimulate and frame discussion during the Sudikoff Interdisciplinary Seminar on Genocide Prevention about the relationship between climate change, climate response, and mass atrocities. Based on a review of relevant research, the paper surveys current knowledge about how factors related to (1) climate change and (2) climate response measures might contribute to the risk and prevention of mass atrocities. In the coming decade, climate change will pose significant risks for communities around the world (Buhaug et al. 2023). Mitigation and adaptation measures taken in response to these risks will occupy a large amount of international attention and have important consequences for global political events. Effective action to help prevent and respond to mass atrocities will require clear analysis of the risks and opportunities that these trends present.
Topic:
Climate Change, Atrocities, Adaptation, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Using Targeted Sanctions to Help Prevent Mass Atrocities: Results from Interviews with Experienced Practitioners

Author:
Tallan Donine, Kyra Fox, Daniel Solomon, Alex Vandermaas-Peeler, and Lawerence Woocher
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
The Simon-Skjodt Center’s “lessons learned” project aims to understand better how policy makers, across all levels of government, can take effective action to prevent mass atrocity crimes and protect civilian populations in situations where they face serious threats of group-targeted, systematic violence. We have sought to identify, distill, and organize insights on a range of policy tools—ranging from “naming and shaming” to sanctions to prosecutions—which are sometimes used to help prevent or respond to mass atrocities. To complement our review of the empirical research literature on the use of targeted sanctions, we conducted interviews with people who had substantial policy or operational experience working in the US government on targeted sanctions prior to 2021. The premise for the interviews is that experienced practitioners have important insights about when and how targeted sanctions can be most effective in helping prevent mass atrocities.3 While one can find many ideas about how to use targeted sanctions most effectively, none that we are aware of are: (1) focused specifically on the use of targeted sanctions for mass atrocity prevention and (2) based on the collective perspectives of a set of experienced practitioners. This report summarizes the results of the interviews with experienced targeted sanctions practitioners. Details on the methods employed and the interview respondents are presented in appendices.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Sanctions, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Social Media Platforms, the Risks of Mass Atrocities, and Opportunities for Atrocity Prevention: 2023 Sudikoff Interdisciplinary Seminar on Genocide Prevention

Author:
Tallan Donine
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
On January 19 and 24, the Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum brought together a diverse group of scholars, representatives of social media companies, practitioners, and policy makers for two 90-minute virtual convenings to discuss social media platforms, the risks of mass atrocities, and opportunities for atrocity prevention. Motivations for this seminar included (1) taking stock of knowledge about the relationship between social media, mass atrocities, and atrocity prevention; (2) generating new ideas for future research or practice on this topic; and (3) exploring how the Simon-Skjodt Center can play a constructive role in this area. This rapporteur’s report summarizes key observations raised during both discussions under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution and does not necessarily represent the views of all participants. The first session focused on exploring the interaction between social media platforms and risks of mass atrocities. Guiding questions included: • How might social media platforms contribute to risk factors associated with mass atrocities? • How might perpetrators use social media platforms to enact mass atrocities? • How might the relationship between social media platforms and mass atrocities change in the future? The second session focused on social media platforms and the prevention of mass atrocities. Guiding questions included: • How do technology firms and others understand the risks that social media platforms may inadvertently contribute to the commission of mass atrocities? • What steps have firms taken to date to address these risks? • What new or different actions can social media companies take to design and manage their platforms in ways that would help reduce risks of mass atrocities? • What type of regulation of social media platforms would most effectively balance interests in civil liberties and violence prevention?
Topic:
Genocide, Social Media, Atrocity Prevention, and Risk Assessment
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Social Media, Mass Atrocities, and Atrocity Prevention: 2023 Sudikoff Interdisciplinary Seminar on Genocide Prevention

Author:
Daniel Solomon and Tallan Donine
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
In 2018, anti-Muslim extremists in Sri Lanka organized a series of attacks against Muslim civilians throughout the country (Taub and Fisher 2018). Extremist leaders used a misleading viral video to stoke fears that the country’s Muslim minority was organizing a campaign to sterilize the majority Sinhalese population en masse. The video circulated widely on Facebook, and participants in the violence also set up private WhatsApp groups to coordinate the violence. This is just one example of a disturbing pattern that is increasingly under the spotlight: social media seeming to fuel violence, including large-scale and deliberate attacks on civilians based on their identity. These examples have become widespread in recent years, with attacks on the Rohingya community in Burma, the Muslim community in India, and multiple marginalized groups in Ethiopia and elsewhere following a similar trajectory. Influential users appeared to use social media in these cases to dehumanize their targets, recruit participants, and coordinate violence. Amid public outcry social media firms have begun to develop or revise some policies to limit the spread of harmful content. In the Sri Lanka case, Meta—which operates both Facebook and WhatsApp— acknowledged and apologized for the platforms’ role in the violence (Facebook 2020), issued a series of human rights impact assessments of its role, and stated it would implement policies to address associated human rights concerns from its products, with applications to other high-risk contexts (Sissons 2020). Across social media companies, responses to concerns about “offline harm” have largely focused on content moderation, modifying algorithms that promote different kinds of content, and restricting access to certain users. Many advocates argue that actions to date have not gone far enough, asserting that stronger action—including government regulation—is necessary to prevent social media from contributing to violence, including mass atrocities. Social media use will only continue to rise, especially in countries at high risk of new mass atrocities. Beyond select cases, however, there is insufficient research about the specific relationship between social media platforms and the onset and escalation of mass atrocities—or how social media companies and government actors might limit these platforms’ potential negative effects. The goal of this paper is to stimulate and frame discussion during the Sudikoff Interdisciplinary Seminar on Genocide Prevention about the relationship between social media technologies and the risk and prevention of mass atrocities. Based on a review of relevant research, policy documents, and public statements by social media companies, the paper surveys current knowledge and identifies important gaps in understanding about (1) how social media platforms have contributed to the risk and occurrence of mass atrocities in the past and how they might do so in the future;1 and (2) strategies to help prevent social media from fueling mass atrocities.
Topic:
Social Media, Facebook, Atrocity Prevention, and Risk Assessment
Political Geography:
India, Sri Lanka, and Global Focus

5. Improving the Use of Lessons Learned and Other Evidence for Atrocity Prevention in the US Department of State

Author:
Tallan Donine, Julia Fromholz, and Lawerence Woocher
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
There are no simple solutions to the prevention of mass atrocities. Decisions about what actions to take to address atrocity risks are invariably difficult judgment calls. Given the stakes, policy makers should make every effort to increase their chances—even if just marginally—of making wise decisions. One way to improve policy choices is to use all available information and insights that are relevant to the decision, including lessons or evidence drawn from analysis of experience or data. Virtually every report on US government efforts to prevent mass atrocities has called for greater investment in lessons learned efforts. At the same time, recent legislation and policy initiatives demonstrate that the US government is increasingly committed to using evidence in policy making across the board, including in atrocity prevention. Yet, no study has analyzed the obstacles to using lessons learned and other evidence for atrocity prevention and how they might be addressed. This report seeks to help fill the gap. This report focuses specifically on the use of lessons learned and other evidence within the US Department of State as a whole, given its lead role in developing and carrying out US foreign policy, including actions to help prevent and respond to mass atrocities. The State Department is a large and diverse institution, making it difficult to characterize the degree to which it exhibits the attributes associated with effective use of lessons learned and other evidence. Nevertheless, we identified a number of common themes across interviews with 25 former and current officials, which paint a picture of the difficulty of encouraging use of lessons learned and other evidence for atrocity prevention in the State Department and help identify potential areas for improvement. This report intends to draw attention to areas of atrocity prevention policy making that could be strengthened; it should not be read as an assessment of any particular entity within the Department.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, State Department, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America