Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Burma Publication Year within 1 Year

1. What Could Changing Conflict Dynamics Mean for the Risk of Mass Atrocities in Burma

Author:
Andrea Gittleman and Denise-Nicole Stone
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
In March 2024, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide hosted a private roundtable discussion on potential conflict scenarios in Burma/Myanmar. The discussion explored plausible trajectories of the conflict over the next six months, and whether these paths may lead to increased risk of mass atrocities for civilians. The convening included researchers, policymakers, and civil society representatives and discussed the following questions: • What are the plausible scenarios in which the conflict could evolve in the coming six months? • What would these changes mean in terms of the mass atrocity risks to civilian populations? • Are there specific regions/areas in Burma where civilians may be at especially high risk? • What particular developments should policymakers monitor? • What potential resiliencies exist to mitigate growing or changing mass atrocity risks, and what strategies should US policymakers use to support them? • What are the policy options available to US policymakers? The discussion took place under the Chatham House rule. This report summarizes key topics from the conversation without attribution.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Atrocities, and Armed Conflict
Political Geography:
Burma, Southeast Asia, and Myanmar

2. Leveraging Social Media for Genocide and Mass Atrocity Prevention: Understanding the Digital Toolbox

Author:
Shannon Raj Singh
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
Much of the existing literature discussing social media focuses on how it might fuel or incite mass atrocities, drawing from experiences in contexts such as Sri Lanka and Burma. But there is significantly less awareness of how tools deployed or developed by social media companies might reduce the risk of mass violence and contribute constructively to atrocity prevention efforts. This report aims to address this gap by focusing on how social media tools can support two core atrocity prevention strategies: (1) protecting vulnerable civilian populations at risk of mass atrocities, and (2) degrading potential perpetrators’ capacity to commit mass atrocities. It provides a landscape assessment of the suite of social media product, policy, and operational interventions that may offer potential to support these strategies and articulates some of the associated limitations, risks, and important considerations when these tools are deployed. This report is primarily aimed at those inside social media companies with authority to develop or deploy tools in moments of heightened atrocity risk (which may include trust and safety professionals, human rights or crisis response teams, and senior leadership), as well as atrocity prevention experts and policy makers who may be able to encourage or incentivize the use of digital tools to support atrocity prevention. Select tools may also be of interest or use for humanitarian and civil society advocacy organizations that operate in atrocity risk settings. The objective of this report is to fill a gap by expanding the understanding of both policy makers and social media platform representatives about the available tools in the digital realm to support atrocity prevention efforts, to stimulate future research in this space, and to broaden our collective imaginations in designing modern atrocity prevention policy strategies that leverage digital tools and opportunities. This report is based on a series of semi-structured expert consultations, held under the Chatham House Rule of non-attribution, with more than 30 current and former representatives of social media companies, academics and practitioners specialized in technology and atrocity prevention, and members of at-risk communities who lent their experiences and insights to support this project. The report concludes that expanding the atrocity prevention toolbox to include digital tools and interventions offers an opportunity to develop more modern atrocity prevention strategies to meet the challenges of the moment.
Topic:
Social Media, Atrocities, Digital Policy, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
South Asia, Sri Lanka, and Burma