Ethnic Cleansing - what is it?

[Shusha]

In defining it, one thing is clear. One is intent - there needs to be intent to make an area ethnically homogenius. Without intent, it's not ethnic cleansing.

We agree. However, I would add one caveat: if the segregation of two distinct populations is deemed by all parties to be a better, more humanitarian option and more suited to their communities goals then it would not be ethnic cleansing. Rather, I guess it would be, but non-culpable ethnic cleansing, like non-culpable homicide.

I also think we should not conflate genocide with ethnic cleansing. Nor population movements due to conflict and war.

What I see as clear cut examples of ethnic cleansing are:
The Holocaust
The Bosnian/Yugoslavia/Serbian conflict
The Rwandan conflict
The Armenian genocide
The Rohinga in Myanmar
The American treatment of Native Americans
ISIS' actions towards religious minorities, in particular the Azidi's.
The population transfers in the Partition of India
The deliberate population transfers under Stalin in the USSR.
The deliberate expulsion of Jews from Arab Countries.
The expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine.

So, I would put the Holocaust, Rwanda and the Armenian genocide as genocides and not thus not a part of this discussion. I might put ISIS there too -- murder and slavery seem to me to fall under the genocide label rather than the cleansing label. Is ISIS's intent separation or subjugation? If its the latter, and I think it is, then genocide, not EC, imo.

I would suggest that the partitions of India/Pakistan/Bangladesh and Bosnia/Serbia/Yugoslavia MIGHT, possibly, be considered non-culpable EC's. (Though both had elements of genocide and intentional EC). What was the intent of those partitions? Was the intent "just" in those cases? Was there a power disparity between the groups where the more powerful side desired ethnic homogeneity for themselves by involuntarily forcing out another group, or was it a mutual "parting of ways"? I think there are many more examples of this type of population movement which would be considered non-culpable, especially after WWII.

I would suggest that the population movements of the Arab Muslim Palestinians can be attributed largely to conflict and thus lack intent.

Which leaves us with: The Jewish expulsion from Arab countries, the Rohinga, and the First Nations peoples of various countries. Clear ECs.

 

[Coyote]

In defining it, one thing is clear. One is intent - there needs to be intent to make an area ethnically homogenius. Without intent, it's not ethnic cleansing.

We agree. However, I would add one caveat: if the segregation of two distinct populations is deemed by all parties to be a better, more humanitarian option and more suited to their communities goals then it would not be ethnic cleansing. Rather, I guess it would be, but non-culpable ethnic cleansing, like non-culpable homicide.

I think adding that caveat could open up a can of worms...but if you mean by all parties, representatives of both populations involved then it would be in a different category, non-culpable sounds good to me.

I also think we should not conflate genocide with ethnic cleansing. Nor population movements due to conflict and war.

I agree, genocide is so extreme, it is it's own category. Not sure about population movements due to conflict and war, because if some of those conflicts have, at their roots, ethnic/religious/racial divisions then ethnic cleansing might be entangled in the conflict.

What I see as clear cut examples of ethnic cleansing are:
The Holocaust
The Bosnian/Yugoslavia/Serbian conflict
The Rwandan conflict
The Armenian genocide
The Rohinga in Myanmar
The American treatment of Native Americans
ISIS' actions towards religious minorities, in particular the Azidi's.
The population transfers in the Partition of India
The deliberate population transfers under Stalin in the USSR.
The deliberate expulsion of Jews from Arab Countries.
The expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine.

So, I would put the Holocaust, Rwanda and the Armenian genocide as genocides and not thus not a part of this discussion. I might put ISIS there too -- murder and slavery seem to me to fall under the genocide label rather than the cleansing label. Is ISIS's intent separation or subjugation? If its the latter, and I think it is, then genocide, not EC, imo.

With ISIS, it's hard to tell. Their actions with the Azedi are genocidal imo. With other religions, it seems more subjugation.

I would suggest that the partitions of India/Pakistan/Bangladesh and Bosnia/Serbia/Yugoslavia MIGHT, possibly, be considered non-culpable EC's. (Though both had elements of genocide and intentional EC). What was the intent of those partitions? Was the intent "just" in those cases? Was there a power disparity between the groups where the more powerful side desired ethnic homogeneity for themselves by involuntarily forcing out another group, or was it a mutual "parting of ways"? I think there are many more examples of this type of population movement which would be considered non-culpable, especially after WWII.

I think India/Pakistan/Bangladesh could be a mixture of non-culpable (the initial splits) and culpable (some of the actions undertaken targeting and killing huge numbers of "the other"). The intent by the powers was certainly not a removal of "undesirables" - so, yes I agree with you on that.

Bosnia is at the least ethnic cleansing, if not downright genocide. It purposely targeted and killed specific ethnic groups - there was intent.

I would suggest that the population movements of the Arab Muslim Palestinians can be attributed largely to conflict and thus lack intent.

I might say that too is mixed - for example there is much movement due to fear of conflict but there is also some intentional expulsions as well.

Which leaves us with: The Jewish expulsion from Arab countries, the Rohinga, and the First Nations peoples of various countries. Clear ECs.

Agree with one caveat. Some Arab countries intentionally expelled their Jews (clear EC), in some others, they fled fearing reprisals so that would be conflict related.

 

[Shusha]

Not much to respond to as we largely agree.

I would suggest that the population movements of the Arab Muslim Palestinians can be attributed largely to conflict and thus lack intent.

I might say that too is mixed - for example there is much movement due to fear of conflict but there is also some intentional expulsions as well.

While I agree there were some localities (for example, Lydda) where an actual expulsion took place, the intent seems to be based on military advantage or need, rather than on a specific intent to EC.

What would you bring as argument for the intent to EC, as opposed to consequences of war?