Petrelis Files

The Genocide Convention, Katrina & Bush

A certain "g" word has been missing from the three (!) weeks of debate about Katrina, her destructive aftermath and the Bush administration's actions before, during and most certainly after she struck New Orleans.

No, the word missing is not gay, as we know a few reverends have blames queers like me and my partner for incurring God's wrath and forcing him to cleanse New Orleans of human trash.

The word is genocide. Can't say I've read any analysis related to Katrina that broaches this question:

Should the Genocide Convention be used to force Bush and his inept appointees to accept their responsibility in the Katrina disaster?

Here is the preamble and the first two articles of the Genocide Convention, which was ratified in the U.S. Senate in 1986:

"Having considered the declaration made by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its resolution 96 (I) dated 11 December 1946 that genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world,

"Recognizing that at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity, and

"Being convinced that, in order to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge, international co-operation is required,

"Hereby agree as hereinafter provided:

"Article I: The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

Yes, I believe some of the subsections apply, particularly the first one.