Abstract
The concept of “triggers” enjoys wide usage in the atrocity prevention policymaking community. However, the concept has received limited academic analysis. This paper reviews the concept critically, develops a definition, and subjects the concept to empirical analysis. The paper offers a mild endorsement of the concept of triggers of atrocity. The paper identifies four main categories of triggering event but cautions that triggers cannot be separated from context or decision-makers.
Highlights
In recent years, analysts have developed increasingly strong models for identifying risk factors of genocide and other mass atrocities, in particular concerning the macro-level drivers of such violence (Goldsmith, Butcher, Semenovich, & Sowmya, 2013; Ulfelder & Valentino, 2008; United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, 2014).1 less is known about the specific timing of when atrocities will start and what will make them start
Studying triggers is an opportunity to adjudicate between competing theoretical models of genocide and mass atrocity
With those concerns in mind, this paper presents a social scientific inquiry into triggers of mass atrocity
Summary
Analysts have developed increasingly strong models for identifying risk factors of genocide and other mass atrocities, in particular concerning the macro-level drivers of such violence (Goldsmith, Butcher, Semenovich, & Sowmya, 2013; Ulfelder & Valentino, 2008; United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, 2014). less is known about the specific timing of when atrocities will start and what will make them start. Studying triggers is an opportunity to adjudicate between competing theoretical models of genocide and mass atrocity With those concerns in mind, this paper presents a social scientific inquiry into triggers of mass atrocity. The paper finds that the triggers most commonly associated with catalyzing mass violence concern changes to the strategic environment, which in turn lends support to strategic theories of genocide and mass atrocity.. Within the sample of cases, battlefield changes, assassinations, and territorial takeovers are those events that are most consistently associated with large increases in the scale and level of large-scale killing of civilians That these types of events are associated with spikes in violence indicates that strategic concerns—retaining power, defeating enemies in wartime, responding to real and perceived threats—are a key dimension of the onset of atrocities
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
