THE EIGHT STAGES OF 20TH CENTURY ACCORDING TO GREGORY STANTON’S CRITERIA

Item Type text; Electronic Thesis

Authors Kmeid, Amani

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 25/09/2021 22:59:38

Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/630281

THE EIGHT STAGES OF GENOCIDE

20TH CENTURY GENOCIDES ACCORDING TO GREGORY STANTON’S

CRITERIA

By

Amani Kmeid

______

A Thesis submitted to the Honors College

In Partial Fulfillment of the Bachelor’s degree with With Honors in

Global Studies

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

M A Y 2 0 1 8

Approved by:

______

Dr. Katherine Snyder School of Geography and Development

Kmeid 1

Abstract:

Through the analysis of three 20th century genocides: the , , the

Cambodian genocide, this research paper will utilize Gregory Stanton’s (1998) original genocide criteria. He describes eight key stages of a genocide: classification, symbolization, dehumanization, organization, polarization, preparation, extermination, and denial, in that particular order. The recognition of these phases has allowed for the identification of past genocides whose statuses were once disputed by providing a rubric to compare other events to, while also aiding in the de-escalation and prevention of future genocides by allowing officials and the global community to recognize what is occurring, and stop it before it progresses.

These examples of genocides were chosen without any prior knowledge as to whether or not they would in fact fit Stanton’s structure, but selected as a random sampling of 20th century genocides from various regions of the world. This paper also tries to understand how these three aforementioned genocides each conformed to Stanton’s rubric long before any official publishing, while also being geographically distant and culturally dissimilar. Were the methods applied in each of the eight stages similar? How successful were they in their genocidal process?

Alongside historical evidence, testimonies, and scholarly discussions, this paper seeks to address all of these questions and more.

Kmeid 2

Introduction

The classification of mass murders as genocides has been debated by many renowned, scholars for centuries. Gregory Stanton’s 1996 briefing paper explicitly quotes The International

Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in order to provide a universal basis for any categorization of a massacre:

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. (1)

Alongside this definition, he stresses the importance of the intent behind the mass killings, which may be “deduced from the systematic pattern of their acts” (Stanton, 2), and would in turn be used to decipher the perpetrators ambition to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group in full, OR at least in part. This definition, our understanding of intent, and the eight stages of genocide defined by Stanton, will be used together to classify (or deny the classification of) these massacres as genocides. This paper will focus on three of the many genocides that occurred during the 20th century. The first will be the Holodomor that occurred in Ukraine between the

1932-1933. Ukrainians of the late 1920s and early 1930s were immensely nationalistic in the face of the . They viewed themselves as distinct from the Russian identity, with separate languages, cultures, and origin. What began as Stalin’s grand attempt to improve the economic issues present during his reign of the Soviet Union, quickly became a man-made mass that almost exclusively targeted the Ukrainian peasantry. Also observed as the to the “Ukrainian problem”, consisting of Ukrainian nationalism, culture, language, and

Kmeid 3

religion, the Holodomor (holod meaning “hunger, mor meaning “plague”) served to finally assimilate the Ukrainian state into urban Soviet Russia. Through the collectivization of once peasant-owned lands, the Soviet leadership was able to increase exports through the requisitioning of tones of grains from Soviet Ukraine, unilaterally starving and eradicating

Ukrainian nationalism and its adherents. Alone, the death of five-seven million Ukrainians between 1932-33 remained insufficient in defining the Holodomor as a genocide, as many insisted this event was an unavoidable natural disaster that resulted in severe malnutrition.

However, since “Ukraine, along with the North Caucasus (also severely stricken), [was] normally the most fertile area of the cast country, all the more paradoxical and poignant the tragedy that overwhelmed the second most populous nation of the Soviet Union” (Dolot, 1987: vii). It is the publication of Ukraine’s distinct, nationalistic identity, and Stalin’s direct assault upon them, that revolutionized our understanding of the Holodomor and its true origins and intentions.

Secondly, this paper will focus on the Holocaust. While World War II did not begin until

1941the roots of the Holocaust can be found in 1933, following Hitler’s rise to power. While the

Nazis went to extreme lengths to achieve their goals, particularly racial purity and spatial expansion, they were rather typical in who they chose to attack. Hitler’s idea of racial purity encouraged the development of an “Aryan race”, and he used the isolation and vulnerability of asocial populations, such as the disabled and the Sinti and Roma, in order to achieve this new order. Through — selective breeding — Hitler hoped to rid the world of all those deemed unworthy, while also creating a master race. This new master race would consist of

Germans and ethnic Germans — Germans living abroad — and they:

“were to settle eastern Europe, where they would produce food and babies for the “Aryan race.” To make such settlements possible, the plan demanded elimination of the people

Kmeid 4

currently living there. Tens of millions of Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, and others were to be forced into less desirable areas, allowed to die of starvation or disease, or killed. A small percentage would be kept as slaves for the German empire. Jews were to disappear altogether.” (Bergen, 2002: 213)

Since the essence of Hitler’s plans relied on winning the approval of Germans at home, Hitler

“brought in millions of people considered disposable,” the aforementioned asocials, “and used them to make waging a war of annihilation as comfortable as possible for the German people”

(Bergen, 2002: 215). While Germans did not necessarily endorse Hitler’s plan to annihilate several different populations, Hitler ensured that Germans were never directly compromised by his ploys to eliminate asocials, and construed their passivity as acceptance of his plans for the new “Aryan race”. So long as German lives were thriving, they paid little attention to the atrocities occurring around them under the Nazi Regime.

Lastly, The Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK), also known as the , took power in 1975 hoping to “transform into a rural, classless society in which there were no rich people, no poor people, and no exploitation” (Dy, 2007: 2), thus resulting in the

Cambodian genocide. While most believed that they would find peace under this new leadership, one that would hopefully save them from U.S. presence in their territory, and the damage that the

Vietnam War had inflicted on their country, they were sorely mistaken. Days after the Khmer

Rouge came to power, two million people were forced from the capital, , and neighboring cities, into the countryside. “The nation’s cities were evacuated, hospitals emptied, schools closed, factories deserted, money and wages abolished, monasteries empties, libraries scattered” (Kiernan, 2004: 339), and citizens were sent to undertake agricultural work in the new collectivized nation. Thousands of evacuees, particularly those who were young, old, pregnant, and sick perished during the journey. In the confusion of the sudden upheaval of a seemingly orderly civilization, husbands and wives were separated, children were lost, and many were

Kmeid 5

never reunited. “It is estimated that between 1.7 and 2 million Cambodians died during the four year reign of the Khmer Rouge” (United to End Genocide), while several hundred thousand

Cambodians fled the country and became refugees. Those targeted most severely by the regime were “the Muslim Cham as an ethnic and religious group; the Vietnamese communities as an ethnic and, perhaps, a racial group; and the Buddhist monkhood as a religious group” (Kiernan,

2004: 354), all of which were protected under the of 1948.

Also at risk were Cambodians with any affiliation with the previous government, the Khmer

Republic government. Lead by , the Khmer Rouge Regime also chose to rename the country the Democratic of Kampuchea (DK).

The Genocidal Process

Classification

Easily classified by their race, language, and geographical location, Ukrainians refused assimilation into Russia, and fought to preserve their independence, though “the absence of natural borders helps explain why Ukraine failed… to establish true sovereignty” (Applebaum,

2017: 2). In 1929, in an attempt to abolish the Ukrainian identity, Moscow had initiated:

“a full-scale campaign against anything that could identify Ukraine as a separate nation, starting with the destruction of Ukrainian scientific and cultural organizations and institutions, and ending with the arrest, execution, or banishment to concentration camps of all those who dared to raise their voices in defense of Ukrainian self-determination” (Dolot, 1987: xiv).

It was soon after realized by the Party that the Ukrainian farmers were the root of the national movement, as they were viewed as the most nationalistic, anti-assimilation group, and thus the brunt of the Soviet campaign targeted the Ukrainian peasantry. The Soviet Union moved into villages and removed any pre-existing, government officials. Upon arrival, they targeted a clear enemy, the “petty capitalists” and the “class enemy”, locally known as the Ukrainian kurkul.

Kmeid 6

According to a Party Commissar, “‘Kurkuls are exploiters of the poor; they are the remnants of the old regime, and they must be liquidated as such. Also those who oppose the policy of the

Party and Government will be considered kurkuls. They will also be liquidated’” (Dolot, 1987:

35). This definition allows for any peasant to be considered a kurkul, which encouraged joining the collectivization to avoid being classified as such. By creating an enemy of the state, the

Soviet Union was able to push peasants to join collectivization ‘willingly’ or else be targeted by the Party.

While it is well known that Nazi focused on annihilating the Jewish population of Europe, the regime also targeted other populations. persecuted millions of non-

Jewish Poles, Soviet prisoners of war, accused partisans, Communists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, gypsies (Sinti and Roma) Afro-Germans, disabled people, and gay men. Gay women were not regarded as an issue, particularly since they could be forced to bear children without consent, while gay men were seen as betraying their race by not reproducing. Most of the aforementioned groups could be easily identified, as they were often found participating in activities directly related to their class, be it a gay bar or in a home for the disabled. The Jewish population, however, could not be easily identified, as there were:

“wealthy Jews in Europe around 1930 as well as middle-class and very poor Jews. There were Jewish bankers and shopkeepers, Jewish doctors, nurses, actors, professors, soldiers, typists, peddlers, factory owners, factory workers, kindergarten teachers, conservatives, liberals, nationalists, feminists, anarchists, and Communists” (Bergen, 2002: 20).

Prior to the implementation of the Nuremberg Laws in 1935, many whom anti-semites considered Jews, did not regard themselves as Jewish, be it due to intermarriages generations ago, or religious conversion. The Nuremberg Laws consisted of two parts. Its first section, known as “the Law for Protection of German Blood and Honor… forbade marriage or sexual

Kmeid 7

relations between Jews and “Aryan” Germans” (Bergen, 2002: 91). Many Germans left their spouses and families in order to protect themselves from any wrongdoing. The second part, known as the Reich Citizenship Law of November 1935, detailed exactly who was to be considered a Jew in the eyes of Nazi Germany law:

“According to Nazi , Jewishness was a racial trait… but there were no reliable markers of appearance, blood type, or any other physical traits that Nazi “experts” could use to separate Jews from “Aryans.” Instead [under] the Nuremberg Laws… people with three or more grandparents of the Jewish faith counted as Jews… The Nuremberg Laws considered people who had two grandparents of the Jewish faith to be Mischlinge , or “mixed bloods”... Mischlinge who were Jewish by religion or who married people categorized as Jews also counted as Jews. Some Mischlinge who had no contact with Judaism or Jews likewise ended up being treated as Jews, perhaps because they looked stereotypically Jewish or had especially hostile neighbors or coworkers” (Bergen, 2002: 92).

Even with the use of the Nuremberg Laws, the identification of those deemed Jews was not straightforward. Many Jews managed to escape the law, particularly children who were hidden away or adopted by non-Jewish “Aryans”. There were those who were captured and died as

“Jews”, even though they were not technically Jews under the Nuremberg Laws. Despite the systematic classification of those Hitler did not want in his new order, it was by no means a flawless endeavor, and was rather subjective to those rounding up individuals at any given time.

While the Khmer Rouge actively targeted several different groups of people during their time, they categorized the population into two distinguishable groups based on their affiliations with the . The Base People, also known as the old people, were “those who had lived in rural areas controlled by the CPK prior to April 17, 1975” (Dy, 2007: 30). These people were often members of poor or lower classes, employed in farming or other labor-intensive industries. Base People were granted full-rights, and could vote, run for elections, and become chiefs. These people had no direct relation to the Khmer Republic, and were thus trusted. Within this classification were ‘candidates’, or those who had distant relatives who had worked for the

Kmeid 8

Khmer Republic. So long as candidates worked hard, they were tolerated and granted full-rights too. The , or 17 April people, “were those evacuated from the cities and towns in

April 1975... many of them were from the countryside and had gone to the cities to escape the war” (Dy, 2007: 30), and were suspected or confirmed accomplices of the Khmer Republic.

Viewed with hatred and suspicion, these people were granted no rights and treated much harsher than Base People. In the end, however, the Khmer Rouge regime would assault, punish, and torment whoever it took to achieve their goals. Classification by no means granted anyone safety.

When classifying enemies, The Khmer Rouge also had two separate groups. The Internal

Enemies were the New People, as well as those not ethnically Khmer, consisting of officials of the Khmer Rouge government, minorities consisting of Cham Muslims, Vietnamese, ethnic

Chinese, and monks, in addition to indigenous highlanders, , alleged traitors, and anyone who had received a (foreign) education. External Enemies referred to the U.S., who had gained animosity by utilizing Cambodia as a regrouping zone and bombing the nation, as well as its allies, such as , , and the Soviet Union. Anyone who served the of these nations was also viewed as a threat, and the Khmer Rouge regime utilized this as a convenient excuse to execute people as needed.

Symbolization

In Ukraine, kurkuls were best identified through their possessions. Though it varied from year to year as Stalin’s policies waxed and waned, “in a poor village, ‘wealthy’ could mean a man with two pigs instead of one” (Applebaum, 2017: 123), a sign of a farmer who had yet to join collectivization. A collectivized household would not have any personal animals aside from a flock of chickens and possibly a pig, as horses and cows would have been sequestered by the

Party and taken to a collectivized location to be ‘shared’ by all. Owning grain rations, large farm

Kmeid 9

animals, a wagon, or even personal possessions, such as jewelry or a bible, that were previously owned by someone classified as a kurkul would endanger the owner(s) and encourage their classification as kurkul, followed by extermination.

Under the Nazis, inside and outside of ghettos, labor camps, and concentration camps, those targeted were required to wear different symbols depending on their aforementioned classifications. The Jewish star, made out of two yellow triangles and sewed onto clothing, is most infamously known as a symbol utilized to recognize Jews before and during the Holocaust.

Aside from the yellow Jewish patches, “criminals wore a green triangle; Communists received red. Roma and “asocials” were marked with a black badge, and Jehovah’s Witnesses with purple.

A pink triangle designated homosexual men” (Bergen, 2002: 219). The utilization of symbols illustrates the systematic methods Nazis put into effect during the Hitler regime to isolate their targets from “Aryans” who were scared, and often too disgusted, to be associated with them. The isolation of Nazi targets was a key tool, as their dissociation from public life made their extermination go unnoticed and unopposed.

While symbolization during the Cambodian genocide was not as systematically implemented as in the Holocaust, the Khmer Rouge regime did enforce their traditional, black revolutionary costumes to be worn across the nation, while also banning any cultural or religious attire. These clothes were to be worn at all times, during work, special events, and even weddings — bride included. As the Khmer Rouge reign progressed, the “politically suspect”

(Kiernan, 2004: 347) Eastern Zone of Cambodia was forced to wear blue-checked scarves, marking them for relocation and elimination (Stanton, 1998)

Kmeid 10

Dehumanization

Ukrainians and kurkuls were dehumanized differently, as kurkuls were betrayers to the state and thus punished. Ukrainian peasants were needed to harvest crops and serve the Party.

Often referred to as bloodsuckers, parasites, agricultural vermin, and animal pests (Dolot,1987: ix, 35) kurkuls were quickly identified and then eliminated. Ukrainian peasants, on the other hand, were treated with an air of respect, for they had joined the collectivization, and therefore succumbed to joining the Party. Though they were beneath Russians, the peasants were otherwise capable of escaping abusive language and insults. However, their houses were entered without warning, they were stripped of the few belongings they had, and were left to live an austere and depressing life.

Victims of the Nazi Regime could not escape name calling and ridicule from propaganda and Nazi officials. “Rats”, “vermin”, “useless eaters”, and “unworthy lives” are just a few of the barbaric terms used when talking to or referring to Jews, asocials, etc. The utilization of these terms on public platforms “served to disseminate stereotypes, normalize stigmatization, and further isolate Jews and other targets of abuse” (Bergen, 2002: 76). At several points throughout

Hitler’s regime, compulsory sterilization was implemented and targeted different groups each time. “In July 1933 Hitler proclaimed the Law for Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased

Offspring,” (Bergen, 2002: 80) which ordered the sterilization of people with specific physical and psychiatric conditions, such as alcoholism, schizophrenia, epilepsy, and “feeblemindedness”, used to directly target Roma and Sinti. The compulsory registration of Germans deemed “half- breeds” resulted in the sterilization of almost all 385 people who had registered under this classification prior to 1937. Afterwards, as Hitler began to experiment with different methods of exterminating people, he implemented a euthanasia program that worked towards perfecting his

Kmeid 11

eradication technique. Perhaps almost worse than that was the social isolation victims experienced both at the hands of German authorities and friends and colleagues alike. Spouses divorced targeted spouses, friends alienated those who were sought after, and “university administrators fired scholars who were not in fact targeted by the law, for example, Christian men with Jewish wives or people whose parents had converted from Judaism to ”

(Bergen, 2002: 77) in hopes of appearing eager to cooperate with the new Reich. Upon seizing

Poland, German authorities instilled several prohibitions to strain the Polish population, whereby

Nazis:

“imposed curfews and seized Polish businesses. They shut down Polish newspapers, closed cultural institutions, and used forced labor and public hangings to make examples of people who defied them. Members of the SS, police, and regular military, along with local collaborators, also terrorized Poles, Jews and non-Jews, in less organized ways that included theft, beating, castration, and rape. Poles were not permitted to say, “Heil Hitler,” nor could they serve Germans in shops. Laws forbade friendships between Germans and Poles and criminalized sexual relationships” (Bergen, 2002: 137).

Those recognized as Jewish under the Nuremberg Laws lost the right to German citizenship, thus placing them in a limbo where their residency was illegal. The dehumanization of these groups served to distance them from the “Aryan race” and increase their daily adversities, without ever directly affecting Germans and ethnic-Germans.

Dehumanized under the Khmer Rouge Regime, life was difficult and cruel, and rules were put in place in order to completely expel any type of comfort to the grueling lifestyle, including:

“[abolishing] money, free markets, normal schooling, private property, foreign clothing styles, religious practices, and traditional Khmer culture. Public schools, pagodas, mosques, churches, universities, shops and government buildings were shut or turned into prisons, stables, reeducation camps and granaries. There was no public or private transportation, no private property, and no non-revolutionary entertainment. Leisure activities were severely restricted” (Dy, 2007: 2)

Kmeid 12

The regime worked hard to deprive every one of their basic human rights, which included banning travelling, gathering, affection, humor, and family relationships, as well as prohibiting

“freedom of the press, movement, worship, organization, association, and discussion…”

(Kiernan, 2004: 339). They soon began conducting mass weddings “in which there were as few as 3 to 10 couples and as many as 30 to 50, or even more than 100, at each ceremony” (Dy,

2007: 32), and where men and women were not allowed to choose their partner, or meet beforehand. Families of the bride and groom were not allowed to attend the ceremonies, nor were traditional clothing, dancing, singing or religious ceremonies permitted. These weddings were purely strategic, and worked to secure the next generation of peasant farmers that would carry on the collectivized routine. Most people worked up to twelve hours a day for seven days a week and experienced extreme malnutrition. Child labor (those under fourteen years old) often included collecting manure, cutting small plants, collecting human waste to make fertilizer, and carrying weapons to the battlefield, while adults (those over the age of 14) “were given the most difficult tasks, such as digging canals and reservoirs, building dikes, cutting logs, clearing land for cultivation, and planting and harvesting rice” (Dy, 2007: 37). Those who were directly targeted, such as minorities and New People, experienced an extreme amount of criticism. They were classified as “parasites” and were frequently tormented with slogans such as “17 April people are parasitic plants. They are the losers of the war and prisoners of war” and “To keep you is no gain; to lose you is no loss” (Dy, 2007: 31). Other instances of dehumanization were the disrobing and persecution of monks, as well as enforcing pork consumption upon Muslim

Chams, purposefully disregarding their beliefs. The Khmer Rouge regime enjoyed belittling the vast majority of the population, and did not hesitate to make lives miserable.

Kmeid 13

Organization

Upon replacing Ukrainian officials, the Soviet Party formed an entirely new administration within the village, while also dividing houses into subunits of Hundreds, Tens, and Fives. Each of these units was monitored by a member of the Party, or a villager who was granted power. The structure introduced to each Ukrainian village was as follows:

● The Communist Party organization, the general membership meeting, and the Board of

Managers were the collective farm’s governing bodies.

● The Auditorial Commission and the Kolhosp Court carried out punishments.

● The Bread Procurement Commissioner was charged with securing grain quotas

throughout Ukraine.

● The Special Section reported everything occurring in each subunit.

● Workers and Peasants Inspection assured the loyalty and efficiency of officials in the

village.

● The Komsomol (Young Communist League, ages 14-26) was considered the future of the

Communist Party and gave organizational support to the Party.

● The Pioneers (ages 8-14) were the messengers and agents between subunits and villages.

● The Komnezam introduced the Revolution into the village and assisted in the

enforcement of food deliveries to the state.

● Agitators, Activists, and Propagandists were used to spread the message of the Soviet

Union and encourage the joining of collectivization.

With the fear of being called kurkul — an “enemy of the people” — already instilled across Ukrainian villages, no one dared outwardly deny participation in collectivization when called upon. As described in Execution by Hunger, peasants were encouraged to join

Kmeid 14

collectivization, as the benefits were numerous, and none were forced. However, when faced with the option of signing the collectivization agreement or being eliminated, many chose the former, or else be the victims of “path treading”, “cooling off”, or “socialist competition”. “Path treading” occurred when someone wouldn't sign the agreement, whereby they would be sent across the Hundreds to deliver messages while treading through the snow, night or day. Upon returning to their Hundred, they would find a new summons. If they didn’t sign the agreement then, they would be sent “path treading” once more. The “cooling off” period occurred afterwards, where peasants would wait to make their anti-collectivization case in a cold, locked shed for hours. This process was repeated daily until the victim surrendered to the officials demands. Lastly, “socialist competition” was installed between the Party functionaries of each

Hundred, Ten, and Five. This was intended to encourage the Party functionaries to recruit more collectivized farmers within their subunit, perhaps unbeknownst to them, a percentage of the

Party functionaries who had the least amount of collectivized farms were later eliminated and replaced. Blacklisting had existed back in the 1920s as a way for factories to track their best and worst employees. In 1932, this technique resurfaced and was applied rigorously. More predominantly in Ukraine than elsewhere in the USSR, “provincial and local authorities had begun to blacklist collective farms, cooperatives and even whole villages that had failed to meet their grain quotas, and to subject them to a range of punishments and sanctions” (Applebaum,

2017: 194).

Collectivization was synchronized with the first Five Year Plan, designed to industrialize

Soviet Russia’s predominantly rural country. The necessary foreign tools necessary to complete this plan could only be obtained through the profits obtained via exporting raw materials, triggering the catastrophic demand that devastated and impoverished the Ukrainian peasantry

Kmeid 15

further. Stalin’s plan required the extraction of grains for growing the urban population, as well as for export. As the Soviet Union’s situation became more and more dire, as did the grain extractions:

“In 1930, with the harvest of 83.5 million tons, the regime extracted from the peasants 22 million and exported 5.5. In the next year the country, largely for the reasons already adduced, produced 14 million tons less, but the regime squeezed out of the terrorized peasantry 22.8 million and exported 4.5. It did not take an agronomist to see that this was a path to disaster, yet the regime went on raising its quotas for compulsory deliveries. When it became clear in the course of 1932 that the quota for state grain procurement could not physically be met, Stalin in his fury ordered all the available stocks to be seized, no matter what the consequences for the local population” (Dolot, 1987: x).

That year, despite serious crop failure, 29.5 million tons of grains had been procured — the highest amount to date. By the end of the year, the Ukrainian peasantry was already starving, yet the Soviet Union exported 1.5 million tons of grain; enough to have fed the six-eight million people who had starved to death in 1932-33 (Dolot, 1987: x). The Soviet Union’s effort to eliminate the Ukrainian peasantry and increase the grain exports was calculated. Brute force was rarely their method, as their attempts to recruit collectivized farms was originally slow and methodical. There was a clear sequence of instructions the Party members were meant to follow, as pre-determined by those of higher rank. Through fear of elimination, slow starvation, and the promise of food for work in the collectivized farms, the Party left peasants with little to no choice if they intended on surviving the industrialization of the Soviet Union.

During the Holocaust, comprising of six chronological phases, Hitler’s systematic organization leading up to the eventual genocide of millions of people was a thorough, conniving scheme meant to shatter and then recreate a new Europe. Phase One: The Nazi Revolution lasted from 1933-1934. During this time period, Hitler came to power and began establishing his vision for the new order he sought. Much of this phase consisted of trial and error, whereby they:

Kmeid 16

“realized that it was easiest to attack people who were already marginalized… [Also], they learned that members of the general public were more likely to participate in or at least tolerate attacks on minorities if they stood to gain rather than to lose from such initiatives… unanimous approval was not required. Indifference of the majority was all that was needed to carry out many plans” (Bergen, 2002: 78).

This realization encouraged the implementation of ‘Gleichschaltung’ (Coordination), which dissolved and outlawed all political parties other than the Nazi Party, while also establishing new

Nazi groups that swallowed pre-existing associations and created new, one-of-a-kind groups focused on serving a singular population, such as the new Nazi-run Labor front that replaced the old trade union. This organization served to ensure that members of different genders, age groups, and industries each felt uniquely tended to and understood under Hitler’s regime. In May

1933, book burnings were organized as an event to unite anti-semites against Jews, specifically

Jewish authors, but was also a tactic to present the intimidating presence of the Nazi regime.

Lastly, Hitler used this time to secretly rearm, using the Agricultural Tractor Program as a cover for building tanks. By 1934, Germany was producing explosives, ships, and aircrafts, and by

1935 they completely disregarded any sense of secrecy, becoming a military power once again.

Phase Two: Routinization went on from 1934-1937 and focused on developing four main components that were meant to assist in normalizing violence and legalizing Nazis’ extreme measures. Firstly, after the death of the German President Hindenburg in 1934, Hitler took the opportunity to unite the offices of president and chancellor, in an act of centralization, thus officially gaining control of the German armed forces, which were legally under the control of the president as supreme commander. The second component of Phase Two, legalization, designated who was to be considered Jewish under the Nuremberg Laws and the Reich

Citizenship Law. The third component, routinization, encouraged normalizing the Nazi Party’s presence in Germany. The Annual Party Rally became a favorite amongst the “Aryan race”.

Kmeid 17

Those targeted by the regime, on the other hand, saw routinized harassment and confinement, specifically during the 1936 Winter Olympics where Sinti and Roma were thrown into ghettos to make Germany more aesthetically pleasing. The fourth and final component, self-coordination, encouraged others to inform the Nazi Party of Jews or asocials in the area, or of anyone breaking the laws instilled to keep these targets isolated. This was successful solely because “Aryans” viewed this as a superior technique for bettering their position and indicating their acceptance to the Reich’s initiative. 1936 marked the first year of Hitler’s 4 years plan, which sought to ensure

Germany would be both socially and militarily ready for war by 1940.

Phase Three: Open Aggression spanned from 1938-1939 and was the period during which Hitler actively sought aggression and war. While many at home were wary of his aspirations, the successes his foreign policies and national laws exhibited bought him new support. In October of 1938, the German government expelled fourteen thousand Jews who had been previously living in Germany, but were Polish citizens. According to the Polish decree, citizens living outside of the country had to revalidate their passports or risk forfeiting their right to return to Poland, and fearful that they would get stuck with this mass group of Jews, Germany dumped them at the border. Initially, many were turned away from Poland, but Jews within vouched for providing them with refuge, and the Polish government allowed them to enter. Thus began Germany’s search for aggression and war. Violence within Hitler’s anti-Jewish plight is namely marked by the Kristallnacht (“The Night of Broken Glass”), which took place November

9 and 10, 1938. While many attacks on the Jewish population had already occurred prior, the

Kristallnacht marked the beginning of violence towards Jews for simply being Jewish. Military and SS officers, “Aryan” youths and the general public all:

“torched synagogues and destroyed ritual objects associated with Judaism, such as Torah scrolls… [some were] lured by the possibility of loot, still others just eager for action.

Kmeid 18

Crowds smashed the windows of businesses owned by Jews; they vandalized and stole Jewish property. The attackers did not spare Jewish homes. They forced their way in, robbing, beating, raping, and demolishing… They burned scores of synagogues all over Germany and and killed about a hundred Jews. Nazi authorities rounded up some thirty thousand Jewish men and sent them to concentration camps” (Bergen, 2002: 110)

The men seized during the Kristallnacht were some of the first Jews arrested for simply being

Jewish, and the first mass group of Jewish men sent to concentration camps. On an international level, Germany successfully invaded Poland, annexed Austria, and overthrew Czechoslovakia, and each of these wins reassured the German people, and Hitler himself, of the Nazi Party’s power. During phase three, the concentration camp system, often abbreviated as “KZ”,”KL”, or

“Lager”, expanded across Europe. The annexation of Austria and the arrests of Jewish men from the Kristallnacht meant there was a large influx of prisoners in need of containment centers.

Concentration camps were originally advertised as reeducation programs, where political opponents or asocials could be rehabilitated before returning to civilization as useful citizens.

Lagers were also considered a location to hold troublemakers in protective custody, which the

Nazi government used to “[give] itself the legal right to imprison suspects without a trial”

(Bergen, 2002: 114). Unbeknownst to the German Homefront, the essence of Hitler’s foreign policy approach consisted of talking of peace, while secretly preparing for war. Between 1935 and 1939, Hitler negotiated several agreements and pacts, be it the Anglo-German Naval

Agreement of 1935, whereby Hitler and Britain swore to prevent a naval arms race regardless of

Hitler’s inventions of turning around and building a navy, or the 1939 Pact of Steel where

Germany and Italy promised friendship and mutual . The biggest achievements of foreign policy schemes was the German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact, or the Hitler Stalin Pact, of August

1939, which included “public proclamations of friendship between the two rival powers”

(Bergen, 2002: 117), and secretly agreeing to divide eastern Europe into two spheres, one for

Kmeid 19

each nation. The public image of these policies promised peace and prosperity, but little did the

German Homefront and the rest of Europe know, Hitler had no intention of abiding by his policies.

Phase Four: War against Poland and the “Euthanasia” Program lasted from 1939-1940.

The invasion of Poland (September 1939) served to acquire new territory, one of Hitler’s main goals of his “race and space” objective, find Volksdeutsche — ethnic Germans living outside of

Germany, and begin the Ghettoization of Poland. Forcing “Jews out of their homes, in villages, small towns, and cities, into designated urban areas called ghettos” (Bergen, 2002: 145) created new space for ethnic Germans to move closer to the Reich and be included in the new Nazi order. Once occupied, the Nazi Party restructured many Polish hospitals to aid in “euthanizing” unwanted Poles. For starters, the “euthanasia” program is within quotations because this project did not take into consideration the suffering or wishes of the person, only if they could contribute to the Aryan race, thus disassociating it with the true meaning of the merciful death euthanasia is usually acquainted with. Questionnaires were handed out to nurses charged with assisting in the program. People were not asked about their ailments, but rather of their status in relation to the

Nuremberg Laws. Marking lists with plus and minus signs, the nurses rarely assessed the victims prior to condemning them to their deaths. Children, adult, and asocial euthanasia programs were each embedded in discreet offices, with the intention of learning how best to kill large numbers of people and later dispose of their bodies. Doctors saw this as an opportunity to not only show loyalty to the Nazi Party, but also to make a finding that would advance their own careers. Hitler made it clear that these euthanasia facilities were not meant to strengthen the Polish population, but rather exterminate certain groups to reduce the strain of caring for such heavily inhabited ghettos, as well as to clear large buildings for Nazi Party use. Once doctors began to fear they

Kmeid 20

would be charged with wrongful killings, the doctors required Hitler to backdate a letter granting physicians the right to give patients a ‘mercy death’. Hitler received scornful remarks from the general public, particularly from those whose elder family members had suddenly died.

Ultimately valuing the public's approval more than anything else, in late August 1941, Hitler ordered the halt of euthanasia programs. Stage one of his killing program was complete, and with all the information he learned about mass killings, it was time to move onto stage two, which brought about the beginnings of mass gassing in concentration camps.

Phase Five: Expansion and Systemization brought about conquering northern and western

Europe, as well as the growth and development of Hitler’s killing units. After he had gained control in Poland, he turned to Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and

France in the beginning of 1940, before later attacking Yugoslavia and Greece in spring 1941, and the Soviet union that same summer. Hitler was immensely successful in achieving his

“space” goal, as much of Europe became either under his control, or at the very least under his direct influence. With new territories came more people to kill, and by the end of 1941, German mobile killing units, both larger and more efficient than before, would murder hundreds or thousands of Jews by shooting them into mass graves, and eventually, two million Soviet prisoners of war would be killed in German captivity while aiding in the laborious job of preparing the killing centers. The systemization of these killings increased the efficiency of mass murder, where instead people would soon walk into a chamber and collectively die from gassings.

One great misconception is the amount of killings that occurred during the Holocaust.

While there were in fact millions of murders throughout the twelve years of Hitler and the Nazi

Party’s reign, “in early 1942, even after three years of war, ghettoization, hunger, forced labor,

Kmeid 21

and massacres, 75 percent of the Jews who would be murdered in the Holocaust were still alive”

(Bergen, 2002: 237). Most of those who lost their lives were killed during Phase Six: War and

Genocide, between 1942 and 1943. The Nazi Party found itself in a position to fully tackle the

Jewish question, and made it a top priority to rid Europe of Jewish people. The Wannsee

Protocol of January 1942 was responsible for coordinating procedures that would eventually resolve the Jewish question, and elite participants of this conference spent time discussing the various categories of Jews, particularly what was to occur to the Mischlinge — Germans with mixed Jewish and non-Jewish blood. This protocol resulted in drawing up lists of who was to be killed and who was to be spared, highlighting the bureaucratic and business-like aspects of the

Holocaust. This conference also gave participants time to report on the progress of their destruction thus far, illuminating which countries were still infested, as well as those where the

Jewish problem had been annihilated. The fate of the remaining eleven million Jews was decided, as the conference members also began seeking methods for their next targets outside of

Europe. Hitler had no intention of stopping at European borders, for his final plan was for no single Jew to exist any longer, so as to ensure they would not be able to reproduce and re-infest his territory.

The organization of The Democratic of Kampuchea gave way to their primary tactic, which included isolating the country from the outside world. In order to achieve this, “borders were closed, all neighboring countries militarily attacked, use of foreign language banned, embassies and press agencies exploded, local newspapers and television shut down, radios and bicycles confiscated, mail and telephones suppressed” (Kiernan, 2004: 342). The country was initially divided into six zones, and thirty two regions made up of districts, sub districts, and villages, though the Khmer Rouge regime hoped to abolish smaller units in order to eradicate

Kmeid 22

quaint village life in hopes of creating a communal life where everyone ate together, worked together, and slept together, en masse. In 1976, the regime formulated a four-year plan (1977-

1980), “which called for the collectivization of all private property and placed high national priority on the cultivation of rice. After national defense, collectivization was the most important policy of ” (Dy, 2007: 26). Under this new plan, Cambodians were to produce “three tons of rice per hectare throughout the country… people had to grow and harvest rice all twelve months of the year” (United to End Genocide). Despite this unrealistic goal, the regime moved forward with planting vegetables, and receiving income from timber, fishing, animal husbandry, and tree farms. The end goal was to lift Cambodia from an underdeveloped agricultural country to a modern agricultural country, ensuring independence both economically and politically. One challenge faced was the lack of educated individuals in Cambodia, as most of them had been eradicated in the early months of the regime, and they ensured no newly educated people would form by abolishing schools. Unskilled workers were tasked to work in fields and factories, however few intellectuals remained to follow the four-year plan through.

The crop which was produced was to be separated into four portions:

“Some of it was intended to feed people; everyone was entitled to receive 312 kilograms of rice a year or 0.85 kg a day. Some of the remaining crop was to be retained as seed rice and some was to be kept as a reserve. The last and biggest portion of the crop was to be sold abroad to earn foreign exchange, which could then be used to purchase farm machinery, goods and ammunition” (Dy, 2007: 27).

However, production fell short of the original quota, thus resulting in the starvation of the people and lack of seed rice. Most of the harvest was used to feed soldiers, or was exported to .

Cooperatives were installed under the Khmer Rouge regime in order to create the semblance of a

“barracks”, where people were supposed to live together, work together, eat together, and share down time together. These cooperatives were also meant to “abolish private ownership and

Kmeid 23

capitalism, and to strengthen the status of workers and peasants” (Dy, 2007: 30). The Khmer

Rouge regime did not operate under the same grand systematic organization as the Nazi Regime or the Communist Party, and this, in part, explains their lack of ability to achieve their goals.

Polarization

The Soviet Union worked to turn the Ukrainian peasants against one another, so that one group felt themselves the ‘victims’ of the atrocities committed by another. The richer peasants

(the kurkuls) were presented by the propagandists as exploiters of the other villagers, simply because they were more efficient producers. According to the Party, the peasants were suffering at the hands of the richer kurkuls, and it was time they redress the wrongs by destroying them.

Propagandists constantly spewed repetitive material along the lines of “Individual farming is evil, the way to paradise is through ” and “Kurkuls are our enemy and we must exterminate them as a social class. There should be no place for the sharks among the harmless fish” (Dolot, 1987: 33), in hopes of recruiting new collective farmers who would help eradicate the kurkuls.

Polarization during the time of the Holocaust was used to belittle one group, while also empowering others. On a public, social scale, Jews, asocials, afro-Germans, disabled, and homosexuals etc. were isolated, and terrorized, but Hitler ensured that any burden placed upon his targets was met with an equal amount of inclusion, power, and success for the “Aryan race”.

This delicate balance is what encouraged “Aryans” to stand by, since:

“many of them stood to gain from the measures it introduced, and others were apathetic. What did any of it have to do with [it]? It was those in the most vulnerable positions— Nazism’s targets— who were the first to recognize what was at stake. They, however, had little power to do much about it…” (Bergen, 2002: 87)

While hundreds of restrictions, such as being forbidden from using public schools, practicing medicine, buying chocolate, shopping at specific times etc. were placed against Jews, these had

Kmeid 24

little to do with the daily life of non-Jewish people, thus ensuring their passivity. In concentration camps, aside from the aforementioned badges classifying each group (yellow for

Jews…), kapos were recruited to encourage the development of hierarchies within the camp, and classification was the deciding factor as to who would be recruited:

“Camp authorities recruited most kapos from the green [criminal] and red [Communist] triangles, the groups at the top of the hierarchy… it was hard for people to assert authority over those considered above them. Jews, marked as they were for death, were at the bottom. Often the other prisoners ostracized and tormented homosexual men in particularly vicious ways…” (Bergen, 2002: 219)

Polarization was used to establish categories of the ‘good’ from the ‘bad’, or the ‘bad’ from the

‘worst’. It created self-importance amongst the “Aryan race” and between prisoners, as well as self-doubt and fear between asocials and the regime, which the Nazi Party used to isolate targets and ensure the indifference and passive-compliance of other groups during some of the worst parts of the Holocaust.

The primary of examples that could be used to explain the polarization used within the

Democratic of Kampuchea would be dividing Base People from the New People, as well as the

Internal Enemies versus the External Enemies described in the Classification. Prisoners were also separated. Those who committed lesser crimes were sent to Regional, District, or Sub- district prisons, while more severe criminals, thieves or betrayers for example, were sent to Zone prisons or the high-level security center S-21, infamous for having 14,000 prisoners and only 12 survivors. On a larger scale, the Khmer Rouge’s isolation from the outside world can also be described as polarization, as the U.S., its allies, and the Western World were all painted as evil.

Preparation

While “de-kulkization was the most spectacular of the many tools used to force the revolution in the countryside (Applebaum, 2017: 133), the final phase of preparing to eliminate

Kmeid 25

the Ukrainian peasantry relied primarily on the isolation of the farmers and their families, primarily through travel restrictions. At the beginning of the collectivization, when the Party had only just arrived to the Ukrainian villages, Dolot states:

“We discovered that we were being carefully guarded. A sentry was posted on every main road which led out of the village. His duty was to keep track of everyone leaving or entering the village. Those sentries checked not only people's’ identities, but also their belongings. Everyone had to give detailed information concerning his destination and reason for leaving the village… We were used to unjust taxes and extortions under various pretexts. But we did not expect such a measure of control over our everyday routines” (Dolot, 1987: 31).

As collectivization expanded, the approach of the Soviet Union hardened, and Stalin’s search for grains became more desperate, the peasant’s ability to travel freely became entirely restricted.

Train tickets were only sold to those who had written permission from the collective farm, along with the pre-approved destination of their travel. Travel documents were checked constantly, as well as travelers’ baggage, where any food found was confiscated. Also, it became illegal to hire famers in the city. This assisted in maintaining a strong workforce within the collective farms, while also preventing farmers from receiving any rations from the cities (Dolot, 1987: 138).

As for preparation during the Holocaust, Hitler had already been preparing for the eventual mass extermination of millions of people for several years, through foreign policy, pogroms, conquering, and “euthanasia centers”. His larger goal, however, was to push all the unwanted people into ghettos, so they could ultimately be streamlined to concentration camps simply and effectively. Tension within these ghettos grew, as crowded living conditions and poor sanitation brought on deadly diseases, while others starved to death. Others were shot or beaten to death for trying to escape, smuggling, or simply for sport. As highlighted by Bergen, “the ghettos were not yet a formal program of annihilation, but they proved deadly for hundreds of thousands of Jews of all ages” (146). In late 1941, lists for transportation out of the ghettos and

Kmeid 26

into killing centers began to circulate. Once they arrived at the camps, Jews and other targets were split into three groups: “skilled workers and craftsmen, laborers, and “superfluous” people: the weak, sick, and old, children, and mothers. Those deemed useless were killed immediately, the others put to work” (Bergen, 2002: 242). Labor camps were used for work connected with military requirements, factories, and mines, and many of those members of the “useful” groups were sent to such camps to work themselves to death. It is unknown how many of the various types of camps existed under Nazi Germany, though the number is assumed to be in the thousands. Some of the most famous are those responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

Preparation for mass extermination under the Khmer Rouge regime largely depended upon the creation of security centers. Only after the conversion of existing buildings, such as temples and schools, into extermination camps and detainment facilities, could people be detained. As explained in Polarization, there were five types of centers: regional, district, sub- district, zone, and then the higher-level S-21. Those in the first three were usually detained for only a short period of time before being transferred to labor camps, where the man force was needed. Most widely known, however, was the S-21 prison, and its creation was likely the biggest resource to the regime. Originally known as the Chao Ponhea Yat High School, built in

1962, S-21 consisted of:

“four main buildings. The classrooms on the ground floor were divided into small cells, measuring 0.8 x 2 meters each; they were designed for single prisoners. The 8 x 6 meter rooms on the first floor were used as mass prison cells. The second floor included even larger rooms that held up to 40 or 50 prisoners. One room served as the office of S-21’s chief, Duch, and another as an office for documentation and general administration. Nearby houses were used for interrogation and ” (Dy, 2007: 49).

The prison itself consisted of a documentation unit, charged with “transcribing tape-recorded confessions, preparing summaries of confessions, and maintaining files” (Dy, 2007: 54). A

Kmeid 27

subunit of the documentation unit, titled the photography unit, consisted of documenting pictures of prisoners upon arrival and upon death, when occurring in the detention facility. The defense unit walked the perimeter, kept prisoners at bay, and examined everything. It was not uncommon for guards themselves to be imprisoned in S-21 if they made a serious mistake, and as such, many feared working in that unit. The interrogation unit was made up of three units: the hot unit, allowed to use torture, the cold unit, prohibited to do so, and the chew unit, which dealt with sensitive, higher-profile cases. The Khmer Rouge worked hard to have peasants and workers do much of their work for them, particularly through the slogan: “You must know how to trace one another. Report everything to Angkar!” (Dy, 2007: 45) — Angkar was seen as the ‘Father’ to all, as the regime operated under the assumption that “it is better to arrest ten people by mistake than to let one guilty person go free” (Dy, 2007: 45). Having workers report each other eased the tension on the regime to find and detain every individual who had done wrong.

Extermination

The extermination of Ukrainian nationals was two-fold. Firstly, Stalin sought to end the

Ukrainian kurkuls; their existence provided a sense of hope and success, which threatened the cooperation of the second targeted populous - the Ukrainian peasantry. Kurkuls, unlike the peasant farmers, were never given the chance to conform to collectivization. Consequent to the

Party’s arrival, “many [kurkuls] were sent to concentration camps, or banished from their villages to God-forsaken northern regions, and still others simply disappeared mysteriously, without a trace” (Dolot, 1987: xviii). Kurkul families were met with violence beyond that sustained by common farmers, such as being thrown from their homes, beaten, and lynched.

Since anyone who refused collectivization could/would be targeted as a kurkul, these active resisters were often executed, and their families exiled to the barren north, despite their clear

Kmeid 28

poverty dissociating them from the ‘lavish’ kurkul-like lifestyle. The extermination of Ukrainian farmers was much slower and drawn out, as “the horrors, the exhaustion, the inhuman indifference to life and constant exposure to the language of hatred left their mark” (Applebaum,

2017: 256). Their remaining days saw extreme malnutrition, starvation, and desperation at the hand of the Soviet Union’s increasing mass grain export.

During the Holocaust, prior to the implementation of gas chambers, mobile killing units were most widely utilized, which functioned as follows:

“First they rounded up the Jews in a given area using various ruses to deceive them… The Germans ordered large pits dug in some convenient area— a local cemetery, nearby forest, or easily accessible field. Sometimes they forced the prisoners themselves to dig what would be their own graves… At gunpoint they made the victims undress. Then they shot them by groups directly into the graves” (Bergen, 2002: 196).

Open air shootings, mass shootings, and explosives, were also methods that were attempted in the earlier years before concentration camps, though each one brought its own set of difficulties, namely difficulty to conceal and a waste of supplies. Death from neglect proved to be a rather efficient technique of wiping out large groups, as through starvation and disease, most would perish. The flaw with this, however, was the smell millions of dead bodies would produce. As such, Zyklon B and other types of gases were introduced into the extermination process.

Nazis at Chelmno deceived Jews into thinking they were being taken to Germany, but that beforehand they had to shower. Forced into vans, they were carried a few miles into the forest, by which time most would have suffocated from the gassings, and those who had not would be shot instantly. A few Jews were always kept to unload and bury corpses. At Belzec, there was a fixed installation of engines used to generate carbon monoxide. After shuffling into the crowded chamber, the killing itself would take thirty-two minutes. Sobibor reflected the basic tactic, where victims were separated into groups, and those unfortunate enough were sent

Kmeid 29

immediately to the gas chambers. Treblinka utilized deception, whereby their railway station reflected the same view one would see upon arriving to Germany. An air of normalcy would circulate around the station, but most would then be sent off to the gassing chambers. At

Auschwitz-Birkenau, a joint concentration camp and , Nazis separated victims into groups and then tricked many into believing they were taking a shower. Often times, soap and towels were even passed out so as to not panic the victims. These killing camps were

Hitler’s biggest personal accomplishment, for after all the years of hard work and trial, he had finally found a way to kill people en masse with little effort from the Nazi Party.

While the Khmer Rouge regime is known for its mass executions, a vast majority died

“due to a lack of medicines and medical services, starvation, execution, or exhaustion from overwork” (Dy, 2007: 3). Executions could have resulted from the early of monks, minorities, affiliates of the Khmer Republic, and intellectuals, or due to minor infractions, such as theft, complaining, or false labeling as an enemy of the state. Approximately 500,000 people were executed for crimes against the state, since refuting these allegations was nearly impossible, and the regime thus utilized it as an excuse to execute whomever they pleased. Thousands of

New People simply disappeared over the four years, and many were killed by being buried alive to spare bullets. fields in forests, faraway fields, and around the S-21 prison have since been found with often hundreds of bodies in a single , killed by a quick blow to the back of the head. Suffocation with plastic bags was also not uncommon, neither was being pushed into wells en masse. In the first few years of S-21’s existence, “corpses were buried near the prison. However, by the end of 1976, cadres ran out of burial spaces, so the prisoners were taken by trucks at night” (Dy, 2007: 55) elsewhere, to be buried in mass graves. Death within S-

21 often resulted from severe torture, such as:

Kmeid 30

“burning cigarettes into prisoners’ flesh, forcing them to eat human waste or drink urine, piercing them with needles, and hanging prisoners by their legs or hands for the whole day. Some prisoners were cut with knives or suffocated with plastic bags. Other methods for generating confessions included pulling out fingernails while pouring alcohol on the wounds or holding prisoners’ heads under water... ” (Dy, 2007: 52)

Women had their breasts cut off, and were often raped by interrogators. The Khmer Rouge lacked any remorse and did not concern themselves with policies or self-restraint. The following chart, copied from The Cambodian Genocide— 1975-1979, Century of Genocide, indicates the approximate death tolls of each group of people during the genocide:

This table describes the breadth of races, ethnicities, and religious groups targeted by the Khmer

Rouge regime, and shows the extent of the monstrous events that exterminated 20% of the population in four short years.

* city dwellers of April 17, affiliates of the Khmer Republic

** full-rights, candidates

Kmeid 31

Denial

During and after the Holodomor, the USSR continued to deny outright the occurrence of any famine. The mass famine was not taught in schools, was not mentioned in any publication, and was hidden from the international press. The Soviet State went as far as destroying local archives, altering death records that would otherwise allude to starvation, and even skewing public census data that would blatantly depict the loss of some 8 million individuals, as well as display the lack of population growth that should have occurred from a new generation. This denial went on from 1930 until 1991, when Ukraine, at last, “declared independence, and through archivists, historians, journalists and publishers the truth of the famine came out”

(Applebaum, 2017: xxviii).

While there are those who deny the events of the Holocaust, the most common type of denial often includes denial of participation in the Holocaust, not the blatant disregard for its happenings. Both during, but mostly after, the holocaust, SS officers, policemen, and others that worked alongside the Nazi Party have been noted denying any really participation in the killings, claiming they did clerical work or something of the sort. For example, when one woman moved to Sobibor to be near her husband she learned the details of his job at the local killing center.

When confronted he “denied any direct connection with killing and assured his wife that he was responsible for routine administration” (Bergen, 2002: 256). Other types of denial include downplaying the number of victims, either by category, such as Jews or homosexuals, or en masse. And even then, despite the indisputable evidence present at the countless killing centers, there are those who deny the Holocaust in its entirety.

Denial of the Cambodian genocide occurred on an international scale, in the case where

“... most of the international community embargoed the new government and continued to

Kmeid 32

recognize the “legitimacy” of the defunct Pol Pot regime, voting for it to occupy Cambodia's UN seat for another 12 years” (Kiernan, 2004: 350), allowing the regime to control the very victims of its reign. It wasn’t until l989 when the new government of Cambodia was granted a seat at the table, and was no longer controlled on an international level by the Pol Pot regime and its UN allies. Nine years later in 1997, after the International Commission of Jurists, the American Bar

Association, and LawAsia all refused to investigate the crimes of the regime, Cambodia’s appeal to “the UN to establish an international tribunal to judge the crimes of the Khmer Rouge”

(Kiernan, 2004: 353) was accepted. In response, an international tribunal, known as the Group of

Experts, was formed to judge the crimes of the Khmer Rouge regime through the examination of available evidence. Finally, in 1999, it was decided that the Khmer Rouge “should face charges

‘for and genocide’” (Kiernan, 2004: 353), particularly against various ethnicities, races, and religions in Cambodia. This final decision by the Experts ended any attempts at denying the true horrors of the Cambodian genocide.

Conclusion

By placing the Holodomor, the Holocaust, and the Cambodian genocide side by side, light has been shed upon the similarities and differences through which each regime conformed to Stanton’s eight stages of genocide. While each government classified their targeted groups differently, be it through a legal path such as the Nuremberg Law of the Holocaust, or the identification of Ukrainians as a culture and the kurkuls as peasants during the Holodomor, each genocide had clear intentions as to whom they sought to attack. The symbolization established during the Holocaust was much more sophisticated than that utilized in the Holodomor or

Cambodian genocide, highlighting just how systematic the Nazi regime was. Each regime excelled in the dehumanization, torment, and ridicule of their targets, and without a doubt, in this

Kmeid 33

stage, the genocides were most similar. While the Nazi regime was extremely organized from start to finish, the Cambodian genocide lacked any real systematic approach. The Communist

Party in Ukraine, placed somewhere between the two, did take a much more methodical approach. Polarizing different groups and creating targets was key to isolating kurkuls from the

USSR, as well as the “Aryan” race from those deemed unnecessary. The Khmer Rouge regime, however, sought to isolate the entire country from the rest of the world, as opposed to isolating different sectors from each other (though people in daily life were, of course, very isolated from each other as dialogue was strictly limited). At this point, it starts to become clear just how dissimilar the Holocaust and the Holodomor appear in comparison to the Cambodian genocide, and perhaps it is these exact discrepancies that caused the Khmer Rouge to fall short of their goals. During the preparation phase, while both Hitler and Pol Pot created mass extermination institutions, Stalin chose to simply isolate the peasantry even further, in order to eventually starve them en masse. Even though Stalin’s strategy differed from that of the former two, his method was a means of preparation for his final plan for extermination that mimics Hitler and

Pol Pot’s tactics in its own way. Hitler undeniably did the greatest amount of damage, and, for lack of a better term, perfected his methods for extermination. Stalin, on the other hand, chose death by neglect, which also succeeded in exterminating the majority of his target. Pol Pot, however, utilized various means to exterminate masses, and never focused primarily on a particular method, which may or may not have affected the final death toll. Finally, all three genocides were denied one way or another, both locally and internationally, and only through time and the perseverance of survivors has the truth managed to come out, and those who participated, prosecuted.

Kmeid 34

The question remains, however, how did these regimes conform to a rubric that had not yet been written? Being geographically distant, culturally dissimilar, and spanning different decades, a good assumption would be that these eight stages are simply natural. When attempting to destroy a race, culture, ethnicity, or religion, it is important first to classify the targets.

Dehumanization, a natural reaction to those deemed unworthy and unnecessary seems an obvious next step, as tormenting only increases their suffering. While systematic organization is not necessary crucial, some type of plan aids in the final extermination of a group, and a regime that is serious about it will create a plan. Polarizing the good versus the bad citizens is easy enough, as those who dehumanize the ‘bad’ already see themselves as better, further isolating the targets. The preparation of killing centers and the final extermination go hand in hand, as the facilities ideally consist of both an execution station and a disposal protocol. The eventual denial of a mass extermination is also a natural conclusion, as once there is concern of repercussions, no one wants to be the one punished.

Learning how to identify the different stages of genocides is important for both the past and the future. By using Stanton’s rubric, experts are able to look back on past events and signify which horrors were classified as genocides, right the wrongs of those who inflicted these sufferings, and hopefully ease the sorrows of the survivors and their descendants. In the future, perhaps this rubric can be used to de-escalate genocides in their early stages, and prevent them from occurring ever again. It is important for humanity to look back on our mistakes, acknowledge the truths, and learn from the choices of our predecessors. Only then can humanity avoid the atrocities committed in the past.

Kmeid 35

Annotated Bibliography

Andrews, Tom. United to End Genocide. http://endgenocide.org. Accessed 30 Nov. 2017.

One of the largest activist organizations in America, United to End Genocide works to

prevent genocides before they occur, connect and mobilize the voices of those equally

committed, and demand action by those with the power to protect the vulnerable around

the world. This website provides historical information and recounts the concise events

that occurred in several genocides, such as the Holocaust, and Cambodia.

Applebaum, Anne. Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine. Doubleday, 2017.

Applebaums’ Red Famine provides historical context about the Ukrainian-Russian

relationship, discusses the events leading up to the Holodomor, and relays the aftermath

of the genocide. It depicts in detail an unbiased account of Stalin’s crime, and will serve

as an invaluable source when discussing the Holodomor as a genocide.

Bergen, Doris L. : A Concise History of the Holocaust. Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers, 2002.

Bergen utilizes this publication to discuss the Holocaust within the historical,

political, cultural, social, and military context of World War II. It not only focuses on the

persecution of Jews, but also that of other victimized identities. By including historical

and firsthand evidence, Bergen explores the intentions of the Nazi German conquest and

the genocide that followed, creating the ideal source to examine when discussing the

Holocaust.

Dolot, Miron. Execution by Hunger: The Hidden Holocaust, W. W. Norton & Company, 1987.

This eyewitness account of the events that took place under ’s control of

Ukraine examines the man-made famine that killed approximately seven million

Kmeid 36

farmer-peasants. This source offers information that could not be matched by a history

book, as it emits the feelings and emotions experienced during the despairing time of the

Holodomor.

Dy, Khamboly. A History of Democratic Kampuchea 1975 - 1979. Documentation Center of

Cambodia, 2007.

Dy’s overview of the Khmer Rouge regime covers the foundations of the Cambodian

history leading up to the eventual genocide. Chapters range from “The Earliest

Communist Movement” to “The Four Year Plan (1977-1980)”, ensuring to encompass all

the necessary information in this rather brief, magazine-style novel. Concise and

straightforward, A History of Democratic Kampuchea 1975 - 1979 offers a clear history

of how the Khmer Rouge regime devastated Cambodia.

Kiernan, Ben. “The Cambodian Genocide—1975-1979.” Century of Genocide, critical essays

and eyewitness accounts, edited by Parsons, William S., Samuel Totten, Routledge, 2004,

pp. 339-373.

Kiernan examines the origins of the violence seen in the Cambodian genocide, describes

the social context of the time, and marks the timeline of the events that occurred. Relying

on first-hand accounts of those who witnessed the reign of the Khmer Rouge regime, this

historic account provides the fundamental details needed for this paper.

Stanton, Gregory H. The 8 Stages of Genocide. US State Department, 1998.

Gregory Stanton composed this article to present the stages that form a genocide, and

establish a concrete criteria for the US State Department, which aided in the identification

of past genocides, as well as the prevention of future genocides. The 8 stages serve as the

backbone of this research paper, as components of global genocides of the 20th century

Kmeid 37

will be fitted to this scale in order to uphold the accuracy of Stanton’s 8 stages.