Prime Minister,
Distinguished Guests,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am honored to represent the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization at this International Forum, and pay tribute to the Government of Sweden for making it happen. The Director-General of our Organization, Mr. Koïchiro Matsuura, asked me to come in his stead --because of my role as a human rights defender and human rights '" communicator.

As I will describe later, the human rights system is particularly relevant to the theme, of preventing genocide, in today's world. I earnestly hope that some practical initiatives will arise from this Forum, to offer other protections against a possible future genocide.
Rene Descartes, the French philosopher, said "The chief cause of our errors is to be found in the prejudices of our childhood."

In order to move toward preventing genocides, we must move toward overcoming simplistic ideas of "us" versus 'them." Myths that define one group against another group in perpetual struggle are a breeding ground for human error. We must end racism.
To prevent genocides, we need more scientific examination to understand and break the root causes. In particular, comparative work-to help identify the warning signs that are common across cultures, despite other minor differences-so that we can better see what could be a genocide in the making.

Genocide is a crime-and it has been declared such at the international level. Within the United Nations system, we rely on a definition from the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:

Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic. racial or religious group, such as:

• Killing members of the group
• Causing serious bodily harm or mental harm to members of the group
• Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, in whole or in part,
• Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

This definition is a legal one. It makes clear that, to be recognized as genocide, actions need not result in a total annihilation of a group-nor even in mass killings. It is sufficient that the actions target a group, with an intent to destroy it.

The term genocide-from its root words-means "race murder." In an issue on Extreme Violence produced by UNESCO's International Social Science Journal, social scientists consider how they should use the legal term. One expert, Jacques Semelin, prefers to study an "organized process of civilian destruction". An organized process of civilian destruction may develop over a number of years--even before the crime of genocide can be recognized by the law.

Preventing the crime of genocide requires a real effort to examine the problem, develop our hard knowledge of causes-in the period before the crime occurs. So, I bring a two-part message: I) we can do much by stopping endemic racism, and 2) we need to invest in more study of causes and indicators. This crime may be "unthinkable" to its victims, but it must be thinkable to those of us who want to prevent the next genocide.

To illustrate, take the case of Rwanda. Its physical landscape is beautiful, but here some of the most thorough and vicious hunts and murders of humans have taken place, just a decade ago--in spring 1994. Hunts and murders were also taking place in Rwanda in 1991, 1992. 1993, and before that in 1973, 1959.

How can we understand the organized killing of 800,000 people in 100 days? In 1994, there were sometimes more than 800 per day--town by town, village by village, hunts and murders were planned and carried out by many people. Individually, most of the murderers were not known criminals. Some of them were teachers, mayors, doctors. What caused them to kill?

Research and science can help us find answers to this question. If we believe their behaviour was driven by frenzied emotions, we have an effective modern science tool called psychology that can explain more deeply "why?" The psychology of group behaviour - social psychology - can help us understand how a group operates, how individuals strive to fit in, and how individuals will act out of character to suit the perceived needs of the group.

We could study genocide with the perspective of 100 years of these sciences, to understand how populism encouraged a myth of tribes in perpetual struggle, fed fears and ambitions of power, and whittled down individual restraints against murder. We could then examine how racist hatred became normal behaviour.

Genocide is also a social phenomenon-not just individual. We have economics that can identify problems of scarce resources. We have political and social science to help us see how social institutions might be faulty-encouraging a norm of racist hatred and brutality. In Rwanda, for example I could describe to you the last days of Belgium's colonial influence - how Tutsi massacres then were part of a popular revolution that gave an exploited Hutu majority more power. After the change-over, authentically democratic institutions-ones that could support and protect minorities-were never established. Tutsi exclusion and occasional murder continued, and exiles from the revolutionary period were never brought home. Even the census was manipulated.

In Rwanda, there were many signs of what was to come-the social institutions were not inclusive and, in that sense, not democratic. The media perpetuated and aggravated conflict - including by falsely reporting on war, and explicitly inciting violence. Just have a look at the schools, the higher learning institutions, the hospitals, the army, the media, and the apartheid-like identity cards. In Rwanda, a longstanding myth of difference between Hutu and Tutsi was the essential crutch for the organized brutality between the groups.

And law and institutions of moral authority were not actively punishing the many prior killings. There were many incidents of organized attempts at local annihilation prior to 1994 -people from one group were humiliated, hunted and killed with intent and knowledge.

Before 1994, persuasive individuals chose deliberately to incite genocide. In November 1992, Leon Mugesera made a rallying speech to call Hutus to kill. He specifically identified the Tutsis as foreign-from Ethiopia. He relied on and encouraged beliefs that the Tutsis were not Rwandan and did not belong-they were different and therefore dangerous. He said:

"The mistake we made in 1959 ...was to let you escape."

"Your place is in Ethiopia, and we are going to send you back there by way of the Nyabarongo river." The instruction was clear to his audience. In April of 1994, the river carried dead Tutsis-tens of thousands downstream to Lake Victoria.

In all cases of genocide, myths of difference--based on race or other human features-- and assurances of impunity help people join violence. Added to these conditions is a trigger: a deliberate decision by persons of authority to destroy the group. Together, these are chief causes.

To prevent genocides, we need to understand causes-so that we can defuse them.
To end genocides, I say with certainty that the first action we should take is this: stop racism. Prevent racism from becoming "institutionalized." To do this, we at UNESCO have worked to debunk myths, .fix a "no-go" zone for brutality, assure that institutions are inclusive, educate for inclusive values.

Myths of scientifically - based and eternal racial difference have been used to justify genocide in Europe, and before that colonial brutality in Africa-and even the aggravated, continued conflict of Hutu and Tutsi. It is these myths that must be done away with.
From the earliest years of its existence, UNESCO waged a combat on the scientific front-mobilizing the scientific community, calling on eminent specialists to draft scientific texts to refute racist theories. A series of historic statements were thus produced, helping to demonstrate the absurdity of racial prejudice: the Statement on Race (1950), the Statement on the Nature of Race and Race Differences (1951), the Statement on the Biological Aspects of Race (1964), and in 1978, the UNESCO Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice. This work made clear that there is NO SCIENTIFIC support for a hierarchy of races.

UNESCO also worked to construct and spread acceptance for a system of bare minimum standards for human beings-legal and moral standards. This system needs agreement and enforcement not at an abstract level in academic settings, but in real life-in action. This is the system we call Human Rights.

As a system, Human Rights can provide us with valuable information and violations of Human Rights are firm evidence that can be used to trigger powerful collective responses when these lines are crossed.

Some of UNESCO's work has been even more precisely aimed at standards to discourage racial discrimination in social institutions (schools, media, political institutions) and reaffirm the value of asserting minority cultures. This goes beyond the minimum of human rights by focusing on social relations and institutions.
Most of UNESCO's work to build up minimum protections and inclusive institutions has been through education and communication -not just texts. This means that UNESCO has been working at teaching values to support inclusive and democratic social and political institutions. These are values such as tolerance, culture of peace as well as the fundamental and minimal human rights standards. Increasing support by the international community for media and communication projects in conflict and post-conflict areas over the last seven years is also an encouraging sign.

We should galvanize social institutions around good values. For example, UNESCO is launching a project called the "Coalition of Cities United Against Racism. " It will bring together municipalities, to share information about which public policies reduce racism and violence. I would encourage cities in your region to join this coalition.

One area of work at UNESCO is called "human security." From the perspective of the vulnerable: State legitimacy, a long-term vision for individuals, and current living standards are linked issues. Africa has human security risks related to all three. Our human security projects in Africa are specifically aimed at reducing these risks.
Alongside projects aimed at preventing armed conflict, UNESCO has a campaign to end poverty, which treats rights -and social inclusion-as inherently linked to the economic improvement of individuals and groups. Human security work has shown that real or perceived scarcity of resources can aggravate social tensions, to the point of being itself part of a calculation of risk.

As I said earlier, we should go further to understand causes and indicators. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute -with support from the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs--compares international crisis cases including those that involve genocides- to devise a measure for risk. This is an excellent contribution to public domain information- and well founded on the best practices used for government intelligence. Publicizing scientific information about risk can help prevention.
As for racism and incidents of racist violence-among the most important factors in a model of genocides causes-the Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (Durban, South Africa, 2001) encourages States to collect, analyse and disseminate statistical data at the national and local levels with the aim of assessing the situation of victims of racism and discrimination. (Paragraph 92)

It also "invites States, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions and the private sector to improve concepts and methods of data collection and analysis; to promote research, exchange experiences and successful practices and develop promotional activities in this area; and to develop indicators of progress and participation of individuals and groups of individuals in society subject to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance." (Paragraph 93.)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

UNESCO is initiating research to develop and promote acceptance for a single set of social science indicators for measuring racism and discrimination. The indicators will be devised to help in assessing the public policies that are designed to reduce harmful racial discrimination-so that they can be made even more effective. This will provide public institutions with the most effective tools to reverse risk.

Thank you.
28 January 2004