Training for Improved Genocide Prevention and Response Summary: Nations should
– provide training to “key actors” in genocide prevention and response;
– facilitate and promote research on how to recognize and respond to potentially genocidal situations; and
– maintain sustained communication with those who have been trained to keep them updated on the best practices for preventing and responding to threats of genocide.

Problem: Moving from “Knowing” to “Understanding”
The last century has been called the “century of genocide.” Time after time, little or nothing was done to prevent or respond to genocide and threats of genocide. One reason is a persistent lack of understanding and recognition, even when facts and information were known – what Samantha Power has called “a bias toward disbelief.”
One explanation for this bias is found in insights into the way that people make judgments under conditions of uncertainty.We tend to assess the probability of what will happen based on the ease with which we can bring similar instances to mind, whether through experience or imagination. We make judgments with reference to data that are most readily available, rather than based on all of the data that might be relevant. Consequently, we tend to under recognize events, such as developing genocide, that are relatively rare, difficult to imagine and very negative. In the past, this has resulted in inadequate, conventional responses to unconventional, radical violence.

Response: Increasing Understanding Through Training
Policymakers, analysts and other key actors will continue to under recognize genocide unless a concerted effort is made to ensure through training that they have the precedents of previous genocides – particularly an appreciation of the process by which they developed – readily available in their minds. Training, of course, is not a panacea. There will still be questions about whether policy makers want to respond effectively to genocide. But training that allows key actors to identify and respond to threats of genocide at an earlier stage and with less costly responses can help avoid the problem altogether. And even in situations that reach the most critical stage, the terms of discussion and decision making can be altered if more of the participants have, by virtue of training, data about past genocide more readily available as they assess alternatives for responding. A sustained commitment to training “key actors” can:
– increase their understanding of what constitutes genocide and crimes against humanity, the warning signs of potential genocide, the tools available for responding to threatened and actual genocide, and the factors that have impeded effective prevention and response in the past;
– establish a common vocabulary for communicating about potential genocides; – contribute to a sense that something can be done; and
– promote critical thought and action, thereby enhancing the prospect of more effective response.
Training should be an “all career” undertaking, fully integrated into the career development of key actors. It would intersect with those paths through formal training, perhaps on multiple occasions, as well as ongoing informal communication. As research improves the ability to recognize potentially genocidal situations and craft effective policy responses, that research must be communicated in accessible, useful ways.

Recommendation: Training to Improve Genocide Prevention and Response
Three complementary strategies are proposed:

Training
– Focus on “key actors” who, in the course of their careers, may be called upon to recognize and respond to genocide or threats of genocide, such as diplomats; intelligence analysts; key military leaders; legislative staff dealing with international relations issues; nongovernmental operatives; UN officials; and journalists.

– Focus in the core curriculum on what genocidal processes look like as they develop and how to deal with them; subjects could include: precursors to past genocides; policy responses to past genocides; genocide and other “atrocity crimes” in international law; dealing with “spoilers” in peace processes; accountability challenges; linking risk assessment and early warning strategies to the policy process; and tools for conflict mitigation.

Applied Research
– Facilitate research on practical problems of preventing and responding to genocide and threats of genocide, with special attention to policy issues; the overarching goal must be to produce information that will be directly useful to key actors in their professional activities.

– Distill research in a regularly updated “Handbook” that presents relevant information in a way that is useful to key actors when they encounter potentially genocidal situations, recognizing that it can only serve to stimulate thinking – not serve as a rigid guide.

Sustained Communication
– Supplement formal training through a network that facilitates communication on and continuing learning about issues of genocide prevention and response.
– Use the network to disseminate the results of applied research on the problem of genocide in an accessible way.
Many nations already have institutions that can work with their governments (and each other) to develop the proposed program, such as Sweden (Uppsala Programme for Holocaust and Genocide Studies), Denmark (Danish Institute for International Studies), the Netherlands (Netherlands Institute for War Documentation), the United Kingdom (Aegis Institute), and the United States (U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum).