The Holocaust is inarguably the most severe genocide in human history. Nearly all of the history classes in the world teach about the horrors of this genocide. However, several smaller conflicts involving genocides and crimes against humanity have occurred since the Holocaust, yet nearly all of them go unnoticed in the Western world. The situation that is unfolding in South Sudan is a prime example of this genocidal ignorance. The origins of the current conflict can be traced back to the twenty-two-year civil war between the northern and southern regions of Sudan. The area that is now South Sudan has a Christian majority and several smaller traditional groups, while the northern region which remains named Sudan is predominantly Muslim (Williams). This divide caused problems for years, until a peace agreement was signed in 2005 and South Sudan declared its independence on July 9, 2011 (Nathan 25). At the time, it seemed as though the years of fighting were over and the region could begin to rebuild. However, this was cut short late in 2013 when two major ethic groups began a power struggle that brought the newborn country to its knees. The Western world is turning a blind eye and ignoring the warning signs of a genocide occurring in the world’s newest country. 

Before the conflict resumed in 2013, two new leaders were appointed to govern the fledgling country away from the brink of war. Salva Kiir of the Dinka became the president, and Riek Machar of the Nuer was selected to become his vice president. Kiir selected Machar in an effort to show unity among two of the largest ethnic groups in South Sudan, despite the long history of violence between them. In 1991, Riek Machar ordered the vicious massacre of two thousand Dinka villagers in a small town in the region, therefore there were a plethora of South Sudanese that did not approve of Kiir and Machar sharing power (Williams). Two years after the country’s independence, Machar began a campaign to turn the population against Kiir and set up a run for the presidency in 2015. Kiir responded to these acts by firing his vice president, thus calming the situation. However, violence erupted between the two sides at the end of 2013, and according to Jennifer Williams the cause remains unclear, “Kiir publicly accused Machar of having attempted a coup, but others say the violence broke out when presidential guards from Kiir’s majority Dinka tribe tried to disarm guards from the Nuer ethnic group of Machar.” Nevertheless, the two rival groups plunged the country into a new war in which more than one thousand people lost their lives during the first week (Pinaud). Despite building the South Sudan with a sense of peace and unity, its leaders destroyed everything they had worked for only two years after it all began.  

Genocide is defined in a simple Google search as ‘the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation. According to Genocide Watch’s president, Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, that definition merely scratches the surface of a much larger entity. “Genocide is a process that develops in ten stages that are predictable but not inexorable. At each stage, preventive measures can stop it. The process is not linear. Stages may occur simultaneously. Logically, later stages must be preceded by earlier stages. But all stages continue to operate throughout the process” (Stanton). Therefore, a conflict can be considered a genocide when only one or two stages are present, depending upon their severity. Classification and Symbolism are the first two stages, and they include names of ethnic groups, symbols of groups, and other means of identification assigned to minority groups by larger groups (Stanton). These two stages are not an issue unless they are associated with one of the latter stages. For example, Dinka and Nuer ethnic groups are named and have flags to resemble their armies, but those acts are not genocidal. 

The escalation of the stages of genocide is marked by a gradual increase in the severity of actions committed by the genocidal groups. Using political power to deny rights to groups falls under stage three, which is called Discrimination (Stanton). Again, this stage by itself is not enough to warrant an investigation by the United Nations, but if a country passes laws that are similar to Jim Crowe laws in the United States, it could raise some eyebrows. Similar to stage three, stage four, Dehumanization, discriminates against minorities by referring to them as forms of animals, pests, insects, or diseases (Stanton). Yelling obscenities at people on the side of the road is not an act of genocide, but if enough people refer to a certain ethnic group as ‘rats’ then it could lead to other stages of genocide. When a conflict reaches the fifth step, Organization, it typically means that a majority group has come together in order to target an opposing group (Stanton). These groups may be preexisting, but they now have one major goal of targeting an opposing ethnic group. For example, the Nuer and Dinka ethnic groups have existed for hundreds of years, but now they have organized themselves into war machines to eliminate each other. The beginning stages of genocide are not very dangerous and can be prevented by government forces or UN intervention.

The final five stages of genocide are more serious than the first five, and only one or two can be enough proof to label a conflict a genocide. Polarization occurs when both ends of the spectrum resort to violent extremism in order to intimidate the moderates into joining one side or the other. Once the majority group gains an edge over its target, the Preparation phase begins and the final plans are drawn up to remove the target from the situation (Stanton). By striking fear into the hearts of moderates, the extremists can either force them into joining their cause, or they will flee the country to avoid the violence. This stage occurred during the first week of fighting in December of 2013, and this is clearly present based on the thousands of citizens that fled the country fearing for their lives. Stages eight and nine overlap because they happen when the perpetrating group Persecutes and Exterminates the opposition by rounding them up into ghettos or concentration camps and swiftly and systematically killing all of their members (Stanton). When Riek Machar ordered the deaths of the Dinka villagers, he was committing an act of genocide. The villagers were unarmed when they were mobbed, and this led the Nuer forces to torture them for hours before killing them. The tenth and final stage of genocide always comes last and can continue for years after the initial violence (Stanton). The Denial stage is highlighted by the accused ignoring all signs of their acts by covering up the evidence and acting as though no violent acts took place at all. These stages are almost completely ignored by the Western world until a conflict reaches the final three phases. Several of these warning signs have been displayed since 2013 in South Sudan, like many other African countries. 

All of the stages of genocide are present in the South Sudanese civil war, and there are gratuitous quantities of sources that back this claim and provide in-depth examples of genocidal acts. A large amount of the violence in the country is going unnoticed by the armed forces due the overwhelming corruption found within their ranks. “…many acts of violence committed by members of the armed forces have gone unpunished…making it appear that soldiers are beyond the reach of the law, perhaps even protected by the institution to avoid being held accountable for their actions” (Olsen 64). The author ventured to the region to experience the situation firsthand, and this corruption is among the first things written in the account. This lack of accountability in the South Sudan is a prime example of stages three and five of genocide; discrimination and organization respectively. The state is denying rights to the victims of the army, and the army is organizing itself into a form of a terrorist organization that suffers no consequences for harming the people it should be protecting. Also, the Dinka ethnic group has a history of targeting other ethnic groups and carrying out violent acts against them. In 2014, they raided several villages home to the Fertit people, which is a smaller ethnic group that has been subject to violent raids by a plethora of groups since the end of the British occupation (Blocq). “Violence was reportedly fierce. One leader explained that assailants forced Fertit women to lie with their backs on top of their husbands, and then were raped (Blocq). The Dinka pillaged the villages and unnecessarily tortured their inhabitants in order to acquire their lands. Not counting the other heinous acts committed by the Dinka, their actions against the Fertit people are proof of several of the stages of genocide, including organization, preparation, and persecution. Violent attacks against the citizens of South Sudan are obvious indicators of genocide in the country.

Although the evidence clarifies that the conflict in South Sudan is a genocidal civil war between the country’s two largest ethnic groups, there is another argument that claims the battles are part of a larger power struggle. According to Clemence Pinaud, “…the current crisis in South Sudan has to be understood not simply in the context of ethnicity, but within a system of class domination based on wartime predation.” In other words, Pinaud is examining the conflict from a political perspective instead of an ethnic point of view. Looking at the situation from this new stance allows one to see other minor factors that have contributed to the violence, such as political conflicts and the militaristic nature of the region. R. J. Rummel approaches the concept of genocide in a similar manner, but he creates a new term in order to explain his perspective. “To cover all such murder as well as genocide and politicide, I use the concept democide. This is the intentional killing of people by government” (Rummel). Rummel, like Pinaud, does not directly address the ethnic side of genocidal conflicts. Instead, they focus their research and discussion on the political side because they opine that the state is the source of conflict. 

While the South Sudanese government has played a major part in the civil war, one must also acknowledge the diverse ethnic tapestry that makes up the population of the newborn country. The views brought to light by Rummell and Pinaud are useful in reporting the overall situation in South Sudan, but they fail to grasp the gravity of the ethnic conflict happening in the midst of the ‘political power struggle.’ The chaos at the top of the governmental ladder began as a result of years of ethnic tensions between the two largest ethnic groups in the region, not because Riek Machar wanted Salva Kiir’s job. Although Machar wanted to be the president, their differences can be traced back to their ethnic backgrounds; Kiir is a Dinka and Machar is a Nuer. Therefore, in order to understand the South Sudanese genocide, one must begin by looking at ethnic tensions before examining the political landscape of the region.

The conflict in South Sudan is significantly less severe than the Holocaust, but it still deserves major recognition in the international media. Although the fighting began over three years ago, the violence is continuous and shows no sign of stopping in the near future. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) is a constantly updating website that provides spreadsheets filled with information about acts of violence occurring throughout Africa and Asia. These spreadsheets were last updated on March 18, and the most recent act of violence involved a police officer raping a civilian on March 15, but he has been arrested by the army (ACLED). The violence has not stopped, but some progress has been made by the government. If Kiir can continue to hold people accountable for committing crimes, then the newest country in the world has a bright future ahead of itself. South Sudan will move forward from these genocidal times to prosper as a sovereign state, and the perpetrators of genocide will be held accountable for their actions at the benefit of the citizens and the country itself. 
