Note: This lesson draws on information from Readings 5 and 6 of the case study. In preparation for this class, you might have students read these passages for homework.

Warm up:
Students ended lesson two [9] by looking at the definition of genocide contained in Article II of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the "Genocide Convention"). This lesson continues students' exploration of the Genocide Convention. There are several ways students can learn more about this treaty. Students could read Reading 5, "Negotiating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" as well as the text of the Genocide Convention (also found in Reading 5 of the case study).

If time is limited, you might just have students read the convention, a fairly short document, either on their own or by assigning pairs of students to paraphrase particular articles. Of special importance are Articles I-VI. Below are examples of comprehension questions you might use to assess students' understanding of the Genocide Convention or to guide their reading of this text. Before reading the document, you may wish to review the concept of the United Nations. Here is a simple description you can use: United Nations [UN]: An international organization made up of 192 countries whose purpose is to help countries work together to solve problems related to human rights, military conflicts, and economic development. The United Nations adopts treaties, resolutions, and conventions, and in doing so, establishes international law.

Genocide Convention Comprehension Questions

• Where in the Genocide Convention does it say that genocide is a crime under international law?
• True or False: Genocide is not against international law if it is committed in time of war.
• This treaty refers to "Contracting Parties." What does this mean?
• Which groups are protected under the Genocide Convention? Extension question: Which groups are not protected under the Genocide Convention?
• If a government killed members of an ethnic group accidentally-for example, if a state-sponsored nuclear reactor leaked and killed or maimed the community surrounding the reactor, which happen to be largely people of one ethnic group-would that constitute genocide according to this definition?
• Why do you think the drafters of this treaty include "forcibly transferring children of the group to another group" in the definition of genocide?
• If someone plans a genocide, but the plan fails, could this person still be punished under the terms of this treaty?
• True or False: The Genocide Convention only concerns the crimes committed by public officials, not private individuals.
• According to Article V, what must nations do as part of adopting this treaty? What does it mean "to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilt of genocide..."?
• According to this treaty, who will judge cases involving crimes of genocide?
• Why might some countries be reluctant to sign the convention?

After students have a basic understanding of the Genocide Convention, you might ask them what they know about its effectiveness in preventing and stopping genocide. You might refer students to Reading 6 of the case study, "International Law in the Age of Genocide," which addresses this issue. The purpose of the rest of this lesson is to help students consider why genocides have continued to occur-in Cambodia, in the former Yugoslavia, in Rwanda, and now in Sudan-despite having an international treaty designed to prevent it. Indeed, the International Association of Genocide Scholars [10] declares, "In the 20th century, genocides and state mass murder have killed more people than have all wars." See the suggested links (listed above) for more information about the history of genocide since 1948.

Main activity:
Next, students will watch a 10-minute video of activist Rebecca Hamilton [11], one of the founders of the Harvard Darfur Action Group, speaking about what people today can do to stop and prevent genocide. Before viewing this clip, it is important that students have some background on the situation in Darfur. You might begin by asking students what they know about Sudan. Do they know where it is? Have they heard about it on the news? What have they heard?

For information about the crisis in Darfur, see the web links in the Materials section of this lesson plan, under Additional Web Resources. As homework prior to this class, you might even ask students to preview these websites on their own, or you could print out information from these sites for students to read. When speaking about activist strategies, Rebecca Hamilton draws on the following terms: divestment, political, domestic policy, constituency, and lobbying group. You might want to review these terms before students view the clip. There are comprehension questions to go along with the video. You might decide to stop the video at various points to go over these questions.

Video Comprehension Questions

• What did then Secretary of State Colin Powell say?
• What are some steps Rebecca Hamilton and the Harvard Darfur Action Group took to educate Harvard students about the situation in Darfur?
• Why does Hamilton think that divestment campaigns might help stop the genocide in Darfur?
• What is the Genocide Intervention Network?
• What does Hamilton mean by the phrase "politically relevant noise"?
• What does Hamilton mean by the phrase "domestic political priority"?
• What does Hamilton think might convince elected officials to take more action to stop genocide?
• What does Hamilton mean by the phrase "anti-genocide constituency"?
• According to Hamilton, what actions might prevent genocide?

After viewing the clip, you might want to focus a class discussion on one of the following quotations from the video. You could also ask students to write about any of these questions in their journals.

• "We realized that getting people to care about genocide is actually the easy part. The difficult part is directing them on what to do with that care once they made that discovery." Do you agree with Rebecca Hamilton? Why might it be difficult to turn caring, or even outrage, into action? Consider times when you have cared about an issue in your community or in the world. What have you done about it?
• Raphael Lemkin said, "If women, children, and old people were to be murdered one hundred miles from here, wouldn't you run to help? Then why do you stop this decision of your heart when the distance is three thousand miles instead of one hundred miles?" Who is responsible for preventing genocide? When we know genocide is occurring, does geographic proximity make a difference?
• The late Senator Paul Simon said, "If every member of the House and Senate had received a hundred letters from people back home saying that we have to do something about Rwanda when the crisis was first developing, then the response might have been different." To what extent do you agree with Senator Simon? What are the implications of his statement for the current situation in Darfur?

Follow through:
As a final activity, students can connect the material from this lesson to their own role as activists. One way to do this is to have students do a think-pair-share [12] around the questions: "What could students at this school do to prevent and stop genocide?" Consider the strategies Rebecca Hamilton suggests. Which ones might be appropriate and why? What else might students do to help prevent future genocide and/or stop current acts of genocide?