Nearly sixteen years have passed since the assassination of Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana on April 6, 1994, and the beginning of the Rwandan genocide. Within three short months, more than 800,000 people were killed by friends, neighbors, and members of Hutu Power militias. Several years ago, I had the  opportunity to visit and study in Rwanda, where I met remarkable young Rwandans who, after having witnessed unimaginable terror in their childhoods, have committed themselves to building lasting reconciliation in their communities. The majority of international media coverage and financial resources have been directed to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (held in Arusha, Tanzania), which has jurisdiction over charges of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Interestingly, a former U.N. ambassador for Rwanda, Jean Damascene Bizimana, who is accused of involvement in the execution of the genocide, was found last week in Alabama. Despite the obvious necessity of prosecuting the masterminds of the genocide, the Tribunal has only convicted 29 persons between 1995 and 2009, and thousands of survivors continue to feel that justice has not been fulfilled. Specifically, 250,000 women were reported to have been raped during the genocide, and approximately 70% of them contracted HIV as a result. While the trial of Jean Paul Akayesu established the international precedent that rape is a crime of genocide, many of the 100,000 survivors of sexual violence are still unable to access necessary anti-retroviral medication (ARV) or basic healthcare services. What does “global justice” mean for these survivors? What forms of “justice” is the international community responsible for after failing to stop the genocide in the first place? 

My thoughts and prayers are with the millions of people impacted by the devastating earthquake that struck Haiti on Tuesday January 13. Print and online media is awash with stories and images of “one of the worst ever natural disasters in the western hemisphere.” No matter how many articles I read or how much live footage I watch the utter devastation, pain, and suffering are difficult to comprehend.

Amidst the endless stream of information detailing the destruction and tireless relief efforts there is also a plethora of suggestions of how and where to send donations, including information about the largest text-based fundraising campaign in history. As with most life-threatening emergencies there has been an immediate outpouring of support (an article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review discusses why sudden crises pull heartstrings and loosen purse strings more than persistent, chronic conditions).

The media coverage is focused, in large part, on the current conditions, with only occasional reference to the historical and structural injustices that magnified the earthquake’s devastating impact. A provocative audio slideshow, published online in the July 2009 issue of Guernica Magazine, captures the reality that the current devastation is best understood as the manmade outcome of a long and ugly historical sequence. A May 2009 Times of London article points to the degree to which Haiti’s status as the poorest country in the western hemisphere – mired in historic debt, stricken by flood and famine, and rife with violence and abuse – was simply accepted.

It is critical that the international community confronts these historical and structural injustices as it considers the help that Haiti needs. An online post in Foreign Policy magazine calls on the international community to cancel Haiti’s debt. The Association for Women’s Rights in Development highlights the specific experiences and needs of Haitian women during this humanitarian catastrophe. If we are serious about Haiti’s recovery, we need to be as committed to addressing the country’s systematic injustices and inequalities as we are to emergency relief.

On Monday, the United Nations called on wealthy nations to provide a collective total of $7.1 billion to help fund humanitarian assistance in 2010 for nearly 50 million people in 25 countries. These funds would assist people whose lives have been torn by natural disasters and conflict in countries such as Afghanistan, Kenya, the occupied Palestinian territories, Sudan, and Somalia. However, many wealthy nations are claiming that financial pressures on their domestic fronts have significantly restrained their budget for international assistance. In the 2008 fiscal year, to give an example, the United States had $623 billion in military expenditures, while countries in the rest of the world had a combined total of $500 billion. What does such spending reveal about our global priorities? If the world can muster $1.1 trillion for military purposes, and can not find $7 billion to aid the people directly affected by political conflict, what are our chances of securing the universal human right to a social and international order that ensures that other rights, such as education, democratic participation, and health, can be fully realized?