Ethnic cleansing
Across centuries and cultures, humanity has witnessed attempts to create societies deemed 'ethnically pure'—a chilling ambition with devastating consequences. This process, known as ethnic cleansing, involves the systematic, forceful removal of specific groups from their homes, often under the guise of national unity or security. It's a complex, controversial phenomenon that blurs the lines between displacement and destruction, leaving an indelible mark on history and international law. Ethnic cleansing is a purposeful policy of forced removal, aiming for ethnic homogeneity through violent and terror-inspiring means. While lacking a specific legal definition, its methods are considered crimes against humanity and can escalate to genocide. The concept has a long, troubled history, often emerging during periods of intense nationalism, war, and state-building.
AI Summary
Across centuries and cultures, humanity has witnessed attempts to create societies deemed 'ethnically pure'—a chilling ambition with devastating consequences. This process, known as ethnic cleansing, involves the systematic, forceful removal of specific groups from their homes, often under the guise of national unity or security. It's a complex, controversial phenomenon that blurs the lines between displacement and destruction, leaving an indelible mark on history and international law.
- Ethnic cleansing is a purposeful policy of forced removal, aiming for ethnic homogeneity through violent and terror-inspiring means.
- While lacking a specific legal definition, its methods are considered crimes against humanity and can escalate to genocide.
- The concept has a long, troubled history, often emerging during periods of intense nationalism, war, and state-building.
The Scars of Homogeneity: Understanding Ethnic Cleansing
At its heart, ethnic cleansing is the systematic, forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a particular geographic area. The grim objective is to achieve a society that is, or appears to be, ethnically uniform. It's a calculated act designed to redraw human landscapes by force.
This 'removal' isn't always direct deportation. It encompasses a range of brutal indirect methods designed to coerce a group into fleeing and prevent their return. Think murder, systematic rape, destruction of homes, cultural sites, and livelihoods—all calculated to make life unbearable and flight the only option.
A Contested Concept, A Modern Term
Despite its brutal reality, the very definition of ethnic cleansing is often debated by scholars and legal experts. Some include coercive assimilation or mass killings as part of the process, while others argue it's merely a euphemism for the more legally defined crime of genocide or cultural genocide.
The term itself gained widespread usage relatively recently. It first emerged in the 1980s to describe the treatment of Kosovo Serbs by Albanian nationalists and exploded into global consciousness during the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s. Journalism played a significant role in popularizing it, bringing the horrific events into living rooms worldwide.
Initially, scholars often attributed ethnic cleansing to deep-seated animosities. However, more recent research suggests it can be a 'natural extension' of nation-states striving for homogeneity—especially during periods of democratization or geopolitical instability—with pre-existing ethnic tensions acting as a dangerous catalyst.
Echoes from Antiquity: The Roots of the Term
While the modern term is new, the concept is ancient. An early antecedent is the Greek word 'andrapodismos,' meaning 'enslavement,' used to describe atrocities like Alexander the Great's conquest of Thebes in 335 BCE, which involved the subjugation and displacement of its people.
Fast forward to the early modern era, and some historians point to the expulsion of the Moriscos from Spain between 1609 and 1614 as an early example of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing. This involved the forced removal of Spain's Muslim population, highlighting an early drive for religious and cultural uniformity.
Raphael Lemkin, who famously coined the term 'genocide,' considered the displacement of Native Americans by American settlers a historical example of genocide. Others, like historian Gary Anderson, suggest 'ethnic cleansing' might be a more fitting description for certain aspects of this tragic chapter.
In the mid-19th century, during the industrial era, the Russian Empire undertook what is known as the Circassian genocide. Russian General Nikolay Yevdakimov, overseeing the operations, dehumanized Muslim Circassians as a 'pestilence' to be expelled, explicitly using the term 'ochishchenie'—meaning 'cleansing'—for the military operations aimed at annexing their lands.
In the early 20th century, regional variants of the term appeared across Europe. The Czechs used 'očista,' Poles 'czystki etniczne,' the French 'épuration,' and the Germans 'Säuberung.' A 1913 Carnegie Endowment report, documenting the brutal Balkan Wars, noted many new terms for atrocities committed against ethnic groups.
During World War II, the Nazis pursued a policy of making Europe 'judenrein'—cleaned of Jews—as part of the Holocaust. Their infamous Generalplan Ost envisioned the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Slavic peoples in Central and Eastern Europe to create 'living space' for Germans.
Other World War II atrocities echoed this language. The Croatian Ustaše regime used 'čišćenje terena' ('cleansing the terrain') for military actions against non-Croats, while Serbian Chetniks used similar directives for genocidal massacres against Bosniaks and Croats. The Soviet Union also used 'ochistka granits' ('cleansing of borders') for forced resettlements of Poles and other groups.
The term appeared in its complete form, 'purificare etnică,' in Romanian in 1941, spoken by Vice Prime Minister Mihai Antonescu. Decades later, in the 1980s, the Soviets used 'etnicheskoye chishcheniye' to describe Azerbaijani efforts to drive Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh, further cementing its presence in modern discourse.
Defining the Indefinable: UN and Legal Perspectives
There is no single, universally agreed-upon legal definition for ethnic cleansing in international criminal law. However, its methods—murder, torture, forced displacement, rape, destruction of property—are unequivocally considered crimes against humanity and often fall under the Genocide Convention.
The United Nations officially defines ethnic cleansing as 'rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group.' It emphasizes a 'purposeful policy' carried out by 'violent and terror-inspiring means.'
Many scholars view ethnic cleansing as part of a grim continuum of policies, from forced emigration to outright genocide. It's often described as occupying the 'central part' between less violent population transfers and the ultimate destruction of a group.
Gregory Stanton, founder of Genocide Watch, critiques the frequent use of 'ethnic cleansing' in the media. He argues that because it lacks a precise legal definition, its use can overshadow events that truly qualify as genocide, potentially hindering justice and accountability.
Mutual Cleansing and Its Aftermath
Sometimes, ethnic cleansing can be 'mutual.' This occurs when two groups simultaneously commit atrocities against the minority members of the other group within their respective territories. A stark example is the population exchange between Turkey and Greece in the 1920s, following the Greco-Turkish War, where each country expelled its opposing minority.
Other instances include population transfers by the Soviets after World War II, involving Germans, Poles, and Ukrainians, and the tit-for-tat killings and displacements that occurred during the First Nagorno-Karabakh War and the Lebanese Civil War.
The post-World War II expulsion of Germans from territories like Czechoslovakia and Poland is another case. While some Germans had supported Nazi expansionism, the mass forced resettlement, though a type of ethnic cleansing, was ultimately considered by some to contribute to long-term regional stability, albeit at a severe human cost.
The Drivers of Displacement
Political scientist Michael Mann argues that murderous ethnic cleansing is strongly linked to the rise of nationalism, which often intertwines citizenship with a specific ethnic identity. When two ethnic groups claim the same territory and feel threatened, this can escalate into severe grievances and the danger of ethnic cleansing.
Mann suggests that while stable democracies and authoritarian regimes might not be the primary perpetrators, regimes undergoing democratization in deeply divided societies are particularly susceptible. These processes can amplify ethnic hostility, especially when one group perceives the other as oppressive or exploitative.
Crucially, ethnic cleansing requires high levels of organization. It is usually directed by states or other authoritative powers, not by 'failed states.' Perpetrators often garner support from core constituencies that favor a blend of nationalism, statism, and violence, especially in unstable geopolitical environments or contexts of war.
Ethnic Cleansing vs. Genocide: A Fine Line
Ethnic cleansing is often described as part of a continuum of violence, with genocide representing its most extreme form. While both involve extreme brutality, the core distinction lies in intent: ethnic cleansing aims to displace a population, while genocide aims to destroy a group, in whole or in part.
However, this distinction can be tragically blurred. Many scholars argue that forced deportation inevitably leads to the destruction of a group through starvation, exposure, and violence, a consequence that perpetrators must foresee. As one scholar put it, 'ethnic cleansing bleeds into genocide, as mass murder is committed in order to rid the land of a people.'
Indeed, some consider ethnic cleansing a 'warning sign of genocide to come'—the desperate final act of a frustrated ethnic cleanser. This perspective highlights why many critics view the term 'ethnic cleansing' as a dangerous euphemism that can downplay the genocidal implications of such acts.
Tactics and Targets: The Erasure of Presence
The tactics of ethnic cleansing are not limited to direct violence against people. They extend to the systematic destruction of cultural and historical symbols: temples, books, monuments, graveyards, and even street names. This aims to erase any memory or trace of the victimized group's historical presence in the purged territory.
During the Yugoslav Wars, for example, Serb and Croat forces engaged in widespread ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo. This involved not only expulsions and killings but also the deliberate destruction of mosques, churches, cemeteries, and cultural buildings, all designed to alter the demographic composition and obliterate cultural heritage.
From the ancient Neo-Assyrian Empire's resettlement policies to modern-day displacements like those carried out by Israeli herders against Palestinian herders in the West Bank, the underlying aim remains the same: to seize control of territory and create an ethnically homogenous landscape, often with devastating human consequences.
Article
Ethnic cleansing
1893 painting by George Craig, depicting the deportation of the Acadians from Grand-Pré in 1755.
Expulsions of Jews in Europe from 1100 to 1600
Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making the society ethnically homogeneous. Along with direct removal such as deportation or population transfer, it also includes indirect methods aimed at forced migration by coercing the victim group to flee and preventing its return, such as murder, rape, and property destruction. Both the definition and charge of ethnic cleansing is often disputed, with some researchers including and others excluding coercive assimilation or mass killings as a means of depopulating an area of a particular group, or calling it a euphemism for genocide or cultural genocide.
Although scholars do not agree on which events constitute ethnic cleansing, many instances have occurred throughout history. The term was first used to describe Albanian nationalist treatment of the Kosovo Serbs in the 1980s, and entered widespread use during the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s. Since then, the term has gained widespread acceptance due to journalism. Although research originally focused on deep-rooted animosities as an explanation for ethnic cleansing events, more recent studies depict ethnic cleansing as "a natural extension of the homogenizing tendencies of nation states" or emphasize security concerns and the effects of democratization, portraying ethnic tensions as a contributing factor. Research has also focused on the role of war as a causative or potentiating factor in ethnic cleansing. However, states in a similar strategic situation can have widely varying policies towards minority ethnic groups perceived as a security threat.
Ethnic cleansing has no legal definition under international criminal law, but the methods by which it is carried out are considered crimes against humanity and may also fall under the Genocide Convention.
Etymology
Ethnic cleansing
Refugees at Taurus Pass during the Armenian genocide. The Young Turk triumvirate aimed to reduce the number of Armenians to below 5–10% of the population in any part of the Ottoman Empire, which resulted in the elimination of a million Armenians.
Istrian Italians leave Pola in 1947 during the Istrian-Dalmatian exodus, which followed the foibe massacres
An antecedent to the term is the Greek word andrapodismos (ἀνδραποδισμός; lit. "enslavement"), which was used in ancient texts. e.g., to describe atrocities that accompanied the Athenian general Chares and his seizure and destruction of Sestos in 353 and Alexander the Great's conquest of Thebes in 335 BCE. The expulsion of the Moriscos from Spain between 1609 and 1614 is considered by some authors to be one of the first episodes of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing in the modern western world. Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term "genocide", considered the displacement of Native Americans by American settlers as a historical example of genocide. Others, like historian Gary Anderson, contend that genocide does not accurately characterize any aspect of American history, suggesting instead that ethnic cleansing is a more appropriate term. The Circassian genocide, also known as "Tsitsekun", is often regarded by various historians as the first large-scale ethnic cleansing campaign launched by a state during the 19th century industrial era. Imperial Russian general Nikolay Yevdakimov, who supervised the operations of Circassian genocide during 1860s, dehumanised Muslim Circassians as "a pestilence" to be expelled from their native lands. Russian objective was the annexation of land; and the Russian military operations that forcibly deported Circassians were designated by Yevdakimov as “ochishchenie” (cleansing).
In the early 1900s, regional variants of the term could be found among the Czechs (očista), the Poles (czystki etniczne), the French (épuration) and the Germans (Säuberung). A 1913 Carnegie Endowment report condemning the actions of all participants in the Balkan Wars contained various new terms to describe brutalities committed toward ethnic groups.
Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia following the end of World War II
During the Holocaust in World War II, Nazi Germany pursued a policy of ensuring that Europe was "cleaned of Jews" (judenrein). The Nazi Generalplan Ost called for the genocide and ethnic cleansing of most Slavic people in central and eastern Europe for the purpose of providing more living space for the Germans. During the Genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia, the euphemism čišćenje terena ("cleansing the terrain") was used by the Croatian Ustaše to describe military actions in which non-Croats were purposely systematically killed or otherwise uprooted from their homes. The term was also used in the December 20, 1941, directive of Serbian Chetniks in reference to the genocidal massacres they committed against Bosniaks and Croats between 1941 and 1945. The Russian phrase очистка границ (ochistka granits; lit. "cleansing of borders") was used in Soviet documents of the early 1930s to refer to the forced resettlement of Polish people from the 22-kilometre (14 mi) border zone in the Byelorussian and Ukrainian SSRs. This process of the population transfer in the Soviet Union was repeated on an even larger scale in 1939–1941, involving many other groups suspected of disloyalty.
Since 1947, in an event called the Nakba, at least 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes or forced to flee from what is now Israel.
In its complete form, the term appeared for the first time in the Romanian language (purificare etnică) in an address by Vice Prime Minister Mihai Antonescu to cabinet members in July 1941. After the beginning of the invasion by the Soviet Union, he concluded: "I do not know when the Romanians will have such chance for ethnic cleansing." In the 1980s, the Soviets used the term "etnicheskoye chishcheniye" which literally translates to "ethnic cleansing" to describe Azerbaijani efforts to drive Armenians away from Nagorno-Karabakh. It was widely popularized by the Western media during the Bosnian War (1992–1995).
In 1992, the German equivalent of ethnic cleansing (German: ethnische Säuberung, pronounced [ˈʔɛtnɪʃə ˈzɔɪ̯bəʁʊŋ] ) was named German Un-word of the Year by the Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache due to its euphemistic, inappropriate nature.
Definitions
Ethnic cleansing
The Final Report of the Commission of Experts established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 defined ethnic cleansing as:
a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas", [noting that in the former Yugoslavia] " 'ethnic cleansing' has been carried out by means of murder, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, extra-judicial executions, rape and sexual assaults, confinement of civilian population in ghetto areas, forcible removal, displacement and deportation of civilian population, deliberate military attacks or threats of attacks on civilians and civilian areas, and wanton destruction of property. Those practices constitute crimes against humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes. Furthermore, such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.
The official United Nations definition of ethnic cleansing is "rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group." As a category, ethnic cleansing encompasses a continuum or spectrum of policies. In the words of Andrew Bell-Fialkoff, "ethnic cleansing ... defies easy definition. At one end it is virtually indistinguishable from forced emigration and population exchange while at the other it merges with deportation and genocide. At the most general level, however, ethnic cleansing can be understood as the expulsion of a population from a given territory."
Terry Martin has defined ethnic cleansing as "the forcible removal of an ethnically defined population from a given territory" and as "occupying the central part of a continuum between genocide on one end and nonviolent pressured ethnic emigration on the other end."
Gregory Stanton, the founder of Genocide Watch, has criticised the rise of the term and its use for events that he feels should be called "genocide": because "ethnic cleansing" has no legal definition, its media use can detract attention from events that should be prosecuted as genocide. Ethnic cleansing has therefore and for being read as euphemistic alternatively identified as ethnocide or cultural genocide.
As a crime under international law
There is no international treaty that specifies a specific crime of ethnic cleansing; however, ethnic cleansing in the broad sense—the forcible deportation of a population—is defined as a crime against humanity under the statutes of both the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The gross human rights violations integral to stricter definitions of ethnic cleansing are treated as separate crimes falling under public international law of crimes against humanity and in certain circumstances genocide. There are also situations, such as the expulsion of Germans after World War II, where ethnic cleansing has taken place without legal redress (see Preussische Treuhand v. Poland). Timothy v. Waters argues that similar ethnic cleansing could go unpunished in the future.
Mutual ethnic cleansing
Mutual ethnic cleansing occurs when two groups commit ethnic cleansing against minority members of the other group within their own territories. For instance in the 1920s, Turkey expelled its Greek minority and Greece expelled its Turkish minority following the Greco-Turkish War. Other examples where mutual ethnic cleansing occurred include the First Nagorno-Karabakh War and the population transfers by the Soviets of Germans, Poles, and Ukrainians after World War II.
Causes
Ethnic cleansing
Massacres of Poles in Volhynia in 1943, carried out by Ukrainian nationalists. Most Poles of Volhynia had either been murdered or had fled the area.
According to Michael Mann, in The Dark Side of Democracy (2004), murderous ethnic cleansing is strongly related to the creation of democracies. He argues that murderous ethnic cleansing is due to the rise of nationalism, which associates citizenship with a specific ethnic group. Democracy, therefore, is tied to ethnic and national forms of exclusion. Nevertheless, it is not democratic states that are more prone to commit ethnic cleansing, because minorities tend to have constitutional guarantees. Neither are stable authoritarian regimes (except the Nazi and communist regimes) which are likely perpetrators of murderous ethnic cleansing, but those regimes that are in process of democratization. Ethnic hostility appears where ethnicity overshadows social classes as the primordial system of social stratification. Usually, in deeply divided societies, categories such as class and ethnicity are deeply intertwined, and when an ethnic group is seen as oppressor or exploitative of the other, serious ethnic conflict can develop. Michael Mann holds that when two ethnic groups claim sovereignty over the same territory and can feel threatened, their differences can lead to severe grievances and danger of ethnic cleansing. The perpetration of murderous ethnic cleansing tends to occur in unstable geopolitical environments and in contexts of war. As ethnic cleansing requires high levels of organisation and is usually directed by states or other authoritative powers, perpetrators are usually state powers or institutions with some coherence and capacity, not failed states as it is generally perceived. The perpetrator powers tend to get support by core constituencies that favour combinations of nationalism, statism, and violence.
Ethnic cleansing was prevalent during the Age of Nationalism in Europe (19th and 20th centuries). Multi-ethnic European engaged in ethnic cleansing against minorities in order to pre-empt their secession and the loss of territory. Ethnic cleansing was particularly prevalent during periods of interstate war.
Genocide
Ethnic cleansing
Photo taken after the burning of Smyrna. From 1914 until 1923, Ottoman Greeks in Thrace and Asia Minor were subject to a campaign including massacres and deportations. The International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) recognizes it as genocide and refers to the campaign as the Greek Genocide.
Ethnic cleansing has been described as part of a continuum of violence whose most extreme form is genocide. Ethnic cleansing is similar to forced deportation or population transfer. While ethnic cleansing and genocide may share the same goal and methods (e.g., forced displacement), ethnic cleansing is intended to displace a persecuted population from a given territory, while genocide is intended to destroy a group.
Some academics consider genocide to be a subset of "murderous ethnic cleansing". Norman Naimark writes that these concepts are different but related, for "literally and figuratively, ethnic cleansing bleeds into genocide, as mass murder is committed in order to rid the land of a people." William Schabas states "ethnic cleansing is also a warning sign of genocide to come. Genocide is the last resort of the frustrated ethnic cleanser." Multiple genocide scholars have criticized distinguishing between ethnic cleansing and genocide, with Martin Shaw arguing that forced deportation necessarily results in the destruction of a group and this must be foreseen by the perpetrators. Furthermore ethnic cleansing has been identified as a euphemism for genocide or cultural genocide.
As a military, political, and economic tactic
Ethnic cleansing
Italian foibe massacres victims
Expulsion of Poles by Nazi Germany. Poles are led to trains under German army escort, as part of the ethnic cleansing of western Poland annexed to the German Reich following the invasion.
A group of Bosniaks from the Lašva Valley close by Travnik, Bosnia and Herzegovina that were forced out of their homes and villages by Croat forces in 1993
The funeral of Bosniak victims of the Srebrenica massacre, carried out by Serbian forces as part of ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian War
Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar in October 2017
Expulsion of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians in September 2023
Portrait of Circassian refugees evicting their towns and villages after the Russian invasion of Circassia. According to some authors, Russian military forces massacred and forcibly deported between 95 and 97% of all native Circassians during the Circassian genocide. Russian Count Nikolay Yevdokimov, who organized the extermination campaigns of "Tsitsekun", designated Russian military operations targeting Circassian natives by the term “ochishchenie” (cleansing).
The foibe massacres (Italian: massacri delle foibe; Slovene: poboji v fojbah; Croatian: masakri fojbe), or simply "the foibe", refers to ethnic cleansing, mass killings and deportations both during and immediately after World War II, mainly committed by Yugoslav Partisans and OZNA in the then-Italian territories of Julian March (Karst Region and Istria), Kvarner and Dalmatia, against local Italians (Istrian Italians and Dalmatian Italians) and Slavs, primarily members of fascist and collaborationist forces, and civilians opposed to the new Yugoslav authorities, and Italian, German, Croat and Slovene anti-communists against the regime of Josip Broz Tito, presumed to be associated with fascism, Nazism, collaboration with Axis and reventive purge of real, potential or presumed opponents of Titoism The foibe massacres were followed by the Istrian–Dalmatian exodus, which was the post-World War II exodus and departure of between 230,000 and 350,000 local ethnic Italians (Istrian Italians and Dalmatian Italians) towards Italy, and in smaller numbers, towards the Americas, Australia and South Africa. From 1947, after the war, they were subject by Yugoslav authorities to less violent forms of intimidation, such as nationalization, expropriation, and discriminatory taxation, which gave them little option other than emigration. In 1953, there were 36,000 declared Italians in Yugoslavia, just about 16% of the original Italian population before World War II. According to the census organized in Croatia in 2001 and that organized in Slovenia in 2002, the Italians who remained in the former Yugoslavia amounted to 21,894 people (2,258 in Slovenia and 19,636 in Croatia).
The resettlement policy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the 9th and 7th centuries BC is considered by some scholars to be one of the first cases of ethnic cleansing.
During the 1980s, in Lebanon, ethnic cleansing was common during all phases of the conflict, notable incidents were seen in the early phase of the war, such as the Damour massacre, the Karantina massacre, the Siege of the Tel al-Zaatar Palestinian refugee camp, and during the 1982 Lebanon War such as the Sabra and Shatila Massacre committed by Lebanese Maronite forces backed by Israel against Palestinian refugees and Lebanese Shia civilians. After the Israeli withdrawal from the Chouf, the Mountain War broke out, where ethnic cleansings (mostly in the form of tit-for-tat killings) occurred. During that time, the Syrian backed, mostly Druze dominated People's Liberation Army used a policy they called "territorial cleansing" to "drain" the Chouf of Maronite Christians in order to deny them of resisting the advance of the PSP. As a result, 163,670 Christian villagers were displaced due to these operations. In response to these massacres, the Lebanese Forces conducted a similar policy, which resulted in 20,000 Druze displaced.
Ethnic cleansing was a common phenomenon in the wars in Croatia, Kosovo, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. This entailed intimidation, forced expulsion, or killing of the unwanted ethnic group as well as the destruction of the places of worship, cemeteries and cultural and historical buildings of that ethnic group in order to alter the population composition of an area in the favour of another ethnic group which would become the majority.
According to numerous ICTY verdicts and indictments, Serb and Croat forces performed ethnic cleansing of their territories planned by their political leadership to create ethnically pure states (Republika Srpska and Republic of Serbian Krajina by the Serbs; and Herzeg-Bosnia by the Croats).
Survivors of the ethnic cleansing were left severely traumatized as a consequence of this campaign.
Israeli herders have engaged in a systemic displacement of Palestinian herders in Area C of the West Bank as a form of nationalist and economic warfare.
According to historian Norman Naimark, during an ethnic cleansing process, there may be destruction of physical symbols of the victims including temples, books, monuments, graveyards, and street names: "Ethnic cleansing involves not only the forced deportation of entire nations but the eradication of the memory of their presence."