[Title: NAME]

The comparison of genocide may have evolved throughout the last two decades because

of the second-generation genocide experiments, the Holodomor as just a criminal act of violence

committed by Stalin's establishment towards the Ukrainian state has not yet been examined from

a quantifiable point of view. Furthermore, it is useful to compare the Holodomor with several

other manifestations of genocide during the first half of the 20th century–respectively, the

Ottoman Empire's Armenian genocide versus Nazi Germany's Holocaust in recognition of the

cognitive and structural aspects of genocide that distinguish both (Antonovych, 2019).

Throughout my paper, I would compare deliberate intent, highlighting the dissimilarities and

differences in the intention of committing such crimes against humanity.

The steps have been taken in the comparative analysis of the three genocides being

examined, and thus the concepts for these kinds of analyses have been highlighted. Therefore,

Frank Sysyn wrote in 1999 "analysis of the Ukrainian famine provides significant comparative

information for all those learning the Armenian genocide (Antonovych, 2019). This examination

between both tragedies has included questions of purpose and proof Both had been

overshadowed by confusion across the number of deaths and holocaust concepts. Stanislav

aimed to evaluate the forms whereby the Holodomor is differentiated from the Holocaust as well

as claimed that the Stalinist state's philosophy behind genocide was distinctive.

According to (Kul’chyts’kyi, 2015) Stalin was driven by social factors, whereas Hitler

remained inspired by national reasons. Destruction based on class contributed to a Holodomor,

although nation-based violence contributed to the Holocaust." Benjamin Lieberman published a

brief comparative analysis of Holodomor with the Holocaust as well as the Armenian genocide,

arguing that perhaps the famine or the Holodomor across Ukraine represented important
elements of massacres and varied by some of the instances of genocide in Europe throughout the

20th century (Relations and Affairs, 2019). He reached to the conclusion that key components of

Ukraine's famine came within genocide as rooted subsequently in international human rights law.

Predictable mortality from malnutrition mirrored some of the main tactics used to finish off

Armenians, very least in some parts.

Additionally, even though the initial operation targeting Kulaks started by attacking

class-identified opponents, cultural, economic, or political definitions intersected as the Soviet

leadership saw hunger as proof of Ukrainian national collectivization opposition, and strategies

which often compounded the consequences as well as losses of starvation centered especially on

Ukrainians. Unlike the Armenian genocide and indeed the Holocaust, nevertheless, with few

variations, the Holodomor has not yet been shown for various reasons in historical genocide

studies. First, this was a disguised genocide, rejected by the Soviet Union for even more than

fifty years, and that only the Ukrainian diaspora, predominantly in Canada and the US, spoke out

against it discovered the truth about that kind of criminal activity. Second, almost all of those

historians who consented that there would be a great man-made famine in Ukraine conscripted

this among Stalin's crimes, the large percentage of which (peculation, expulsion, eradication of

political enemies, etc.) didn't quite fit the lawful definition of genocide provided in the 1948 UN

Convention on only the Preventative and Retribution of a Felony of Genocide (the Genocide

Convention). Thirdly, only within the last decades following the initial release of the Soviet

records seems to have an agreement emerged across a large group of researchers that "the

Ukrainian Famine of 1932–33 matches the generalized pattern of genocide.

During the first half of the 20th century, Rafael Lemkin, the father of the Genocide

Convention, who developed the term "genocide," distinguished the Kremlin policy in Ukraine as
the perfect example of Soviet genocide, the largest and widest independent study in Russification

– the decimation of the Ukrainian state. Ever since several philosophers have made reference the

Holodomor to genocide offenses. Nevertheless, the focus stays on its in-depth analysis for almost

all articles about the Holodomor, and not just on its contrast with other genocides.

The evaluation of three genocides under review showed the comparative instances of

genocide and portray a variety of differences and commonalities. There has been a common

purpose across all three massacres to kill a particular community, whether in full (the Armenians

and the Jews) or even in portion (the Ukrainians); but, throughout the three genocides, the

essence of the aim was distinctive. Whereas the intention was unambiguous throughout the

Armenian and Jewish cases, the intention was tacit in the Holodomor and can be interpreted from

AUCPB and CPC amendments and rules and regulations, including from their behavior and

ramifications.

As has already been pointed out, a crucial commonality between genocides committed

throughout the Ottoman Empire, the Soviet Union, as well as the Third Reich would be that in

each situation political government was overshadowed by the dictatorship of a governing

party, the Soviets, and the Nazis, individually, who have been the real perpetrators of the three

genocides (Motyl, 2010). Therefore, except under the tightest definition of genocide, the

Ukrainians' Holodomor may have been positioned among many of the three most

considerable acts during the first half of the 20th century–including the Armenians' Ottoman

Turk genocide and indeed the Holocaust. The comparative study showed that almost all

genocides are distinct and similar at the very same time. The significance in evaluating incidents

of genocide becomes clear–if lessons from either the history are therefore not disregarded and

violence is not prosecuted, attackers can tend to be empowered, as seen in the eastern part of the
country of Ukraine as well as in Crimea, wherein the Soviet Union's sovereign state–the Russian

Federation –keeps attacking Ukraine as well as its citizens.

Reference

1. Antonovych, M. (2019) ‘Specific intent (dolus specialis) in the Armenian genocide, the

Holodomor and the Holocaust: a comparative analysis’, NaUKMA Research Papers.

Law, 3(0), pp. 19–25. DOI: 10.18523/2617-2607.2019.3.19-25.

2. Motyl, A. J. (2010) ‘Deleting the Holodomor: Ukraine unmakes itself’, World Affairs,

173(3), pp. 25–33. DOI: 10.3200/WAFS.173.3.25-34.

3. Relations, F. and Affairs, F. (2019) ‘The G-Word’, 94(1), pp. 141–148.