Why don’t governments do more to prevent genocide? What role does the public have in compelling their governments to take an active stand in the face of genocide? In Reluctant Interveners: America's Failed Responses to Genocide from Bosnia to Darfur
(Rutgers University Press, 2019), Eyal Mayroz
approaches these questions and more through an interdisciplinary lens that includes history, political science, rhetorical studies, and media studies. In doing so, Mayroz focuses on the United States and the complex relationships between political elites, including those who reside in the executive office; political and media communication, including the flow of information upward and downward; and the citizenry, including public opinion, political engagement, and political action.
In Reluctant Interveners
, Mayroz offers a critical, but not pessimistic account of the relationship between the U.S. government and its citizens when it comes to genocide recognition and prevention. Importantly, Mayroz’s research illustrates the ways in which the public and civil society can seek to take control of the narrative from those officials who attempt to manage the public through framing suspected cases of genocide in ways that will elicit support for their preferred policy. In this regard, Mayroz highlights the potential for the American public to play a more influential role in presidential decisions in response to genocide.