Killing Neighbors is meticulously researched and contains a wealth of ethnographic interview data, bringing some much needed clarity to the debates on what drives individuals to take particular actions in a context of mass violence, and highlighting a range of motives behind what is often characterised as senseless killing. This is very much in the tradition of Paul Richards' work, emphasising the utility of an ethnographic approach in uncovering motives for, meanings behind, and interpretations ascribed to, individual violent acts, or indeed failures to commit violent acts. It also proves a welcome contribution to the literature challenging simplistic characterisations of ‘ethnic conflict’, arguing effectively and convincingly that the testimony of those interviewed indicates that a much more complex approach is needed to understand why individuals play sometimes overlapping or seemingly contradictory roles during violent conflict, from killing some whilst hiding others, to refusing to denounce Tutsi but engaging in looting of their property. Fuji challenges those who in their rush to explain violence try to categorise social phenomena and groups of actors too simply, arguing that essential categories such as ‘elites’ and ‘masses’ lack explanatory value. The data, she avers, however messy and complicated, must speak for itself.
This is the central achievement of Killing Neighbors. Fuji presents the 1994 genocide as a process rather than an event, highlighting the importance of social dynamics and interactions in the study of violence. She also identifies ethnicity as perhaps more malleable and responsive a form of identity than others have professed, characterising ‘state-sponsored ethnicity’ as a central text which is performed by individuals differently in different locations at different times, and with reference to their own specific range of personal circumstances and external influences. Killing Neighbors questions the value of monolithic accounts of the actions of ‘the masses’ during genocide, arguing instead for a more complex approach to understanding why ‘ordinary’ individuals, often with little or no promise of protection or privilege, participated in genocidal acts. Using interview data, she reconstitutes individual and local community narratives of the genocide, building up a highly complex picture of the lived experience of the genocide over time, and exposing layers of action and inaction, both violent and non-violent, by individuals. Fuji may well face similar criticism to others adopting ethnographic approaches to conflict and violence, that her data is ‘too local’ to contribute significantly to our understanding of mass participation in violence. On the contrary, the strength of this study is in the richness of the data. Such well-researched and grounded contributions to the study of violence are a welcome addition to the literature, and are essential if we are ever to understand what drives ordinary individuals to, quite literally, kill their neighbours.
