As far as the UN and the international community are concerned, the verdict appears mixed. There is some discussion in this book regarding the questions of why no one stopped the violence when it happened. But also once the tribunals were formed, how well did they work? And what diplomatic and political factors contributed to their success or failure? Many authorities are pleased with the developments in the new field of international humanitarian law. Everything is precedent-setting. But is this what the societies and victims need?
The question of what constitutes `justice' for these victims is the core of the book. Justice is not limited to a guilty verdict for the perpetrators. The tribunals only have had marginal success in this area. But as the book explores, the victims have other needs that are also only partially met. There is the need for victims to find and bury their loved ones, to say good-bye (p.218). There is a need to match the perception of justice with its delivery (340). Is it punishment and retribution? Is it acknowledgemnt of the truth throughout the society? Can revelation and discussion of the truth prevent future conflict? What about restitution?
For me the most poignant passage was on p.264. Rwandan survivor Antoinette was raped by five men, one of whom fathered her son, whom she chose to name Emmanuel. This is not commented on in the book, but I know that the meaning of that name is `God with us'. It is also likely that Antoinette is aware of this, being a Christian. The naming of her rape-produced son is a testament to me of the resilience and character of that woman in the most awful of circumstances.
The book is written with a reporter's eye and ear. It has an observational style and develops in detective-like manner. Other reviewers have questioned the quality of her research. I am not knowledgeable enough to comment. But it seems to me that the late Ms. Neuffer did credit to her profession with this book.