According to international law, what criterion separates genocide from other international crimes, e.g. crimes against humanity or crimes of aggression?
According to international law, the criterion that separates genocide from other international crimes, such as crimes against humanity or crimes of aggression, is the specific intent or motive behind the actions.
Genocide, as defined in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, requires the perpetrators to have the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. This means that the crime of genocide is specifically targeted at a particular group based on their identity.
On the other hand, crimes against humanity refer to widespread or systematic attacks against any civilian population. These crimes include acts such as murder, torture, enslavement, sexual violence, etc., committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.
Crimes of aggression, as defined by the International Criminal Court, involve the planning, preparation, initiation, or execution of an act of aggression, which by its character, gravity, and scale, amounts to a manifest violation of the UN Charter. Crimes of aggression focus on the unlawful use of force by states against other states, rather than targeting specific groups based on their identity.
So, the key criterion that separates genocide from other international crimes is the specific intent to destroy a particular group, as opposed to attacks on a civilian population or acts of aggression between states.