Ethnic cleansing and genocide are frequently used interchangeably in a wrong sense. In reality, both of them are different terms and there is profound difference between the two. This is because, while genocide is an attempt to exterminate a minority, ethnic cleansing is a method to expel the minority. Thus, genocide is a type of ethnic cleansing. Genocide may be defined as any act that is aimed at systematic expulsion of a particular group of individuals from their homes either through threat or by force (Naimark, 2001). Infact, genocide is considered as an element of war crime and is considered a crime against humanity. Genocide is against the law and has a juridicial status. The term has specific definitions and has a meaning even in international law. People who are involved in genocide and get convicted like general Radoslav Krstic who was convicted for geneocide, later on appeal was convicted only for accomplice of genocide ("Prosecutor v. Krstic":56). A classic example of genocide is the mass murder of about 7500 Bosnian muslims at Srebrenica.
Thus ethnic cleaning and genocide occupy positions which are adjacent in the spectrum of violence against religions, countries and minorities. In some situations, ethnic cleansing is referred to as "forced deportation" or "population transfer". The means used to achieve this can be legal or semilegal. hence it can be said that genocide is the most extreme form of ethnic cleansing and as Michael Mann put it, it can be called as “murderous ethnic cleansing” (Mann, 2005:11). As such forced deportation occurs mainly during times of war or aggression and people seldom leave their homes during peace time. This is because each and every individual is attached to their land which their fore fathers cultivated and lived in.
In my opinion, both ethnic cleansing and genocide are the same, both are inhuman and against the law. Both can have devastating