UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL FORUM ON MINORITY ISSUES 26 NOVEMBER 2014 . Present tion by Mark Lattimer, Executive Director, Minority Rights Group International (Check against delivery) Mr Chair, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to begin by saying that at this UN Forum on the theme of preventing violence and atrocities against minorities, it is an honour to speak on the same platform as representatives of communities who are facing such attacks at this very moment: Rohingya from Myanmar, Yazidis and Assyrians from Iraq and Kurds from Syria, Gaboye from Somalia, and Hazara from Pakistan. The fact that such attacks are ongoing even as we deliberate here is sobering, but should also alert us to factors of central importance for avoiding future violence. The phrase 'never again' has been voiced a number of times these last two days. But what does it mean to say 'never again' when we know that the reality is that atrocities are happening again and again? Those who say 'never again' are of course expressing hope, which is essential, and also a commitment to preventing the recurrence of violence, which we should all share. But it does seem to me that there is also a danger of implying that atrocities against minorities are one-off, rare events, when in fact in a number of states around the world the reality is a continuum of violence, with peaks and troughs, but no real respite over the course, sometimes, of many years. For the last eight years, Minority Rights Group International has produced the Peoples under Threat index, to provide early warning of potential future mass atrocities.Using methodology developed in the wake of the Rwandan genocide, the index uses a basket of 10 current indicators from authoritative sources to identify situations around the world where communities face the greatest risk of genocide, mass killing, or systematic violent repression. One finding is striking: how those states with a recent history of atrocity are often also those facing the greatest danger of future mass killing even, in some cases, despite a change in government. Two years ago, colleagues in South Sudan asked why their communities remained on our critical list despite the country's independence. Users of the index, particularly in the United States, also asked why we identified a critical level of risk remaining in Iraq in recent years. As we all now know, in both South Sudan and in Iraq, events of the last year have sadly proved the index correct. . Two conclusions quickly follow. The first is' that when atrocities occur, prevention cannot be allowed to wait on some future peace-building or democratization phase. It needs to accompany conflict resolution and stabilization efforts from the start. This means that not just immediate protection concerns but also the longer-term grievances of minority communities need to be on the table; whether they concern land tenure, political participation, regional autonomy or linguistic and education rights. Ensuring minorities