Question

background information: this is an excerpt from an investigative report commissioned by the united nations.
the commission concluded that the government of the sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide. . . . generally speaking the policy of attacking, killing and forcibly displacing members of some tribes does not evince a specific intent to annihilate, in whole or in part, a group distinguished on racial, ethnic, national or religious grounds. rather, it would seem that those who planned and organized attacks on villages pursued the intent to drive the victims from their homes, primarily for purposes of counter-insurgency warfare.
how does the un report contradict the sudan tribune article?
○ it states that some people were forcibly displaced.
○ it states that genocide has not occurred.
○ it states that no killings have taken place.
○ it states that the attacks were unplanned and unorganized.

Explanation:

To find the contradiction, we first identify the core claim of the UN report: it explicitly concludes that the Sudanese government did not pursue a genocide policy. A contradiction would mean the Sudan Tribune article made the opposite claim, so the UN report's denial of genocide is the contradictory point. The other options do not represent contradictions: the UN report acknowledges forced displacement, killings, and planned/organized attacks, so those points align with (rather than contradict) potential claims in the Tribune article.

Answer:

It states that genocide has not occurred.