A disregard for minority rights lies at the heart of terrible wars in Darfur, Kosovo, Sri Lanka and countless other places. But attention to these rights, which include the right to identify yourself on ethnic or religious grounds or to worship as you choose, have been sidelined in international conflict prevention.

It is clear that too many conflicts with minorities at their centre are not being understood as such. The result? The warning cries of minority rights violations go unheard. Conflicts that could have been prevented flare up. History repeats itself.

A new report from Minority Rights Group International shows clear links between upholding minority rights and conflict prevention. Conflict early warning systems do exist but few give minority rights priority. The systems that do so are criticised in the report for being inconsistently applied. www.minorityrights.org

A more coherent and coordinated approach, drawing on expertise from across continents and highlighting findings on the international level, especially in the United Nations, could have prompted an intervention in Darfur at a time when the government might have been more accommodating to minority concerns. Instead, since 2003, at least 200,000 people have died, 2 million are displaced and thousands of women and girls have been raped.

It's not too much to ask that early warning systems record ongoing minority rights violations, such as the systematic denial of the existence of particular groups, or a lack of legislative framework to prevent racism and punish it, just two of the violations that happen over and over in conflict-wracked countries. If systems did this, patterns of discrimination and exclusion could be analysed and the rise of tension that can lead to violence could be tracked.

Why are governments so scared of upholding minority rights? Do they fear that by supporting those rights, communities will end up demanding their own states?

Evidence shows the opposite is true - in India's Tamil Nadu, relative peace and integration has been achieved because minority rights have been upheld, and the different groups have participated in proper negotiations on the future of their area.

The reverse is true in China, where tensions are rising in the Uyghur, Mongolian and Tibetan Autonomous Regions because those minorities are being systematically excluded from the fast-paced economic development that is taking place elsewhere. Not only that but in the name of China's vision of a "harmonious society", it seems the very identity of these minorities is under threat.

It is time that the four main categories of minority rights - existence, identity, discrimination and participation - are given focused attention.

In terms of existence, we can look to Turkey, which currently denies that Kurds are a minority, and where for many years this group were referred to as "Mountain Turks" under government policy.

In terms of identity, Iraq's minority communities such as Christians and Turkomans are targeted for violence because of their religion and ethnicity.

In terms of discrimination, well-qualified members of minority communities face discrimination in employment in China because they are not Han Chinese. Participation is no less important.

In Sudan, national identity is defined in terms of either a single or a restricted number of ethnic or religious groups, and other groups that form part of the country are implicitly or explicitly excluded from political life. The source of the Darfur crisis lies in economic exclusion and competition over scarce resources, exacerbated by the historical discrimination of minorities and neglect of the area by successive governments.

Things are little better in post-conflict situations. Attempts to end violence often only sow the seeds for more tragedy when further violations of minority rights are built into new constitutions, electoral and legal systems. Peace settlements simply become ceasefires.

Too often, separating groups along ethnic, religious or linguistic lines is seen as a way of upholding minority rights and keeping peace between groups. While such solutions might seem right in the immediate aftermath of conflicts, in the long term these divisions simply entrench old hatreds and wounds.

Just look at Kosovo, where after seven years of international rule, society is deeply segregated and the threat of another ethnic conflict remains very real. Segregation, or the creation of ethnically or religiously "pure" countries or regions, must not be the only solution if sustainable peace is the genuine aim.

It's a sad state of affairs. The protection of minority rights actually began with the aim of preventing conflicts. These rights were not designed to separate people. They aim to protect groups and integrate all members of a society as equals.

Minority experts should exist in key U.N. bodies that deal with conflict, including the Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the Peace Building Commission as well as in the country missions. A better awareness and more linked approach to these issues might just prevent tragic histohistories from being repeated over and over again.

Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.