AfroAmerica Network

Rwanda:  Quand La Recherche de la Paix Devient Terrorisme

par  Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD

le 19 mai 2011

INTRODUCTION

Le 5 mai 2011, The New Times, un journal largement connu pour être sous la coupe du président rwandais général Paul Kagame et de ses services de renseignement, a publié un article écrit par Tom Ndahiro, l’un des conseillers occultes en communication du président rwandais. L’article, intitulé «Rwanda:  Le Chef d’Al-Qaïda Mort, Pendant que des Terroristes et Génocidaires Rwandais Jouissent de l’Impunité,” suggère que le gouvernement Rwandais devrait se mettre à la chasse aux dirigeants de l’opposition Rwandaise de la diaspora et les assassiner en s’inspirant de l’action héroïque de l’élite militaire des États-Unis d’éliminer les terroristes les plus notoires.  Parmi les personnes que le conseiller du président rwandais Général Paul Kagame a énumérées  figurent deux citoyens américains: Dr Jean Marie Vianney Higiro et  Dr. Félicien Kanyamibwa.

Il n’est pas nécessaire de s’attarder sur les implications juridiques et diplomatiques  découlant du fait qu’un gouvernement étranger, le gouvernement du Rwanda, serait entrain de planifier l’assassinat de citoyens américains. La question est à traiter par le Département d’Etat Américain, US Homeland Security, US Department of Justice et le FBI.

Dans cette note, nous allons seulement essayer d’analyser comment le gouvernement rwandais en est arrivé à ce point d’appeler ouvertement à l’assassinat de dirigeants de l’opposition basés à l’étranger, allant même jusqu’aux tentatives d’assassinat. Nous concluons en faisant appel à The New Times et aux proches collaborateurs du général Paul Kagame enfin d’ aider celui-ci et son régime pour qu’ils ne  continuent pas à succomber aux appâts  d’un pouvoir absolu, de la tyrannie, des motivations criminelles et du radicalisme.  Comme contribution, nous revenons sur notre message de décembre 2008 dans lequel nous invitions le général Paul Kagame à s’efforcer, après 16 ans de pouvoir absolu,  et à s’atteler à  la reconstruction de la nation rwandaise sur un modèle non pas fondé sur les expériences qui  ont échoué dans le passé, mais  plutôt visant l’avenir du Rwanda, où nos descendants pourraient s’élever au-dessus de ce qui a jusqu’à présent divisé les Rwandais; un Rwanda où nos enfants et nos descendants ne vivront  plus dans la confrontation, mais plutôt passeraient leur temps à explorer et mettre en pratique des solutions pour le développement du Rwanda.

UN CONSEILLER MALAVISE OU UN COURTIER DE LA HAINE

Ou bien  Tom Ndahiro est malavisé ou il est motivé par la haine et la propagande. Nous pensons qu’il s’agit probablement des deux. Dans tous les cas,  son argumentation fallacieuse ne peut être mis en parallèle qu’avec son manque de jugement.

Premièrement, les États-Unis d’Amérique ont un gouvernement légitime, démocratique et respectueux des lois, et ayant des institutions acceptées par et fonctionnant pour l’intérêt du peuple. Le gouvernement rwandais actuel  dirigé par le général Paul Kagame est une dictature, une tyrannie dirigée par une junte militaire où le pouvoir  économique, militaire, judiciaire et  social est concentré entre les mains d’une petite clique, incluant General Paul Kagame, sa famille, et ses proches collaborateurs.

Deuxièmement, les actions du gouvernement des États-Unis dans la lutte contre le terrorisme international sont légales, légitimes,  et justifiées.  Par ailleurs, elles sont avalisées par Communauté Internationale.

Troisièmement, de quoi accuse-t-on ces deux personnes marquées par Tom Ndahiro? Est-ce un crime d’ être en opposition au régime rwandais, un régime accusé de crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de guerre,  génocide et  terrorisme par les Nations Unies et les systèmes judiciaires français et espagnol?

Par ses actes et, par conséquent en engageant le gouvernement du Rwanda dans les complots d’assassinat,  Tom Ndahiro est non seulement malavisé, mais aussi, et heureusement, a de nouveau rappelé au monde le coté criminel du gouvernement rwandais.

APPELS  REPETES D’ASSASSINAT DE CITOYENS AMÉRICAINS ET EUROPEENS PAR TOM NDAHIRO

Ce n’est pas la première fois que Tom Ndahiro écrit des articles haineux et appelle à l’élimination des citoyens des États-Unis ou des pays d’Europe. L’année dernière, à travers plusieurs articles sur les blogs (voir http: / / friendsofevil.wordpress.com/2010/08/30/academics-lawyers-and-journalists-joined-in-genocide-denial / et http://friendsofevil. wordpress.com/2010/12/10/spanish-fame-and-shame-manipulations-of-ngos-and-media /) Tom Ndahiro a donné le ton et mis la marque rouge  sur les personnages américains, surtout  des universitaires, des intellectuels, des avocats , des journalistes et  de militants des droits humains, tout en appelant à leur élimination.

Une liste non exclusive des personnes ciblées par le gouvernement rwandais et les motifs  avancés par Tom Ndahiro peut-être trouvée sur le web AfroAmerica Network (http://www.afroamerica.net),  Conscious Being Alliance (http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com) ou Friends of Evil (http://friendsofevil.wordpress.com), un weblog du government  rwandais géré parTom Ndahiro lui-même .

On trouve sur ces listes des personnalités comme  Prof Peter Erlinder, Ann Garrison,  le journaliste de New York Times Jeffrey Gettlemen,  Professeurs Kenneth Gallant, Eric Janus,  Christian Davenport, Stam Allan, William Van der Griend, Mick Collins, le Senateur Espagnol Pere Sampol and l’ humanitaire espagnol Juan Carrero, etc.  On y trouve également le nom du Dr. Jean Marie Vianney Higiro et le Dr Félicien Kanyamibwa.  Tom Ndahiro, le conseiller du président rwandais général Paul Kagame,   préconise l’élimination des deux individus  pour être des «fondateurs de [Organisation pour la Paix, la Justice et le Développement au Rwanda (OPJDR)] organisation» et pour avoir appelé à  “mettre en place une commission internationale pour enquêter sur le génocide des Hutu commis par le FPR au Rwanda et en RDC.”  I convient de rappeler que Le Haut Commissariat de l’Organisation des Nations Unies  pour les Droits Humains a déjà documenté, dans le rapport intitulé “DRC: Mapping Human Rights Violations 1993-2003 Report”  publié par  l’ONU le 1er Octobre  2010, le génocide des rwandais et congolais commis par le Front Patriotique Rwandais (FPR) et de son armée (APR).

UNE CAMPAGNE BIEN ELABOREE D’ASSASSINAT DES FIGURES DE L’OPPOSITION

L’appel à l’assassinat des personnalités de l’opposition est en fait une affaire sérieuse, et pas seulement un discours de mauvais goût émanant d’un conseiller malavisé d’un dictateur africain. L’appel s’inscrit dans le cadre de la campagne globale d’assassinat déclenchée par le gouvernement rwandais à travers le monde.

L’an dernier seulement, plusieurs Rwandais ont échappés ou ont succombé à des assassinats par des agents de renseignement du Rwanda à l’intérieur et l’extérieur du Rwanda. Deux tentatives dans les pays étrangers ont attiré l’attention, et heureusement échoué:

Général Kayumba Nyamwasa, ancien chef d’état-major de l’armée au sein de la dictature militaire au pouvoir au Rwanda a quitté le pays après avoir été ciblé pour s’être opposé aux politiques de la junte qu’il était censé servir.  En Juin 2010, quelques trois mois seulement après avoir fui le pays, il échappa  à une tentative d’assassinat en Afrique du Sud.  Il fut abattu par balles, mais parvint heureusement  à récupérer. Les assassins présumés, que la police et gouvernement sud-africains  croient être des agents du gouvernement rwandais, sont en prison en attente de jugement. La tentative d’assassinat poussa l’Afrique du Sud à rappeler son ambassadeur au Rwanda jusqu’aujourd’hui.

En décembre 2010 et janvier 2011, Major Emmanuel Munyaruguru échappa de justesse à deux tentatives d’assassinat lorsque des criminels suspectés par la police norvégienne d’être à la solde  des services de renseignements du gouvernement rwandais basés à Londres et à Bruxelles le manquèrent, ayant mépris  la voiture de son voisin pour la sienne et après avoir forcé la porte de sa maison qu’il venait juste de quitter.

Il y quelques années,  Dr. Jean Marie Vianney Higiro échappa aux tentatives d’assassinat par poison, par un agent suspecté d’être membre des services de renseignements Rwandais.   L’agent rwandais suspecté disparut après le forfait sans laisser des traces. Il y a d’autres cas sous enquête dans plusieurs pays, avec les premiers résultats montrant l’implication des agents des services de renseignement rwandais. Nous sommes également au courant des intimidations constantes dirigées contre les familles et les personnes apparentées aux membres de l’opposition.

Major Emmanuel Munyaruguru se trouve être le frère du Dr. Félicien Kanyamibwa. Après plusieurs années de lobbying du gouvernement rwandais pour l’arrestation d’Emmanuel Munyaruguru, en Octobre 2010, le gouvernement norvégien, à travers le Procureur Royal, rejeta officiellement les allégations et la demande du gouvernement Rwandais. Ainsi,  le gouvernement rwandais  essaie d’accomplir  par des assassinats ce qu’il ne peut pas obtenir par le biais du système judiciaire ou la voie diplomatique.

Le 13 Octobre 2010  dans un article intitulé «Der Krieg der ist nicht Rebellen vorbei (La guerre des rebelles n’est pas terminée, ici), le groupe médiatique allemand Die Tageszeitung ou TAZ, en citant largement Rakiya Omaar, la directrice d’African Rights et une contractante des services de renseignement militaire  et de sécurité rwandais, apparemment envoyée en mission spécial pour s’attaquer aux  Dr .Felicien Kanyamibwa et Major Emmanuel Munyaruguru  et ternir leur image à travers des médias de grande circulation.

Selon TAZ, citant Rakiya Omaar: «Il y a déjà des rumeurs d’une collaboration entre les FDLR et RUD dans l’Est du Congo et la collaboration internationale entre les deux groupes est possible.”

TAZ ajouta, toujours en citant encore Rakiya Omaar, que “RUD-Urunana a été créé en 2005 et a sa propre direction aux États-Unis. RUD-Urunana présente un contrepoids plus modéré et pragmatique aux FDLR. Les dirigeants du RUD-Urunana sont de l’avis et ont exigé que les dirigeants des FDLR accusés de crimes de masse doivent être retirés des positions de leadership. Lorsque d’autres dirigeants des FDLR refusèrent, le RUD-Urunana fut créé, à partir de 400 combattants. “

Selon TAZ, le changement le plus probable des alliances consisterait au fait que RUD-Urunana recruterait les rebelles des Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR), puis formerait une coalition stratégique avec les troupes de l’ancien chef d’état-major de l’Armée rwandaise, et l’Ambassadeur en Inde, le général Kayumba Nyamwasa.

TAZ  mentionna également que dans  la dynamique de ces alliances nouvelles  le Dr Félicien Kanyamibwa, le Secrétaire Général du RUD-Urunana qui est basé aux Etats-Unis et son frère, le major Emmanuel Munyaruguru, basé en Norvège, joueraient, “selon des rumeurs crédibles”, un rôle majeur en facilitant la formation de ces alliances.

Que ce soit par hasard ou non,  dans son dernier article Tom Ndahiro précise qu’ il y a des gens comme “Paul Rusesabagina, Kayumba Nyamwasa, Théogène Rudasingwa et leur parti  Congrès National Rwandais qui sont heureux d’être associés à ces terroristes tropicaux, et génocidaires», qui, selon Tom Ndahiro , mériteraient d’être assassinés par le gouvernement rwandais. Major Dr Théogène Rudasingwa, un ancien membre de l’élite dirigeante Tutsi du Rwanda a été le secrétaire général du Front patriotique rwandais (FPR) et Ambassadeur du Rwanda à Washington, D.C. avant de fuir vers les États-Unis.

LES DECLARATIONS FALLACIEUSES ET  LA PROPAGANDE DE TOM NDAHIRO  COUVRENT DES COMPLOTS D’ASSASSINAT

Il est facile de relever des trous, des fausses allégations et des informations erronées contenues dans les articles de Tom Ndahiro. Par exemple, il affirme que “ALIR était partiellement composée des dirigeants des ex-FAR qui cherchaient à renverser le gouvernement rwandais et installer ses dirigeants au Rwanda. Une faction de l’Ouest du groupe, appelé ALIR II, était dirigée par Mudacumura. ”

Comme conseiller du général Paul Kagame, Tom Ndahiro doit certainement savoir que le dernier des deux commandants  des troupes d’ ALIR, qui ont mené une guerre civile au Rwanda et avaient des bases dans le Kivu et le Maniema est le général Paul Rwarakabije, actuellement général-major des  Forces de défense rwandaises, l’autre ayant été tué au combat au Rwanda. Après le démantèlement d’ALIR, le général Paul Rwarakabije a rejoint les FDLR, qui venaient d’être créées en 2000 et devint plus tard le commandant  des Forces Combattantes Abacunguzi (FOCA), la branche armée des FDLR.

Que l’opposition armée soit devenue un bouc émissaire résulte de l’échec du général Paul Kagame à bâtir des institutions démocratiques au Rwanda et à réconcilier les Rwandais.  Pour tenter de masquer ces défaillances, le général Paul Kagame et ses proches conseillers ont tenté de résister aux demandes légitimes  et pacifiques de l’opposition. Aux  appels à la paix de l’opposition le général Paul Kagame a répondu par la multiplication des appels de plus en plus vocaux aux assassinats.

APPELS  INCESSANTS POUR DES SOLUTIONS PACIFIQUES PAR  L’OPPOSITION

Le 23 décembre  2008, comme “Droit de réponse”  à un autre article publié dans le New Times et intitulé: “Le drame des FDLR / désarmement RUD-Urunana à Lubero, République démocratique du Congo», dans lequel le gouvernement rwandais est ses médias avaient accusé le RUD-Urunana d’être une organisation extrémiste [Hutu],  nous avions rappelé au public ce qui suit:

“La plupart des troupes RPR basées à Kasiki étaient des Tutsis  qui avaient vécu et mené d’autres activités avec les troupes du RUD-Urunana Armee Nationale – Imboneza depuis 2006. Comment alors  le terme “extrémistes” pouvait-il s’ appliquer dans ces circonstances? Notre cause serait juste et légitime indépendamment de l’origine ethnique des personnes partageant nos aspirations légitimes. Toutefois, la présence de toutes les composantes du tissu social et historique rwandais renforce la confiance du peuple rwandais dans la légitimité de notre lutte, les objectifs positifs de nos buts, et le chemin visionnaire fixé par les dirigeants de notre organisation.

En ce qui concerne nos aspirations, elles peuvent être résumées en une phrase simple et courte: Rwanda appartient à tous les Rwandais. En Janvier 2008, après avoir visité la RDC et son gouvernment, nous avons interpellé le général Paul Kagame dans notre Déclaration de Kinshasa du 24 janvier 2008 sur la paix dans la région des Grands Lacs, et l’avons invité à << la reconstruction de la nation rwandaise sur  sur un modèle non pas fondé sur les expériences qui  ont échoué dans le passé, mais  plutôt visant l’avenir du Rwanda, où nos descendants pourraient s’élever au-dessus de ce qui a jusqu’à présent divisé les Rwandais; un Rwanda où nos enfants et nos descendants ne vivront  plus pas dans la confrontation, mais plutôt passeraient leur temps à explorer et mettre en pratique des solutions pour le développement du Rwanda.>>“

Encore une fois, à Kasiki, le 31 Juillet 2008, nous avons invité le général Paul Kagame  à ouvrir les portes pour les réfugiés rwandais  pour qu’ils puissent rentrer chez eux dans la paix. Nous l’avons invité, d’abord comme un être humain, d’autre part comme un ancien réfugié, et  troisièmement en tant que président du Rwanda. Le défi pacifique a été la constance de nos appels et nous avons exprimé à plusieurs reprises notre volonté de rencontrer le général Paul Kagame à tout moment avec la facilitation de véritables médiateurs indépendants.

PAUL KAGAME A DEUX CHOIX:  LA PAIX  OU LES ASSASSINATS

Nous avons présenté deux choix au  général Paul Kagame: soit il est un véritable leader, alors il faudra qu’il s’élève  au-dessus de l’amertume, des frustrations psychologiques et de  la vengeance, ou il restera un homme  dont la vie tragique ne se résumera qu’en une source sauvage d’un fleuve de sang et de souffrances. Oui, il a passé 30 années en exil. Mais, Mandela a passé pratiquement le même nombre d’ années en prison, assujetti au travail forcé de chaque jour.  Bien avant sa libération de prison, Mandela, un grand leader, a choisi de se libérer du venin de la haine et de la vengeance. Dès que Mandela est parvenu à la décision, il est devenu un homme libre. S’il n’avait pas pris cette décision, personne ne peut imaginer ce que serait devenue l’Afrique du Sud après qu’il soit devenu président.

Général Paul Kagame a échoué à devenir un leader quand il a pris le pouvoir en 1994,  choisi de rester un prisonnier de sa haine et des vices qui en résulte, et est monté sur le dos d’un bébé tigre. Cela fait  maintenant 16 ans qu’il s’est assis sur le dos d’un tigre en pleine croissance. Il ne faut pas attendre jusqu’à ce que le tigre devienne un monstre qui le dévorera. Le général Paul Kagame n’a pas besoin de gens comme Tom Ndahiro. Il ne doit pas se cacher derrière ces hommes de main et des médias de propagande comme le New Times pour  faire appel  ou justifier des assassinats de personnalités rwandaises de l’opposition, des dirigeants ou des membres.

Le New Times et les proches collaborateurs du général Paul Kagame devraient plutôt aider le général Kagame et son régime pour qu’ils ne succombent pas au pouvoir absolu, la tyrannie, les motivations criminelles et le radicalisme. Les expériences du  passé montrent que les médias et les courtisans qui ont accumulé des éloges sur des dirigeants malavisés et des tyrans et ignoré le sort du peuple, ont fini par faire du tort à la nation tout entière. Le général Paul Kagame, ses médias, en particulier le New Times, et ses courtisans et proches collaborateurs, comme Tom Ndahiro devraient se souvenir des leçons de l’histoire. Ils devraient regarder autour d’eux et se rendre compte du vent de liberté soufflant à travers l’Afrique et le Monde entier. Les Africains, y compris les Rwandais,  comme d’autres personnes dans le monde, n’ont pas besoin de tyrannie.

Félicien Kanyamibwa, PhD

Secrétaire Général du RUD-Urunana

Président, Congrès National pour la Démocratie (CND) -

National Democratic Congress (NDC)

New Jersey, le 19 mai 2011.

AfroAmerica Network invites contributors to submit articles.

AfroAmerica Network invites contributors to submit articles.

Have you visited AfroAmerica Network lately?  If not, please do (http://www.afroamerica.net). You asked, we listened, and now we are answering.

Several of our readers have expressed their interest in submitting articles to AfroAmerica Network to be posted in our pages on  http://www.afroamerica.net.

There are several areas  of interest. We may add more in the near future.  The articles may address the following topics:

1. Global Issues
2. World Events
3. Freedom and Democracy
4. International Justice and Crimes
5. Economy and Business
6. Politics and International Affairs

If  a given article addresses a specific area of interest with an in-depth look,  we will publish the article in our competitive section:  “AfroAmerica Discourses.”

Joining AfroAmerica Network is free. However, all articles will be reviewed thoroughly before publication. We do not guarantee publication.

To avoid any conflict of interest, all submissions accepted for publication belong to AfroAmerica Network. However, the opinions and views expressed in articles belong to the authors, who are responsible for the content and may be sole liable for any consequences from their views.

To guarantee independence, integrity and professionalism and as a policy, AfroAmerica Network does not compensate contributors in any form or in any way.

We prefer articles in English. However, in very specific cases and depending on the intended audience, AfroAmerica Network may publish articles in other languages.
As an added benefit, regular contributors may have access to all our premium areas. Three of the top contributors in AfroAmerica Network Discourses may also have their own tag.

For more information, please contact us by e-mail at:

afro@afroamerica.net

AfroAmerica Network

e-mail: afro@afroamerica.net

web: http://www.afroamerica.net

©AfroAmerica Network, All Rights Reserved

Sources at the United Nations Security Council inform AfroAmerica Network that May 2011 will be dedicated to dealing with Africa issues, especially the Great Lakes Region of Africa which includes Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, Uganda, and South Sudan. For that purpose three main actions are planned:

1) On May 13,  2011 the UN Secretary General will debrief the UN Security Council on major issues and progress in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the fate of MONUSCO, whose mandate is set to expire  on June 30, 2011. The expectations are that the UN Secretary General will request an extension arguing that that MONUSCO is needed to help in presidential elections to be held at the end of the year 2011.

2) In mid-May, 2011  the  UN Secretary General Special representative on sexual violence in conflict, Margot Wallström, is expected to brief the DRC sanctions committee on the on going actions to prevent the scurge of rapes plaguing Eastern DRC.

3) On May 18, 2011 the UN DRC Panel of  Experts will present their interim report on armed groups and the illegal exploitation of natural resources.

4) In end May 2011, UN Security Council members plan to visit  the following countries: Kenya, South Sudan, Khartoum and Ethiopia. The trip appears to be focused on getting a feel of what would happen when South Sudan becomes independent in June 2011. In fact, the UN Security council members will visit Juba, Abyei, Khartoum, all in Sudan. The delegation to Sudan will be led by the United States of America, whereas the other legs of the trip will be led by UK and France

France will preside over the UN Security Council in May 2011.

©AfroAmerica Network, 2011.

Sources within MONUSCO, Rutshuru inform AfroAmerica Network that  a  Rwandan rebel Colonel Wenceslas Nizeyimana has surrendered to MUNUSCO and is on his way to Rwanda. The colonel surrendered after  Rwandan troops who, in past month,  have crossed in large numbers into the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) have been fighting soldiers of the breakaway group of CNDP in the Territory of Rutshuru (see our April 2, article “Rwandan Troops Attack CNDP offshoot linked to General Kayumba Nyamwasa”).

The troops crossed into DRC since early March 2011 (see our March 21, 2011 article – Rwandan Troops Reinforced by FDLR Deserters Reenter East-DRC).  According to the sources, the secret mission of Rwandan troops is to hunt down CNDP dissenters suspected of trying to link up with Rwandan exiled General and Colonel Kayumba Nyamwasa. They also have a mission to preempt any link between General Kayumba Nyamwasa and FDLR or RUD-Urunana troops based in Eastern DRC.

Colonel Wenceslas Nizeyimana, alias Kit, once an FDLR spokesperson based in Kampala, was imprisoned in Uganda in 2006. He was allegedly freed from prison following the intervention of RUD-Urunana leadership and intense lobbying with the Ugandan Government. He  subsequently  joined RUD-Urunana armed wing, the National Army  (AN-Imboneza) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).  However, in 2010, RUD-Urunana leaders expelled him from  AN-Imboneza for unspecified reasons along with 10 people, including dependents.

He joined  an armed group  being sett up by Colonel Gaheza, also expelled  from RUD-Urunana in 2008 and Colonel Sok, expelled from FDLR-FOCA in around 2006.  Both Colonel Gaheza and Colonel Sok have been accused by the Rwandan government of working with the Rwandan dissident  General Kayumba Nyamwasa.

The sources within MONUSCO and contacts in Rwanda have told AfroAmerica Network that recently  Rwandan intelligence services were tipped of a meeting by operatives within ex-CNDP and General Kayumba Nyamwasa’s representatives.  A network of the same Rwandan operatives assassinated the former leader of the ex-CNDP (see our February 26, 2011: Congolese Colonel Linked to General Kayumba Assassinated).  Working on this intelligence, Rwandan troops attacked the meeting attendees, killing most of them and seizing weapons.

However, after the defection of Colonel Nizeyimana, sources in Goma  have told AfroAmerica Network  that Colonel Gaheza and Colonel Sok are accusing the wife of Colonel Wenceslas Nizeyimana of having provided the intelligence to the Rwandan operatives. Before the defection, the wife of Wenceslas Nizeyimana had been crisscrossing between Rwanda and the DRC, and had recently spent two weeks visiting with her husband  from her residence in Northwestern Rwanda and staying with the troops.  According to the sources, Colonel Gaheza and Colonel Sok are alleging that the wife could not have been allowed by the Rwandan security services to visit her husband in the rebel held areas, unless she worked as an informant for the Rwandan government.

However, during interviews aired on local radios in Goma, Colonel Wenceslas Nizeyimana alleges that the reasons for his repatriation to Rwanda are related to how he and his wife were treated by RUD-Urunana  military leaders. He does not specifies why he waited for several months after being expelled from RUD-Urunana before repatriating.

©AfroAmerica Network, April 2011

Sources in Kinshasa have given more details to AfroAmerica Network regarding the ongoing negotiations between the Congolese Government and the Rwandan rebels of the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR) (see our March 31, 2011 article: Rwandan Government Contradictions as DRC Government Negotiations with FDLR).

MONUSCO sources were the first to inform AfroAmerica Network that the military leaders of FDLR had been recently engaged in negotiations with the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). According to the same sources, the advanced negotiations  provide for the relocation of FDLR headquarters from the Walikale-Masisi area to the  Maniema province in exchange for cash and other material advantages. In all, close to 1,500 FDLR troops were schedule to be relocated in phase I.  DRC President Joseph Kabila was so confident that he announced the ongoing negotiations in his cabinet meeting on March 14, 2011.

The sources in Kinshasa told AfroAmerica Network that the negotiations were led by the current President of FDLR, General Gaston Iyamuremye aka Rumuri. On the government side, President Kabila sent his personal envoy, the Belgian Jean Pierre Breyne, accompanied with Msgr Kuye Ndondo, and Father Minani. The meeting was held in Ntoto in Walikale area.

The DRC Government official version of the negotiations is:

• to bring peace in Eastern Kivu before the November 2011 presidential elections
• to resume the failed Rome Accord between the DRC Government and FDLR in 2005 and DRC Government and RUD-Urunana in 2008-2009. The accords provided for a resettlement within DRC or voluntary repatriation

The DRC government offered or required the following:

• relocating FDLR troops to Maniema province
• stopping attacks on FDLR during relocation
• immediate disarmament of at least 1,500 troops to be followed by the disarmament of 4,500 more once the first group reaches Maniema.

The FDLR have put forward the following conditions:

• DRC government must pay  the FDLR between US$ 250,000 and $1 million promised during the 2005 Rome Accord
• DRC will convince the Rwandan Government to engage in  direct negotiations between FDLR
• stop all attacks on FDLR

However, most of the sources remain skeptical about the process and its outcome. It is alleged that the initiative was pushed by Rwandan Government worried that FDLR is trying to link up with the dissidents General Kayumba Nyamwasa and Colonel Patrick Karegeya. To preempt the potential link, General Paul Kagame approached Joseph Kabila and convinced him to initiate the talks with FDLR so that the FDLR may be pushed back far from the Rwandan border, sent to remotes jungles on Maniema and disarmed. Once the FDLR are disarmed the Rwandan troops would then be able to attack and destroy them, or at least prevent them from allying themselves with Kayumba-Karegeya.

The FDLR also play the same game. First,  only the political leadership led by Gaston Iyamuremye participated in the talks. High ranking FDLR-FOCA officers contacted by the sources seems to be unaware of the talks and its outcomes.   Hence, disarmament of troops appear unlikely to succeed. General Gaston Iyamuremye’s delegation requested direct negotiations with the Rwandan Government, knowing that the Rwandan Government would certainly reject the proposition.

Meanwhile, the DRC Government has promised to pay US$ 250,000 and Jean Pierre Breyne has left Kinshasa for Kigali to try to convince the Rwandan Government to agree to the conditions if they want the FDLR destroyed.

©AfroAmerica Network,  April 2011

Sources in Goma inform AfroAmerica Network that Rwandan troops who have crossed into the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) have been fighting soldiers of the breakaway group of CNDP in the Territory of Rutshuru.

The troops crossed into DRC since early March 2011 (see our March 21, 2011 article – Rwandan Troops Reinforced by FDLR Deserters Reenter East-DRC). Wearing the uniforms of the Congolese government troops, FARDC, they have been easily infiltrating the Rutshuru Territory, focusing on the Chefferie of Bwisha. The only distinguishing characteristics among the two forces are the boots, with Rwandan troops wearing leather boots, while FARDC wear plastic boots.

According to the sources, the secret mission of Rwandan troops is to hunt down CNDP dissenters suspected of trying to link up with Rwandan exiled General and Colonel Kayumba Nyamwasa.

They also have a mission to preempt any link between General Kayumba Nyamwasa and FDLR or RUD-Urunana troops based in the DRC.

Heavy fighting erupted on Thursday and Friday in the villages surrounding Nyamilima and all way to Nyakakoma and Ishasha.  According to the villagers,  Rwandan troops burned homes and crops  and killed a large number of villagers. A large number villagers have fled towards the Chefferie of Bwito and  Rwindi.

Sources also confirmed that Rwandan troops allegedly disrupted on going meetings between envoys claiming to represent General Kayumba Nyamwasa and the delegation composed of the leaders of ex-CNDP, Colonel Sok, Colonel Gaheza and Colonel Wenceslas Nizeyimana, alias Kit. Both Colonel Gaheza and Colonel Nizeyimana were expelled from RUD-Urunana last years, for unknown reasons and had since joined Colonel Sok.

The sources said that Rwandan intelligence were tipped of the meeting by operatives within ex-CNDP.  A network of the same Rwandan operatives assassinated the former leader of the ex-CNDP (see our February 26, 2011: Congolese Colonel Linked to General Kayumba Assassinated).

According to  FARDC and MONUSCO sources,  several members of the delegation were killed by Rwandan troops and others fled towards Miriki and Vitshumbi.

©AfroAmerica Network, April 2011

Sources close to MONUSCO have informed AfroAmerica Network that the military leaders of the Democratic Forces of Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) have been recently engaged in negotiations with the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). According to the same sources, the advanced negotiations  provide for the relocation of FDLR headquarters from the Walikale-Masisi area to the  Maniema province in exchange for cash and other material advantages. In all, close to 1,500 FDLR troops will be relocated. No word on what will happen to the remaining 4,500 troops.

Meanwhile, the Rwandan government, through the Prosecutor General, Martin Ngoga, has come out  in the Rwandan media to answer several critics that pointed out that the Government has been misleading the population and the media by falsely alleging the US State Department and the UN Security Council have classified the FDLR as a terrorist organization. In fact, the Rwandan Government had widely circulated false statement alleging to the FDLR qualification.

Neither the  US State Department nor the United Nations Security Council  have classified the FDLR as a foreign terrorist organization or  put it on a any terrorist exclusion list or  presidential executive order.

Also, the UN never  imposed any travel ban nor asset freeze on the FDLR organization. Only a few leaders of FDLR living in Europe and in Eastern Congo were  sanctioned by the UN Security Council and the US Treasur, banned from international travel,  and submitted to assets freeze.

In a statement on March 29, 2011, Martin Ngoga, responding to a discourse  and a BBC interview by Professor Charles Kambanda of St. John’s University in New York, further added to the confusion carefully cultivated  by the Rwandan government.

Martin Ngoga said:

“There should be no ambiguity – FDLR is subject to numerous Security Council resolutions, with the ongoing prosecution of its leadership, and others on travel bans as well as their assets being subject to freeze.”

However, the assets freeze of armed rebellion leaders does not make the organization itself a terrorist organization. Leaders of CNDP , the DRC Government, and some Rwandan businessmen have appeared or appear on the UN lists without making their businesses, organizations or Governments terrorists organization.

The Rwandan Prosecutor Ngoga  appeared at a loss when he alleged that the fact ALIR once appeared on Terrorist Exclusion automatically implies the FDLR is also on the list.  According to US Government reports ALIR was disbanded long ago after the 1998 civil in Rwanda.

Perhaps the most intriguing remark from Martin Ngoga is when he stated that: “We know of no date when ALIR fighters surrendered to any authority that can account for them today. The change of names is of no importance as regards their pursuit.  If the list is of essence, the resolutions of the UN Security Council to which the US sits, are weightier than declarations of the State Department.”

In fact, most of the leaders of ALIR, including ALIR commander, General Paul Rwarakabije, his chief of Staff General Ngendahimana, and a large number of ALIR high ranking officers such as Colonel Murenzi, Colonel Karegeya  and according to Rwandan and MONUSCO statistics, more than 15,000 former ALIR troops have surrendered  to the Rwandan government. Most have since been integrated in the Rwanda Defense Forces.

From Martin Ngoga’s argument  FDLR could be qualified a terrorist organization because some of ALIR officers joined FDLR. From that perspective, one would equally believe that the Rwandan Defense Forces would also qualify as a Terrorist Organization because ALIR commander, Military Chief of Staff, Military Operations Commander and a large number of officers and troops have deserted ALIR and FDLR to integrate within the Rwandan Defense Forces.

©AfroAmerica Network, March 2011

In our discourse titled the Dilemma of Dictators Part 1, we set a stage by contrasting a few African dictators with a figure from the Hebrew Bible. In this second part, we will continue by looking at the dilemmas faced by dictators and propose how to overcome them.  We focus on how dictators come to power, how they maintain power and how they become the prisoners of the tyrannies they have created. We conclude that the proposed solution to break the shackles of the vicious circle can only found in dialogue.

Dictators usually conquer power through violence: popular uprising, armed rebellion, civil wars or coup d’etat. Thus, once in power, these dictators may fear that the conditions that facilitated their rise to power will also be the precursors for their downfall. As the American Philosopher and psychologist Abraham Maslow said: “If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail”. Hence, any suspicion of opposition, dissent, or criticism raises a flag. Born out violence, dictators have tough times rising from and above it.

Most dictators come from humble beginnings or overcome unfavorable odds. By cunning, slyness, or sheer bravery, they rise through ranks to the top of the pyramid. Idi Amin of Uganda, Paul Kagame of Rwanda, Jean Bedel Bokassa of Centre Afrique and Muamar Gaddafi of Libya are good examples. Once they reach power, they may see enemies everywhere. Since that attitude and predisposition served them well when they were rising to the top, they have tough time dusting off these acquired bad habits. Adjusting to the new role as the leaders of a nation composed of people with diverse opinions becomes a formidable  challenge to overcome. During their rise to power, nobody or very few paid attention to them. However, once the reach the top,  they appear to forget  they are watched carefully by, as Machiavellli put it, all the people in the valley.

At some point in their dictatorship, dictators identify themselves with the system. Without the dictator the system would crumble and without the system the dictator would not survive. It is a vicious cycle in which tyrants become prisoners of the system they created around themselves. To get to the top, dictators rely on several kinds of people: legitimate democrats, opportunists, cynical and frustrated individuals, adventurers, profiteers, and criminals. Once at the helm of the power, all these early supporters and parasites, except perhaps legitimate democrats, feed, like leaches, on the tyranny to enrich themselves, cover up their crimes, and maintain their privileges. They cannot let it go. Instead, like a Democles sword, they implicitly threaten the dictators with a potential palace coup if necessary to make sure they maintain the grip on whoever is at the top. Instead of reigning on the cronies around them, dictators, like their subjects, become the victims of the tyranny from the aristocrats. Only those among the cronies who dare to challenge the privileges of other cronies are thrown out, if not eliminated. Divisions in tyrannic systems are usually the symptoms of these crises.

Most dictators fear for the after, when the extent of their crimes is exposed and allies turn against them. In fact, most dictators have committed imaginable and unimaginable crimes, either directly or through proxies. Their closets are full of skeletons, so to speak. But literary the path to their power and maintaining it are littered with countless bodies of innocent victims and paved with the blood of legitimate opposition, innocent bystanders, and the victims of power mongering. The nights of dictators are haunted by the souls of known and unknown slain victims.

Despite the strain of power, the remorses, the disgust, haunted nights, and the constant fear of assassination and coups, dictators find themselves unable to say “enough is enough.  We had our time. It is time to go.” The dilemmas described above are hard to overcome.  Yet, it is easy for the dictators to move on and enjoy the rest of their lives. They may risk their life by making the decision to break the shackles holding them in power, but the freedom and inner peace they feel when they succeed overweight the risk. A few steps can be decided and implemented for a smooth, peaceful transition to the normal life of a citizen.

The steps can be:

• Ask themselves why they sought power in the first place. Some dictators claim to have sought power in order to make a change, to orient the history of the country, to better their lives and the lives of their families and relatives, and to leave a good legacy. By the 10th year in power, most dictators have reached most of the objectives, except perhaps leaving a legacy. After that, they start destroying whatever they built, alienate the people and dig a whole for themselves. Hence,  If they could heed the winds of time and say: OK, I am where I wanted to be, let us move to the next step, and enjoy the rest of our lives, they would be in a good posture to be honored for their accomplishment and fora positive legacy. Mwalimu Julius Nyerere of Tanzania and Pierre  Buyoya of Burundi were smart in that sense. Jerry Rawlings of Ghana took time to understand that, but he finally got it and is enjoying his “hard earned” dictator money.
• Remember that their predecessors were also once as mighty. If the dictators managed to overthrow those who came before them, then why do they think that similar situations cannot happen to them? There is a good trend in West Africa, were military officers overthrow dictators but let others lead.
• Remember that is takes more courage to sit with the opposition figures than to assassinate, try to fight or impose violence on them.  It takes even more courage to work with the genuine opposition than to be surrounded by cronies, relatives, and the likes.

To conclude, we may see that among the African dictators, Yoweri Museveni and Robert Mugabe have found a right way to move from tyranny to the right path, even though, they still need to give up power for the benefit of the next generation or cluster of leaders. Those who ceded power before them, such as Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, Daniel Arap Moi of Kenya enjoyed or are enjoying their life as citizens. Many dictators have learned  that avoiding the unavoidable may be a futile exercise. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe agreed to work with Morgan Tsvangirai, Mwai Kibaki of Kenya with Raila Odinga.

Changing the constitution to favor ones’s bid like Joseph Kabila of the DRC just did, appointing his first cousin as Prime Minister after jailing all the opposition figures like General Paul Kagame did, saturating the political, economical, military institutions by one’s ethnic group members as it is in Rwanda and Uganda, do not resolve the problems and dilemma dictators face.

This stratagem may work for some time, but the inevitable will happen. It has happened in South America, Asia and now is happening in the Middle East and Africa.

As Yoweri Museveni recently said in his statement “Libya Needs Dialogue: “

• A legitimate internal insurrection, if that is the strategy chosen by the leaders of that effort, can succeed. The Shah of Iran was defeated by an internal insurrection; the Russian Revolution in 1917 was an internal insurrection; the Revolution in Zanzibar in 1964 was an internal insurrection; the changes in Ukraine, Georgia, etc., all were internal insurrections.
  It should be for the leaders of the Resistance in that country to decide their to sponsor insurrection groups in sovereign countries. I am totally allergic to foreign, political and military involvement in sovereign countries, especially the African countries.
• All this notwithstanding, Col. Gaddafi should be ready to sit down with the opposition, through the mediation of the AU, with the opposition cluster of groups which now includes individuals well known to us – Ambassador Abdalla, Dr. Zubeda, etc.
• know Gaddafi has his system of elected committees that end up in a National People’s Conference. Actually Gaddafi thinks this is superior to our multi-party systems. Of course, I have never had time to know how truly competitive this system is.Anyway, even if it is competitive, there is now, apparently, a significant number of Libyans that think that there is a problem in Libya in terms of governance. Since there has not been internationally observed elections in Libya, not even by the AU, we cannot know what is correct and what is wrong. Therefore, a dialogue is the correct way forward.

Unless we are mistaken, when Yoweri Museveni talks about dialogue, it is dialogue with the true opposition, including an armed opposition.

Fore example, Yoweri Museveni himself needs to open a dialogue with the leaders of the Lord Resistance Army (LRA) and the Allied Defense Forces (ADF-NALU). During the dialogue, it will be decided by Ugandans how crimes committed by LRA and ADF-NALU leaders will be handled. Anyway, Yoweri Museveni himself, despite his good rhetoric, is not an angel. He will have to account for the Luwero triangle massacres committed by the Rwandans fighting under his command.

In the same vein, General Paul Kagame of Rwanda will have to sit not only with the unarmed opposition, but also with the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR), Rally for Unity and Democracy (RUD-Urunana), Rally for the Rwandan People (RPR), and the alleged Kayumba-Karegeya armed group. Crimes attributed to FDLR leaders will be covered during the dialogue. So will be the crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity and war crimes attributed to General Paul Kagame and his army by the United Nations and the French and Spanish courts.

©AfroAmerica Network, March 2011

On October 8, 2010  AfroAmerica Network published a discourse titled  “A Case For General Paul Kagame: the President of Rwanda”.   Following the publication, AfroAmerica got a lot of comments from the readers. Some reproached AfroAmerica Network of having turned  pro-Kagame, others said we showed our bias against the regime  led by General Paul Kagame and failed to focus on the multitude of its achievements, nitpicking every small slip by the regime instead.
The two opposing views show that AfroAmerica Network has continued its mission of being unbiased, while keeping dictators and other leaders aware of their responsibilities towards their citizens. From that perspective, we would like to continue with our series of discourses by looking at the dilemma dictators face while clinging on power. The discourse is long overdue given the momentous changes sweeping across Africa. These changes, painful in the short term, but rewarding in the near future, have rewritten the history of how determined people can get rid of entrenched dictators. These changes we are witnessing remind us of an interview one Rwandan rebel leader gave to NPR/PRI on January 23, 2009 (see here: http://www.pri.org/theworld/?q=node/24056) as highlighted in following excerpt:
KANYAMIBWA (NDLR: rebel leader): We think that there is a small clique of individuals who are ruling Rwanda. The majority happens to be Tutsis, but Tutsis and Hutus are also suffering. So we want to get all the groups together and stop that heritage of Tutsi or Hutu-led power.
KAVANAGH (NDLR: NPR/PRI journalist): And, RUDE leaders say, they will do it by force if necessary. RUDE has several hundred soldiers in eastern Congo. It’s a small force compared to other Rwandan Hutu militias there, but their aims are similar: return to Rwanda, justice for war crimes on all sides, and direct negotiations with Tutsi President Paul Kagame.
“KANYAMIBWA: Kagame has said no way. All the dictators in the world have started that way “ they said no way,” and it happens.
KAVANAGH: It happens?
KANYAMIBWA: Yeah. And it happens. By the end of the day, he will understand, because if he does not understand, then the end is going to be very, very bad.

What NPR/PRI did not ask and Mr. Kanyamibwa did not address is the dilemma faced by dictators. We will do it in this and following discourses.

The best example of a dictator who ended up like most of the dictators we see in Africa can be found in the Hebrew Bible: The mighty King Saul, the first King of united Israel. Chosen by God himself through the prophet Samuel, the main Judge of Israel, upon the request of the Jewish people, he reigned  over 42 years, more like Muammar Gaddafi, a little more than Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
The similarities among the contemporary African dictators and Saul are staggering:

• The people of Israel asked for Saul, despite God having warned them about the danger of having a self serving king; a king they may worship, willingly or unwillingly.  Contemporary dictators claim to have been chosen by  the people;
• Saul was a soldier and showed his worth through wars after defeating his enemies and brutal massacres. Museveni was an army rebel leader who got to power after the massacres of Luwero triangle. Paul Kagame, a military officer, won power through a civil war, assassination of the Rwandan and Burundian presidents and  genocides.  Robert Mugabe led the armed rebellion which gained power after a violent independence war. Kadhafi overthrew a legitimate, but weak King.
• Saul was selected from the smallest tribe of Israel, the Benjamites, to the dismay of the major tribes. Paul Kagame is from the minority Tutsi tribe; Museveni from the tiny Ankole tribe; Mugabe from the small Shona tribe from his mother side, his father being a Malawian; Muammar Gaddafi from a small tribe of arabized Berbers, the Qaddadfa, who are stock-herders with holdings in the Hun Oasis.
• Saul soon became the personification of power, then erratic and then started to abuse his close advisors and the people. We heard tales of abuses in Rwanda, Uganda, Libya, Egypt, Zimbabwe, and Tunisia.
• Saul rebelled against the people who sponsored him especially Samuel. Paul Kagame did it against Museveni, Museveni against Gaddaffi, Gaddafi against the USA that backed his coup.
• Saul held public and vicious executions of opponents or perceived opponents including young boys. Thus, the future King David, then a young boy,  narrowly escaped Saul’s spear, because Saul had heard David may be his potential heir to the throne. Gaddafi conducted public executions. Kagame not only conducted public executions, but also has held hundreds of thousands of Hutu in prisons for years without trials , led a campaign of genocide against Hutus in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and assassinated or attempted to assassinate his opponents or perceived opponents. Mugabe is little more disciplined in that area, except sporadic violence against the opposition and the illegal expropriation of white farmers and destruction of squatters’ shacks. Also, Museveni has shown self restraint after the Luwero massacres and his support of the Rwandan rebels responsible for the assassination of the Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi in 1994 and the genocide and war crimes in the DRC in 1996- 1999. Hosni Mubarak and Beni Ali’s organized terror against their opponents is well documented.
• Saul tried to groom his sons for his succession. He committed suicide by falling  on his sword in the battle against Philistines at Mount Gilboa to avoid capture. During the battle three of his sons were also killed. The succession to his throne was contested by Ish-bosheth, his only surviving son, and David, his sworn enemy. David eventually prevailed. Ish-bosheth was assassinated by his own captains. Yoweri Museveni has been grooming his son. Mubarak tried. Gaddafi has been grooming his sons. Paul Kagame is grooming his son.
• Saul outlasted the will of the people and ended up overthrown and killed. Ben Ali was lucky but may die in exile. Mubarak was even luckier but may die a pariah. Gaddafi is fighting on.
• Paul Kagame is hoping for the best. Yoweri Museveni is a born again peace maker and has been advocating dialogue with the opposition (see his March 21, 2011 statement here, received by AfroAmerica Network and also published in the Ugandan Government newspaper: New Vision and Titled: Libya Needs Dialogue – http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/12/749765”
  There is no doubt that among the African dictators, Yoweri Museveni and to some extent, Robert Mugabe have chosen the best solution, well before the people go in the street and say: “Enough”.
• Instead of saying: “No Way”, the Museveni and Mugabe appear to have been enlightened and said: “there is a way: Dialogue.” Not the kind of dialogue with themselves and their cronies, but with their staunch opposition. Robert Mugabe accepted to work with Morgan Tvangirai. Yoweri Museveni accepted to run against his opponent Cyiiza Besigye and most importantly is advising Dialogue in Libya, between Gaddafi and his armed opposition.
• Paul Kagame needs to listen. Perhaps it is time for him to start talking to his armed opposition, or his staunchest opponents. The same may go for Yoweri Museveni himself who has been battling multiple armed rebellions. But to do that, they will need to overcome the dictator’s dilemma.
  Dictators’ dilemma is real. It is the scourge that keeps most dictators to turn vicious, cling to power and eventually to leave in violence if not killed or assassinated along with their relatives.
  We will look at this curious scourge in our upcoming discourse: The Dictator’s dilemma part 2.

©AfroAmerica Network, 2011