≡ Menu

Ways to Help Africa: Clear From Dictators

Response to Pr. Jendayi Frazer:  US President should not shake bloody hands of dictators

Jendayi E. Frazer, former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs proposed  ways to help Africa in the article titled “Four Ways to Help Africa”, published in the Wall Street Journal on August 25, 2009.  One of the four ways proposed by Dr. Jendayi Frazer is to “Hold a summit at the White House with the presidents of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda and Uganda. Mr. Obama needs to spend more time meeting and engaging African leaders to address the continent’s challenges.”
The idea of the summit with the dictators who lead Rwanda and Uganda to solve the conflict in the DRC appears flawed and not consistent with Dr. Jendayi Frazer’s past advocacy for a tough stance against dictators. I do not think President Bush’s summits and individual meetings with Kagame, Museveni and Kabila that Dr. Jendayi Frazer alluded to helped at all.  From 2000-2008, we had the warlords Mutebusi, Nkunda, Ntaganda, all supported by Rwanda,  wrecking havoc, raping women, recruiting children, and committing war crimes, and mass slaughters of the innocent and defenseless Congolese people.
It is only with the UN Experts Report of December 2008, followed by the decision  by Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands to cut aid to the Government of Kigali that the dictator Kagame was forced  to stop its military and financial support to the renegade General Nkunda, and eventually dismantle the CNDP as we know it.
President Obama should not have any summit with General Kagame or Museveni.  General Kagame is accused of war crimes, genocide and mass  killings of more than 5 millions Congolese. He is under Spanish and French indictments for war crimes and genocide.  General Nkunda’s CNDP forces, armed, trained, and financed by  General Kahame  are responsible for war crimes and the rapes.  Ms. Clinton heard vivid accounts  from the victims of these rapes.  It is unfortunate that most of these crimes and rapes happened when Dr. Jendayi Frazer, as Advisor to President Bush and then Assistant Secretary of State,  was playing a major role, advising on and then overseeing the US African policy. General Kagame should be treated as a criminal and tried for these crimes.

President  Obama should keep his moral high ground and not shake the bloody hands of African dictators.  President Obama  has a better grasp of African issues and proposes better solutions, as confirmed during Ms. Hillary Clinton’s recent trip across Africa. His African policy has more chance of success than the ways advocated by Dr Jendayi Frazer in the Wall Street Journal.

Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.
August 26, 2009

{ 0 comments }

With Kagame’s Junta Rwanda Cannot Be a Model of Success

Dear Fareed Zakaria,
Producer/Host CNN GPS

I follow with great interest your insightful program GPS.  The July 19, 2009 show  dealing with Rwanda and having the current Rwandan President Paul Kagame as a guest was  particularly captivating. Your questions pointed to real issues. Unfortunately, the guest failed to provide honest  answers, and I believe a contradictory debate would have been a major positive addition.
In your introduction you hailed the achievements by the current Rwandan regime and labelled Rwanda a “success story”. The guest attempted to argue that reconciliation is on a winning streak. Unfortunately, beyond media hypes, the facts on the ground point to a more ominous future and  raise doubts on the success of the Rwandan reconciliation and model. The continuing wars in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the growing mistrust among Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups, the widening gap between those living in cities, perceived as mostly Tutsis and those in the countryside, mostly Hutus, and the impact of the Gacaca courts on the social structure do not match the hopes and statements expressed in the interview you conducted with the current Rwandan leader.

Gacaca is a Rwandan tradition, not a creation of Paul Kagame. In the Rwandan tradition, Gacaca was a truth and reconciliation system, and provided consensual and community justice. The form of the Gacaca courts designed and set up by Paul Kagame’s regime are a flawed judicial tool based on ethnic politics and politics of fear.  Gacaca courts target only one ethnic group and are an instrument of repression. The impact of the Gacaca courts  and “genocide ideology” law was well summarized in the article published on April 11, 2009  in Los Angeles Times and titled: “The power of horror in Rwanda”, by  Human Rights Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth.

Rwanda, or any country, cannot be a model of success without the respect of the basic human rights, such as freedom of speech, press, association, or dissent.  Freedom of press does not exist in Rwanda: BBC-Kinyarwanda was recently banned for running a debate on “genocide”, Voice of America (VOA) is under threat, and local journalists are jailed for running articles dissenting with the government views. Rwanda cannot be a success story when hundreds of thousands of refugees are kept outside the country and the political system continues to generate a flow of political refugees.

I agree with Paul Kagame that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is flawed. If ICC was not flawed, Paul Kagame would have been tried for massive war crimes he committed from 1990-1994,  the assassination of  two presidents (Rwanda and Burundi), and the massacre of more than 5 millions congolese. Both Spain and France have issued indictments against Paul Kagame and 40 of his associates.  Hence, Paul Kagame  is not opposed to ICC indictment against President Bashir  of Sudan because ICC is flawed, but because he, himself, knows he may be next.

I hope  GPS will run an other episode with a contradictory debate on the situation of Rwanda. If so I am ready to participate in that show.

July 19, 2009
Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.
New Jersey, USA
E-mail: kanyami@optonline.net
©Copyright Felicien Kanyamibwa 2009

{ 0 comments }

Rwandan Government seeks sexual castration of socially degenerate people: a repeat of the tragedy of the Jews and the gypsies

During World War II, the Nazis embarked on a systematic attempt at genocide of the Romanies, known as the Porajmos or gypsies. It is estimated that  between 220,000  and 1,500,000 Romanies were massacred by Nazis across Europe.  Accused of being mentally degenerate,  they were marked for extermination and sentenced to forced labor and imprisonment in concentration camps. They were often killed on sight, especially by the Einsatzgruppen (essentially mobile killing units, also know as Operation Reinhard against the Jewish people ) on the Eastern Front.

As part of the genocide of the Jews, the Nazi Germany introduced Euthanasia Programs, known as T-4. The T-4 program  involved the mass extermination of those Hitler and the Third Reich considered “unfit” or feeble-minded. The “business” of keeping the mentally retarded or mentally ill in state financed asylums and homes, and eventually euthanizing them by lethal injections or gassings,  aimed at eliminating the risk of having the mentally-ill and developmentally delayed contribute negatively to the ‘bloodlines’ of Europe, and increase the burden on the state. All the Jews ran the risk of being labelled “socially degenerate”, hence candidates for the T-4 program.

After World War II, the Romanies did not have a reprieve. In several communists countries, especially in Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, East Germany, and Romania,  they were labeled a “socially degraded stratum”.  In Czechoslovakia, the women were sterilized as part of a state policy to reduce their population. The report published in December 2005 upon an official inquiry from the Czech Republic, condemned the Communist authorities  for having practiced an assimilation policy towards gypsies and Roma, which “included efforts by social services to control the birth rate in the Romani community by  sexual sterilization.

One would think that the reprehensible genocidal policy would have ended with the era of Nazism or Communist regimes of Eastern Europe. One could not be so wrong! Recently the world was appalled to learn that the leaders of the tiny African country of Rwanda were pushing for a law to sterilize people deemed “socially degenerate” or “mentally unstable or ill.”   In late June 2009, the Rwanda government, mostly composed of the Tutsi minority  ethnic group,  introduced the so called “Reproductive Health Bill” to the Rwandan Parliament. The main purpose of the bill is to legalize the forceful sterilization of people judged mentally handicapped, ill, or unstable. According to people inside Rwanda, the bill would target basically anyone deemed having behaviors not  falling  within the norms. Apart from the violation of basic human rights, another major problem of the bill is to determine what these norms could be.

Despite the backing of the bill by the Rwandan president General Paul Kagame, the Parliament  referred the bill back to the Rwandan Parliamentarians for the Population’s Development (RPRPD) and eventually sent back to the bill’s initiators – among them former Health Minister Dr. Jean Damascene Ntawukuriryayo [pictured above], one of the very few ethnic Hutus in the Tutsi led government. The  Vice Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee  that analyzed the bill, Mr.  Samuel Musabyimana argued that  “[Rwandan] parliament found that there was language in the Bill that was not clear and seemed to be infringing on basic  human rights.”

More troubling are the true intention of the bill. In Kigali, several government officials confided to an AfroAmerica Network correspondent that the bill constitutes one of the many tools used by the Rwandan government  to control the birth rate  of some components of the Rwandan society by sexual sterilization. The bill also targets those opposed to the Rwandan government and their relatives. The Rwandan officials argued that anyone may be labelled mentally degenerate by the government; especially  those accused of genocide ideology or anyone under stress due to torture, wrongful imprisonment or persecution by the government Gacaca courts.  Hutu ethnic group members are particularly targeted by the bill and several may already be candidates for legal sterilization if and whenever the bill passes.

During World War II, many Germans and others were outraged by the Nazi policies:  Catholic Bishop Galen sent out one of the first “White Rose” pamphlets to protest against such practices. In the case of Rwanda,  several human rights organizations have already been alarmed and shocked by such a bill  aiming at reintroducing the methods and policies  used by Nazis and totalitarian communist regimes of Eastern Europe  to target both the Jewish and Romano people.  The US-based Human Rights Watch has condemned the bill as “deeply flawed and violates the government’s obligations to uphold and protect human rights”. As of this writing, there was no official comment from Western governments,  the United Nations, the Jewish organizations, or the Catholic Church about the bill.

AfroAmerica Network

http://www.afroamerica.net

e-mail: mail@afroamerica.net

© AfroAmerica Network, 2009

{ 0 comments }

Au-delà de la Politique Ethnique et de la Peur: Hutus, Tutsis et l’identité ethnique au Rwanda

Félicien Kanyamibwa, Ph.D.
New Jersey, Etats-Unis d’Amérique, le 19 Mai 2009.

INTRODUCTION

Quinze ans après que la petite nation du Rwanda ait connu l’une des pires tragédies de l’histoire moderne, plusieurs problèmes restent en suspens. Alors que la plupart des gens, y compris des experts de la région des Grands Lacs, les organisations humanitaires et des droits humains, les diplomates, les services de renseignement, et des ressortissants de la région des Grands Lacs s’accordent plus ou moins sur les causes sociales des problèmes, ils sont en désaccord presque total sur les solutions possibles. Un consensus s’est dégagé selon lequel la racine du problème reste la politique ethnique et son utilisation dans tous les rouages du fonctionnement de l’état moderne rwandais.

La politique ethnique a permis à la tragédie de se produire et continue à marquer profondément le paysage politique. Plusieurs propositions visant à résoudre ce conflit ont été avancées. Malheureusement, ces solutions semblent ne pas avoir un objectif clair,  spécifique, mesurable, faisable, pragmatique, et planifié. Sans objectifs clairement définis, les voies de solution durable à ces conflits dans la région des Grands Lacs, plus particulièrement au Rwanda,  ne mèneront nulle part. Ce manque de vision claire a conduit à de multiples invasions de la RDC par le Rwanda et l’Ouganda,  la récente invasion de la RDC par le Rwanda par le biais de milices commanditées, et les opérations militaires récentes par la coalition des Forces de Défense Rwandaises (FDR) et l’armée Congolaise, les FARDC contre les milices congolaises ainsi que les rebelles et les réfugiés rwandais.

Le monde a expérimenté avec la théorie d’Henry Kissinger que “Si vous ne savez pas où vous allez, n’importe quel chemin vous y emmène” et l’adage de l’empire Romain que “Tous les chemins mènent à Rome” . Le résultat de cette approche chaotique pour résoudre les problèmes de la région des Grands Lacs a été plus de chaos, la perte énorme en vies humaines sans parler des pertes économiques ce qui a rendu le problème encore plus complexe.

Le présent mémorandum tire des enseignements de ma tragédie personnelle, tente de trouver des solutions et propose une approche pour parvenir à une paix durable dans la région des Grands Lacs. Le mémorandum propose d’examiner les méthodes du passé, sans suivre les routes qui ont conduit à l’échec. Comme le poète japonais Matsuo Bashô du 17 ème siècle nous l’a conseillé: “Ne pas chercher à suivre les traces des ancêtres; rechercher ce qu’ils cherchaient.”

L’expérience de nos prédécesseurs rwandais nous met en garde contre ce qui a fait échouer leur vision en dépit de leur honnêteté.  Nos prédécesseurs rwandais ont cherché à construire une région pacifique et prospère, où les groupes ethniques vivent en harmonie et les individus s’épanouissent,  à travers une intégration économique et sociale. Il est du devoir des dirigeants actuels et des générations futures de poursuivre les mêmes aspirations, mais en suivant un autre chemin: la voie au-delà de la politique ethnique et de peur.

Le présent mémorandum essaie d’en baliser la route. La voie proposée s’articule autour de quatre étapes:

Reconnaître les erreurs de la négation des identités ethniques;
S’engager sur la voie de la démocratie consensuelle;
Viser une pleine démocratie;
Ouverture au monde autour de nous en commençant par un bon voisinage et une intégration régionale.

Pour l’article entier visiter: Au-delà de la Politique Ethnique et de la Peur: Hutus, Tutsis et l’identité ethnique au Rwanda

{ 0 comments }

Beyond Ethnic Politics and Fear:  Hutu, Tutsi, and Ethnicity in Rwanda

 

by Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.

New Jersey, USA, May 19, 2009.

INTRODUCTION

Fifteen years after the small nation of Rwanda experienced one of the worst tragedies of the modern history, the core problems remain unresolved.  While most people, including Great Lakes Region experts, humanitarian and human rights organizations, diplomats, intelligence services, and Great Lakes region nationals agree on the social roots of the problems, they disagree on the solutions. The agreement that ethnic politics constitute the root of the problem remains widespread. Ethnic politics have set the stage for the tragedy to happen and have continued to profoundly shape the political landscape. Several propositions to resolve the conflict have been put forward. Unfortunately, these proposed solutions appear not based on clear specific, measurable, achievable, pragmatic and time-bound objectives. Without such clearly defined objectives, the roads to durable solutions in the Great Lakes region, especially in Rwanda, may only lead nowhere. This lack of clear vision has lead to the multiple invasions of the DRC by Rwanda and Uganda, the recent invasion of the DRC  by Rwanda through proxy forces, and the combined military operations by the Rwandan Army, Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) and the congolese army, FARDC, against congolese militias, rwandan rebels, and rwandan refugees.  The world has been experimenting with Henry Kissinger’s theory that “If you do not know where you are going, any road will take you there” and the Roman Empire narcissistic approach that “all roads lead to Rome”.  The result of the chaotic approach to solving the problems of the Great Lakes region has been more chaos, massive losses of life, missed economic opportunities, and making the problem even more complex.

This memorandum goes from lessons learned from my own personal tragedy and attempts to propose an approach and find solutions to reach durable peace in the Great Lakes region. The memorandum proposes to look at the ways of the past without following the roads that led to failure. As the Japanese poet Matsuo Basho said: “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.” The experience of our predecessors can teach us what made them fail despite their honest vision. They sought a peaceful and prosperous region, where ethnic groups will live harmoniously, while individuals would thrive, and the region would live in an economic integration. For that purpose, our Rwandan predecessors tried ethnic politics and failed: from the seeds of ethnic politics, Rwandans harvested unbearable suffering. It is the task for the current Rwandan leaders and the future generations to follow the legitimate aspirations of their predecessors, but track a different road: a road beyond ethnic politics and fear.

The memorandum describes the road as envisioned. The proposition in the memorandum maps four critical phases:

  • Recognize the fallacies behind the denial of ethnic identities;
  • Mobilize the Rwandan people for consensual democracy;
  • Aim for the full democracy, where platforms of ideas will transcend ethnic identities;
  • Openness to the World, beginning with good neighborhood and regional integration.

A DAY OF RECKONING

I can claim that my active interest in the Rwandan politics started on March 2, 1997. That date will remain forever engraved in my memory. In the morning of March 2, 1997 a company of Tutsi soldiers of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) army, the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA), encircled the villages and small towns of my origin, in Jenda, Cellule Kabatezi, Sector Nkuri, Prefecture Ruhengeri, Norwestern Rwanda. They rounded up all Hutu men and young boys they could find, tied their arms in the back with sturdy ropes (also known as “Akandoya”, one of the torture methods in RPA arsenal) and led them into the mountains of Konoma, Rubare, and Runyanjya.  Late that evening, women and a few men who by chance had escaped, heard heavy fusillades. When the fusillades ceased, the RPA soldiers descended down the mountains and left the villages.

During the night, the surviving men, conquering their fear, went to the place where the fusillades took place. The macabre scene lit by the moon could only be equaled by episodes from the scariest horror movie.  Torn apart bodies of young boys and men, old and not old, lay in pools of blood, some with arms tied in the back by sturdy ropes that had eaten away the flesh.  Unrecognizable and severed heads were smashed and lifeless bodies were riddled with bullets. Few of these surviving men, frozen by fear, had enough courage to burry some of the bodies before the sunrise. In the following morning the RPA troops came back with trucks and led terrified Hutu porters up in the mountains to carry the bodies and load them in waiting trucks. When the RPA troops could not find some of the bodies, they went on rampage, killing more Hutu men,  torturing and executing women they suspected of knowing where the missing bodies were buried. The cleansing operations took several days. After the operations, only a few Hutu men and young boys from the villages of Jenda and the surroundings had escaped the pogrom. Several women and children, including infants, were massacred. Hutu men and young boys and women who were spared were because they either were mistaken for Tutsis or were hidden by Tutsis.

On the single day of March 2, 1997, thousands of Hutu people were systematically massacred by Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) troops. My close family alone lost 57 people. These are 57 brothers, sisters, cousins, nephews, nieces, uncles and aunts, and their wives, husbands or kids, who were killed by the RPA for one reason: being Hutu or suspected of being Hutu or Tutsi associated with Hutus. However, even the most brutal regime cannot annihilate an entire clan. Several more brothers, sisters, cousins, nephews, nieces, uncles, and aunts, along with their spouses or kids  survived the pogrom. Some survived because they were Tutsis, or mistaken for Tutsis, others because of the flip side of the human wicked face: humanity.

This is how Human Rights Watch recounted these events in an report titled: “Rwanda: the search for Security  and Human Rights Abuses, published by Human Rights Watch on April 1, 2000: “In 1997, ex-FAR and Interahamwe who had returned from the Congo and who had strengthened their forces by recruiting inside Rwanda, conducted a major insurgency in the northwestern prefectures of Gisenyi and Ruhengeri. In suppressing this uprising, as in the first Congo war, RPA troops killed tens of thousands of unarmed civilians, a slaughter which Rwandan authorities sought to justify by their need for security.

In that period of total darkness, a dim light shone and humanity prevailed in some cases. Some Tutsis conquered their fear and risked their lives to protect some of my surviving relatives against the murderous madness of their Tutsi brothers of the RPA. My Hutu relatives who survived that day owe their lives to these courageous and selfless Tutsis. When I contacted my surviving relatives they could not tell me the story: It was too painful to relate.  It is from these Tutsis that I came to know the tragic story of what happened in my village on that fateful day of March 2, 1997.

From those tragic moments, I retained the names of two individuals: the criminal commander of the Tutsi RPA company responsible for the ethnic cleansing, and one of the fearless and self-sacrificing Tutsis who stood guard in front of the shacks and caverns where some of my Hutu relatives hid for days. Sadly, RPA soldiers, when they learned that these Tutsis had protected my relatives, murdered some of them.

When I asked one of the Tutsis who saved my relatives why he did it, he simply answered: I am a Christian. I did what any good christian would do: “having the fear of God’s judgment and making amends by loving your neighbor as yourself.”  He attempted to apologize on the behalf of the Tutsis but I stopped him. I explained that the horrendous crimes were not committed by Tutsis, but that criminals just happened to be Tutsis. I also gave him the example of Tutsis relatives who were massacred in the same period.

FEARLESSNESS, A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF TRUTH

The Tutsi’s answer reminded me of Gandhi’s vow of fearlessness: “When we fear God, we shall fear no man, no matter how high-placed he may be. And if you want to follow the vow of truth in any shape of form, fearlessness is the necessary consequence. And so you find, in the Bhagawad Gita, fearlessness is declared as the first essential quality of Brahmin. We fear consequences, and therefore we are afraid to tell the truth. A man who fears God will certainly not fear any earthly consequence.”

In the days following March 2, 1997 and after listening to the amazing story of the fearless Tutsis who stood guard in front of the hideout of my relatives and gave them the chance to live another day, I took two important decisions: first to honor the memory of my 57 relatives brutally murdered for their ethnicity on March 2, 1997 and second, as a tribute to the bravery and selflessness of the fearless Tutsis. These two decisions  have followed me and guided my political engagement for the last 12 years:

  1. I will tell the truth about the Rwandan tragedy
  2. I will strive for fearlessness in pursuing the truth

These incidents happened when a number of Rwandan refugees living in the United States of America, Europe, and Africa were busy building the human rights organization, Organization for Peace Justice, and Development in Rwanda (OPJDR) that we had co-created in 1995.  As the Coordinator General of OPJDR, I looked at the human rights organization as a launching pad and a platform for fulfilling the vows I had made.

The OPJDR sought to actively and objectively create awareness about the situation in Rwanda. During an investigation on massacres committed in Eastern Rwanda, I received troubling reports regarding my relatives who had moved to and resettled in Rusumo region of Kibungo Prefecture and Mutara region of Byumba Prefecture in search of land and other economic opportunities. I learned that when Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) resumed attacks on April 6, 1994, RPA troops quickly reached Gabiro and Kabarore. An uncle lived there and owned a prosperous small business in Kabarore, Mutara. The first day of the attacks, RPA troops captured the small town of Kabarore, rounded up all Hutu men, including my uncle, his sons, and neighbors and massacred them. My uncle’s wives and a few of his remaining children fled South-East to Rusumo to live with my other relatives, including uncles, aunts, cousins and their spouses and kids.  The RPA troops caught up with them around the end of April – early May 1994.  A company of RPF soldiers massacred them and dumped their bodies into the Akagera river.  It is believed their bodies were among those found hundreds of miles away in Lake Victoria and that I watched with horror on US TV floating and being recuperated and buried by Ugandans. Refugees International, working with UNHCR recounted the massacres in the May 17, 1994 SITREP by Mark Prutsalis transmitted to George Hogeman, Program Officer of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration at the U.S. Department of State:

“At Rusumo commune, sectors NYAMUGARI, GISENYI, NYARUBUYE, the RPF comes at 05h00 waiting for villagers to open their doors. The villagers are caught and taken away to the river by trucks. No one has returned. Refugees of the area have seen people being tied together and thrown into the river… Asked by UNHCR field officer refugees said that RPF did not care whether victims were hutu or tutsi villagers

In these Rusumo massacres, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) massacred almost all my relatives who had migrated to Rusumo and Mutara, including 43 adults, and an unknown number of children. Only two young men are known to have escaped to Tanzania and are still alive. The RPF government tried to deny the massacres and attacked the UNHCR in the “Statements on the Questions of Refugees and Security in Rwanda”, published on 25 September 1994 by Colonel Frank Mugambage from the Ministry of Defense and Claudine Nyinawumwami Umutoni Deputy Minister for Rehabilitation and Social Welfare (MINIREISO): “At the height of the genocide in April-May this year the UNHCR officials dared to make a false report that RPF forces were responsible for the genocide… The UNHCR accepted and widely publicized false reports by MRND-CDR militias in refugee camp in Ngara… UNHCR officials encouraged the people [from the zone Turquoise] to run to Zaire lest they be killed by the RPF forces when the French Forces left … UNHCR reported bodies (of HUTU) in Akagera river in early September purportedly as a result of Government atrocities. Following this, the President [Pasteur Bizimungu] made a week long verification tour in areas along the river and did not come across a single body in the river.  .. The above cases raise suspicions that UNHCR could be having other motives not yet known to us. Otherwise how does one explain their continued baseless and unfounded allegations up this day.”

From that time on, the UNHCR was intimidated and remained silent about the atrocities committed by the Rwandan government, to the point of declaring in the April 1997 report called “REFUGEE CAMP SECURITY IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION that: “The fatal accident which befell the President of Rwanda in April 1994 gave the signal for the start of a brutal genocide which was to last for several months and involve the massacre of several hundred thousand civilians,” when it was already public knowledge that President Juvenal Habyarimana’s plane was shot down by a missile.

I fell sick when I learned about the massacres and dumping the bodies into Akagera river, including those of at least 43 of my relatives. As I remembered seeing on TV and in news papers and magazines the bloated bodies floating in the Akagera river, the hands tied in the back, and those being fished in the Lake Victoria I could only imagine the cruel death these Hutus and Tutsis suffered in the hands of an organization that claimed to liberate them and the country.

The denial by the RPF government officials was a sharp knife in a bleeding wound, a proof that a monster had inherited a den full of preys: the innocent Rwandan Hutu,Tutsi, and Twa alike. The fact that RPF systematically massacred Hutus, Tutsis and Twas while claiming to stop the “genocide of Tutsis” showed an even more sinister side of the regime. I believed the RPF wanted to eradicate Hutus and Tutsis living alongside them in selected areas, so that the separation between Hutus and Tutsis would be effective and any reconciliation and cohabitation would be doomed forever. This realization convinced me that remaining a mere activist would be equivalent to staying silent in the face of the worst evil.

Thus, I embarked on the second project towards reaching the goals I set for myself.  I researched the circumstances of the assassination of the two Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi and their entourage. The research led to the publication in September 1999 of the “Memorandum on the Assassination of the President Habyarimana.

These two experiments – launching OPJDR  and the publication of the memorandum- taught me several things that I had long sensed, but never really pinpointed.

 

 

  • Ethnic politics were entrenched in our lives;  we could not move forward before we face the sad reality heads-on;
  • Wherever I looked, and despite the tragedy that separated Rwandans, I found people who, though conscious of their ethnicity, sought ways to escape the entangling web of ethnic politics. Somehow these individuals aspired to be transported into a “neverland” where ethnic groups would have never existed, and the events that have plunged the Rwandan nation in an endless cycle of violence, retribution, fear, and bloodshed since 1990 were just a nightmare;
  • There were, and possibly will always be, some cliques of individuals who will seek to use ethnicity to reach their machiavellian goals at all cost including assuming the helm of the power.

CONQUERING ETHNIC POLITICS.

I realized that we can ignore ethnicity only to our own risk. At the same time I found genuine people who would see ethnic identity as a positive addition to the diversity of ideas, experiences, and enrichment in a nation that has always regarded peaceful coexistence as a major, if not the key source of resources and progress. This realization and finding led me to contemplate the third idea, and to engage on a path that would alter the course of my life forever.

My participation in the creation of the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR) lay within that approach. The co-founders of the FDLR believed that on both sides of the ethnic divide, there are forces of good that can mobilize the rest to sit at the table and debate their differences within a fraternal and constructive framework. The Inter-Rwandan Dialogue which constituted the backbone of the FDLR platform stemmed from this core belief, shared by the initial members of the FDLR.

A few years later, a light shone on this idea with the birth of the “Alliance pour la Démocratie et la Reconciliation Nationale (ADRN-Igihango)”. ADRN-Igihango was an experiment, where Tutsis, who could no longer tolerate the cruelty, brutality and dictatorial methods of the ruling RPF,  and Hutus, mostly refugees, met, debated, and proposed a platform for change: the Consensual Democracy. The Consensual Democracy envisioned a democratic society where an effective representation and protection of all the components of the Rwandan society would be guaranteed.

Meanwhile, it had became clear that some key leaders of the FDLR no longer had the vision of the founding members and favored political profiteering to the goals of rebuilding the society beyond  ethnic politics. Several of the founders, including myself, and a large number of my companions of the struggle could no longer identify themselves with what had become of the FDLR. We decided to pursue our vision and objectives outside the organization and leaders resigned from the FDLR in September 2004. The ADRN-Igihango could not survive the departure of the leaders who had engineered the platform of inter-ethnic dialogue and consensual democracy.

Despite its failure, the ADRN-Igihango experiment, remained a watershed in conquering ethnic politics.Along with other political leadership companions, the failure of ADRN-Igihango coincided with our resignation from the FDLR in September 2004. However, the ADRN-Igihango experience left me with the following important lessons that would fuel my next political move:

  1. Several Hutus and Tutsis share core aspirations for the creation of a democratic, yet diverse and pluralistic society, where people’s voices will be heard, and truth and genuine participation will be given precedence over fear and ethnics politics;
  2. Building a consensus around the idea of Consensual Democracy is an arduous enterprise, that requires a ground up approach of mobilizing the grassroots  before diffusing innovative ideas slowly across the Rwandan social fabric;
  3. Time is the best friend of success.

It is with this realization that I, working with other struggle companions that had resigned from the FDLR, embarked on a new initiative: the creation of the Rally for Unity and Democracy (RUD-Urunana).  The principle behind the initiative remained the shared vision of consensual democracy, the constant dialogue among ethnic groups, the mobilization for a Rwandan nation united for the common purpose, while aiming for a sustained development and regional integration to the benefit of all the components of the society.

The RUD experiment was unique, yet promising because of the existence of a team with a focused vision, a sense of common purpose, an idea that we could not afford to lose. An impetus was added when Tutsis brothers and sisters of the Rally for the Rwandan People (RPR), mostly ex-RPA, joined the Army National (AN-Imboneza), to protect Hutu refugees in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The fact that hundreds of Tutsis troops who, a few months or years before were part of the RPA that sought to exterminate the Hutu refugees, had joined their former Hutus opponents to fight for a common good and just cause, while protecting Hutu refugees, was a first and a major step in the direction of the birth of a new Rwanda: a Rwanda with a political landscape void of ethnic politics.  It was a major victory over ethnic politics and a significant blow to the clique of Hutus or Tutsis who promoted these politics. It was an awesome experience lived by fearless individuals, Hutus, Tutsis and Twas.

THE THREAT OF FEARLESSNESS TO ETHNIC POLITICS

The RUD/RPR experiment threatened those who sought to plant fear among Rwandan ethnics groups to better control them. The Tutsi-led Rwandan regime, whose ethnic politics is the root and the engine of its existence, felt particularly vulnerable. The Rwandan Intelligence and security services apparatus launched a terrorist campaign targeting all the Hutus and Tutsis suspected rightly or wrongly of being behind the RUD-RPR coalition initiative.

After dismissing the existence of RUD-Urunana/RPR on Voice of America (VOA), Mr. Richard Sezibera, then Rwandan President Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region, suddenly made a volte-face. On March 17, 2006, Mr. Sezibera published in the Daily Monitor, one of the leading Ugandan newspapers, an article alleging that Rwandan dissidents in Kampala were preparing to wage a war against their homeland. He particularly singled out RUD-Urunana and RPR.  His article showed that the Rwandan regime was clearly alarmed by perspectives of the collaboration among mostly Hutu and mostly Tutsi political organizations.

The article set off a chain of repressive actions by the Kigali regime. Mobilizing its full financial, diplomatic, and political machine, Kigali hunted down people across Rwanda and the Great Lakes Region suspected of supporting the two organizations. People were arrested and accused of all sorts of things:  Tutsis were accused of being members of “Army of the Tutsi King”.  Already in September  2006, just after they learned of the collaboration between the RPR and RUD, Kigali government officials circulated a list to the Tripartite-Plus, on which the founders of the two political  parties were included. On that list, the former RPA officer Major Gerard Ntashamaje, a Tutsi and the leader of RPR was included as a Hutu and a former ex-FAR. Yet, Major Gerard Ntashamaje, whose father was a prominent Tutsi, government Minister, Supreme Court Judge, and Prosecutor under the previous regimes, was until 2000, an RPA soldier and RPF high ranking government official.   On  March 17,  2007, after the Rwandan Government exerted a heavy diplomatic pressure on the Ugandan Government, 10 people, including 9 Tutsis and 1 Hutu that were arrested in Uganda a few months earlier were handed over to the Rwandan intelligence services and accused of being RUD/RPR members.

The uneasiness of the Rwandan Government about the peaceful cohabitation between Hutu and Tutsis was clearly underlined by several independent observers. In an report published on April 1, 2000 and titled: “Rwanda: the search for Security  and Human Rights Abuses,” Human Rights Watch observes: “Between November 15 and 20, 1999 local authorities in Nyamirambo, a section of the capital city, Kigali, detained more than 200 young people on the charge of being part of the “army of the king”. They arrested the young men on the streets, where they had supposedly been awaiting transport to take them to places where they would receive military training. The young men were detained in the local lockup for two days and then handed over to the Department of Military Intelligence (DMI), which reportedly released them after they had confessed to unspecified crimes. Unlike previous opposition groups identified solely with Hutu, the monarchists include both Hutu and Tutsi.”

The Human Rights Watch Report continues further:

Some Tutsi soldiers of the RPA, both survivors of the genocide and those from Burundi and the Congo, say they have no wish to fight the war in the Congo. They want that conflict settled by negotiations, even if this means coming to terms with the insurgents.

The multi-ethnic nature of the monarchist group poses a major challenge to authorities who previously could discredit opposition groups for being composed only of Hutu and for including persons implicated in the genocide. Now both the RPF and the government are themselves increasingly criticized for being dominated by Tutsi. Although they continue to talk about the multi-ethnic sharing of power, about nationalism, and about reconciliation, the RPF and the government have progressively excluded all the major Hutu leaders who once participated in power.

The Rwandan Supreme court judgment Nr RPA 0017/07/CS  of October 25, 2007 of Prosecutor vs Rukeba Francois (Tutsi) , Ugirimpuhwe Leonard (Hutu), Kabagambe Peter (Tutsi), and Iyarwema Vedaste (Tutsi) accused of seeking to overthrow the Rwandan government under the provisions of articles 164 and 165 reinforce the trend of Rwandan ethnic and fear politics. The three Supreme Court judges: Mukanyundo Patricie, Hatangimbabazi Fabien and Kanyange Fidelite convicted the defendants of creating the RPR and having cooperated with RUD-Urunana. Specifically they convicted them of “having talked on phone with Kanyamibwa (myself), residing in America” and of “belonging to the political party created by Ntashamaje Gerard.

The case of Rukeba Francois took its roots long before 2000. The Tutsi-led government National Rights Commission writes in its 2000 Annual report published in March 2001, under the section: “The arrest and detention of Second Lieutenant MURERA Bertin, Pte BYABAGAMBA Innocent, RUTABANA Benjamin, RUKEBA Francois and RUGEMA Janvier”.

“The families of the soldiers MURERA Bertin and BYABAGAMBA Innocent, together with those of the Civilians, Benjamin RUTABANA (known by the name Ben) and François RUKEBA sought verbally the Commission’s assistance so as to know where these four men had been detained. They had been arrested, some in Tanzania,

others in Burundi and forced back into the country by Rwanda Government.

“As for RUTABANA Benjamin, he said that the charges referred against him were fabricated and not the real reason for his arrest. He thought the real reason could be that, he had been suspected of aiding and abetting in the escape of former Speaker of Parliament, Mr. SEBARENZI KABUYE Joseph.”

On his part, RUKEBA François admitted to have taken BYABAGAMBA Innocent in his car as far as Butare, on the day BYABAGAMBA fled the country. He did not however, know that he was running away from the country. He said they later on met in Burundi by coincidence. RUKEBA François denied any involvement in the soldier’s escape.

During these discussions at the Kigali Military Prosecutor’s Office, none of the detainees said he had been tortured or undergone any other cruel, in-human treatment.

However, they showed such signs as unusual fatigue that the Commission believed those men might have experienced such kind of treatment but, out of fear, they

concealed the fact.

 

Five months after the Commission met them for the first time, all the five were bailed out. They are currently waiting to appear before the court, free from detention.

However, at the time of writing this report, some information yet to be confirmed by the Commission says that two of them, namely RUKEBA François and RUGEMA Janvier, might have fled the Country.

The government will once more catch up with Rukeba Francois in Uganda a few years later and accuse him of allying himself with Hutus seeking to overthrow the government.

Reading both Reports, one by the completely independent Human Rights Watch and the other by the Tutsi-led government sponsored commission, one may realize the following:

  1. Like Hutu, Tutsis seeking to free themselves from ethnic politics and politics of fear are equally targeted by the Tutsi-led government;
  2. They also, like Hutu, are arrested on trumped up charges and eventually tortured

It is clear that ethnic politics and fear are used to intimidate both Tutsis and Hutus. The policy of division has been embraced, promoted, and enhanced into a method of governance by the Tutsi-led regime, since its inception. The regime has expanded the policy to promote divisions based on criteria such as clan, region of origin, second language.

FEARLESSNESS ON A LONG AND NARROW ROAD BEYOND ETHNIC POLITICS

This year, amazing things happened in the World. America got its first Black President (and first Black First Lady).  On January 20, 2009 the voice of the Black President echoed across the halls where decisions that shake the entire World are made.

The man came from a race, which less than 50 years ago, was struggling to move from the back of the bus to decent schools, whose males were being lynched for making innocuous comments or gestures, women raped for being in a wrong neighborhood,  and both men and women imprisoned or killed for just claiming their basic rights.

In his speech, the Black president preached hope, racial harmony, and a new order of peace around the World.  Most Americans agreed with him that race and diversity should be a source of richness of ideas, initiatives, entrepreneurship and openness that would propel the most powerful and richest country to new heights of prosperity and respect around the World. The American people, the most diverse nation in the World, made a bet on the complementarily of races, nationalities, and ethnic groups and won the war over racial and divisive politics.

America heeded the call of Franklin  Delano Roosevelt delivered in his March 4, 1933 First Inaugural Address: “So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life, a leadership of frankness and of vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory.

When the American people were making strides and renewing their shared commitment of building a nation as a beacon of hope and racial harmony, somewhere, in Africa, Rwanda in particular, ethnic identities were exploited  and used for the politics lethal to the interests of  the African people.  The current Tutsi-led Rwandan regime has used and continues to use these politics to the criminal perfection.

On April 11, 2009 , in an article published in Los Angeles Times and titled: “The power of horror in Rwanda”, Human Rights Watch Executive Director  Kenneth Roth wrote:

One tool of repression has been the gacaca courts …  which the government established at the community level to try alleged perpetrators of the genocide. … the law outlawing “genocide ideology” is written so broadly that it can encompass even the most innocuous comments. As many Rwandans have discovered, disagreeing with the government or making unpopular statements can easily be portrayed as genocide ideology, punishable by sentences of 10 to 25 years. That leaves little political space for dissent.”

In Rwanda, both the Gacaca courts and the law on “genocide ideology” targets one ethnic group: The Hutus. The purpose of these two instruments of repression is to keep both Hutus and Tutsis in constant fear and mutual distrust. The Hutus fear being jailed, tortured, or killed. The Tutsis are always reminded that Hutus are seeking to exterminate them. It is a win-win situation for the small clique in power. The cynicism behind the logic is simple: Hutus will never express any dissent, and Tutsis will keep loyalty to a clique that promises protection. It is a lose-lose situation for the Rwandan people: reconciliation will remain a distant dream. Therefore ethnic distrust will prevail while racial conflicts, like a ticking bomb, are bound to erupt.

Gandhi, in his speech on “Ashram Vows” at YMCA, Madras and published in Indian Review in February 1916 and The Hindu, 16 Feb 1916, writes about the Untouchables “There is an ineffaceable blot that Hinduism today carries with it. I have declined to believe that it has been handed to us from immemorial times. I think that this miserable, wretched, enslaving spirit of “Untouchableness” must have come to us when we were in the cycle of our lives, at our lowest ebb, and that evil has still stuck to us and it still remains with us. It is to my mind, a curse that has come to us, and as long as that curse remains with us, so long I think we are bound to consider that every affliction that we labour under  in this sacred land is a fit and proper punishment for this great and indelible crime we are committing. That any person should be considered untouchable because of his calling passes one’s comprehension; and you, the student world, who receives this modern education, if you become a party to this crime, it were better that you received no education whatsoever.

In Rwanda, a new class of “Untouchables” is being created. This class is made mostly of Hutus, but also of Tutsis who question the rationale behind ethnic politics.  Fear has, like a metastatic cancer, spread its tentacles into the fabric of a nation, fueled by ethnic politics.  One sees it in the administration, in the private enterprise, and public ceremonies, in schools, in the military, in the police, in the financial system, in the judiciary system, and in the media:  in summary, the entire public and private administration.

Every year, in April, Rwandans remembers the survivors of the 1994 madness. Usually, the first day, Rwandan leaders make speeches and survivors remember the departed. In all speeches, there is no mention of Hutus victims. Only Tutsis are mentioned and remembered.  Only Tutsis have the right to remember, to shed tears, to cry, and to commemorate. As recently as in January 2009, a delegation of Hutu refugees visited the Memorial erected in Gisozi for Tutsis killed in 1994. When her baby cried, the Hutu mother was expelled from the memorial site, being accused of defiling the sacred place.

Rwanda has moved from the period of ethnic politics to ethnic annihilation.

Annihilation of Hutus has become a public policy: Hutus and Tutsis who sympathize with them are excluded at all cost, in order for the clique leading the country to maintain itself in power. In a resolution, the United Nations (UN) Security Council concluded that events in Rwanda in 1994 constitute “Rwandan Genocide”. The Rwandan government, while denying the existence of a Tutsi ethic group, renamed the events “Tutsi genocide”.

The new qualification of the 1994 events by the current Tutsi-led government  only solidifies the exclusion and annihilation of Hutus under three forms:

  1. Constantly and wrongly reminding the other ethnic groups (Hutus and Twas) that are criminals;
  2. Trying to pretend that ethnic groups do not exist in Rwanda;
  3. Imposing the belief that only Tutsis were killed.

With this politics, Hutus and Twas cannot claim being discriminated against: How can one be discriminated against if he or she doesn’t exist? Job, public service, scholarships, admissions to high and higher education, and other benefits can be given to one ethnic group without being accused of discrimination. At the same time, Hutus can be arrested, accused of “genocidal ideology” and crimes against the Tutsi survivors, and be subjected to torture, summary execution, and arbitrary imprisonment because they are  “marked” as being responsible for the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.

Hence, only Tutsis, as the only recognized survivors may benefit from all the programs such as Fond d’Aide aux Rescapés du Génocide (FARG), a fund set up to  assist “ Tutsi genocide survivors” and Travaux d’Interets General (TIG), forced public work executed by Hutu prisoners. Hutus and Twas cannot be survivors, because they are not Tutsis, and cannot claim to exist because there are no ethnic groups in Rwanda. Hutus and Twas as members of ethnic groups have been annihilated and Tutsis  who sympathize with them suffer the same fate.

The annihilation of Hutus is fueled by fear:

  • Fear by Tutsis to tell the truth about the blatant repression against Hutus;
  • Fear by Tutsis to sympathize with the plight of Hutu, because they may risk to loose the support of or being persecuted by a Tutsi government;
  • Fear by Hutu to tell the truth, because they are already accused of being criminals and risk being accused of “genocide ideology.”, negationism or revisionism.

Maintaining fear among Tutsis and Hutu through ethnic politics is the only efficient and effective tool the current Tutsi-regime has to maintain itself in power.  The Tutsi-led power preys on the nation and will devour the people if nothing is done.  Tutsi and Hutus who have understood the machiavellian scheme have no other choice than finding ways to move beyond fear and ethnic politics for their own survival but, most importantly, for the survival of Tutsis, Hutus, and Twas, and of Rwanda as a nation.

ETHNIC POLITICS WAS TRIED IN RWANDA BEFORE AND FAILED: IT LED TO 1959 BLOODY REVOLUTION

Between 13 and 28 June 1956, the Conseil Superior du Pays, exclusively composed of Tutsis, held a closed-door meeting called “Huitième Session du Conseil Supérieur du Pays”. The question of ethnicity was raised, following the general discontent of Hutus across the entire country. The Hutus openly complained about excesses, abuses, and repression by Tutsis. The Conseil Superior asked the Rwandan King to make the following statement to the nation [French]:

Certaines personnes peu ou mal informées répètent ou écrivent volontiers que les Batutsis venus dans le Pays en conquérant ont spoliés les Bahutu [Hutus] de leurs biens et les ont maintenus à un rang inférieur. Une telle affirmation relève d’une tendance à ne voir que le  mauvais côté des choses. Ceux qui la formulent perdent de vue que certaines lacunes de l’organisation politique et sociale des Bututsi [Tutsis] étaient compensées  par l’assurance qu’avaient les serviteurs de jouir de la protection de leurs maîtres,  les administrés de celle de leurs chefs, cette protection revêtant un caractère nettement familial. …

“Les Bahutu eurent en tout temps l’occasion d’acquérir richesses et considération sociale. Quant au pouvoir politique, des Bahutu et même certains Batwa furent nommés chefs par le Mwami[King] du Ruanda. Si la chose a été perdue de vue, si l’on a pu croire que seuls les Batutsi étaient aux postes de commande du Pays, c’est que des alliances de ces chefs Bahutu et Batwa avec des familles Batutsi avaient tôt fait d’aplanir les différences sociales et raciales de sorte que toute distinction devenait impossible.  A plus forte raison sous le régime actuel, les chances sont-elles laissées à tous, suivant leur capacités et leur mérites, d’accéder a toutes les fonctions vacantes.

 

“Le conseil Supérieur du Pays émet le voeu suivant: “que les mentions “Mututsi, muhutu ou mutwa soient rayés dans les livrets de recensement, fiches ainsi que dans tous les actes officiels.” La séance est suspendue à 12 heures.”

Hence, to the complaints of ethnic discriminations and the monopolization of power by one ethnic group, Tutsis, the Conseil Supérieur du Pays, composed exclusively by the Tutsi ethnic group decided to suppress the mention of ethnic groups in official records and documents.  However, in months that followed, the complaints by Hutus became even louder across the entire country.

On October 21, 1957, the Hutus wrote a letter to the Mwami Mutara III Rudahigwa asking for equal representation of Hutu, Tutsi, and Twa within the Conseil Supérieur du Pays.

In October 1957, the Hutu published the Manifeste des Bahutu asking for democracy in general, and a constitutional democracy, in particular.

On March 7, 1958, Vianney Bendantunguka, a prominent Hutu political activist, compared the situation in Rwanda to that at the night of the French Revolution on 4 August 1789. However, he suggested that the King still had time for a peaceful revolution, instead of a bloody one, in order to replace a society based on privilege of one ethnic group by a society based on Democracy.

A series of unrelenting complaints came from all the regions of the country:

In Marangara: Hutu asked why only Tutsis were allowed in colleges and universities, demanded the abolition of forced labor and sharecropping by Hutu, the introduction of competitive examination in attribution of scholarships, the participation of Hutu in Conseil Supérieur du Pays, the abolition of arbitrary confiscation or appropriation of Hutu farms by Tutsis, etc.

In Bushiru:  Hutus observed that all the Chiefs, Deputy Chiefs, Judges, and public servants were Tutsis; that even these were imposed to the Hutus. Hutu owned the land, but now Tutsis had decided that land belonged to Tutsis. Hutu were not allowed to graze cattle on their own farms. Tutsis who failed schools were hired as teachers of agriculture, when Hutu farmers knew better.

In Kingogo:  Hutus wondered why only Tutsis were the only ethnic group allowed to inherit. If a Hutu died, his property became the property of a Tutsi chief. All public functions were occupied by Tutsis.  Hutus demanded  the abolition of arbitrary confiscation or appropriation of Hutu farms by Tutsis, etc.

In Kabagali:  Hutus pointed out that all Judges and prosecutors were Tutsis. They insisted that there were 3 races in Rwandal: Hutu, Twa and Tutsis. They asked what criteria to get a public position: race (ethnic group) or competency. They wondered whether all Hutu were incompetent. They demanded the abolition of arbitrary confiscation or appropriation of Hutu farms by Tutsis, etc.

In Cyanika-Bufundu:  Hutus asked why only Tutsis receive scholarships to study in Europe.  They complained that all Jugdes were Tutsis. Hutu denounced corruption and arbitrary confiscation or appropriation of Hutu farms by Tutsis, etc.

And several other complaints from individuals or groups landed at the Royal court, in tracts, newspapers, magazines, reports from local meetings, etc.

The core of those complaints was: Tutsis hierarchy oppressed Hutus and occupied most of the public positions; Tutsis were exclusively represented in the highest institutions of the country, such as Conseil Supérieur du Pays, Chiefs and Deputy Chiefs, Judges, persecutors. Tutsi were exclusively admitted in public high and higher education and exclusively received public scholarships; Tutsi  aristocrats misappropriated the farms of Hutus.

The situation before 1959 appears similar to what we observe in Rwanda today.  At the invitation of the Government of Kigali and the international community and between 23 and 28 January 2008, a delegation of the combatants and their dependents of the Rally for Unity and Democracy (RUD)/ Rally of the Rwandan People (RPR) conducted an exploratory visit to Rwanda. The visit was in the agenda within the framework of the Peace Process initiated in Rome on May 9, 2008 between the Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (RDC) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC), a coalition between RUD and RPR, under the facilitation of the Community Sant’ Egidio.

The Roadmap of the Process was published in Kisangani on May 26, 2008. In executing the process, a first group of combatants of RUD/RPR voluntarily disarmed in an official ceremony held in Kasiki, Lubero Territory, North-Kivu, on July 31 2008. The combatants, their dependents and other Rwandan refugees were subsequently grouped in Kasiki.

The exploratory visit to Rwanda was organized in order for the delegation to enquire about the security conditions and social, economical, and political participation of Rwandans inside Rwanda with the purpose of a voluntary and peaceful repatriation of Rwandan refugees.

The report published by the delegation after their visit underlines the following findings about the general political and social situation inside Rwanda:

  • pervasive lack of security for individuals;
  • terror by government militias, Local Defense Forces (LDF), et intelligence services;
  • harassment, targeting one ethnic group, fabrication of accusations and general lack of justice in the Gacaca courts;
  • lack of freedom in political and social participation;
  • selective exclusion of Hutus from government jobs, the army, the police et businesses;
  • arbitrary confiscation of private properties without compensation;
  • forced labor in Travaux d’Intérêt Generaux (TIG);
  • cruel treatment of prisoners and detainees;
  • forced recruitment of ex-combatants to fight in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, within CNDP or the Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF).

The current Rwandan regime repeats the same mistakes and follows the roads of the past generations. The same causes lead to the same results. That is why it is important to reject ethnic politics, before its is too late. We need to create a just system, regardless of the ethnic background of those, with legitimate aspirations, who would associate with it. However, the presence of all the components of the Rwandan social and historical fabric must be sought at all costs. All the components must be empowered. Leaders must earn the confidence of the Rwandan people in the legitimacy of their leadership, the positive goals of their purposes, and their vision.

Rwanda as a nation belongs to all Rwandans. In January 2008, at the invitation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) a delegation of Rwandan political leaders visited Kinshasa. The purpose was to find peaceful solutions to the resolution of the 15 years old problem of Rwandan refugees in Eastern DRC. At the conclusion of the visit,  I, as the head of the delegation,  challenged General Paul Kagame, in our 24 January 2008 statement in Kinshasa on peace in the Great Lakes Region, to rebuild “the Rwandan nation on a model [not] based on the failed past, but a future Rwanda where our descendants will rise above what has until now divided Rwandans; a Rwanda where our children and our descendants will not live in the confrontation but rather would spend their time exploring and putting into practice solutions for the development of Rwanda.”

Yet again, in Kasiki, on July 31, 2008, I invited General Paul Kagame to open the doors for the Rwandan refugees to go home. I invited him, first as a man, second as a former refugee, and third as a leader. The challenge has been the constance of our calls and we have always stated our willingness to meet General Paul Kagame anytime with the facilitation of fair and independent minded mediators. We made the call because we believed, as a Chinese proverb teaches us, that “A Great Man Can Bend and Stretch.” The current Rwandan leaders need to show they can bend lower and stretch farther.

The urgency of acting now, before it is too late, compels Rwandans to learn from the mistakes of the past and to avoid them. Both the French and the Rwandan Revolution had their time and taught us the consequences of ignoring the aspirations of the people and the tragedy of ethnic politics and politics of fear.

We need to free ourselves from fear and ethnic distrust, move beyond bitterness and retribution, so that Rwanda and the Great Lakes Region would not remain plagued by a cycle of violence and bloodshed. Other countries and nations became victors over ethnic politics and fear.  We can learn from them and even do better. I remain convinced that Rwandans can get there if they focus their energies to reaching these stated goals.

A GRADUAL ROAD TO THE SOCIETY BEYOND ETHNIC POLITICS AND FEAR.

Rwanda has been living in a vicious cycle for which the velocity is fueled by ethnic politics. Ethnic politics can only exist because of fear and mistrust among the various ethnic groups. Dishonest politicians, like scavengers and parasites, feed on that fear, keep the mistrust alive, and inflame popular emotions to maintain themselves in power.

On December 12, 1958, less than a year before Hutu rebelled against the Tutsi monarchy in a bloody revolution, a Tutsi priest warned both the Tutsi aristocrats and the Colonial administration about the impeding tragedy.

In an article titled “Aux Origines du problem Bahutu au Rwanda, published in Revue Nouvelle XXVII, no 12 p1-5, the priest Stanislas Bushayija  wrote [French]:

Le sentiment d’injustice que ressentirent à un moment donné les plébéiens romains vis-à-vis des patriciens, les serfs vis-à-vis des seigneurs dans l’ancien régime, est celui qu’éprouvent aujourd’hui les Bahutu par rapport aux Batutsi. Ils cherchent leur émancipation, leur accession à un monde libre et égal pour tous. C’est ainsi qu’il faut comprendre les discussions, les manifestes, les articles qui se succèdent à un rythme de plus en plus rapide. L’histoire nous montre que lorsque des revendication arrivent à ce point de maturité, elles aboutissent fatalement à des révolutions ou des guerres civiles, si les responsables ne leur donnent pas une réponse satisfaisante.”

 

[Translation: The sense of injustice felt at one time by the Roman plebeians towards the Patricians, the Serfs towards the Lords in the former regime, is now felt by the Hutu towards the Tutsis. They seek their emancipation, to access equal rights. Thus, it is necessary to understand the complaints, the events, the journal articles that follow each other at an accelerated pace. History shows that when claims reach such a point of maturity, they inevitably lead to revolutions or civil wars, if the leaders do not give them a satisfactory answer.”]

Unfortunately, very few leaders learn from history. As I recently pointed out in a speech I delivered at Rutgers University, citing the Irish author and Nobel Prize Laureate George Bernard Shaw: “If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man be of learning from experience… Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.

The observation by the Tutsi priest remains relevant now and applies to the current situation in Rwanda. On October 30, 1959, Father Stanislas Bushayija wrote to the colonial Administrator to propose measures for calming the impeding social explosion [French]:

“ D’autre part, je suis persuadé que le temps est révolu où il était possible de gouverner le Munyarwanda, surtout le mututsi, par des négotiations douceureuses et concessions factices, c’est, aujourd’hui, l’énérgie (j’allais dire la force, mais je n’y pense pas moins) dans la justice et l’équité, qui doit et peut gouverner le Ruanda.

 

[Translation: “On the other side, I remain convinced that the time where it was possible to rule on the Rwandan people, especially the Tutsis, by sweet negotiations and fake concessions has passed. Today, it is by strength (I was going to propose force, although I believe it is the right approach) with justice and equity of treatment, that must and should govern Rwanda.”

Eight days later, on November 7, 1959, the 1959 Rwandan Social Revolution had started, plunging the nation into an orgy of bloodbath that has marked the history of Rwanda to date.

Unfortunately, the dire consequences predicted by Father Bushayija are bound to happen. When tragedy strikes again, the flames from the fire of social revolution undoubtedly would consume masses of innocent people.

That is why we cannot remain oblivious by-standers, and let Rwanda go on a road to perdition and annihilation.  A society beyond ethnic politics is possible. I propose the following steps to get there.

1. Recognize the fallacies behind the denial of ethnic identities.
Ethnic identity is who we are, our social heritage, our essence as people or group of people, whether we want it or not or others want to define us as such.  It is not the existence of ethnic identity that is the problem: it is the use of ethnic groups to reach misguided political aims that dooms us. We need to question, fight against, and defeat this cursed heritage that our forefathers have left us with.

Ethnic groups cannot be suppressed or kept conveniently at the whims of politicians or one ethnic group.  The social nation must determine the best way to manage a multi-ethnic state and use ethnic identity as a source of richness of ideas, initiatives, driven entrepreneurship, and openness and prosperity. Rwanda has a good example in America, Canada, India, Great Britain, France, South Africa and other increasingly multiracial, multi-ethnic states, where diversity has become the best resource that fosters the goodness of the respective societies.

2. Consensual democracy remains the best solution to ethnic politics and fear.Ethnic politics in Rwanda is a curse. As Gandhi urged us, as long as that curse remains with us, the Rwandan people will be afflicted by suffering, exile, uprooting, bloodshed, and one day, annihilation.  Annihilation can only be avoided by self recognition and acknowledgment of others, in a society where, as argued Philosophers Jurgen Harbermas and Bruce Barry,  the legitimacy of our nation Rwanda must be based on a notion of political rights of autonomous individual subjects. However, we need to marry those individual rights with the approach put forward by political scientists like Charles Taylor and Will Kymlicka: Rwanda must recognize ethnic identity and develop processes through which the particular needs of ethnic groups can be accommodated within the boundaries of a strong and fair political structure accepted by all.

Brief, we need a system where the voice of every individual is heard, but in which ethnic groups strive. That is the concept of Consensual Democracy.

 

 

 

 

  1. 3. Consensual democracy will be phased out in favor of a full democracy.

Consensual democracy will protect minorities, specifically ethnic minorities, from the potential tyranny of ethnic majority. However, as trust among ethnic groups grow and political groups form around a platform of ideas and trensend ethnic identities, the consensual democracy will have outlived its usefulness, and eventually lead to a unfettered democracy.

4. Rwanda must work outward not inward.Most of ethnic conflicts may be linked to limited resources. Unfortunately, overpopulated, landlocked, with limited natural resources, Rwanda and its people must only rely on their ingenuity, sense of entrepreneurship, and hard work. They must develop good neighborhood and a sense of seizing opportunity wherever it comes from or may be found. Rwandans are bound to be good neighbors if they have to survive as a nation.  They must be flexible, proactive, and strategic thinkers. They must anticipate and seize opportunities around and in front of them. However, they cannot do it if they do not burry their clothes of victims, and wear those of victors: Victorious over Ethnic Politics and Fear.

CONCLUSION

Despite all its complexity, problems arising from the current policy of ethnic politics and politics of fear promoted by the current Rwandan regime may find practical and actionable solutions. The fact that so many Tutsis are fleeing the country, and some are joining the so called “Hutu rebels” in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) or elsewhere, or creating their own armed-rebellions is an indication that the policies of division and fear promoted by the current Rwandan regime have failed and Rwandans leaders are “building on moving sand”.

A system based on democratic values, respect for individual rights and freedom, exclusion of the complex of the conqueror, and the social, political, and economic participation of all the components of the Rwandan society is more likely to succeed. We, Rwandans, can not built a nation on vengeful and domination premises. Rwandans cannot get there alone. True friends of the Rwandan people cannot afford to watch Rwandans led on the path of destruction, like a flock of sheep to the butcher. These true friends have also an awesome and uplifting responsibility. It is this kind of system, with the help of true friends that would lead the Rwandan nation beyond ethnic politics and fear.

Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.

New Jersey, USA.

May 19, 2009.

E-mail: kanyami@optonline.net.

Tel: 201-794-6542

 

©Copyright 2009, Felicien Kanyamibwa.

{ 0 comments }

Massacres of Kiwandja

A PARADISE IN HELL

Over 2008, I travelled on several occasions to the Democratic Republic of the

Congo. In July-August 2008, I visited North-Kivu, and took the road from Goma to Lubero region in North-Kivu. The road was, and still is arguably one of the most dangerous roads in the world .

One sees a very beautiful scenery, almost paradisiac mountains with lush forests. Active volcanos surrounded with magnificent jungles rise all around. In July 2008, while travelling with a team of the Mission of United Nations in the Congo (MONUC), we crossed, during a seemingly interminable journey, an area infested with the troops of the renegade Nkunda(CNDP), the Mai-Mai, Rwandan rebels, the civil militias, the congolese army (FARDC) and all sorts of armed groups. It was and is a place no one would like to visit twice.

WOMEN AND CHILDREN PREYED UPON

Along the road, people, mostly Children …

Click here to read more on AfroAmerica Network

{ 0 comments }

A PARADISE IN HELL

Over 2008, I travelled on several occasions to the Democratic Republic of the
Congo. In July-August 2008, I visited North-Kivu, and took the road from Goma to
Lubero region in North-Kivu. The road was, and still is arguably one of the most
dangerous roads in the world .
One sees a very beautiful scenery, almost paradisiac mountains with lush forests.
Active volcanos surrounded with magnificent jungles rise all around. In July 2008, while
travelling with a team of the Mission of United Nations in the Congo (MONUC), we
crossed, during a seemingly interminable journey, an area infested with the troops of
the renegade Nkunda(CNDP), the Mai-Mai, Rwandan rebels, the civil militias, the
congolese army (FARDC) and all sorts of armed groups. It was and is a place no one
would like to visit twice.

WOMEN AND CHILDREN PREYED UPON
Along the road, people, mostly Congolese Hutus and Rwandan Hutu refugees,
lived in camps, terrorized, afraid to go back to those paradisiac farms where these
armed groups lurk, ready to kill, ransom, loot, rape women and abduct young boys and
girls. That time, it appeared, from conversations with people selling bananas and other
meager fruits along the road and from camps, that women and children were most
vulnerable, and at the mercy of hoards of CNDP Congolese rebels supported by the
government of Rwanda. Nkunda ‘s CNDP rebels had started to reorganize then and war
was looming. The road from Goma, Kibati, Rugari, Mugunga, Rumangabo, Rutshuru,
Kiwanja, Kanyabayonga, Kaina, Loufu was controlled by armed groups and FARDC.
However, all along there were already camps of congolese displaced Hutus, mixed with
Rwandan Hutu refugees who have been living in DRC without refugee status for close
to 14 years.

MONUC, ALSO TARGETED
I was traveling in a MONUC vehicle with MONUC agents, including high ranking
MONUC officials. In Rutshuru, we fell in an ambush by militias. MONUC officials
traveling with us could not tell what armed group the militia belonged to. The militias that
surrounded the MONUC car, ready to burn it, were particularly virulent against MONUC
personnel. The MONUC high ranking official who followed us in another vehicle, went to
a MONUC base in the area to call for help. The help did not come. It took charming
negation skills from a MONUC lady who was traveling with me to convince the militias
that we meant no harm, and that there was no need to burn our car, or kill us. The lady
also negotiated that they let the other MONUC car following us to pass. They let us go.
1 to 2 miles down the road, between Rutshuru and Kiwanja, we found a terrorized
MONUC Indian military units, who had received the call to come to our rescue. They
had heavy armored vehicles but were paralyzed by fear and had aligned their armored
vehicles, praying.

That day, I understood that MONUC was not going to or will hardly protect the
civilian population. Later we met along the road several groups of people menacingly
pointing to MONUC and shouting that MONUC has outlived its mandate, accusing
them of raping women or selling them into prostitution or looting the congolese minerals
and timber, or just for supporting Rwandan invaders.

RWANDAN REFUGEES: EASY TARGET AND EASY PREY
One may ask the question of the protection of Rwandan Hutu refugees who fear
from persecution and do not want to go back to Rwanda? My simple answer is:
Those who do not want to be repatriated do not receive any protection or
humanitarian help whatsoever. They are hunted down to be repatriated by force.
Hutu refugees have been living in the DRC for 14 years without status,
protection, or any other action from the UN agencies. For UN agencies, fear from
protection is unfounded and all Rwandan Hutu in Eastern DRC must go home
voluntarily or by force. For those who are repatriated, see the report attached.
Mid August-September 2008, Nkunda’s CNDP rebels attacked with the help of
Rwandan government troops (RDF). Already, there were rumors coming from Rwanda
that several young Hutus, especially those from Northwestern Rwanda were kidnapped
and disappeared in the night, during the months of June to August 2008. Parents
thought they were, like most of Hutu men who disappeared, put in jail for “Genocide
ideology”. However, it appeared they were being sent to areas bordering the volcanos
for training, especially in Kinigi, Kigombe, Nkumba and Mutura.
When Nkunda attacked in September 2009, the stated objective was to hunt down
the FDLR. But, it appeared that with the overt cleansing of areas conquered, followed
by the appointment of Tutsi chiefs, raping of Hutu women and massacring of Hutu men,
the objective appeared to be ethnic cleansing. Young Hutu boys were forcibly recruited,
trained for one to two weeks, and sent to the battlefront, where fighting was the
heaviest. Most of those Hutu were killed by FARDC and other congolese armed groups
fighting against the CNDP, especially PARECO, which is composed mostly of Hutus and
Nande. Tutsis within CNDP were mostly recruited from Rwandan Defense Force (RDF)
troops. They held command positions and were mostly responsible for “pacified” areas
conquered by CNDP. It appears that pacification meant: raping of Hutu women and
killing of Hutu men who appeared not cooperative. In the article, from December 3,
2008 edition of New York Times, titled: “Rwanda Stirs Deadly Brew of Troubles in
Congo” by Jeffrey Gentleman, a Rwandan army officer who was sent to fight in the DRC
for the renegade General Nkunda was asked why he went. He answered: “Why? I am a
Tutsi… One hundred percent Tutsi”. Those 100% Tutsis are the ones who were in
charge of Hutu ethnic cleansing and raping of Hutu women.
Following are some of incidents for which I have detaled information. I will focus on
October-December 2009, and mostly in the area of Rutshuru- North Kivu:
Hutu women raped by Tutsi soldiers of the CNDP and Rwandan Defense
Forces (RDF):
- Nyiramabuye Disdain;
- Madame Magic
- Bihoyiki Pauline
- Nyirabyatsi Marie
- Amman Chance
Hutu boys (minors) kidnapped and enrolled within the CNDP by force:
- Bahati
- Ndungutse
- Munganyiki Pierre
- Kabuye Padri
- Bwenge
Hutu women killed and burried in mass graves in Nyongera, near Kiwanja:
- Mariana and her 5 children
- Nyiaramaganya, the wife of Byibeshyo
- Kabano a.k.a Namasifa
- Uwimana a.k.a Mama Maombe
- Bampoyiki Chantal
- Mama Maize, the wife of Jean
On 4 and 5 November 2008:
- 172 Hutu men, women and children disappeared in Kwanzaa;
- 595 Hutu men, women, and children massacred by CNDP in Kiwanja.
From 23-25 November 2008 in Rubare and nearby:
- 64 Hutu women raped by CNDP and RDF soldiers
- 250 Hutu boys (mostly minors) rounded up in Ngwenda and Kinyandonyi. They
were led to Rumangabo for a forced military training within CNDP;
Between 23 November 2008- 15 January 2009:
Several young boys were kidnapped in Kinyandonyi and enrolled within CNDP
300 people were massacred in the villages of Jomba, Bowes and Kisigali.
On 22-23 November 2008 in Nyongera:
Several Hutu women were raped, killed, and burried in mass graves by CNDP and
RDF soldiers in Nyongera;
39 Hutu women were killed and burried in mass graves in Rutshuru;
Late November and early December 2008:
300 Hutu, mostly young boys were killed in Jomba, Bowes, and Kisigare by CNDP
after refusing to enroll within CNDP. The responsible CNDP commanding officers are:
- Colonel Makenga, CNDP commander of Rutshuru sector;
- Colonel Moise;
- Lt Colonel Mulomba, Commander of CNDP brigade;
- Colonel Byamungu: later killed in battle in 2009;
-
Over the month of January 2009, several mass graves were discovered of Hutu
killed during the month on November and December 2008:
On January 15, 2009: a mass grave containing 39 Hutu was found near Kwanzaa.
These Hutus were killed by soldiers commanded by Major Seko of CNDP Military
intelligence and Colonel Moise of the National Police, an ex-ranking officer of CNDP.
On January 15, 2009: a mass grave containing 114 bodies of Hutu was found in
Kamulina, near Mabungo Hutu camp;
In February 2009:
2 Hutu civilians killed by RADC-RDF-CNDP soldiers:
- Tofa, son of Byashara and Nyirabazungu, in Gihiko, the Hutu village of Binza-
Rutshuru;
- Bihenango, son of Seruyombo,in Kabuga, Hutu village of Binza.
- Marc, son of Rwigana and Nyirabishanga
March 25, 2009 in Kashwa, 1 km from Rutshuru Centre:
2 Hutu women killed when they refused to be raped by CNDP police agents;
March 31, 2009 in Katemba, 2 km from Kwanja: 3 Hutu women killed and 1 raped.
FARDC commanding officer: Lt Colonel Colombia, ex-CNDP high ranking officer;

THE ETERNAL TORMENT

When I left Eastern Congo in August 2008, one thing struck me: in those jungles,
one sees a river of blacken lava, the reminder of what happened in January 2002. In
January 2002 the Volcano Nyiragongo erupted with fury and its lava engulfed large
areas of the jungle and the provincial capital Goma, leaving destruction and a large
loss of life. When the lava cooled down, it remained like a large scar, perhaps as a
reminder that one day it may happen again. I flew over the area in a UN helicopter.
From the helicopter, I looked down and saw a frozen black river, haunting the forest as
the tragedy that has haunted the region since 1994.
I saw many pictures as those I am attaching. I receive graphic pictures showing Hutu
women raped, then shot in private parts, burned afterwards or their limbs chopped off. I
receive pictures of young boys massacred. Those are graphic pictures that I choose not
keep. I also receive pictures like these below.
Pictures of Hutu kids who just saw their mothers raped and killed, their father killed
and their house burned or small Hutu boys forced into Tutsi armed groups and killing
their relatives, or women raped then killed or forced to take up weapons.

Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD. April 5, 2009.

{ 0 comments }

The Dead and the Undertaker: Paul Kagame Defies the West

The Dead and the Undertaker: Rwandan dictator Paul Kagame  threatens the West.

by  David O’Brian

AfroAmerica Network.

London, Great Britain, March 20, 2009

It is often said that the dead doesn’t argue with the undertaker and that one of the most puzzling phenomenon is why criminals return to the scenes of their crimes. By challenging the West on BBC Hard Talk, the Rwandan dictator General Paul Kagame showed that the dead can challenge the undertaker and criminal often returns to the scene of the crime.

December 7, 2006: Paul KAgame defies and threatens FRANCE AND ADMITS TO KILLING HABYARIMANA.

On December 7, 2006, the West was shocked to discover,  on BBC Hard Talk Show hosted by Stephen Sackur,  the true face of the once darling African leader, one President Bill Clinton and his then Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright used to label “the cream of the new breed of Africa leaders.”  AfroAmerica Network had said then that the so much touted rare fruit was crawling with worms, and the world could only be appalled by the degree of the stinking rot displayed by the Rwandan dictator on one of the most reputable media in the World.

As if not satisfied, or rather like a criminal that goes back to the scene of the crime, Paul Kagame did it again on March 17, 2009. The only significant change was the date. The protagonists were the same: Stephen Sackur, the smart and engaging journalist trying to make a sense of the psychopathic mind of a dictator out of touch and ideas. The questions started where they were left off three years ago.

Let us go back to December 7, 2006.

With an unprecedented mastery of the Great Lakes Region of Africa geopolitical issues and challenges, Stephen Sackur relentlessly pursued the dictator of Rwanda, Paul Kagame. In a confrontational interview that lasted more than 20 minutes, neither Kagame nor Sackur gave away land. Kagame tried to intimidate the journalist, and the journalist retaliated with a mastery of his stuff and a calm that disarmed the dictator and led him to commit public relations mistakes that viewers may have not forgotten.

Yet, the interview was to boost the public standing of Paul Kagame, after he and his henchmen were indicted by the anti-terrorist French Judge Brugiere for the terrorist attack in 1994 on a civilian plane that carried the late Rwandan President Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira  and their staff. Everyone on the plane, including the French crew, perished. After an inquiry conducted over 12 years, the reputed Judge Brugiere concluded that Paul Kagame ordered the terrorist attack and was assisted by 9 of his closest aides. International arrest warrants were issued against the nine aides by the French Justice System in late November 2006, while Kagame, as a head of state enjoys immunity, waiting for a ruling to try him through the International Criminal Court. Since then , the Spanish judicial system followed with their own indictments of 40 of Paul Kagame’s top aides for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.

General Paul Kagame  was used to the British media rolling the red carpet and covering him with praises, perhaps out of empathy stemming from the 1994 tragic events or for the lack of interest in the Great Lakes region of Africa. The dictator used to talk  while the media listened. It must have been with anticipation that he entered the studios of BBC Hard Talk.

Alas, things did not go the way he anticipated.  In December 2006, General Paul Kagame discovered with horror and stupefaction that  the British media landscape had changed.  Stephen Sackur showed him that British journalists can do their homework, and that the empathy and guilt, as any strong and unfounded emotions,  may always wane down. Sackur folded his sleeves instead of being lectured by an African dictator, be he a friend and confident of some in the British political establishment, especially the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, now his personal advisor.

The highlight of the interview came when Stephen Sackur asked: “But do you believe you had a right to assassinate him [President Habyarimana]?” and

President Paul Kagame answered: “No,  no,  no! … for Habyarimana’s death. I don’t care ! I wasn’t responsible for his security. He wasn’t responsible for mine either. And he wouldn’t have cared if I had died. I don’t care that it happened to him. I was fighting that government, the government that made me a refugee for those years, for which I had a right to fight about, and the judge wants to ask me why?”

Like many who watched the show, Stephen Sackur was visibly shocked by these words from a head of state,  What was the dictator thinking?  But that was just an appetizer of what was to come on March 17, 2009.

March 17, 2009: Paul KAgame defies and threatens the West AND ADMITS TO DESTROYING EASTERN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

There are multiple hypotheses why a criminal returns to the scene of the crime: to retrieve their forgotten or lost weapon,  to admire their work or correct mistakes that may have been made,  or  to get caught  and earn fame.

Few may ever fathom why after the 2006 blunder and sheer stupid performance General Paul Kagame returned on BCC Hard Talk to be grilled by Stephen Sackur.

Perhaps, as it is known,  Paul Kagame does not want to listen to reason: he is the Head of State, he has brought Hutus under control and they voted for him almost 100%. No one can tell him what to do or say; not to do or not say: he is  the leader- the supreme leader- and he does not care about anything or anyone else.

And that what Stephen Sackur and all the BBC Hard Talk viewers may have gotten. Perhaps that was his mission, or perhaps he is just plain idiot.

The staff of BBC studios who saw him, for the second time, on March 17, 2009, may have felt the same chill down the spine they felt when they once again looked into  Kagame’s protruding and blood injected eyes, watched his menacing gestures towards the journalist and the world, and listened to his legendary “I don’t care” tantrums. They may have been comforted in their Western citizenship, happy for not being Rwandans, both Hutus and Tutsis, who daily face the dictator’s ire.

As he did in 2006, on March 17, 2009 Paul Kagame, confronted with basic international affairs, showed he is not atop of national and world issues. Once again the case of the Congolese rebel General Nkunda imprisoned in Rwanda was raised and he didn’t care. His excuses remained the same:  justifying his mistakes and crimes by the undying love of and for his people, whose majority happens to be the oppressed Hutus and less connected Tutsis.

In 2006 he blamed the interference and arrogance of France, this time around he blamed the naivety, ignorance, and arrogance of the West.

Instead of facing his problems he found scapegoats,  In 2006 he blamed France for supplying weapons to Hutus, this time he went to length of indicting MONUC for supplying the weapons to Hutu rebels.

The journalist conceded that Paul Kagame may have concealed the recruitment of children in Rwanda and the money provided by  his personal advisor and confident Rujugiro, but he asked a simple question:  How about the tanks firing into Congo across the border from Rwanda in support of Lauren Nkunda’s rebel forces.

But Kagame doesn’t care.

Once again the journalist appealed to him by pointing out that he is  the president of Rwanda and should care about the case of his the confident, Rujugiro,  providing hundreds of dollars to Nkunda?

On holding Nkunda, Kagame blatantly said he is holding him outside the legal process, for political reasons, like millions of Rwandan who have been rotting in jails and dungeons for the last 15 years without trial or legitimate accusations. As a good African dictator he lent his support to none other than Bashir, the indicted President of Sudan.

In 2006, Stephen Sackur concluded:”You are a president of a nation. Do you believe it is responsible for you to seat here on this program and suggest that the Prime Minister of France was actively involved, colluded in the slaughter of a million people.”

Despite the wise warning, Kagame, like a dog biting his tail, responded in 2006: “I don’t need any advice”.

In 2009, Kagame pounded: “What I do not want is the arrogance of the West.”

Stephen Sackur was just shocked.  What went in Stephen Sackur’s mind in his last last minutes of interview when he remained silent, like some one struck on the head by a mysterious force?  He may forever wonder how, for the second time, a head of state may be so careless, tactless, arrogant, ignorant, and aggressive to the point of defying the entire West, after putting the Great Lakes region of Africa on the knees.

But our question is: What West the dictator of Rwanda was talking about? The West that keeps him on life support or the West that threatens to cut the lifeline. Either way, the dead may be challenging the undertaker.

©AfroAmerica Network, 2009

{ 0 comments }

Ethnic Genocide Without Ethnics

My argument with a Rwandan Official, Olivier Ndugungirehe, a.k.a  Rwemalika on the fallacies of Rwandan Genocide in January 2009:

Me:

Mr. Rwemalika,

You have a way of arguing  typical of some of the attorneys we have here in the US. Don’t take me wrong. Attorney is an honorable job. Your arguments may be flawed, but you defend them with passion. That is why I like you already, with you human flaws.
My brother, most of your arguments appear fallacious. Whether it is due to the lack of understanding or other motives,  I may one day  be able to find out.

Now, let me tell you a little bit about your problems.

1) Your point 3. I was just pointing out possible incongruences and fallacious arguments that may arise from hasty and illogical affirmations. I did not try to make a point the Rwandan government is in Tutsi genocide denial. That would be absurd and I hope your are not that stupid to think I did ( UN recognized “Rwanda genocide”, Rwandan government has created its own Tutsi genocide, but that is another matter for another day). You may simply have missed my sentence just below the points which is: “Beware of such arguments based on political ideology for they can lead to deceptiveness and illogic nightmares. I was reading a translation of the Rwandan history. The Rwandan King Kigeri claimed that there were no ethnic groups in his Kingdom and at the same time, had the motto of advancing the three ethnic groups (“Imbagayinyabutata “).”

By the way, it does not add anything to your argumentation to call me Einstein. This is what we call in English: Appeal to ridicule, ad hominem, or reductio ad Hitlerum, some of the most common fallacies from people short of arguments. Try another way!

2) Your point 1. How do you know that Pascal did not know the identity of those arrested? Where did he say that? (Your apologies are already accepted for your false statements!)

3) Now your point 2.  Again, this is the masterpiece of fallacies in Rwandan genocide and probably a subject for scholars to study. I know the CPPCG provisions. I can send you to so many divergent rulings and opinions on the topic. See Jorgic vs. Germany at the European Court of Human Rights in 2007,  for the intent.  Then see 2004 Prosecutor vs. Radislav Krstic – Appeals Chamber -Judgment -IT-98 33 (2004) ICTY 7 for the access to the group.    Then read the book by M. Hassan Karkar “The Soviet Invasion and the Afghan Response, 1979-1982. After you read them, if you never did, we can talk. Meanwhile, how can one be accused of destroying in whole or in part a group that does not exist, and cannot be identified. Corollary, how can one ignore a group intentionally destroyed in part or in whole, such as Hutu politicians killed in 1994. That is one of the contradictions in the definition of Tutsis and the term “genocide of Tutsis.” The UN Security Council  appeared to have a more prudent approach by qualifying it “Rwandan Genocide.”

4) Your statements in Point 4 are just amazing. So, by questioning the methodologies used by Guardian, I become an Ex-FAR/ Interahamwe sympathizer.  This may be your lowest point in argumentation. Kangura and RTLM were also media, but would you cite them, now?  what would be their standing in Rwandan media if the Ex-FAR/Interahamwe had won the war?

Where did I define  “academic refereed”. If you do not know, refereeing involves subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of experts in the same field. Journals, like Guardian, are edited. The methodology used by Guardian and that led to he title and the content of the article is flawed and does not meet the standards of reference. If you never published in a refereed academic journal, try it. Guardian presented its findings like it was a result of a research work, when we know articles in new papers often do not meet such standards, and certainly the one in Guardian didn’t at all. The journalist may have interviewed “accidents” but made generalizations (dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum) and provided us with his purely personal and irrelevant considerations (argumentum ad hominem and ignoratio elenchi) maybe edited by his journal editors and published by a reputable news outlet (Appeal to authority) and provided us with illogical and possibly erroneous conclusions (all fallacies combined).

You by religiously citing the article without addressing the limitations I pointed out above, you expose yourself to numerous fallacies. And at end you run out of arguments. In other times and places, you would appear stupid.  If you live in the US,  cite  “National Enquirer” in your arguments, and let us have a blast of laughter!!!

By the way, I do not work for an academicaly refereed journal and I do not pretend to. I work for an electronic news media, and I never pretend to use scientific approaches in all our articles. AfroAmerica Network uses journalistic approaches:  gathering, investigating, disseminating fair and balanced news  on events, people, issues, trends, and activities. Nothing less, nothing more.  When ones gives their opinions, we say it.  We systematically refuse to publish outrageous  opinions such as the one published by New Times yesterday claiming Human Rights Watch promotes moral genocide and homosexuality or those published by RTLM and Kangura in their times.  That may say a lot on the work done by New Times, RTLM and Kangura.

In conclusion do not be confused  between these: media, academic journal, judicial investigation, and propaganda.

Enough for the day and I am done on the topic.

Bye good brother.

David O’Brian
DOB, AANET News.

http://www.afroamer ica.net

Théoneste Rwemalika wrote:
>
> Bonjour Monsieur David O’Brien,
> Vous écrivez ceci:

> 1. « Actually, I should even have removed Mr. Kalinganire, as for him, the distinction between Hutu and Tutsi must be clear   ».
> Monsieur O’Brien, je suis désolé de vous le dire mais dans le dernière lettre de Kalinganire, celui-ci n’a jamais affirmé que « the distinction between Hutu and Tutsi must be clear » ! En revanche, il a affirmé que 370 suspects arrêtés dernièrement après les attentats de Kinamba II sont tous d’ethnie Hutu, et ce, avant même qu’il ne connaisse leurs identités respectives ! Pensez-vous alors, cher ami, qu’il soit illogique de demander à Pascal Kalinganire comment il a découvert le groupe ethnique de chacun d’eux ou pensez-vous aussi, comme l’inénarrable Tuvugishukuri, que toute personne arrêtée au Rwanda soit réputée Hutu « jusqu’à preuve du contraire » ?

> 2. « 1) Either Tutsis exist and can be identified or there was no genocide of Tutsis, 2) If there are no Tutsis, then the  Rwandan Government, by claiming genocide of Tutsis,  is de facto a Tutsi extremist government and a liar ».

> Vous devez être dur d’oreille, cher ami, car j’ai suffisamment expliqué cela sur ce site, mais je le réexplique volontiers. Les « ethnies » rwandaises n’ont aucune existence matérielle ou juridique. Bien. Cependant, en 1994 non seulement ces ethnies avaient une existence juridique (figurant sur les cartes d’identité) mais surtout, les Interahamwe et autres génocidaires ont massacré, «  comme tel  », ceux qu’ils considéraient comme Tutsi, qu’ils possédassent les cartes d’identité Tutsi ou pas !
> En d’autres termes, le génocide ne se définit pas en fonction de la réalité matérielle ou juridique des ethnies, elle se définit en fonction de l’intention spéciale du génocidaire, qui est celle de « détruire, en tout ou en partie, un groupe national, ethnique, racial ou religieux, comme tel  » (article 2 de la Convention pour la prévention et la répression du crime de génocide ».
> A titre d’illustration, vous êtes d’accord avec moi que les sous-clans transversaux (banyiginya, bega, basinga etc.) ont encore moins de réalité matérielle ou juridique que nos fameuses ethnies. Cependant, si d’aventure un dirigeant rwandais, par exemple « singa », décide de détruire, en tout ou partie, les « groupes » nyiginya ou ega, il s’agira bien évidemment d’un génocide même si la moitié des victimes de ce génocide ne savait même pas à quel « groupe » ils appartenaient !

> Vous commencez à comprendre maintenant, cher David O’Brien ?

> 3. « 3) If there are no Tutsis, then the Rwanda Government is a revisionist and in genocide denial  »

> Dites-moi Einstein, même selon votre logique, quel génocide aurait donc nié le Gouvernement rwandais, si vous dites vous-même qu’il a fait exactement le contraire, à savoir reconnaître un génocide qui n’existe pas  ? En d’autres termes, comment diable pouvez-vous accuser le gouvernement rwandais tout (reconnaître un génocide qui n’existe pas) et son contraire (nier le génocide)? Heureusement que le ridicule ne tue pas !
> 4. « Now,  you certainly know that citing the Guardian to make your point is a fallacy in itself. First, because publication does not mean truth,  Guardian is not even an academically refereed journal and the sample drawn for its research may be biased and not statistically sound » .
> Nous y voilà ! Eh bien, il fallait le dire plus tôt, cher ami, que vous n’êtes rien d’autre qu’un sympathisant des Ex-FAR/Interahamwe et autres génocidaires ! Dites-moi, David O’Brien, êtes-vous entrain de nous dire qu’un « academically refereed journal » est seulement un journal qui critique le Gouvernement rwandais mais que tout journal qui ose critiquer les mouvements génocidaires perdent immédiatement cette qualité ? Permettez-moi de rire, cher ami !
> Rappelez-moi, pour quel « academically refereed journal » travaillez-vous déjà ?
> Bonne journée.
>   Rwemalika Théoneste

ME:
— En date de : Mar 6.1.09, David O’Brian <afro@afroamerica. net> a écrit :

De: David O’Brian <afro@afroamerica. net>
Objet: *DHR* Unanswered Question to Mr. Rwemalika on 370 Hutu arrests

À: rwandanet@yahoogrou ps.com, janvierhabyara@ yahoo.com, agaculama_mu_ ikibunda@ yahoo.com
Cc: “Alison DesForges” <desfora@hrw. org>, Democracy_Human_ Rights@yahoogrou pes.fr
Date: Mardi 6 Janvier 2009, 17h27
Mr Rwemalika,

You know you did not provide answers to my questions. Actually, I should even have removed Mr. Kalinganire, as for him, the distinction between Hutu and Tutsi must be clear.

Your brief and vague answer raised even a more serious issue, which again underlines the fallacies in your argument:

1) Either Tutsis exist and can be identified or there was no genocide of Tutsis,

2) If there are no Tutsis, then the  Rwandan Government, by claiming genocide of Tutsis,  is de facto a Tutsi extremist government and a liar.

3) If there are no Tutsis, then the Rwanda Government is a revisionist and in genocide denial
Beware of such arguments based on political ideology for they can lead to deceptiveness and illogic nightmares. I was reading a translation of the Rwandan history. The Rwandan King Kigeri claimed that there were no ethnic groups in his Kingdom and at the same time, had the motto of advancing the three ethnic groups (“Imbagayinyabutata “)

Now,  you certainly know that citing the Guardian to make your point is a fallacy in itself. First, because publication does not mean truth,  Guardian is not even an academically refereed journal and the sample drawn for its research may be biased and not statistically sound.

For example, the article in Guardian concludes: “It is not that we have to develop an ideology of hatred against the Tutsis. It’s just that people should see what’s happening.”

And, contrary to your claim, Guardian knows how to tell Hutu and Tutsis apart.

This flies in the face of your using the article itself.  By the way, is it a coincidence that the article was written in May 2008, when the invasion of DRC by Rwandan-led Nkunda’s Tutsi forces was being hatched, and suddenly  the Rwandan Government cites the article , the Burundian Tutsis cite the article, and Nkunda’s Tutsi cites it, all to justify their actions?

And now you cite it.  Beware of such articles. Word of a journalist.

Regards.

David O’Brien
Editor
AfroAmerica Network (AANET).
http://www.afroamer ica.net

>  Théoneste Rwemalika wrote:
> Bonjour Monsieur David O’Brian
> Au Rwanda, les ethnies n’ont aucune existence matérielle (territoire, couleur de peau, culture, langue, religion, mode de vie) ou juridique (documents d’identité ethniques) mais elle a toujours une existence « mentale » dans les esprits de certains de nos compatriotes, surtout les extrémistes. A titre d’illustration, je qualifie les FDLR de « mouvement ethniste Hutu» parce qu’eux-mêmes se considèrent comme Hutu et enseignent même à leurs jeunes recrues la haine contre les Tutsi (cfr le dernier reportage de  The Guardian, intitulé « FDLR : We have to Kill Tutsis wherever they are »).
> Cependant, vous avec posé une excellente question à notre ami Pascal Kalinganire ; il devrait donc vous révéler le secret qu’il a utilisé pour découvrir que les suspects dernièrement arrêtés sont tous d’ethnie Hutu alors qu’il ne connaît même pas l’identité d’aucun d’eux !

> Bonne journée.

> Rwemalika Théoneste

> — En date de : Lun 5.1.09, David O’Brian <afro@afroamerica. net> a écrit :

ME:

De: David O’Brian <afro@afroamerica. net>

Objet: [rwandanet] Question to Mr. Rwemalika and Kalinganire on 370 Hutu arrests
À: rwandanet@yahoogrou ps.com, “Janvier Habyarimana” <janvierhabyara@ yahoo.com>, “Agaculama mu Ikibunda” <agaculama_mu_ ikibunda@ yahoo.com>, “Donat Muneza” <dmuneza@yahoo. fr>, “Léopold Munyakazi” <cmunyakazi2@ yahoo.fr>, “Michel Niyibizi” <michelni2001@ yahoo.fr>, “rwanda-l” <rwanda-l@egroups. com>, “Maurice Shankuru” <m_shankuru3000@ yahoo.fr>, “Théophile Umujyambere” <theohumu@yahoo. fr>

Date: Lundi 5 Janvier 2009, 22h12

Our understanding is that ethnic groups do not exist in the new Rwanda. How is it possible to have Hutu and, for the matter, Hutu extremist groups in Rwanda?  How does anyone distinguish Hutu from Tutsi?

Now, if there exist Hutu extremist groups, and that the government arrests 370 Hutu, which seems exaggerated for such a single criminal incident, hence arbitrary, doesn’ t this mean there is persecution of Hutu?
Further, suppose ethnic groups still exist in Rwanda and that a group is composed of Hutus, alone. Does it really mean the group is extremist?

I think yours is a fallacious argument. In fact, randomly pick anyone in Rwanda, and I have 85% Hutu. Suppose a group of farmers, in a village populated with mostly Hutu create a tontine, and it happens that only Hutu women voluntarily enroll. Does the group become extremist, sexist?

I thought “Extremism” is defined by ideology not the background.

Finally, is it possible that “le mouvement terroriste auquel ils seraient membres actifs” IS NOT ” un mouvement ethniste” , whereas the government that arrests the 370 is the one that is “ETHNISTE” for it targets only Hutus among Tutsis an Hutus that form the group?
Just curious and thanks for your answers.

David O’Brian.
Editor, AfroAmerica Network (AANET);
www.afroamerica.net

{ 0 comments }

New Times: Media or Propaganda

Right to Respond.

From: Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD

To: New Times Editors

Dear Editors of New Times,

As this year 2008 touches its end, I take the opportunity to address you this note: a right to
respond. I challenge you to publish this brief commentary, if not out of fairness, at least to show that in your profession you strive for accepting opinions from various quarters, uncomfortable as these opinions may make you. My intention is not to sway you in your own opinions, rather to persuade you that the role of a journalist comes with the obligation of “gathering and dissemination of information while striving for non-bias viewpoint.”
Over 2008, your reporting on “select” events, trends, issues, and people should make you proud of your journal. Unfortunately, your reporting on anything related to the RPF regime and its opposition, especially your articles on the Rally for Unity and Democracy (RUD-Urunana) and Rally of the Rwandan People (RPR), appears not to have met the challenges and professional standards of you mission.
Earlier this year, in the article “The drama of Fdlr/rud-urunana disarmament in Lubero, DR Congo” you wondered how “Kanyamibwa, an extremist who controls FDLR/RUD who had recently objected to voluntary disarmament after the May, 2008 Kisangani meeting, would freely come to the FDLR/RUD combat zone”. A few things to point out from article:
First, New Times knows too well the difference between FDLR and RUD-Urunana. I assume,
and hope, the amalgam is the result of a lapse of attention in New Times editorial process than the product of ill feelings of the journalist who wrote the article or of a despicable propaganda inserted into the work of a reputed journal. In any case, let New Times make necessary corrections: RUD-Urunana is not associated with FDLR in anyway, shape, or form.
Second, I, Felicien Kanyamibwa, could not object to Kisangani process, for I am the signatory to the Kisangani roadmap, as the representative of National Democratic Congress (NDC), a
coalition of Rwandan armed groups of RUD and RPR engaged in the peace process. The
roadmap, a copy of which you must have, was agreed upon in Rome, between the NDC and the RDC government, with the facilitation of San’Egidio Community, and published in Kisangani in front of an overwhelming number of congolese people and leaders, members of the International Community, and representatives of all the permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Third, in Kasiki, I was invited by both the DRC government and the International Community, which includes the Rwandan Government as well. As a matter of fact, representatives of the Rwandan government were present, along with representatives of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. I, personally, had a pleasant chat with the representatives of the Rwandan government. Some members of the Rwandan delegation were equally happy to see, hug, and talk to their former RPA comrades, now RPR members based in Kasiki.

Forth, New Times rightfully notes than Major Gerard Ntashamaje, a Tutsi, former high-ranking member of the RPA and RPF and President of RPR, is engaged in the process and was in Kasiki.

Most of the RPR troops, based in Kasiki are Tutsis and have been living and conducting other
activities with RUD-Urunana troops of Armee-Nationale Imboneza since 2006. How can then
the term extremist be applied in these circumstances? Our cause would be as just and legitimate, regardless of the ethnic background of those, with legitimate aspirations, who would be pursuing it. However, the presence of all the components of the Rwandan social and historical fabric reinforces the confidence of the Rwandan people in the legitimacy of our struggle, the positive goals of our purposes, and the visionary path set by the leaders.
Regarding our aspirations, they may be resumed in one simple and short sentence: Rwanda
belongs to all Rwandans. In January 2008, after I visited the DRC, I challenged General Paul
Kagame, in our 24 January 2008 statement in Kinshasa on peace in the Great Lakes Region,
“for reconstructing the Rwandan nation on a model [not] based on the failed past, but a future
Rwanda where our descendants will rise above what has until now divided Rwandans; a
Rwanda where our children and our descendants will not live in the confrontation but rather
would spend their time exploring and putting into practice solutions for the development of
Rwanda.”
Yet again, in Kasiki, on July 31, 2008, I invited General Paul Kagame to open the doors for the Rwandan refugees to go home. I invited him, first as a man, second as a former refugee, and third as a leader. The challenge has been the constance of our calls and we are willing to meet General Paul Kagame anytime with the facilitation of genuine mediators. New Times may choose to call our offer “a heap of insults,” but this will not change the reality and the urgency of acting now, before it is too late. I equally summon the leaders of Rwanda, most of whom were former refugees, and call on the rwandan media, in which New Times plays a predominant role.
As I recently posted on one internet group, General Paul Kagame has two choices: either he is a leader, then he will have to move beyond bitterness and retribution, or he remains a man
whose tragic life would only be remembered as the untamed source of a river of blood. Yes, he spent 30 years in exile. Mandela spent close to those years in jail, with daily forced labor. Even before his liberation from prison, Mandela, a great leader, chose to free himself from the venom of hatred. As soon as Mandela came to the decision, he became a free man. If he had not made that decision, no one can fathom what would have become of South Africa after he became president.
Kagame failed to become a leader when he took power in 1994, and chose to remain the
prisoner of his hatred and resulting vices, and mounted on the back of a baby tiger. For 14 years he has been sitting on the back of a growing tiger. He should not wait until the tiger becomes a beast. New Times needs to help General Kagame and his regime not to fall prey to absolute power and radicalism. Past experiences show that journals that heaped praises on misguided leaders and overlooked the plight of the people, ended up doing a disservice to the entire nation.

The choice is New Times’ : a reputed journal or an instrument of propaganda.

Regards,
Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.
New York, USA
Tel: 201-794-6542
December 23, 2008

{ 0 comments }