Is better n
ow or was it better during Habyarimana’s rule? 3,5 millions of victims, most of them still in mass graves. This is what happens if you have a hidden agenda and launch a bloody wise war on the Nation and assasinate, in a terrorist act, its elected leader. At what age do you expect a human being to act like a human being?
And justice becomes selective. While local actors are being punished, the often more powerful international culprits [TONY BLAIR] go untouched. The events in Rwanda in 1994 were not an internal armed conflict. IT’S BLOODY OBVIOUS THERE WAS NO CIVIL WAR IN RWANDA.
They were caused by international intervention from the outside. To limit the discussion one-sidedly to the internal dynamics of Rwandan society and history neglects the fact that it were interventions from the outside, which set the conditions for the catastrophe to unfold and helped one side of the conflict to conduct its military operations. And to add insult to injury, Mr. Tony Blair became Officially Advisor (But Prime minister) of the bloody dictator of Rwanda Paul Kagame. A horrifying act that should land him to the International criminal Court.
Western powers, most prominently the Anglo-American powers with the Francophone powers acting as competing junior partners, have caused the crisis in the Great Lakes region of Africa during the 1980s and 1990s in a two fold manner and are therefore responsible for the human catastrophe that followed.
Often times when involved in conversation about Rwanda’s current social and political affair, many people defend the current administration by excusing its past crimes as accidental to necessary social and political development of the country in various forms of “It had to be done.
It just had to! And seeing how well off the people are now and how much off they would have been (especially the minorities), it’s excusable.” [Report by Uwe Friesecke,Prepared for the ICTR Defense Team]
The people whose lives were lost (3,5 millions mainly Hutus) are characterized as simply collateral, rendering the current government’s past actions immune to law and punishment.
In these people’s eyes, the current Rwandan government is filled with heroes who should be celebrated, instead of punished for crimes which unfortunately still continue today in violation of cardinal human principles.
So let’s consider the killings of 4 million civilians as collateral, who does the current government have to kill in order for their crimes to “count” and be punishable by law. Hmm let’s see…since attacking a peaceful country, for no good reason, other than to take over power and kill its citizens on the way are not good enough reasons…How about the killing of a president? Would that count for something? Maybe not…how about TWO presidents? How about then? Would they still be the anointed saviors that they are today?
Here is an excerpt from a recent article by Andrew G. Marshall entitled,
“Western Involvement in the Rwandan Genocide” where we can perhaps draw some conclusions as to why these guys aren’t going to be held to the same standards as anyone else.America will pimp it until it is no longer useful or at least until it becomes too messy to deal with. And whether it’s playing the role of America’s “hoe” right now, it is still not excused or absolved from it’s crimes.
People please, stop defending those criminals! A crime is a crime, and their crimes were crimes against humanity. They don’t get a pass just because they are another country’s hoe!
Note: Throughout the article, Marshall alternates from saying Rwanda was invaded by the RPF from Uganda, to referring to that war as an incursion to finally referring to it as a civil war. It was not a civil war since the country was attacked.It was an extended invasion/incursion that lasted for over 3 years, culminating in the politicide more commonly knows as the “Rwandan Genocide.”
What I do find “improper” though, and reasons why I concentrate on this so much is the way the tale of what happened in 1994 was told. I have issues with lies that have been perpetuated by the media, and the way the rebels and their sympathizers committed/still commit massacres with IMPUNITY.
Along with how the conflict has been characterized (Hutus are genocidaires, Hutu extremists vs moderate Hutus) and simplified into the attacker/hutu-victim/tutsi scenario, when it’s sooo much more complex than that.
Both sides definitely did have their “fair share of bloody actions” however, the media has disproportionately pinned the blame on one side, and whose people have been getting punished, while some are even innocent. Simply because the world believes they are “genocidaires” then they can be convicted of crimes they never committed.
© Kazamarande Phoïbe,PhD
International Relations
