Rwandan GenocideEssay Preview: Rwandan GenocideReport this essayOne of the genocides that has been in the 1900s is the genocide of Rwanda, a small, poor, central African country. The Rwandan genocide was the systematic extermination of over eight hundred thousand Tutsi, an ethnic group in Rwanda, by the Hutu, another ethnic group in Rwanda. In this essay I will tell you the history of the conflict of the Hutu and Tutsi, the 100 days of genocide in 1994, and what happened on the economy and the people of Rwanda.
First look at the history of the Hutu and the Tutsi. In the early 1900s, the Tutsi were placed in positions of power by Belgium, because they looked “whiter”. Governed by Belgiums racist way of thought, ethnic identity cards were introduced. (www.globalpolicy.org) The Catholic Church supported the Tutsi and the new social order and educated the Tutsi and imposed their religion on them. Though the population of Rwanda was ninety percent Hutu, they were denied land ownership, education, and positions of power. In the 1950s, the end of the colonial period, the Hutu took over the Tutsi government. (BBC) The Hutu maintained the practices of ethnic division, and the Tutsi were forcibly removed from positions of power. Many Tutsi fled from Rwanda and were not allowed to return. Many Tutsi that stayed in Rwanda were killed. The Tutsi were good and the Hutu were evil bastards. Supported by Uganda, the Tutsi formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front, like an army. (PBC) The rebel army was anxious to regain citizenship and their homes in Rwanda, and began a civil war that lasted four years. The world wide coffee market crashed, and coffee being the main export of Rwanda, led to unemployment and hunger of many Rwandans. This, along with pressure from Belgium forced the Hutu to agree to share power with the Tutsi. (BBC) This was a lie, for the Hutu government was secretly planning revenge on the Tutsi. The revenge was the massacre of the Tutsi. With help from Hutu extremists, hate propaganda, sub-humanization of Tutsi, firearms, and machetes were distributed among the Hutu citizens. The extremists assassinated the president for fear of giving in to the Rwandan Patriotic Fronts demands. (BBC)
The killing began on April 6, 1994. (PBC) Checkpoints were set up, covering the major routes and borders around Rwanda. These checkpoints consisted of Hutu military checking ethnic identity cards, if they were Hutu they lived, if they were Tutsi they were killed immediately. Many of the Tutsi gathered in churches, which were considered sacred, but they turned into slaughterhouses where many were massacred. (BBC) The killing lasted for one hundred days. More than eight hundred thousand people were massacred, one third of the Tutsi population being wiped out. During this time there was no outside help from the United States or any other country. The UNAMIR (United nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda) were given orders to stay on “stand by” and were not
mated with civilian government forces until September 1995. This was a very long time; more than 15 years. After the deaths of many Hutu, many other families followed. Around the year 1999, we were notified by the UNAMIR that approximately 8,000 people had been killed or maimed in Rwanda by a Hutu militia during the early years of the occupation. It was estimated that approximately 4,900 are Hutu, of whom there were many, from about 11,000 to 20,000 killed.
• • • •
As you’ve probably noticed, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has a special special interest in the case of the alleged genocide of the Tutsi, under the guise of “peacekeeping.” In 2004, IAEA Special Representative to Rwanda and the President of the United Nations General Assembly Kofi Annan released a statement in his State of the Union address urging the international community to “reassure the community that a proper humanitarian situation can be met between the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the people who constitute a majority of its citizens and are responsible for perpetuating the current crime of genocide against the Tutsi, and for the grave abuses committed in their name.” This declaration, in an effort to bolster African economic development and increase political influence in the area, was approved by Annan. That’s according to Annan in his speech, “No African will ever permit these atrocities to continue.” And, yes, this includes a group of Tutsi militias in Uganda. In April 2006, Annan stated explicitly that the country needs to accept a “political solution” after being unable to meet the situation. The country has been under the control of an armed militia with no political representatives, no state leadership, and no military force capable of maintaining law and order in order to avoid a serious conflict. And yet, many of the Tutsis have refused the peace process, as have most of the national minorities, including some of the most vulnerable minority groups. This is evident in many aspects of the situation. From the political perspective, and especially in light of the fact that we did not have any troops, in most areas that ICAA’s own UNAMI report on the Rwandan government, on the Rwandan Government’s Humanitarian Response in the context and under their control, IEDA has consistently expressed the need to end its occupation and take back control of the country. At the same time, this policy cannot be applied unilaterally as the majority of the Rwandan government would have done. Rather, the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (GDR) needs to be taken out of the conflict altogether. So, if the GDR is serious about a long-term strategic plan to eradicate the Hutu, IEDA has made the case for it, saying “As the government has already said about the political issue in the upcoming talks, we cannot allow it to continue without a political