Historians and myths agree that the Twa were the first proprietors of Rwanda, then the Hutu group and lastly the Tutsi group. Although it was believed that the Twa were the owners of Rwanda, the creator of Rwanda, Gihanga, did not belong to the Twa group. The myth seems to be quiet about this matter. All Abami b‟Imishumi and Abami b‟Ibitekerezo, belonged to the Abanyiginya clan of the Tutsi group (Overdulve 1997: 13, Nkusi 2004: 60, Vansina 2001:
13).
The consideration that there was only one clan from one group which could be predestinated to rule would contribute to confusing the understanding of the Rwandan context of the three social groups. Myths and historians agree on the absence of a Twa or Hutu king in Rwanda; the kingship was the property of a few Tutsi, Abanyiginya. The reason for this segregation was not clearly defined. The only explanation was given by a myth telling that Abanyiginya were ibimanuka, meaning that they came from heaven. Therefore they came with a super-natural power to rule that was the only explanation of the hereditary power of the Nyiginya clan.
This hereditary power cannot be interpreted as the property of the Tutsi social group because not all of them had the chance to rotate to the ruling power; history shows that there was some conflict between the Abanyiginya and other clans expressing their disagreement about that predestined power (Vansina 2001: 174, Semujanga 2004: 36, Kajeguhakwa 2001:
12). Throughout history, the Twa were not represented and even later in the genocide tragedy, they were not involved as a key group in the conflict. It was the Hutu and Tutsi groups that were always quarrelling (Kayihura 2004: 166-167).
Although the identity card in itself did not do any harm, in the Rwandan context the way it was conceived became an issue of dehumanization. From the time of the introduction of the identity
51 card, the socialized ethnic groups became a social phenomenon, affecting each individual as a part of society. The population groups felt that they had different origins and were different in matters physical, intellectual, cultural and historical. Because of this, people began thinking that some were superior to others. With time, this developed into hatred, leading to the injustice, oppressions and violence that climaxed in the 1994 tragedy.
The colonial period introduced the identity card that indicated the ethnic group of the bearer.
When the republic replaced the colonial period (the first and second republics 1962-1973; 1973- 1994) the problematic identity card remained as part of the legacy. The socio-political system had always been trapped in these ethnic unrealities, which had become socialized in the community. The republics maintained the same identity card, which enabled the administration to recognize who was who, thus generating discrimination and marginalization in the population.
Therefore inequality became part of the publicly-accepted socio-political element, affecting other sectors such as education and the job market.
The manner of socio-political propaganda used to carry out divisions, particularly between the two social groups, helped the leaders to enlarge the gap generated by the colonizers to advance their own interests. Eisenstadt (1995: 1) explains that ―Men (sic) make their own history, but they do not make it as they please, they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given, and transmitted from the past‖.
This statement applies to the situation in which the first and second republics were created.
2.6.1 Impact of stereotypes developed toward the three social groups
Stereotypes of the social groups have arisen and tend to be seen as reflecting real differences.
These arose as a result of misusing the myths and the misunderstanding that followed concerning the origin of the three groups. Hatred and feelings of superiority and inferiority developed and were internalized throughout the country by political propaganda. The prejudices developed and
52 became political ‗playing cards‘. Any sensitive crisis in Rwanda, leading up to the tragic period of genocide, shows evidence of the ethnic grouping trump card being used. As a result, this hatred later opened the gates and paved the way for violence that culminated in genocide.
The socialization of inequalities through stereotypes was so effective that they became second nature to group members. Giddens (2001: 29-30) delicately defines socialization as ―the primary channel for the transmission of culture over time and generations‖. Some elements of culture impact positively or negatively on its members. One negative legacy among the Rwandan culture is that superiority developed between groups.
One example comes from the classroom. At any time, the teacher could ask the pupils to raise their hands according to their social groups. This caused frustration among pupils because Hutu looked down on Tutsi because they were few in number compared to Hutu pupils. Interestingly, some children did not know which group they belonged to. It sometimes happened that a Hutu child would raise their hand because a Tutsi friend had raised hers or his and vice versa.
The teacher in this case played the role of policeman/woman to soothe the frustrations between pupils, especially the marginalized Tutsi (Mugesera 2004: 125).
2.6.2 Aftermath of „La Révolution Rwandaise de 1959‟
In 1959, the colonial era was in transition to independence. There was upheaval in the community, orchestrated by a group of Hutu intellectuals. These tensions generated a catastrophic situation of threat and the killing of Tutsis. Many refugees belonging to the Tutsi social group, in general, but including a few Hutu and Twa members, fled to neighbouring countries. The expected changes seemed to be a dream for the community, as it was passing out of the colonial era and becoming a republic, ironically an era expected to generate respect for human rights in Rwanda.
53 The major features of the changes observed were only in the circles of the rulers and the population did not benefit much from these changes. Instead of benefiting from the changes, a large portion of the population fled to neighbouring countries and became refugees. From the Tutsi dynasty to the Hutu rulers, the social, political and economic history of Rwanda focuses on the leaders‘ circle; the history of the rest is not known (Jewsiewicki 2002: 127-128, Vansina (2001:13). The leaders included the community in their programme only when they wanted to exploit them in their own interests. This is what happened to the population in the so-called ―la Révolution Rwandaise‖.
The number of refugees increased in 1973 when the second republic overthrew the first. The 1959 and 1973 refugees constituted a major danger to Rwanda and affected diplomatic relations with the neighbouring countries. After this the refugee issue became a political problem and the political propaganda generated to explain what was going on, was to keep alive `the hatred between Hutu and Tutsi (Waller 1996: 8). One of the most pressing problems for the republics was the struggle to deal with ‗mass refugees‘. This created an atmosphere of fear, mistrust and trauma amongst those who did not run the country, the Tutsi social group and a few Hutu (Nkunzumwami 1996: 89).
In time, refugees began asking to come back to their native country. The leaders did not give them the chance to come back peacefully, saying that the country was not large enough to host them. Consequently, the refugees organized themselves into a party called the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) and decided to come back forcefully, because negotiations were becoming very difficult. In 1992, the refugee problem had become sensitive for Tutsis who had not left the country and a few Hutu who believed in the right of refugees to come back to their country.
Mass murders took place after the aircraft crash of Rwanda‘s President, Habyarimana Juvenal, and this incident was the starting point of the killing of people belonging to the Tutsi social
54 group and a few Hutu non-extremists. This upheaval inside the country enhanced Rwanda‘s Patriotic Front army, allowing it to advance quickly from its position in the north of the country to fight against Rwanda‘s National Army, which was orchestrating and leading the massacres. It was the RPF which stopped the genocide after winning the combat involving the whole country.