JOURNEYING THROUGH THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF THE GENOCIDE IN RWANDA
2.4 Post-colonial Rwanda (1962-1994): Learning from the past?
2.4.2. Execution of the Genocide against the Tutsi
54
entourage of few dignitaries close to the President Juvenal Habyarimana and his wife’s families organised its militia, Interahamwe which at the beginning was the youth association of the ruling party. Hutu-power factions refer to the political parties’
factions created since 1993 and who opposed the power sharing with the Rwandese Patriotic Front composed mainly by Tutsi in exile and who wanted to return to their homeland.
55
Habyarimana regime feared losing power (Jones, 2002). In this regard, anti-Tutsi propaganda was organised through the media. The literature mainly from Rwandan refugees, states that the Genocide was due to the anger of the population caused by the death of their President (IRDP, 2005). However, there are other examples of presidents who were killed but their deaths were not necessarily followed by extermination. The death through the grounding of the presidential airplane on April 6, 1994 led to an attempt to exterminate all Tutsi and democrat Hutu in opposition (Chrétien, 1995; Dallaire, 2004; Hron, 2011; IRDP, 2005; Melvern, 2000; Prunier, 1997; Rutembesa, 2011b; Verwimp, 2011).
The airplane crash is considered in some documents (Lemarchand, 1995; National Curriculum Development Centre, 2011; Robinson & Ghahraman, 2008) as the immediate cause of the Genocide and others (Rutembesa, 2011b) reject it and consider it as a pretext to the Genocide. They argue as such because there were other reasons such as the exclusion policy, hatred propaganda and repetitive killings of the Tutsi which could lead to the same catastrophe. However, Rutembesa does not provide any other incident which in his view provoked the Genocide. It can thus be argued that the extermination of the Tutsi was possible and was motivated by a range of different reasons.
Regarding the grounding of the presidential jet near Kigali International Airport, the airplane was carrying not only the Rwandan President and some of his collaborators, but also the Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira. There are controversies around the persons involved in the crash. For Des Forges (1999, p.255) “the RPF [Rwandese Patriotic Front], politicians opposed to Habyarimana and the circle of his own supporters all might have wanted the Rwandan president dead and could have found the means to bring down his plane”. Some scholars posit that the Rwandese Patriotic Front was considered responsible for this act (Onana & Mushayidi, 2002;
Prunier, 1997; Reyntjens, 1996). Chrétien (1995) rejected this view and added that Onana’s publisher, Duboiris, who is accusing the Rwandese Patriotic Front, is not even recorded on the professional listings of publishers. According to Rutembesa (2011b), the hypothesis of accusing the Rwandese Patriotic Front was put forward by French officials as their government had supported the former regime against the Rwandese Patriotic Front. An electronic source revealed that in France, the
56
intelligence departments do not have the same view as the author on the event (Rigaud, 2013).
The defeated leaders and different political associations in exile and persons working closely with the French army were also identified by Rutembesa (2011b) as advocates of the Rwandese Patriotic Front hypothesis. For the supporters of Rwandese Patriotic Front theory, the killing of the president was a sabotage of the Arusha Peace agreement signed by two parties in August 1993. Secondly, it aimed at evicting a president who had prevented the Rwandese Patriotic Front from seizing power by force. The grounding of the airplane is also seen as way of taking power without sharing as planned in the Arusha agreement (Reyntjens, 1996; Rutembesa, 2011b). Thus, one argument is that the Genocide was a result of anger due to the death of the President. Longman (2010) rejects the idea that the Genocide was a result of a spontaneous uprising of the Hutu population against the Tutsi, and that these events were inevitable. He emphasizes the organization of the Genocide by the government and military officials, who in several cases had to intervene in order to see that the Genocide was fully accomplished (Longman, 2010).
Another explanation related to the grounding of the presidential airplane underlines the role of the Habyarimana’s circle and members of his family-in-law helped by foreign military experts (Prunier, 1997). To kill the president was a way of creating confusion and disorder leading to the failure of the Arusha peace agreements and to the elimination of Tutsi and Hutu opponents. The inner circle of President Habyarimana is also accused by the current Government of Rwanda which affirms that the former Rwandese Army Forces had acquired 16 -surface-to-air missiles used to ground the airplane. In addition, the former army had been trained by the French Army to manipulate the missiles. A government report reveals that the missiles should have targeted the presidential plane from Kanombe hill which hosted Kanombe military camp instead of Masaka as previously argued by Jean Louis Bruguière, who was the leading French investigating magistrate in charge of counter- terrorism affairs, who had accused the Rwandese Patriotic Front of having grounded the plane (République du Rwanda, 2009).
57
The third explanation for the Genocide accuses foreign diplomats and military troops based on the reactions of Belgian and French soldiers in Rwanda after the death of the president. It is claimed that after the crash white soldiers were on the scene of the accident (Rutembesa, 2011b). Briefly, there are different views on President Habyariman’s death considered on one hand by some people as the immediate cause of the Genocide but also on the other hand rejected by others. The purpose of describing all these views is not to find who is guilty but rather to show different viewpoints on this sensitive issue which can be challenged by looking at their weaknesses or strengths through available evidence. In general, there is no unique cause of this unimaginable Genocide, they are multiple and intertwined. Some causes, such as the demographic aspects seem to have been facilitating factors while others such as the power of ideology which led to the discriminative policies (Chrétien, 2005; Newbury, 1995; Verwimp, 2005) seem to have played a determinant role.
The extremist Hutu ideologues used the death of the president as a tool for anti-Tutsi propaganda and the extermination started across the whole country to avenge President Habyarimana’s death. One day after his death the most important political opponents were killed, some of whom were Hutu. The same day the killings engulfed almost the whole country with the aim of killing Tutsi and weakening the political opposition. At the outset, the population was not aware that the Tutsi were targeted and consequently some Hutu requested Tutsi families to hide them (Des Forges, 1999; Rutembesa, 2011b).
After the death of President Habyarimana, the new government which was composed of leaders from the five most important political parties Mouvement Républicain National pour le development et la Démocratie, Mouvement Démocratique Républicain, Parti Social Démocrate, Parti Libéral and Parti Démocrate Chrétien extended the killings in the until then untouched southern and central regions of Rwanda (Newbury, 1998). The population involved in the killings was pushed to nullify Tutsi resistance in some places such as Bisesero, Nyarubuye and Rwamagana (Ndayisaba, 2011).
58
Different factors led to the failure of the resistance by the targeted people. Victims’
harsh living conditions, the country controlled by organisers, vicinity between victims and perpetrators because the former were hidden in known places, imbalance of weapons, and the high number of perpetrators led to the reversal of Tutsi resistance.
Moreover, the Tutsi were defeated for instance in Rwamagana due to the support of the militia and soldiers from other places (Ndayisaba, 2011). The involvement of the interim government through the distribution of firearms to Interahamwe militia or to the population as means of civilian auto-defence and the control of identity cards at roadblocks weakened the resistance (Des Forges, 1999). Resisters to the Genocide in places such as Bisesero or the Bugesera swamps seem to have been largely self- sufficient, but others, through flight, hiding, or buying their safety usually survived by means of help from the Hutu (Des Forges, 1999).
There were different strategies used in the Genocide killings. In the beginning the killings targeted either specific individuals or the Tutsi as a group. Firstly, Hutu leaders who could legally seize power and who could oppose the Genocide were eliminated. Their names were sometimes broadcasted on Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines. Secondly, the Tutsi became the target. They had taken refuge mainly in administrative offices or churches. Travelling documents were refused to the Tutsi and they were hunted from their shelters and killed (Des Forges, 1999; Rutembesa, 2011b).
The genocidal acts were committed by using different weapons “grenade, gun, machete, impiri (club), sword, knife, drowning, arson, stick, rock, and barehanded assault” (Straus, 2004, p.88). Other techniques in killing and torturing were also utilized such as to drown people in rivers, to throw grenades into a crowd of victims, to hit children against walls or trees and by slicing tendons (Des Forges, 1999;
Jones, 2002; Straus, 2004). In the process of exterminating the Tutsi and their Rwandese Patriotic Front accomplices analogies and agricultural metaphors were used in coded message. For instance, killing was compared to farming or extermination to a “job” (Hron, 2011).
The killings were organized by different institutions and people. Firstly, the role of the Rwandan government was obvious because killers were not prevented from
59
continuing their extermination process or brought to justice as can be gleaned from the following passage:
On April 10, Colonel Gatsinzi then temporarily chief of staff, and the Ministry of Defense ordered subordinated to halt the killings of civilians, using force if necessary. The Ministry of Defense sent a second, weaker command on April 28
“to cooperate with local authorities to halt pillage and assassinations.” But neither the general staff nor the Ministry of Defense enforced the orders, leaving subordinated to conclude that the directives had no importance. In fact, as some officers had observed from the start, the authorities countermanded the official orders by another message, passed discreetly to like-minded officers who executed the informal order to kill rather than the official directive to stop the killings (Des Forges, 1999, p.177).
Des Forges (1999) attempted to clarify the composition of the perpetrators of the Genocide. Kimonyo (2008) talks about a popular Genocide because people from all layers of the society were involved. In fact, criminals, clergymen, political leaders, elites, unemployed youth, peasants and ordinary people were all involved. Among ordinary people are those who since 1990 were displaced by the war between the Rwandese Patriotic Front and the then government. Another category of perpetrators was composed of non-Rwandan citizens. This category included Hutu refugees from Burundi. In Southern Rwanda, there were mostly 400 000 Hutu Burundian refugees (Newbury, 1995). By killing Tutsi, Burundian refugees wanted to avenge Melchior Ndadaye, the Hutu President of that country. Furthermore, members of the army also aided in the killings by distributing firearms. The Interahamwe paramilitary group, which was supported by Akazu (Kissi, 2004; Scherer, 2002), and other political parties’ militia also participated in the Genocide. Another category of perpetrators came from other institutions such as the media. For instance, Rwanda Radio and the Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines propagated hatred propaganda and revealed where victims were hidden (Allen & Norris, 2011; Des Forges, 1999; Kissi, 2004; Rutembesa, 2011b; Thompson, 2007; Verwimp, 2011;
Yanagizawa-Drott, 2014).
Gender violence was another aspect of the Genocide against the Tutsi. After targeting men supposed to have ties with the Rwandese Patriotic Front, rich men, educated Tutsi and mature learners, the perpetrators directed their extermination plan against women, children, the elderly and other apolitical persons (Jones, 2002).
Women suffered greatly during the tragedy because they were raped, massacred
60
and subjected to other brutalities (Des Forges, 1999; Jones, 2002; Mukamana &
Brysiewicz, 2008; Uwizeye, 2011) such as the cutting off of breasts or the disembowelment of pregnant women (Straus, 2004). The number of raped women is controversial. For instance, Shyaka (2011) advances a figure of 6 689 raped women.
Other sources mention an “estimate of 250,000 to 500,000 rapes committed during the 12 weeks of the genocide” (Jones, 2002, p.81).
The role of the Rwandese Patriotic Front to halt the Genocide was also decisive.
After the refusal of its proposition by the Rwandan Army to collaborate with the United Nations Mission of Assistance in Rwanda to save victims, the Rwandese Patriotic Front decided to intervene through three axes (East, West and Kigali City Centre). The third axis had the mission to break the blockade against the Rwandese Patriotic Front battalion in charge of protecting the Rwandese Patriotic Front officials who were waiting to swear in transitional institutions. This battalion was stationed in the parliament building, Conseil National de Développement).
The strategy was to infiltrate the Government troops, disorganise them by the use of mortar sharing. Some authors note that the target was more a military or political victory than to save Genocide victims (Des Forges, 1999; Kuperman, 2004). Jyoni wa Karega (2011) dismisses this point of view. He posits that the military victory argument is supported by those who wanted to tarnish the Rwandese Patriotic Front image because the purpose of using all these axes was to attract governmental forces in the North to get a quick victory in the East, Central and Southern Rwanda where more Tutsi were being killed. The objective was achieved by saving some Tutsi and capturing certain perpetrators. By July 1994, the interim Government was defeated and fled to Zaïre.
Alongside the military action, the Rwandese Patriotic Front diplomatic battle was also a contributing factor in ending the Genocide. An effort was made to counter the then government propaganda accusing the unjust invasion by the Rwandese Patriotic Front supported by Uganda to be one of the causes of the Genocide (Jyoni wa Karega, 2011; Kuperman, 2004). Kuperman’s interviews with Rwandese Patriotic Front high cadres affirmed that they were aware that the continuation of the war would cause the death of some Tutsi as retaliation but on a small scale. But, this
61
does not justify the injustice against Tutsi in Rwanda since the late 1950s and the systematic killings which were organised during the Genocide. The Rwandese Patriotic Front delegations managed to convince the United Nations that what was happening in Rwanda was a genocide. Another diplomatic campaign was against the biased French peacekeeping mission in Rwanda. Furthermore, a diplomatic effort was made to get the change of the United Nations peacekeeping mission mandate so that it can protect civilians and to end the Genocide chaos. However, some international institutions such as the African Unity Organisation noted human rights violations against Hutu population during and after the Genocide due to new recruited soldiers who avenged their relatives killed during the Genocide. In all, the Rwandese Patriotic Front was able in military and diplomatic domains to oppose the Genocide (Jyoni wa Karega, 2011).
Despite the intention to exterminate the Tutsi, some Rwandans were not bystanders.
They risked their lives by hiding Tutsi and other targeted people. Some accounts reveal how the Hutu cooperated with the Tutsi to push back killers and some of them died saving Tutsi (Buhigiro, 2011; Kabwete, 2007). The resistance against the perpetrators of the Genocide was guided by the courage of some Hutu to save other human beings. Some Hutu also saved targeted people due to political or familial ties.
Another category of people ambiguously preferred to hide some victims but also participated in the killings (Fujii, 2009). These Hutu who saved Tutsi were considered by the authorities, the Rwanda Radio and Radio Télévision Libre des Mille collines as traitors (Des Forges, 1999; Rutembesa, 2011b). They were intimidated by having their houses attacked.
In spite of Tutsi killings, there is a conceptual tension about what happened. The United Nations has put into place the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda through the resolution number 955 of 08 November 1994 to punish those who committed the Genocide and other human rights violation in Rwanda. However, the use of the term Genocide in the Rwandan context is still denied by some scholars.
They equate it to simple war between Hutu and Tutsi (IRDP, 2006; Kambanda, 2014). Some lawyers acting for perpetrators base their denial on the fact that “all the top Rwandan military officers, including the supposedly infamous Colonel Bagosora, were found not guilty of conspiracy or planning to commit the genocide” (Erlinder,
62
2008, p.2). As Genocide preparation was not proved by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, they argue that it was not a genocide. Other reasons include the fact that all Interahamwe were not Hutu and that people who died included Tutsi, Hutu, Twa and foreigners killed by both the Interahamwe and the Rwandese Patriotic Front (Kambanda, 2014). Genocide is therefore considered by these scholars as massacres or civil war. On the other hand some scholars argue that the Tutsi were killed as a target group and a genocidal continuum can be traced through Rwandan history (Gouteux, 2002; Rutembesa, 2011b). Moreover, Bizimana declared that the Hutu killed during the Genocide must be considered as victims of crime against humanity (Ntakirutimana, 2014). The next section looks at the role of the international community during the Genocide. Understanding the role of different actors in the Genocide is of paramount importance because it is stated in the history curriculum. In addition, it is important to know different reactions of the international community to know to what extent different countries or institutions contributed to deter the genocidal process.