CHAPTER 8: CRITICAL REFLECTION ON THE DIALOGUES
8.2. Critical reflection on the life stories
8.2.5. Homecoming and reconciliation
During his interview, Fred repeated that those that are abroad need to ‘come home’. He says that only if they are in Rwanda can they begin to work through some of the issues that remain in the reconciliation process. Robert says that it is not easy for young Hutu but that they need to be part of the process. But Francois insists, “I don’t feel okay to go home. They can’t accuse me of anything” but he cites again the injustice and people being put in jail even when they are innocent.
“I don’t know what will happen if I speak out over there.”
On asking Francois if he would consider being part of a focus group, his response was that there would be no chance. “I could not expose myself. It would not be safe. It is not even safe talking to you. I still have family in Rwanda.” Fred, on the other hand, could not understand why open dialogue between himself and Rwandan refugees in other countries would not be possible and found it hard to imagine that others would feel unsafe to be speak freely.
Reginald, however, said that it is just not true that he is free to voice his opinions in Rwanda. “You can’t stand in Kigali and say the RPF killed people”. He
describes how many Rwandans in the north have lost family members to the RPF but that you never hear from them. “Do you think their pain has healed?” he asks.
“If there is no fear in Rwanda, why are we not hearing their stories?”
Fred found it difficult to understand why someone would choose to be a refugee and remain away from home unless the person was in fact guilty or benefiting from being a refugee. When I mentioned that these Hutu men were too young to have been involved in genocide, he suggested that there must be economic gain for them in staying outside. He described how several Hutus he knew had
returned to Rwanda, and through the legal system had reclaimed their properties.
He added that Rwanda needs all the educated people from the outside to come back to help rebuild things and kept reiterating that those outside must “come home, feel free”. Until they feel they are free to speak out, however, Reginald and Francois have no desire to return home.
Reginald suggests that with the way things are going the chances of violence happening are very high. He says the current government is sabotaging itself and that the cost of the truth coming out will be very high. He describes the approach of the current government as confrontational, a case of accepting their way or nothing else. He sees this as a significant block to reconciliation taking place.
On the topic of reconciliation, Francois says that reconciliation doesn’t need to happen between strangers but between “me and the people I am angry with. With strangers it will be like an academic debate. It needs to be between the
government and opposition leaders”. He adds, “The government wants to solve
issues militantly but that’s not going to work. Reconciliation needs to happen from the top.”
Fred feels that there is some progress being made in terms of reconciliation. He says that the government started with justice and is now moving on with things like community work. He thinks it’s a good idea to use those in prison to rebuild the country. He can’t tolerate people who have killed and are now comfortably off, but says their children are welcome to be free in Rwanda. He adds that the
standards are not always high because of a lack of resource, but that they are doing the best they can under the circumstances.
What is evident from Francois’ interview is the high level of fear. There was fear that I was a government spy and fear that other Rwandan refugees may be plants by the Rwandan government to secure information about other refugees. There was a sense that Francois could not trust anyone, even being outside of his country. This same fear was not shared by Robert and Fred, who seemed completely confident of all ordinary Rwandans who wanted to contribute to the development of the country. Fred even said that he would like to buy flight tickets for people who are outside the country just to come and have a look at how things have changed and then to decide if they want to stay or go.
Interestingly, as these interviews were taking place, during mid-October, 2009, news agencies reported that four hundred Rwandans had fled to Burundi to seek refuge there. The reasons for fleeing were as cited as being ‘fear of persecution in Rwanda’. “One said he was acquitted before Rwanda's community-based gacaca courts in 2006 on charges of having burned the house of a Tutsi during the 1994 genocide. In September, though, he was summoned to respond to the same charges, was convicted, and sentenced to 30 years in prison. He fled to Burundi”
(Human Rights Watch, 2009). Alongside this were allegations by some Rwandans that “their neighbors had been taken from their homes in the middle of the night and had not been seen again” (Human Rights Watch, 2009).
These reports give some credence to Francois’ fears and add fuel to the ‘negative feedback loop’ which pervades so much of undercurrents of Rwandan society.
Where Rwandans may want to believe in the governments’ vision, and in the
confidence of Robert and Fred that things are moving forward, other stories
suggest something quite different. Reginald says, “Development is fantastic and is working, but is it working as it should be? It works for the IMF, the international community, the governments’ image, the AU and so on, but is it working for the Rwandan people?”
The following section will report on and analyse the dialogue that took place during a NURC Reconciliation Forum seminar. This is significant in its own right but particularly because of the light it sheds on the dialogue between the four young Rwandan men. Where the dialogue between the interviewees was largely divisive, the dialogue amongst members of the Forum, although still full of tensions and challenges, gives more reason for optimism.