Colonialism In Rwanda Genocide

Genocides happen when ethnic divisions become apparent. Many times, these ethnic divisions were due to colonization from people of different race. These cases are especially true in Africa when Europeans colonized their territory, with clear racial divisions between them (Gavin). These genocides go on because of nations acting on ignorance and refusing to help out the nations in turmoil, allowing the genocides to continue, without wasting their own resources. These nations purposefully ignoring the slaughter of people cause the nations to also be guilty of the genocide underway (“The Heart”). The genocide occurred in Rwanda in Central Africa during 1994. The decades of Tutsi oppression of Hutus and the assassination of President Habyarimana in 1994 led to the genocide in Rwanda.

Rwanda is a country located in the middle of the African continent. The two ethnic groups present in the country lived in peace under their monarch until the arrival of Europeans. The Belgians arrival into Rwandan is what split the two ethnic groups of the Tutsi and Hutus, making them identify themselves with ID cards. This caused tension between the two groups as the Belgians favored the ethnic Tutsi, and made them the head of the government. Decade’s later Hutu extremists would take over the government and have revenge on the Tutsi. The new government would send out broadcasts calling on Hutus to kill their friends and neighbors. The Rwandan genocide would become the worst genocide to ever happen in Africa and one of the worst in the world. Today Rwanda’s recovery is surprisingly fast with the help of multiple nations and organizations. Rwanda’s recovery is nothing short of a miracle and is an amazing story of a war between two peoples.

August 3, 1993 The Arusha Accords are agreed upon, opening government positions to both Hutu and Tutsi.

With over eight hundred thousand to one million deaths, the Rwandan genocide is undoubtedly one of the most sad and shocking examples of the lack of intervention by not only the US and the UN, but by other countries as well. The ongoing tensions between the Hutu, the largest population in Rwanda, and the Tutsi, the smaller and more elite population is what eventually lead to the Rwandan genocide. The killings began quickly after President Habyarimana 's plane was shot down. After hundreds of thousands of deaths, the US did not intervene in Rwanda because being a landlocked country with no natural resources to benefit the US, there was no economical benefit, and the risk of sending in troops simply outweighed the rewards. The aftermath of the genocide has not only impacted those who lived through it, but it has also impacted future generations as well. At the end of the genocide, the ICTR was formed by the UN to find justice. The Rwandan genocide has shocking similarities between the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide as well. Overall, the Rwandan genocide was a terrible event that escalated far beyond what it should have if there had been intervention from other countries and the UN.

April 7, 1994 marked the beginning of one hundred days of massacre that left over 800,000 thousand dead and Rwanda divided by a scare that to this day they are trying to heal. The source of this internal struggle can be traced back to the segregation and favoritism established by Belgium when they received Rwanda after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 1918. At the time the Rwandan population was 14% Tutsi, 1%Twa, and 85% Hutus; the Belgian’s showed preferential treatment to the Tutsi, who were seen as socially elite, by giving them access to higher educations and better employment. This treatment causes the uprising of the Hutus in 1959 overthrowing the Tutsi government forcing many to flee the country, sparking even greater resentment between the two ethic groups. Without the interference and preferential treatment by the Belgian’s this atrocity could have likely been avoided.

Unfortunately, this peaceful life style was corrupted when German and Belgian colonizers first came to the state now known as Rwanda. When looking at the early creation of the neo-states there was little to no care about the indigenous people; there values, tradition, and own forms of government were ignored, “while states were conveniently put together to further European metropolitan economic interest” . This meant that the imperial Belgium was now in total control of the territory, they had little to no interest in the indigenous population. The only interest the Belgian leaders did show in the indigenous population was in finding a way in which the population would be best subdued and controlled. This started with the distribution of identification cards, “These cards, which were to be carried from the age of 16, stated the bearer’s identity in terms of their belonging to the Hutu, Tutsi

During this period of time, 10,000 people were murdered each day and more than 6 men, women and children were murdered every minute every day. This kept going for about 3 months.

At the end of World War I, Belgium accepted the League of Nations authorization to govern the Ruanda-Urundi territory. Which later became Rwanda and Burundi. Two separate territories. Prior to Belgian rule, the African native people coexisted amongst each other and lived in peace under the same religion and spoke the same language. That was until the Belgian caused division amongst the people.They divided the people based on physical features. The Belgium announced that the Tutsis were more superior due to their visible features which included those with longer pointier noses, lighter skin, those who were taller, and had more elegance. The Hutus were the opposite. They were; dark, short and strong. They weren’t exactly sophisticated. Government

Rwanda has a long history that has contributed to their experiences of great violence and suffering and therefore the need for a peacekeeping. In pre-colonial times there was a division between the superior people being the Tutsi’ and the peasant people being the Hutu’s. King Ruganzu Ndori, being a Tutsi outlined Hutu’s area and showed no hesitation in treating any Hutu’s who opposed the order with unmitigated harshness.

Acts of genocide have occurred for centuries even though the term genocide did not appear until the twentieth century. In 1948 the United Nations General Assembly passed a law that legally defined genocide and ruled it as an illegal act. According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) Article II the definition of genocide is “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Genocide is the destruction of a cultural, racial or political group through the use of “..one-sided mass killings..(Hintjens 267).” The April of 1994, “Rwandan subjects and citizens were the main actors in the genocide (Hintjens 244).” The establishment of colonial rule by the Europeans impacted the conflict in Rwanda due to the creation of ethnic boundaries between the Tutsis and the Hutus. Hierarchies were established based upon European racial theories. Throughout the colonization and independence of Rwanda, the tension generated by European intervention only magnified thus leading to quotas and ineffective regulations. Aside from the assassination of the Rwandan President Habyarimana, propaganda through

The radio was utilized to not only list the location of specific Tutsis to be targeted, but to also justify the genocide. Radio hosts discussed discrimination the Hutus suffered under the power of the Tutsis. Strong connotations describing Hutus as slaves during colonization painted the Rwandan genocide as a type of slave rebellion. Radio stories were used to anger the Hutus and channel that anger into action. Radio was also used to dehumanize Tutsis by calling them “cockroaches,” making acts of violence against them seem less inhumane.

In the era of colonialism, European authorities all cynically insisted that they acted to promote such higher commitments entitled the "white man's burden,” a vital aspect claimed to be in their national interest and of prodigious importance. Yet when these global and transnational forces increasingly usurp the power of states, in order to determine their own fiscal policies, newfangled ideologies spread, and eventually rivals spur in conflict and tragedies befall. Such a case was found in the dramatic fallout of the Rwandan Genocide. The root of the carnage is entwined in the European colonialism in Rwanda; where the hunger for power and land lied in Belgium colonist’s interest. Ultimately, upon their unwanted arrival, European colonists

When the Belgian colonizers entered Rwanda in 1924, they created an ethnic classification between the Hutu and the Tutsi, two tribes who used to live together as one. After independence in 1962, there was a constant power struggle between the two tribes. Former Canadian Prime Minister, Jean-Pierre Chrétien described the situation as “tribalism without tribes.” (Destexhe, 1995) There were many signs leading towards genocide, yet the nations in power chose to ignore them. From April 6, 1994 until mid-July, a time spanning approximately of 100 days, 800,000 people were murdered when the Hutu attacked the Tutsi. No foreign aid came to the rescue until it was too late. Ten years after the genocide the United Nations was still

Prior to colonial era, Rwanda had larger population of Hutus compared to Tutsis and Twa. Rwanda as a country was divided into three ethnic groups i.e. Hutu (approximately about 85%), Tutsi (14%) and Twa (1%) (United Nations). Although, Tutsis were the minorities, they belonged to the higher strata compared to the other ethnic groups; Tutsis were privileged and had power and control over the Hutus and Twas. “Hutus were formerly bound to their Tutsi patrons via client ship” (Sinema, 2012). When Rwanda was colonized by Germany followed by Belgium, they favored Tutsis as they represented the upper class prior to the colonization. These created a social system like feudal system where there was a power difference between the Hutus and the Tutsis. Tutsis were considered as lord and the Hutus on the other hand, were considered as peasants. As a consequence, this created an ethic tension between the Hutus and the Tutsis and created a system more like apartheid. Nonetheless, they managed to co exist in Rwanda until they were decolonized. Although there is no social distinction between the Hutus and the Tutsis, the conflict between these tribes increased tremendously after the independence from Belgian that led to mass murder and ethnic cleansing of the Tutsi by the Hutu.