International Response To The Rwandan Genocide In The 20th Century

The socio/cultural cause of the genocide in Rwanda came from the German and Belgian colonization, bringing along with them an idea of social science. Both colonial powers reinforced the Tutsi’s political power, which further oppressed the Hutus. This reinforcement caused the Hutus to envy the Tutsi’s aristocracy because they were privileged to all things, while the Hutus were privileged to nothing (Kapuscinski). This oppression led to many Hutu revolutions that the Hutus were successful in over the unprepared Tutsis. These victories of the Tutsis incidentally reversed the Rwandan apartheid system. The reversion of the system then gave

After the atrocities of the Rwandan Genocide and the lack on international intervention, Rwandan was forced to rebuild itself from scratch. Rwanda is a small country located in central Africa. Its population is divided between two ethnic groups: the hutus and the tutsis. The roots of the Rwandan genocide date back to 1924 when Belgium first took over Rwanda, formally a part of Tanzania. The Belgians viewed Tutsi superior to the hutus. Many referred to this as Hamitic hypothesis. It was motivated mainly by the fact that Tutsi were taller and thinner than hutus. This lead to a major boost in Tutsi egos and mistreatment of the Hutus for decades. This angered the Hutus leading to a major conflict between the two ethnic groups.

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.

Rwanda, a small country in the middle of Africa bordered by Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo was controlled by the German after they arrive in 1890. But after the World War 1, Belgium gained control of Rwanda (Hymowitz & Parker, n.d.). Few years after the Belgium colonizes controlled the country, In order to strengthen the Belgian and German control, the Belgian colonists divided Rwanda’s unified population into distinct groups. Not to mention that the Hutu were about 85% of the population, the Tutsis were 14%, and the rest were Twa. The Hutus and Tutsis were not aware about the results of this classification in the future. Actually, not too far from that date the Belgian colonization put one group above the

In the play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar ignores many warnings about his death. He ignores the soothsayer and his wife, Calphurnia’s, warnings; he decides to visit the Capitol even though there are many omens like storms that split old oak trees, and a lion walking on the street without bothering to attack people. Similarly, the United Nations ignored many warnings of the Rwandan Genocide, in which almost a million Tutsis were slaughtered between April to July, 1994. Before the Rwandan Genocide, people at the UN headquarters paid no attention to the ethnic tensions that existed before the genocide, and they took no notice of a letter about the Hutus’ plan to kill all the Tutsis. Key players in both Julius Caesar and the Rwandan Genocide ignore both environmental and personal warnings about impending danger.

One particular case that has been studied recently is the Rwandan Genocide that occurred in 1994. The Rwandan Genocide remains one of the fastest and most brutal cases of genocide in modern history (Temitope and Danjibo 2013). In the years leading up to the genocide there was a civil war between the Government of Rwanda (led by Hutu General Habyarimana) and the Tutsi expat group, the Rwandan Patriotic Front, who had been in exile in Uganda (Buhr 2015). Following the cease-fire agreement in 1993, there were signs that the agreement would not hold despite the presence of UN peacekeepers (Buhr 2015). In April 1994 General Habyarimana was assassinated, and violence ensued (Buhr 2015). Tutsis were blamed for the death of Habyarimana, despite a lack of evidence (Buhr 2015). From April to July of 1994 vengeful Hutus slaughtered approximately one million Tutsis (Temitope and Danjibo 2013).

The Rwandan Genocide was one of the most horrific acts of genocide since the Holocaust during World War II.  Lasting only one hundred days it claimed the lives of over 800,000 people and had lasting effects on global civilization to this day. Even though the world had been consumed by many travesties before, the Rwandan Genocide exposed that violent human injustices on a grand scale could still happen regardless of the advancements made within “global society”. Decades of internal conflict within Rwanda because of colonialism, class, and clan played a great role in marring cultural identity and thusly created a foundation for the genocide.  The homogeny of cultures evolved, separating the population of Rwanda into three distinct groups: Hutu, Tutsi, and a marginal group of Twa that made up one percent of the population. Hutu ultimately came into power and with the help of the Interahamwe (a Hutu militia group) and the Rwandan Armed Forces committed atrocities towards Tutsi peoples under the ideal of 'social revolution ' and extermination of perceived 'enemies ' of the Hutu race. The planning and execution to erase and exterminate the culture and identity of Tutsi people is a classic and legal example of Genocide.

Often described as the most horrible and systematic human massacre since the Holocaust, the Rwandan Genocide has been a subject of research and debate for decades. Typically, ethnic and cultural differences between segments of Rwanda’s diverse population, namely the Hutu and the Tutsi, is the reason given to explain the genocide. Although this is a valid argument, the roots of the conflict are more complex stretching back to the era of colonialism. The impact of colonialism on Rwandan politics and society set the foundations for revolution in 1959 and, ultimately, genocide in 1994.

In today’s world, it is of the utmost importance to learn from mistakes of the past. Certain events, especially tragedies that could have been avoided, hold within them the lessons and wisdom that should be used to prevent similar disasters. The 1994 Rwandan genocide resulted in over 800, 000 deaths of the Tutsi people, at the hands of the Hutu; the genocide, and the international response to it, is a lesson about the humanitarian responsibilities, successes, and shortcomings of the United Nations.

The Belgians’ act of inhumanity through the discrimination of the Hutu is the main reason that the Rwandan genocide took place. In the article titled, Rwanda Genocide of 1994, the author begins by introducing the background of Rwanda: “The three groups, Tutsi, Hutu, and Twa lived together for centuries. Belgium ruled Rwanda in the 19th century and granted the Tutsi social power over the Hutu.” (“Rwanda Genocide”). For instance, the Belgian colonizers threw the Hutu into agriculturist and other primary jobs which did not earn them enough to support themselves. Tutsis were given complete control over the government. This cruel classification of the Hutus directly relates to the different acts of inhumanity present before the genocide even started.

The UN 's lack of intervention, was based mainly on economics and conflict avoidance. The UNAMIR was an understaffed peacekeeping force which was ill-equipt intentionally, to keep costs low. With that in mind, the UN simply didn 't want the added expense of sending extra troops to Rwanda.[7] An example of this mindset was evident in the actions of the United States. After suffering recent losses in Somalia, the United States was not interested in being involved in another costly conflict.[8] However, as the atrocities in Rwanda escalated, the UN had no choice but to act. On May 17, 1994, the UN finally agreed on the deployment of 5,000 to Rwanda, but their departure was delayed due to arguments regarding who will pay for them.[9] The UN had a legal and moral obligation to intervene sooner. As a former colony, the presence of colonialism in a country, will impose values and rule of law onto the culture.

In addition to the moral reasons for humanitarian intervention, the increasingly globalized nature of the world means that there are many practical benefits to reinforcing a country’s responsibility to protect it’s people. In this day and age, isolationism is no longer a valid foreign policy strategy as the actions of one country are inexorably linked to those surrounding it. From a revolution in communications to increasingly efficient and affordable methods of high-speed transport technology, people are able to connect with others from all points on the planet. The proliferation of transnational corporations have forged bonds between countries, and free trade agreements, like NAFTA and CAFTA-DR have further promoted the global economy. While this globalization has brought

Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, ethnic, political, or cultural group”. In Rwanda for example, the Hutu-led government embraced a new program that called for the country’s Hutu people to murder anyone that was a Tutsi (Gourevitch, 6). This new policy of one ethnic group (Hutu) that was called upon to murder another ethnic group (Tutsi) occurred during April through June of 1994 and resulted in the genocide of approximately 800,000 innocent people that even included women and children of all ages. In this paper I will first analyze the origins/historical context regarding the discontent amongst the Hutu and Tutsi people as well as the historical context as to why major players in the international

In the previous paper, it was introduced that the Rwandan Genocide was more than just an internal conflict between the Tutsi and the Hutu. It was also a combination of ineffective foreign military intervention, failed human rights initiatives, and a lack of political will that sabotaged any chances for successful peace operations in Rwanda. Many people believed that the ultimate driver of the conflict were the assassinations of presidents Juvenal Habyarimana of Rwanda and Cyprien Nytaryamira of Burundi.

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.