Hisroty of Rwandans Genocide Essay Example

no progress was achieved. Tragically, within just 100 days starting in April 1994, over 800,000 Tutsis were brutally murdered by Hutus. It can be concluded that tribalism, ethnicity, and political power struggles combined to fuel the Rwandan genocide when considering various perspectives.

Due to being denied access to significant government roles, the Tutsi community was compelled to remain as agricultural workers without any say in governmental matters. The presidency of Juvenal Habyarimana led to a deterioration in Rwanda's economy, which subsequently had an effect on his level of public support.

According to a report by BBC News print (2011), the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) was formed when Tutsi refugees in Uganda joined forces with certain Hutus in the Ugandan states. The RPF, led by Paul Kagame, aimed to remove the Habyarimana government and return to their homeland. This led to conflicts in 1993, including numerous attacks and negotiations to end the violence. Eventually, a peace agreement was signed between the RPF and the Habyarimana government. However, civil unrest persisted until April 1994 when President Habyarimana's plane was shot down.

According to Turner (2007), the individual who killed both the President of Rwanda and the President of Burundi remains unidentified. Turner proposes that the situation deteriorated as significant figures from opposing groups, as well as moderate Hutus and Tutsis, were assassinated. Nationwide, armed civilians were enlisted to retaliate against Hutus and moderate Tutsis. Politicians, military members, and eventually affluent businessmen who supported the warring factions provided financial backing for the civil war. The Hutus recognized that they had to eliminate the Tutsis in order to maintain their hold on power.

The Hutus united and, with the assistance of the presidential

guard and radio propaganda, they organized a large number of soldiers for the conflict. In return for payment or the ownership of their land, many Hutus were compelled to kill their Tutsi neighbors. Melvern (2000) contends that the signing of the treaty of Versailles during the First World War had an impact on Germany. Additionally, Rwanda and Burundi were formerly a single country (Rwanda-Urundi) governed by Belgium.

The Belgians used the classes imposed by the Germans to govern Rwanda, but this system was not fair to all tribes. The classes created divisions between the Hutus and the Tutsis, as there were more Tutsis compared to Hutus. Tutsis made up only 14% of the population, while Hutus were the majority at 85%, with 1% being Aboriginal Twa. Belgium favored the Tutsis and gave them more privileges, while denying them to the Hutus.

The Hutus in Rwanda were deprived of access to Western education and political power, leading to indirect rule by Belgium through the Tutsi. They utilized the Tutsi population to enforce their policies within Rwanda. Belgium introduced a coffee farming initiative in Rwanda, but the treatment of the workers on these farms was harsh, with eight lashes administered every morning before work. This resulted in a significant number of Rwandans seeking refuge in Uganda (Melvern, 2000).

The Belgium introduced identification cards to separate Tutsi from Hutu, as Tutsi were considered more privileged due to their light skin and perceived Caucasian heritage. When conflict broke out in Rwanda, United Nations troops, including 400 soldiers from Belgium, were deployed to maintain order. Following the April 6 attack, rumors circulated implicating the involvement of Belgium soldiers.

The assassination of the prime minister

in Rwanda angered the Rwandan president and led to the deaths of Belgian soldiers who were protecting him. This event caused concern among the Belgian troops, resulting in their evacuation to Germany. Likewise, both the United Nations and the United States chose not to intervene in order to prevent the Rwandan genocide due to a specific rationale. They claimed that they did not have enough resources to send peacekeepers to Rwanda as these resources are provided by member states and powerful economic nations such as the United States. Regrettably, these organizations were unwilling to allocate the necessary resources to put an end to the genocide (Taylor, 1998).

Despite some countries sending peacekeepers, the situation in Rwanda could not be improved due to a severe political and economic crisis. The United Nations acknowledged that they had a limited number of troops but agreed to increase them to enhance security measures as per all member states' agreement. Many believed that a strong and well-trained army was necessary, especially after the United States Army's experience in Somalia in 1993. However, instead of deploying troops, the United States only sent observers to gather information about the progress of the war in Rwanda (Baldauf, 2016). This allowed them to stay informed without commenting on the issue or risking controversy surrounding their deployment of troops in an African nation.

During the Genocide period, the United States decided to ignore the genocide because there was no economic benefit involved, according to Carroll (2016). This suggests that the US only intervenes in situations that offer economic gains. Another reason given against the United States was that their soldiers had been killed and humiliated in Mogadishu

before the genocide took place. The world saw horrifying media footage of this event, causing the United States to be reluctant to send more troops to any African nation. In order to avoid becoming involved in the war, the United States chose not to label it as a genocide, but instead remained silent until May 25th when a diluted term, "an act of genocide," was used (Carroll, 2016). The Clinton administration at the time feared that using the word genocide would generate public opinion demanding strict action against the ongoing massacre, as it was considered a pragmatic decision.

Despite receiving regular progress updates from the United States, no intervention measures were taken. Paul Kagame, with the support of the Rwandan Patriotic Front, successfully halted the Rwanda Genocide and assumed presidency in Rwanda. Simultaneously, Mobutu Sese Seko held presidency in Congo.

Mobutu's reign in Congo, which lasted for three decades, was confronted by Kagame's invasion. They alleged that Mobutu provided refuge to the orchestrators of the Rwandan genocide. This invasion ultimately led to the downfall of Mobutu's regime and Laurent Kabila assuming control of the government. Uganda stood by Rwanda in their effort to establish stability and capture Kinshasa, Congo's capital city. However, Kabila later ordered Rwandan troops to withdraw from Congo in 1998 as mentioned by Turner (2007).

To address the situation, Kagame decided to deploy additional troops in Congo and eliminate those responsible for the Hutu genocide. As a result, a civil war erupted in Congo, receiving support from other nations. Angola and Zimbabwe both sent their military forces to Congo out of fear that it could serve as a base for rebel leader Jonas Savimbi's attacks

on Angola. Additionally, Zimbabwe had its own interests in accessing Congo's mineral resources. Consequently, Rwanda ultimately gained control over Central Africa.

Despite its small size, Rwanda initially controlled the mining business in the Congo forest through the Rwandan Patriotic Front. The involvement of Rwandan troops in civil wars has destabilized the governments of Angola, Burundi, Uganda, Congo Brazzaville, Zimbabwe, Central African Republic, and South Sudan (French, 2009).

References

1. Arnot, C. (2016). What caused the genocide in Rwanda?. the Guardian. Retrieved 29 November 2016 from https://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/nov/30/rwanda-genocide-research
2. Baldauf, T. (2016). Why the US didn't intervene in the Rwandan genocide.

The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 7 April 2009, from http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2009/0407/p06s14-woaf.html

The first citation is from The Christian Science Monitor and can be accessed through a link provided on the given date. The second citation is an article written by Carroll in 2016 for The Guardian discussing the decision of the United States to overlook the Rwandan genocide.

Retrieved 31 March 2013, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/mar/31/usa.rwanda

• Cohen, J. (2007). One hundred days of silence: America and the Rwanda genocide. Lanham, Md. u.a.: Rowman ; Littlefield.
• French, H. (2009).

Kagame's Hidden War in the Congo. The New York Review of Books. Retrieved 29 November 2016, from http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2009/09/24/kagames-hidden-war-in-the-congo/

Melvern, L. (2000). A people betrayed: The role of the West in Rwanda's genocide. London u.a.: Zed Books

Rwanda: How the genocide happened - BBC News.

The first text is from BBC News in 2011 and can be accessed at http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13431486.

The second text is an article written by Taylor in 1998 titled "The United Nations and Rwanda 1993-96."

The text contains a citation from The International Journal of African Historical Studies,

Volume 31, Issue 2, page 414, which includes a DOI link. It also references an article by Trumpeter (2016) titled "Difference Between Hutu and Tutsi" from Difference Between.The following text was obtained from http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-hutu-and-tutsi/ on 3 October 2013 (Turner, T. (2007). The Congo wars: Conflict, myth, and reality. London u.a.: Zed Books).