Topic 10: Africa in the 1990s

The first half of the 1990s, Africa was characterized by two major events, the fall of the Apartheid regime, and the genocide in Rwanda. The spring of 1994 was a period fo two totally different and historic events, the major regime change (South Africa) on one side, and the biggest genocide on the other. Below, you will find a short history of the root causes of the genocide, while we will discuss the genocide itself in the class with all its consequences for the region. 

Rwanda

Numerous authors studied the contexts, consequences, causes, and impacts of the genocide but a deeper understanding of the root causes must necessarily include historical links and deeds such as “ethnic favoritism,” officially legalized inequalities between groups of people and subsequently a combination of demographic, economic, social, and environmental causes.

Rwanda is a small country in Equatorial Africa which has become known for the 1994 genocide that finished a century long development of polarization of society in its socio-economic, political as well as cultural consequences. The early roots of the genocide can be found already at the end of the 19^th century when first under the German, and later during the Belgian colonialism two “racial” entities were formed within one nation which had for centuries lived together sharing common history, language, cultural traits, religion, and socio-political organization and institutions. However, social scientists and historians until very recently could not agree on the initial phase of “antagonism” between Hutu and Tutsi, whether it was a matter of the Tutsi conquest long before the European colonialism came to Rwanda, or whether the politics of distinction was a matter of the European policy of divide and rule.

Tutsi aristocracy was put into a place of indubitable superior “race” and rulers of the country with a supervision of their Belgian administrators. Hutu farmers and Twa hunters were destined to a role fo second-class citizens or subjects with no privileges. It was this polarization of society and the division between the rulers and the ruled which had later imprinted the genocidal character to Rwanda and Burundi. Until the World War II, the Tutsi aristocracy enjoyed the fruits of superiority in terms of social privileges including distribution of wealth, access to education, power and influence.

Polarization of society in Rwanda was caused by several interrelated factors. Belgian impact on formation of ethnic, or racial in this case, identities is indubitable; growing demographic curve and overpopulation of Rwanda and Burundi is linked to it as well; mythologization and re-invention of collective identities done by the Catholic Church was allowed by its monopoly on education which was until 1940s mostly offered to Tutsis while Hutu were allowed to attend only to gain education (in smaller numbers) in worse schools. One of the notable Belgian representatives said in 1920s that the “Tutsis were destined to rule,” which openly approved the direction of Belgian administration giving privileges to one part of society while marginalizing the other.

In 1952, the Belgian administration initiated significant reforms which counted with higher representation of the Hutu delegates in local and regional councils in order to reach a resolution on elimination of existing dominance of the Tutsi part of society. In 1953, election councils included 7 674 of Hutu (56,58 %), 5 442 of Tutsi (41, 4 %) and 22 of Twa (0,22 %) representatives. The reforms calculated with future strengthening of indigenous social and political institutions which would lead to further democratization of the country including higher percentage of indigenous representatives in election bodies.

The Hutu Manifesto, originally called Report on social aspect of racial native problem in Rwanda, published on 12^th July 1957 divided the racial question into three levels, political monopoly, socio-economic monopoly, and cultural monopoly. The critique of the political monopoly was based on long-lasting superiority of the Tutsi kings and chiefs where the Hutu chiefs had played only minimal role rather being exceptional. Socio-economic monopoly was stemming from an absolute dominance of the Tutsi people when it came to functions, privileges and advantages with direct economic benefits. Cultural monopoly was defined as a superiority of the Tutsi in terms of noble race whose cultural traits were regarded supreme. The Hutu Manifesto was aimed to promote and develop the Hutu part of Rwandan society in each of these levels in order to get rid of the Tutsi leadership. Belgians were aware of legitimate arguments and power the Hutu Manifesto had being simply a resonation of ambitions of frustrated and marginalized Hutu elites.

The Manifesto came as a result of already existing notions among the Hutu elites that the Hutu people were first colonized by the Tutsi and later by Europeans. The authors of the Manifesto used similar ideological vocabulary as the Catholic Church. The Manifesto thus argued for elimination of disproportionality in which numerical minority ruled numerical majority, in this case the Hutu. Social, economic, and political reforms leading to promotion of power and rights of the Hutu were the only way out. The Manifesto was not directed only to Belgian authorities but more importantly to Belgium and United Nations as it aimed to point at insufficient conditions in which indigenous inhabitants of Rwanda had lived under twofold colonization. Such appeal was necessary to understand as a part of general post-war emancipation and self-determination movement of the era of decolonization.

Crucial difference between the Hutu nationalism and the Tutsi nationalism lied in the way in which both perceived the roots of the colonial problem. While the Hutu called for elimination of the Tutsi colonialism first, the Tutsi pressed for an independent Rwanda and thus to end the European colonialism. Despite the Belgian control over social and political issues, the authorities were aware of necessity to implement the reforms. Anyway, in official documents, the problem of Hutuization of the Tutsi system was never mentioned as the principle of Africanization of Rwanda was the primary factor of the native development and democratization. Mandate administration and above all the direct impact of the Church became inevitable obstructions to development. The only possible scenario for the Rwandan elites how to reach a positive development in their country could be the Africanization of political system. In spite of such proclamations and plans, Belgians did not allow a complete regime change as they tended to keep a grip on power in the late 1950s. The word “independence” was not a part of colonial vocabulary of that time. Among some Belgian officials, plans for a decolonization of Ruanda-Urundi and Africanization of its political system acted like a treason of Belgium that had invested so much for the development of the country and its functional apparatus.

The Hutu Social Movement was founded in June 1957 in Kagbayi for the purpose of democratization of Rwandese institutions and judicial system. A very tense situation and ethno-political polarization of the society was accelerated by sudden death of Mutara III Rudahigwa on 25^th July 1959 in Bujumbura showing a deep rupture between the Hutu and Tutsi element of the society. After Mwami’s death, the Supreme Council did not waste time with the election of his successor and on its meeting which had taken part shortly after Mutara’s funeral, Jean-Baptiste Ndahundurwa, a son of the former Mwami Musinga and a step-brother of Mutara III, was elected Mwami under the name Kigeri V. Such a quick action was by Belgian authorities, Hutu elites and the Catholic Church considered a coup d’état and caused many negative reactions. Although Kigeri V seemed to Ruanda-Urundi vice-governor Jean-Paul Harroy as an appropriate candidate, the speed with which he was inaugurated made him feel puzzled as it was not a result of general consensus, especially in such a tense period of time.

Turbulent development of the 1959 resulted in series of attacks and counterattacks. The whole social revolution gave the Hutu militants a “free hand” with which they began to victimize local Tutsi civilians, burning their homes, killing and beating them. Soon after, violence spread all over Rwanda and the UN mission sent to Rwanda at the beginning of 1960 estimated the number of dead at around two hundred. The Belgian administration directly contributed to the Hutu social revolution by setting no restrictions and limitations to it, not mentioning the fact that they directly called for advantaging of the “Hutu element.” Belgians imposed a state of emergency and Colonel Guy Logiest became a primary actor of the Hutu revolution when he stated that the Tutsi chiefs and sub-chiefs were responsible for the public unrest. Under such conditions he began to substitute the Tutsi chiefs by the Hutu chiefs resulting in a final phase of the social revolution. Meanwhile, violence forced thousands of the Tutsi civilians to take refuge in neighboring Uganda, in April 1960 there were already 22 thousand of Tutsi refugees. The PARMEHUTU party which viewed itself as the leading Hutu power called for an exodus of the Tutsi people to the homeland of their fathers somewhere in Abyssinia (Ethiopia), or to return in case they would respect the real democracy, meaning the rule of the Hutu.

Foundation of independent Rwanda in 1962, victory of the Hutu political parties in autumn of 1961, and ambivalent attitude of the Belgian administration toward increasing tensions presented the first major threat to the cohabitation of the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda. Tens of thousands of Tutsis were forced to leave the country especially to neighboring Uganda which proved to be decisive for the 1994 genocide. Appalling presumptions of several representatives of Francophonie about Rwandese identity has been fulfilled. Roots of this situation can be found already in the era of colonialism and failed decolonization of Rwanda, which Belgians did not manage properly.

Photo: Jan Záhořík (Genocide Museum, Kigali, Rwanda)