Case Study:RwandaCase Study:Rwanda

Lina SaraieBaan AliTiyanyu Wang (River)Peter Brüesch

OutlineOutline

1. Historical background2. Key events3. Action taken by the UN4. Failures of the international community5. The situation today6. Conclusion

Hutu and Tutsi – an overviewHutu and Tutsi – an overview

Hutu TutsiFarmersMajority in Rwanda (~85%)

Cattle herdersMinority (~15%)Traditional political and

economic elite

• Intermarriage• Same language• No racial conflicts

Peaceful coexistence:

ColonizationColonization

Colonial rule by Belgium after WWI→ Construction of racial identities:• Tutsi: “civilized“ (originally not from Rwanda)• Hutu: inferior race

• Privileging the Tutsi as the ruling group• Support to the Tutsi monarchy→

The Hutu RebellionThe Hutu Rebellion

Rebellion against the Tutsi monarchy in 1959→Withdrawal of Belgium forces in 1961→ Overthrow of the Tutsi monarchyIndependence in 1962 under Hutu controlFailed Tutsi counterrevolution in 1963 →Hutu reprisal: “the most horrible and systematic human

massacre we have had occassion to witness since the extermination of the Jews by the Nazis“ (Russell in Wheeler p. 210)

Military coupMilitary coup

1972 military coup by General Juvenal Habyarimana

Northern based Hutus claim powerMore Tutsi-friendly Hutus in the

south lose on influenceDoctrine of Hutu superiorityEstablishing of the MNRD

Opposing partiesOpposing parties

MNRDMouvement National pour la Revolution et le Developpement

Governing partyMany Hutu extremistsFear of the Tutsi and fear to

share powerControl over military

RPFRwandan Patriotic Front

Exile Tutsis who fled to Uganda after 1959

Supported by UgandaMilitarized

The Civil WarThe Civil War

RPF‘s Invasion into Rwanda in 1990 Repelled by Rwandan, Belgium, French and Zaïran forces Ended in a „stale-mate“ civil war

President Habyarimana Faced international pressure to democratize (economic aid condition) Faced domestic pressure due to war with RPF

Transitional Government from June 1991 Three new key political parties emerged Targets a sharing agreement with RPF

Peace NegotiationsPeace NegotiationsStarting in June 1992Habyarimana reluctant and fearful for his

own position

However:International pressure from US, France &

BelgiumMediation efforts from the OAU and UN

→ Arusha Peace Agreement

Arusha Peace AgreementArusha Peace Agreement Peace agreement between MNRD and RPF in Arusha

(Tanzania) in August 1993 Cease fire and formal end of civil war Right to return granted to Rwandan refugees Equal representation in the government of RPF and

MNRD New composition of the army: roughly 50:50 between

RPF and MNRD

→ supposed to be a „textbook success of preventative diplomacy and conflict management“

The Problems with ArushaThe Problems with ArushaThe implementation of the peace agreement

depended on the extremists within Habyarimana‘s clique compromising with the RPF

→ CDR was founded and set into practice by these extremists

By agreeing to the Arusha accords Habyarimana signed his own „death warrant“

The Introduction of organizationsThe Introduction of organizations

UN = United Nations

UNAMIR = United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (by Resolution 872)

DPKO = UN’s Department of Peacekeeping Operations

RPF = Rwandan Patriotic Front

The Introduction of organizationsThe Introduction of organizations

CDR = Defense de la Republique ( anti Tutsis organization, which started the genocide)

RTLMC = Radio Television Libre Mille Collines ( basically a radio station borcasted message for killing Tutsis)

Key EventsKey Events

Before the genocideBefore the genocide

1. RPF’s invasion (1990) and Arusha Peace

Agreement (1993)

2. CDR’s found and the “Final Solution”2. CDR’s found and the “Final Solution”It was found by anti Tutsis extremists during 1992, and it organized the genocide

Four key elements 1.President’s own family and trusted advisers 2.Rural organizers (maker of the target list) 3.The armed militias (youth wings, envy Tutsis) 4. The presidential Guard

3. The set up of RTLMC3. The set up of RTLMC

Radio Television Libre Mille Collines was set up during 1993 by people from Habyarimana’s circle

Broadcasted message of hate to Tutis

Resolution 872. Oct.5 1993, the found of the UNAMIR “ To monitor the implementation of the ceasefire and

the movement to a transitional government”

Resolution 909 Apr. 5 1994. withdrawal of UNAMIR “UN would pull out in 6 weeks unless the transitional

government was created”

5. President Habyarimana’ plane crash 5. President Habyarimana’ plane crash

The plane was shot down on Apr. 6.1994 still remain unclear who response for it

The start point of the genocide

The start of the genocideThe start of the genocide

6.After the plane crashed, the genocide began. Soon RTLMC started to broadcast messages to kill Tutsis

7. Dead of Belgium soldiers7. Dead of Belgium soldiers

CDR killed the the Hutu’s Prime Minister and 10 Belgium soldiers

It made Belgians withdraw from Rwanda

The End of the genocideThe End of the genocide

8. RPF’s invasion RPF invaded Rwanda in July and Hutu government made a peace agreement with RPF

The symbol of the end of the genocide

USA’s MovementUSA’s Movement1. the failure in Somalia deeply affected

US’s decision, and it affected the UN’s whole decision

2. “Continuing support for the force would depend upon progress in implementing the peace agreement and keeping costs under control”

French’s movement French’s movement In fact French had a close relationship

with the Habyarimana’s government

help training the Presidential Guard

Only rescue Western nationls after the genocide broke out

Failure of International society to protect Failure of International society to protect Rwandans Civilians. ( The Withdrawal)Rwandans Civilians. ( The Withdrawal) The UNIMAR forces was ruined because of the withdrawal of :Belgium the murder of 10 Belgium peacemakers on 7th April. they were concerned of the safety of their soldiers.•Bangladesh they had 900 soldiers, they also were concerned about the safety of their soldiers.

The Secretary General ProposalThe Secretary General ProposalAfter he received a report from Dallaire on 10th

April asking for reinforcements, the secretary general set out three alternative of UNAMIR:

1. Massive deployment of troops.2. Scale down UNAMIR forces to a force size

of around 270.3. Complete withdrawal of UNAMIR.

the secretary general concluded his report by stating that it is to parties to Arusha agreement who must “bear the responsibility” for the current situation.

Alternative constrictions for the Alternative constrictions for the killing, which the general should killing, which the general should have been awarehave been awareDallaire's report there were no mention for Dallaire`s report,

stating that a genocide were taking a place and that UNAMIR camps had become a safe havens for Rwandan civilians and requesting reinforcement to protect human rights.

US-based human Rights Watch stated that as many as 100,000 people might have

been killed during the previous two weeks.Butrus Butrus Ghali ignored those alternatives and

stated that his options are the only available action can be taken.

The Non-permanent Members’ The Non-permanent Members’ Reactions:Reactions:

They relied on the secretariat for their information

they were in no position to challenge the Secretary-General interpretation of the situation.

How did the non-permanent How did the non-permanent members legitimate their decision?members legitimate their decision?

France, Britain and especially USA had the military capabilities to respond to Dallaire`s request for reinforcements to protect human rights. BUT they did not take an action to help them.

They could legitimate their decision not to intervene and stop the massacres by naming of the violence as a “civil war” not a “ genocide” !

Reasons of choosing the 2Reasons of choosing the 2ndnd option option of Secretary Generalof Secretary GeneralBritain advocated the secretary general 2nd

option of withdrawing the UNAMIR whilst leaving a small group behind to try and negotiate a ceasefire.

The terrible situations that the peacemakers were facing in Rwanda, Baril stated that there ‘was no a military commander in the world who would leave an army in such a way... They were “exhausted, confused and questioning the responsibility of their superiors” and constantly in fear’.

After applying the resolution 912 After applying the resolution 912 of reducing UNAMIR to 270of reducing UNAMIR to 270 As soon as the bulk of UNAMIR left

Kigali, many of civilians being protected by them (UNAMIR) were KILLED!!!

More Justifications & More More Justifications & More Alternative SolutionsAlternative Solutions Justifications : *any more peacekeeping fatalities would mean more

criticism and fewer resources for the UNAMIR * No state in the security council was prepared to risk its

soldiers to save Rwandans civilians * The Secretariat and Security Council had a moral

responsibility to protect UNAMIR soldiers Solution: *This agonizing moral choice could have been a voided by a

change of mandate and the deployment of an effective fighting force.

* Informing the UN members of Dallair`s request for reinforcements would have undermined the argument that there were no alternative but to withdraw the force or massively reinforce it.

The Situation TodayThe Situation TodayRwanda has shown tremendous economic

growth in the past 17 years. The tourism industry in Rwanda is

growing.Rwanda has improved their healthcare

fundamentals such as AIDS and family healthcare.

Education is improving.

Rwanda’s GDP GrowthRwanda’s GDP Growth

The Situation TodayThe Situation TodayHowever, poverty affects 40 percent of

the population. Overpopulation is becoming a problem in

Rwanda. The aftermath of the genocide haunts the

country in forms of orphaned children and emotional trauma.

The Situation TodayThe Situation TodayPaul Kagame is the president of Rwanda. He has been in control of Rwanda since his

rebel army (Rwandan Patriotic Front) ended the genocide.

After the genocide, it is said that two million Hutus fled to DR Congo.

The relationship between Hutsu and Tutsi is not peaceful.

UNAMIR UNAMIR Supreme Humanitarian Emergency Necessity / Last Resort

Proportionality

Positive Humanitarian Outcome

Wheeler’s Framework and Criteria for Humanitarian Intervention

○

○

××

UNAMIR UNAMIR Humanitarian Motives

Humanitarian Justifications

Legality

Selectivity

Wheeler’s Framework and Criteria for Humanitarian Intervention

○

○

×

△

Operation Turquoise Operation Turquoise Supreme Humanitarian Emergency Necessity / Last Resort

Proportionality

Positive Humanitarian Outcome

Wheeler’s Framework and Criteria for Humanitarian Intervention

××/△

△

△

Operation TurquoiseOperation TurquoiseHumanitarian Motives

Humanitarian Justifications

Legality

Selectivity

Wheeler’s Framework and Criteria for Humanitarian Intervention

○

×

×/△○

The EndThe EndThank you for listening!!