There Is No Military Solutions To Political Problems
By MUJYANAMA
June 10, 2009
Also available in French.
Fifteen (15) years after the Rwandan genocide of 1994 and nineteen (19) years after the Rwandan civil war of 1990, a non-negligible portion of the Rwandan population does neither have a place to live in their home country nor rights in many western power's foreign policies.
In January and February 2009, a joint military operation “Umoja wetu” between the Rwandan army (RDF) and the Congolese army (FARDC) was launched in the Province of North Kivu (DRC) with the specific mission of tracking down Rwandan Hutu refugees, some of which have joined the FDLR rebellion.
The official goal for "Umoja wetu" operation was to disarm these combatants and force them to return home in Rwanda. Since the operation “Umoja wetu” has failed, attentions are now turned to the Province of South Kivu where a similar military operation, “Kimya II” is underway with the same specific mission of tracking down Rwandan Hutu refugees who just await their voluntary repatriation in dignity and tranquility.
Meanwile, the Congolese people continue to pay for a political deadlock whose solutions are not military but political.
Mujyanama, a citizen of Rwanda, contributed the following pertinent analysis of the endless crisis in the African Great Lakes region and proposed some solutions.
MK/HTPJ
=======
IN RWANDA
The fate of Hutus repatriated to Rwanda from DRC
Most of the Rwandan refugees who have been “voluntarly” repatriated from DRC during the operations “Umoja wetu” and “Kimya II”, are women, children, and the elderly. Usually, it is the UNHCR that transports them to Rwanda. Once in Rwanda, they spend a few days in a transit camp and are then sent to their home villages with an insertion kit.
When these people leave the transit camp, the camp authorities call the RPF agents in the village of destination for theses returnees. The camp authorities ask the RPF agents whether they are willing to accept the returnee's arrival. If the answer is no, the police officer will immediately proceed by arresting these returnees and put them in prison, accusing them of having participated in the Rwandan genocide of 1994.
Some of these returnees manage to make it to their home land. However, since for many of their houses have been destroyed, most of these returnees end up living in "small houses" that the government has built along the roadsides.
Women refugees returning to Rwanda from DRC are subject to extensive harassments and intimidations mostly owing to the fact that in Rwanda there is a saying that "he who kills a snake must also kill that snake’s youngsters".
For instance, in the former Commune of Cyimbogo, the RPF soldiers have recently falsely accused and unjustly imprisoned two young men, Niyibizi, son of Rwanzegushira, and Kaze, son of Nyandwi.
Following this unfortunate incident, a representative of Ibuka gave a speech that frightened local populations:
“In the past, the Tutsis have dominated the Hutus, so must also be it until this very day!”
Concerning the FDLR fighters who decided to return home, their fate is still uncertain: some of them ended up in prison.
Demobilized RPF soldiers and demobilized FDLR rebels have different ID cards. On the ID cards of the latter it is written that: “He distanced himself from the rebels”.
This is why some of these repatriated refugees are returning to the Congo.
The Gacaca courts still pose problems
In Rwandan prisons, prisoners are mercilessly packed up. The prisoners are massively dying in prison on a daily basis. Families of prisoners are no longer allowed to bring food to their imprisoned relatives. People continue to be unjustly arrested. The “gacaca courts”, traditional tribunals, that judge Hutus accused of genocide, are supposedly aimed at bringing about Truth and Reconciliation in Rwanda.
In reality the Gacaca courts have become instruments of repression for Tutsi revenge against the Hutus with the financial and moral support from the International Community.
The Gacaca Courts were supposed to end in late 2007, but their mandate has been prolonged up to June 2009. They still deal with allegations of property damage during genocide.
Through the Gacaca courts many Hutus have been expropriated but on top of that corrupted genocide Tutsi survivors are now in process of appealing several court rulings so that the acquitted Hutus can once again be imprisoned.
The Gacaca courts absolutely seek to convict those Hutus who have been already released from prison. Specifically, Hutu elites are the main targeted. These are Hutus who worked for the former regime. These Hutus have always lived in Rwanda without being harassed. Some of them have been even working for the RPF.
In Rwanda anyone who thinks, anyone who can share his/her thoughts, becomes a danger to the public. These people are targeted by the Rwandan authorities who usually manage to silence them and set them aside.
The Rwandan President Paul Kagame knows very well that the majority of the people who are routinely arrested in Rwanda on genocide charges are innocent.
In order to hold on power, the Rwandan authorities rely on arbitrary massive imprisonments of innocent people.
Recently, the Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW) in New York wrote a letter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), based in Arusha, Tanzania, and asked him to also address the crimes committed by the RPF soldiers.
The Rwandan Minister of Justice ironically responded by saying that it would be a tautology, because the RPF criminals, have been already prosecuted in Rwanda.
Stay silent otherwise die or become slaves
People who have parents or children abroad, particularly refugees in Congo, are persecuted, in order to force their family members in exile to return home.
The RPF agents with the specific duty of identifying those families require the “nyumbakumi”, local leaders controlling just ten (10) households, to directly report to these agents if there are any opponents among the ten families under their control.
The list of opponents is transmitted to the military leadership. At night, RPF spying agents spend sometimes near the residential homes of these alleged opponents, listening to their conversations or their phone calls.
If they notice that they were talking about their exiled relatives or talking with them on phone, they arrest them. The alleged opponents who dare to leave their homes after 8:00PM will be severely beaten up.
Selected by the President of Ibuka, the “Intore” (the chosen ones), have a fundamental task of constantly terrorizing the population in preparation of the 2010 presidential elections and specifically to submit the names of the people who have family relatives in the Congo and to monitor their movements and conversations.
They are supposed to provide daily reports on what they heard behind closed doors. Other spying agents cross the Kivu Lake at night to Bukavu in order to capture some information about the FDLR.
In each cell (also called Akagari), there is a leader responsible of death squad. The main duty of this leader is to physically eliminate opponents.
On May 7, 2009 in Cyato Sector, a meeting took place. The meeting was chaired by a representative of Ibuka. To the meeting, only Tutsis born to a Tutsi father and a Tutsi mother were invited. There were more than two hundreds people including the leaders of Ibuka and the leaders of death squads in each Sector.
Here is an excerpt of their concluding remarks:
"All those Hutus you know to harbor bad ideologies, and those believed to be physically strong, must have a file of participation in genocide and get arrested. Those who have lands or money, they should quickly be imprisoned before the elections take place. We will start by arresting two persons in each sector, the following week we will arrest four, within a month, eight, and so on, until all of them have been arrested. They have to work for us in land managements, field works on our hills, or build our houses. The Hutus are physically strong. If we do not imprison them they won’t be able to work for us as Tigists (from the French acronym TIG: Travaux d'Interets Generaux or Works of General Interests). The Gacaca courts must be reinstated, so that the Hutus who have never been imprisoned be arrested and that those who have been released be imprisoned again."
A population impoverished and intimidated
Bullying looms throughout Rwanda. Every Rwandan is afraid to express his/her opinion on any situation even within close friends.
In April 2009, during a visit to Byumba, President Kagame said that:
“whoever is unable to follow his instructions, has to leave the country, and that he who diverts public funds will be imprisoned”.
Paradoxically, it is the smal group of people that run the country that are incredibly accumulating wealth beyond any measure.
In schools, during break times, the Tutsi students associate themselves according to their social classes. Their whispers usually worry the Hutu students. Such associations of ethnic character among students in Rwanda are surely not aimed at fostering justice and reconciliation.
Although the institution of the “mutual healthcare” system guarantees primary health cares, the gap between rich and poor people is widening on a daily basis.
In Kigali-City the small houses belonging to the Hutus i.e. the poor people, have been destroyed to make room for the villas, and these Hutu people had to leave the city towards rural areas with a meager compensation.
No small venders are allowed to sell goods on the roadsides, and many small shops are going out of business because of too high taxes. Peasants have been forced to cut down their banana plantations under false allegations that banana consumption may cause malnutrition.
Instead, it is through banana plantations that the ordinary Rwandan family gets some cash.
Even among the Tutsis, the Banyamulenge from DRC, those of Burundi origin, and those who have always lived in the country, briefly all those who do not belong to the English speaking group that came from Uganda, are increasingly getting marginalized. Any one who wants to do the right thing is threatened and pushed aside.
A regime that enjoys international support
Despite the unspeakable levels of social injustice in Rwanda, the International Community continues to use the double standards, two sets of rules and continues to support the Kigali regime.
There are numerous signs:
-During all those years of civil war since October 1, 1990 too much blood has been shed from one side to the other: why then labeling some people as victims and the other ones as perpetrators, instead of promoting a process of genuine investigation of the facts in truth and justice, so that all Rwandan children can rebuild their country together?
-Why didn’t we see any follow up about the two arrest warrants issued, one by the French Judge Bruguiere against nine senior leaders of the RPF, and the other one by the Spanish judge Merelles against forty officers including high ranking official close to Paul Kagamé?
-While the RPF-Inkotanyi used child soldiers during their conquest war in Rwanda, why up to date no international institution has expressed any concern about this issue?
-Why the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), whose mandate is to investigate all crimes committed in Rwanda and neighboring counties from January 1, 1994 until December 31, 1994, has only prosecuted the Hutus?
-Why the USA has long supported the rebel Laurent Nkunda affiliated to Rwanda, whose soldires in two years of war in North Kivu, has killed so many people and has displaced nearly two million people?
-Upon the publication last December, of the UN report on the Rwandan aggression in the Congo through Nkunda's forces, the Netherlands and Sweden have suspended budgetary aid to Rwanda. Why didn’t other donors do the same?
-The December 2008 agreement between the Congolese President, Joseph Kabila and the Rwandan President, Paul Kagame has made it possible to arrest Nkunda so that the FDLR track down in North Kivu can begin in January 2009.
-The International Community supports these military operations and refuses to listen to the voice of helpless Hutu refugees in DRC: they are hunting them down. Are they all killers? What about the children born in the DRC in exile, the young people born in Rwanda but who were children in 1994, women, elderly and many adult people, who were also victims of the Rwanda civil war?
IN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (DRC)
After “Umoja wetu” in North Kivu, “Kimya II" in South Kivu
In North Kivu, during the operation “Umoja wetu” (our unity), which was launched on January 20, 2009 and officially ended on February 25, 2009, there was no fightings between the FDLR combatants and the Rwando-Congolese coalition soldiers.
The FDLR were good at ambushing the coalition soldiers in order to delay their inward progress and has fought only once in February at Katoyi in Masisi territory, when they suddenly became surrounded by the coalition soldiers. There were many dead and wounded among the Rwandan troops and very little among the FDLR combatants.
Even though the Rwandan authorities have stated that the operation “Umoja wetu” was a succes in 80%, the FDLR are still there. The FDLR have moved further inward in the forest. They are now scattered in several groups and very few of them have returned home in Rwanda.
Currently, a similar operation, prepared by the arrival of many more Rwandan troops, called “Kimya II” (Silence), is underway in South Kivu.
Officially, the operation Kimya II is only conducted by the Congolese (FARDC) soldiers with a logistical support from UN (MONUC) peacekeepers.
However, local Congolese populations have deeply expressed their worries to see among these troops a strong presence of Rwandan (RDF) soldiers, newly arrived, and therefore other than the CNDP soldiers.
As far as the FDLR are concerned, they are determined to defend themselves if they are attacked. However they constantly ask the Congolese soldiers the following questions:
“
We have already married your sisters. How can you attack your brothers-in-law, your sisters, your nephews?” We have been welcomed in this country by Laurent Desire Kabila, we fought with you against the RCD, a Rwandan proxy rebellion. We have even saved the life of your current President from the hands of the RPF soldiers in Pweto. How is it possible that you now mistakenly consider us your enemies?”
Long before “Kimya II” operation began, the Congolese population suffered from extensive exactions of the FARDC soldiers: the burning of houses, rapes, and some of the massacres that are officially attributed to the FDLR on a regular basis.
Indeed, for many of the alleged FDLR massacres, strong evidence has proven otherwise.
There are some Congolese soldiers that are poorly paid. There are other Congolese soldiers that are corrupted by the Kigali regime. There also are some Rwandan (RDF) soldiers who have already infiltrated the FARDC. There are several groups of bandits, etc.
Their misdeeds continue to tarnish the FDLR image so that the “Kimya II” operation can continue to receive support from the International Community.
Concerning lootings, one should keep in mind that Rwandan refugees in DRC were used to grow their own crops, had their own livestock and were used to sell their products at several local markets. Now that these refugees are forced to be on a constant run, they are left without any means of survival.
Military operations with hidden goals
Is it possible that the Rwandan (RDF) soldiers, perpetrators of several massacres of Congolese poeple in Kasika, Makobola, Katogota during the invasion war in 1998 can now bring peace to DRC?
Has anyone forgot that on November 6, 2008, more than four hundreds (400) Congolese aged between 14 and 40 were massacred by the Rwandan soldiers led by Laurent Nkunda in Kiwanja, North Kivu?
Obviously, military operations in the eastern provinces of DRC have hidden goals that the Congolese will surely discover in the future.
Under the umbrella of “Umoja wetu” operation, several thousands of Rwandan soldiers entered the Congo. When the operation officially ended in February 2009, only a very small number of these soldiers returned home in Rwanda while thousands joined the CNDP rebels and have been integrated into the FARDC.
A number of witnesses have reported several nocturnal entries of Rwandan soldiers in Bukavu, by the border or across the Kivu Lake. These soldiers soon after their entries take their lead in the forest.
Last year, President Kagame, speaking to the Rwandan youth, Tutsis and Hutus included, who had failed the final exams for their degrees that year, told them:
“Do not get discouraged. The end of school education does not mean the end of life! I will give you some job.”
Soon after the speech, these young man and women have been invited to join the Rwandan army (RDF). They underwent military trainings provided by the American instructors. Upon completion of these accelerated trainings, the young people were immediately sent to the Congo. one group encompassing some Presidential Guards of Paul Kagame, went deeper into the forest. Another group remained in Bukavu.
Their specific mission could not be clearer: kill as many people as possible and put the blame on the FDLR rebels. These slodiers all speak native languages of North and South Kivu.
Thus continues the sinister plan aimed at strengthening the Rwandan military and political presence within all Congolese institutions in order to install the Hima hegemony in this country.
Owing to the fact that many Congolese are prone to corruption, it is much easier to conquer them. Thus, the Machiavellian plan aimed at annexing the eastern Congo to Rwanda inexorably stays on the right path towards its realization.
Conclusion
It is not understandable that one wants to repatriate the Hutu refugees by force, while some of those returnees are now returning back to DRC. One cannot force someone to go home: it is a crime and history will prove it. Rwandan Hutu refugees in Congo would really love to return home, but they cannot be forced to do so, when there is not guarantee for their security and dignity in Rwanda.
Their return that these war operations in North and South Kivu allege to aim at will be achieved not by violence, which is making new victims and displacing people, but by a democratic change in Rwanda. The only solution to restore peace in Rwanda is through an inclusive inter-Rwandan dialogue so that Rwandans at all society levels can discuss the future of their country, just as other people have done so, and build a country where everyone feels free and protected.
The International Community should abstain from supporting perpetuation of crimes against the Hutus worldwide and especially in the eastern provinces of DRC. The Hutu have been equally created by the same God as any other human beings and are therefore entitled to the right to life, the right to claim anything they are entitled to, the right to express themselves and right to receive assistance of any kind.
The International Community should put pressure on the Rwandan government, so that:
- An inclusive inter-Rwandan dialogue can take place, in order to build the country's future in peace;
- A general amnesty be given to all ex-FAR (the army of the previous regime) soldiers and even to every Rwandan so that altogether the Rwandan children can rebuild their country.
- A functioning multiparty system be installed in the country without delay on the eve of the 2010 presidential elections, and that these elections be transparent and free and democratic.
Related Materials:
Letter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Regarding the Prosecution of RPF Crimes
Response to The New Times Article on Rwandan Genocide
Rwanda: Economic Growth Sustained Through Free Labor
Rwandan peasants on the brink of extinction
The US Destructive Role In The Rwandan Tragedy
UN: The Joint Military Operation Against The FDLR Has Failed
Rwandan Hutu Refugees in DRC: Slaves of the 21st Century
Beyond the Myth Ex-FAR/Interahamwe and the Congolese Tragedy
Beyond Ethnic Politics and Fear: Hutu, Tutsi, and Ethnicity in Rwanda
On the Immunity for Former Dictators, Zuma is out of Step with History
By Comfort Ero and Piers Pigou
The New Sudan Vision
June 29, 2009
GUEST COLUMN
June 290, 2009/guest column--Just ahead of this week’s African Union summit in Libya, South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma has advocated an old and discredited approach for dealing with African heads of state facing international justice, write Comfort Ero and Piers Pigou.
When a leader of South Africa’s ruling African National Congress speaks on such critical issues as impunity for the perpetrators of human rights violations, the rest of Africa listens. We listen because we recall with passion how apartheid was dismantled, ushering in a new era of democracy for South Africa.
So it comes as a shock that President Jacob Zuma used the recent meeting of the World Economic Forum for Africa to call for a continental policy favouring impunity. Sharing a roundtable conversation with President Paul Kagame of Rwanda, Zuma proclaimed that the “world has changed” and that we must “do things differently and … not emphasise punishment” in dealing with leading perpetrators of serious crimes.
His statement is embarrassing and retrogressive, especially because the world has indeed changed – but not in the ways Zuma assumed.
What has changed is that over the last two decades a global consensus has grown that amnesty for violent crimes is morally and legally unacceptable. Africa led this change in many respects, and the newly-democratised South Africa enthusiastically supported the creation of the International Criminal Court in 2002.
What Zuma now proposes is not a “new” approach but an old and discredited one that would reinforce outdated visions of an Africa which resists human rights and is willing to tolerate the worst forms of brutality.
At a time when Radovan Karadzic is being brought before the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, Charles Taylor faces justice before the Special Court for Sierra Leone, and Peru has tried and convicted Alberto Fujimori, Zuma has chosen to make the worst kind of rationalization for African exceptionalism.
Even worse, Zuma’s statement was made just ahead of this week’s African Union summit in Libya, which has on its draft agenda at least two reports dealing with attempts to bring to trial African heads of state. Zuma’s “new” approach, coming just as the continent faces pressures from some of its leaders to thwart justice, threatens to undermine the legitimacy of international humanitarian law.
Zuma’s approach would protect the perpetrators and architects of violence at the expense of redress for their victims. Not only is no thought given to providing reparation to victims of such violence, but their right to see justice done would be extinguished. When societies fail to make victims’ needs a priority, those societies risk new cycles of violence.
President Zuma did not distinguish between short-term peace processes and durable peacebuilding. His “bold approach” would do more to promote political violence as a means of gaining power than promote peace. He would invite leaders of political violence to look forward to impunity and a mansion in a neighbouring state.
Zuma presents this position – a safe retirement home for African despots – as being “for the sake of our people,” when clearly this protection is antithetical to the public interest. His position suggests that domestic, regional and international legal commitments can be airbrushed away, cloaked under the rubric of the pragmatic notions of what best serves Africa.
Many commentators assume Zuma’s remarks refer mainly to President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. Zuma is indeed faced with a serious problem in Zimbabwe that is likely to be resolved only when Mugabe is persuaded to step aside.
Mugabe’s decision to leave the scene will likely depend on guarantees of impunity being extended to members of his inner circle. That is all the more reason that accountability should not be bargained away. Prospects for sustainable transformation in Zimbabwe require more, not less accountability, extending to economic crimes and corruption.
Perhaps Zuma’s public remarks are a tactical gamble, presenting himself as “on side” with the recalcitrant leaders while knowing full well that Africa’s political leadership can provide no meaningful guarantees of impunity. If this benign interpretation is true, is it worth the egg that has landed on his face as a result of appearing an apologist for the continent’s perpetrators?
Notes:
Comfort Ero is deputy director of the Africa Program of the International Center for Transitional Justice. Piers Pigou is a senior associate at the ICTJ.
Related Materials:
Immunity for dictators: free pass to perdition
Immunity for dictators?
Rwanda gives ex-leaders immunity
Ex- presidents given immunity - Official Website of the Rwandan Government
Law on Privileges for Ex-Presidents Runs into Stormy Weather
Zuma must be supported in his accord for dictators
The conquest of Rwanda (1990-1994): Recognizing the international conspiracy
By Emmanuel Neretse
June 29, 2009
In Rwanda, the 4th of July marks the commemoration of Kigali-City capture by the Tutsi-dominated RPF rebels from the Ugandan army. This day which is celebrated on July 4th each year, has been cynically and abusively named the “Liberation Day” by the conquerors. In preparation of the commemoration of the "liberation" day's 15th anniversary, the Rwandan government has decided to honor, by decoration, some foreigners who substantially contributed to this so-called “liberation”.
By doing so the Kagame’s regime counts to honor personalities, whose actions have been directly or indirectly decisive during the conquest of power in Rwanda. These figures will obviously include nationals from some powerful western countries that have conceived and carried out the conquest of Rwanda by the Tutsi refugees.
Thus will be decorated Ugandans, Tanzanians, Burundians, Ethiopians and Somalis, Belgians, Americans (USA) and British (UK).
Beyond the individual profile of each fortunate candidate, I strongly believe that this symbolic action of Kagame is a tip of the hat to the home country of each candidate for its contribution to the restoration of the Tutsi hegemony in Rwanda. Of course, diplomatic constraints did not allow the dictator of Kigali to decorate the official representatives of these countries. It is through a few citizens of these countries that Kagame will express his gratitude for the assistance he received during his quest to power.
It is therefore interesting to examine the real motivations of each of these countries and the specific acts posed by them to support the conquest of Rwanda.
Uganda
It is well-known that that the rebellion that brought Yoweri Museveni to power in 1986 was mainly controlled by Tutsi officers of Rwandan origin. Museveni not only had the moral obligation to help his former comrades but also to get rid of them by creating a kind of protectorate regime over his tiny southern neighbor.
The implementation of this strategy was obvious. Several units of the Ugandan army invaded Rwanda on October 1, 1990. The Ugandan military bases served as back up bases of the so-called Tutsi rebellion (RPF). The RPF combatants retreated there after their military operations in Rwanda. The Ugandan government has allowed the RPF to gain supply in weapons and other war materials under its endorsement as a sovereign country. Until the conquest of the entire country, Uganda has provided technical and diplomatic support to the RPF whenever there was a crucial need.
Tanzania
To understand the implication of Tanzania along side with the RPF in the conquest of Rwanda, one must first have a look at the position of the undisputed leader of this country at that time. Julius Nyerere, who remained until his death in 1999 the
real strongman of Tanzania, had a dislike of Heads of State who came to power
through military coups in general and in particular towards Juvenal Habyarimana.
In addition, with regard to Rwanda and Burundi, he had a fixed “strange” position because he was convinced that Rwanda should go back to the Tutsis and the Hutus should be regrouped in Burundi! This is why he actively supported the conquest of Rwanda by Ugandan soldiers of Rwandan origin while protecting Burundian Hutu refugees in Tanzania. He even went on to become their sponsor in order to put pressure on the Tutsi regime in Burundi.
It is in this context that Tanzania, under the disguised neutrality (during the Arusha Peace Agreement negotiations in which it was a “facilitator”), was very active in imposing the RPF views. For instance, through the Organization of African Unity (OAU), whose Secretary General was Salim Ahmed Salim, a former Minister of Nyerere! As in Uganda, Tutsi elites from all jurisdictions in Tanzania have been supported and encouraged to join or support the conquest of Rwanda.
Burundi
The destabilization of Rwanda in 1990 was a boon to the mono-ethnic Tutsi in Burundi. This military regime was out of breath at that time. However, it saw the conquest of Rwanda by Tutsi elements from the Ugandan army as a life buoy and a strong warning signal to Hutus who dreamed about their emancipation any time soon.
Thus, the Burundi did not skimp on resources to mobilize in order to support the RPF war for the conquest of Rwanda. RPF recruits from Rwanda used to transit from Rwanda to Burundi before being shipped to Uganda. Rwandan Tutsi refugees living in Burundi at that time were all trained by the security services to support the RPF war.
The Tutsi refugee elites in Burundi have been allowed to do politics within the RPF governing body while enjoying the protection of Burundian government. Businessmen have also been mobilized to contribute to the war effort. Under high protection, young people (students) were massively sent to battle fields via Uganda.
Ethiopia (Somalia filigree)
Ethiopia was involved in the conquest of Rwanda because of two fantasies that were equally eccentric and destructive.
At that time, the current leader of Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi, had just seized power by force in Addis Ababa. He was presented by his American sponsors as one of the models of the ''new leaders'' that were crucially needed for Africa, just as his colleague Yoweri Museveni of Uganda. The Americans wanted then to extend these models throughout the region starting with Rwanda.
Another fantasy intended to make Ethiopians and Somalis believe that the Tutsi who will soon march on Kigali are their biological brothers hence the need support them in their struggle since their conquest would be another vital space in their possession.
This was concretely translated into action by sending several units of Ethiopian troops to occupy areas conquered by the RPF in May 1994. To cover up this scandal and cover one's tracks, the UN declared that the first contingent of UNAMIR II, which was due in August 1994, would be made up of Ethiopian troops. The announcement of the arrival of the UNAMIR II (the Ethiopian contingent) was made public several weeks after the Ethiopian troops were visible on the Rwandan soil without knowing when or how they had arrived.
The United States
At that time, the super power was eager to promote the generation of the so-called of “new leaders” from the jungle such as Museveni, Zenawi, John Garang, etc. and insisted that this move be spread throughout the African Great Lakes region. Marshal Mobutu of Zaire (now renamed DRC), the main ally of the Rwandan regime of Juvenal Habyarimana, was already convicted. Logically, the U.S. had to specifically support Museveni’s enterprise mostly due to the fact that his success would cheaply open access to a springboard that will make it possible to jump on Zaire.
The United States has honored these decisions by providing accelerated training to Tutsi officers within the Ugandan army before they are sent to the battle field. By its widespread influence every time the USA tipped the balance on the RPF side within all international forums, especially the United Nations, while pushing down the legitimate government of Rwanda.
Throughout the Rwandan civil war and especially since April 1994, the United States provided military intelligence to the RPF, which enabled it to accelerate its conquest. The United States had already positioned its elite troops (marines) in a neighboring country just days before the assassination of Habyarimana on April 6, 1994 (just in case ...!).
United Kingdom
With Museveni’s ascension to power in Uganda, the UK strongly believed to have discovered a “rare bird”! The UK would then support it in all of its enterprises. In addition if the move might help put an end to French influence in the region, that would be great. To implement such as strong commitment, the UK will host the RPF headquarters albeit financial (bank accounts) and social (families of RPF leaders) for the entire duration of the conquest.
Like the USA, Great Britain will use its influence to help pass RPF views to the large expense of the Rwandan government.
Belgium
Those who are aware of the Belgian politics know that this country has no foreign policy and has been this way since 1945. The motto in Belgian foreign policy is to align behind the United States positions. Concerning Rwanda, it was sufficient to the then Belgian government to realize that the U.S. was thrilling for the RPF to make puppy dog eyes at this movement.
In addition, the Belgo-Belgian policy had a considerable effect on the attitude of the Belgian authorities with regard to the Rwandan civil war. The Liberals who were in the opposition for decades took in charge RPF facts and causes to overwhelm the Socio-Christians in power supposed to support the Habyarimana’s regime.
Specifically, Belgium distinguished itself by a spectacular and inexplicable volte-face since the beginning of the war in 1990. Brussels became the official platform of the RPF. Prior cooperation agreements and/or commercial contracts were simply unilaterally terminated.
Conclusion
Up to date, all informed observers were convinced that the international conspiracy was the basis of the conquest of Rwanda but so far the regime that embodies this conquest, out of pride or political calculation, did not dare to admit it. Today, it is done.
Related Materials:
Rwanda: law, justice and power
By Gregory Mthembu-Salter
Open Democracy
June 26, 2009
The international tribunal charged with investigating the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 has some significant achievements to its credit. But a series of problematic decisions casts a shadow over its reputation, says Gregory Mthembu-Salter.
The mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda is approaching its end. Its chief prosecutor, Hassan Bubacar Jallow, intends to conclude the work of the tribunal by its latest possible deadline of 31 December 2009. In investigating and prosecuting some of the worst perpetrators of Rwanda's genocide in April-July 1994, the ICTR has played an honourable role; but there is a shadow over it which will remain a blemish on its reputation
The issue is the ICTR's failure to extend its reach by also bringing to justice individuals belonging to the Rwandan Popular Front - the movement that came to power in Kigali in the aftermath of the genocide, and has held it ever since. The reasons for this failure are a familiar, if still grisly, story of international power-politics and behind-the-scenes pressure. This brief article sets out its ingredients.
A difficult start
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) by a resolution of November 1994. The tribunal‘s mandate was comprehensive, as befitting the overall goal of aim of achieving justice and "national reconciliation": to prosecute those responsible for the genocidal slaughter that had consumed the lives of at least 800,000 people, but also to target those who had committed "other serious violations of international law".
There are few who doubt that Rwandan Popular Front (RPF) troops - advancing southwards from their base in Uganda to overthrow the génocidaires and chase many of them towards or into the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Tanzania - committed war crimes in 1994, though the extent to which these were ordered by the RPF's leadership remains in dispute. Most estimates suggest the RPF killed 25,000-40,000 people in the relevant period: at most 1% of their enemies‘ total, yet of a number in a context that suggests that some at least in the RPF fell within the terms of the ICTR's mandate.
The ICTR's first chief prosecutor was Carla del Ponte, who also headed the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). She began with the intention of prosecuting RPF members for war crimes, without losing sight of the tribunal's primary objective of seeking out genocide perpetrators. The ICTR's efforts in this respect, however, quickly ran into trouble.
The Rwandan government in Kigali soon heard of the ICTR's intention to investigate the RPF - as well as the incident which triggered the genocide, the plane crash that killed Rwanda's president, Juvénal Habyarimana. The relations between government and tribunal - already tense - went into deep freeze.
There were three reasons for the existing tension. First, Rwanda's government to a large measure blamed the genocide on the international community and the United Nations system. Second, Kigali was angered by the decision to locate the ICTR in Arusha, Tanzania, rather than in Rwanda; this deprived the Rwandan authorities of the chance themselves to prosecute any of the key genocide suspects. Third, it was furious too at the succour given by international-aid organisations to the over 2 million Rwandan Hutu refugees then crowded (and in some cases reorganising) in Congolese and Tanzanian camps - among whom were the very politicians, militia and Rwandan army members responsible for the genocide.
This toxic context guaranteed that Rwandan politicians from the top downwards would denounce the ICTR for allegedly equating genocide crimes with RPF killings. There was a spate of stories in the government-controlled Rwandan press about génocidaires who were said to be working as defence counsel for several of the ICTR's indictees. Soon after, the Rwandan government formally suspended its relations with the ICTR, denying visas to would-be witnesses for the tribunal's genocide trials. Without these witnesses, the trials ground to a halt.
A sour fallout
The Rwandan government's stance was in defiance of the UN Security Council, and a violation of its legal obligation to assist the ICTR. Yet the decision of both council and tribunal to acquiesce was understandable. For both bodies, the most important thing was to hold genocide trials, and thus demonstrate to a sceptical world that it would not allow impunity for this terrible crime. Any trials of RPF members for war crimes would of course be desirable, as would clarity on who killed Juvénal Habyarimana; but now that the Rwandan government had effectively created a stark choice - genocide trials only, or no trials at all - the UNSC and ICTR chose the former option as the lesser of two evils.
In principle, the UNSC could have challenged the Rwandan government's stance, perhaps backed by aid cuts from the Washington and London (Kigali's main donors until) cooperation was restored. This was unrealistic, for two main reasons. First, the record of the two main parties. The Rwandan government included those who had stopped the genocide, saving hundreds of thousands of lives; the Security Council had authorised the withdrawal of its troops from Rwanda just as the killings were getting underway. The council had near-zero moral credibility over the genocide; indeed, part of the whole point of the ICTR was to restore it.
Second, the particular stance of the United States. The 1994 genocide happened during Bill Clinton's presidency. His administration both supported the withdrawal of UN forces from Rwanda when the genocide started, and played a major role in the UNSC in undermining subsequent attempts by other countries to muster an international force to intervene.
The US government even opted to describe what was happening in Rwanda (in the first weeks) as "tribal killings", an evasive and inaccurate term preferred to "genocide" because the latter would entail an obligation to respond. When it was all over, Clinton appeared to experience genuine remorse at having failed Rwanda, and his administration was simply not prepared to challenge the Rwandan government on the ICTR issue.
A bleak endgame
The Rwandan government went further than stopping RPF prosecutions and the ICTR's plane-crash investigation. It demanded a price for restoring cooperation with the tribunal: Carla del Ponte's resignation. Here too the UN Security Council conceded. The official justification - which had the advantage of being true - was that she already had a full agenda with the ICTY.
Hassan Bubacar Jallow replaced Carla del Ponte in 2003. Soon after, it became clear that there would never be any RPF prosecutions by the ICTR. The official position was that the tribunal was studying the matter and pursuing leads, but when questioned on the matter Jallow repeatedly fudged the issue, and nothing ever happened. In the meantime he invested considerable time and energy improving relations with the Rwandan government, even appealing five times for ICTR cases to be transferred to Rwanda for trial.
Each time, the tribunal's magistrates blocked Jallow's requests for trial transfers. At the same time, it has agreed to the transfer of several cases to other national jurisdictions (as its mandate allows) and refused to allow any of those convicted to serve their sentences in Rwanda. These decisions, against Rwanda's own wishes, seem to be the ICTR's way of demonstrating its even-handedness.
Moreover, the ICTR and Rwandan prosecutors collaborated on a case brought to court in Rwanda in 2008 - in which four RPF officers were accused of killing Vincent Nsengiyumva, the archbishop of Kigali, and several other senior members of the Rwanda's Roman Catholic hierarchy, in June 1994. The ICTR promised that it would monitor the officers' trial closely, even as it hinted that this was the closest it would ever get to tackling the issue of RPF war crimes. In the event, the Rwandan courts controversially acquitted the two senior officers, while convicting the two junior officers (who in any case had already admitted carrying out the killing).
When its mandate expires on 31 December 2009 , the ICTR will have significant achievements to its credit: challenging impunity by bringing the worst of the genocide perpetrators to book; proving in the process that the genocide did take place, greatly weakening the efforts of denialists; and advancing international jurisprudence, particularly regarding rape as a weapon of war and genocide.
And yet... the UN Security Council's decision in 2002 to accept the Rwandan government's de facto veto over the ICTR's progress because it seemed the lesser of two evils means that the ICTR will always be accused of perpetrating "victors' justice". This is a sad judgment for a tribunal that has carried out such important work on the world's behalf. But ultimately, it is a just one.
Note:
Gregory Mthembu-Salter is a writer and researcher on Africa who lives in Scarborough, South Africa. He writes for the Economist Intelligence Unit, Africa Confidential and the Africa Report. He has been a researcher for the South African Institute of International Affairs and the Institute for Security Studies, and was a member of the UN Panel of Experts on the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2007-08.
Also by Gregory Mthembu-Salter in Open Democracy:"South Africans have voted. What did they say" (24 April 2009).
Related Materials:
The Future of Rwanda Depends on Reconciliation and Dialogue Between Former Murdurers and their Victims
Rwanda: Tribunal Risks Supporting ‘Victor’s Justice’
Letter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Regarding the Prosecution of RPF Crimes
Rwanda: Academic Scholars Call for ICTR to Fulfill Mandate and Prosecute RPF/RPA Members
Rwanda: RPF's Paranoia Over HRW
During the 1994 Rwandan genocide, Kagame massacred both Hutu and Tutsi
The Rwandan Genocide: The Bodies That Were Floating In The Kagera River Were Victims Of The RPA
Immunity for dictators: free pass to perdition
Rwandan tribunal seeks extension
Civilian Plane Shoot-Downs and International (In)Justice; From 007 to Rwanda
Tanzania tipped to host Africa’s criminal court
Rwanda could lose out on hosting of ICC despite reforms
Rwandan presidential hopeful makes Dayton stop
An exile from her native land, Victoire Umuhoza seeks ethnic reconciliation.
By Doug Page
Dayton Daily News
Staff Writer
June 28, 2009
DAYTON — Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza is one of the estimated 500,000 Rwandans living in exile.
The mother of three hopes to end her exile in September, returning to her country to get her political party on the 2010 presidential ballot.
Umuhoza is chairwoman of the United Democratic Forces, which espouses nonviolence and reconciliation among the various Rwandan ethnic groups following the 1994 genocide.
“It is time to get the (democratic) process back on track,” she said Saturday, June 27, prior to speaking to members of the local Rwandan community at the Holiday Inn North. “I am speaking to the exiles, telling them they can play a role in solving these problems.
“The first step is to end the use of violence. We must give a chance (to) a peaceful transition of power.”
Unlike some in her audience Saturday, Umuhoza did not witness the genocide that killed an estimated 1 million people. She left her country for school in the Netherlands several months before the start of the countrywide violence.
But what she saw on television started her down a political path.
Recently, several disparate exile groups formed a political coalition of the Umuhoza’s United Democratic Forces and the Rwanda Democratic Opposition Party to put forward a presidential candidate: Umuhoza.
There are several roadblocks the coalition must pass. It must be recognized by the current government, which prohibits opposition parties, to appear on the ballot.
And Umuhoza must get a passport and return to Rwanda for the first time since 1994. If allowed back and her candidacy is recognized, then comes a likely uphill campaign.
“I will do anything for my country,” she said, though admitted some trepidation about returning to Rwanda. “The regime does not accept dissenting voices.”
She hopes that her appearances before Rwandans in Europe and the United States will encourage Western governments with investments in Rwanda to speak out on her behalf to the current Rwandan government.
“I hope the United States government will support the democratic process, put words into action,” she said.
Related Materials:
Rwandan presidential candidate plans to visit Dayton on Saturday
Rwanda: Exiled Opposition Planning for Presidential Elections
Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza Is getting ready to put an end to Kagame’s dictatorship in Rwanda during the 2010 presidential elections-Éénvandaag April 10, 2009
Rwanda: UDF-Inkingi requests a copy of the drafted Electoral Code
Rwanda 2010: Another Kenya? Another Zimbabwe?
Rwanda: RPF's Paranoia Over UDF-Inkingi
Interview with FDU-UDF chairwoman Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza 18 - 01- 2009
In Rwanda, stability sometimes comes before justice
New tensions in Rwanda are not the result of a failure by the Rwanda tribunal to deliver justice, but of the struggle for food and land, says Jeroen Corduwener.
By Jeroen Corduwener
June 25, 2009
Photo:
Rwandans demonstrate in Kigali in 2006 to denounce France's alleged complicity in the 1994 genocide. Photo AFP
In the article
France and the Tutsi have to face justice in Rwanda too, Marcia Luyten argues that all those involved in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 should be put on trial internationally: not just the Hutu, but also the Tutsi who killed tens of thousands of Hutus, and international players like France.
Luyten bases her argument on the assumption that a repeat of '1994' can be prevented if the path of international justice is followed in Rwanda. This analysis and conclusion do not add up. First of all because justice is not an end in itself, and certainly not in a country where this could lead to destabilisation. And secondly because the greatest threat to Rwanda is not in its past, unresolved or not, but in poverty, and the shortage of land and food.
LiberatorThe genocide was aimed at the Tutsi. Current president Paul Kagame and his RPF stopped the mass killings in 1994. Although there are questions about whether this was Kagame's principal goal, or just a means to get to power, it does not detract from the fact itself. Kagame took power as a dictator, but he has great authority precisely because he is seen as the liberator.
This is true in his own country but also at the international level: both the European Union and the United States treat Kagame with kid gloves. When Luyten makes the argument that the Netherlands can and should play a more critical role in Rwanda, she should know that the Netherlands is a relatively small donor and plays an accordingly minor role in the diplomatic game in Kigali.
Anyone wanting to investigate the crimes committed by the RPF threatens the stability, not only of Rwanda, but of the region as a whole. It is precisely the lack of stability that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the region over the past decades. It is a dilemma of justice versus stability. It is for these reasons that the US has blocked such an investigation by the Rwanda tribunal.
The US has taken over the role of France as the most important international player in Rwanda. The detrimental support from France for the previous regime is well-known, but remains without repercussions. The same scenario applies here as to the absence of an investigation into the RPF: geopolitical interests and diplomatic relations stand in the way of justice.
One peopleTutsi and Hutu have been united as ‘Banyarwanda’ by Kagame: ‘One people, one destiny' is the slogan that can be read on billboards in Kigali: pseudo-Marxism in miniature. Many Hutus feel their suffering has gone unnoticed, but it is incorrect to assume that this gives rise to a new generation of victims, with the ultimate result that the violence will be repeated, as Luyten writes. The largest group of forgotten victims are the Tutsi survivors of the genocide, who do not feel recognised as such.
All these Rwandans live together in one of the smallest and most densely populated countries in Africa. And that population is growing at a dizzying rate. In 1994, the country had four million inhabitants, there are currently over ten million, a number that will double in ten years' time. Rwanda is fertile, but it is unable to feed such a large population, despite all attempts at land reform and economic growth.
The new tensions arise only from this and they threaten stability and peace. The greatest dangers are the struggle for food, land and economic ownership. The large majority of the desperately poor will turn on the small group of rich. And it in turn will defend itself.
Ethnic relations could play a role in this, intensified by the linguistic divide between English and French speakers. But it will be a response, not the underlying cause. If the international community is really concerned about the future of Rwanda, it should focus on investing in eliminating that underlying cause.
Note:
Jeroen Corduwener is a historian and a journalist who lives and works in Rwanda
Related Materials:
Rwandan presidential candidate plans to visit Dayton on Saturday
Many of the about 300 Rwandans living in the Dayton area are refugees.
By Hannah C. Bealer
Dayton Daily News
Staff Writer
June 26, 2009
Rwandan presidential candidate and United Democratic Front party member Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza will be at the Dayton North Holiday Inn at 3 p.m. Saturday, June 27.
Dayton has a Rwandan population of about 300, said Kristine Ward, chair of the board at the House of the People, a shelter for Rwandan refugees in Dayton.
Ward said 17 refugees are currently housed at the center, where they have the opportunity to seek employment and focus on education.
In September 2010, Umuhoza will run against President General Paul Kagame of the Rwandan Patriotic Front.
The Tutsi-formed RPF as well as Hutu extremists are widely believed to have played a part in the killings of Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira, who died when their plane was shot down in 1994. The assassinations caused controversy among the two groups, and led to the Rwandan genocide.
“Those who ignore all about Rwanda think that Kagame is a hero for his country whereas he is co-responsible for the Rwandanese tragedy,” Umuhoza said April 15 while giving a lecture at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands.
Ward said as an American citizen, she does not have a position in the Rwandan election. She believes that the local refugees, however, will “have a great deal to say about it. They were the ones who fortunately lived through the genocide.”
Renewal ceremony
“We gather not because we are all the same. We gather because we are all in this together,” Father John Krumm said at St. Mary’s Church on Saturday, June 20.
Krumm, who has been the priest of St. Mary’s for nine years, led a ceremony for the renewal of Isaie Sibomana’s and Sylvie Incuti’s marriage vows. The couple married in 1999 in Burkina Faso, a nation in West Africa. Their first child, Brice Sibomana, 8, was born in the country.
When the couple moved to Dayton, Incuti gave birth to their now 1-year-old twins, Bryan and Bright.
The family felt it was “important to renew their vows in a church for the community and their children,” Ward said. Brice’s first communion was included in the ceremony as well as the twins’ baptism.
Many Rwandan refugees who escaped the 1994 genocide were in attendance for the ceremony, and Krumm’s words must have hit home for many of them.Ward has only positive things to say about the refugees she assists at the House of the People. “They’re very forgiving,” she said.
“That’s why it’s hard for them to understand the genocide.”
Ward also noted that many of the refugees held high-ranking jobs in Rwanda, ranging from university professors to doctors. However, when they arrive at the House of the People, “they take any job they can get.”
Many will agree to work the night shift so they can spend the daytime with their children, she said.
“If there’s a gift they can give, it’s the way they care for their children,” Ward said. “These men are the most dedicated fathers I have seen.”
Ward, who’s work at the House is voluntary, says it’s a miracle when a Rwandan family comes to live at the House with all members intact. Despite their misfortunes, “they never lost their dignity, their hope or their love,” said Ward.
Now, the refugees have a new hope for the country they fled.
That hope comes in the form of Umuhoza.
Umuhoza did not witness the genocide personally.
In an interview with Oliver Nyiruburgara, a journalist who focuses on African affairs, she explained she left Rwanda in 1994 to live in the Netherlands. She watched the genocide progress on television.
“It hurt me deep in my heart,” she told Nyiruburgara. “My political determination is based on that. We suffered a genocide and the first step should be reconciliation.”
Philippe Bizimana, the Rwandan community coordinator in Dayton, says that Umuhoza will be the first politician the community will see when she comes to speak in Dayton.
Bizimana came to live in the U.S. 10 years ago when he left a Kenyan refugee camp and arrived in Dayton. “This is my place,” he said of the city.
Bizimana said not many people know of Umuhoza, but “many people would support anyone who could bring peace in Rwanda.”
Dr. Joseph Twagilimana, another Rwandan refugee, feels similarly. He explained the name ‘Umuhoza’ means a person who cleans the tears off of a crying person’s cheeks.
If Umuhoza defeats the current president, she will be the country’s first female president.
“That would be great. I feel like everyone will be happy like they are in Liberia now,” said Bizimana, referring to Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf who won the 2005 Liberian presidential election and became its first elected female head of state.
“We don’t distinguish between male or female,” explained Twagilimana. “We distinguish who can do what and the way he or she can do it. A president is a president, not a male or a female.”
Contact this reporter at (937) 225-9370 or hbealer@DaytonDailyNews.com.
Realated Materials:
Rwanda: Exiled Opposition Planning for Presidential Elections
Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza Is getting ready to put an end to Kagame’s dictatorship in Rwanda during the 2010 presidential elections-Éénvandaag April 10, 2009
Rwanda: UDF-Inkingi requests a copy of the drafted Electoral Code
Rwanda 2010: Another Kenya? Another Zimbabwe?
Rwanda: RPF's Paranoia Over UDF-Inkingi
Interview with FDU-UDF chairwoman Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza 18 - 01- 2009
Fresh Nightmares in Congo's Drive Against Rwandans
Villagers Describe Atrocities on Both Sides of Conflict
By Stephanie McCrummen
Washington Post Foreign Service
June 25, 2009
MINOVA, Congo -- A Congolese military operation against Rwandan rebels who have caused years of conflict in eastern Congo is unleashing fresh horrors across this region's rolling green hills.
The mission, backed logistically by U.N. peacekeepers and politically by the United States, aims to disband the remaining 7,000 or so Rwandan Hutu rebels who fled into eastern Congo after the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
But since the operation began in January, villagers have recounted nightmarish stories that raise questions about whether the military action will ultimately cause more destruction than it prevents.
At least half a million people have fled a rebel campaign of village burnings and retaliatory killings, including a massacre of more than 100 people in which several civilians were decapitated. At the same time, people are also fleeing the advance of their own predatory army -- a toxic mishmash of mostly unpaid, underfed, ill-trained former militiamen churned into the military after various peace deals.
According to an army spokesman, the deputy to the commander in charge of the operation is an ex-militia leader and wanted war crimes suspect known as the Terminator. Villagers say soldiers are killing people accused of collaborating with the rebels. And in scenes that conjure the brutalities of Belgian colonial rule, commanders are forcing locals to carry supplies across the forest, killing those who collapse from exhaustion.
"Pastors, teachers, students, everyone must carry, and not for one day, for weeks," said Kalinda Hangi, a former teacher who has filled a notebook with names of people killed by the rebels and the army in his area. "They make you build their tents, take water -- if you don't obey, they kill you."
In its mission, the army is being supported by trucks, food, attack helicopters and other equipment provided by the U.N. peacekeepers, but the cooperation has spawned criticism.
Humanitarian workers say the operation has paralyzed assistance to the newly displaced, and a U.N. interagency committee last month described "a fundamental conflict" between the U.N. support of the army and the world body's mandate to protect civilians.
"This operation is definitely doing more harm than good," said Julien Attakla, who heads the U.N. human rights section in North Kivu province, where the operation has been centered. The rebels "have never been as dangerous to the population as they are now. And the Congolese army -- what are the chances of them carrying out a successful operation? They are looting houses, looting farms, raping everywhere, using forced labor -- that's the real face of this operation."
Preying on Villagers
Diplomats from the United Nations, United States, Europe and especially neighboring Rwanda have pressured Congo for years to act against the Hutu rebels, who are known as the FDLR (Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda) and include leaders accused of helping organize Rwanda's genocide.
Although they are no longer considered an immediate threat to the Rwandan government, the rebels have in the past collaborated with the Congolese army, sharing weapons and fighting against common enemies. The rebels have set up parallel administrations in many areas, preying on villagers and controlling much of the region's lucrative mineral trade.
Their presence has prompted Rwanda to invade Congo twice and to back two Congolese rebel movements, fueling a complex conflict that has become the deadliest since World War II. By some estimates, the fighting and related turmoil have left at least 5 million people dead over the past decade.
U.S. and U.N. officials say the operation -- initially supported by thousands of Rwandan soldiers -- is a crucial part of a wider political and economic deal to mend the destructive relationship between Rwanda and Congo and return stability to Congo's long-suffering east. They say the operation has forced hundreds of rebels to desert, disrupted their command and weakened their hold on the mineral trade, though analysts dispute the latter two gains.
Top U.N. officials say that if they were not cooperating with the army, human rights abuses would be worse.
"We've been mandated to support this army, and we are trying to the best of our ability to improve their performance and protect civilians," said Hiroute Guebre Sellassie, head of the U.N. office in North Kivu province. "Our coordination with the army has helped us control the damage."
'Our Bullets Are Finished'
Still, there have been dozens of rebel attacks since the operation began, many advertised in advance by rebels who have left leaflets in villages promising death to anyone who helps the army. The most brutal attack came last month in the village of Busurungi, where at least 100 people were massacred, according to several survivors.
The army had taken up position in the formerly rebel-held village, but most of those soldiers had moved on by the time the rebels arrived one night. A few militiamen tried to fight back but ran out of ammunition.
"They called us civilians and said, 'Our bullets are finished, try to run,' " said Angelus Bahavu, secretary to a traditional king in the area.
As he ran, he saw rebels force screaming women and children back into their huts, which they set on fire. Rebels guarded the doors to prevent anyone from escaping, he and others said. The rebels slammed babies against trees, and people fleeing were killed with arrows, machetes and guns. And in a tactic aimed at terrorizing those who might cooperate with the army, rebels decapitated several people, whose heads were placed on tree branches planted at the entrance to the village.
"They told people, 'You are bringing these troops to hunt us, now we will hunt you,' " said Bahavu, who eventually made his way to a sprawling camp of banana-leaf huts.
The rebels "are clearly pursuing a strategy of reprisal attacks against civilians," said Anneke Van Woudenberg, senior researcher with the group Human Rights Watch, which has documented more than 300 reprisal killings, a number she described as probably only "the tip of the iceberg."
Although less is known about the army's tactics, villagers said the Busurungi massacre was payback for an army massacre of rebels and their families in a nearby village.
Soldiers are looting farms and markets, and rape cases are rising in areas in which they are deployed, according to aid workers. Forced labor is becoming common.
Inaye Mifuti, 27, said soldiers forced him to haul ammunition and a sack of salt for a week. He escaped, only to meet a second group of soldiers who ordered him to join a weary line of conscripted porters.
"I said: 'No, I've been carrying. I'm tired,' " he said. "When I answered like that, they started hitting me with the knife attached to the gun."
Mifuti, who now lives in the camp and wears a scarf over his ruined left eye, said he saw soldiers force 20 primary school students and their principal into slavery. When the principal got tired of working, Mifuti said, "they killed him with a knife."
A spokesman for the Congolese army, Col. Seraphin Mirindi, said the army is stepping up efforts to prosecute such abuses.
But he defended the participation in the operation of Bosco Ntaganda, the man known as the Terminator, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for allegedly conscripting child soldiers and is separately accused of commanding militiamen who killed at least 800 civilians in 2002.
"In Congo, there are general interests and particular interests," Mirindi said.
"The peace is a general interest in Congo. Bosco is a particular interest. For now, we are arresting people who are committing crimes during this operation. For the rest, after this war, there will be time to act," Mirindi added.
Related Materials:
Lalibre Reports: Is it Too Late for Eastern Congo?
Rise in Armed Attacks in Eastern Congo Prompts UN Aid Appeal
DRC: UN mission backs DRC forces against rebels
UN: The Joint Military Operation Against The FDLR Has Failed
Beyond the Myth Ex-FAR/Interahamwe and the Congolese Tragedy
Beyond Ethnic Politics and Fear: Hutu, Tutsi, and Ethnicity in Rwanda
