By Greg Rosen
News Scotsman
January 9, 2010
FROM within the boundaries of this island, you might think that Britain's international reputation was currently such that no-one would want to come near us.
Yet almost unnoticed, 15 years after the UK's opposition on the United Nations Security Council helped to block action to stop the Rwandan genocide, late last year Rwanda, of its own enthusiastic volition, joined the British Commonwealth
The Rwandan government today is led principally by the rebels who evicted the genocidaires by force – after the failure of the UN to concede that genocide was taking place. Only months later, by which time it was all conveniently over, did the UN formally concede that a genocide had taken place. As detailed studies have now revealed, ministers in John Major's government and their representatives at the UN actively frustrated the efforts of those on the Security Council, such as New Zealand and the Czech Republic, who advocated immediate intervention.
Britain argued that a ceasefire was required before troops could be deployed – even though one side was massacring innocent civilians. In the telling words of the Czech ambassador to the UN, it was like "wanting Hitler to reach a ceasefire with the Jews".
You would think, given the behaviour of the British government in 1994, that Britain would be among the last countries with which the now peaceful Rwanda would want to build closer relations. But talk to Rwandan politicians and you will find the enthusiasm for Britain palpable.
Astounding as it is to think, so hardened are we to the failures and betrayals of our governments, Labour's decision in 1997 to put the rejuvenation of Rwanda at the heart of the new Department for International Development, has been a startling success.
In the wake of the genocide and subsequent civil war, Rwanda was devastated. Yet now, as a former senior British business figure, now based in Kigali, told me, Rwanda is on the road to becoming "the Switzerland of Africa" – a reference not just to its abundance of verdant peaks, but to its growing economy and the seriousness with which it is tackling corruption.
Tony Blair's personal commitment to righting wronged Rwanda reflected his outrage at the behaviour of Mr Major's government. It was that outrage that underpinned his determination that Britain should intervene internationally to save lives, as it did successfully in Sierra Leone and Kosovo and less successfully in Iraq.
Whether he is prepared to admit them or not, Mr Blair's government made mistakes in Iraq. But Mr Major's government made greater mistakes in opposing UN action to stop the Rwandan genocide. Indeed, some would argue that they were not mistakes but deliberate policy. But we seem more interested in putting Mr Blair in the stocks for taking action in Iraq without UN support than learning lessons from British policy through the UN in Rwanda.
It is striking that when the UN itself issued a report on its handling of the Rwandan genocide, the response from UK officials was as defensive as it was evasive. Unlike over Iraq, there has been no big British inquiry. No media hullabaloo. No great "Stop the Genocide" marches.
When I spoke to her in December, the new Rwandan foreign minister, Louise Mushikiwabo, suggested that the lessons from 1994 had yet to be properly learnt and called for reform of the UN and expansion of the Security Council.
As one senior Rwandan MP put it to me, if western countries are reluctant to intervene militarily to help faraway counties of which we know little, then the decentralisation of the UN, to give regions the ability to take action free from the veto of faraway powers, could save lives.
Rwanda is one of the main contributors to the Darfur UN force, and this could give them a freer hand to prevent killings. Perhaps that might be a recommendation from a proper UK inquiry into the lessons from the Rwandan genocide of 1994?
But who would set it up? After Iraq, Labour lacks enthusiasm for inquiries. And such an inquiry could seriously embarrass the last Conservative government. It would take courage for David Cameron to commit to setting one up – but then he is going to great lengths in seeking to demonstrate that the Conservative Party has changed its spots.
What better way to show it had changed than by opening the British files on Rwanda?
Note:
Greg Rosen is an author and political commentator.
Related Materials:
The conquest of Rwanda (1990-1994): Recognizing the international conspiracy
UK's proxy wars in Africa: The case of Rwanda and DR Congo
KBR and the Rwandan Genocide
The US Destructive Role In The Rwandan Tragedy
The dark shadows that stain the new darling of Africa
No comments:
Post a Comment