Case analysis Rwanda

Introduction to global development

By Caroline van SlobbeStudent number: 2112685Lector: Martin de WolfSemester: September 2012 – Februari 2013

Date: 9 October 2013

Table of contents

1. The genocide in Rwanda in 1994....................................................................................................3

1.1. Before the genocide...............................................................................................................3

1.2. The genocide..........................................................................................................................3

1.3. Aftermath...............................................................................................................................4

2. Causes of the genocide...................................................................................................................6

2.1 Jared Diamond: a Malthusian event.......................................................................................6

2.2 Karol Boudreaux: critics on Diamond.....................................................................................7

2.3 Additional criticism on Diamond.............................................................................................9

2.4 Dependencia thinking about Rwandan genocide.................................................................11

3. Rwandan post-genocide development.........................................................................................13

3.1 Political.................................................................................................................................13

3.2 Economy...............................................................................................................................14

3.3 Socio-cultural........................................................................................................................15

3.4 Environmental......................................................................................................................16

4. Future development.....................................................................................................................17

5. Reflection.....................................................................................................................................19

5.1 My involvement....................................................................................................................19

5.2 Dutch development aid........................................................................................................19

5.3 Most important items to me................................................................................................19

References............................................................................................................................................21

2

1. The genocide in Rwanda in 1994

In Rwanda, both Hutu and Tutsi people live next to each other, speaking the same language, having the same culture. Two ethnic groups which lived together for centuries, but not always in peace. What is the difference between them? Hutu’s are square-jawed, a bit shorter and traditionally crop-growers. Tutsi’s are a bit taller, paler-skinned and usually herdsmen out of history. The last, were supposed to have immigrated from northern countries, like Ethiopia. Many clashes between the two ethnic groups took place in the twentieth century, of which the genocide of 1994 was one of the most horrific in modern times. In this chapter I will shortly explain what was preceded by the genocide, how it actually happened and what was the aftermath. What did this mean to nowadays Rwanda?

1.1.Before the genocide

Because Tutsis were traditionally herdsmen, it was average that they were usually landowners and Hutus were often land workers. When the Belgium colonists came along in 1916, they thought Tutsis looked more like Europeans with their lighter skins, more aristocratic, so they had to be superior over the majority of Hutus. The Belgians introduced identity cards for all the Rwandans which showed their ethnicity as well; Hutu or Tutsi. The differences between them were more and more emphasized, which probably was not the cause of the Belgians, but it was done anyway. The Tutsis, although they were a minority in the country, could take power as a result, and they actually behaved like aristocrats against the Hutus. They, on the other hand, were valued down to peasants. The discontent and hate increased during many years among Hutus.

In 1956, this led to a great rebellion of Hutus against Tutsis which would continue until Hutus took over power in 1959. According to the Peace Pledge Union Information website, around 100.000 people died during these years. A BBC-article says an estimated 20.000 Tutsis were killed. Numbers are always hard to check.

As Belgium left the country and granted Rwanda independence in 1962, the Hutus had gotten in charge. Many Tutsis fled to neighbouring countries such as Zaire (nowadays Democratic Republic of Congo). There they formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), led by Mr. Kagame, the current president, and trained their soldiers. Meanwhile, in Rwanda, Tutsis were suppressed and tensions grew bigger and more intense.

In 1990, the civil war came up, after decades of conflict and violent actions. The RPF took their ‘chance’ and attacked. It came to a ceasefire in the summer of 1993, but that didn’t help a lot. Already a lot of violence was spreading.

At the 6th of April the next year, the plane of the Hutu president, Juvenal Habyarimana was shot down. Tutsis were pointed at to be the murderers, although it never became clear exactly who was behind the attack. Nevertheless, it was a trigger for the Hutu’s government to start a massive campaign of violence against Tutsis as well as moderate Hutus. This was the start of the genocide, which would turn out to be one of the most terrific in recent human history.

1.2.The genocide

3

It was incredible how fast the violence was spreading. Within hours after the plane was shot down, the Hutu government had recruited thousands of soldiers and through the radio Hutus were told to kill the Tutsis all over the country. But first, moderate Hutu’s who didn’t hate Tutsis should be killed. It became a slaughter, not a war fought with guns, but by hand: with machetes, spears and arrows. This was the only way, thought the extremist Hutu regime, they could remain in power, by wiping out the Tutsi people completely.

Hutus formed an unofficial group called Interahamwe, which means ‘those who attack together’. They were trained to massacre. But also civilians were forced by policemen and soldiers to kill, not seldom their Tutsi neighbours or co-workers. Tutsi men, women and children were murdered in schools and churches, were they would hide.

Rwanda was left alone by the international community, although they pleased for help. Three months before the event, the UN was warned about the Hutu power action. There was a UN force present in Rwanda, but they didn’t have a mandate to intervene. The troops were pulled out when ten of them died. The UN tried to get them to negotiate, but this lead to nothing. The ‘red line’ which was important to the Security Council, was when it would be clear that the definition of genocide was actually what was going on. When they found out that it was, it was too late. The USA didn’t want to use their high-tech materials to get rid of the hate-spreading radio, because that was not right according to America’s freedom of speech.

By the end of May, 500.000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus had died. More or less, a tenth of the total population of Rwanda, died in 100 days of genocide. Was it not by murder, than from illness or food starvation as a consequence of the extreme violence. Finally, in July, the RPF took over capital Kigali. The government collapsed. It came to a ceasefire, this time.

1.3.Aftermath

First, a multi-ethnic government was taken together, with a Hutu, Pasteur Bizimungu as President, and Tutsi and RPF-leader Paul Kagame as his deputy. Later, after accusations against Bizimungu, Kagame became president.

When the whole population found out that the RPF had taken over power in Kigali, Hutus became afraid. An estimated two million Hutus fled to neighbouring countries, mainly Zaire, nowadays DR Congo. Many of them were implicated in the massacres, probably afraid to take responsibility for their actions. This became a huge problem for DR Congo, causing violent ethnic conflicts over there and an estimated five million deaths. Rwanda, such a small country in comparison to neighbour DR Congo, invaded several times, aiming that the Tutsi government wants to wipe out all the Hutus forces.

The Western countries tried to ignore the fact that they were the ones closing their eyes for genocide. It was called ‘tribal violence’ and ‘ancient ethnic hatreds’, for example.

The genocide was over in Rwanda, but still going on in DR Congo. Hutu extremist there had the time to make plans of another attack on Tutsis and recruit new soldiers in the refugee camps. Tutsis from Rwanda wanted to clear the camps to be able to put in prison every murderer. Congo also wanted them to close, but this was hard at first. After all, in 1996 the refugees were forced out. But the Rwandan government lent many killers a moratorium, probably because the prisons were too full.

Already two years after the genocide of 1994, Hutus and Tutsis were living next to each other again, just as before. But now, killers and victimized families lived as neighbours. There was some kind of

4

anti-genocide campaign of the government. It was emphasized that both Tutsis and Hutus are Rwandan civilians.

President Kagame was praised for his good leadership after the genocide. But in 2010 a UN report was leaked in which Kagame was accused for his own government of carrying out mass slaughter in neighbouring DR Congo, also after the genocide. A report of The Nations speaks of 671 ‘incidents’ where extreme violence against Hutus took place on a great scale.

Still, a lot of conflict is going on in DR Congo, while Rwanda seems to have become a peaceful country. Criticism on Kagame and on the UN’s lack of actions during the genocide are now being brought forward, years later. Many more there can be written about the genocide, but for now, I leave the summary this way. One thing I ask myself: from the UN point of view, is the case of Rwanda comparable with the nowadays civil war in Syria, where the international community’s doing nothing either?

5

2. Causes of the genocide

2.1 Jared Diamond: a Malthusian event

Jared Diamond describes some causes of the genocide, looking further than only the ethnic problems the country already had long time ago, which he first describes. Under president Habyarimana, Rwanda got a lot of foreign development aid because the economy, health and education in the country improved. But drought and environmental problems such as erosion took the overhand. That had much impact on the country’s economy. From 1990, when the food prices of Rwandan export products were decreased to a nadir, the civil war began and this lead, in the end, to the genocide. These already mentioned causes Diamond admits, although he describes some other causes in addition.

The two groups of Hutus and Tutsis are not so different than often is thought. They, as I already said, speak the same language, go to the same schools and churches, worked together in the same offices. This has impact on the relations between both groups. They even get intermarried very often. On the outside, they look different on the average, but in many cases the difference is not noticeable from the outside. The two groups were grown together, at many places, and this fact ended up in incredibly many family or community tragedies, when Hutus were forced to kill their Tutsi neighbours or co-workers. This inevitably brings forward the question: how is it possible that so many people were in such a way manipulated to kill their neighbours? Why would they do that? Is it dwangjust the pressure of the extreme Hutu government, or did it have other reasons?

Diamond argues that the genocide could be seen as a Malthusian event. Thomas Malthus argues that there is no way that all people get enough food, when the population is growing faster than food production. That is most commonly the case, since, Malthus says, population grows exponentially, and food production grows arithmetically. When there’s not enough food for the population anymore, population has to decrease, because food production cannot increase any more. Nature will take care of this, according to the economist. Either it’s the case that people die of hunger, or, like in Rwanda, of genocide.

This is what Jared Diamond describes as another possible cause for the Rwandan genocide: the bad economic conditions, because of the lack of food for a great amount of people, both Hutu and Tutsi. Agricultural technology was not improving in the country, while the population grew after independence of Belgium. Clearing forests for the interest of farmers lead to short term solutions, but in the long term to erosion and, thus, infertility of the land. This continued for some decades, and the prospects of land owners was more and more negative.

As a result of the lack of food production, inequality between the land owners increased. He calls the example of the region of Kanama, where both Hutus and Tutsis lived. Literally: the rich (who are not that rich, in fact) were getting richer and the poor were getting poorer, over here. That was because of a system in which fertile land was sold by poor farmers out of necessity, they needed money today to survive. The rich farmers were buying this land from the poor en got greater income out of it. The number of ‘hunger thieves’ grew bigger, because of the increase of poverty. In the end, even the richer land owners just had enough to feed their own family. This was no good for the cohesion between civilians. Family relations were cursed, no one could help each other, and it became more bitter. Conflicts within communities were getting common, and these conflicts sabotaged family ties, turned them into enemies. And this was before 1994, that the levels of violence and theft were rising all over Rwanda.

6

Research was being held in the region of Kanama, before and after the genocide. It revealed the great number of people being killed not only because he was a Tutsi, but because he has a big fertile piece of land. Many Hutus were therefore being labelled as ‘moderate’, when in fact they just had too much land in comparison to their neighbours. The huge amount of people that died in, not per se from, the genocide, was not just because everybody was killed. The largest number of victims were especially malnourished people, who died from starvation. According to Diamond, Rwandans argue that a war is necessary to wipe out an excess of population and to bring numbers into line with the available land resources.

That last sentence is exactly what is the answer to the question: why does Diamond think that the genocide is a Malthusian event? Because there was a lack of food and a surplus of people, population had to decrease. This people did by themselves, out of emergency, in order to survive themselves.

2.2 Karol Boudreaux: critics on Diamond

Boudreaux doesn’t think the arguments of Jared Diamond are incorrect or implausible, he says he just misses something in his believed causes of the genocide, being the role that institutions and policies play in Rwanda, which shape a particularly authoritarian, inflexible and anti-urban society (Boudreaux, 2009). Because: how can it be that densely populated Rwanda is as poor, and inhabitants kill each other, and that other densely populated countries, such as the Netherlands and Belgium, don’t have such problems. Thereby, research showed that not many killers actually took the lands of their victims. Boudreaux says we have to look further, to the way politics work in Rwanda and what other factors lead to the lack of food production. He thinks Diamond’s argumentation is too superficial.

Especially the Hutu extremist within the government, wanted to remain in power. When in 1990 the Tutsi RPF invaded, which started the civil war, the moderate Hutu’s in the government took off and formed an opposition. As I already mentioned in the first chapter, it came to a ceasefire in 1993. Why it didn’t solve problems, was because the intentions to provide a number of ministries to opposition politicians and to integrate with the RPF, were not implemented. The violence therefore erupted even more heavily. This is another background of the genocide, be it a political background. But Boudreaux thinks this is important.

The next question Boudreaux puts forward, is why didn’t rural Rwandans migrate to the cities? What political pressures kept them on their land? And for example, why didn’t they try to increase their income by off-farm jobs? Next to that, which family policies were important: why didn’t they limit their birth rates? These institutional issues, Diamond overlooks, says Boudreaux (2009, p. 90). In his eyes, killing enemies and competitors was not the only option for solving poverty and land scarcity, so he questions whether violence was accepted so much.

The Hibayarimana government held the people very tightly controlled. Because the people weren’t content about the government, it took the choice of repression to maintain political power. This had a huge impact, according to Boudreaux. I could conclude from the article, that the extremist Hutu government set Hutus and Tutsis against each other, in order to retain power.

In addition, a tightly fettered market contributed to the problem of land scarcity, because movement of people was not allowed. This also was overlooked by Diamond, says Boudreaux. Agriculture was the most important to the government. Rwanda had to be able to feed themselves, everyone should be a farmer, in the government’s eyes, intellectuals were not doing ‘real work’ (Boudreaux, 2009).

7

This lead to limited job opportunities, agriculture was 90 per cent of the active labour force. Limited economic growth was a consequence of these tight regulations by the state. “The policies created to fulfil Habyarimana’s dream of an agrarian utiona, contributed to the nightmare of the genocide”.

So Boudreaux argues that there were many more contributions to the genocide than what Diamond argues, the lack of food and a bad economy. These aspects were due to several policies of the Hibyararimana government. So I can conclude that the main critics on Diamond are, that not the society choose to collapse, after which his book is called. There were many more contributors to the choice to kill, than simply the desperations about land. Diamond is too superficial and the genocide is not purely a Malthusian event. In could not be seen as the result of greed or of too many people on too little land. More solutions of this problem where there, but the government restricted these. That’s the actual cause of the genocide, according to Boudreaux.

2.3 Additional criticism on Diamond

Different criticism on Jared Diamond’s Mathusian explanation of the genocide in Rwanda, I found in the book Questioning Collapse: Human Resilience, Ecological Vulnerability, and the Aftermath of Empire. Therein, chapter 9, from Christopher Taylor, is called Rwandan Genocide: Toward an Explanation in Which History and Culture Matter.

Whereas Diamond finds causes of the Rwandan genocide in Malthusian events and Boudreaux argues that political institutions and policies where the main aspects, Christopher Taylor wants us to look mainly at (historical) cultural conditions which precede to the genocide. In his introduction, he too claims that Jared Diamond is too superficial. He asks the question why, if the conditions of overpopulation were of longstanding nature, the genocide happened just in Rwanda, and just in this time? Why would other densely populated nations not have these problems? In addition, Taylor criticizes the background on which Diamonds argumentation is set: only the commune of Kanama. This is not enough to conclude in all Rwanda, this could be the case. (Taylor, 2009, p. 240)

Taylor was in Kigali at 6 april 1994, and he describes his experiences. I won’t summarize this part of the chapter because I think this is of little relevance with regard to the causes.

He argues that the causes of genocide are in the history and culture of Rwanda. First, he says we need to recognize the failure of German, then Belgian colonist. Although the conditions of inequality between the ethnic groups were there before the colonial period, especially the Belgian worsened them, by creating identity cards and by accepting racism (paler skinned people, Tutsi, should be in charge). The Hutu’s came into power after independence, and it looks like Taylor concludes they wanted ‘revenge’ for their suppression. He admits the same as Boudreaux, that political institutions and certain policies of the Hutu government, in particular under Habyarimana, led to increasing hate and tensions. (Taylor, 2009, pp. 251-252)

Furthermore, Taylor finds it hard to believe that genocides ‘just happens’. Preparation and mobilization is necessary. One of the instruments is the media (not only propaganda, but journalists own). Symbols and images have immense impact. And most probably, seeing these images and symbols won’t motivate Western people to commit violence, but other cultures work differently. They refer to history, for example to the kingship, which was common in Rwanda until the new Hutu government wiped it out after independence. So a link is set between Rwandan kingship and the printed media just before genocide.

8

To understand why kingship could have been of importance for the background of the genocide, it’s required to understand the term imaana, which stands for supreme being, supreme leadership. The most important human embodiment of imaana was the sacred king. In the era of kingships, there were only Tutsi kings (Taylor, 2009, p. 254)

The media went through a democratization process, supported by France. The press became free and open, in contrast to the timid 1980’s. In the press, president Habyarimana was compared to those sacred kings in cartoons and articles in the way that he is an inadequate embodiment of imaana (Taylor, 2009, p. 255). He is incompetent because of the lack of food production the poverty and other economic problems. And the media took this over in their newspapers.

So why are the media so important, according to Taylor? He describes some different cartoons in which the Hutu government is drawn as victims of torture and castrations. “The preceding cartoons show many things, but what I think is most noteworthy is their depth of anger and their degree of symbolic aggression. (…) Journalists from both Hutu and Tutsi camps used symbolic sources to appeal to their readers’ basest emotions – fear, hatred and sadism – emotions that run rampant in most wars.” This is one of the conditions that were part of the causation of the genocide, according to Taylor. He says that once violence is represented in the media as it is acceptable, real violence cannot be far away. (Taylor, 2009, p. 265)

Taylor concludes that in all this there is little confirmation of Malthusian principles. Jared Diamond’s reasoning is to ‘scientific’ and least cultural.

2.4 Dependencia thinking about Rwandan genocide

In the article of Thomas Hauschildt (2011) ‘SAP’s and the Build Up to the Rwandan Genocide’ different theories about possible causes of the genocide are discussed. SAP stands for Structural Adjustment Programme. The aim of the article is to assess the impact of the SAPs on the Rwandan economy. First, the main policies and purposes of the IMF and the World Bank are explained. Then these policies are assessed and opposed by advocates of the dependency theory and world systems theory of Wallerstein, with regard to the case of Rwanda.

Hauschildt discusses two classical economic approaches: Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand of the market’, and John Keynes intervention in the market by governments. From the establishment of the IMF and the World Bank in 1944, policies were made according to Keynes’s concept. Their purpose was to build up European economy, as well as oversees trade and development to avoid crisis in the future (Hauschildt, 2011). During these times, until the 1970s, developed states encouraged interventions in developing states, such as Rwanda. From the 1970s, neoliberal ideas, with Smith’s philosophy, were more and more implemented. Other rules were set now. IMF and the World bank now only gave help to developing countries, if they meet certain requirements. Such as a focus on health and education and a liberalisation of trade. In addition, developing states could only receive aid when they implemented SAPs, because only then the IMF would approve.

These neoliberal ideas are opposed by dependencia thinkers and advocates of the world system theory. Dependency theory, which has linkages to the ideas of socialist Karl Marx, implies that differences between lower and higher classes are equal to the differences between core and periphery countries, developed and developing countries. Core countries are those in the richer West, the colonizers. The periphery are the so called third world countries, the poorer, the ones being colonized. Advocates of this theory argue that it is dangerous when former colonies, periphery, stay dependent to their former colonists, the core, even after the official independency, because

9

they can’t develop on their own. Wallerstein further developed the dependency theory with his world system theory, which distinguishes not only core and periphery, but also semi-periphery (Potter, 2008).

Now, back to Rwanda. Hauschildt writes that the implications of the SAPs and the demands which came accompanied, became of importance in the early 1990s, in the build-up to genocide. The coffee industry ruled in the post-colonial Rwandan economy, it made up eighty per cent of the state’s export earnings (Chossudovsky, 1997, in Hauschildt, 2011). But due to land degradation and population growth the coffee-industry capsized. Because of the economic crisis, Rwanda asked for financial aid by the World Bank, which they received in 1991: 90 million dollars of loans. In return, the Rwandan government had to agree with the implementation of SAPs. Adaptations which must be made, were for instance the focus on cash crops rather than food crops, which were much more common in Rwanda. The World Bank argued that “once you have income, you can buy food”. Different measures were implemented under the control of the World Bank, but these were deteriorating. Income did not increase. A lack of food arose and the Rwandan Franc devaluated, which led to an inflation of nearly twenty per cent in 1992, according to the World Bank (Hauschildt, 2011). Furthermore, the SAPs demanded the privatization of government owned-companies, like neo-liberal World Bank policies, and cuts for the public sector.

In addition, on a non-financial field, the international community wanted to establish a democratic system, in order to establish stability and to promote development. This only wasn’t done in a right time. Under the pressure of the IMF and World Bank, a new government was formed in Rwanda in 1992, with opposition parties getting more power. Radical parties stood up, such as the Mouvement Démocratique Républicain (MRD) and the Coalistion pour la Défense de la République (CDR). They presented their extreme anti-Tutsi ideas and there played a big role in the spread of hate, and also in the preparation and implementation of the genocide (Hauschildt, 2011). President Habyarimana came in a dilemma position when he had to choose between meeting the Rwandan government and meeting the international donors. The international donors required power-sharing with the Tutsi-dominated RPF, the government wanted to oppose the RPF as much as possible. He choose the first, althought this would lead to the increase of support of Hutu elites to the CDR and MRD. Therefore, Hauschildt cites Andersen (2000, p.451) the conditions made by the international donors could be described as ‘a match igniting the conflict’.

Due to the decreasing economy, the role of ethnicity increased. Tutsis were described by the Hutus as invaders who are responsible for all the problems in the country.

Hauschild concludes that “The development policy of the industrialised states changed with the emergence of neoliberal policies.” Dependecy theorists argued that neoliberal policies do not fit in foster development, but leads to a bigger dependence of periphery states on the core states. Hauschildt argues that this is definitely the case in the Rwandan genocide: it worsened the economic situation, and moreover had great impact on Rwandan politics and social environment. (Hauschildt, 2011). In the end, Hauschildt acknowledges that no direct link can me established between the demands made by the IMF and World Bank and the genocide. But he thinks it is evident that SAPs and its demands did not consider the wider political and social conflicts, and that became fatal to Rwanda.

10

3. Rwandan post-genocide development

When the RFP had taken over the country and stopped the genocide in July 1994, the country had been collapsed, ruined, destroyed. 800.000 people were killed and many survivors, mostly genocidaires, fled to neighbouring DR Congo (mainly) and other countries. However it seemed no prosperity lay in the future, the rebuilding of the country went incredibly fast. Now, disease is down and schools, running water and infrastructure were spread, as well as the literacy and life expectancy has improved. How is this possible in this extension in a country which lost everything? The achievements can be categorized in four indicators: political, economic, environmental and socio-cultural causations.

3.1 Political

President Kagame is often being presented as the man who made the Rwandan after-genocide development a success story. Which choices made him the ‘star of Africa’, as U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called him? (Time Magazine, 2010).

Justice

One of the first things the new government had to deal with after the genocide, were the tons of people who were guilty of killing. The extremist Hutus in exile in DR Congo refugee camps were making plans, training and recruiting new militias, causing great unrest and more violence in the neighbouring country. In 1996, DR Congo forced them out. Many returned home, other chose a nomadic life in Congo.

The government of Rwanda surprised the world by declaring a moratorium on arrests of suspected murderers. This was a practical as well as a political decision. Already over a 100.000 people were in jail awaiting for their trial, so the prisons were full. In addition, the president said that “the Rwandan people were able to live together in peace for six hundred years and there is no reason why they couldn’t do this again. (…) They too, are Rwandans: abandon your genocidal and destructive ways, join hands with other Rwandans and put that energy to better use.” So already two years after the genocide, Hutu killers came to live next to Tutsi survivors. Identity cards with their ethnicity on it were banned. But a moratorium doesn’t mean acquittance. An international tribunal was set up in Arusha, Tanzania, to try leaders of the genocide. (PPU) According to the United States Institute of Peace (1999), ex-Interahma were to reintegrate in the Rwandan army, so that they stopped the insurgencies in the northwest of Rwanda.

Vision 2020

In 2000, the Vision 2020 for Rwanda was documented by the initiative of president Kagame, in which the government strives after “a modern, strong and united nation, proud of its fundamental values, politically stable and without discrimination against its citizens.” (Groundviews, 2011) In this vision, an emphasis is placed on good government: it is the government that has to change, make policies and help the country forward. The author of the Groundviews-article thinks it’s notable that the vision is a very frank and self-critical reflection on the country’s position. Take into account that Rwandans are characterized by obeying the government, according to Irenee Bugingo, in the article in The Nation (2010), of assignment A. This helps to develop into a stronger country. The vision is in the main part focusing on economic development, but because the government implements several measures, this falls under political aspects. However, which economic measures are taken, I will elaborate later.

11

Democracy

Another political measure is the, partly, democratization. After the RPF put an end to the genocide, it formed the Government of National Unity and the Transitional National Assembly, in coalition with other political parties (Rwanda Vision 2020, 2000). In the Vision 2020 the role of the government in democracy is outlined as follows: There is an ombudsman institutionalized, multipartism, laws liberalizing the press and decentralization is strived after, so that certain powers are brought back to the region, instead of the state. Transparency and non-corruption is aimed at as well. There is a National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation. At last, gender equality is an intention, too (Rwanda Vision 2020, 2000)

Gender equality

That last point developed quickly. What I thought is outstanding, is that women played a big role in the rebuilding of the country, according to Hope Mbabazi of Visionews.net. The journalists argues that women were forced to take over their killed husband’s or father’s business (I will elaborate this under the Economic-paragraph). Also in politics, more women participate than in most states of the world. According to the article, today (point of critic: there’s no date when the article is written), 55 per cent of the parliament’s seats are women’s. In Kagame’s cabinet, 40 per cent is female.

3.2 Economy

The economy of Rwanda has grown stunningly, with eight per cent GDP growth for the past five years and an average of 6.6 per cent per year from 1995 until 2010 (The Freeman, 2012). A report of the Rwandan government implies that poverty has been reduced from 57 to 45 per cent in five years, according to a Global Post article (2012). Infrastructure grew rapidly, as I mentioned before. Roads, running water and transportation were improved all over the country. Different policies were at the grassroots of this economic growth.

Private sector

The government wants that the number of non-agricultural jobs increases, so that the country can become a knowledge- and services-based economy. Whereas there were only 200.000 jobs in the non-agricultural sector, Kagame wants it to be 1,4 million in 2020. Therefore, a policy is implemented in which the private sector-led development is emphasized. In the Vision 2020, the government says it would not be involved in providing services and products that can be delivered more efficiently by the private sector. The state wants to act as a catalyst, ensuring good infrastructure and education, which are prerequisites for economic growth.

12

Coffee

This is a good thing, according to an article the article ‘Rwanda rising: a new model of economic development’ on the website fastcompany.com (2009). Summarising: the country has no oil and few minerals or other resources, so Kagame focused on getting well-placed friends internationally. In New York, this led to the interest of the Starbucks-CEO and a mega investor, who became interested in the coffee-production of Rwanda, on which more than half a million families depend. The Freeman argues that the coffee that farmers were forcing to produce, was only bought by a government agency for a below-market price, which would sell it on the market at the higher price and kept the difference. Additionally, farmers had to pay an export tax. This supported the corrupt government and deteriorated the situation of the farmers. In the late 1990’s, President Kagame liberalized the coffee sector. Farmers were from then able to freely trade with buyers from any part of the world. This led to an increase of investments and innovation with the farmers, they now had to compete with their neighbours for the best coffee. (The Freeman, 2012)

Businesswomen

In combination with that, the women who now run many farms and other businesses, made more efforts to invent and innovate then their former husbands and men did, according to Visionews.net. They show more willingness than men to embrace new techniques aimed at improving quality and profit. And this profit is invested in the family, better nutrition, increase savings etcetera, more than men would do, which led to better health and the payment of education for children. Another explanation why women were better farmers, is that they had never done it before, so they were not stuck in old habits and work-processes, says the author.

Additional efforts

Rwanda’s business and service sectors now account for two-thirds of GDP, instead of agriculture. Tourism arose in Rwanda to the flourishing key part that it plays in the service sector currently. Hotels were built, national parks were taken care of.

As Kagame says it’s only temporary, he wants to reduce dependency of international aid in the future. Increasing exports, expanding domestic resource and the private sector development, is in his eyes the only way to lessen aid dependency (Vision 2020).

3.3 Socio-cultural

As I mentioned before, gender equality is one of the socio-cultural aims of the Rwandan government. According to the article about women’s successes in businesses, women were forced to take over work of their husbands and fathers or brothers. So in a way, this automatically led to more equality. There was no other option. According to the Vision 2020, women make up 53 per cent of the population (in 2000) and now participate more in agriculture than men. The laws on gender are still updated and adapted and the government want girls as well as boys to receive primary and secondary education and get rid of discrimination. Therefore, Kagame integrated gender as as cross-cutting issue in all development policies and strategies.

In addition, the political choice to let ex-Interahamwe reintegrate in the community, has socio-cultural consequences, since they got to live next to victims again. And: identity cards with ethnicity on it are gone and genocidal or racist thoughts are forbidden. So Hutus and Tutsis came to live together again, and had to act like everything is normal, although they were traumatized. Rwandans

13

are extremely obedient people, says a researcher at Kigali’s Institute of Research and Dialogue for Peace (The Nation, 2010). The country is obsessively controlled, argues one in the same article. Fear is the dominant expression. So although the intentions of the government are good, to clean away genocidal thoughts, to never let it happen again, it has some negative effects on the harmony in the society as well.

3.4 Environmental

According to the Vision 2020, the imbalance between the population and the natural resources is a major problem. Massive deforestation in favour of agriculture, depletion of bio-diversity, erosion and pollution of waterways are outcomes of this problem. Care for the environment started in Rwanda with the creation of the Ministry of Land, Environment, Forestry, Water and National Resources, in 1999. Later, the Rwanda Environmental Management Authority was launched. According to a report of the United Nations Development Programme, environmental success is booked by the decision makers in Rwanda, taken care of water and energy inefficient technologies, poor soil and water management, pollution etcetera. The UNDP argues it is good that more senior managers understand the relation between a good environment and a good economic performance. A network of laws and institutions is created in Rwanda in order to take care of the environment, is written in a report for the United Nations Conference of Sustainable Development, a National Report for Rwanda. A sector plan is made with a five-years planning horizon.

14

4. Future development

Rwanda’s economy grew incredibly rapid after the genocide in 1994, in which 800.000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed, and over 2 million fled to exile in DR Congo. Identity cards with the label Hutu and Tutsi were thrown away, the economy got a boost from different new rules and the replacement of old rules. Schools were built, water was running for everybody and poverty decreased, mainly due to governmental policies. Rwanda has been seen as an example for other African countries. But will these measurements take into account the future as well? Or does it only look like it’s going easy in Rwanda?

According to Martin Wolf, who (co-)created the curriculum of the minor Global Development Issues at Fontys Hogescholen in Tilburg, there are some requirements for true sustainable development. The first prerequisite for sustainable development is the elimination of poverty and exclusion. This, the Rwandan government try to accomplish by boosting the economy. In a UN report on sustainable development (2012) the percentage of people living in poverty decreased from 57 to 44, an extreme poverty from 37 to 24. The government achieved their own targets (Vision 2020, 2000). The UN report concludes that there are still challenges: institutions of certain sectors of the economy need more structure, strategies and roles and responsibilities need to be clear. Otherwise, these efforts will not be sustainable for the future. Otherwise, no checks and controls are there, and reflecting out of reporting could become difficult. I, myself, think that even though Rwanda did great efforts to reduce poverty, it is not something that is stable all the time, the government needs to work on it, always, and not let it go as a main policy, to make sure that generations after this one also benefits, or at least not becomes worse.

Preservation of ecological balance and compatibility of ecology and economy at all levels is important for future sustainable development. This means, that there needs to be balance in the way man interrupt in the natural ecology. In Rwanda, overpopulation is a massive issue, and the expectation is that it will be doubled between 2000 and 2020 (Rwanda Vision 2020, 2000). The Rwandan government takes birth control as one of the main measures. This is a sustainable solution. Education and awareness is important, and can be passed from generation to generation.

Another requirement for sustainable development, is the preservation and development of the resource base. Rwanda has lots of trouble with natural resources, since the overpopulation led to deforestation and degradation of land. This could not be made undone, but efforts can be made to take care of current environmental projects. Rwanda created institutions to increase the welfare of the environment. The UN thinks the implementation of the environment and climate change strategic plan requires more and broader partnership and institutional responsibility as well. In this matter, again, the grassroots are there, but challenges are still there to be able to create a true sustainable resource base.

A sustainable development concept needs to include social and cultural development. The throw-away of identity cards, the restrictions on speaking about genocide, in short, the efforts to prevent another genocide, could turn out the other way arount According to the article ‘Rwanda’s other genocide’ on The Nation’s website, there are doubts about the sustainability of the forced equality. “You can’t build stability, peace, reconciliation, in a society where people can’t speak.” With reference to democracy, which has impact on the social structures and culture, too, the system is not quite sustainable, according to a BBC-article about the elections of 2010 in Rwanda. The author shows people’s fear, the lack of debate about other ideas than those of the government, Is it possible that the hided anger and trauma once comes up again? Or that Mr. Kagame’s opposition will use violence to let the people hear their voice? I think there is no sustainable political system of true

15

democracy in Rwanda. I don’t say that democracy is the only system that can be sustainable, but since that is what is strived after, it’s not sustainable now.

16

5. Reflection

Well, that was it, almost. I read incredibly much about Rwanda and I found it very interesting to think about causes and consequences, and about history and culture. Now, it’s time for reflection.

5.1 My involvement

I think Rwanda is a very far-from-my-bed-show, as we say it in Dutch. But reading about the conflict, the issues, the causes, the choices, made me think about how I would act in a situation. But involvement is a big word, I think. I mean, when the genocide happened, I was only four years old. I knew that there had been a genocide, that many people were killed and that it was because Hutsis, Histua, Tutus, Titus, or something, were fighting against each other. That was all. I think it is strange that this conflict never occurred in my history books or, since we used old ones in high school, was discussed in the history classes. It teaches you something about a totally different country and culture, and about how certain choices can lead to this kind of brutalities. Since I only learned about the Rwandan issue last year, I don’t think that I am involved in the past and current situation of the country. I could say, in a way I will be involved in Rwanda’s future. I now have the right background to make a choice. Do I want to have anything to do with that country? Do I want to go there for holidays? Or maybe for journalistic stories, since my major study is journalism? Would I do voluntary work in development aid there? Or if I continue studying international relations, conflict studies or anthropology, would I go there to do field research? I think that kind of involvement is possible for me. Much is written about Rwanda, but I think this never ends. There are always more stories, more visions, more developments which are not studied or discussed yet.

5.2 Dutch development aid

Much is going on in Dutch politics about development aid. The government wants to cut on the budget for foreign help. I don’t think this is good, because there are so many places in the world where money can help people to take big steps forward. I find it difficult to say if Rwanda needs more aid from the Netherlands. On the one hand, Rwanda is already on its way. The Vision 2020 is well created and the intentions are there to really develop the country. Maybe the way in which it is done is still not very democratic, or sustainable, but maybe that is something the country has to figure out for itself. I think I can label myself as a dependencia thinker, kind of. Dependency on different countries is not good for the economy, it can even worsen it, like it already did before. But on the other hand, although poverty has decreased, there are still too many people living in poor circumstances. That the government is already on its way with institutions and laws, doesn’t mean that aid is not necessary anymore. But small aid would, in my opinion, be better than state-based aid. Helping NGO’s and private help organizations could do a lot to the Rwandan people, and therefore I conclude that the government does good to give aid in this way.

5.3 Most important items to me

Although it was a pain in the ass to finish this assignment one year after the minor, I found it very interesting and I worked with pleasure on the different items of it. I think what is most important to me, is the reading, altogether. If you read articles, and you find new articles and new opinions, you can keep going and you learn so much about the country. My challenge was to summarize all that I read to a readable essay. I hope that that worked out. I found it difficult to linkage different causes to consequences, and to linkage different articles together. With regard to the content, I found the

17

assignment of finding the causes of the genocide the most important. You find out that it is almost impossible to find the one and only point of view which explains about ‘the’causes. No, there are many plausible causes, but no one is ever right or wrong. To recognise that, and to understand where different aspects of history could lead to, to me is a very important thing. Not only in this assignment, but in life as well. There is no such thing as ‘the’ truth.

18

References

Anan, K. (2004, November/December 2004). Wars and Conflicts in Africa: Will Africa Ever Know Peace? . African Renaissance, 9 - 42.

Ángel Martín Oro, M. B. (2012, June 27). Rwanda's Economic Success: How Free Markets Are Good for Poor Africans. Opgeroepen op October 6, 2013, van Fee - Inspire, Educate, Connect: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/rwandas-economic-success-how-free-markets-are-good-for-poor-africans

Boudreaux, K. (2009). Land Conflict and Genocide in Rwanda. The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development, 87-95.

Chu, J. (2009, April 1). Rwanda Rising: A New Model of Economic Development. Opgeroepen op October 6, 2013, van Fast Company: http://www.fastcompany.com/1208900/rwanda-rising-new-model-economic-development

Diamond, J. (2005). Malthus in Africa: Rwanda's Genocide. In J. Diamond, Collapse, How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed (pp. 311-328). London: Viking Press.

Fast Company. (2009, April 1). Rwanda Rising: A New Model Of Economic Development. Opgehaald van Fast Company: http://www.fastcompany.com/1208900/rwanda-rising-new-model-economic-development

Global Post. (2012, April 1). Economic Growht Pulls Rwandans Out Of Poverty. Opgehaald van Global Post: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/africa/120328/rwanda-economic-growth-pulling-rwandans-out-poverty

Hauschildt, T. (2011). SAPs and the Build Up to the Rwandan Genocide. Opgeroepen op September 30, 2013, van E-International Relations: http://www.e-ir.info/2012/03/31/saps-and-the-build-up-to-the-rwandan-genocide/

Perry, A. (2010, August 10). Rwanda's Rebel Reformer: Paul Kagame. Opgeroepen op October 6, 2013, van Time Magazine: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2007287,00.html

Potter, R. B. (2008). Geographies of Development, an introduction to global development studies. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

PPU. (sd). Talking about genocide - Rwanda 1994. Opgeroepen op September 20, 2013, van Peace Pledge Union Information: http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_rwanda.html

Rwanda, M. o. (2000, July). Rwanda Vision 2020. Kigali, Rwanda.

Schubert, A. (2011, June 17). Governance and Development: Lessons from Post-Genocide Rwanda. Opgeroepen op October 6, 2013, van Ground Vews - journalism for citizens: http://groundviews.org/2011/06/17/governance-and-development-lessons-from-post-genocide-rwanda/

19

Taylor, C. C. (2009). Rwandan Genocide: Toward an Explanation in Which History and Culture Matter. In P. A. McAnany, Questioning collapse: human resilience, ecological vulnerability, and the aftermath of empire (pp. 239 - 267). Cambridge University Press.

The Freeman. (2012, June 27). Rwanda's economic success: how free markets are good for poor Africans. Opgeroepen op October 6, 2013, van The Freeman: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/rwandas-economic-success-how-free-markets-are-good-for-poor-africans

The Nation. (2010, September 17). Rwanda's other genocide. Opgeroepen op September 15, 2013, van The Nation: http://www.thenation.com/article/154857/rwandas-other-genocide#

UNDP. (2008). Assessment of Development Results: Rwanda. New York: A.K. Office Supplies.

United Nations. (2012). United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development: National Report for Rwanda. United Nations.

United States Institute of Peace. (1999, September 1). Post-Genocidal Reconstruction: Building Peace in Rwanda and Burundi. Opgehaald van United States Institute of Peace: http://www.usip.org/publications/post-genocidal-reconstruction-building-peace-rwanda-and-burundi

Visionews.net. (sd). Rwanda: Women's Post-Genocide Success. Opgeroepen op September 30, 2013, van Visionews.net: http://www.visionews.net/rwanda-women%C2%B4s-post-genocide-success/

20