If ancient chaos/race were an actual reason for why the genocide occurred, the racial tensions of the Hutus and the Tutsis would have existed long before the genocide and colonization. This notion is supported by Robert Melson, author of “Modern Genocide in Rwanda”. Melson alludes to the fact that during precolonial Rwanda, the Hutus and the Tutsis lived fairly peacefully with one other. Melson demonstrates that if it were tribal chaos, it would have to involve disputes over “land, booty, and women”. Because that was not seen in precolonial Rwanda, it would be hard to attribute the genocide only to race and territory. In order to further recognize how state power/ institutions, civilian mobilization, and war played significant roles in the Rwandan genocide, the methods that Scott Straus used in order to reach his conclusions need to be understood. When Straus chose to focus his research on Rwanda, he believed that the best way to do so would be through the lens of a social scientific approach. He conducted his research in three parts. His first research stage was a nationwide survey of …show more content…
The first major change that happened had to do with the civil war between the Hutu-dominated government and the Tutsi-dominated rebels. The second major change was the change in the political party of Rwanda. These changes in the government happened over a span of 40 years, demonstrating the instability and vulnerability of the state. This instability and vulnerability allowed the Hutus, who were the majority of the population, to be able to take over the government easily. When communism fell, Rwanda was under pressure from France to change from a single party state. When Rwanda did this, it led to Hutu opposition which created the Party of the Hutu Emancipation Movement (MDR). Straus notes that these changes in the political institutions change the dynamics of the
He places a lot of his emphasis on fear and intimidation as the main drivers of the violence and says that no matter what reason perpetrators gave for their individual participation, there was one main rationale that drove genocidal violence. That one rationale was that the violence occurred in the following way: “the RPF killed President Habyarimana; RPF soldiers had invaded to kill Hutus; all Tutsis were RPF supporters or potential supporters; ergo, Hutus had to kill Tutsis to prevent being attacked by them” (Straus 153). The most common reason respondents stated was the cause of the genocide was the death of their president, but some said it was because elites desired power. As a reader, it is hard to understand why perpetrators chose to kill people who did not pose any immediate threats when the perpetrators themselves feared insecurity. The Hutus believed that the Tutsis wanted to take back their power so the Hutu extremists had a goal of terminating them, but it is still difficult to interpret the happenings of the genocide because there were so many dynamics. But regardless of all that went on, in sum, The Order of Genocide maintains that three dynamics lead to the killing: war, race, and power. Without a war in Rwanda, the genocide may have just been unable to take place. But the war resulted in “fear, insecurity, rage, revenge, and self-defense” and tensed up the country to perform violent acts of killing (Straus, 173-174). Race allowed all Tutsis to be labeled as the enemy. And finally, power gave hardliners an ability of control to issue the elimination of all Tutsis and authorize the
The analysis of the genocides that took place both in Rwanda and Sudan’s Darfur region exhibit some similarities as well as differences. The character of violence was similar in both cases, but in Rwanda the violence was more intense, participatory, and extraordinary. The violence in these two places took place in an environment that had experienced civil wars. It was a period of political transition which was further aggravated by ethnic nationalism and a conflict of ethnic populations that were living in close proximity. However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on using the genocide label to create domestic constituencies especially in the Rwandan case.
The main reason the Hutus killed Tutsis in the Rwandan genocide was for economic reasons. The Tutsis began to benefit greatly from killing Tutsis by looting them and gaining things like money, land, and cattle. The looting of Tutsis became a means of income to the Hutus. The Hutus neglected their fields in favor of killing so they could loot for better food and goods. As Jean Baptiste states, “Why dig in the dirt when we were harvesting without working, eating our fill without growing a thing?”(Hatzfeld, 60) The Hutus mind set of being farmers shifts to being killers who can benefit more from that, than from their regular jobs of harvesting. As stated by Adalbert, “…we didn’t care about what we accomplished in the marshes, only about what was important to us for comfort.” (Hatzfeld, 83) This shows how the men became more concerned with looting and profiting from the killing than actually being concerned with killing people. So in a sense, the job of killing became a means for the men to do their more comfortable job of looting. One can begin to enter the Hutu mind set and see how, by killing other people, people they may have a...
It was said that the genocide had deemed the name of Hutu Power, this meant that they were plan and simply killing off people and as many as possible. All this started in Rwanda’ Capitol Kigali and spread outwardly from there, as the Hutu traveled they killed the Tutsi. The Hutu had set up road blocks and checked ID’s and killed Tutsi, t...
The Rwandan genocide occurred due to the extreme divide between two main groups that were prevalent in Rwanda, the Hutu and the Tutsi. When Rwanda was first settled, the term Tutsi was used to describe those people who owned the most livestock. After the Germans lost control over their colonies after World War I, the Belgians took over and the terms Hutu and Tutsi took on a racial role (Desforges). It soon became mandatory to have an identification card that specified whether or not an individual was a Hutu, Tutsi, or Twa (a minority group in Rwanda). The Tutsi soon gained power through the grant of leadership positions by the Belgians. Later on when Rwanda was tying to gain indepe...
(Countries at Risk). The genocide in Rwanda began when the tension between the Hutus tribe and the Tutsis tribe steadily increased. After the European country, Belgium, colonized Rwanda, they gave more power to
The Rwandan Genocide was a terrible event in history caused by a constantly weakening relationship between two groups of people. The country of Rwanda is located in Africa and consists of multiple groups of people. Majority of Rwanda is Hutu, while a smaller amount of people are Tutsis. The genocide started due to multiple events that really stretched the relationship between the two groups to its end. One of the starting factors was at the end of World War 1. Rwanda was a German colony but then was given to Belgium “who favored the minority Tutsis over the Hutus, exacerbated[exacerbating] the tendency of the few to oppress the many”(History.com). This created a feeling of anger towards the Tutsis, because they had much more power then Hutus.
Africa has been an interesting location of conflicts. From the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea to the revolutionary conflict in Libya and Egypt, one of the greatest conflicts is the Rwandan Genocide. The Rwandan Genocide included two tribes in Rwanda: Tutsis and Hutus. Upon revenge, the Hutus massacred many Tutsis and other Hutus that supported the Tutsis. This gruesome war lasted for a 100 days. Up to this date, there have been many devastating effects on Rwanda and the global community. In addition, many people have not had many acknowledgements for the genocide but from this genocide many lessons have been learned around the world.
The Rwandan Genocide “It is our responsibility to empower the powerless while giving voice to the voiceless” -(Irwin Cotler “Six Lessons from the Rwandan Genocide”) When the Rwandan Hutu majority betrayed the Tutsi minority, a destructive mass murdering broke out where neighbor turned on neighbor and teachers killed their students; this was the start of a genocide. In this paper I will tell you about the horrors the people of Rwanda had to face while genocide destroyed their homes, and I will also tell you about the mental trauma they still face today. Hutu and Tutsi Origins When Rwanda was first settled, the people there raised cattle, the ones with the most cattle were considered “Tutsi” and everyone else was ‘Hutu”.
...ause the colonial masters believed that they resembled them. It was unethical for the Belgians to interfere with the peaceful coexistence that the two communities had enjoyed in the past. As a result, the Hutus acquired negative misconceptions about the Tutsis’ origin, what they stood for, and what they had done for them in the past. The Hutus expertly planned and organized the Rwandan genocide as a result of such historical distortions created by their country’s colonial masters.
When the Belgian colonizers entered Rwanda in 1924, they created an ethnic classification between the Hutu and the Tutsi, two tribes who used to live together as one. After independence in 1962, there was a constant power struggle between the two tribes. Former Canadian Prime Minister, Jean-Pierre Chrétien described the situation as “tribalism without tribes.” (Destexhe, 1995) There were many signs leading towards genocide, yet the nations in power chose to ignore them. From April 6, 1994 until mid-July, a time spanning approximately of 100 days, 800,000 people were murdered when the Hutu attacked the Tutsi. No foreign aid came to the rescue until it was too late. Ten years after the genocide the United Nations was still involved in Rwanda, cleaning up the mess that was left behind because of man’s sinful nature. Could the Rwandan Genocide have been prevented, or is it simply a fact of life? Even though the international community is monitoring every country and race, such an event as the Rwandan Genocide could occur again because the European colonizers introduced ethnic classification where it did not exist and the nations in power chose to ignore the blatant signs of genocide.
The Tutsis were favored and felt superior to the Hutu and Twa. This caused much tension and jealousy between the two groups. The greater half of Rwanda, known as the Hutu, are a big part of the social issues that took place in 1994 as they overthrew the Tutsi power. The Hutu were located in both Rwanda and Burundi and while they wanted to gain power in both countries, the Hutu of Rwanda forcefully took over the Tutsi ruler. The Rwandan Hutu were in command until 1994 when they were invaded by the Tutsi.
Baldauf, S. (2009). Why the US didn't intervene in the Rwandan genocide. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2009/0407/p06s14-woaf.html [Accessed: 21 Feb 2014].
After reading into this topic, I find it hard to believe that the Hutus and the Tutsi were actually ever two distinct people. Instead it seems more likely that their class system is the product of a cultural construction. The stories the Rwandans tell about how the two peoples came to Rwanda are vastly difference from one another. I believe that the Hutus and the Tutsi say that they are separate people so that they can feign responsibility for killing their own kind.
Instead of watching from afar, Philip Gourevitch decided to investigate himself and visit Rwanda for more information. He mentions, “I wanted to know more” (Gourevitch 187). Gourevitch was engrossed in finding answers. He used sources such as Ndagijimana and many others to recall the horrifying events that took place in 1994. His sources brought validation to all of the horrors that occurred in Rwanda.