Within 100 days of the beginning of the Rwandan genocide in
1994, over 800,000 people, systematically slaughtered by people
armed with machetes, lay dead while the international community
stood by and did not intervene. The killing added up to an average
of 333 murders every hour, five and a half lives every minute.
On Tuesday, Carl Wilkins, the former director of the Adventist
Development and Relief Agency in Rwanda, shared his experience with
UCLA students during a discussion held at the School of Law about
living through the Rwandan genocide.
Wilkins refused to leave Rwanda when other foreigners were
evacuated from the country for safety reasons. Instead, he remained
in the country during the genocide and attempted to help in
whatever way he could. Wilkins spent his days there attempting to
talk his way through roadblocks to get food and water to people in
need.
“Our home ““ it was a hell that seemed to be unknown
to the rest of the world,” Wilkins reflected during the
discussion. “We often forget the faces. … The Rwandan
people are no different than you and I. Part of today is so we do
not forget, but part is also to ask why?”
On April 6, 1994, Hutu President Hayarimana’s plane was
shot down. Though it is now known that his plane was shot down by
Hutu extremists, Hutu leaders at the time blamed the assassination
on the Tutsis, using it as an excuse to call on the Hutu population
to eradicate the Tutsi people.
“A combination of historical discrimination and political
policies contributed to the tension which culminated in the Rwandan
genocide,” said Edmond Keller, a political science professor
at UCLA.
The history of ethnic division between the Tutsis and the Hutus,
combined with extreme poverty, are partly responsible for the
genocide. Rwanda is a country mainly comprised of two ethnic
groups: Tutsi cattle herders and Hutu peasant farmers. The Hutus
comprise the majority of the population with a 15 percent Tutsi
minority.
As a way of imposing colonial rule, Belgium exploited the
supposed physical differences between the Tutsis and Hutus and thus
planted the seeds of ethnic division.
But for over a century, these two groups coexisted peacefully
despite racial tensions provoked by the fact that the Tutsi
minority made up most of the upper class.
“To be Rwandanese is like being American. You might look
different but the culture is the same,” Keller said.
The idea of ethnic differences being a decisive reason for the
genocide is “hugely overblown,” said Professor Allen
Roberts, chair of the African Studies Center. “The underlying
factors leading to violence are extremely complex. Among the
reasons for tensions … are geological and demographic
factors,” he said.
The high density of the population in the region caused by the
unusual agricultural potential of the land created the
circumstances for conflict.
“The region possesses the highest densities in Africa and
among the highest in the world … such high concentrations of
people puts intense pressure on land, water and other basic
resources, hence the potential for conflict,” Roberts
said.
Though the United States signed the Geneva Convention, which
established that genocide is a crime under international law and
that nation-states aware of genocide have an obligation to
intervene, the government did not commit to sending troops to
Rwanda. In fact, at the time of the Rwandan genocide, the Clinton
Administration forbade U.S. officials from using the word
“genocide” to describe the events in Rwanda so as to
avoid having to send military to put a stop to it.
“The foot-dragging intransigence of U.S. administrations,
including that of Bill Clinton during the 1994 Rwandan genocide and
that of George W. Bush right now regarding the Darfur genocide, is
to avoid the moral and legal requirements” of intervening,
Roberts said.
Some experts believe race-related issues toward Africa and the
African people played a role in causing the unwillingness of the
international community to intervene.
Keller said the constant need for international aid in Africa
caused a donor fatigue, which compounded racial issues. “The
attitude was to let the Africans kill themselves” he
said.
Though former President Clinton apologized to the Rwandan people
in March 1998 for not having intervened during the genocide, many
believe an earlier response may have prevented many deaths.
“Excuses are always possible … if the United States
really does stand for “˜values’ as the winners of the
last presidential election claim, then our leaders should either
step up to the line to take difficult risks, or continue to reveal
their rank hypocrisy,” Roberts said.
“We should have learned from the Holocaust, from Cambodia,
Bosnia and Rwanda but we haven’t. A good testimony is what is
happening today in Sudan and Darfur, where genocide is occurring.
Political reasons won’t allow the word “˜genocide’
to be used because to take action against genocide is too great of
a commitment,” Keller added.
The Geneva Convention represents an effort on behalf of the
international community to end genocide.
“One of the few things the entire international community
has agreed upon is to put an end to genocide. The Rwandan genocide
was highly centralized. It could have easily been stopped by the
international community but wasn’t. However, that
doesn’t mean that all genocides can be stopped,” said
Allison DesForges, senior adviser to the Africa Division of the
Human Rights Watch.
“It’s not about shaking the finger,” Wilkins
said. “It’s about understanding.”