Ethnic Violence And The Rwandan Genocide

Over 800,000 people, mostly Tutsi minorities, were killed by Hutu extremists in just one hundred days (Rwanda Genocide). The United Nations failed to provide support and protection to the people of Rwanda, and were ashamed of the abandonment of the helpless people. At the twentieth anniversary ceremony of the genocide, UN chief Ban Ki-moon mentioned, "In Rwanda, troops were withdrawn when they were most needed (Rwanda Genocide)." The UN left the victims to fend for themselves, resulting in an even larger death total. They ignored the fact that the genocide was planned, and refused to take action, when the Rwandans needed their help (Winfield). As stated by the former Swedish Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson in a press conference, "Our conclusion is there is one overriding failure which explains why the UN could not stop or prevent the genocide, and that is a lack of resources and a lack of will - a lack of will to take on the commitment necessary to prevent the genocide (Winfield)." If the UN had taken more action and became more involved, the Rwandan Genocide wouldn’t have reached the extremity that it had reached. The inaction in Rwanda was the largest failure the UN has ever had. Just about 1,200 miles away about ten years later, the UN once again fails the people of the corrupt country of

If nations knew that there would be consequences to their calculations of profit from the genocide, that would cause them to lean towards the right and not the wrong. Taking away the benefits of any alliance or trade, to the ones that cause genocide would intensify the seriousness of their atrocities. Together, every member of all diplomatic nations, must have the right to intervene in military interventions. Solving the issue before it happened would have been helpful when the Serbians manipulated Bosnians by feeding the children cookies, and assuring them not to be afraid. The United Nations should have not been deceived by these actions, nor abandoned 25,000 Bosnians gathering in a United Nations base, wanting protection. Not only did the Unite Nations ignore this situation, but they claimed to not have any information about the Rwandan genocide that cause the deaths of 800,000 individuals. Therefore, we must hold our leaders accountable to their promises to alleviate the issues, otherwise they should be denied not to hold that

Throughout the 20th century, numerous acts of genocides have attempted to bring the complete elimination and devastation of large groups of people originating from various particular ethnicities. With these genocides occurring in many regions of the world, the perpetrators often organizing such crimes, have historically been larger and more powerful than the victims themselves. Often being the government and its military forces. However, the lack of international response associated with these genocides, further contributed to the devastating outcomes. On April 6,1994, the fastest killing spree of the century took place in Rwanda against the Tutsi minority population. With many warning signs having already been proclaimed prior to the start of the Rwandan genocide, I believe that with international interference, this bloodshed could have ultimately been prevented.

Rwanda is a country located in the middle of the African continent. The two ethnic groups present in the country lived in peace under their monarch until the arrival of Europeans. The Belgians arrival into Rwandan is what split the two ethnic groups of the Tutsi and Hutus, making them identify themselves with ID cards. This caused tension between the two groups as the Belgians favored the ethnic Tutsi, and made them the head of the government. Decade’s later Hutu extremists would take over the government and have revenge on the Tutsi. The new government would send out broadcasts calling on Hutus to kill their friends and neighbors. The Rwandan genocide would become the worst genocide to ever happen in Africa and one of the worst in the world. Today Rwanda’s recovery is surprisingly fast with the help of multiple nations and organizations. Rwanda’s recovery is nothing short of a miracle and is an amazing story of a war between two peoples.

In Rwanda, the IC was not concerned with stopping the genocide just like in Darfur. This makes the two cases similar. These comparative claims are accurate although the claims need some close scrutiny. For instance, the comparisons do not provide the degree of similarity and differences in the two instances. Form the international perspective, we are not able to tell in what way the response in Rwanda is different or similar to what took place in Darfur (Straus).

With over eight hundred thousand to one million deaths, the Rwandan genocide is undoubtedly one of the most sad and shocking examples of the lack of intervention by not only the US and the UN, but by other countries as well. The ongoing tensions between the Hutu, the largest population in Rwanda, and the Tutsi, the smaller and more elite population is what eventually lead to the Rwandan genocide. The killings began quickly after President Habyarimana 's plane was shot down. After hundreds of thousands of deaths, the US did not intervene in Rwanda because being a landlocked country with no natural resources to benefit the US, there was no economical benefit, and the risk of sending in troops simply outweighed the rewards. The aftermath of the genocide has not only impacted those who lived through it, but it has also impacted future generations as well. At the end of the genocide, the ICTR was formed by the UN to find justice. The Rwandan genocide has shocking similarities between the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide as well. Overall, the Rwandan genocide was a terrible event that escalated far beyond what it should have if there had been intervention from other countries and the UN.

Nevertheless, they failed to prevent this ridiculous genocide because of their lack of attempt and lack of effort to stop it. On the fourteenth-anniversary of the genocide, the UN’s thoughts go out to the victims who have been traumatized, hurt, or dead during Rwanda’s Genocide. Quote UN secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon’s message “It is often those who most need their rights protected, who also need to be informed that the Declaration exists -- and that it exists for them.”- This message was a little too late after hundreds of thousands of people have been brutally massacred in the genocide in Rwanda. Though the UN seemed to have convinced the people in Rwanda that they were doing their best to stop this, nevertheless, the UN is respectively responsible for their inability to keep peace among the ethnic tribes (Hutus and Tutsis). (M2PressWIRE, 2008)

Rwanda was left with a crisis amongst the children and people, leaving them with horrible memories. A lot of children have been orphaned too.

History has a funny way of repeating itself. After World War II, the United States and the rest of the international community promised to do all they could to prevent future genocides. However this was a promise they were unable to keep. In 1994 when Rwanda went through genocide the United States and U.N were absent, leaving the Tutsis to be brutally murdered by the Hutus. As a consequence 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed and dumped into mass graves. Once again the United States and U.N promised to do more, but this time it was too late.

Rusesabagina’s accounts have left me to believe that the United Nations could have easily stopped the progression of the genocide in the beginning. If they had stayed in Rwanda to portray the slightest bit of protection to the people, I believe the Hutu murderers would be have been threatened enough to back off for the time being. Also, Rusesabagina’s account of asking the White House for help at the last minute and recalling how each person responded with an obscure declination

Over 300,000 Tutsis were forced to leave Rwanda and never return. In 1961 the Hutus wanted more of the Tutsi population gone. In an effort to show their strength and domination over the Tutsis, the Hutus pushed the Rwandan ruler, who was a Tutsi, into exile and forced him to declare Rwanda as a Republic. In 1962, a year after this declaration was made Belgium finally gave Rwanda its independence. After this, the Hutu people stopped harming and forcing Tutsi citizens or officials into doing what they wanted them to do, until 1994.

The UN had resources in Rwanda with the UNAMIR (United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda). When the UNAMIR sent, a report saying they needed more because something big was going to happen in Rwanda, the UN didn’t believe them so they did nothing. The UN Security Council took a slightly non-intervention type of thought. They didn’t completely stay out of it, they had peace keepers on the ground in Rwanda. But they didn’t send enough and once they were there left them to their own

Initially, Western media dismissed the beginnings of the genocide as just another “tribal conflict” or civil war in “war-torn Africa”. This often led outside countries to dismiss the conflict for up to a month. Soon, however, as the Western journalists in Rwanda began to communicate to their countries how bad the violence really was, a growing understanding of just how catastrophic the genocide was finally began hitting the West. Unfortunately, before the West could gauge much more, all non-Rwandan people were ordered out of the country. French, Belgian, American, and other citizens living in Rwanda were ordered back to their country and they took with them the last of the journalists who were truly connected to the Western world. Information about what was happening every day and how the genocide was escalating was limited (The Editorial Board). Even then, there were enough humanitarian organizations on the ground that constantly updated the international community on the disastrous state of Rwanda. Despite knowing enough about the genocide to at least intervene on some level, the international community was especially slow to move. People were dying at alarming numbers in Rwanda and the world was hesitant to move because it did not want to label the conflict a genocide ("Rwanda, Genocide, Hutu, Tutsi, Mass Execution...”). Calling the conflict a genocide would mean definitive involvement and this involvement, purely done for humanitarian reasons, would take up money and resources. Since most countries had no interests to protect in Rwanda, they felt a limited sense of urgency and discussed the correct definition of the word “genocide” while thousands got displaced and died ("Rwanda, Genocide, Hutu, Tutsi, Mass Execution...”). Aside from not wanting to spend resources, nations like America were hesitant to intervene in Africa because of their past on the continent. In the past, American soldiers

In 1994, Rwanda’s population was made up of three ethnic groups, the Hutus, the Tutsi, and the Twas. Hutu extremists blamed the Tutsi for their country’s social, economic, and political problems. Because of this, The Hutu extremists decided to kill the Tutsi and the Hutus who were opposed to the extremists. “In the early 1990s, hutu extremists within Rwanda’s political elite blamed the entire Tutsi minority population for the country’s increasing social, economic, and political pressures.” This shows that human rights are being violated because one ethnic group decided to blame a minority population for their country’s growing problems. The extremists decided they wanted control back and because of this they felt it was justified to kill as

On May 25, 1994, U.S. president, Bill Clinton, wrote in a letter to Representative Harry Johnston, “The White House issued a strong public statement calling for the Rwandan Army and the Rwandan Patriotic Front to do everything in their power to end the violence immediately. This followed an earlier statement by me calling for a cease-fire and the cessation of the killings” (qtd. in Baldauf). It seems that by calling out those engaged in the conflict, the U.S. took the responsibility from themselves and took no further action. In the post-Cold War era, it is not surprising that most other countries followed the lead of the U.S. and also chose to not take any significant action