History Of Rwanda And The Genocide

Genocides happen when ethnic divisions become apparent. Many times, these ethnic divisions were due to colonization from people of different race. These cases are especially true in Africa when Europeans colonized their territory, with clear racial divisions between them (Gavin). These genocides go on because of nations acting on ignorance and refusing to help out the nations in turmoil, allowing the genocides to continue, without wasting their own resources. These nations purposefully ignoring the slaughter of people cause the nations to also be guilty of the genocide underway (“The Heart”). The genocide occurred in Rwanda in Central Africa during 1994. The decades of Tutsi oppression of Hutus and the assassination of President Habyarimana in 1994 led to the genocide in Rwanda.

For years, Rwanda has been a hotbed of racial tension. The majority of the Rwandan population is made up of Hutu's, with Tutsi's making up the rest of it. Ever since European colonial powers entered the country and favoured the Tutsi ethnic group over the Hutu by putting Tutsi people in all important positions in society, there has been a decisive political divide between the two groups. This favouring of the Tutsi over the Hutu, and the Hutu subjugation as an ethnic lower class resulted in the civil war and revolution of 1959, where the Hutu overthrew the Tutsi dominated government, and resulted in Rwanda gaining their independence in 1962.

The two ethnic groups that were include in the Rwanda Genocide was the Tutsis and Hutus. The Tutsis were the minority population in Rwanda, but they held all the positions of authority. On the other hand, the Hutu made up around 85% of Rwanda’s population, but held no political power, they were denied higher education and land ownership. The size of the nose and the color of the eyes were the factors that determined whether a person was Hutu or Tutsi. The Tutsis disapprove of the colonial rule of the Belgians and demanded to become more independent. After World War II, the Tutsis felt impatient and that it was time they took matters in their own hands to pursuit their independence. In 1959, the tension and violence between the Tutsis and Hutus were greatly increased.

Rwanda is a country located in Central Eastern Africa, with an extensive history of colonization, after Belgium attained control in 1924. Belgium’s rule however also marked the beginning of a lengthy ethnic rivalry between the Hutu and the Tutsi people. Belgium favored the Tutsi the minority at 14 percent of the population over the Hutu, the majority at 85 percent, simply because the Tutsis were more resembling of the Europeans. “Colonial policy helped to intensify bipolar differentiation between Tutsi and Hutu, by inscribing “ethnic” identification on identity cards, by relegating the vast majority of Hutu to particularly onerous forms of forced cultivation and corvee, and by actively favoring Tutsi in access to administrative posts, education, and jobs in the modern sector,” (Newbury, 12). Belgium’s control fueled the Hutu’s resentment towards the Tutsis because the Tutsis received superior treatment for decades. Thus, when Rwanda finally acquired independence in 1962, the Hutus fought for control over the government, highlighting the first warning sign of the genocide to come. Many Tutsis were killed afterwards, while many others fled to neighboring countries to escape the violence.

The Rwandan Genocide was the 1994 mass slaughter in Rwanda of the ethnic Tutsi and Hutu peoples. The Rwandan Genocide left 70% of total ethnic Tutsi dead and a total of 20% of the entire country 's population dead. Today, more than twenty years later, Rwanda is a growing society with an ever expanding skyline.

The Rwandan genocide occurred during the period of April to July of 1994. This genocide was as a result of the Hutu ethnic majority slaughtering the Tutsi minority. During this period as much as 800,000 Tutsis were killed. The genocide was started by Hutu extremists in the capital of Kigali and the genocide soon spread across the country. Despite all of this there were several survivors of the genocide. Immaculee Ilibagiza is one of those people.

I think if nations see that a genocide is about to happen, and that it is starting to occur, but has not yet fully began they should try with all their power to stop it from happening, before it’s too late. If countries can make a peaceful end to the situation, I think they should. They should investigate deep into the countries past, looking for anything that might help them get through and talk to the people behind the genocide. See what’s going on and why they are going to such extremes. They should ask questions like, who is behind the mass murders. Is it the leader of the country killing his people? Is it a terrorist group acting on their own accord to make people bend to their will or is it a random group trying to exploit a heritage

Several key events led to the beginning of the premeditated genocide in Rwanda. Belgium, who favored the Tutsis, ruled Rwanda after taking it from Germany after World War I (“The Rwandan Genocide”). In 1962, Rwanda gained independence and after this the Tutsis were discriminated against in every way. Due to this, the Rwandan “social revolution” took place, killing 20,000 Tutsis and causing many others to seek refuge in other countries, making them an even smaller minority in Rwanda. Within four years, 100,000 Tutsis were killed with machetes and dumped in rivers.

The Belgians also decreed that Tutsis should be the only ones in power and thus removed Hutus from positions of power and excluded them from higher education (Arraras). “By assuring the Tutsis’ monopoly of power the Belgians set the stage for future conflict in Rwanda” (Arraras). The Tutsis were enjoying their status as being superior to the Hutus but all that changed in 1959 with the Hutu revolution and so in 1960 and 1961 the Hutus won the elections. Since then, ethnic tensions had always been brewing between the Hutus and the Tutsis. However the tensions escalated when Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, a Hutu, was shot down above Kigali airport on April 6, 1994. I consider this to be a form of political violence because someone or a group that opposed this President which represented only the political interests as well as the viability of the Hutus had to be killed in order for another group possibly the Tutsis to fill the vacuum of power left by the Hutu president. The Hutus blamed the assassination of their president on the Tutsis and in turn sparked an all out massacre waged on to the Tutsi people.

For the Rwandan genocide, there was always tension and hatred present between the Hutus and Tutsis. Contrary to the Armenians and Ottomans however, they were similar in many fields such as their language and traditions. In 1916, Belgian colonists classified the residents with identity cards according to their ethnicity. The Tutsis were considered superior over the Hutus, which sparked obvious hatred from the inferior Hutus. “Resentment among the Hutus gradually built up, culminating in a series of riots in 1959. More than 20,000 Tutsis were killed.” (Rwanda: How the genocide happened) Killings of Rwandans occurred even before the genocide. In 1962, as soon as the Belgium granted Rwanda independence, the Hutus took this opportunity to swoop in and replace them. The Hutus’ natural hatred towards the Tutsis and overpowering presence made them the perfect targets/suspects to be guilty of wrongdoings. Their build up of previous controversies played a significant role in giving themselves the right to believe that whatever horrible actions are inflicted upon the Tutsis are necessary and justified. Although some moderate Hutus were also victims of the genocide, the majority were potentially the Tutsis because of the Hutu regime’s claim that the Tutsis are the ones that should be wiped out completely. For the Holocaust during World War II, there was prior discrimination from the

In April of 1994, a terrible atrocity began in the African country of Rwanda where around eight hundred thousand individuals were massacred over a time period of 100 brutal days. If thought about in mathematical terms, this works out to about 333 deaths per hour; which is a rate of deaths worse than what occurred during the Holocaust. (2) The term genocide is defined in the United Nations Genocide Convention, established in 1948, as “any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: a) killing members of the group; b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to

Even though the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 is an excellent illustration of the failure of the State of Rwanda to observe and apply its state responsibility toward its population, especially the Tutsi minority, Nation states have inter alia several responsibilities towards the population under their jurisdiction, which include protection against egregious atrocities, genocide, mass murder, assassinations, and ethnic cleansing… International law emphasizes Nation states responsibilities and assures that no one State or a group of Nation states has the right to interfere directly or indirectly for any reason whatsoever in the internal or external affairs of any other State. However, what are the consequences of a State failure, inability, or unwillingness to protect its own population? And most importantly, would another State stand still while communities are being slaughtered just because it has no right to intervene in the domestic jurisdiction of another State, just like it happened in Rwanda and Bosnia in the 1990s? Additionally, are there other reasons that can allow a State or a group of Nation states to intervene, legally under the

This tragic event which was originated in Rwanda occurred in 1994 killing 800,000 people. The genocide first came about by the death of the Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, who was a Hutu. This resulted from the conscious choice of the upper class to promote hatred and fear to keep itself in power. The extremist ethnic Hutu regime in office in 1994 believed that the only way they could hang on to power was by wiping out the ethnic Tutsis. This genocide was further carried out and justified with the utilization of radios as they would discuss the suffering of the Hutus under the power of the Tutsis. With the use of machetes the people of the Tutsi descent were slaughtered and tortured making this one of largest genocides in Africa.

The war in Rwanda has often been presented as a “tribal conflict.” This is highly misleading. Hutus and Tutsis existed a century ago, but the two categories were defined in very different terms in those days. They were far less mutually hostile. Colonial rule and its attendant racial ideology, followed by independent governments committed to Hutu supremacy and intermittent inter-communal violence, have dramatically altered the nature of the Hutu-Tutsi problem, and made the divide between the two far sharper and more violent. In short, political manipulation of ethnicity is the main culprit for today’s ethnic problem.

The UN should have definitely taken more action to prevent the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. The UN has the resources and manpower but it seems that the UN is only motivated by monetary gain. Based on the reading, the UN stated “We will recommend to our governments not to intervene as the risks are high and all that is here are humans.” (Dallaire & Beardsley, 2003. p. 121) indicates that the members of the UN only take action if it’s in their best interest. In my opinion, the UN should disregard any gain and put human life at the top of their priorities. If they had done so during 1994, the civil war might not have become a genocide, saving the lives of