Things I Read: 2016 Edition

2016 was a year of writing for me. Most of my intellectual time and energy went to finishing up a book project I’ve been working on for almost five years. Yale University Press will publish Rwanda, 1959-2016 no later than spring 2018.

The grind of writing meant that I read a lot of court cases and judicial opinions, particularly from the International Criminal Court for Rwanda and the Joint Mechanism that appeared after it closed in 2015. I also read raw statistical data and the accompanying analysis from the World Bank, IMF and the Rwandan government. Human rights reports, Rwandan government documents, political blogs and the memoirs of survivors of the 1994 genocide round out my technical reading for the year.

I also published in 2016 the ‘Genocide in Rwanda’ bibliographic entry for the Oxford Bibliography in African Studies. I read and reread many wonderful (and not so wonderful) books and articles for this project.

I continue to read in the fields of Rwanda studies, security studies and human rights. The yoke of empirical evidence on the folly of the post-genocide policies of the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front is far heavier thanks to the following:

Investing in Authoritarian Rule Punishment and Patronage in Rwanda's Gacaca Courts for Genocide Crimes by Anu Chakravarty (2016)

From War to Genocide: Criminal Politics in Rwanda, 1990-1994 by André Guichaoua (2015)

Inside Rwanda’s Gacaca Courts by Bert Ingelaere (2016)

Making Ubumwe: Power, State and Camps in Rwanda's Unity-Building Project by Andrea Purdekova (2015)

Training for Model Citizenship: An Ethnography of Civic Education and State-Making in Rwanda by Molly Sundberg (2016)

Bad News: Last Journalists in a Dictatorship by Anjan Sundaram (2016)

I also read some wonderfully rich PhD theses that I hope will become books:

Seeing Like a Neoliberal State? Authoritarian High Modernism, Commercialization and Governmentality in Rwanda’s Agricultural Reform by Christopher Huggins (2013)

Sharing scarcity: Land access and social relations in Southeast Rwanda by Margot Leegwater (2015)

From Donorship to Ownership? Evolving Donor-Government Relationships in Rwanda by Haley Swedlund (2011)

Hidden inequalities: Rwandan female politicians' experiences of balancing family and political responsibilities by Justine Uvuza (2014)

Mass justice for mass atrocity: Transitional justice and illiberal peace-building in Rwanda by Lars Waldorf (2013)

I reread books that I think anyone interested in understanding contemporary Rwanda must read:

The Cohesion of Oppression: Clientship and Ethnicity in Rwanda, 1860-1960 by Catharine Newbury (1988)

Antecedents to Modern Rwanda: The Nyiginya Kingdom by Jan Vansina (2005)

I learned a lot from the following titles in the fields of human rights and security studies.

Peaceland: Conflict Resolution and the Everyday Politics of International Intervention by Séverine Autesserre (2014)

Masculinity and New War: The Gendered Dynamics of Contemporary Armed Conflict by David Duriesmith (2016)

Marching Through Suffering: Loss and Survival in North Korea by Sandra Fahy (2015)

A New Weave of Power People & Politics. The Action Guide for Advocacy and Citizen Participation by Lis VeneKlasen with Valerie Miller (2007)

Researching War: Feminist Methods, Ethics and Politics edited by Annick T.R. Wibben (2016)

I remain interested in storytelling as a genre to understand violence. This means I read memoirs, historical fiction as well as fiction novels. Some really stand out:

I am Evelyn Amony: Reclaiming my Life from the Lord’s Resistance Army by Evelyn Amony, edited by Erin Baines (2015)

Seasons of Trouble: Life Amid the Ruins of Sri Lanka’s Civil War by Rohini Mohan (2014)

Dust by Yvonne Adhiambo Owuor (2014)

Raw Hope, New Life: Decency, Housing and Everyday Life in a Post-Apartheid Community by Fiona Ross (2010)

A Man of Good Hope by Johnny Steinburg (2015)

The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead

New Book of Rwandan Poetry by Froduald Harelimana

For those of you who read Kinyarwanda, Froduald Harelimana has recently published a new book of poetry, Bita Ukwabo. His Froudauld's own words: "The book is in Kinyarwanda and in poetry style easy to read even for those not fluent in the language. It describes and analyses names and naming of people, things and places in the Rwandan social and cultural context." You can purchase the book here, and contact Froudauld here.

Aristide Rwigara on his family's continued persecution

Aristide Rwigara has once again reached out to me to share the following verbatim statement. I have not verified the claims within. I am posting it as the persecution resembles that experienced by regime insiders at the dusk of the Habyarimana regime -- let's not forgot the importance of intra-ethnic elite in-fighting in Rwanda's recent and distant past. The demolishing of the Rwigara family hotel also seems to mark an intensification of the RPF's usual approach to dealing with loyalists turned critics; it now uses the rhetoric of respecting rule of law to justify its treatment of former allies.

"PERSECUTION OF RWIGARA ‘S WIDOW AND ORPHANS

Despite the fact that our family holds the permits that were required to build our hotel, the city of Kigali destroyed our building on September 12, 2015. Our family had attempted to meet with the city’s decision makers to resolve the situation, but we were turned down. We tried to prevent the destruction through judiciary processes as well, but we were forbidden from filing a case and exercising our legal rights.

In addition to demolishing our hotel, they have also dispossessed us of all the land our father left us.

Given that the city of Kigali is unmoved by the stark victimization of our family, and seems at ease inhabiting the role of bully in the public’s consciousness, our family wants to use this forum to ask publicly the following question: what crime have we committed that we should be punished so mercilessly and with such ruthless determination?

Our father was assassinated in a gruesome manner, and his children are now being made to endure the same persecutions he experienced for many years prior to his death. What has our family done to be targeted so relentlessly?

Our father had absolutely no link with any opposition party, and neither do we. So why are we treated like enemies?

Who are these people who do not mind entering the annals of Rwanda as oppressors of a widow and her orphans? And who are the veritable originators of these orders, using the city of Kigali to annihilate us?

We are asking for the perpetrators to come out as men and state the reasons for maintaining the Rwigaras in perpetual grief.

We are also asking the public, wherever you are, to please take notice of these gross violations of human rights and intervene in whatever capacity you can. Our family is a civilian unit, with absolutely no political involvement whatsoever, and our persecution cannot be explained away as repression of a political threat. So we are asking you readers to relay this question which was undoubtedly in my father’s mind as they were savagely murdering him: WHY ARE THEY DOING THIS ?

Aristide Rwigara September 12, 2015

On Leopold Munyakazi and his ICE Detention

I have been working on the asylum case of Leopold Munyakazi. He was picked up by American Immigration and Customs officials on Friday afternoon, September 4, as the holiday long weekend was about to begin. I share here a statement from the investigative journalist Keith Harmon Snow. I agree with the general thrust of his argument. I think if Munyakazi is returned to Rwanda, it is likely he will be tortured. The trend of political opponents being tortured has been documented over the years by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, among other human rights NGOs, and there is no reason to believe Professor Munyakazi won't experience the same. Contra Snow's headline that Munyakazi will face 'certain death' on his return to Rwanda, I think torture is more likely. I also have no knowledge of the raid, meaning I do not agree with Snow's assertion that the raid on Munyakazi was 'gestapo-like.' My own stance is, and always has been, to base my analysis on substantiated evidencerather than speculation. That said, there is much to be learn from Snow's interpretation of what I believe is a politicized smear campaign against Leopold Munyakazi. You can read Snow's post here.

On Rwigara's Assassination and Subsequent Harassment of his Family

Yesterday, Aristide Rwigara reached out to me to publicise his family's version of events surrounding his father's assassination. I am reposting the letter he sent to me verbatim and with his permission. I agreed to post because the targeting of RPF loyalists is one of many worrying signs coming out of Kigali. In addition to assassinations, the RPF has wrongfully imprisoned presumed enemies, including Kitizo Mihigo. Rwanda's culture of impunity reigns supreme, just as it did before the 1994 genocide. Publicising regime excesses is now imperative.

For the record, I have not verified the facts of the following statement. I publish them for your consideration, and with concern. Politicials scientists know that when authoritarian elites turn on their own, the risk of political violence intensifies. Journalists wishing to write about the Rwigara case, please let me know and I'll put you in touch with Aristide: sthomson@colgate.edu.

"Hello. My name is Aristide Rwigara. I am the son of Assinapol Rwigara, who was one of Rwanda’s most prominent businessmen. My father was assassinated on February 4, 2015, and my siblings and I petitioned the Rwandan president for an investigation into his death in the month of March. I would like to bring attention to the tragic events that have been unfolding in the aftermath of my father’s assassination.

A few days ago, the city of Kigali ordered my family to demolish our hotel located in the neighborhood of Kiyovu, in Kigali. They ordered us to demolish it by August, 15 of this year. They said that our hotel was built without the proper permits, and that it presents a safety problem. They ordered my family to destroy the building ourselves, and also to pay over 7 million Rwf to the company that performed the bogus study about the safety issue.

This is just part of their plan to ruin our family after my father’s assassination. Indeed, we built our hotel with all the proper permits and are still in possession of those permits.

Moreover, to say that the building was built without following rules of safety is an incredibly brazen lie given the conditions in which it was built. Indeed, the city monitored every single step of the construction since they ceaselessly harassed my father in order to make him abandon the project. For example, they would grant him the permit to build only to stop him immediately after work had begun, with new and invented reasons for the halt.

The hotel being one of the most valuable buildings in the area, they even illegally took it at one point. My father went to court over the matter and won his hotel back. The city then offered to buy the hotel from my father, which he refused to do.

It is unbelievable that the mayor of Kigali would now say that our hotel is not safe, when the city’s own officials and experts were sent to test the solidity and safety of the building, and emphatically asserted that everything was according to regulations. Moreover, observers of the situation are wondering how the city of Kigali could have allowed for the construction to happen until completion without the permits (the construction took very long because of all the tribulations my father faced).

Last week, my mother, Adeline Rwigara, was approached by branches of the media over this matter. She publicly denounced the authorities for harassing our family. Indeed, the hotel matter is just one of a long series of actions to thwart my father’s ventures and smother us economically.

The city has gone after three other of our plots in Kiyovu. One of them was grabbed with the sole explanation being that the land was not being used productively. But the city had, without cause, refused to grant us the permit to build on it. So really we could not use it at all.

We are not being given information on whether we are allowed to build or not on another one of our plots; so despite the fact that we own the property, that building remains under the city’s control.

There is a third plot that my father had acquired by paying the residents of that land so that they would move. But the city of Kigali then told him that they were taking possession of that land. My father told them that they then had to reimburse him for the payments he had given to the former residents so that they would move. The city refused to pay so my father took them to court. He won, and the city was ordered to pay him close to a billion Rwandan Francs. But the city refused to pay my father. Shortly thereafter, he gave an interview to a newspaper in Kigali where he discussed the injustices he was being subjected to. Ten days later, he was assassinated.

My father was assassinated because he is the only businessman in Rwanda who would not allow the state to enter into his businesses. He refused to comply to the usual model of doing business in Rwanda, which is to forcibly give shares of one’s companies to the state, and then watch them take over the entirety of one’s hard earned assets. Many other businessmen have fled the country to save their lives once their companies went under assault from the state. The others who remain have no control over their own businesses.

My father refused to be intimidated , which is why he was continuously targeted since 1995, enduring many other persecutions unmentioned here. Ultimately, he paid with his life because he stood up for his economic rights.

The state has now gone after my mother for publicly speaking out about this latest attack against our family, and telling the media the truth of the matter, which is that my father was assassinated so that they could take his possessions.

Last Friday, August 7, more than 30 police and military officers jumped over the gate of our house in Kiyovu, Kigali, threatened to smash open the doors and arrested my mother. They took her to the CID (Criminal Investigation Department). But the media learned about it almost instantly and the story immediately spread over the internet . Given the attention her unlawful arrest was receiving, the CID had to let her go after hours of interrogation. But she was ordered to come back the next morning.

She went back to the CID a third time on Monday morning, August 10, and was there again this morning of August 11. It bears repeating that she has not committed a crime, other than talking about the never-ending persecution of our family by the state of Rwanda.

The Rwandan police released a statement on Sunday night intended to justify the authorities’ recent actions against our family, and which contained, among many other blatant lies, the following incensing assertion concerning our request for a thorough investigation following our father’s assassination: “Even when the family raised other concerns surrounding the incident later, further systematic and thorough investigations were conducted and findings were also shared with the family, who expressed that their concerns were addressed and revealed that their accusations were just based on hearsay.”

My family wants to set the record straight about the so-called thorough investigation by the police. There was no investigation at all! The whole thing was a farce in which my family was called at the CID where we were grilled for hours as if we were the ones on trial. During this mockery of an investigation, they attempted to discredit each one of the proofs we put forward concerning our father’s assassination. Their ultimate finding was that the man driving the truck involved in the fictitious accident that night was not at fault, and that our accusations against him did not hold up. Actually, that man was never even once mentioned while we were at the CID ! So the police produced findings that were not even related to the facts we put forward!

Our family also never expressed that our “concerns were addressed” or that our “accusations were just based on hearsay”. That is simply a lie! Our concerns certainly were not addressed by the police’s sham investigation, and our accusations were based on what members of my family witnessed themselves, not hearsay!

I would like to insist that the only political party my father was ever part of was the RPF. He had been a major financial contributor since 1990, and remained one until his death.He had absolutely no political ties to any other party.

It is also important to know that the night of his assassination, my father was carrying, among other things, a blue folder with a great number of documents concerning all the plots his family is still being embattled over. He had been requested to bring those documents over by the people he was meeting that night, under the false promise of helping him solve the issues we are still dealing with. After the assassination, we were never allowed to recover those documents.

The usual result of denouncing the authorities in Rwanda for an injustice is death, torture, imprisonment, or exile ; which is why our family's situation requires urgent attention.

I strongly hope that you will publish this story, in order to expose this great injustice.Thank you very much."

Want to Protest Obama's invitation to Paul Kagame to visit the White House in August?

I have been asked to post the following to raise awareness about Kagame's presence at the US-Africa Summit, hosted by the White House on August 4. For some Rwandans, Kagame's presence is an insult, given the human rights record of his government. The petition information follows: "Kagame is among the African presidents who are to visit the White House on August 4th. Based on factual evidence below and on more facts you know, please write a letter, send an email, make a phone call to the White House raising concerns over the visit of Kagame and outlining your requests to Obama. Spread in secret the word to everyone you know believes in democratic values, justice, sustainable development and humanism virtues. Mail: The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Phone: 202-456-1111, 202-456-1414, 202-456-6213, 202-456-2121 E-mail: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments We all know that Kagame committed and is still committing: (1) Genocide against Hutus since 1991 [Reference to Robert Gersony Report and UN Mapping Report], (2) Distortion of the truth over the Genocide against Tutsis [Reference to Stam and Davenport ‘What Really Happened in Rwanda’] (3) Assassinations against legitimate political opponents [Reference to Patrick Karegeya, Seth Sendashonga, Charles Ingabire, André Kagwa Rwisereka, Leonard Rugambage], (4) Extrajudicial executions [Reference to Alfred Nsengimana, Eric Hashakimana], (5) Massacring Congolese people [Reference to UN Mapping Report and Report by UN Group of Experts], (6) Rape against women [Reference to UN Mapping Report and Report by UN Group of Experts], (7) Pillage of Congolese minerals [Reference to UN Mapping Report and Report by UN Group of Experts], (8) Embezzlement of state funds and impoverishment of the majority of Rwandans [Reference to Susan Thomson ‘Whispering Truth to Power’ and the work of Gustave Makonene] , (9) Ethnic discrimination against Hutus [Reference to HRW Report ‘There Will Be No Trial: Police Killings of Detainees and the Imposition of Collective Punishments’], (10) Persecution through tyrannical laws like the Law on Genocide Ideology [Reference to UN Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai Report], (11) Suffocation of freedom of expression and of association [Reference to UN Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai Report], (12) Oppression through security services (Reference to Filip Reyntjens “An Army with a State, Not a State with an Army], (13) Arbitrary detention against legitimate political opponents [Pasteur Bizimungu, Déo Mushayidi, Ingabire Umuhoza, Bernard Ntaganda, Sylvain Sibomana, Dominique Shyirambere], and (14) Abductions [Joel Mutabazi, Innocent Kalisa, Augustin Cyiza]."

Why are Rwandans Disappearing?

Last month, I published an op-ed in the New York Times. With Lara Santoro, we provide an answer to the question, why are Rwandans disappearing? The comment section is worth a read as well.

Rwanda's Twitter-Gate: The Disinformation Campaign of Africa’s Digital President

Today, I published a short opinion piece on the AfricanArguments.org website about Rwanda's recent Twitter-gate, linking it to broader patterns of disinformation in postgenocide Rwanda. The link is here.

The original text follows:

As Rwanda prepares to mark the twentieth anniversary of the 1994 genocide, it has found itself in an unprecedented diplomatic crisis. The ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front has all but claimed responsibility for the murder of its former spy chief Patrick Karegeya in Johannesburg in January. More recently, the South African government has accused Rwandan diplomats of a third bungled attempt on the life of the country’s former army chief Kayumba Nyamwasa. The State Department scolded the government of President Paul Kagame for the attempt. The South African government then expelled three Rwandan diplomats, and is considering ending formal diplomatic ties with Rwanda.

Foreign journalists reporting on the attack on Nyamwasa raised the ire of President Kagame. On March 7, Radio France International journalist Sonia Rolley was subject to misogynistic harassment from the account of @RichardGoldston. American freelancer Steve Terrill came to Rolley’s defense, resulting in a series of mocking tweets from the account of Rwanda president @PaulKagame himself, not the @RichardGoldston to which Terrill (@steveinafrica) had directed his Tweets. A week later, on March 15, Terrill was denied entry into Rwanda. The denial appears politically-motivated as Terrill broke the story that someone in the office of the Rwandan president also had access to the @RichardGoldston account. The @RichardGoldston account trolled Twitter for any sign of criticism of Kagame or the RPF, and regularly harassed and demeaned Twitter users that criticized the government.

On March 8, the official Twitter account of the Office of the Rwandan President (@UrugwiroVillage) tweeted that the @RichardGoldston account had been deleted and the staff member responsible for the account had been “reprimanded’. Rwanda’s Twitter-gate raise questions about the central role of RPF Twitter-trolls in calling out foreign journalists who seek it hold it to account for its excesses at home and abroad. President Kagame’s reactionary tweets provide insight into the political reality behind his government’s carefully crafted narrative that Rwanda is a nation rehabilitated from the ruin of the 1994 genocide. Twitter-gate is also illustrative of the harassment and intimidation that critics of the RPF regime regularly experience.

Twitter-gate is the first crack in the armor of the RPF’s longstanding disinformation campaign that has relied on exchange students, public relations firms, commemorative events, and a whole host of other techniques to craft an idealized and often invented version of what Rwanda was like before the onset of colonialism and what it has become since the 1994 genocide. Since 2009, the RPF has worked with American and British PR specialists whose primary task is to drown out the voices of foreign critics and bury evidence of the RPF’s human rights abuses under rosy language about political stability, economic growth, and the stated intention of helping the poor. In January, Rwanda launched the Kwibuka20 campaign, from inside Kagame’s office of course, for the same instrumental reason: to substitute the trope of genocide for the trope of authoritarianism in narratives about Rwanda.

The disinformation strategy is simple: ensure maximum international sympathy and donor dollars and a minimum of international inquiry into the government’s denial of liberties and human rights abuses. The Kagame-led regime has a penchant for U.S. visits and visitors, and until recently successive U.S. administrations turned a blind eye to massive human rights violations for which the Kagame-led regime, according to the United Nations, is responsible in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Americans in particular have been taken in by the rhetoric of reconstruction, development, and reconciliation that invariably accompanies most public events in the country.

The RPF frames itself for Western audiences as the political party best able to move Rwanda is moving towards a Western-style democracy because it has regularly held presidential and parliamentary elections. The RPF handily won the most recent round of parliamentary elections, in September 2013, with 76% of the vote. In theory, it was contending with nine other parties. In practice, Rwanda’s nearly six million voters had little choice on the ballot. A total of 98% of the votes went to the RPF and its four coalition parties. The continued dominance of the RPF in the electoral realm projects a semblance of political pluralism while masking the fact that all parties are expected to acquiesce to the ruling party. Two actual opposition parties have been banned and their leaders jailed.

Another pillar of Rwanda’s disinformation campaign is that the government promotes gender-equality. 64% percent of parliamentarians in Rwanda’s lower house are women, but this number masks reality. Although women are very visible in Rwanda politics, their ability to shape the future of women, ironically, is circumscribed. Rwanda's parliament has limited influence. Parliamentarians—be they male or female—actually have little power to legislate on behalf of their constituents. They have little room to develop policy or even to debate openly; space for free and open political expression is limited. Put differently, an assessment of political realities shows that women parliamentarians in Rwanda are mere accessories of power; they do not actually wield any of it.

Though the genocide has not repeated itself, growing socio-political and economic inequalities—notably the exclusion of youth—under an increasingly authoritarian and repressive government have meant that post-genocide Rwanda is still deeply entangled in its violent past. Rwandans deserve better from their American friends. Rwanda’s Twitter-gate also reminds us that, on this 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, we should not allow our generally rosy perception of Rwanda as a stable and free country under the visionary leadership of President Kagame to mask long-standing political tensions, unresolved resentments, and the rise of an authoritarian regime.

New and Valuable Resource: Rwanda Witness Website

For those of us that have researched and written on/in Rwanda for a while (in my case for the last 18 years or so), it is a rare delight to have a new cautioned, considered and independent voice on which to rely. This person, fellow Canadian and journalist Judi Rever, has recently come into my orbit. I am writing this blog post to let folks know about her writing and research, most of which is published on her blog, Rwanda Witness.

Two things stand out for me about Judi Rever's work. One, it seeks to centre, through oral and witness testimony, the experiences of ordinary Rwandans and Congolese. The daily hardships and victories of these lives are generally absent from what we think we know about Rwanda since the 1994 genocide, thanks to a carefully crafted whitewash of the successes of the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). Her writing foregrounds these experiences and for this reason is an invaluable resource.

Second, Judi Rever's work places socio-political realities in Rwanda in broader context, mostly notably through events in Zaire/DRC as well as the American failure to protect civilians lives in Rwanda, both during and since the 1994 genocide.

Given the recent assassination of Patrick Karegeya, and the gloating that some senior members of Rwanda's ruling RPF have engaged in on various social media platforms, Judi Rever's reporting on the role of the RPF/A in perpetrating mass violence is all the more urgent. It seems to me that the RPF is well aware that it can flaunt its human rights abuses with no fear of international repercussion or prosecution. This culture of impunity reigned pre-1994 and Karegeya's murder suggests it is alive and well as at the dawn of the 20th anniversary of the 1994 genocide. We'll likely never know what Karegeya knew about the mass violence of the early days of the RPF government, nor the violence that he likely oversaw or participated in to make sure the RPF took power in July 1994. What is clear that the mantra "never again" rings rather hollow for many Rwandans.

To get you started thinking about the pattern of human rights abuses perpetrated by the RPF/A, I recommend reading Rever's investigative reporting on the role of senior members of the Rwandan Patriotic Army in perpetrating mass murder, and the ways in which it has been able to whitewash its crimes for a largely uneducated Western audience. Happy reading.

On Karegeya's Assassination: Dying by the Sword

Quite a few people (activist bloggers, and journalists based in Nairobi and Kampala) have been asking for my opinion on Patrick Karegeya's assassination.

My position is quite straightforward. It is too early to accuse Kigali but it is also too early to think that Kigali is not involved. It is possible that folks within Karegeya's inner circle killed him; it is also possible that Kagame or someone close to him ordered the killing. At this stage, there is a sizeable lack of independently verified information. I look forward to learning more about the circumstances as well as the individuals involved in Karegeya's death in the coming days and weeks.

I also want to make this clear. I do not think Karegeya is a Rwandan hero. While is always a moment of sadness and reflection when a life is lost, particularly one lost to violence, it bears mentioning that Karegeya lived by the sword. He has blood on his hands from the early days of the (then rebel) RPF drive into Uganda in the late 1980s. Yes, he fell out with Kagame in 2007, but he was the head of military intelligence in Rwanda from 1994 to 2004. Karegeya oversaw the killings in Kibeho in April 1995 (which the UN tried to report in the Gersony Report but the US had its publication suppressed), among others including in a second report the US tried to suppress - the UN Group of Experts reports on DR Congo, published in 2010. Most recently, in 2013, the UN GOE published another report, which details the M23 rebellion and Rwanda's role in financing it. Many Rwandans, of all ethnicities, died at the hands of RPF/A soldiers. This is but one example of the brutality that those in the RPF ordered or directly perpetrated.

It is also important to keep in mind that men like Karegeya operate in service of other elites like him. The majority-- some 85% of the population are rural Rwandans who make their living as subsistence farmers-- are subject to the machinations of political and military elites.

Karegeya was a founding member of the Rwandan National Congress, along with other once-close allies of Rwandan president Paul Kagame. The political goals and aspirations of the RNC, for those who wish to carefully read its policy platform, is not significantly different from the current policy programs of Kagame's ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front. My analysis suggests that many of the men like Karegeya, who have fallen out with Kagame and the RPF, did so because they questioned the ways in which Kagame began to hoard political and economic power, not because they had deeply held moral views about the heavy-handedness of the RPF leadership, but rather for economic reasons.

Rwandans who have lost their lives, or their loved ones to the violent machinations and/or complicity of Karegeya, deserve better than to have him lionised as a Rwandan hero.

"Whispering Truth to Power: Everyday Resistance to Reconciliation in Postgenocide Rwanda" Just Published

My latest book, Whispering Truth to Power: Everyday Resistance to Reconciliation in Postgenocide Rwanda published by the University of Wisconsin Press, is now available in both paperback and e-copy. The Press will consider reviews by prominent bloggers (I have no idea what they mean by 'prominent') so if you are interested in providing a review, please let me know and I'll try to get a copy to you. I am excited about this publication as it represents almost ten years of research and writing.

Ntganda's surrender: Let's not forget a few things....

My twitter feed is alive with speculation and opinion on Ntganda's pre-arrest/surrender in Kigali on Monday. I have been using twitter less and less as the rumour mill and reality are regularly divorced, making following those with claimed expertise on the conflict in DRC, politics in Rwanda, etc, etc hard to stomach, and even harder to interpret. Your number of followers or regularity of your tweets does not equate with accuracy or influence, people! My own take on Ntganda's surrender to the Americans in Kigali is to remind everyone that Rwanda is a master of grand strategy. Do not discount the notion that Kagame and other senior RDF officers knew well before we did what was going on. At the same time, don't overlook that Kagame is regularly and loudly critical of the ICC, calling it a form of neo-colonialism. (And he has a point there - ICC justice is pretty flawed for all kinds of reasons). Don't reify leadership and other state actors. Yes, it is important and useful to consider the motivations and interests of Kagame and Nkunda and Kabila and Museveni and so and so on. But so are local actors, local dynamics and local interests. Don't forget to drill down behind the headline, behind what you think you know. And don't forget that Kagame and his RPF as masters of grand strategy, whether military or public relations. Remember when Rudasingwa, Gahima, Karegeya and Nyamwasa defected/exiled and started their Rwandan National Congress Party? Same kind of speculation, and we learned little new expect that Rwandans elite political class remains disconnected from local realities. Only certain types of people matter in Rwanda, and the RNC has reinforced this in adopting a platform and rhetoric that is basically Arusha Accords redux. Indeed, Gahima just published a book that could have really illuminated and opened up discussion and debate on RPF crimes before, during and after the genocide (and more). But he didn't take the route, and Ntganda probably won't either. Don't overlook that legal standards of evidence and full disclosure for purposes of national reconciliation and individual healing are vastly difference. Even if Ntaganda sings, how much will we really learn? Remember Major General Rose Kabuye's arrest in Europe in December 2008? Kigali feigned outrage, forcing protests about the illegality and injustice of her arrest in Kigali (who is truly allowed to protest, with English signage in Rwanda?). Then we learned that Kagame and company, thanks to the rules of French legal procedure that they learned of the scope and nature of the charges against Kagame himself, and other senior members of the RPF? Kabuye was scapegoated, and so could be Ntaganda. All I am saying is that there is a broader trend of RPF manipulation and control embedded in Ntaganda's surrender. Don't forget that. And don't fail to pleasantly surprised if everything I just said turns out to be wrong. Maybe Ntaganda will share what he knows as part of a plea bargain and we will finally have enough to begin the indictment process for members of the RPF.

AWOL but not Absent

It has indeed been a while since I posted. This does not mean that I have failed to follow and react to current events. Instead, everything from Rwanda's alleged support for M23 rebels in neighboring Congo to Victoire Ingabire's politicized and dare I say sham legal trial and everything in between. I remain deeply concerned about peasant livelihoods as the government's drive to "modernize" results in increased physical and emotional insecurity for many rural residents. I have been writing a lot, and can now share that I have a book coming out next year on peasant resistance to the postgenocide policy of national unity and reconciliation, and have contracted for a second one to come out in late 2014/early 2015. This second book will assess the sustainability of Rwanda's postgenocide development, justice and reconciliation policies. I am excited for both works to emerge so we can continue the debate on why the RPF needs to open up Rwanda's political space. In the meantime, see this SSRN piece by Ciara Aucoin is one of the best I've seen in a while. Please read and share widely if you agree.

Kinyarwanda-language Poetry Books

This morning, I received a message from Dr Froduald Harelimana asking me to publicize his new collections of Kinyarwanda-language poetry. Nkuzimanire (ISBN # 978-0-98597-781-8) and Bihige (ISBN # 978-0-98597-780-1) are available from the author directly here at 20$ each. You can reach the author, Dr. Harelimana, here.

Old wine in older bottles? Rwanda's Information Economy

I have been pretty silent of late despite all the activity and news coming out of Rwanda in last few months. The M23 rebellion is big news, as is the symbolic cutting of aid to Rwanda. Two comments here. The M23 rebellion is not a surprising development to those of us who follow the region and its politics, and it has been analysed well on the http://congosiasa.blogspot.com/ blog. The Atlantic also published a useful piece asking what took the US so long to react and why is it doing so little now that it has cut aid to Kigali. There is an interesting development in the ways that Kigali is managing its PR machine around its presumed role in the M23 rebellion, the UN Group of Experts report, and the cutting or reconsideration of aid by key donors to Rwanda-- the US and UK among them. The trend to watch is whether or not Kigali, through its traditional posse of social media trolls, will continue to believe that it has a monopoly over Rwanda's information economy. Will it dig in its heels and continue with ad hominen attacks that do little to elevate the space for sincere dialogue and action to resolve the 'Congo' issue? Early analysis of the blogosphere suggests it will. Old tracts of the FDLR threat to Rwanda's peace and security are trotted out as the primary rationale for Rwanda's continued presence in the DRC. The personal attacks on Steve Hege (Coordinator of the UN Group of Experts) are recycled from the playbook that suppressed the Gersony Report in 1994, and sought to suppress the October 2010 UN report that linked Rwanda the acts of genocide in the Congo. (See Alex Engwete's post on Hege here). In other words, there is nothing new in Kigali's information management tactics. I think Rwanda's old wine in older bottles approach to managing its public image for international audiences is a sign of weakness. The regime is not in control of its PR machine simply because so few of us buy into the narrative. Kigali's inability/unwillingness to concede space suggests that the government is not in its usual comfortable position of maintaining total control. The RPF can't let the genie out of the bottle, lest attempts to remain in control of its own destiny threaten to unhinge it....

On the 18th Anniversary: Lack of Inclusiveness in Rwanda an Issue

Lack of Inclusiveness in Rwanda Could Breed Potential Conflict

Saturday April 7, 2012, marks the 18th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide. In 1994, Hutu militias and civilians targeted their Tutsi neighbours, friends and colleagues, killing at least 500,000 Tutsis in just 100 days. It was the worst case of genocidal violence since the Nazi holocaust.

Because it must never again happen, now is a good time to reflect on the lives of the Rwandans that lived through the genocide—the 85 percent of the population that lived in the country during the civil war (1990-1994).

It is worth noting that Rwandans of all ethnicities—Tutsi, Hutu and Twa—were caught up in the maelstrom of violence in 1994. Undeniably, the Tutsi were targeted solely because of their ethnicity. That the Tutsi died in great numbers is well established in both the academic and policy literatures. Lesser known, in part because the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) government denies their experiences, are the countless stories of survival and succour of ordinary peasant Rwandans of Hutu ethnicity who took extraordinary risks to protect Tutsi they knew. These stories include instances where notorious killers protected Tutsi they knew personally, ushering them safely through roadblocks, warning them of the whereabouts of marauding groups, and even hiding them at their homes. Some individuals killed during the day, but at night, they would shelter and hide Tutsi friends and relatives. In this way, many Tutsi survived because of help from a Hutu family member, friend, colleague, neighbour, or stranger.

To acknowledge that Rwandans of all ethnicities suffered various forms of violence during the genocide does not diminish the horror, gravity, or the meaning of the genocide against the Tutsi. Instead, it situates the events of 1994 in a larger landscape of violence, one in which peasant Rwandans were disproportionately affected when they were targeted by armed groups and militias. It also highlights the injustice that many peasant Rwandans feel in the face of government efforts to impose a single version of how the genocide happened and what needs to be done to recover from it. This government version does not take into account the various standpoints of genocide survivors, perpetrators, survivors of atrocities led by the RPF rebels (who now hold power), bystanders, Rwandans in the diaspora, and so on. In addition, the government presents a simplistic version of the cause of the 1994 genocide; identity politics grounded in decades of bad governance resulted in deep-rooted ethnic hatred of all Tutsi by all Hutu.

Eighteen years after the genocide, the silencing of the physical and emotional violence that the majority of Rwandans experienced during the genocide do more than erase their suffering; it also allows their economic and political grievances against the ruling RPF to accumulate. The vast majority of peasant Rwandans who survived the genocide are poor, politically marginal, and traumatized by what they experienced during the genocide. Many lack clean water, adequate food, affordable health care and education. To add insult to injury, the government does not allow for frank and open discussion of the genocide. Discourse on the genocide is reduced to making the Hutu tell the truth about what they did during the genocide, and make the Tutsi to forgive their Hutu aggressors. In essence, reconciliation is not a sincere affair of the heart; it is an administrative matter.

As Rwanda marks the 18th anniversary of the genocide, there are two things that the ruling RPF can do to encourage a more open and inclusive political culture that both brings in peasant experiences of violence while creating a more economically equal society. First, President Kagame should create space for national dialogue – an open and safe space where Rwandans of all ethnicities, and from all walks of life, can meet to discuss what happened to whom during the genocide, and to strategize ways forward from the hurt of the past. As Olive, a Hutu widow whose Tutsi husband died during the genocide said, ‘Hutu confess to get free. But we know what happened! We were there in 1994. Not all who killed get justice – the government pardons them for reconciliation. Not all who didn’t kill go free – the government puts them in prison for reconciliation. What kind of peace is this? It is not from the heart.’

Second, the government needs to develop policies to equitably manage Rwanda's natural resources (its people and its land). The U.S. State Department estimates that by 2020 Rwanda will be home to some 13 million people. With 225 people per square mile, it has the highest population density in Africa. Land pressures in rural Rwanda are intense. The government requires rural farmers to grow coffee and tea instead of the crops needed to feed their families. A new land policy has decreased peasant holdings to less than a half-acre. The RPF does not allow peasant farmers to voice their concerns about its agricultural policy and the inequitable ways in which land is distributed into the hands of government loyalists.

On this 18th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, it is imperative that the lived experiences of peasants before, during and after the events of 1994 be incorporated into government policy and practice, lest the toll of growing socio-economic inequity and the daily injustices that many peasants experience make another round of mass political violence possible.

On the Munyenyezi Trial

I was listed as an 'expert' witness on the trial of Beatrice Munyenyezi, a Rwandan woman living in New Hampshire. Her trial, like that of Lazar Kabagoya in Kansas, resulted in a hung jury. Jason McLure wrote the following article, and it's an excellent read for anyone keen to understand genocide trials in American courts.

"U.S. trips in Rwanda prosecution

Who to believe, when the African government uses genocide memories as political tool?


During her rape by a militiaman, the nun screamed and spit at the face of the woman they called "Commander Beatrice," the witness recounted from the stand. "If you don't want to be like other women, let me take you somewhere else," the militiawoman responded. She took the nun to an open pit and shot her with a pistol.

The alleged rape and murder took place in Butare, Rwanda, during that country's 1994 genocide. The testimony was by Jean-Damascene "Saddam" Munyanyeza, a slight Rwandan wearing leg shackles and a blue work jacket that looked three sizes too large. He spoke not before an international tribunal, but through a translator to a federal jury in New Hampshire. The defendant, Beatrice Munyenyezi, 41, was on trial not for murder or genocide, but for immigration fraud.

Her trial was part of a multimillion-dollar effort by the U.S. Department of Justice and Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prosecute and deport U.S. residents suspected of involvement in Rwanda's 100-day slaughter, 18 years after it ended.

Only the government didn't succeed. The jury deadlocked, and U.S. District Judge Steven McAuliffe declared a mistrial on March 15. It was the second failed prosecution of someone accused of genocide during the past year.

Although international legal experts and human rights groups have praised the attempts to ensure justice for genocide victims, many question whether witnesses like "Saddam," provided by Rwanda's authoritarian, ethnic Tutsi-dominated government, are reliable. And almost no one claims that once deported to Rwanda, defendants will face a fair trial.

"The Rwandan government is making it impossible to tell false accusations from real ones, because they use genocide allegations as a political tool to silence dissent," said Brian Endless, a political scientist at Loyola University Chicago who studies Rwanda and advised Munyenyezi's defense.

Rwanda's government drew a different conclusion. "Some of these Western jurisdictions can't just understand the gravity of cases before them," Martin Ngoga, the country's prosecutor general, told Rwanda's The New Times following the mistrial. "They handle these cases in a very simplistic way. We have, in the past, applauded trials abroad because we thought they would substitute extradition. But this isn't happening; some countries have abused this process."

Defense attorneys David Ruoff and Mark Howard argued much the same point, but from the opposite perspective. "The approach that the federal government has taken is to apply Western norms and carve out witnesses from the heart of Africa and think the same norms will apply," Ruoff said. "That just doesn't apply here, and the government hasn't addressed that."

Carmen Ortiz, the Massachusetts U.S. attorney whose office prosecuted the case, in a formal statement called the outcome "unfortunate" and said the Justice Department was reviewing its options. The department noted its successful immigration prosecutions in the past of suspected former Nazis and people linked to massacres in Guatemala and Bosnia.

"The Justice Department is committed to ensuring that human rights violators from any region of the world are not granted safe haven in the United States," the department said. "As in every type of case, we conduct thorough investigations and bring charges we believe are supported by evidence sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction."

COMING TO AMERICA

Rwanda's genocide was preceded by four years of civil war between a Hutu-dominated government and Tutsi guerrillas. The spark was the shooting down of an airplane carrying President Juvénal Habyarimana, a Hutu, on April 6, 1994 — possibly by radical Hutus who feared he would make peace with the rebels. For 100 days, Hutu extremists in Rwanda's interim government directed soldiers and members of the Interahamwe militia to slaughter an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus out of a population of about 7 million people. The killings ended with the Tutsi rebels seizing power. Hundreds of thousands of Hutus fled to neighboring countries; several thousands of those who remained fell victim to reprisal killings.

Munyenyezi and her three children moved to the United States in 1998. Since the genocide, she had shuttled among refugee settlements in east Africa, but once in this country found an apartment, a car and a job with the Manchester Housing and Redevelopment Authority, where she became an advocate for refugees, according to Manchester's New Hampshire Union Leader. In 2003, she became a U.S. citizen in the same federal courthouse where she later would stand trial. By that time, she'd bought a home and was working on a memoir, Life In the Middle of Nowhere.

In 2005, she gave an interview about fleeing Rwanda. "I escaped, I locked up my house," she told New Hampshire Public Radio. "At some point, I thought I would go back in a few weeks, and I never knew that it was for good. And you know, I left everything, especially my wedding dress that I wish that I could have."

Munyenyezi's July 1993 marriage into a politically connected Hutu family has proven problematic. Her husband, Arsène Shalom Ntahobali, became a feared Hutu militia leader during the slaughter. Her mother-in-law, Pauline Nyiramasuhuko, was the minister of women's affairs in the government that oversaw the killings. Both were convicted for their roles in the genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and sentenced to life in prison.

In 2006 Munyenyezi, traveled to Tan­zania to testify during her husband's trial; she told the court that Shalom hadn't participated in any crimes. At about that time, her life in the United States had begun to unravel; she lost her job to city budget cuts, according to the Union Leader. By 2008, she was working as a nurse's aide, making less than $1,000 a month. She declared bankruptcy and lost her home. That same year, her sister, who had also testified in Tanzania, was indicted on 10 counts of perjury and immigration fraud for allegedly lying under oath during her immigration proceedings about her membership in Habyarimana's political party (which before the peace talks sanctioned persecution of Tutsis).

According to Ruoff, immigration agents opened an investigation into Munyenyezi after someone sent investigators a transcript of her tribunal testimony.

Prosecutors Jon Capin and Aloke Chakravarty of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts attempted to prove at trial that Munyenyezi played a role in the genocide. Ruoff and Howard argued in turn that the government's case was built on unreliable witnesses, some of whom had admitted to mass murder themselves — "Saddam," for example, testified that he couldn't recall how many children he'd killed. They argued that Munyenyezi, who was pregnant with twins at the time, sheltered with other female family members from the carnage around her. Her relatives backed up that argument at trial, although eight Rwandan prosecution witnesses insisted that she was deeply engaged in the slaughter.

"It's the face I saw during the genocide, and it's a face I will never forget," testified Aleysia Mukankuriza, who described surviving by walking to Burundi despite a head wound. "A person who has done wrong to you, you will never forget."

"Saddam" accused Munyenyezi not only of killing of the nun, but also of procuring Tutsi girls to be raped, instructing him and other militiamen to construct a roadblock and making a radio speech warning Hutus not to shelter Tutsis.

By some estimates, as many as 80 percent of the Tutsis living in Rwanda were murdered in three months. Killing at that scale requires the participation of a wide swathe of the population. "I think anyone in Rwanda at that time has some stain on them," said Susan Thomson, a Hampshire College professor who has spent much of her career researching the genocide, and who was listed as an expert witness for Munyenyezi's defense but did not testify.

INVOLVEMENT NEVER MENTIONED

Munyenyezi's lawyers noted that in hundreds of pages of testimony before the international tribunal and in reports by Human Rights Watch and other groups, Munyenyezi's involvement is never mentioned, including by witnesses who would later testify at her trial. Moreover, a growing body of evidence suggested that the Rwanda's government is using genocide allegations to silence exiled political opponents and discourage defense witnesses from coming forward — as Munyenyezi did for her husband.

During the past 18 years, President Paul Kagame's Rwandan Patriotic Front government has been widely credited with rebuilding a country in ruins and restoring some form of normalcy. Since 2001, it has tried more than 1.2 million genocide-related cases before community courts known as gacaca. But it's also a country where questioning the official version of the genocide has been criminalized, opposition party leaders are jailed and attacked, and Kagame won the last two elections with more than 90 percent of the vote against no real opposition. The government has blocked the international prosecution of its own members for revenge killings.

During last year's trial of Lazare Kobagaya, an 84-year-old asylum-seeker in Kansas accused of charges similar to those against Munyenyezi, the jury deadlocked on one immigration fraud charge and convicted on a lesser charge. That conviction was dismissed after prosecutors acknowledged failing to share exculpatory evidence with the defense. Jurors in that case, which involved more than 80 witnesses and $1 million in costs, told The Associated Press that they unanimously rejected the genocide allegations, which were largely based on the testimony of Rwandans — even though most of them believed that Kobagaya had lied on his immigration paperwork.

Kobagaya had been reported by the Rwandan government to U.S. authorities after he testified via video for a Rwandan genocide defendant on trial in Finland, said Kurt Kerns, a Kansas lawyer who defended him. "We learned if you become a defense witness, you do so at your own risk," he said. "Nothing comes out of Rwanda without the Rwandan government's say-so. If the Rwandan government has a particular interest in prosecuting someone, they'll find the witnesses to say so."

Similarly, Leopold Munyakazi, a Rwandan exile and professor at Goucher College in Maryland, found himself accused of genocide by the Rwandan government and under investigation for immigration violations soon after claiming in a 2006 speech that the events in 1994 were not genocide but "fratricide."

Claims that the Rwandan government is using genocide accusations to silence defense witnesses or political opponents has been a common defense before the international tribunal and within Rwanda itself. A 2011 Human Rights Watch report on the community genocide courts found that "some defense witnesses were afraid to testify for fear of being accused of genocide themselves, and there were numerous allegations that gacaca courts sacrificed the truth to satisfy political interests."

Said Carina Tertsakian, a senior Rwanda researcher at Human Rights Watch: "It's a government that controls people very well and that has a strategy and knows quite well how to get what it wants. If it decides that it really wants this particular woman to be found guilty or sent back to Rwanda, it can quite easily find ways of rustling up witnesses and sending them over."

Balancing such doubts with the need to bring to justice to perpetrators is not likely to get easier. "Did she or didn't she? That's the million-dollar question," said Thomson, the Hampshire College researcher. "I wouldn't be surprised if she did. And I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't. But there's no way to know.""

--

Jason McLure
Office: (202) 370-6905
Mobile: (603) 991-4511

FDLR behind Tuesday's Grenade Attack in Kigali?

On Tuesday, 4 January, grenade attacks rocked Remera, Kigali at approximately 640pm in the evening. Two died, at least 18 people required hospitalisation to treat their wounds. Graham Holliday of Reuters tweeted that he saw people missing limbs when he visited the hospital (his report here), but none of that news has been reported by the Rwanda authorities. Follow him at @noodlepie. A doctor treating some of the victims estimated at least 32 injury cases.

The statement of the Rwandan police firmly states that those individuals behind the blast will be brought to book. Grenade attacks were common in the run up to the 2010 presidential elections. These blasts are the first we've heard of in eighteen months (the last being in July 2010, in western Rwanda, not in Kigali).

According to the BBC's report on the blasts, Rwandan security forces believe the Kivu-based FDLR rebel group is responsible for the attacks.

Yet, the evidence from the ground does not directly point to the FDLR as security forces claim. The target of vegetable sellers in Remera, on the opposite side of Kigali from the Presidential Palace, and the homes of senior members of the government in Kivoyu, does not match up. True, Remera is not far from the Ministry of Justice and the Parliament, but the target was ordinary Rwandans at they shopped for their evening's dinner on the way home from work, not government installations. Surely the FDLR leadership would target a more impactful location for the blasts if he had the intention of destabilising the government? As Kigaliwire reported, 'Nyabisindu [in Remera sector] is like many non-descript, dirt track areas of Kigali. The kind of place where local folk sell fruit and vegetables in front of shops and houses and workers sit outside for a Primus or a Fanta in the evening'.

If is is the FDLR, why did Rwandan security forces round up vegetable sellers and beat them for information on who planted the blasts. If the government knows it is FDLR, then why target sellers? Perhaps because it thinks that vegetable sellers in Remera are collaborating with the FDLR?

That makes little sense. If Rwanda is as peaceful and secure as the government claims, how could FDLR operatives make it all the way to Kigali, while winning over the hearts and minds of ordinary Rwandans selling their wares at market.

I don't know who is behind Tuesday's grenade attacks. I hope that a blind insistence on the culpability of the FDLR does not blind analysts and security forces to the possibility of other actors carrying out the deed. Whoever is behind the blasts, the effect at the local level is likely the same: striking fear into residents of Kigali.

Where will Kagame's Rhetoric Take Rwanda?

It has been a wild couple of weeks for Rwanda's President, Paul Kagame. American Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, offered a speech full of glowing praise for the country's institutional and economic development on 23 November 2011. In the final few paragraphs of the speech, Rice, who believes 'friends should speak frankly to friends', encouraged Rwanda to open up its political space so that 'the deepening and broadening of democracy can be the next great achievement of this great country and its remarkable people.' Word from folks resident in Kigali states that President Paul Kagame was so angry about Rice's nudge for greater political expression that he did not receive her as a diplomatic guest at Urugwiro Village. An insult to one of Rwanda's biggest donors? Perhaps. This is the least interesting part of the story.

I thought Kagame's immediate reaction to the speech showed his true stripes. He is the embodiment of Rwanda and to insult the country is a direct and personal attack on Kagame himself as father of the nation. A clear sign of his increasing megalomania is the outrage he showed for Rice's gentle words. Indeed, she could have come out much stronger against many of the regime's current oppressive practices, not least of which is the farcical trial of Victoire Ingabire. The government is so clearly involved in this trial that I hear from foreign journalists on the ground that even they can't cover it, for free of ending up in 1930 prison themselves! Leaving aside whatever you may feel about Ingabire and her culpablity, she still deserves a free and fair trial.

It wasn't until days later, allegedly during Kagame's participation in a Kigali-city umuganda clean-up that he began to rant about 'so-called friends or those among us who consider themselves extraordinary'. A quick diversion: If you look at these photos of Kagame at his Flickr site at umuganda you'll readily suspect that none of the people in images are peasant Rwandans (e.g., abakene (poor, living on less than $1/day) or abatindi (vulnerable, living on less than $0.50/day). Notice the western style of dress, the covered shoes and new rubber boots, wrist-watches, and other trappings of success. The audience members in these images reflect nothing of the peasantry I consult in my own research -- poorly nourished with weathered faces and bodies that belie their actual age, dressed in threadbare clothes, with little if any opportunity for socio-economic mobility. My guess is that the folks we see in these Flickr photos are part of the entourage of sycophants (willing, delusional or otherwise is another matter) that travel around, in the employ of the ruling RPF, to put the best possible spin on everything Kagame says and does. Word on the street in the US is that Rwandan sycophants, some of whom are on RPF-sponsored scholarships, receive between $250 and $1500 per protest. (These numbers taken from Rwandans resident in the US who protested at the HQ of the Lantos Foundation in early November because of its prize for Paul Rusesabagina; folks spoke openly to me about this, expressing themselves freely I suppose although we both know Kagame would definitely not approve!)

Back to the task at hand. During umuganda, Kagame spoke only in Kinyarwanda, meaning that Susan Rice may yet know about his anger towards her remarks in Kigali just a few days before. Key excerpts from Kagame: 'If you promote equality among people, and you are the first in the world in terms of gender equality -- by lifting up women who had never before reached such a level, if you tell me this is not democracy, if you tell me this is not respect of human rights, you certainly are sick' I guess I am also 'sick' (meaning sick in the head, i.e., deranged) as the equality of women in parliament has yet to trickle down to women in the hills. Indeed, I think it remains fair to say, as I did in an editorial published in The Guardian (co-authored with Erin Baines and Stephen Brown) in 2008 that 'even as women's visibility in politics is at an all-time high, their ability to shape the future of the country, ironically, has not improved. Parliamentarians – be they male or female – actually have very little power to legislate on behalf of their constituents. They have little room to develop policy or even to debate openly; space for free and open political expression is limited'. Instead, what I think we are seeing from Kagame is his an acknowledgment that his gender policy is only for elite women, and for elite women who toe the RPF line. Susan Rice surely knows this, but said nothing about it, opting instead for a more diplomatic statement of 'friends talking to friends.' Someone who is receptive to criticism sees it for what it is, considers the advice, reflects upon, perhaps seeks counsel from others, and finds ways to improve the situation. We see none of this emotional or political moderation from Kagame, and that is the worrying aspect of his leadership at the moment. Indeed, his rhetoric is reminiscent of the ramping of political language we saw before the 1994 genocide. Surely, this is food for thought for anyone concerned about peace in Rwanda.

President Kagame continued with his vitriolic reaction to Ambassador Rice. He said,'every person among the eleven million of Rwandans can speak whenever he/she wants and whatever he/she wants, because we continuously empower them in terms of freedom of speech. But I cannot accept you saying that there about hundred or hundred fifty people that we prevent from speaking – and to whom the right of reply is not allowed. What type of people are those? Why [should we allow them to speak]? Among them there are those who say useless things, and some of them even say destructive things. If you say things that destroy the Rwanda we are building, we shall destroy you. We don’t need to apologize to anyone about that; the only problem is that we don’t do it [destroy them] sufficiently (my emphasis).

Is this thinly veiled threat not worrying to anyone in the international community? Do we not remember the many warning signs, both rhetorical and programmatic, that presaged the 1994 genocide? I believe we are at a critical juncture in Rwanda's postgenocide evolution. President Kagame has entered a phase of political extremism. Threats to 'destroy you' if you speak out need to be take seriously. Indeed, the word on the street among Rwandans at home at abroad is that the murder exiled journalist Charles Ingabire in Kampala on 2 December 2011 was to send a message to silence critics. I am not entirely convinced of this myself as the Kagame regime has been killing its own since it took office in July 1994. One only need to consult the writings of Filip Reyntjens to learn of the killing machine that supports the Kagame regime (see in particular his excellent January 2011 article in African Affairs). Either way, Ingabire is dead, and a full independent investigation is needed.

At any rate, we know that Kagame is furious with the international community (and perhaps Susan Rice in particular). He made a speech at Rwanda's 9th National Conference on 15 December 2011. The tone is his voice is chilling as he tries to equate the press freedom that the international community desires to letting the planners and implementers of the genocide 'to go scot free'. Please email me and I will send you the .mp3 file. The last eight to ten minutes are in English. Listen for yourself. I am keen to hear what others think. To my ear, Kagame is throwing down the gauntlet in a veiled battle cry. It is the spectre of renewed conflict that is worrying, and this is something those of us working for peace in Rwanda, and the region, need to think about as the 2017 elections are less than five year away (and Kagame has already started posturing -- my money is on his running for a third term).

What can be done at this stage to not only avoid conflict, but open up freedoms of expression and assembly while reducing socio-economic inequalities in pursuit of sustainable peace?

Rudasingwa's Political Aspirations?

For the past several months, one of the founders of the Rwanda National Congress (RNC), Theogene Rudasingwa. has made a number of statements about both his falling out with President Paul Kagame, and a series of RNC Strategies for Reforming Rwanda. All of these statements, and supporting documents can be found in Rudasingwas's Facebook page.

I am personally skeptical about Rudasingwa's sincerity and integrity. His various pleas and calls to actions are long on rhetoric and short on concrete steps to enact the necessary steps to return Rwanda to its former glory. His most recent post (cut-and-paste in full below) prompts me to write this post, as it is nothing short of a call for regime change, and is perhaps the most revealing of Rudasingwa's main posts, and media appearances. Just google his name. Much will come up. Little will be learned except insights into an individual who clearly has an axe to grind with Kagame and who manipulates international audiences in much the same way as the man he hopes to overthrow. It is a very worrying time in Rwandan politics as its elites are sabre rattling while the population starves.

"WHAT IS IN A NATIONAL ANTHEM: CAN WE FIND A SYNTHETHISED FLAG AND NATIONAL ANTHEM OF THE FUTURE RWANDAN NATION?

Both anthems are beautiful. Both evoke strong passions. Each speaks to the passing away of the old order, and the establishment of the new. Both extol the beauty of this ancient nation of Rwanda. Rwanda is our only home that we love so much that we sometimes want to deny others the right to love it. It is ok to love Rwanda Rwacu. It is ok to love Rwanda Nziza. It will be ok to love a possible Rwanda Rwacu, Rwanda Nziza, a synthesised anthem of the future free, democratic and prosperous Rwanda.

Today I am announcing two prizes, each worth 5,000 $:

1. A concept of a new Rwandan flag that incoporates some themes from the old and new Rwandan flags.

2. A new concept of lyrics and music of a new national anthem that incorporates some themes from the old and new national anthems.

Rwandans and non-Rwandans free to compete for one or both prizes.

The winners will be announced on 1st January 2013.'