The continent of Africa is considered the birthplace of humanity, it has become a continent where crimes against humanity have been committed extensively. Crimes against humanity committed on the African continent, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, also commonly known as Black Africa, have often been seen by the world community as a familiar, usual, and customary part of tribal conflicts and civil wars. In 1994, the press described the genocide in Rwanda as a tribal war between ethnic groups. This definition, which was often seen in the Western press in those years, makes clear the West's stance and its unresponsiveness to crimes against humanity in Rwanda or anywhere else in the world outside of its interests. The genocide in Rwanda took place in a very short period of about 100 days in 1994.

It is the largest systematic and planned genocide carried out 50 years after the Holocaust in World War II. Close to a million people lost their lives in the genocide in Rwanda. The genocide in 1994 is not the first in Rwandan history. After the ‘social revolution’ carried out by the Hutus near the end of the colonial period, the Tutsis, who formed the minority, were massacred by the Hutus for the first time. Beneath this silence and unresponsiveness lie many different reasons. The most important of these is the direct or indirect influence of the West, especially the Western colonial powers such as France and Belgium, in the steps taken towards genocide. The international community has not been able to show the desired response to the genocide that took place in a very short period and has kept its silence until the very last moment. This lack of response has created the necessary environment by allowing the genocide to be carried out easily without any hindrance or deterrent.

Historical background

Unlike the majority of countries on the African continent, before the colonial periods of Germany and Belgium, Rwanda had a strong Kingdom in its territory. Compared to other African countries, missionaries, and colonial forces entered Rwanda too late. It is known that missionary activities in Rwanda began only in the early twentieth century. When Europeans arrived in Rwanda at the beginning of the twentieth century, they brought with them their racism, which would have a profound effect on Rwandans ' ideas and practices. Germany was the first state to colonize the territory, including present-day Burundi, under the name Rwanda. Germany dominated Rwanda, along with Burundi, as part of German East Africa from 1894 until the end of the First World War, and the west of present-day Tanzania.

Germany did not make major changes to Rwanda's social and administrative system during its rule until the First World War but helped consolidate central power by suppressing uprisings in the northwest region. Following the First World War, Rwanda, and Burundi, countries in the west of German East Africa, were given to Belgium as mandates of the League of Nations. Belgium continued its style of rule indirectly, and ruled Rwanda through Mwami, further increasing the power of the Tutsis and consolidating its presence in the North. Belgium, unlike Germany, has left deep traces in social and political structure, from economy to architecture.

Some of the practices carried out during the Belgian colonial period, such as ID cards showing the ethnic origin of the citizens, forcing the majority of Hutus into forced production and forced labor, on the other hand, bringing Tutsis into administrative positions and administrative positions, providing privileged access to education and employment opportunities that are part of modern life; It is the first applications that caused the increase of bilateral separation between Hutus and Tutsi who share the same language. Colonies were also heavily influenced by fascism and racism in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s; skull measurements were carried out in Rwanda to determine race origins. One of the most important factors that accelerated the Hutu-Tutsi separation was the forced labor initiated for development, the removal of the Hutus from the administration and political levels, and the showing of the Tutsis as the principal owner and administrator of Rwanda.

When the United Nations promised freedom, justice, and protection to people living in colonial countries under the UN Charter, the Belgian colonial administration, seeking to adapt to the changing environment and the requirements of the international community, took a sharp turn to support the Hutus subjected to ethnic discrimination and classification against Tutsis to spread democracy, and engaged in activities that would pave the way The power gained by the Hutus in the political sphere paved the way for the revolution by increasing their demands for political power. The social revolution of 1959 is an important turning point in Rwandan history. The Revolution marks the end of the state rule enjoyed by the privileged Tutsi elite. With the end of colonial rule and the transition of political power to the Hutus, a new era begins in Rwanda. The Hutus, who have lived in their territory for centuries as second-class individuals under the Tutsi monarchy, are now dominant and wield political power.

The ethnic hatred that surfaced in the late colonial period has strengthened and increased in the face of the ethnic hatred exhibited against the Hutus in Burundi. Social events and ethnic hatred in Rwanda between 1972 and 1973 for both political and economic reasons ended with a military coup. The civil war started in Rwanda in 1990. Between 1990 and 1993, as many as 2000 Tutsi were killed as a result of murder or massacres as a result of a policy specifically targeting Tutsis. The resulting economic collapse, manipulation of ethnic hostilities, and civil war, combined with this memorandum dividing political power between the rebels and the government, led to the fragmentation of Rwandan society during the period 1990-1993. The Arusha reconciliation has further fueled ethnic hatred following the civil war that began with the October 1990 attacks, bringing the genocide one step closer.

1994 Rwandan genocide

Until 1994, the country was divided around ethnic and political lines; on one side were dissidents with supporters of President Habyarimana, and on the other side were dissidents acting with the RPF and rebels. The hatred against the Tutsis has grown to an increasing extent, with small massacres and murders carried out by militias called the Interahamwe once again causing chaos. In this chaos, the plane carrying Habyarimana, returning from peace talks in Arusha, was shot down on 6 April 1994. Acts of violence and genocide began the night the plane was shot down in Kigali and violence was carried out by Presidential Bodyguards and militiamen. Radical Hutus used the assassination of the president as a pretext to turn Rwanda into hell and killed more than half a million Tutsi and opposition Hutus who were anti-regime in nearly 100 days.

The killing of Habyarimana has been an excuse to show the hatred that exists. The militias, elements within the army and the Presidential Guard, mobilized in fear and organized by the state, have come up with a plan to kill the entire Tutsi population and moderate Hutu regime opponents, and have identified Tutsis as potential targets. By 8 April, an interim government was established, entirely under the control of the radical Hutu; armed militias under the command of this government were set to eliminate their enemies. Presidential guards have killed lots of people with the support of police, and local government officials. They hunted down their enemies with the help of private radios controlled by the radical Hutus.

Until April 1994, about 400,000 refugees, mostly Hutu, entered the refugee camps in the south of Rwanda. The fall of Habyarimana's plane on April 4, 1994, ignited the road to genocide, The Hutu militia, which constituted the ethnic majority, systematically killed 500,000 to 1,000,000 civilians, most of them Tutsi. Taking advantage of the chaotic environment, RPF defeated the Rwandan army, supported and trained by France; Nearly two million Hutu involved in the incidents flocked to the borders of Zaire and Tanzania. There are many reasons behind the genocide in Rwanda. The most important of these are the following: the creation of races by ethnic identity from the Belgian colonial period and the creation of the definition of Rwandans by these race definitions; the beginning of the 1990s, with the Civil War, Rwandan Tutsis, who were already seen as foreigners, began to be seen as traitors.

Support for the Habyarimana government, especially by French President Mitterand (this support is not limited to political support only, as later seen; it includes the sale of weapons and the sharing of technical, military knowledge and skill accumulation). Radio Milles Collines radio channels and magazine publications encouraging separatism conducted by the Kangaroo; the West and the international community, representing the inertia of institutions such as the UN; economic problems; the negative effects of International Monetary and economic institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank are also among the reasons.

Violence in the genocide has been seen to rise to very high levels. The desire for revenge is one of the main causes of this violence. On the other hand, prejudice has driven people into mass violence; prejudice has always become more radical when elites perceive threats. At the same time, there is a traditional culture of obedience to authority in Rwanda, and people tend to join the dominant group, obeying authority. Although some of the reasons that led to this genocide are based mostly on ethnic culture and social characteristics, the Western influence in the genocide should not be underestimated.

However, it is not possible to suggest that the only things that caused the genocide were the policies of the West and the regional interests of the West. However, the West and Western powers such as Belgium and France, which have colonies in the region, have great influence on the social structure of Rwanda. Ethnic groups have existed throughout history in Rwanda, but myths, virtues, and beliefs created by colonial powers and the West have been encouraging ethnic nationalism and ethnic segregation, causing ethnic segregation to surface and deepen.

Belgium, which glorified the Tutsis until just before the social revolution carried out by the Hutus at the end of the colonial period, tried to make the Hutus dominant in the country by glorifying them with a sharp turn, and France, which followed a policy of supporting the Hutus during the Habyarimana government, caused ethnic dissociation to turn into hatred between the two ethnic elements. However, the influence of the West in the emergence of ethnic hatred cannot be cited as the sole cause.

The chaos in neighboring countries such as Burundi and Uganda, the Civil War, the refugee problem, and having the same ethnic elements, have fueled ethnic hatred and formed one of the keystones on the road to genocide. Belgium had dominated the Hutu before Rwanda's independence, which caused many Tutsi to leave their homeland in revenge, and the change in Belgian policy caused both the Hutu and Tutsi to resent Belgium's political role. Among the reasons for the relations between Rwanda and France, France's Cold War and Francophone are on the post-colonial list in the African continent in the region.

In post-colonial Africa, France was able to create a special zone of influence for itself; Thus, he was able to claim the leadership of third-world countries under great power. Another reason France attaches great importance to a small country like Rwanda is to interrupt the progress of Anglo-Saxons trying to penetrate East Africa through Uganda. France, which is trying to play the continental leadership in the European Union, sought to maintain its former colonial power in Africa by increasing its influence over African countries and balancing its interests against Britain and the United States. Economic reasons, strategic resources, especially oil and uranium, and the market created for French products, culture, and ideas have also led France to turn to Africa.

Since the UN acted following the Security Council resolutions, although demands were made from the peacekeeping commander in the region to increase power, it could not implement a successful operation. Both the US and other world forces have failed to act despite knowing what is going on. The West only took action to save white people, to save them from chaos; he did not do anything to protect endangered people. In addition, the UN has not strengthened its military unit in Rwanda or even changed its mandate to save the lives of thousands of civilians. Approximately two months after the start of the genocide, however, on May 31, the UN finally submitted a report to the Security Council, which officially accepted the genocide. There are several reasons behind the UN and the international community's lack of response.

The first is that the genocide in Rwanda was carried out very quickly and as unrelenting as possible to the international community that the world became aware of the genocide late and that the news about the genocide, especially in the Western media, was traditionally referred to as a civil war or ethnic conflict based on tribal strife on the African continent. Another reason is that the death toll is not taken seriously and is exaggerated. The apathy exhibited by the United States is among the main reasons for the unresponsiveness. Although US President Clinton promised the UN Secretary-General to provide logistical support for an operation to prevent genocide, he later withdrew his offer because the cost of carrying out such an operation was increasing.

One of the reasons behind the withdrawal of the proposal is that the US operations in Somalia in 1993 were not welcome by the US public. Another reason why the US has avoided such an operation is the financial dimension of the operation. The U.S., in addition to being the country that draws the technical and financial burden on such an operation, will also provide the military equipment they demand to the countries that send troops to the operation, thus increasing its financial burden.

What could have been done, and what is the current situation?

The inefficient judging process of the United Nations and the inability of the Rwandan state encouraged new and desperate measures to deal with the substantial amount of cases that were on hold for years. One of these methods was the creation of Gacaca Courts. The passing of Organic Law No. 40/2000 in 2001 paved the way for these makeshift courts. Gacaca Courts were popular tribunals that were formed with judges who were selected by general elections.

Its members were not educated in law and did not hold degrees. After they were selected, they received training; however, it was insufficient to resolve complex cases. Mostly it was an effort to decrease the trial burden on the formal courts. Also, it functioned as a way to quench public opinion about the slow trial period that damaged public consciousness. It is needless to say that fair trials were rare in Gacaca Courts. It is estimated that the Gacaca court system tried 1,958,634 cases during its lifetime and that 1,003,227 persons stood trial.1

Although assuming what would happen if foreign military intervention had undergone is not the exact topic of this paper, it is impossible to mention that its effect would be tremendous against the primitive ways of the instigators. The UN had a peacekeeping force in the region; however, it recalled the bulk of the force when the genocide began. On 21 April 1994, the Security Council voted to reduce the number of troops from 2,500 to 270 personnel in Resolution 912.2 Also, the UNAMIR Force Commander, Romeo Dallaire, was ordered not to engage if not attacked first. Therefore, UN forces were practically nonexistent when it came to intervening in the ongoing genocide.

Currently, Rwanda still trying to mend its wounds from almost 30 years ago. The efforts to keep the memory of the genocide alive to prevent future incidents have been strong. The tragedy that took place has been the subject of countless pieces of art and media. However, there are some revisionist sentiments still alive today claiming the toll of the genocide is exaggerated or that there were multiple reciprocal genocide attempts. On the other hand, there has been an economic and infrastructural revival in Rwanda since 1995. Since 2000, the economy, tourist numbers, and Human Development Index (HDI) have grown; between 2006 and 2011, the poverty rate reduced from 57% to 45%, while life expectancy rose from 46.6 years in 2000 to 59.7 years in 2015.3

References

1 Inside Rwanda's /Gacaca/ Courts: Seeking Justice After Genocide, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press (ISBN 978-0-299-30970-1), pp. 28.
2 United Nations Security Council resolution 912, article 8(c).
3 World Bank. (n.d.). Rwanda.