Pre-Colonial Rwanda

A complex web of events composes Rwanda's history; an ancient common thread - a deep-seated social divide between the two major ethnic groups of the country: the Hutu and the Tutsi - defines its modern state.  Historically, ancient hunter-gatherers, from whom the Twa descended, an ethnic group which now comprises no more than 1% of the total population, initially inhabited the land that is now Rwanda since 10,000 B.C. (C).  Around 700 B.C., an agricultural people known as the Hutu discovered the region’s fertile highlands and consequently forced them to give up the best farmland.  A few hundred years later, a pastoral people called the Tutsi migrated into Rwanda, only to become the dominant force in the country.  A social system known as buhake (literally “cattle contract”) similar to European feudalism soon emerged, with the tall and lighter Tutsi fulfilling the role parallel to European nobles and the shorter and darker Hutu serving as the equivalent of serfs (C).  Additionally, the Tutsi adamantly maintained control over Rwandan political life, as every king or mwami up until the creation of the Rwandan Republic was of Tutsi descent (C).  This division not only prevented the two ethnic groups from intermarrying and thus fusing both cultures into one contiguous society, but also created a divide so sharp, that it escalated into a violent division instead of the glorious unity that walks hand in hand with independence.

Conquest and Lasting Impact

Rwanda originally belonged to a territory known as Ruanda-Urundi, which encompassed the combined area of the modern countries of Rwanda and Burundi (D).  This territory came under German rule in 1885 due to its late unification and pursuit to claim its own piece of “African cake” during the “Scramble for Africa” (C).  Despite this disadvantage, Germany was able to add Ruanda-Urundi as part of its international landscape during the Berlin Conference that formally divided the continent into sections of European colonies.  In reality, Germany had little effect in Ruanda-Urundi.  Apart from allowing Catholic and Protestant missions to establish schools, medical centers, and farms, the most significant impact that the German era possessed was the purposeful identification and distinct separation of the two major ethnic groups in the territory: the Hutu and the Tutsi (C).  German colonizers and the Belgian colonizers that followed assumed that like in their own countries, physical characteristics determined ethnic differences and thus proceeded to create a social system that enhanced the inherent physical differences between them by discouraging intermarriage (D).  The German colonial government which was officially implemented by 1898 then decided to pursue a policy of indirect rule through the Rwandan monarchy already in place (C).  Consequently, the main policy of this German rule was to “strengthen the homogeny of the Tutsi ruling class and the absolutism of its monarchy” (D). 

German rule lasted up until World War I due to its weakened national state.  Therefore, in 1916, Ruanda-Urundi became a UN trust territory under Belgian administration (D).  The League of Nations provided Belgium a League Mandate for the territory in 1923 (D).  After World War II, the League Mandate was replaced by a United Nations trusteeship in 1946 (D).  Overall, Belgian rule had a greater impact on Ruanda-Urundi than Germany did, and in many ways, benefitted it as a whole (C).  For example, agricultural production soared after teams of agricultural specialists spread across the country and taught Hutu farm families how to increase production by using improved seeds and chemical fertilizers (C).  They also taught Hutu men and women how to shape hillsides into terraces to avoid soil erosion (C).  Belgium also invested a great deal of money into the construction of roads, schools, hospitals, and government buildings.  However, the more important and unfortunately negative effect was that Belgians fed the flame of division and ethnic prejudice that Germany had preserved by pursuing the key policy of strengthening the effective control of the Tutsi throughout Ruanda-Urundi (B).  

The Hutu and Tutsi: The Struggle For Power and Independence

During the 1950s, a movement known as Pan-Africanism swept across the continent as one by one, African colonies demanded their independence from European colonial powers.  In Ruanda-Urundi, the demand for independence began in the late 1950s, but growing tensions between the neglected Hutu majority and the powerful Tutsi minority complicated the struggle (C).  By 1959, the Hutu began to demand social equality, receiving critical support from the Roman Catholic Church as well as the surprising support of Belgian administrative officials, who had gradually shifted their support from the Tutsi to the Hutu throughout the 1950s after sensing the decline in power of the former (C).  Both support systems led to the Hutu revolution known as the “wind of destruction” that was launched on November 1, 1959 in response to rumors of the assassination of Grégoire Kayibanda, the author of the Hutu Manifesto, which demanded the continuation of Belgian administration until the Hutu were ready to assume power, as well as the founder of Parmehutu, a political party dedicated to ending Tutsi rule and abolishing the feudal system (D).  In the Hutu revolution, Hutu across Rwanda massacred an estimated 20,000 to 100,000 Tutsi with thousands more fleeing to Uganda, Tanzania, and Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo) (A).  In 1960, Parmehutu extremists arranged a provisional government which was decidedly republican and composed almost entirely of Parmehutu members (A).  In January of 1961, a Hutu coup led by the Parmehutu announced the deposition of the mwami and the creation of a republican government.  Although the Belgian administrative authority recognized the new government, the UN declared its formation as “irregular and unlawful” (C).  Therefore on September 25 of the same year, the UN General Assembly held legislative elections to determine whether or not to retain the institution of the mwami (C).  The Hutu majority enabled the Parmehutu to emerge as victor, thus abolishing the monarchy and establishing a republic.  On the 27^thof June 1962, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution that the territory Ruanda-Urundi would divide into the separate, independent countries of Rwanda and Burundi, as they did not wish to become a single independent nation (D).  On July 1, 1962, Rwanda became an independent country with Grégoire Kayibanda as its first president (D).

Post Independence

Despite UN involvement and the achievement of independence, tension between the Hutu and the Tutsi not only continued, but escaladed.  Hutu assaults on the Tutsi spread, sending thousands of additional refugees into neighboring countries.  Extremist Hutu President Kayibanda also set strict laws in retaliation for the inequalities that the Hutu had long suffered.  For example, the Tutsi population obtained only 9 percent of all jobs, school positions, and government appointments, reflective of the fact that they now only comprised 9 percent of the total population (C).  Hutu supremacy was also maintained through the reelection of Kayibanda for president in 1965 and again in 1969 (C).  However, Kayibanda’s administration became so corrupt and brutal that Major General Juvénal Habyarimana led a military coup that drove him out of his position and established a new and relatively calmer period in Rwandan history (C).  This new administration did not create any significant improvement in the treatment of the Tutsi; additionally, the decline in prices for Rwanda’s products, especially tea and coffee, almost led to an economic collapse (C).  It was also easy for Habyarimana to maintain power in Rwanda due to almost total Hutu political dominance, reelecting him as president in 1978, 1983, and 1988 (C).  But in 1990 after a group of Tutsi exliles orgainized by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (known as the RPF) invaded Rwanda with Major Paul Kagame as head, whose purpose was to restore democracy and not to bring the Tutsi back to power, pressure from the UN and Western nations motivated the agreement made at Arusha, Tanzania (A).  This agreement outlined a number of reforms, including the integration of the Rwandan national army with the RPF as well as a transitional national assembly to implement all reforms.  However, after the Hutu extremists rejected this proposal, the Rwandan national state disintegrated into genocide.

When The World Turned Away

In 1994, Tutsi Rwandans continued to flee the country due to increased propaganda that labeled them as “the enemy” (A).  Out of desperation, President Habyarimana appealed to regional presidents and discussed the issue of refugees in their countries.  On his return to Kigali, a missile fired by an unknown culprit shot down the plane carrying himself and the president of Burundi; the resulting crash killed everyone inside the plane.  Even though the identity of the true culprit was never determined, Colonel Theoneste Gabosora unleashed a systematic, violent attack upon Rwanda; the ultimate goal was the elimination of all Tutsi left in the country, an attack known as genocide (A).  One of Gabosora’s first orders was the assassination of Prime Minister Agathe Uwilingiyimana, a Hutu “moderate” as well as the murder of ten Belgian UN peacekeepers (C).  Knowing that this assault would cause Belgium to with draw all of its troops, the door for genocide was left wide open.  It is estimated that the Hutu "death squads" killed, attacked, mutilated, and raped between 800,000 to 1,000,000 Tutsi men, women, and children (as well as suspected Tutsi sympathizers) for the three month period for which the genocide lasted (A).  All the while, millions of people around the globe who watched televised reports waited in shock as National Governments as well as the UN did nothing.  The UN Security Council later discussed the crisis for eight hours, avoiding the term “genocide,” because by the provisions of the Genocide Convention, written in response to the Holocaust, they would have had to “prevent and punish” those responsible, which up to this point, they had not done (C).  By the time UN troops began to arrive in Rwanda after a dispute for which countries would pay, most government accepted that genocide had taken place in Rwanda.

Facing The Future

On July 4, 1994, the RPF successfully captured the nation’s capital at Kigali after months of struggle and massacre (D).  As thousands of frightened Hutu began to flee the country for fear of violent retaliation, the RPF announced that the war was over and that they would initiate the formation of a broad Government of National Unity (C).  Rwanda also began to receive a great deal of support due to the guilt accumulated internationally from ignoring the genocide.  Finally after hundreds of years of ethnic violence, peace came about with the RPF’s decision to approach the national reconstructive process through reconciliation instead of the revenge that many Hutu anticipated (C).  The spirit of unity that overtook Rwanda brought an estimated two million refugees back into the country (A).  Practices such as Identity cards were banned and as a testament to the true progress that the country made, Paul Kagame, the Tutsi leader of the RPF, was elected president with 95.05 percent of the total popular vote (C).  What makes this victory even more impressive is that a nation that was 75 Hutu voted him in to that office (C).  Although the people of Rwanda still live with the awareness that ethnic violence could erupt again in the future, they have made tremendous progress in their efforts to create a united and independent Rwanda.

Because History Repeats Itself

Karl Marx once stated that, “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”  Indeed, history not only repeated itself, but outdid itself as around the globe, nation after nation pursued the vicious cycle of colonization: from the limited and purely economic benefits of colonialism to the intense political, economic, social, and military involvement of imperialism.  In both eras, conquering nations quickly discerned and developed more efficient forms of conquest and exploitation in order to secure their interests, from which patterns have emerged across centuries.  Similarly, members of colonies and empires around the globe also developed means to strip themselves of the oppressive shroud of colonization as they fought, both peacefully and violently, for the one thing that their colonizers had forgotten that they too once fought for: freedom.

A desire for gain and power has long fueled the conquest of other nations.  Many similar trends surface and repeat, from South America, to Africa, to the Middle East, to Asia.  These trends can be traced back to the extroverted nature of the conquering nations during both the colonialist and imperialist eras.  Originating in England, industrialization quickly spread, but only to the nations open to receiving change.  Isolated, introverted, or unexposed nations who wished to preserve their ancient, traditional identity were unwilling to accept foreign ideas and were subsequently susceptible to foreign infringement, whose advancement would easily overtake “primitive” technology.  Therefore, the most common form of conquest was military dominance coupled with advanced technology, chiefly (but not always) developed during the industrial revolution.  Conquistadores such as Hernan Cortez made great use of this tactic throughout South America.  Through the use of superior weaponry, Cortez was able to penetrate and corrupt traditional Aztec culture and lifestyle.  With the threat of death or enslavement, both of which he was entirely capable due to his military strength, the Aztecs had no choice but to submit themselves to Spanish reign.  Korea was another nation which had fallen behind technologically due to its isolationist policy, which proved to be a crippling effect in a world whose inhabitants continuously strove for superiority.  Utterly unprepared to face a powerful force such as Japan, Korea quickly fell under its control.  Many imperialists also depended upon internal division or struggle to obtain control, as they assumed the role of righteous mediator or supporter of righteous rule within the territory.  The British used the former method to obtain control over India after the collapse of the Mogul Empire.  As Britain strategically assisted the disputing kings across the nation, their power spread and eventually encompassed the entire territory.  An example of the latter method took place in Rwanda, where both German and Belgian administrative forces ruled indirectly through the ruling party, allowing them to strengthen their own control over the country through a familiar instead of foreign ruling class.

Colonizing nations also employed tactics within their colonies that would maximize the benefits that the country could yield.  Although it took on a less invasive role through colonialism than imperialism, foreign involvement in other nations almost always disregarded the common good, especially that of the native population.  The most aggressive cases of control and exploitation of the native population came through the motive of economic profit.  In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the forced production of cash crops throughout the nation resulted in a policy of the violent reinforcement of foreign rule.  The Congolese people worked as full time slaves, growing rubber instead of crops that would be used as sustenance.  Additionally, Belgian King Leopold held many families hostage to ensure diligent work and would cut off the hands of those who refused to work.  A similar case also formed in Egypt as Britain imposed the production of profitable goods such as cotton.  In these cases and many others, the common people suffered the most under colonial or imperialistic rule, as their un-repaid labor was instrumental in ensuring the economic success of their colonizer.  The acquisition and control of valuable resources, not only for themselves but also for the native population, served as a strong motive.  For example, when the British conquered Nigeria, they strategically seized control over the palm oil trade, a prized and valuable item.  Possessing this considerable form of influence on the Nigerian population, the British were soon able to conquer the territory in order to acquire the resources they sought, such as cocoa, cotton, hardwood, palm oil, peanuts, and tin.  Although conquering nations specifically planned to achieve economic profit through colonial submission, geared the acquisition of land toward the formation of a mighty empire, and produced many negative effects throughout the world, many colonized nations received long-term material, educational, and transportational improvements.  For example, the Spanish built roads, schools, cathedrals, and missionaries throughout the Dominican Republic, Belgians established schools, mines, and railroads throughout the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Germans established government buildings, roads, and schools in Rwanda, only a few examples of overall public, social improvements that colonization presented.

The declaration and acquisition of independence was the final step in the cycle of colonization, as around the globe, country after country sought the right to govern itself.  This transformation proved itself to be inevitable – the extreme imbalance in power between the native population and the conquerors served as a vital piece of motivation: nations wanted to seek their own prosperity.  For example, in the Indian independence movement, a boycott of all British goods known as the Swadeshi Movement enabled Indians to support the local economy instead of the East India Company.  This shift in support assisted its peaceful transition into a free nation.  The desire for independence is also commonly fueled by the oppressed working class, despite a lack of power and access to money.  In Rwanda, the Hutu majority socially fell beneath the Tutsi minority, which both Belgium and Germany fervently supported.  As an oppressed minority, the Hutu eventually summoned the power to violently overthrow the unjust rule in their nation.  Haiti also experienced a similar uprising as Haitian slaves led the only successful slave revolt in history after their French conquerors mercilessly subjected them to long work days, a lack of sanitation, and extreme poverty.  Lastly, independence is inevitable because a common desire coupled with unity cannot fail.  One example of the many is Zimbabwe’s road to independence.  Zimbabwe’s first few attempts to achieve independence during the First Chimurenga or the “War of Liberation” failed because of the lack of a united front.  However, after the formation of the Zimbabwe African People’s Union, liberation became an achievable goal.

History never fails to repeat itself.  Consecutive cycles of conquest, suppression, bloodshed, and eventual liberation have plagued the globe for centuries.  As the human race continues in its attempt to be all powerful and wealthy, unable to grasp the lessons that example has tried to teach, one begins to contemplate the true motives of war and “righteous intervention” in foreign nations.  But even as countries struggle to surpass and control each other politically, economically, and militarily, they continuously forget the single most important fact about the human condition: no power, money, country, or strength can ever suppress the human will to be free.