Le Président de la République vient de totaliser 10 ans à la tête de la Rd Congo. A l’occasion, Alain Lubamba rappelle les événements qui ont concouru à l’accession au pouvoir le 26 janvier 2011, avant d’affirmer que son bilan est largement positif. Par rapport aux échéances électorales de 2011, Alain Lubamba pense que son parti, le PPRD devrait dès à présent mettre au point une stratégie communicationnelle appropriée pour expliquer sur la scène internationale et surtout au peuple congolais le bien-fondé et la finalité de la dynamique de la modernisation, de reconstruction nationale ainsi que de l’amélioration du climat des affaires amorcée par le Chef de l’Etat comme l’unique voie pour améliorer de manière durable le social des congolais et bâtir un pays plus beau qu’avant conformément à la volonté des pères de l’indépendance.
Le Président Kabila vient de totaliser 10 ans à la tête du Pays. S’il vous était demandé de lui préparer un discours-bilan, comment l’aborderiez-vous ?
L’opinion doit se rappeler que Joseph Kabila est venu au pouvoir le 26 janvier 2001, après l’assassinat de Mzee Laurent Désiré Kabila et a hérité d’un pays en plein chaos indescriptible après 32 ans de monopartisme politique et de guerre à répétition particulièrement à l’est. A cet effet, Messieurs les journalistes, vous le savez autant que moi, le Gouvernement central contrôlait moins de la moitié du territoire national. Les forces de sécurité notamment l’armée, la police, les services de renseignement et l’administration publique étaient entre les mains des différents belligérants et l’économie nationale sous contrôle des forces obscures et des prédateurs de tout bord, qui ne se souciaient guère du sort de la population. Objectivement, le bilan des 10 ans de pouvoir de JKK à la tête de notre pays est positif et nous le subdivisons en trois périodes majeures, chacune ayant une mission précise :
*De 2001 à 2003 : le Président JK, lors de son discours d’investiture s’était lancé dans une démarche purement pragmatique et cartésienne dont les soubassements étaient la fin de la guerre, la réunification du territoire national et la sortie progressive de notre pays de l’isolement diplomatique dans lequel il se trouvait depuis les années 1990. Je me souviens encore du bout de sa phrase prononcé lors de son premier discours qui avait retenu mon attention quand il disait « Mes chers compatriotes, au nom de la paix, je partirais partout, alors partout… » Et la suite, vous le savez messieurs de la presse. Il a sillonné le monde entier, rencontré tous les belligérants et autres seigneurs de guerre à la recherche d’une paix durable jusqu’à procéder à Sun city en Afrique du sud à une concession majeure du partage du pouvoir, d’où le fameux schéma dénommé 1+4, prix à payer pour la pacification du territoire national et de la réconciliation des filles et fils du pays. Et c’était l’accomplissement avec succès de sa première mission.
*De 2003 à 2006 : contrairement aux attentes de certains sceptiques et défaitistes qui n’accordaient pas la chance à une transition non conflictuelle et à une possibilité de mettre fin à la crise de légitimité qui caractérisait le pays depuis 1960, JK a prouvé à la face du monde par un dépassement de soi sans pareil, sa détermination et sa volonté politique de remettre la RDC sur orbite et de présider aux lendemains meilleurs du peuple congolais. Il a consolidé le processus de démocratisation par l’organisation des premières élections démocratiques, pluralistes, libres et transparentes qui ont donné naissance aux institutions légitimes et démocratiques actuelles.
*De 2006 à 2011 : après que le peuple lui ai confié de façon non équivoque la marche de son destin, JK établit un vaste programme de la modernisation et de la reconstruction nationale dénommé « cinq chantiers de la République », considéré comme priorité des priorités pour le décollage de la RD Congo. Notons entre autres, la réalisation des grands ouvrages tels que la construction du pont Loange reliant le Kasaï-Occidental au Bandundu, le pont Pozo à Matadi dans le Bas-Congo sur le national n° 1, la route Lubumbashi-Kasumbalesa, l’hôpital du Cinquantenaire à Kinshasa…Tous ces ouvrages ont un impact réel et visible ainsi qu’un effet d’entrainement dans d’autres secteurs. A titre illustratif, si un camion mettait un mois d’attente pour traverser par bac la rivière Loange avec tous les cortèges de malheurs tels que l’avarie des marchandises, le risque d’exposition à des intempéries des camionneurs et voyageurs, les risques de pénuries de la marchandise dans les centres de consommation, à ce jour avec la construction du pond Loange, les camions mettent à peine quelques minutes pour se retrouver de l’autre coté de la rive. Il y a est un impact positif sur le plan économique et social. Ne dit- on pas que le temps, c’est l’argent
Le Social reste, selon les Congolais, le maillon le plus faible de cette décade du Président Kabila. Ne pensez-vous pas qu’il faut encore plus d’efforts de ce côté-là ?
Bien entendu, Messieurs les journalistes. Vous m’aviez coupé la parole au moment ou j’étais entrain de parler des grandes réalisations faites par le Président JK pendant ces dix années. Tous ces grands travaux ont pour objectif, de poser des jalons d’un social durable et réaliser le désenclavement du pays. A ces jours, les producteurs des cossettes de manioc et de mais dans le Bandundu peuvent en un temps record approvisionner la Ville minière de Tshikapa en denrées alimentaires de première nécessité par exemple. La santé, c’est dans le cadre du social et vous pouvez vous rassurer, messieurs les journalistes, que l’hôpital du cinquantenaire dont les travaux touchent à la fin, est une œuvre du président JK qui a eu le courage de matérialiser, pour cause d’utilité publique, un projet longtemps abandonné par les colonisateurs et les différents gouvernements qui se sont succédés dans notre pays. Et dans le même secteur du social, la RD Congo est inscrit dans le programme relatif aux objectifs du millénaire pour le développement ou la prévention et le traitement des maladies endémiques et pandémiques telles que : le VIH- Sida, le choléra, la poliomyélite, la malaria, la coqueluche ... L’amélioration du climat des affaires avec comme corolaire la création des emplois dans les secteurs des mines, banques, constructions, télécommunication etc. La motivation des paysans agriculteurs d’augmenter leur production suite à la facilité de l’évacuation par le désenclavement de certaines provinces et contrées. La matérialisation progressive de la gratuité de l’enseignement dans notre système éducatif, la construction et la réhabilitation de certaines écoles primaires et secondaires ainsi que certaines institutions supérieures à travers le pays. L’université de Kindu dans une province autrefois enclavée en est une illustration.
Que répondez-vous à ceux qui pensent que Joseph Kabila n’a pas suivi la ligne tracée par Mzee Laurent-Désiré Kabila ?
Le sens du combat politique de ces deux personnalités est le même. Mzée a prôné l’unité nationale, la bonne gouvernance, l’auto-prise en charge ainsi que l’indépendance économique. JK est venu pour la continuité de ce même combat avec une approche politique et de coopération très particulière. Il a prouvé à la face du monde combien il est artisan de la paix, rassembleur en permettant le retour et la cohabitation avec la famille biologique et politique du Maréchal Mobutu. Son sens patriotique à faire bénéficier au peuple congolais de ses richesses, l’a amené à mettre en œuvre notamment le programme sino-congolais qui à ce jour permettra à notre génération de dire à notre progéniture ce à quoi nos minerais ont servi, cela par la réalisation des grands ouvrages à travers le pays.
Nous sommes dans une année électorale, quelles sont les chances de votre candidat Joseph Kabila ?
Le Président Joseph KABILA, Initiateur de mon Parti, que je soutiens sans réserve, a toutes les faveurs de pronostic d’autant qu’il a compris et réalise ce que le peuple Congolais réclamait depuis plusieurs décennies. Pour ce faire, il a toutes les chances de gagner haut les mains. Cependant, Il est un fait qu’une élection n’est jamais gagnée en avance. Connaissant la capacité de manipulation, d’intoxication et de désinformation qui caractérise l’opposition congolaise ainsi que sa politique de mensonge et d’intimidation, je dois sincèrement dire comme dans tout autre domaine, une victoire est avant tout le fruit d’une bonne préparation. En politique tout dépend des stratégies mises en œuvre ainsi que du discours et du personnel politique aligné pour battre campagne et rassurer les potentiels partenaires politiques nationaux et étrangers. A mon avis, notre Parti devrait dès à présent mettre au point une stratégie communicationnelle appropriée pour expliquer sur la scène internationale et surtout au peuple congolais le bien-fondé et la finalité de la dynamique de la modernisation, de reconstruction nationale ainsi que de l’amélioration du climat des affaires amorcée par le Chef de l’Etat comme l’unique voie pour améliorer de manière durable le social des congolais et bâtir un pays plus beau qu’avant conformément à la volonté des pères de l’indépendance.
Quel est votre mot de la fin ?
Je voudrais affirmer que le Chef de l’Etat et homme de parole et je demande au peuple congolais dans son ensemble, de renouveler la confiance au Chef de l’Etat et de se mobiliser comme un seul homme pour lui accorder toutes les chances de réussite au scrutin de Novembre 2011 en lui dotant d’une majorité parlementaire confortable afin de lui permettre de poursuivre les reformes amorcées et de parachever l’ œuvre de modernisation et de reconstruction de notre cher et beau pays.
Author: Propos recueillis par Jean-Marie Nkambua
Source: L'Avenir Quotidien, 31/01/2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
RWANDA: End human rights imperialism now. An article contrasting with the previous one!
Groups such as Human Rights Watch have lost their way by imposing western, 'universal' standards on developing countries
For those of us who used to consider ourselves part of the human rights movement but have lost the faith, the most intriguing piece of news in 2010 was the appointment of an eminent foreign policy mandarin, James Hoge, as board chairman of Human Rights Watch.
Hoge has a huge task, and not simply because human rights violations around the world are so pervasive and egregious. Just as great a challenge is remaking the human rights movement itself. Founded by idealists who wanted to make the world a better place, it has in recent years become the vanguard of a new form of imperialism.
Want to depose the government of a poor country with resources? Want to bash Muslims? Want to build support for American military interventions around the world? Want to undermine governments that are raising their people up from poverty because they don't conform to the tastes of upper west side intellectuals? Use human rights as your excuse!This has become the unspoken mantra of a movement that has lost its way.
Human Rights Watch is hardly the only offender. There are a host of others, ranging from Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders to the Carr Centre for Human Rights at Harvard and the pitifully misled "anti-genocide" movement. All promote an absolutist view of human rights permeated by modern western ideas that westerners mistakenly call "universal". In some cases, their work, far from saving lives, actually causes more death, more repression, more brutality and an absolute weakening of human rights.
Yet, because of its global reach, now extended by an amazing gift of $100m from George Soros – which Hoge had a large part in arranging –Human Rights Watch sets a global standard. In its early days, emerging from the human rights clauses in the 1975 Helsinki Accords, it was the receptacle of the world's innocent but urgent goal of basic rights for all. Just as Human Rights Watch led the human rights community as it arose, it is now the poster child for a movement that has become a spear-carrier for the "exceptionalist" belief that the west has a providential right to intervene wherever in the world it wishes.
For many years as a foreign correspondent, I not only worked alongside human rights advocates, but considered myself one of them. To defend the rights of those who have none was the reason I became a journalist in the first place. Now, I see the human rights movement as opposing human rights.The problem is its narrow, egocentric definition of what human rights are.
Those who have traditionally run Human Rights Watch and other western-based groups that pursue comparable goals come from societies where crucial group rights – the right not to be murdered on the street, the right not to be raped by soldiers, the right to go to school, the right to clean water, the right not to starve – have long since been guaranteed. In their societies, it makes sense to defend secondary rights, like the right to form a radical newspaper or an extremist political party. But in many countries, there is a stark choice between one set of rights and the other. Human rights groups, bathed in the light of self-admiration and cultural superiority, too often make the wrong choice.
The actions of human rights do-gooders is craziest in Darfur, where they show themselves not only dangerously naive but also unwilling to learn lessons from their past misjudgments. By their well-intentioned activism, they have given murderous rebel militias – not only in Darfur but around the world – the idea that even if they have no hope of military victory, they can mobilise useful idiots around the world to take up their cause, and thereby win in the court of public opinion what they cannot win on the battlefield. The best way to do this is to provoke massacres by the other side, which Darfur rebels have dome quite successfully and remorselessly. This mobilises well-meaning American celebrities and the human rights groups behind them. It also prolongs war and makes human rights groups accomplices to great crimes.
This is a replay of the Biafra fiasco of the late 1960s. Remember? The world was supposed to mobilise to defend Biafran rebels and prevent the genocide that Nigeria would carry out if they were defeated. Global protests prolonged the war and caused countless deaths. When the Biafrans were finally defeated, though, the predicted genocide never happened. Fewer Biafrans would have starved to death if Biafran leaders had not calculated that more starvation would stir up support from human rights advocates in faraway countries. Rebels in Darfur have learned the value of mobilising western human rights groups to prolong wars, and this lesson is working gloriously for them.The place where I finally broke with my former human-rights comrades was Rwanda. The regime in power now is admired throughout Africa; 13 African heads of state attended President Paul Kagame's recent inauguration, as opposed to just one who came to the inauguration in neighbouring Burundi. The Rwandan regime has given more people a greater chance to break out of extreme poverty than almost any regime in modern African history – and this after a horrific slaughter in 1994 from which many outsiders assumed Rwanda would never recover. It is also a regime that forbids ethnic speech, ethnically-based political parties and ethnically-divisive news media – and uses these restrictions to enforce its permanence in power.
By my standards, this authoritarian regime is the best thing that has happened to Rwanda since colonialists arrived a century ago. My own experience tells me that people in Rwanda are happy with it, thrilled at their future prospects, and not angry that there is not a wide enough range of newspapers or political parties. Human Rights Watch, however, portrays the Rwandan regime as brutally oppressive. Giving people jobs, electricity, and above all security is not considered a human rights achievement; limiting political speech and arresting violators is considered unpardonable.
Human Rights Watch wants Rwandans to be able to speak freely about their ethnic hatreds, and to allow political parties connected with the defeated genocide army to campaign freely for power. It has come to this: all that is necessary for another genocide to happen in Rwanda is for the Rwandan government to follow the path recommended by Human Rights Watch.
This is why the appointment of James Hoge, who took office in October, is so potentially important. The human rights movement lost its way by considering human rights in a vacuum, as if there are absolutes everywhere and white people in New York are best-equipped to decide what they are.Hoge, however, comes to his new job after nearly two decades as editor of Foreign Affairs magazine. He sees the world from a broad perspective, while the movement of which he is now a leader sees it narrowly. Human rights need to be considered in a political context. The question should not be whether a particular leader or regime violates western-conceived standards of human rights. Instead, it should be whether a leader or regime, in totality, is making life better or worse for ordinary people.
When the global human rights movement emerged nearly half a century ago, no one could have imagined that it would one day be scorned as an enemy of human rights. Today, this movement desperately needs a period of reflection, deep self-examination and renewal. The ever-insightful historian Barbara Tuchman had it exactly right when she wrote a sentence that could be the motto of a chastened and reformed Human Rights Watch:
Humanity may have common ground, but needs and aspirations vary according to circumstances
RWANDA: Kagame's authoritarian turn risks Rwanda's future and COMMENTS!
Paul Kagame's presidency helped heal genocide-torn Rwanda. But now he must listen to critics, not imprison them
When President Paul Kagame of Rwanda won re-election in August, he could look back with pride on his accomplishments. Rwanda has emerged from the devastation of genocide and become more secure and prosperous than anyone had a right to expect. The central task of his second seven-year term, which by law must be his last, is to add broader democracy to this security and prosperity.
Since his inauguration, however, Kagame has given no sign that he is eager to face this challenge. On the contrary, he has continued to scorn his critics. This month, a Rwandan court issued harsh sentences against four of his former comrades who denounced his rule and urged a change in course for their homeland.
All four of those sentenced are safely outside Rwanda, but the severity of the sentences,which range from 20 to 24 years, was startling. The defendants were Kagame's former chief of staff and ambassador to Washington, Theogene Rudasingwa; Gerald Gahima, Rwanda's former prosecutor general and vice president of the supreme court; Col Patrick Karegeya, former director of Rwanda's external security services; and Gen Kayumba Nyamwasa, a former army chief of staff who survived an assassination attempt in South Africa last year.
The four were found guilty of forming a terrorist group, threatening state security, undermining public order, promoting ethnic divisions and insulting the president. Evidence was taken in part from a "Rwanda Briefing" they issued as their former boss began his second term, describing him as "a callous and reckless leader" shaped by "greed for absolute power". They asserted that there is "more to Rwanda and Paul Kagame than new buildings, clean streets, and efficient government … Rwanda is essentially a hard-line, one-party, secretive police state with a façade of democracy." To avoid future conflict, they urged Kagame to convene a "genuine, inclusive, unconditional and comprehensive national dialogue" with the aim of creating a new "national partnership government".
In one passage, which the court cited as a criminal attempt to stir communal hatred, they warned of another ethnic explosion in Rwanda. "The Tutsi minority cannot hope to impose their will on the Hutu majority forever," they warned. "The military victory of Hutu insurgency could, in turn, conceivably lead to the genocide of the remaining Tutsi population of Rwanda."
Adding to the fear of new instability were this week's reports that regional leaders meeting in Kigali, the Rwandan capital, concluded that a new armed force is emerging on the turbulent eastern Congo, which borders on Rwanda and which has, in the past, been a staging ground for anti-Kagame forces. There was ominous speculation that the force might be collaborating with one or more of the newly-sentenced signers of "Rwanda Briefing".
Kagame's repression of opposition during his first term may have been unwise, but it was at least defensible. Some of his most outspoken critics were allies of the defeated genocide army, which still dreams of returning to power. The four men convicted this month, however, became prominent because Kagame himself elevated them to high office. He trusted them once – and should listen to them now.
No authoritarian leader cedes power easily, or turns it over to bodies he cannot control. This is especially true of leaders who come to power by guerrilla war, as Kagame did. Guerrilla leaders win wars by being paranoid and ruthless. Once they take power, they are expected to abandon those qualities and embrace opposite ones: tolerance, compromise and humility. Almost none manages to do so. Kagame has proven himself to be a visionary figure in some ways, so there seemed hope that he would be an exception. Events of recent weeks suggest otherwise.
Kagame and his allies argue that opening too much political space in Rwanda now would unleash ethnic hatreds and possibly lead to another genocide. His critics, including the four who were sentenced this month, argue the opposite: that opening political space is the best way to prevent another genocide. Both arguments are plausible, and both should be openly discussed. Instead of having a court sentence his four ex-comrades to prison terms, Kagame should invite them and others to join him in planning a sustainable path toward Rwandan democracy. By rejecting their counsel, he is increasing his pool of enemies and perhaps even contributing to the destabilisation of the country he has done so much to settle on a better course.
It may or may not be true, as the four men convicted this month have asserted, that Rwanda is "again on the brink of an abyss". The stakes, however, are enormous. President Kagame should accept the possibility that his judgment may not always be correct, and listen earnestly to Rwandans with different ideas. He still has the chance to enter history as one of the greatest modern African leaders. There is also the chance, however, that he will be remembered as another failed African big-man, a tragic figure who built the foundations of a spectacular future for his country, but saw his achievements collapse because he could not take his country from one-man rule toward democracy.
In Kagame's early years in power, he made enemies of many he might have turned into allies, including former president Pasteur Bizimungu, former prime minister Faustin Twagiramungu, former speaker of parliament Joseph Sebarenzi, and Paul Rusesabagina, the hotel manager whose story was the basis for the film Hotel Rwanda. He could plausibly argue that in those days he felt under siege, with the former genocide army waging war against him and the country still in upheaval. Today, the country is secure, and Kagame has attracted foreign supporters ranging from Bill Clinton and Tony Blair to Rev Rick Warren and high-powered American business tycoons.
Yet, his contempt for critics seems as intense as ever. Around the same time his four ex-comrades were given long, if symbolic, prison terms, prosecutors asked a Kigali court to impose sentences of 12 and 33 years on two opposition journalists charged with genocide denial, inciting public disorder, insulting the president and spreading false rumours.
"The challenge that Rwanda and her partners have is to engineer peaceful transition to inclusive, democratic governance in time to avoid renewed widespread violence and sectarian bloodshed," Kagame's four former aides wrote in their "Rwanda Briefing". He should heed their warning and seek their counsel.
COMMENTS
- Recommend? (2)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr Stephen Kinzer
i d like first like to ask you one question, what is the difference between Hutu and Tutsi? and most of all i would like to meet you so you can tell me who i am ?
if you didn't know there is no difference between what you call Tutsi and Hutu; so you should be careful and do further research when you deliberately want to present Rwanda politics along these so called ethnics; as for Kagame has to build broader democracy in Rwanda ..... i don't know what is you call democracy? i live in rural Rwanda; we vote our mayors, our councils at the district, and we have meeting reguraly and expose those who are corrupted.... we talk about the road that need to be repaired the hospital that neet to be mentained etc etc ......so which democracy are you talking about ? ohh that we should vote according who is Hutu and Tutsi .....i don't know the ethnic of my mayor but he delivers !!!! what is wrong with that ? and for Gahima and Rudasingwa i suggest you read Umuseso newspaper in 2003, they did an investigation that exposed these men ? and as for Karegeya you should ask him about KAbuga, yes Kabuga the guy who financed the genocide !!! just ask him about this man and have an expert in lie detector present you will know the true nature of this man - Recommend? (2)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- This is a sudden departure from the usual Steve Kinzer who is normally effusive about Kagame, he is or was his biographer so I wonder why he had a sudden change of opinion about Kagame. Perhaps this is a response to the recent criticism he faced about defending Kagame, but to turn on a man you claimed to admire is curious in its timing to say the least. I have often assumed that Kinzer is informed about Rwanda and it surprised me that he is placing his hopes for Rwandan democracy in washed-up soldiers. When America has political problems, they do not look to Gen. Stanley MacChrystal or a former soldier, they look to the civilian population. But when it comes to Africa then it becomes a beauty contest of former soldiers for the west to choose from.
The situation the RPF found itself in is complex, in the post 1994 Genocide, the RPF tried to seek parties to form a coalition based on the Arusha accords. They invited Arusha co-signatories Liberal Party and Social Democratic party and other minor parties to join then. Rwanda had never had a multi-party election so it was impossible to measure the popularity of these parties. By 2003 the RPF won a massive victory and the other parties were vanquished as they had been complacent. Now the RPF is in the curious position of being blamed for a weak opposition, google the websites of Rwandan opposition parties and look for a good manifesto and you will find none; is the RPF to blame for that?
Why has Kinzer regurgitated the so-called “Gang of Four” statements, the so-called Rwanda Briefing was a long list of their grievances and a pity-party. No Rwandan will ever vote for these men because they were grieved by Kagame, they will vote for who can give them development. I challenge any reader to read their statements and say they have Rwanda’s interests at heart
http://www.musabyimana.be/uploads/media/Rwanda_Briefing_August2010.pdf.
To hate Kagame is not enough, they need to present a different vision for Rwandans, and that is something they are incapable of. These men were corrupt, see the hotels they built on meager government salaries
http://www.lemigohotel.com/
and these washed up soldiers are the hopes for Rwandan democracy?
Kagame cannot be called authoritarian or a dictator, how many dictators allow imitators to parody them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3k58jVdhwo
He has provided firm leadership in a time of total chaos. In the post-1994 period we had nothing, no workable institutions, no standing infrastructure, to understand Rwanda today you have to know where we came from. We abolished tribal classification and were commended, then we are told about tribal quotas and ethnic balance. We cannot have ban tribal classification and keep quotas. Then these shameless four want to manipulate ethnic sentiment by inciting hatred towards their own group for political gain. For them to say a Genocide is possible again is dreaming, THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE TUTSI OF 1994 WAS NOT SPONTANEOUS TRIBAL KILLING, IT WAS METICULOUSLY PLANNED BY THE HABYARIMANA GOVT.
If Kagame needs to listen to anyone, it is to the Rwandan people and not exiled former soldiers, they know nothing of the lives of ordinary Rwandans. Rwanda is not a powder keg waiting to blow, it still has some reforms to do but it is not teetering. There is no doubt our democracy is an experiment, a round-table coalition when the winner only gets 50% of cabinet seats, so smaller parties are guaranteed seats and this makes them complacent. That democratization process should not be confused with the rumblings of former soldiers.
These men were military men and as such deserved to be tried in court martial, they now openly collaborate with extremist Hutu rebels who are committing mass-rape in Congo, the FDLR. Why should Kagame speak to such people? The same people being sent to ICC for crimes in Congo, this is a ragged coalition of people united by hate of Kagame not by a united vision. - Recommend? (3)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Stephen Kinzer makes a real about-face in this piece. His 2008 biography of President Kagame (A Thousand Hills: Rwanda's Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It) was a glowing review of both Kagame’s military prowess as well as his nation-building skills. Even as recently as last year in his Gaurdian article titled ‘The limits of free speech in Rwanda’ Kinzer seemed to defend the laws he now criticizes. In that piece he wrote, “Even in the US, though, it is illegal to cry “fire!” in a crowded theatre.”
There is nothing wrong with a journalist changing his or her mind. It’s healthy. But perhaps it would have been more appropriate for Mr. Kinzer to mention—in the interest of full disclosure—that he was the author of Kagame’s most well known biographical work and that while he was being paid for that task, the views he presented were quite contrary to the ones he promotes here. So it would be great to know what changed him and how he went from one extreme to the other so quickly.
Also, I would like to suggest that Kinzer come and live in Rwanda for an extended period (I advise at least a year) before he espouses the would-be benefits of Western-style democracy here.
I like the idea of encouraging the current regime in Rwanda to be more open. But the suggestion that President Kagame should take counsel from convicted enemies of the state belies the lack of understanding Kinzer has of this small but complex country. Many foreign correspondents—especially we Americans—often make the mistake of seeing places so different from our own country through our own red, white and blue glasses.
This award winning journalist survived a long list of dangerous assignments, as his website describes (http://www.stephenkinzer.com). And of Rwanda, he states--in the article above--that “today, the country is secure.” So, why not come Mr. Kinzer, and really get to know this place you want so much to write about? - Recommend? (4)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- For the first time I can agree with Mr. Kinzer about the Rwandan issue. As a Rwandan native I suffered and still suffer injustice and demonization under Kagame's regime. Arguing that there is no Hutus or Tutsis in Rwanda is being purely irational while the Rwandan government recognizes the genocide against Tutsis which was committed by majority from Hutus ethnic. This is an official version of the recent history.
Kagame and his extrimist Tutsis group believe that they can demonize all Hutus and lead them with an iron fist until the end of the world by passing power on to their children and convincing hutus generations are sons and daughters of Genocidaire. But it is not going to happen. More oppression and excluding majority of Rwandans (Hutus) in the life of their country will only encrease the hatred and anger between the Rwandans. Kagame must listen or he will wish to listen when it will be too late. - Recommend? (3)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr Kinzer,
I respectfully disagree with your analysis. Had Kagame listened to the the 4 men you're advising him to start listening to, Rwanda would be in abyss by now. I am in no way, shape or form connected to Kagame, so i guess i'm only speaking as an impartial observer. If these 4 men had their way, i guarantee you Rwanda would be ever more divided than it was pre-1994. Does this mean that Kagame way of doing things is correct, frankly i don't think so. There has to be a better way of governing our country than it is currently governed. However, I dare think that Kagame's way of governing is the best we can have for the moment. At least he builds schools, roads, provide access to clean water, electricity, education, etc. These things are the precursors of Democracy. Once people are not worried about their daily survival due to famine, malnutrition, etc then they turn their attention to other things (democratic governance etc). C'mon Mr. Kinzer, you're smarter than this and you should know better. Giving in or appeasing your opponents only leads in their empowerment not their moderation. Kagame is fallible like all other humans, no doubt about it. However, in my humble opinion, i think it is incumbent upon the opposition to tone down their vitriol and that'd be the most potent weapon that'd turn Kagame into a moderate politician. After all, judging Kagame from a distance, he may have his limitations and vices but i tend to think that he's a fair man therefore he would moderate if his critics do the same. On the other hand, the more his critics become radicals, the more tolerant Kagame becomes.
Cheers,
Peace out! - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Stephen Kinzer is either intrinsically becoming confused or he is deliberately confusing his audience just to be seen to be playing from the middle.
Whatever the reason, I find it very unprofessional and unethical for a respected person like Kinzer to suddenly and fundamentally change his position on the subject that he has been able to adequately educate people about.
How can you change your position based on the version that you heard from disgruntled employees? Do disgruntled employees have the credibility to discredit the reputation of an elected public official, without providing any evidence to their allegations?
Should their continued antics and staged incidences be taken seriously and form basis for any such arguments? Can the court decision be challenged in the press? Have you noticed the numerous incestuous associations between this group and many Genocidal elements and their supporters, working furiously to damage President Kagame’s reputation?
Even after the 29th November UN report implicated them in the terrorism activities in Eastern DRC, you still cannot understand who these people are?
The media has an obligation to establish the credibility of individuals making such allegations, to assure that their allegations are supported by solid evidence, and to provide fair and balanced reporting to the public.
Have you established the credibility of these allegations based on solid evidence? If you haven’t done your homework to determine the credibility of allegations by disgruntled employees, then you have contributed to the unfair character assassination of a dedicated public servant. The very same person you described as a man who dreamed the rebirth of Rwanda.
I know in America people create controversy around them in order to get instant fame. Could it be that Kinzer has not become a celebrity enough despite his intensive research and writings on the issues of poltical science and he could be looking for that?
Kinzer should know that it is extensively believed that politics can offer panacea for people’s problems. That is if they are played by visionary people like the current President of Rwanda, H.E Paul Kagame. But if you have cantankerous and crabby self-centered individuals like the group of four (Kayumba, Karegeya, Gahima and Rudasingwa) then you have a problem.
The group’s political landscape is dotted with fractured splinter groups (FDLR, PDR, FDU..), more often than not led by ideologically charged individuals most of whom have either committed genocide in the past or are simply genocide ideologues, seemingly more obsessed with installing a Hutu President, rather than working to improve the lives of Rwandan people.
But they are fighting an uphill battle especially because their past is blemished due to their terrible delinquency. They have failed to courageously admit their blunders and be apologetic to the people of Rwanda and the President. They should be prepared to fight this legal battle; otherwise a favorable article like this will probably not help them.
What Kinzer should know is that the wounds of genocide are still fresh and he should be reminded that, 16 years after America came into existence as a nation, things were terrible..
Rwanda is doing better and the trajectory on which Kagame is griving the country is promising. - Recommend? (2)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Kinzer you should be reminded that it is high time that Rwanda developed a political culture that will not allow egocentrism and mediocrity. And our President has set a stage for us to move forward. He has fought corruption, he has spearheaded legal reforms, economic transformation, social progress, he has generated a remarkable sense of ownership and responsibility among leaders and the people. He has systematically changed the leadership style which reflects the principle of-Government of the people, for the people and by the people.
He was elected by the People of Rwanda by 93%. The group that you are defending wants this overtuned so they could take over? And they have been saying and writting that if President Kagame doesn't gconcede power to them he will be removed violently! Are you advocating for treasonable activities? Those statements are enogh to try them with treason!
If they are your clients you have made a wrong choice!! - Recommend? (1)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- By any standards whatsoever, if Paul Kagame has to do some listening from any critic, even if it meant doing so discreetly, or by radar of some sort, at least those 4 fugitive former soldiers are not inclusive. The hands of these 4 fugitives: Kayumba Nyamwasa, Patrick Karegeya, Theogene Rudasingwa & Gerald Gahima are too dirty with Corruption, Arrogance and Intrigue. Their ferocious thoughts over their Boss Mr Kagame have nothing helpful to a common Rwandan. They are a product of Mr Kagame. If anything, their Boss has to blame himself for tolerating to much with them, he should have picked them earlier and incarcerated them for their long overdue and publicly known misappropriation & arrogance some of it earlier than the year 2000.
The best these 4 fugitives (Nyamwasa, Karegeya, Rudasingwa & Gahima) should do is: (1) Desist from any of their inferno - talk. (2) Request people like Bill Clinton, Rick Warren, Tony Blair, Bill Gates etc who can influence & seek their pardon from Mr Kagame. (3) Then, those 4, they should go on and sincerely say SORRY to their Boss Mr Kagame and go on to make guarantees for never acting inappropriately ever. (They can do that, if even if, it meant serving a symbolic sentence thereafter...) - Recommend? (1)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- The Kagame PR team is out in force today. Can't imagine Kinzer being invited back to Rwanda after this, so credit where credit is due - this article took some balls.
I am wondering what has led to this change of heart on Kinzer's part, and I suspect it might have something to do with the recent events in Tunisia etc. Despite what Kinzer claimed in his recent piece on human Rights, it isn't just a western thing.
It's frightening to see how otherwise intelligent people can put their heads in the sand and pretend like everything is fine, but sadly that is often the Rwandan way. If the status quo is to remain in Rwanda, then more people will have to be silenced, more journalists attacked. There is no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship. - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Kinzer with all due respect this article is cooked with lots of sour grapes and derailing. With such an article we also get other articles like President Paul Kagame in Davos, Switzerland to attend the World Economic Forum. Really as a Rwandese we havae come from far previously deeped a hole by the previous regimes but things had to change and we have succeded both socially and economically with an outstanding performance to be ranked as a top reformer. Again all this depends on who leads and where we Rwandese want to be so these articles with crocodile tears of spoilers/haters will not move us. We know where our country was, not ready to look back no more Genocide.
Such spoilers (Gang of 4) differentiated themselves from our President Paul Kagame and this people but this gives us more strength to continue with the right path of growing the economy while the haters age badly shifting goal posts here and there. But Kinzer talk to any honest Rwandese possibly be in Rwanda to see for your self Rwanda gets better everyday, well lite secure and safe as a priority of set by the Visionary leader-Paul Kagame - Recommend? (2)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- I am quite disappointed by Mr. Kinzer - for a respected journalist who should be far above the Western perceptions about Africa in general, this piece makes me suspect some dishonesty at play. Kinzer knows a great deal about Rwanda's history and its prevailing discourse. He knows that in spite of the painful efforts by Rwandans to get their country back on track, inspite of having achieved so much in a short time, Rwanda has not yet attained the level where it can afford the luxury of Western democracy. Majority of the people are still illiterate, elements schooled the politics of divisionism and genocide ideology are still breathing hard, agitating for revenge - and now we have to grapple with yet another problem of people in our midst being overcome by greed and betraying our cause. Kinzer must admit that even western democracy cannot level-headedly deal with this overwhelming phenomenon. If Kagame is gathering a few enemies in the course of protecting his people; consolidating peace and prosperity for them, why take the side of the few enemies? Talk to the 'gang of four' if you dont want Rwanda to go on the brink of an abyss you say? this is utter black-mail yet the stakes are neither here nor there. What is there to talk about between Kagame and the gang of four apart from them coming to him on their knees begging for forgiveness. They were not politicians before they left -they were civil servants who could not restrain their itchy fingers from going down state coffers. They are thieves and this has been recorded. Kagame's biggest mistake was to tolerate them for long - and understandably he did this because he came from too far with them and wanted to give them a chance to wake them from their spell and go back on the principles of the RPF. But they failed and the system had to vomit them because they were causing a stomachache. There are people to be brought back in the fold for the sake of the political health of the nation and people who are bent on fomenting disintegration, the corrupt and the greedy are not among them. And trust Rwandans, they can ably identify the grain from the chuff. So, Mr. Kinzer, go back and think, perhaps you are tending to forget that Rwanda's problems are unique and complex?
- Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- We are all entitled to our opinions and commentary should always be welcomed. Stephan Kinzer can claim as the Kagame's biographer to have 'some' knowledge of Rwanda. However, this article leaves quite a bit to be desired and has a peculiar conclusion which leaves most simply baffled.
- What makes these four people worth talking to? Two (Gahima, Kayumba) left Rwanda without being attacked/prosecuted/arrested, Rudasingwa was found innocent in a court of law. They chose to leave Rwanda because, it is safe to say, they no longer felt that they were getting pampered they way they thought they should. How can they claim Rwanda is so corrupt and evil, if they were left alone for the whole time they were there and working in the government they hope to bring down?
- Rudasingwa and Gahima left before 2005. Why did it take five years for them to decide to speak out? Karegya left in 2008, why didn't he speak out then? Why was it not till Kayumba left that they decided to write this briefing?
- Let's not dismiss the issues that already surround these men. They claim Kagame decided to invade DRC which was a poor decision. Interesting coming from the Head of External Security and the Army Chief of Staff at the time. Who was above them giving this advice? Gahima defaulted on over $700,000 in loans when he left. This isn't a government claim but a private banks.
- Beyond this, if four disgruntled French, Dutch, or American officials decided to make claims about their former bosses, would we tell Obama or Sarkozy to listen to them?
- Kinzer defends the suppression of ethnic hatred speech in Kagame's biography, in his article on December 31th on Human Rights Groups, but makes no mention of the 'four's' ethnic comments in their brief. Claiming Hutus are oppressed is very similar to some claims by other groups circa 1993-4.
- Victoire Ingabire's, who stood at the Genocide memorial and flamed ethnic tension by suggesting that the memorial was one sided, party just signed an agreement to work together with the 'fours' RNC. Also let's not forget her personal assistant is an admitted genocide criminal.
- "President Kagame should accept the possibility that his judgment may not always be correct, and listen earnestly to Rwandans with different ideas", is an interesting statement coming who when writing Kagame's biography Kagame listed the people "don't like me" and told Kinzer to go interview them.
-" It may or may not be true, as the four men convicted this month have asserted, that Rwanda is "again on the brink of an abyss"." Another wild assertion! This might be why Peace Corps continues to send hundreds of volunteers, why tourism has nearly doubled in two years, or why more embassies continue to open diplomatic offices in Rwanda. These are all key indicators of an upcoming disaster!
- On December 31th in this newspaper Mr. Kinzer stated, "By my standards, this authoritarian regime is the best thing that has happened to Rwanda since colonialists arrived a century ago. My own experience tells me that people in Rwanda are happy with it, thrilled at their future prospects, and not angry that there is not a wide enough range of newspapers or political parties." Oh how much can change in a few weeks. (Let's not forget the Rwanda briefing came out months ago)
- Perhaps the last thing to question here is what's the point of all this. If Kagame doesn't like criticism why write this article? To motivate people to rise against him? Its safe to assume that previously Mr. Kinzer could have contacted the President quite easily. If the future of Rwanda is a real concern, why not just tell him your opinion? Why put it out here for the world? Perhaps to fight off criticism that he's pro-tutis, pro-RPF, or just pro-Kagame? Perhaps to due to friendships with some or all of the 'four'? Perhaps because he's given up on Rwanda. Any of these seriously put Kinzer's journalistic integrity in question. - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr. Kinzer,
Your a piece is nothing but a total BS and you are becoming one of the flip floppers journalist on earth. I hope your readers become aware of how irrelevant you are becoming !First you should know that Rwanda is not a banana republic. Like any sovereign country Rwanda has laws and you should differentiate between rule of law and cheap popularity. While you seem to advocate the latter, Rwanda has every right to prosecute whoever violates the law of the land whether a Hutu, Tutsi, white or black. I don’t think that you even believe what you wrote in this article but rather your intention is nothing but to appease people who criticized your previous article. A government worth the name can’t afford to be you. Our government has laws and the mandate to make sure that whether you are a high ranking official or otherwise, same laws will apply and that’s what has been consistently happening in Rwanda.
There should be also a difference between criminals and critics! The four criminals you have mentioned violated the Rwandan laws and should face the law like everybody else. I hope next time you are not going to confuse terrorists to freedom fighters mr. Kinzer ! - Recommend? (1)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Dear Kinzer,
I have always heard elders say that the hero tittle is a usually awarded to an outstanding person after that distinguished person has departed from this earth, and reading your comments, i remembered those words of wisdom from our elders.
Rwandans have always appreciated your positive attitude, support and words of encouragement but the above comments leaves two major questions in many Rwandans minds.
1. The first question, have you been bought to write such unwise article that us Rwandans can qualify you to have joined enemy camp?
2. Another benefit of doubt could be that you are trying to be negative against our leader to the detrimental of our country so that outsiders could consider you as someone with an independent mind?
I read some of the above comments and i would indeed add that the person you have always admired all of a sudden has become doubtable?
I dont want to comment on the so called Kagame's so called allies, but what is clear is that these so called allies were wolves in the sheep's skin. Rwandans with the good leadership of our beloved President will never allow any individual who want to elevate himself/herself and be synonymous with any government institution.
Mr. Kinzer, you should be appreciating what our President is doing in terms of fighting corruptuion in Rwanda and whether the gang of four thugs are your friends, for Rwandans we have to tell you this, they have become irrelevant.
The way i see it, when a General is shown exit then this sends a strong signal that no one is untouchable in Rwanda.
Keep the fire burning our president and we Rwandans are behind you. - Recommend? (1)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr. Kinzer, the problem we have is those who make democracy as a cover and want the power in negative way, but remember we have a great President who protect and enhance the value of citizens Some one who knows the history of Rwanda, can not take Ingabire as a democrat . She believes his group is majority . Accept ideology of Ingabire is like to accept KU KLUX KLAN in America.
- Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Steven,
Fifteen years ago, the genocide brought Rwanda into the lime light,previosly unknown to the outside world or simply known as a small,insignificant and impoverished country.
The devastation went beyond the loss of human life,a very divided county and total collapse of social -economic infrastructure.
today under the leadership of President Kagame the country is transformed into a secure,prosperious country, the economy is growing , the gross domestic product is increasing ,Kagame`s leadership is providing opportunities for Rwandan`s with out any discrimination, for the first time in Rwanda`s history people are rebuilding thier nation ,the women and the youth have a voice .
Rwandan`s are the best people to plan their path,a goal that together with their leaders have set to achieve.
real solutions can not come from four individuals; Theogen.kayumba,gahima,karegeya. Rwanda has over eleven million people today . - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr. Kinzer, while i commend your interest in all things rwandan, unlike many of your colleagues in the media fraternity who simply copy and paste press releases from Human Rights Watch and other NGO's, i think you are wrong to ask the rwandan president to dialogue with these men. what makes them special? they are simply four rwandans who left the country on their own free will. at the end of the day, life continued without them without a hitch.
while the sentences might seem harsh to some observers, should the rwandan judiciary ignore the law of the land because of who they are? are you calling for the suppression of the rule of law? sadly, these four men refused to heed the court summons, i would have loved to see them defend themselves. actually, despite victoire ingabire's extremist views, at least she had the balls to enter the so-called 'lions den' and meet her 'enemies' head-on. these four men could borrow a leaf from her book. let them challenge the charges. Or have Kayumba Nyamwasa, Theogene Rudasingwa and Patrick Karegeya, all former army officers, become soft as a result of all those years spent skimming off parts of the national cake?
i cannot, for the life of me, understand why these men are special. every year, rwandans engage in a national dialogue which guides the political discourse of the country. this discourse is democracy at its best. rwandans are happy, as you've said so many a time. where is the proof that this situation has changed? - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Kinzer,
Rwanda is growing stronger:
It is one of the safest and the most ordely countries in Africa 'by Philip" - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Mr. Stephen Kinzer has already done good to Rwandans by writing President Paul Kagame's biography and we appreciate his work on Rwanda because it is balanced. he has however this time got it wrong by overrestimating the intellect, character and value of the four former Rwandan government officials.
Fortunately though, Kinzer has recognised a lot of positive things about President Kagame and his leadership. It is a fact that President Kagame can look back with pride on his accomplishments. It is a fact that Rwanda has emerged from the devastation of genocide and become more secure and prosperous than anyone could have expected. That today, the country is secure, and Kagame has attracted foreign supporters and investors is also true. That President Kagame has proven himself to be a visionary figure is also a fact and Rwandans are convinced that he is an exceptional leader not only in Africa but all over the globe. It is also a fact that the four men convicted this month became prominent because President Kagame himself elevated them to high office.
It is however a very weak argument to say that because President Kagame trusted these people once, he should listen to them now. The fact is that the President cannot trust them anymore. Neither can he trust their word nor their advice because of what they have done.
The four have for no reason at all abandoned a cause they once dearly fought for; to rid this country of politics of ethnicity, corruption, nepotism and many other vices.
They are now at the forefront of trying to destroy the good things that together with President Kagame they helped to put up, again for no strong reason.
Patrick Karegeya and Kayumba are dealing with the FDLR leader, Sylivester Mudacumura. There is no excuse nor reason whatsoever why Karegeya and Kayumba should talk to Mudacumura, except for selfish opportunistic reasons.
The four gentlemen are not genuine in their dealings and utterances when they claim to be fighting for democracy in Rwanda. Why is it that they are seeing the vices they talk about only after falling out with the system? There is no evidence at all that these people ever disagreed with President Kagame politically or personally. President Kagame had nothing to do with their self imposed exile. With the exception of Kayumba who used illegal routes to travel out of Rwanda, all the other three, left Rwanda in broad day light, no persecution, no repression, no surveillance, nothing!
Evidently then, the four gentlemen are simply angry because they lost their privileged positions and their more than a decade lifestyles but not because of President Kagame's alleged misrule; all because they lacked the humility to re-xamine themselves, admit their mistakes and correct their behaviour which was not welcome in Rwanda due to moral high standards established by the RPF and its leadership.
In Kinzer's article it is implied that President Kagame lacks tolerance, compromise and humility. President Kagame is known to be patient, compromising, down to earth and is a man of a noble character. Those who know him will testify to this.
President Kagame is however intorerant to abuse of power and office, injustice and people who abuse trust like the four gentlemen did and indeed there should be no apology about that.
President Kagame is still on the right course, striving to transform Rwanda and Rwandans fundamentally and instead of urging him to talk to the four dissidents, Kinzer should advise them instead to re-examine their hearts and conscience, ask for mercy or serve their prison sentence if they have too. But to restore their worth and dignity the need to do all this with the ultimate aim of rejoining the President and other Rwandans who struggle daily to defend and protect this country from falling back. into the abyss it has emerged from.
Mike - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- The sad but true fact is that Kinzer, like several other observers is just giving up to the basic business principle of supply and demand.
He probably doesn’t believe a word of what he wrote in this column
Kinzer’s initial courage in thinking “out of the box” and challenging the prejudice and hypocrisy that underlies the bulk of the typical attacks over Rwanda’s unique post-genocide journey has been met by such sustained fire from the anti Kagame/RPF/GoR fanatics that he is simply afraid to loose his credibility vis-a-vis his mainstream readership.
Despite the outrageous nature of the ferocious anti-Kagame attacks that strive to divert attention from the simple fact that he and his team have done more than any contemporary leader to put a people back on his feet against all odds, things seem to have reached a point where the few observers who dare asking the tough questions on which standards should be used to assess Kagame’s achievements are systematically vilified to a point where they feel obliged to demonstrate their willingness to criticize Kagame’s RPF in order to accommodate the expectations of their conventional audience.
Unfortunate reaction from Kinzer who chooses to sacrifice, for the sake of cheap business interests, his intimate knowledge of the unique dynamics involving an entire nation beyond president Kagame. - Recommend? (0)
- Report abuse
- | Link
- Hullo
First of all, allow me to express my disappointment with Kinzer. To me, he should be the last person to write such an ill researched, reckless article about Rwanda. The respect I had for him as an analyst on Rwandan issues has now changed. He is one of those western individuals who think they have knowledge about Rwanda and having authored President Kagame's autobiography, Kinzer thinks he is the "official expert" on Rwanda. This article says something different.
The picture you painted here is different from the Rwanda we know. Its funny how Rwanda keeps eluding even those that think know something about it. To know and write about Rwanda, like SteveinRwanda says, you need to be here...period.
If you asked Rwandans, majority dont want to hear about Ingabire and neither do they support the activities of the Gang of Four. They have worked hard for the 17 years and they will not let anyone squander what they have sweated for for many years.
- The sad but true fact is that Kinzer, like several other observers is just giving up to the basic business principle of supply and demand.
He probably doesn’t believe a word of what he wrote in this column
Kinzer’s initial courage in thinking “out of the box” and challenging the prejudice and hypocrisy that underlies the bulk of the typical attacks over Rwanda’s unique post-genocide journey has been met by such sustained fire from the anti Kagame/RPF/GoR fanatics that he is simply afraid to loose his credibility vis-a-vis his mainstream readership.
One more victim of the ferocious anti-Kagame attacks that strive to divert attention from the simple fact that he and his team have done more than any contemporary leader to put a people back on his feet against all odds. Things truly seem to have reached a point where the few observers who dare asking the tough questions on which standards should be used to assess Kagame’s achievements are systematically vilified to a point where they feel obliged to demonstrate their willingness to criticize Kagame’s RPF in order to accommodate the expectations of their conventional audience.
Unfortunate reaction from Kinzer who chooses to sacrifice, for the sake of cheap business interests, his intimate knowledge of the unique dynamics involving an entire nation beyond president Kagame.
- Mr Kinzer,
Now you can see what criticizing RPF and Kagame means.After reading the RPF sycophants's comments here, I am sure now you ara persona non grata in Rwanda.The late Alison Des Forges did all she could to help RPF and its thugs led by Kagame to cover up theirs war crimes and mass killings against Hutus.But when she tried to open her eyes from the deep sleep she was put in by the RPF propaganda, she was accused of spreading "genocide ideology"!You can not do better for RPF than her!
Look, just because you said what is obvious, that Kagame should also listen to others, you are now accused of lacking objectivity by those who were praising you yesterday when you unfortunately blindly tried to convince us that the murderer Kagame should be tolerated because he is developing Rwanda.If they allow you back in Rwanda (which I doubt they will do unless you disown this article and promise to be blind for all your life), just move a bit out of Kigali, recognise that you are in the soviet union of Staline and let you eyes and ears do their work.Do not expect people to talk to you in presence of your driver or local thugs but act as a journalist, you will see that your hero Kagame is simply a Rwandan Neron who is simply feared rather that loved.Why do people think you have changed your mind?I suppose you have been seeing this and you know more than this, only that now you have gone beyond the red line!Mr Kinzer what you have tried to say is not allowed in Rwanda otherwise tomorrow you will also be called genocidaire or at least you are espousing genocide ideology!I promise you, they will accuse you of that if you do not change your language.May be you can see what Victoire Ingabire, Ntaganda, the 4 former Kagame's allies and many other people who are dying in prison or in exile have gone through.
Hutus and Tutsis all know each other.They also know that this turn is for Tutsis and Hutus are waiting for theirs.Kagame had a chance to unite Rwandans but he failed.His apartheid policies have left Hutus feeling like slaves in their own country.Look at the destruction of their houses,look at the overnight switch to Englis as a language of teaching while all Hutus speak French, look at the sudden decision to no longer offer burseries to students while all Tutsis are taken care of by FARG, a fund to which every Rwanda contributes but is only accessible to Tutsis even those who are not genocide survivors!The list of such policies is endeless.
Those who say they do not see it, go to the Airport in Kigali, count Hutus and Tutsis,go to the President Office, tell me any one Hutu who works there.Look at the Generals and other senior military officers.You will get one or two useless generals former FDRL commanders who are being used to ternish the image of opposition parties.Don't you really think that every Rwandan should be given the opportunity to serve his countyr rather than having the so called angels victims who enjoy the fruits of the land on one side and the evil genocidaires who deserve persecution on the other?What will you say when the world remembers that it is Kagame who started the genocide in Rwanda and continued it in congo until now?
Those who say Rwanda is developing and we should let Kagame continue oppress us, we say Hitler developed Germany better than Kagame but the world could not stand his madness.We cant stand Kagame's madness and cruelty any more! The Four RNC guys understood this and their action needs to be supported. - Recommend? (4)
- LET ME MAKE MYSELF CLEAR, THOSE WHO BLAMED KINZER FOR FINALLY UNDERSTANDING THE TRUE NATURE OF KAGAME NEED TO KNOW THAT ANYONE CAN BE MISLEAD. THE KAGAME'S REGIME IS WELL KNOWN FOR LIES, DEMONIZATION OF HUTUS AND OTHER OPPONENTS, PLAYING VICTIM WHILE IS THE PERPETRATOR AND OTHER UNHOLY ACTS. GEN. KAYUMBA, COL. KAREGEYA, DR. RUDASINGWA AND GAHIMA WERE PART OF THE SAME REGIME. I THINK RUSINGWA ADMITTED THAT THEY WERE ALLIES WITH THE DICTATOR AND THEY NEED THE RWANDANS TO TRUST THEM. "RWANDA BRIEFING" IS THE MAJOR STEP FOR RESTORING THAT TRUST. THE POOR KINZER WAS MISLED OR HE WROTE KAGAME'S FALSE BIOGRAPH AS BUSINESS. NOW IT THE TIME FOR TELLING THE TRUTH LET US FACE IT.
- Kagame is like other world dicators who rule with an Iron fist. He does not want to listen to the calling of Democratic reform unless the Rwandans people rise up peacefully and restore their right to elect their own leaders democratically.
THE YEAR 2011 IS FOR REFORM CHANGE IN AFRICA. WE SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISE TO HEAR KINZER SWITCHING POSITIONS FROM THE MANUPILATION TO TELLING THE TRUTH. KAGAME MUST GOOOOOOOOOO.
- The sad reality is that if Kinzer was a Rwandan journalist he would be sent to jail for writing this piece. Questioning the regime is simply not tolerated and "genocide ideology" is the excuse used to silence anyone who dares.
It's very disheartening to read the comments that people have written denouncing Kinzer. There is a minority here in Rwanda that live in big houses, drive nice 4x4s and good jobs, and they owe it all to Kagame. To question Kagame is to question their right to all of that. I'm 100% sure they don't even believe what they are saying about Hutus and Tutsis.
Until the regime allows open discussion about the crimes committed by both sides then "reconciliation" will remain just a meaningless word that gets thrown about when people want to impress donors.
- Like i said in my previous reaction, i respectfully but profoundly disagree with Mr. Kinzer, but having said that, i wish Kagame could be more careful than he's now in terms of his governing style. It's not enough to just giving cabinet posts to Hutus or people who perceive themselves that way, Kagame needs to start showing how seriously committed his is when it comes to Hutu representation in key government entities that wield greater influence on the lives of banyarwanda as a whole. When you look at agencies like RDB, RRA, REMA, NEC, RNEC, just to name the few, you'd be hard pressed to find those agencies representative of the true picture of the people of Rwanda. If Kagame can improve on that front, his critics especially outsiders won't have much weight to put behind their rhetoric.
Morgan Matsiko,
Peace out!
- Dear Laura venda,
Thanks for your comments about this article, as a native Rwandan, when I read your comments, I can straight see who you are and what motive push you to make such comments. You are saying that “General Kagame has still a change to enter the history as one of the greatest modern African Leaders”. I don’t understand what you do mean here. Looking on the history, Paul Kagame is guy who didn’t finish his GCSE level and who entered the Joel Kaguta Muveni army etc… Paul Kagame has been promoted by the western leaders such as Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, George Bush, and Rick Warren and so on. Kagame is being promoted not because of his brave being but because of the western interest in the region or some other issue. Some people sing that Paul Kagame has developed the country. The country has been developed by the donation from the western and the RDC wealth stolen by the Dictator Paul Kagame.
Dear Laura Venda, I would like to let you know that Kagame will be remembered as the Hitler of Central Africa. Is him who ordered to shoot down the flacon 50 of the former Juvenal Habyarimana plane and this incident is the main element provoked the Genocide. He killed thousands of Kibeho Hutu Refugees; He killed thousands of Hutu population in eastern Rwanda. He killed thousands of Hutu in north Rwanda; he killed millions of Hutu and Congolese people in RDC. Paul Kagame has been reject in America last time, he recently been reject in Madrid and Belgium.
Dear Laura, when you come to killing, you make me wonder who the killers are and who are the victims? Which genocide are you talking about? Tutsi genocide or Hutu genocide? Kagame support which his westerner friends, made his own definition of the Rwanda genocide. I do believe that there is Tutsi genocide and Hutu genocide and this can conclude that there is only one genocide which can be summarised as Rwanda genocide.
Dear Laura, the only reason Paul Kagame is harshly controlling the media, closing the newspapers, killing the journalists and put other in the prison, is because your president doesn’t want any challenge. He don’t want the Rwandan and others to know the truth about what happened and what is happening in Rwanda now. Mrs Victoire Umuhoza Ingabire is held in prison because is only one Rwandan in country who dared to say in public that the RPF/ RDF has killed Hutu and that the justice need to be made.
Dear Laura the following sentence made by the “Rwanda Briefing”, Four men is write: “The Tutsi minority cannot hope to impose their will on the Hutu majority forever, the military victory of Hutu insurgency could, in turn, conceivably lead to the genocide of remaining Tutsi population of Rwanda" . Former President, Pasteur Bizimungu before overflown from the presidency to prison has mentioned the same and I am agree with all of them. It is true, the majority Hutu is oppressed by the Tutsi minority and if nothing is done soon or later the Hutu will take up the arms and fight for their freedom. Remember this has happened again in early sixties, by what the history call the Hutu revolution.
Dear Laura, in Rwanda there is no reconciliation. There is only what I can call “one way reconciliation” where the Hutu are obliged to ask the forgiveness from the Tutsi. In your informal reconciliation, can you mention that the Hutu has been killed and that the Tutsi are responsible for the killing of these died Hutu? Are you willing to build a memory of these killed Hutu? Are you willing to put to justice the people who committed this killing? Are you going to treat equally all the orphans and windows without looking the ethnicity origin? Shame on you Laura who is saying that there is reconciliation in Rwanda. I can title this kind of reconciliation as “Reconciliation according to RPF”.
Laura for my conclusion, I can say that it look like you are one of this government leader who is trying to defend your government or you are fanatic of this government as Bill Clinton and Tony Blain do or you are not a Rwanda or you are only a simple ignorant.
Dear chris1432, physically, there is a difference between hutu and tutsi even if sometimes you can see some tutsi who look like hutu and some hutu who look like tutsi, this because of the inter-marriage. During 1994, the hutu militia knew who tutsi was and who tutsi was. When RPF was committing killing towards hutu, they knew who hutu was and who tutsi was. Please don’t be naïve. I can agree with you that sometimes there is a special case where some hutu look like tutsi and some tutsi look like hutu and I repeat that this is a special case. If you are saying that there is no ethnicity in Rwanda, so forget what you do call “TUTSI Genocide”.
Dear chris1432, do you want to explain to me that the real democracy is to put in prison the entire political opposition leader? To close all the independent newspapers, to kill Journalists and kill them? Do want to say that the real democracy to force people to go to - Recommend? (1)
- Dear chris1432, do you want to explain to me that the real democracy is to put in prison the entire political opposition leader? To close all the independent newspapers, to kill Journalists and kill them? Do want to say that the real democracy to force people to go to vote? Do you mean that the real democracy is to hold the people who challenge the government with their different opinion like Mushayidi Deogratias? Killing innocent people like Major Cyiza, Assiel Kabera,… the list is too long. What is the democracy according to you? Hum.
Dear Damaisibo, Paul Kagame and his government is super liar. Steve Kinzer may be having been victim of kagame lies and he may know the truth. Dr Alison Desforge used to be a strong supporter for Kigali regime, but knowing the truth she became the enemy of Kagame, as she was wondering is Rwanda history of genocide can be rewritten. Two years before she passed away, she was banned to enter on the Rwanda territory. Dear Damaisibo, wait and see the number of people who are knowing the real truth of Rwanda genocide is growing quickly and the activists are being born like mushrooms. In Kinyarwanda there is a say “Ukuri kuratinda ariko ntiguhera”, which I can try to translate in English as soon or later the hidden truth will be known.
I don’t see any multi political parties in Rwanda, any why RPF hurried to make political parties forum? Why not to hurry to build a strong institutions, strong and real reconciliation. The real opposition parties are held in prison. You are saying that these four men have bought a hotel? Hum… Kagame has two modern plane each one cost around USD 50,000,000 and plus USD 30,000,000 each one for the installation of the anti-missile. Who own the Rwandan embassy in UK and the embassy staffs accommodations? Who own different houses in urethrae? Hum… how much is the kagame salary, three times the salary of UK primary minister. These four men did not mention any insult to Paul Kagame unless the truth is what you call insult.
Dear Morgan38, I think it is in Kagame and all Rwandan for Kagame to listen to not only the four men but to all the opposition political leaders, to the National and International journalists who criticize his way of ruling. To put in prison whoever you don’t share the same vision or opinion is not a solution but a dictatorship ruling. Morgan38, please don’t say that you are impartial in your comments. You are a real kagame supporter. Some people do not look far and wider enough. In Burundi one day the government has refused to speak to what it was considering as the enemy. Former president Cyprien Ntaryamira suggested the dialogue with these people and he was thrown away by the tutsi dominated army in Burundi, and what happened finally? The government find out that there is no other option to get to the lasting peace without dialogue with what were considered as the enemy. Morgan38, remember that to be charged by kagame regime is not enough to make you a real sinner. What is make me more annoyed is every time to justify kagame bad doing by exposing the development he made, it is true but where the fund to develop the country come from? Some is stolen in Congo after more that six millions people killed by rwanda troop, other are from the international aid.
Dear Makaraj, do you like someone because is supporting the kagame regime? Do you hate someone because of his position or because he has a different opinion? Who is confused you or Stephen Kinzer? I don’t know either you or Stephen but what I do know is what he is saying is right. I hope that you are not one of the Rwandan leaders otherwise, I am sure that between you and kagame there is no difference. Kagame regime is using too much money to find the lobbies all around the world and these lobbies are trying to do all they can make the propaganda that the four mentioned men are working with the FDLR? Dear Makaraj, who is the genocidaire and who is not? Or do you mean the genocide according to kagame regime? It is time to start to understand that the propaganda and lies have to stop. Till when you will continue to cover up the truth or till when you will continue to pay the money to your lobbies or some news agencies to continue to spread the lies and disinformation? You are mentioning the same UN who failed to stop the killing of the tutsi? Do you mean the same one who put in box the four different reports about the RPF killing? Do you mean the same UN who refused to renew the contract of Carla Del Ponte while she was the general prosecutor for the international tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha Tanzania because she has been asked to stop the investigation on the RPF killing and the plane shot down? Please do forget the UN. Rwanda regime is feeling that its lobbies and financial aid will remain forever, the rwanda regime that the hutu will remain quite forever, day by day the number of people who are know the true image of kagame regime and the truth about rwanda genocide is incr
- Rwanda regime is feeling that its lobbies and financial aid will remain forever, the rwanda regime that the hutu will remain quite forever, day by day the number of people who are know the true image of kagame regime and the truth about rwanda genocide is increasing significantly. Please do build more schools, hospitals to use as the explanation and excuse when been asked about democracy and human rights abuse. Please be realistic, Kagame is more corrupt than anyone else, what about the two very expensive plane he bought, where did he get money from? How about his salary? You are saying about the presidency election? It is a real game and I was in Rwanda during this time and I have seen how it happened. Kigali regime has wasted the public money which should be used to build the public infrastructures.
My conclusion is that I do appreciate this article as it shows me how the Rwandan reacts to their criticism. I can see some are willing even if to insult Stephen and I wish I can see this people in the real debate. Before the invasion of the RPF to Rwanda, the central Africa never knew any such massacres and agonies. Kagame is the ever president who has killed many politicians, human activists, journalists and people. Kigali regime always justify their bad doing by the development and this is a big no sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
I believe he will be remembered as a great leader, because already he is braving the tides of pressure and speaking up for what, not only he, but his nation and people believe.
I dont think the zero-tolerance for genocide denial, inciting public disorder and discrimination are at all over the top. People must remember that Rwanda is a nation that has experienced Genocide and ethnic based violence at a brutal level. The fact that there is peace and reconciliation, let alone the massive economic and social development under-way, is not pure coincidence.
Media, for example, was a terribly misused tool by Militia during the Genocide, it is of course imperative therefore for the Government to ensure that it is never used to incite hatred or violence of this sort again. One can also surely understand the delicacy and sensitivity that the people of this country must feel. Why would people impose on them the freedom for others to basically rub salt into wounds that are still very fresh.
This is not to say that Media should be restricted, Rwanda, like all democratic states recognize freedom of opinion and expression, but at the same time, their laws punish any abuse of freedom when it is used for inciting people to discrimination, hatred, violence and defamation.
“Rwanda Briefing”, co-written by the Four convicted men you mentioned, as you said wrote “The Tutsi minority cannot hope to impose their will on the Hutu majority forever, the military victory of hutu insurgency could, in turn, conceivably lead to the genocide of remaining tutsi population of Rwanda" Basically what this is saying is that that the majority Hutu is being oppressed by the Tutsi minority and that in order to change such a situation, the Hutu will take up arms to overthrow the Tutsi state.
I find it really sad how such statements are not recognised for the severity in which they oppose reconciliation and peace in the country. A nation that has bent over backwards to heal its self when no one was around, that has moved forward to leave difference and discrimination behind. How can the president listen to advice of someone who clearly goes against the very spirit or the country?
Of course we must all listen and be attentive to the criticism made about us. However, if we took all of it to heart..I doubt any of us would be where we wished to be. I don't think the issue is so much with the President listening to his Critics...I think the issue is the Critics start listening to the people...to the people of Rwanda. From what I see there is development, Investment, Freedom, Food security, Peace and much more....why are these not the topics of discussion/?
A democracy is not simple defined by the number of political parties, but rather from the elected party being one chosen and representative of the people. A party fulfilling its promises to the nation and serving it according to that which it has called for. As far as I can see, the Rwandan Government is striving to do just that...