Rwanda frustrates Ingabire’s trial

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

From Rwanda Nkunda

Rwanda frustrates Ingabire’s trial
It’s been more than a year of pain and anguish since Rwandan opposition leader Victoire Ingabire was arrested. The first arrest was made on May 24th 2010 and she was subsequently placed under house arrest. Even without clear evidence the police detained her again on the 15th of October the same year. Now, the Rwanda prosecution having failed to give her a speedy and fair trial is turning the blame on her. The Rwandan media claims that Ingabire is responsible for delaying her own case. The cynically implied message being that Ingabire enjoys detention.

On the 24th of June, the New Times released an op-ed titled “Victoire [Ingabire] should not Rush us”. It quoted the Rwandan prosecutor, Martin Ngoga as saying, "If these countries send us the information tomorrow, then we can start the case tomorrow, if it takes longer, we will wait, but from the feedback we have received, we are sure all information will trickle in." He was being open to the fact that Rwanda did not have enough evidence against Ingabire. Yet the government continued to detain her.

Interestingly, the Rwandan government is turning around to place the blame on Ingabire. According to Sunny Ntayombwa, a New Times columnist, Ingabire wants another five months in jail. The piece which is literally aimed at mocking her, insinuates that she is enjoying staying in a Rwandan cell with “a private shower, toilet, a comfy bed and a window”; as if to suggest that Ingabire was homeless before her imprisonment.

In an interview that Radio Netherlands Worldwide held with Ingabire’s lawyers, it emerges that the trial will be postponed but not for reasons given by Rwanda. First, the lawyers accuse the prosecution for failing to consult with them when setting the trial dates. This is important because two of the lawyers are British nationals, living in Britain. Another problem has to do with translation. Yes despite the government of Rwanda’s switch from French to English, they still conduct trials in Kinyarwanda and provide no English translations. Ingabire’s lawyers do not understand Kinyarwanda and have to translate over 2000 pages.

It’s been clear since day one that the Rwandan government wants to silence Ingabire ; and they are now using the legal system to achieve that end.

Related articles

• Rwandans in UK 'threatened by hitman' (bbc.co.uk)
• UK police: Rwandan government threatens exiles (foxnews.com)
• UK police: Rwandan government threatens exiles (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• FACTBOX-Key political risks to watch in Rwanda (reuters.com)
• Is Rwanda's Hero Becoming Its Oppressor? (time.com)
• FACTBOX-Key political risks to watch in Rwanda (reuters.com)
• British Police Warn Rwandan Dissidents of Threat (nytimes.com)
• UK police: Rwandan government threatens exiles (sfgate.com)
• Uganda defends repatriation of 1,700 Rwandans (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• You: British police warn Rwandan exiles in the UK their life is in danger from Rwandan government (washingtonpost.com)

State Department War Crimes Chief Stephen Rapp’s cover-up of U.S. War Crimes in Rwanda Genocide

Daya Gamage – Foreign News Desk Asian Tribune Washington, DC. 29April

 

The April 28 report in The New York Times captioned ‘American Lawyer is Barred from Rwanda Tribunal Work’ caught the eye of this Online Daily’s Foreign News Desk which informed the readers that Peter Erlinder, a law professor in an American university, has been barred by the UN from working at the international tribunal for Rwanda based in the Tanzanian city of Arusha. He refused to travel to Arusa for fear of his life.
He said that he is a target of the Rwandan government and has even received threats while on lecture tours in the U.S.
Prof. Erlinder charges the current Paul Kahame regime of Rwanda of targeted assassinations of those who were accusing the Rwandan leader of genocide - 1990 through 1994 - in which one million people were killed. He and others who have given a long list of victims in many worldwide cities attributed those assassinations to the current Rwandan leadership of Paul Kagame.
One of the mysterious deaths known to the Asian Tribune network was a UN professional who worked to unearth the evidence of the Rwandan genocide – a Sri Lankan Shyamlal Rajapaksa who happened to be a first cousin of the present president of Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksa. His killing in August 2009 in the Tanzanian city of Arusha where the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was headquartered is still a mystery.
Professor Peter Erlinder has come out with an array of evidence and interpretations of the direct culpability of the current Rwandan president Paul Kagame in the Rwandan genocide, how he and his colleagues were given military training in the U.S., how Kagame as the head of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), a proxy force of the Pentagon according to Erlinder, invaded Rwanda to unleash a genocide with tacit approval of the United States, and in the following years how the United States took covert and overt steps to cover up its involvement in the Rwandan mass massacre.
It is here that Ambassador-at Large Stephen Rapp’s name emerge. Mr. Rapp is currently the head of the Office of War Crimes Issues of the U.S. Department of State, and in his previous position as the chief prosecutor of the Rwandan genocide, according to Peter Elinder, and many other investigators, Mr. Rapp was one of the main who was involved in the cover up of US involvement in the Rwandan Genocide.
The Asian Tribune readers may recall that Stephen Rapp in his capacity as the State Department’s War Crimes Issues chief who prepared and released a document in October 2009 with ambiguous evidence which accused Sri Lanka of violating international humanitarian laws during the final (Jan-May 2009) stage of the battle with separatist/terrorist Tamil Tigers (LTTE).
In October 1990, the Ugandan army and the Rwandan Patriotic Front/Army (RPF) led by Major General Paul Kagame invaded Rwanda. The guerrillas who violated international laws and committed massive war crimes were backed by Britain, Belgium, the United States and Israel, according to many investigators and researchers. By July 1994, the RPF completed its coup d'etat and consolidated its power in Rwanda.
On April 6, 1994, the governments of Rwanda and Burundi were decapitated when the plane carrying the two presidents and top military staff was shot down over Kigali, Rwanda's capital. The well-planned assassinations of Juvenal Habyarimana and Cyprien Ntaryamira sparked a massive escalation of warfare that is falsely portrayed as the result of meaningless tribal savagery. These assassinations were major war crimes, and the RPF and UPDF were responsible, but almost every attempt to honestly investigate the double presidential assassinations has been blocked by the U.S. and its allies.
A frequent contributor to a think tank called Global Research, Prof. Elinder outlined the United States endeavor in the cover up of its own culpability in the Rwandan genocide.
He wrote: “The July 9, 2009 New York Times reported that the Obama administration had selected Stephen Rapp to replace the Bush administration Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, Pierre Prosper. Rapp began his international career at the UN Security Council Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in 2001, while Carla Del Ponte was Chief Rwanda Prosecutor. Rapp’s nomination just a few months after Del Ponte’s of her memoir of her years as Chief UN Prosecutor, Madam Prosecutor: Confronting Humanity’s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity was published in English.
“Del Ponte’s book describes in detail the systematic U.S.-initiated cover-up of crimes by the current Rwandan government, a U.S. ally, committed during the Rwanda Genocide, and how she was removed from her ICTR (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda) position in 2003 by U.S. Ambassador Prosper, himself, when she refused to cooperate with the U.S.-initiated “cover-up.”
According to Del Ponte, her ICTR Office had the evidence to prosecute Kagame for “touching-off” the Rwanda Genocide by ordering the assassination of Rwanda’s former President Juvenal, Habyarimana, long before 2003. She also details the dozens of massacre sites, involving thousands of victims, for which the current Rwandan President, Paul Kagame and his military, should be prosecuted. The well-publicized canard, that “the identity of the assassins of Habyarimana is unknown” is a bald-faced lie, well -known by ICTR Prosecutors, according to Ms. Del Ponte, writes Prof. Elinder in Global Research.
Two years after Del Ponte was removed from office, Stephen Rapp became “Chief” of ICTR Prosecutions with access to all of the evidence known to Ms. Del Ponte, and more that has been made public in the past few years. During his four years at the ICTR, Rapp like Del Ponte, also was in a position to prosecute Kagame and members of the current government of Rwanda but, not ONE member of Kagame’s military has been prosecuted at the ICTR, to date…and the “cover-up” revealed by Del Ponte, continues today. And, unlike, Ms. Del Ponte, who was fired by the U.S., Mr. Rapp was first rewarded with an appointment as Chief Prosecutor at the U.S.-funded Sierra Leone Tribunal and now, a coveted ambassadorship by the Obama administration as the chief of the Office of War Crimes Issues at the State Department.
Mr. Rapp, for reasons known and unknown to the Asian Tribune, used ambiguous and conflicting information and data to accuse Sri Lanka of violating International Humanitarian Laws (IHL) in a report released to the US Congress in October 2009.
Former Chief ICTR Prosecutor Del Ponte Details War Crimes “Cover-up”
According to Del Ponte, in May 2003 she was called to Washington D.C. by Prosper (ironically, also a former ICTR prosecutor with knowledge of Kagame’s crimes) who informed her that the U.S. would remove her UN post, if she carried through with her publicly announced plans to indict Kagame and members of his government and military. According to Del Ponte, when she refused to knuckle-under because “she worked for the UN, - not for the U.S” Prosper told her ICTR career was over. In October Del Ponte was replaced by a US-approved ICTR prosecutor, Hassan Abubacar Jallow, who elevated Rapp to “Chief of Prosecution” two years later.
ICTR Trials: More Evidence of Rwanda Crimes Cover-Up
Del Ponte’s revelations are not the only evidence that a U.S.-initiated “war crimes cover-up” at the ICTR is creating impunity for crimes committed by the Kagame and his military. On September 10, 1994 memo in evidence in the ICTR Military-1 Trial confirms that U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher was informed that Kagame’s troops were killing “10,000 civilians a month” in military-style, according to an investigation funded by US Agency for International Development (USAID). And, as early as January 1997, a team made up of Chief ICTR Investigative Prosecutor and former Australian Crown Prosecutor Michael Hourigan; former FBI Agent James Lyons; and former UN-Chief of Military Intelligence in Rwanda, Amadou Deme; reported Louise Arbour, Ms. Del Ponte’s predecessor, that Kagame should be prosecuted for assassinating the previous president. Arbour scuttled the investigation, suppressed the report and disbanded the investigative team.
Shortly, thereafter, Arbour was elevated to Canada’s Supreme Court and has sunsequently been chosen to head the International Crisis Group.
Louise Arbour as the head of the International Crisis Group released a report in May 2010 accusing Sri Lanka of war crimes said: “Evidence gathered by the International Crisis Group suggests that these months saw tens of thousands of Tamil civilian men, women, children and the elderly killed, countless more wounded, and hundreds of thousands deprived of adequate food and medical care, resulting in more deaths. This evidence also provides reasonable grounds to believe the Sri Lankan security forces committed war crimes with top government and military leaders potentially responsible.”
Former ICTR Prosecutor Rapp Complicit in Cover-up
But, even though Arbour suppressed the “Hourigan Report,” Del Ponte, Rapp and other ICTR prosecutors certainly knew about it, because ICTR judges had ordered Del Ponte’s Office to release the “Hourigan report” to a defense team as early as the year 2000, a year before Rapp began his ICTR work, and three years before Del Ponte was fired by Prosper.
Prof. Peter Elinder says “But….to date, not one indictment has been issued against Kagame by the ICTR Prosecutor.”
Consequences of the ICTR Cover-up of Kagame’s Crimes
The tragic consequence of the failure to prosecute Kagame at the ICTR, from 1994 to date, is that Kagame has been free to invade the Congo in 1996 and 1998, and to occupy part of the eastern Congo many-times larger than Rwanda, to this day. No less than four UN Security Council-commissioned Panel of Experts Report(s) on the Illegal Exploitation of the DR Congo (2001, 2002, 2003 and December 2008) have detailed the massive rape of the Congo’s resources that has brought vast riches to Kagame and his inner circle.
While Rapp was ICTR Senior Trial Attorney in 2003, Kagame was effectively elected President-for-Life with 95% of the vote, after banning opposition parties and jailing opponents, in “a climate of intimidation” according to EU observers.
“Chief of Prosecutions” Rapp Withheld Exculpatory Evidence
In February 2009, the ICTR issued its Judgment the Military-1 case, that main case at the ICTR, in which Mr. Rapp personally appeared for the Prosecution. Although massive violence did occur in Rwanda, the court certainly recognized that blaming only one side WAS a falsehood, when it acquitted all of the “architects of the killing machine” (as Mr. Rapp called the defendants in court) of conspiracy or planning to kill civilians. The highest ranking military-officer was acquitted of all charges.
And, although it is now clear from Ms. Del Ponte’s memoirs that Mr. Rapp had the evidence to clear the ICTR defendants of the assassination charges and only the losing side has been blamed for all crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. Simply put, Mr. Rapp and other ICTR prosecutors have withheld evidence that would be beneficial to the defense, contrary to Tribunal Rules; have prosecuted defendants for crimes they knew were committed by Kagame’s forces; and, have created a system of “judicial impunity” that has permitted Kagame to kill millions in the eastern Congo.
It is in this context that Prof. Peter Elinder writing to Global Security questioned President Obama’s wisdom in appointing Stephen Rapp as the head of the Office of War Crimes Issue at the State Department in this manner: “This “inconvenient-African-truth,” raises an uncomfortable question regarding President Obama’s nomination of Mr. Rapp, in the first place: Are Obama and his advisors ignorant of the public record regarding Rapp’s complicity in the ICTR Cover-up….or do they just not give a damn?”
The U.S. Culpability in Rwanda Genocide
Aimable Mugara in a piece to OpEdNews put it this way: “In 1990, General Kagame who was the Chief of Military Intelligence of Uganda and head of the Rwandan Patriotic Forces (RPF) led a violent invasion of Rwanda from Uganda, with the approval and support (financial, military and political) of the United States government. This violent war changed the landscape of that region forever. By landscape, I also mean the number of mass graves that dot every of inch of that region now. The two final years of President Bush the father, during which his American government supported the murderous gang of General Kagame and Yoweri Museveni resulted in the deaths of many innocent Rwandan and Ugandan civilians. During those two years, there are thousands who lost their lives at the hands of General Kagame's soldiers and Yoweri Museveni's soldiers. But this was nothing compared to the more than 6 millions of civilians that would later die under Bill Clinton's 8 year reign, with American money, American weapons and American political support.”
In a September 30, 2010 New York Times article titled ‘Dispute Over U.N. Report Evokes Rwandan Déjà Vu’, it is mentioned how in the fall of 1994, a United Nations investigation discovered that General Kagame's forces had killed tens of thousand of innocent civilians that year. That under pressure from Bill Clinton's government, the United Nations was forced not to publish that report. In that New York Times article, they talk about how the 1994 UN report describes General Kagame's soldiers "rounding up civilians and methodically killing unarmed men, women and children."
“Kagame received his military education under the Pentagon’s Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) at the Command and General Staff College of Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, beginning in 1990,” wrote John E. Peck of the Association of African Scholars (2002). “His sidekick, Lt. Col. Frank Rusagara, got his JCET schooling at the U.S. Naval Academy in Monterey, California. Both were dispatched to Rwanda in time to oversee the RPF’s takeover in 1994. Far from being an innocent bystander, the Washington Post revealed on July 12, 1998 that the United States not only gave Kagame $75 million in military assistance, but also sent Green Berets to train Kagame’s forces (as well as their Ugandan rebel allies) in low intensity conflict (LIC) tactics. Pentagon subcontractor Ronco, masquerading as a de-mining company, also smuggled more weapons to RPF fighters in flagrant violation of UN sanctions. All of this U.S. largesse was put to lethal effect in the ethnic bloodbath that is still going on.”
In 2009 published Edward S. Herman and David Peterson's investigative/research book The Politics of Genocide said: “The United States and its allies worked hard in the early 1990s to weaken the Rwandan government, forcing the abandonment of many of the economic and social gains from the social revolution of 1959, thereby making the Habyarimana government less popular, and helping to reinforce the Tutsi minority’s economic power.9 Eventually, the RPF was able to achieve a legal military presence inside Rwanda, thanks to a series of ceasefires and other agreements. These agreements led to the Arusha Peace Accords of August 1993, pressed upon the Rwandan government by the United States and its allies, called for the “integration” of the armed forces of Rwanda and the RPF, and for a “transitional,” power-sharing government until national elections could be held in 1995.10 These Peace Accords positioned the RPF for its bloody overthrow of a relatively democratic coalition government, and the takeover of the Rwandan state by a minority dictatorship.”
The U.S. State Department’s Office of War Crimes Issues chief Stephen Rapp knew this entire Rwandan episode, the U.S. interests in Paul Kagame, the UN concealment of the 1994 report at the behest of the Clinton administration, the U.S. military assistance to Kagame’s Rwandan Patriotic Front and the entire exercise of the ‘Rwandan cover up’ to conceal the U.S. culpability in the Rwandan genocide when he focused his attention elsewhere; Sri Lanka.
- Asian Tribune -

The Politics of Genocide How Victims of the Rwandan Become Guilty

Noam Chomsky Edward S. Herman

Imperialism, US Politics/Economy

In this impressive book, Edward S. Herman and David Peterson examine the uses and abuses of the word “genocide.” They argue persuasively that the label is highly politicized and that in the United States it is used by the government, journalists, and academics to brand as evil those nations and political movements that in one way or another interfere with the imperial interests of U.S. capitalism. Thus the word “genocide” is seldom applied when the perpetrators are U.S. allies (or even the United States itself), while it is used almost indiscriminately when murders are committed or are alleged to have been committed by enemies of the United States and U.S. business interests. One set of rules applies to cases such as U.S. aggression in Vietnam, Israeli oppression of Palestinians, Indonesian slaughter of so-called communists and the people of East Timor, U.S. bombings in Serbia and Kosovo, the U.S. war of “liberation” in Iraq, and mass murders committed by U.S. allies in Rwanda and the Republic of Congo. Another set applies to cases such as Serbian aggression in Kosovo and Bosnia, killings carried out by U.S. enemies in Rwanda and Darfur, Saddam Hussein, any and all actions by Iran, and a host of others.

With its careful and voluminous documentation, close reading of the U.S. media and political and scholarly writing on the subject, and clear and incisive charts, The Politics of Genocide is both a damning condemnation and stunning exposé of a deeply rooted and effective system of propaganda aimed at deceiving the population while promoting the expansion of a cruel and heartless imperial system.

In this brilliant exposé of great power’s lethal industry of lies, Edward Herman and David Peterson defend the right of us all to a truthful historical memory.

—John Pilger, journalist and filmmaker

Why so much talk in recent years about ‘genocide’ as a major threat? Perhaps because, while extremely rare, genocide represents an intentional evil in comparison to which the far more frequent massacres committed by ‘our’ side fade into innocent blunders. Herman and Peterson describe the double standards used to distinguish evil ‘genocide’ from the slaughter wrought by the United States and its allies as mere collateral damage.

—Diana Johnstone
Author, Fool’s Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions

Destined to become a grim classic, The Politics of Genocide is an antidote to the stultifying doublethink of U.S. news media. The authors document a baseline of purposed journalism so subservient to power that it has routinely perpetuated ‘the normalization of anything the U.S. government chose to do in the realm of foreign policy, regardless of its brutality and criminality.’ Concise and devastating, this book turns the media wallpaper inside-out, debunking the most sacred conceits while showing us the intellectual and moral rot of Washington’s political structures. Herman and Peterson will make readers yearn for a political culture that embraces a single standard of human rights instead of selectively wielding such words as ‘massacre’ and ‘genocide.’ In the end, we’re left with an enhanced understanding of what ‘responsibility to protect’ really means—and how far we have to go before the lofty rhetoric of U.S. foreign policy resembles its realities.

—Norman Solomon
Author, War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death

The authors brilliantly expose the policy of double standards that is at the root of the ‘politics of genocide.’ The well-documented case studies reveal the largely hypocritical nature of today’s establishment discourse on global justice. The book is a must-read for today’s self-declared ‘humanitarian’ intellectuals who are blind vis-à-vis a political agenda that has corrupted the project of international criminal justice.

—Hans Köchler, Professor of Philosophy, University of Innsbruck
Author, Global Justice or Global Revenge: International Criminal Justice at the Crossroads
President, International Progress Organization

The Politics of Genocide presents careful research to dismantle the hideous notion that there are worthy and unworthy victims of genocide. The authors help us understand how U.S. ‘exceptionalism’ has brutally and lethally punished people. This book will help readers stop accepting what Dorothy Day referred to as ‘this filthy, rotten system.

—Kathy Kelly, founder, Voices for Creative Nonviolence
Author, Other Lands Have Dreams: From Baghdad to Pekin Prison

Herman and Peterson convincingly demonstrate the U.S./NATO imperial designs lurking behind claims of ‘humanitarian intervention;’ the selective prosecutions carried out by all international criminal tribunals to date; and the calculated use of emotionally-laden accusations of ‘genocide.’ At a deeper level, this book presents a challenge to Western media and human rights activists to recognize the ‘impunity for the powerful’ regime that they have assisted in creating, through uncritical acceptance of the ‘human rights’ narrative promulgated by U.S. foreign-policy elites. It is an enormous contribution to the ongoing foreign policy/human rights discussion.

—Peter Erlinder, Professor of Law, William Mitchell College of Law
Director, International Humanitarian Law Institute

Edward Herman and David Peterson are genuine independent thinkers, who relentlessly expose unwanted realities behind some of the largest atrocities of our times. They dissect the shameful distortions behind the favored narratives about massacres, ranging from the infamous to those scarcely known to the outside world. Their work is a valuable corrective to the ideologically sanitized output of those who manipulate genocide and its variants to serve the interests of power.

—Steven Fake, co-author, The Scramble for Africa: Darfur—Intervention and the USA

A riveting and penetrating study of how genocide is invented and manipulated by the state-media nexus. Decisively exposes the yawning gap between Washington’s rhetoric and practice. Cuts through the minefields of shibboleths and propaganda. Meticulously researched and documented, The Politics of Genocide stands to endure as a classic.

—David Barsamian, founder, Alternative Radio

Though an impassioned and modern lexicon centered on accusations of genocide, massacres, and human rights abuses has become the lingua franca of the U.S. political and media elite, David Peterson and Edward Herman forcefully debunk any notion that such word-mongering signals an actual shift in Washington’s imperial agenda. Rather, in their clearly argued and carefully delivered blow against establishment double standards in portraying ‘their’ versus ‘our’ atrocities, the authors systematically unmask the government and media’s supposedly newfound humanitarian concerns as new bottles for old wine. In doing so, The Politics of Genocide lucidly exposes those who exploit the victims of atrocities everywhere for U.S. reasons of state—regrettably, no small category. It deserves to be widely read.

—Kevin Funk, co-author, The Scramble for Africa: Darfur—Intervention and the USA

Edward S. Herman is professor emeritus of finance at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania and has written extensively on economics, political economy, and the media. Among his books are Corporate Control, Corporate Power; The Real Terror Network; The Political Economy of Human Rights (with Noam Chomsky); and Manufacturing Consent (with Noam Chomsky).
David Peterson is an independent journalist and researcher based in Chicago.

Related articles

• Kan. man accused in Rwandan genocide faces trial (sfgate.com)
• Kan. man accused in Rwandan genocide faces trial (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Rwandan Genocide Trial Set to Begin in Wichita Kansas (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
• HuffPost Greatest Person Of The Day: Tibi Galis On Preventing Genocide (huffingtonpost.com)
• Turks increasingly commemorate Armenian massacre (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Kimmy Cakes Covers Leading Egyptian Fashion Mag And Recognizes Armenian Genocide (bossip.com)
• Armenian Americans React to Obama's Broken Promise (blogs.abcnews.com)
• Herman Cain: 'It's Not Planned Parenthood - No, It's Planned Genocide' (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• 1 in 4 children in U.S. raised by a single parent (ctv.ca)
• The Story of Rwandan Genocide - II (talesoftwonations.wordpress.com)

Rwanda Genocide: Honoring the Dead Without Honoring the Lies

Written by Ann Garisson for the Global Research

On April 7 the United Nations began its annual commemoration of the anniversary of what we know as the 1994 Rwanda Genocide, when as many as one million Rwandans were slaughtered in 100 days.

The RPF Soldiers Cutting Genital parts of a Hutu Refugee in DRC 1997

The ceremonies raise several questions for all those who contest the received history of the Rwanda Genocide: How to honor Rwanda’s dead without honoring the lies?

And, how to honor six million more Congolese dead, but not commemorated, in the ongoing aftermath of the Rwanda Genocide when Rwanda’s war crossed its western border into neighboring D.R. Congo?

Though both tell the received history of the Rwanda Genocide; the BBC and Wikipedia mark its outset not on April 7th, as the UK, UN, and Rwandan officialdom do, but on April 6th, when, in 1994, the assassination of Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana and Burundi President Cyprien Ntaryamira triggered the ensuing panic and violence that grew into the horror of the next 100 days and beyond. The two presidents were flying home from a conference between east and central African leaders in Tanzania, held to discuss ways to end violence between ethnic Hutus and Tutsis from Burundi and Rwanda, when their plane was shot out of the sky over Rwanda’s capitol, Kigali.

On the evening of April 6, 1994, the BBC reported:

The deaths of the presidents, both Hutus, look likely to make the situation in both states [Rwanda and Burundi] worse. Heavy fighting has already been reported around the presidential palace in Rwanda after news of the deaths spread. News agencies in Kigali said explosions have been rocking the city but it was not immediately clear who was involved in the fighting.

Carla del Ponte, lead prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals on Rwanda and Yugoslavia, in her book “Madame Prosecutor; Confrontations with Humanity’s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity,” tells the story of how she was fired by the UN after announcing her intent to prosecute sitting Rwandan President Paul Kagame for the assassination of Presidents Habyarimana and Ntaryamira that triggered the genocide.

The received history says that former President Bill Clinton and the rest of the world stood by and let extremist Hutus murder up to a million Rwandan Tutsis and moderate Hutus until current Rwandan President Paul Kagame and his Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) army arrived in Kigali to end the killing, restore order and begin a reconciliation process. Volumes of interviews, testimonies, mass-grave exhumations and identifications as well as statistical analysis by five different teams of investigators, tell a far more complex story that includes a psychosis-induced mass-murder. Five teams of investigators came to varying sets of conclusions which University of Michigan Professor Allan Stam explained in Coming to a New Understanding of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide. Four out of five teams concluded that the vast majority of those who died were Hutus.

French is Dead, Long Live English!

Some say that Clinton could have stopped it with a phone call because the US and UK were backing Kagame’s RPF Tutsi Army, whose advance from the north after the assassinations stirred waves of panic and consequent violence in southern Rwanda.

But, whether he could have stopped it that easily or not, and/or at what point, the Rwanda Genocide ultimately represented the triumph of the US, the UK, and their allies over France in a fierce scramble for Central Africa’s vast natural resources, including the dense mineral wealth in eastern D.R. Congo.

President Paul Kagame, an English speaking Rwandan refugee in Uganda from the age of two, rose to become an officer in Uganda’s Army, then Intelligence Chief, then RPF Commander, after training at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where future generals learn to plan invasions.

The RPF army invaded Rwanda across its northern border with Uganda in 1990 and arrived victorious in Kigali at the end of the 100 days following the Habyarimana and Ntaryamira assassinations.

Though reported to have stood by during the genocide, the US moved in to build a large military base in Rwanda almost as soon as the RPF triumphed, as reported in the New York Times, July 27, 1994:

The United States is preparing to send troops to help establish a large base in Rwanda to bolster the relief effort in the devastated African nation, Administration officials said today.

(Administration officials’ claim that relief was the base’s purpose is disputed by those who dispute the history of the genocide.)

All Rwandans share the native African language, Kinyarwanda, “Rwanda” for short, but before the English-speaking RPF victory, urban, educated Rwandans also spoke French, the language of the dominant European power and thus the language in which Rwanda conducted international business.

The new RPF rulers declared English the language of business, causing enormous stress and dislocation to French-speaking Rwandan professionals, and in November 2009, the Commonwealth Heads of Government welcomed Rwanda, a former member of the Commonwealth’s equivalent, La Francophonie, as a member.

Shortly thereafter, “French is dead; long live English in Rwanda!” a news report from the English stream of French-based satellite channel, celebrated the end of 100 years dominance of the French language and French business ties.

Law Professor Peter Erlinder, former National Lawyer’s Guild President, lead defense counsel for the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda, and author of the Rwanda Documents Project, offered these comments on the commemoration of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide:

“Commemorating the ‘Rwandan Genocide’ is certainly a noble goal, but without acknowledging the role of the current Rwandan President Kagame in the assassination of Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi, and the crimes committed by his forces in their 90-day assault to seize power in 1994, whether those crimes are called ‘Genocide’ or ‘Crimes Against Humanity,’ converts a solemn remembrance into a farce of political deception and ‘cover-up, organized by the dominant member of the UN Security Council and Kagame’s most-important backer, the government of the United States.

“Investigating judges in France and Spain have indicted Kagame and his RPF forces. US government and UN documents from 1994 confirm that Kagame’s RPF is guilty of mass-killings during all of 1994, which continue in the eastern Congo to this day. More than 6-million have died as a result of the Kagame-initiated war and violence in Central Africa and the former Chief UN Prosecutor, Carla del Ponte, has concluded that Kagame’s RPF is responsible for crimes that have been charged to the side that lost the Rwandan Civil War between 1990 and 1994.

“In 2009, the four top-military leaders of the vanquished army have been acquitted of planning or conspiring to commit genocide, or any other crimes, in the UN Tribunal.

“Del Ponte has publicly said that she was fired from her UN job by the US in 2003, when she insisted on prosecuting Kagame and the RPF.

“There is much, much more to a ‘genocide remembrance’ than meets the eye even when the UN is involved and history is ignored, or ‘covered-up’ in the interests of superpower geopolitical interests.”

Never again?

This admonition from the web pages of the UN’s 2010 Rwanda Genocide commemoration could not more perfectly describe Rwanda as it is now, under Rwandan President Paul Kagame and his ruling RPF Party:

Warning Signs of Genocide

The Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, working with other genocide experts, has compiled a list of warning signs that could indicate that a community is at risk for genocide or similar atrocities. It includes:

• the country has a totalitarian or authoritarian government where only one group controls power

• the country is at war or there is a lawless environment in which massacres can take place without being quickly noticed or easily documented

The UN is at least good for comic relief, but pretending that these were warning signs of Rwanda’s past, and not its present, does not honor the dead. It honors the lies told by the US, the UK, and the UN to cover their responsibility for the loss of millions of African lives.

Senator Russ Feingold calls for political space in Rwanda

On March 2nd, as grenades exploded in Kigali, and Kagame’s political targets fled the country, Senator Russ Feingold, Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Africa, read the Feingold Statement on the Fragility of Democracy in Africa, into the Congressional Record, calling on President Barack Obama to make human and political rights a condition for the support of the US and other “donor nations” in Africa.

Feingold stressed the urgency of the Rwandan political situation, with presidential election polls approaching in August.

The Africa Faith and Justice Network, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Friends of the Congo, the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative Group, Reporters without Borders, the Committee to Protect Journalists and the Greens/European Free Alliance, have also called for a free and fair election in Rwanda and an end to civil and human rights abuses.

This is advocacy within a very narrow, very contradictory political space, that of Western parliamentary democracy within the larger context of an unsustainable Western scramble for Africa’s energy and mineral resources, driven by the West’s unsustainable, growth-driven culture and economy.

Ann Garrison is an independent journalist and contributor to the San Francisco Bay View, Global Research, Digital Journal, KPFA and KMEC Radio News, and her own blog, Plutocracy Now: the War and Plunder Report. More of her radio/video reports available on YouTube.

Related articles

• Genocide court sentences Rwandan mayor to life (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Genocide court sentences Rwandan mayor to life (foxnews.com)
• Stephen W. Smith: Fables of Rwanda (lrb.co.uk)
• The Story of Rwanda Genocide - I (talesoftwonations.wordpress.com)
• The Story of Rwandan Genocide - II (talesoftwonations.wordpress.com)
• Lawyer asks int'l court to free Rwandan rebel (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Libya Isn't Rwanda (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• FACTBOX-Key political risks to watch in Rwanda (reuters.com)
• From Egypt to African Great Lakes (valensny.wordpress.com)
• You: Rwanda: Kagame's dilemma (search.japantimes.co.jp)

WHO KILLED JUVENAL HABYARIMANA OF RWANDA AND NTARYAMIRA CYPRIEN OF BURUNDI ON 1994?

The late President Cyprien Ntaryamira of Burundi who was assassinated alongside Habyarimana.

We all remember the Rwandan genocide of 1994; however, few of us remember it start with the assasination of president Habyarimana. This research paper, will examine and try to answers questions of why, how and who. In history, there are occurrences that exist only to subsequent events, and the miserable history experienced by Rwandans in the year 1990 is one of them. In this year, structural adjustment policy of both World Bank and International Monetary Fund pushed Rwanda to devaluate its franc by two thirds while at the same time the hutu regime had to raise sharply its military expenditure because the Front Patriotique Rwandais was attacking from Uganda. In addition, the traditional agriculture corps could not generate export revenue any more, because the world market price for coffee bean had plunged. Consequently, Rwanda was in a state of bankruptcy, the social basic services worsen, infant mortality increased, malaria, food shortage, drug trafficking and corruption all reappeared subsequently. This was the situation that Rwandans have had to face until 1994, when Habyarimana’s airplane crashed in his presidential garden, the death of the dictator marked the beginning of self-destruction for all Rwandans.It was the moment for local prophesies to become true; the latter with the complicity of hutu extremists programmed the "final solution" for their tutsi compatriots. This vicious enterprise was like a bomb waiting for the detonation, when the two still non identified soldiers (both French and Belgian military secret services believe they are white European or South African mercenaries, but former American Ambassador D. Shinn disagree, with no further comment) lunched two soil-air missiles of model 16 (SAM 16), it engendered the death of about one million Rwandans’ life, and Habyarimana as the one who played with the fire, was burned.

Before the Crash

In order to better understand who has a better interest on the death of president Habyarimana, it is absolutely necessary to elucidate first of all on the whole issue of war preparation between the government of Rwanda versus the tutsi rebels. Secondly, on the political situation in Rwanda from the beginning of 1990 to 1994, and pressure from Arusha peace accords on the hutu politicians.

The situation for Habyarimana begun to deteriorate in 1986 when the coffee prices fell, the revenue from coffee dropped from 14 billion to 5 billion Rwanda Franc². As the economic situation deteriorate, Rwanda accepted the Structural Adjustment package offered by the World Bank and International Monetary Fond, consequently the social living condition determinate dramatically, and tutsis, as minority carried for the blame. However, at the same moment, another event happened. October first 1990, FPR crossed the Rwanda-Uganda border, overpowered the small local detachment, and headed for the capital Kigali. On October 4, the RPF had advanced a considerable distance into Rwanda but was still forty-five miles from Kigali. At this crucial moment, French lunched Operation Noriît and Zairian president Mobutu send his personal presidential guard to stop the advancement of FPR; the latter had to withdraw (I will explain this event in a closer detail in the FPR section). In February 1993, FPR attacked again from the regions of Byumba and Ruhengeri, north of Rwanda, and stopped at Rulindo, about 30 km north of Kigali. At the moment, they proclaimed a cease-fire. In my view, it was for three reasons. First, they did not know if the French and Zairian will intervene for a second time or not. Secondly, because their attack, they were afraid that other tutsis will become target for extremist hutus.

The invasion of tutsi rebels from Uganda had engendered two subsequent issues.

I. Military Preparation:

The Rwandan military expenditure increased from 1.9% of government budget in 1989 to 7.8% in 1992 ³. The army increased in size from 7,000 troops in 1989 to more than 30,000 by 1994 ⁴. According to a Human Right Watch report ⁵, after having obtained U.S.$6 million worth of arms from Egypt on March 1992, the Rwandan Ministry of Defense took delivery of a further U.S.$5.9 million worth of arms and ammunition from South Africa on October 19, 1992. The March purchase included some 450 Kalashnikov rifles (the report did not show another further data), and the October purchase included 20,000 R-4 rifles. At the time of the March purchase, the Rwandan army also bought two thousand rocket-propelled grenades, which require a significant amount of instruction to use effectively, but no hand grenades; in October they purchased 20,000 hand grenades, which could be used by persons with relatively little training.

II. Emergence of Akazu, the Hutu Extremists

In this war context, Akazu (translate as small house) composed by extremists hutu elite including militaries and bureaucrats form the north-west Rwanda started to organize itself both in terms of political and military force. In terms of politics, although the president Habyarimana was the number one of Akazu, his entourage was tightly controlled by Akazu member under the leadership of his wife, Agathe Habyarimana. The Akazu’s network was known as the "Reseau Zero" or "Zero Network" or "Zero tutsis", the power was so concentrated it was considered as a state within state. In terms of military force, Akazu helped to maintain and train the militiamen including: Reseau Zero, Interhamwes, MRND, CDR.

Time and Events Before the Final Realization of Arusha Accords

• Under the terms of Arusha Accords, a transitional government was due to have been install in Rwanda on April 8^th, a day after the genocide started. The U.N mission installed in the country was due to leave on April 5^th, the day before president Habyarimana’s assassination.
• Under Arusha Accords, the most crucial aspect is the military one. The national army will be composed of 19, 000 men. 60% from FAR and 40% from FPR. And officer positions will be shared be 50/50. The post of chief of staff will attribute to FAR, and chief of staff of gendarmerie to FPR.

Il y est prévu que la future armée nationale comptera 19 000 hommes dont les forces gouvernementales fourniront 60% des effectifs et le FPR 40% ; au niveau des postes de commandement toutefois, du bataillon à l’état-major, la proportion sera de 50-50, avec la pratique du principe de l’alternance : les postes de commandant et de commandant en second ne pourront être occupés par la même force. Le poste de chef d’état-major de l’armée est attribué à un membre des FAR et celui de chef d’état-major de la gendarmerie à un militaire du FPR.⁶

• The new army was be composed by 19,000 soldiers and 6,000 national polices; therefore both forces, the Rwandan army with more than 30,000 soldiers beside of police force, and the RPF with some 20,000 rebel troops would have to demobilize at least half their military personnel ⁷.
• Braeckman ⁸ (1994:189) suggests that on February, 1994, the Belgian Foreign Affaire minister Willy Claes told him: "Il est minuit moins cinq (it is five to midnight)". In March, Defense Minister Leo Delacroix of Belgium repeated "prenez une initiative, prenez la tres vite (take an initiative, take it very quickly)". At the same period, Boutros Boutros Ghali, a long time friend of Habyarimana then Secretary General of the U.N threaten the latter that if Rwanda will not implement the Accords, the U.N will withdrew the U.N peacekeepers and terminate MINUAR( Mission des Nations Unies pour le Rwanda) mission which cost about 750,000 dollar per day.

As far as Rwandan hutu regime was concerned, at the same moment, a political struggle accompanied with assassinations was going on in Kigali (FPR could be the responsible).

• In May 18, 1993 Emmanuel Gapyisi, an important leader of MDR (Mouvement Démocratique Républicain) was assassinated, MDR was the chief threat to the MRND, headed by Habyarimana.
• August 23, Fidèle Rwambuka an extremist leader was killed.
• In February 21, 1994 minister Félicien Gatabazi from PSD (Parti Social Démocrate) was mysteriously assassinate. PSD was composed mostly by tutsi members. (However, Jean Pierre Mugabe argues that Gatabazi was killed by FPR, order by Kagame himself.)
• Two days later the president of CDR (Coalition pour la Défense de la République) Martin Bucyana was killed for revenge. (According to Mugabe, militia of PSD killed Bucyana, and CDR a party even more extreme than MRND attack local innocent tutsis people.)
• In March 31, 1994, Alphonse Ingabire, another leader of CDR was assassinated in Kigali.
• Rumor in Kigali said that Agathe the president’s wife confounded with him several times and left home. She was furious that Habyarimana was ceding concessions to FPR.
• Habyarimana knew that some people want him to disappear, so he changed his traditional habitus. Before he used to drive himself a jeep, now each time when he need to move around, he took the itineraries at the last moment by him self. According to Braeckman ⁹, she mentions that during this period, a black killing list which contains 1500 hutus and tutsis already been initiated by president’s faction and him self. When Habyarimana went to Des es Salaam, he took with him the major general Deo Nasbimana, and Colonel Elie Sagatwa, they were the chiefs of hutu extremists. For Braeckman the voyage of the hutus military leaders was unnecessary, and it might be interpreted as that Habyarimana want to have some insurance.

Who knows About the Assassination of the President?

In this section I will only demonstrate some interesting facts that I have collected from my readings on the book of Braeckman, Reyntjens, Prunier, French parliament report, Human Watch reports and other Francophone newspapers.

Mobutu

The reason to suspect Mobutu is because in fact the latter had met with the two presidents, Habyarimana and Cyprien Ntaryamira of Burundi at his homeland in Gbadolite, north west of Zaire. Mobutu agreed to go to Tanzania; however, at the last minute, he changed his plan.

According to Braeckman ¹⁰, certain testimonies say, at the last moment, Mobutu’s private assistant Mr. Aka, responsible for security tell the latter not to go, and Mobutu called Habyarimana, but he talked only with Agathe, and the Agathe did not transmit the message to her husband. Moreover, the Kenyan president Arap Moi also renounced his personal participation and sent the Vice President George Saitoti at the last minute. (According to J.P Mugabe, Mr. Aka is in fact NGBANDA Honoré ATUMBA, a former advise of Mobutu for security affaires.)

Yet, according to the French parliament report ¹¹, the former French Ambassador M. Jacques Depaigne mentions that, Mobutu’s withdrew was due to a political interest. The latter in fact did not see any political advantage of going.

" l’absence du Maréchal Mobutu au sommet de Dar Es-Salam s’expliquait très bien et que, sur le moment, elle n’avait même pas posé de questions particulières. Le Maréchal ayant convoqué les deux principaux protagonistes, il avait fait, en quelque sorte, son " numéro ", ce qui devait lui suffire. De plus, la qualité de l’accueil qui lui aurait été réservé par ses autres collègues n’était pas suffisamment garantie pour qu’il pense devoir effectuer le déplacement ".

Mobutu Sese seko Kuku Ngbendu wa Za Banga. He advised Habyarimana not to travel to Dar es Salaam because he was informed by secret official (Francois de Grossouvre) from Elysee that something bad is going to happen

Francois de Grossouvre an agent from Elysee in Paris who later commited suicide after Habyarimana presidential plane Falcon 50 shot at presidential garden in Kigali.

As the result, the mysterious withdrew of Marshall Mobutu could be explained in my view by two simple hypotheses: he knew something very serious was going on; therefore, he withdraw from to participate a regional powerhouses negotiation; however, this theory has few credibility in my judgment, because if Mobutu knew a secret coup was going on, hence firstly of all it was not any more a secret coup and other secret services should know. Or, Mobutu as described by the French Ambassador just did not want to go by personal political interests, because he lacked political credibility and authority.

Hutu Extremists

According to French parliament report, Filip Reyntjens¹² in his paperback "Rwanda, Trois Jours Qui Ont Fait Basculer l’Histoire", based upon Belgian military investigation, he argues that during the evening and before the arrival of presidential airplane, eyewitness saw a Jeep (Braeckman argues for two¹³) at bifurcation between national route and the airport, it is about 200 meters away from the location that the missiles were believed to be fired (I will explain the location of fire in a later section). One hour before the crash FAR and gendarmerie were still guarding the same place. This area called Masaka, inhabited by pro-government hutu people was under controlled, in accordance with Arusha Accords, by the governmental force. Both Belgian authors, Filip Reyntjens and Colette Braeckman, described the jeep as something that I qualify as a technical, and it appeared to contain some tubes of about 1.5 meter long. According to the French parliament report, both Reyntjens and Gerard Prunier¹⁴ highlighted that FAR and the gendarmerie reacted very quickly after the crash by establishing barrages around the airport and in Kigali. One barricade was put in place as early as 7:30 in the district of Kimihura inside of Kigali.

The French report highlights another fact ¹⁵, the elements of Presidential Guard were found in the tower control. In an interview made with Belgian newspaper Le Citoyen ¹⁶(Oct.94), a Burundian pilot who was fleeing over the sector said that the controller in the tower was repeatedly interrogated by soldiers about the presidential Falcon’s progress. Braeckman argues that because Cyprien Ntaryamira decided to take flight with Habyarimana at the last minute, the flight was two hours late with initial time. When the air plain was flying on the air of Kigali, the control tower asked five times to the pilot if the president and his Burundian colleague were on board, the French pilot became furious, at the end and answered, "no one is on board". The reason is because it is professionally incorrect to mention name of passengers. This could means that the controller was in fact forced by the soldiers to repeat this question in order to make sure the airplane carried the president.

Tutsi

Is it FPR committed the assassination? This track becomes much more in favor for different specialists. But did FPR’s leaders know about the travel of president Habyarimana?

First of all, diverse opinions argue that it was not difficult for any one with standard radio equipments to receive radio communications in Kigali. De facto, I have found from my reading that different protagonists including FPR and FAR were listen to each other’s communication, in addition international actors such as French, Belgian and other UN official were doing the same. For example, according to inside FAR’source, during the evening of April 6^th, a post of listen located in Gisenyi, and which was listen on the communications of FPR, captured a message which says: "the target is hit". Et the meantime, a Togolais captain Mr. Apedo of MINUAR observed the same message, as he has written in Kagali " RGF Major said they monitored RPF communication which stated " target is hit " ¹⁷. Therefore, we should believe that FPR had a possibility to follow closely with the conversations between different hutu officials in the capital. In addition, during that time FPR’s members in Dar es Salaam could inform FPR headquarter at any time about the departure of two hutu presidents, and then follows the flight’s progression by radio.

In terms of military force, in accordance with Arusha Accords, in side of Kigali, 600 tutsi soldiers of FPR camped (according to J.P Mugabe, they were actually 4000). FPR troops before the crash also made suspicious maneuvers, both inside of Kigali campground and in regions under their control.

• General Christian Quesnot declared to the French mission that:" certains éléments du bataillon FPR étaient déjà en position de combat à Kigali entre 20 heures 20 et 20 heures 40 ". (Some FPR elements in side of Kigali were already in combat position between 8:20pm and 8:40pm). However, according to French parliament report, the fact is this FPR element did not star the fight in the afternoon of April 7^{th 18}.
• Yet, although J.P Mugabe did not specifically mention what happened to this unity, but he argued that Kagame order all troops to attack immediately. L’Unité du Haut Commandement prit immédiatement les dispositions pour le combat et attaqua la nuit même. Toutes les autres unités du FPR passèrent à l’attaque sans autre préavis.

• The French Lieutenant-Colonel Gregoire de Saint-Quentin, then Commandant (the first non Rwandan accessed to President Palace’s garden after the crash) outline that, during the evening of April 6^th, certain FPR militaries was found inside of Kigali Meridien Hotel, which is located in the north of their camp¹⁹.
• Filip Reyntjens argues that FPR was ready to establish an operation of significant size. FPR’s infiltration troop in the route to Kigali provisioned materials in Rutongo, a dozen kilometers to Kigali ²⁰.
• Other sources argue that FPR did not started its offensive from the north including the zone of Kisaro, Rukomo, Kagitumba and Nyabishongwezi after April 8^th but during the morning of April 7^th.
• In addition the French parliament report citied from APR’s source, that FPR was in alert since April 3^rd, and Kagame ordered himself to Colonel Kaka of to prepare offensive attack at the night between 6 and 7^{th 21}.
• And finally, J.P. Mugabe suggested that even before 4.6.94, FPR elements in Kigali had already finish their preparative movements, and other FPR forces were as well.

An interesting fact, I have noticed that the Belgian journalist Colette Braeckman was once a pro-tutsi; she was also honored by the new Rwandan regime for her books. Yet, I have notice that in her early paperback "Rwanda, Histoire d’un genocide", she was then greatly convinced on the hutu and French track, but to challenge on the credibility of FPR possibility, maybe it was unconscious but she said something ambiguous. As the former gendarme named Paul Barril (also worked for Agathe Habyarimana in private)of GIGN (Group d’intervention de la gendarmerie national), accused publicly on the responsibility of FPR. Braeckman counter argued in her book ²²: several FPR’s ministers including Jacques Bihozagara and Set Sendashonga were in Kigali during the crash… It was a miracle that they saved their lives. Alexis Kanyarengwe and Kagame were in Kampala… Kanyarengwe repeatedly argued that FPR always privileged a political solution and knew, tutsis in side of Rwanda were potential hostages and will pay the price for any offensive attack. From a political aspect, …Arusha accord gives satisfaction to FPR, and we can’t see from what interests FPR would undermine those advantages by an assassination. In my own view, precisely because to cohabit with hutu extremist was not in FPR’s advantage; therefore, FPR used this unique occasion to eliminate all major hutu extremists’ chefs and launch a lightning attack. In addition, Sendashonga was assassinated in Nairobi. I will discuss my theory with a closer attention later in my FPR hypothesis.

French

Colette Braeckman, as a specialist of Great Lacks region and Belgian national, believes, or used to believe, that the government of French was involved in the assassination, and certain French soldiers, had contributed physical to the crash of aircraft. And the French had speared the word that "Ces’t les Belges" (is the Belgians) did it.

For example, Braeckman ²³ mentions in her book that a strange foreigner, very possibly a Frenchman with radio equipment, occupied until the day of crash a room in hotel Diplomats, which is very close to the presidential guard camp, about few dozen meters. She believes this person could use the radio to send message on the air to say Belgian did it.

The FAR soldiers with the Jeep found earlier in Masaka, according to Braeckman could be black French soldiers from DOM TOM, because they hold their beret inversely, in a French style.

She also shows a letter which she received in June 1994 ²⁴ from "the chief of militia from Kigali" that says the real killers are two French soldiers of Dami (Department d’assistance militaire a l’instruction) for the service of CDR (a pro-hutu power party). And the other two French military men (former GIGN) who were killed by FAR, because they were helping for FAR to listen telephonic transmissions and perhaps knew too much.

Captain Paul Barril

I think he played a determinant role in the affaire. He was a former gendarme worked in French presidential palace. All the authors that I have cited above believe that he either know the authors, or recruited mercenaries and organized the assassination for the service of Akazu and particularly for Agathe Habyarimana. Paul Barril also went on French television to say that he has the black box of the air plain (however, other argue that it is not a black one but orange). Currently, if I am not mistaken, Mr. Barril is working with Mr. Verges on the lawsuit against Kagame.

Explosion of Airplane

April 6^th 1994 at 8:23 pm, at the moment when the air plane begun to land from the eastside of Kigali airport’s runway, the flight was attained by one sol-air missiles and crashed in the very garden of Presidential Palace. According to Braeckman, the first shoot did not touch the airplane, then few second later; the flight was attained by the second shoot. Habyarimana’s daughter Jeanne and Jean Luc and some guards witnessed the crash, and Jean Luc had the reflex to take pictures, which was later showed on Belgian TV and magazine Jeune Afrique.

Victims of explosion includes:

• The President of Rwanda Juvénal Habyarimana
• The President of Burundi Cyprien Ntaryamira
• Two Ministers of Burundi, Bernard Ciza and Cyriaque Simbizi
• Major General Deogratias Nsabimana, commander of FAR
• The major Thaddée Bagaragaza, responsible for military mission
• The Colonel Elie Sagatwa, a member of personal secretarial of President Juvénal Habyarimana, chief of military cabinet and president’s brother in law
• Juvenal Renzaho, former ambassador (to Germany) and advisor to president
• Emmanuel Akingeneye, personal doctor

French aircraft crew:

• Jacky Héraud (pilot)
• Jean-Pierre Minoberry (copilot)
• Jean-Michel Perrine (flight engineer)

The Habyarimana's Plane Falcon 50

Remains of Juvenal Habyarimana's presidential plane on 1994

A Tutsi RPF soldier standing next the debris of Habyarimana's plane after the RPF killing all the equipage on April6, 1994, which sparked the Rwandan Genocide.

The French crew belonged to a private French company named La SATIF, a small company (PME) crated in 1977, the CEO is named Charles de la Baume. All crewmembers were ex-military men ²⁵. The crewmembers were paid indirectly by he French ministry of Cooperation. According to former French Ambassador to Rwanda, Mr. Georges Martres, the team reported in a regular base to the embassy directly about the movement of President. However, the responsible of DGSE deny that the French intelligent service had never ever asked to the crew any information ²⁶.

Location of missile launch

The majority if not all specialists agree that the missiles were fired from a location called " la ferme ", it is located near the road, which connects the hill of Masaka to the principal road of Kigali-Rwamagana-Kibungo. This was a residential area; a number of pro-government military and bureaucrat people lived here. The location was under control of FAR, but it was accessible by every one, and MINUAR patrolled frequently. According to the French report, some witness saw white men on the Masaka hill during the evening of April 6^th. (Gerard Prunier argues they could be the authors of crash, because the missile’s launching requires professionally trained personnel. And if they are mercenaries, Prunier thinks they must be under order of Akazu.) Last remark, Masaka is only about 50kms away from Burundian border.

• J.P Mugabe telled approximately the same story, except that the area of fire was suggested by his close friend, Colonel LIZINDE Théoneste. Eliminate by Kagame latter.

The Hours Followed the Crash

• Belgian Blue Helmets of MINUAR were immobilized by FAR in side of the airport’s parking.
• The lights of airport’s runway were totally shouted down.
• Ten hours later, the killing begun in side of Kigali, furious Presidential Guards followed a black list executed well known tutsis elite and hutu opposition members, including former premiere minister Agathe Uwilingiyimana, and ten Belgian peacekeepers who supposedly to protect her (a long story), the president of supreme court, the future members of transitional government, political dissident, and journalists ²⁷. According to French mission, FAR soldiers, mostly para-commando from Kanombe camp (about two kilometers away from "la ferme") begun the killing in the zone of Masaka hill as early as the evening. It could be viewed an act of to eliminate witnesses or reprisals. Within three days, more than 3000 people were eliminated in the area of Masaka by Presidential Guard came from Kanombe camp, in side of Kigali.
• In side of Kigali, according to UN responsible René Degni-Segui ²⁸, "Barricades had been established between thirty and forty five minutes after crash, and even before the news had announced by the national radio."
• According to Reyntjens’ book, during the evening of April 6^th, military and gendarmes brought politicians and ministers linked with president to Presidential Guard’s camp in order to protect them from FPR’s possible attack.
• Belgian soldiers belonged to UN, were immediately being accused to be the responsible for the crash by different protagonists, including French and Rwandan reside in Belgium.
• President’s family members and dignitaries of regime took refuge in foreign embassies (mostly in French embassy) in the morning of April 7th. Different sources also argue that Colonel Theoneste Bagosora, one of the most suspected men, was also in a state of shock.
• From a political point of view, Reyntjens believes that the new government, composed by Habyarimana faction in side of French embassy begun to control the situation only in April 8^th.

Author, Missile, and Purpose?

The missiles that crashed the Falcon were, according to most specialists today, SAM-16 "Gimlet". Officially, ten nations, before 1995 retain such arm equipment. Angola, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Iraq, Nicaragua, North Korea, Poland, former Tchecoslovaquia and ex-Soviet Union ²⁹.

Filip Reyntjens’s book " Rwanda : les trois jours qui ont fait basculer l’histoire " ³⁰ demonstrates, based upon a story from Mr. Munyasesa, an ex-FAR officer in exile, pictures of two launchers and its’ serial numbers. One of them, in accordance with pictures belongs to Ugandan stock.

French Ministry of Defense disposes also pictures of only one missile launcher, taken in 6 and 7 April 1994 in Rwanda. According to the French parliament investigation, its serial number match up with the one provided by Reyntiens ³¹.

• However, after specialists’ examination, conducted by the French mission based on the photography, they conclude the launcher has never been used.
• The serial number of launcher is 9m322, appeared to correspond to SAM-16 "Igla" of Russian model.

The problem is that if after expertise, the French Ministry of Defense concludes that the launcher has never been used, hence, the one that provided by Reyntjens was not the one that had shout down the airplane! Although, it could be Ugandan missiles, but we should not automatically accuse FPR as the author, because FAR had captured some of those Ugandan missiles from FPR, and according to experts, to use this kind of missile, which is guided by laser is not difficult to learn.

The U.S Interest On the Death of Habyarimana

I have tried very hard to understand way the U.S, under Clinton administration has providing substantial help to new Rwandan FPR regime, and at the mean time American officials repeatedly argue that the U.S has absolutely no interest on this small country, overpopulated with no resource. I my view, if the African policy of the U.S is first of all, truly dominate by economic interests and secondly dominated with this obsession again the Islamite regime of Sudan, then in this case, Rwanda, as a small but well infrastructured (has 7 airports) state with a ideal geographic position could attract the gourmandize of the U.S.

Former French Minister Vedrine and American specialist on African Affaires Cohen demonstrate the following statement on the U.S strategic interest on Rwanda. However, the recent publication of National Post, a young Canadian newspaper contradicts their argument. Asked by the French parliament mission on the relationship between France and the U.S in regard of Rwanda, Vedrine replies "the issue of Rwanda never was a central element between both states and both governments have different priorities. Americans has attention on Sudan, which they perceive as the niche of terrorism. That way the U.S is backing Uganda and then FPR.

As far as Herman Cohen is concerned, he was astonished by the theory of an Anglo-Saxon complot against the French interest, he argues, it corresponds to no fact. If the U.S would take any action against French interest in Africa, we (the U.S) would not begin with Rwanda, for, it is a country of little importance. In addition, the U.S always recognizes the " pré carré français " in Africa as a positive element, which was not in the contrary with the U.S interests ³².

According to the testimony of Jean Pierre Mugabe, the reason that Washington did not react vis-à-vis of genocide in 1994, was because Kagame send two massagers named Dusaidi and Muligande, and lobbied the U.S government not to intervene.

Comment KAGAME expliquerait-il au peuple rwandais pourquoi il a envoyé

Claude DUSAIDI et Charles MULIGANDE à New York et à Washington pour empêcher une intervention militaire, quelle qu’elle soit, qui serait envoyée pour sauver du génocide le peuple rwandais? Le prétexte de cette opposition
était que le FPR se suffisait pour arrêter le génocide qui, pourtant,
continua à faire ses ravages pendant plus de trois mois.

National Post: who could be this "foreign government"?

On Wednesday, March 01, 2000, this Canadian newspaper published an controversial article, written by Steven Edwards, which argues based upon three tutsi informants’ revelation to the United Nations, that they were part of an elite strike team that assassinated the hutu president. According to the newspaper, the informants told UN investigators in 1997 that the killing of president Habyarimana was carried out "with the assistance of a foreign government ³³" under the overall command of Paul Kagame. Who is this foreign government? The U.N report did not mention, because "the investigation was shut down before the identity of the foreign government could be uncovered." Nevertheless, if this mysterious "foreign government" does exists, and if it is not the U.S, then we must not exclude the existence of this unknown country (I will discuss this controversial article in the section of FPR)

French and French’s Iraqi missiles

Professor Filip Reyntjens established a theory that argues the two SAM-16 " provenaient d’un lot saisi en février 1991 par l’armée française en Irak et acheminé en France " (came from a stock gain by French army in Iraq in February 1991, and transported to France) ³⁴. But he also highlights that he does not have sufficient prove, and the information is actually from he says, British, American and Belgian military secret services. In order to clarify the hypothesis, he ask then, if France did actually gain these SAM-16 from Iraqis? If so, what are their serial numbers? And do the Missiles fired from the hill belong to this French collection? If those two missiles are Iraqi origin, then FPR had also a chance to use it because FPR purchased previously weapon from Iraq.

Two Frenchmen under hutu extremists command.

It is very confusing and difficult to establish that the authors were indeed two white males, and they are French nationals. Specialists argue that they could be whites because to manipulate a missile launcher, a certain skill is needed. Assuming that they are white, but they could be also mercenaries from places such like South Africa. According to the French parliament report, the CIA during the early June 1994 affirmed that two agents of DGSE were the authors of the crash. In exchange, the French service declared that an American company, represented in Central African Republic with help from Belgians recruited some mercenaries specialized in the missiles utilization ³⁵.

Reason: In my opinion, the governments of both France and Belgium alike, they have no reason to eliminate Habyarimana who they were as a matter of fact protecting. For France, Habyarimana represented her interests against the FPR, viewed by president Mitterrand as an Anglo-invasion. In addition, the three crew member of airplane were French national, I don’t know if the French secret service would have the courage to kill two African presidents with three former French military men. In my own view, I truthfully believe that the son of president Mitterrand, Jean Christophe, had influenced definitively on president’s decision-making. I have heard once in Paris, from a friend originate of Madagascar that J. C Mitterrand is an old African hand. He used to traffic diamonds in Africa, and when F. Mitterrand came to power, all his African connection was established through J.C. Mitterrand. As far as the personal attachment between Mitterrands and Habyarimanas, I have two examples to support the theory that Mitterand did not order to remove Habyarimana.

• For example, according to Reyntjens (1995:30) ³⁶, both J. C Mitterrand and Jean Pierre Habyarimana were found guilty of drug trafficking in Rwanda, but either was sentenced.
• According to former minister of cooperation, Bernard Debré, Mitterrand at first remained "very attached to former President Habyarimana and his family, and to everything that was part of the old regime" (Quoted on Radio France Internationale. ³⁷). This attachment took the concrete form of a gift of some U.S.$40,000 to Madame Habyarimana at the time of her arrival in France, a sum that was designated as "urgent assistance for Rwandan refugees" and was taken from the budget of the Ministry of Cooperation ³⁸.

Nevertheless, Mitterrand was a good man in terms of human nature, but immoral as a politician, hence he could do every thing unpredictable in terms of politics. He was a very ill and marginalized by the out side world man, if he really had an obsession against Anglo influence and perceived the concession made by Habyarimana undermined the interest of "France", he could thus order to eliminate the latter because Mitterrand knew he was going to die himself very soon any way.

Mobutu

Two Belgian news reporters affirmed in September and October 1995, based upon documents from Belgian military secret service dated in April 1994, that Mobutu commanded the crash.

Missile: The two missiles were brought from France, transported via airport of Ostende, Kinshasa, Goma and Gisenyi, from Zairian embassy in Brussels to Kigali.

Author: The authors of bombing were a Belgian mixed, a French and a Rwandan.

Reason: Unknown.

FAR and hutu extremists

Missile:

• According to the report made by Human Rights Watch, FAR had sol-air missile capacity; however, the report only mentioned SAM-7 and Mistral.
• In addition, FAR had captured missiles from FPR during combat in February 1991.

Reason: Why the extremists hutus want to kill the president? We could argue that for the extremists hutu and members of Akazu, the president become much more vulnerable vis-à-vis of FPR. Habyarimana was determinate to establish a new government in accordance with Arusha Accords (he knew he will win the election, because of the hutu majority), but Akazu didn’t want to have any members of FPR in their government and army, and beside Akazu was planning to eliminate all tutsis, so either Akazu used quickly trained FAR soldiers or mercenaries to carry out the assassination (Former French Ambassador Georges Martres observed that the extremist hutus had already difficulties to use canon and mortar, which means they used foreign assistance).

Why they did not kill the president before April 6^th ?

In my view, the decision made by president Habyarimana in Dar es Salaam, to exclude the extremist party-CDR from the transitional government, this could be considered by the latter as a final signal, and they had to take very quick the ultimate decision why explains that way any political clan including Akazu could not present a new government after the crash. This is perhaps also explains that why Mr. Herman Cohen is so convinced that Agathe Habyarimana authored the assassination.

However, we can also argue against extremist theory with the same information: if the Jeep located in the bifurcation of Masaka hill is the one that was waiting for the arrival of airplane, and then execute the missile launch, why they have to expose them self publicly during a whole day? Beside, the tube carried by the Jeep could also be bazookas, or any thing else. If the members of Akazu committed the crash, why they also killed their chiefs? Why after the crash it was difficult for Akazu to organize a provisional government? Worth, members of Akazu clan including president’s wife took refuge in French embassy. Different sources also argue that Colonel Theoneste Bagosora, one of the most suspected men, was also in a state of incapacity. And finally to contradict the theory of Cohen, according to former French minister of Cooperation Mr. Hubert Vedrine, " la veuve du Président Juvénal Habyarimana semblait totalement désemparée" (the widow of president seemed totally disoriented).

The theory of hutu extremist was the dominant theory for a long while. In my opinion, if a certain number of unknown people would like to kill, not only the president, but also the supreme chefs of hutu extremists such as the Colonel Elie Sagatwa, then to blow up the airplane and take over the government during a short moment of notional chaos, this is a wise act. Otherwise, in my opinion, you don’t need to eliminate 12 men including extremists’ leaders, because you want the death of president. From this aspect, the hutu hypothesis could not be viewed first of all persuasive and secondly a clever act.

However, to back the hutu theory, we may argue that Caesar was killed by his son! Hutu extremists, in order to secure their own interest, according to the Arusha accord, about 50% per cent of FAR officers will be composed by the tutsis soldiers. Therefore, in order to avoid another Burundi drama, it is justifiable to eliminate all people, including the president, the number one of Akazu, and others who are marching shoulder to shoulder with president’s new political direction. For: 1. The army is essential element in a dictatorial regime. 2. According to the legacy, tutsis power will kill hutus and make all of them slave again. Therefore, to kill the president as a means, justifies the end of self-preservation.

I have realized that a lot of specialists agree on the question of why hutu extremists needed to kill the president and his military commanders, if they only want to eliminate the tutsis? According to Ambassador Shinn, this is a very logical way to think. However, he argued, those people (extremist folks) are not often logical people. To end my hutu theory, we have to remember that the hill where the missiles were lunched was under control by the FAR soldiers, even an hour before the assassination of the president, the Jeep was still there! Soon after the airplane crashed, FAR came over and eliminated about 3000 pro-government hutu people in three days. In sum, until other theories or the truth come out, the hutu extremists’ theory will remain as one of the most possible track.

Hypostasis of FPR

I will start by showing some examples of when FPR have had used missiles against FAR, then I will show some interesting events that would support the FPR track. And in the third section I will discuss about the possibility of FPR as author and what is my assumption.

Technically speaking, FPR disposed sol-air missiles and had used them in different occasions previously. In October 3^rd 1990, in Matimba, a FAR’s spy airplane was shout down. In October 23^rd a helicopter Gazelle in Nyakayaga. In September 10^th 1991, a Fokker 27 belonged to SCIBE (Zairian company) was shout down in the area where Rwanda, Zaire and Uganda touches. In February 1993, another FAR’s helicopter in Cyeru was shout down by FPR’s missile.

Missile: The most probable way for FPR to gain SAM 16 is from Uganda. We all know the historical relation between FPR and Museveni’s government.

• According to the Filip Reyntjens, it could be originated from Ugandan arm stock. Yet, Mr. Reyntjens also argues that Uganda stock has only SAM-7 not SAM-16 which probable was used in the crash.
• According to American Senior Adviser Mr. Herman Cohen, he argues that the missiles could be Soviet fabrication, taken from Iraq by the U.S, gave to Uganda, and the latter gave in its turn to FPR ³⁹.
• According to Mugabe, he never said which kind of Missile, yet he suggested that they are from Uganda, and soldiers were send by Kagame to learn to use SAM 7 Strela of Russian fabrication.
• I have read other sources that argue: FPR could purchase SAM 16 from other countries such as South Africa or Libya.

Appealing notes from my reading

Gene. Kagame and Major Kabuye

• Professor Reyntjens mentions that eminent FPR sources affirming the latter was the author of assassination. The DMI (Department of Military Intelligence) of FPR confirmed this implication and argued that if the president Habyarimana was not eliminated, the war would never end. One of theses sources affirmed the coup was made by Major Rose Kabuye and Colonel Karegeya, then chief of DMI ⁴⁰. 
•  Major Kabuye once said that if she had opportunity to conquor Rwanda she could kill more Hutus so that Tutsis become the majority in Rwanda. You can imagine what that killing would be considering the fact  that Hutus are 85% and Tutsis are only 14% of Rwandan population. But though RPF killed as many as 4 million Hutus in both Rwanda and DR Congo between 1990 to2003, the Hutus are still the majority in Rwanda. This figure has been manipulated by the US government and organizations in order to conceal their role in the mass killing of Hutus in both Rwanda, mainly, Kibeho Parish where around 200,000 people were killed in the watch of UN peacekeeping mission MINUAR, and DRC especially in Tingitingi where more that 300,000 Hutu refugees were massacred by the forces of RPF, Burundi, and Kabila.

• We need also to remember that according to spy listen stations of FAR and UN, both of those stations had captured a RPFmessage which said the "target is hit". And the UN observer, the Togolais Capitan Apedo included this fact in his report date on April 7^th 1994 : " RGF Major said they monitored RPF communication which stated " target is hit ".
• French mission argues that by the fact that current Rwandan political and military responsible denied to them this missile capability; therefore, the report argues, it could be considered as a sing of culpability. The report then argues, the widow of Seth Sadashonga, told to Kenyan police that the assassination of his husband could be explained by the anxiety of FPR to see the latter testimony to French mission on the question of crash. Sendashonga, was a hutu, then FPR’s minister of interior (failed against Bizimungu to become the new President) was a former ally of Kagame, according to Africa- Confidential "Sadashonga was FPR trusted Interior Minister, but he was also one of few to dare contradict Kagame" ⁴¹. The latter was shot dead on May 1998 in Nairobi where he exiled (he was existing from the U.N mission in Nairobi) by two hutus gunmen, for the reason of money sharing according to the murderers (this is the second attempts).
• In the French Parliamentary report, it mentions a letter correspondence on February 28 1994 between Captain Ducoin, a former military technical assistant to Rwandan aviation during the early 1990’s, and one presidential Falcon’s pilots. in this letter, it indicates that the crew members felt threaten by the FPR’s SAM-7 since the beginning of 1994, and they were taking technical initiatives.
• After Rwandan’s participation in the second Congolese civil war after August 1996, the tutsi community of Kivu, the Banyamulenges, disapproved with this war. So they write publicly to Ugandan president Museveni and vice president Kagame, ask to them if at the moment when they thought about to assassinate the president Kabila, the tragedy of tutsis Rwandan, after the death of Habyarimana did not serve to them as the lesson?
• Former FPR Premier Minister Mr. Faustin Twagiramungu tell to French parliament mission that when he was still in office, he suggested during a ministerial meting on a possibility of to organize an investigation on the crash. However, the president and minister of Defense answered to him that it was not a priority for the country. The French mission then comments in the report, Kigali has never exposed any information that the latter retains ⁴².

Why FPR Would Eliminate the President, and what are the Facts?

In my view, from a military point of view, in the Art of War, Suen Zi argued that the best and most beautiful technique to win a war is not to use force. Because war is cruel, once it starts, it devastates the country. When it is inevitable, you need to make sure that you have more than seventy per cent of possibility to win. In October 1^st 1990, the lighting attack of 2500 APR’s soldier was resulted in 1800 death including 3 best FPR commanders as well the leader of movement, Dr. Peter Bayingana, Chris Bunyenyezi and Fred Rwigyema. The FPR arrived as far as in Gabiro, 90 km from Kigali. But in October the 4^th 1990, French president François Mitterrand, while officially visiting the King Fahd, decided to intervene ⁴³, his decision was followed later by Mobutu. This was known as operation Noroît, designed officially to protect French and European interests in Rwanda. Subsequently, FPR retried back, and Kagame become the new leader.

In terms of military force, according to foreign military specialists’ opinion, in 1994, FPR was better equipped (from unknown financial source), disciplined and trained than FAR, although the latter received French and Belgian military instructors.

In the year 1994, with the realization of Arusha Accords, from Kagame’s point of view, and assume his ultimate goal was not only to go back to Rwanda, but to gain the power and to preserve the survival of tutsis people. He had only two choices, because it was becoming harder for them, the tutsis exile to stay in Uganda. First option is, as Arusha Accords designed, to go through a democratic process, to participate in the transitional government and then in election. The second choice is to take over the power by force.

As a proverb says, close the door and beat the dog

Although in terms of military force, Arusha Accord designed to divide the control of army fifty-fifty, and FPR will have lots positions in the new transitional government, but in a country where the majority hutu hold from 80% to 85% of population, and with an unpopular reputation, there was a little chance for FPR to stay in the government (we just have to look at the current Rwandan government, where the most hutu officials are gone) and to win any seats in the national and regional assemble. De facto, FPR’s participation in Juliet/September1993’s free election in the demilitarized region of Tampan was a disaster. During this election, all parties including FPR had chance to participate; nevertheless, Habyarimana’s MRND conquered all seats. Moreover, I also think that FPR members could view the return to Rwanda as a trap made by Akazu, only in no out.

Therefore, even though FPR would become a legitimate political force in Rwanda in accordance with Arusha Accords, the movement had no chance to gain any power!

According to the French parliamentary report and Braeckman’s book, that FPR showed more and more reticence in regard of Arusha accords. Caused by the failure of Tampan election, FPR’s alliances with hutu opposition parties became less reliable. In addition, FPR did not demobilize its troops as prescribed by the Accords, but recruited a lot of new forces from the Ugandan army.

I assume Kagame, his sergeants and other leaders of FPR including hutus and tutsis were aware of the political reality. We also need to remember that the FPR as a polity is composed by the leftist (some argue Maoist) militants and Rwandan old bourgeoisie, which do not share strongly on the theory of diplomatic negotiation. If the ultimate goal is to take over the power, thus, the means could not be democratic transition but military force. In addition, as I have mentioned previously, their final return to Rwanda could be considered as a trap cautiously designed by hutu extremists. At the meantime, the final realization of Arusha Accord is coming. Under a circumstance as such, Kagame needed to react, because he knew that if they refuses to return to Rwanda as initially designed, FPR losses its legitimacy and credibility.

Theory

In February 8 1993, FPR violated ceasefire and begun to attack from the area of Byumba and Ruhengeri bordering with Uganda. It was a success; FPR stopped at Rulindo, 30 km north of Kigali. At this moment, French military intervened in accordance with operation Noroît. In February 20^th, FPR unilaterally proclaimed ceasefire. The problem that FPR had to face was two simple issues. I. To wait and observe what the French and UN were going to do. II. Gerard Prunier ⁴⁴ illustrates a dialogue between a young FPR soldier and an old tutsi during this raid on Ruhengeri :" c’est le pouvoir que tu veux ? Tu vas l’avoir. Mais ici, nous allons tous mourir (it is the power that you want? You’ll have it. But here, we are all going to die)." Under such circumstance, in order to minimize the fatalities of civilian lives (tutsis especially), only a lightning attack, within a minimum time could be view as the most useable technique to conquer the country.

A Chinese legend says, a hunter in the forest saw two sleeping tigers, he knew that he does not have the force and possibility to kill them, because if he attacks one, both will weak up and come to get him. So he took a rock and throws it with force on one tiger, this one weak up, and begin to bite the other one. A fight between two tigers starts, the hunter hidden behind the tree watch it and smile. I image that we all know what happen the next: both tiger were so exhausted they died, and the intelligent hunter get them without using any force.

In my assumption, Kagame knew he must to move, yet although he has a strong army, but a direct confutation with FAR is not a solution, he needed to use the division between Rwandan hutu forces, launch a surprise attack, quickly capture Kigali, destroy FAR, and minimize the civilian casualty. However, Kagame was facing not two but three tigers, including an unpredictable foreign force, they are French. In 1990, Mitterrand backed his protégé Habyarimana militarily to counter attack FAR’s intrusion. As I have mentioned before, the situation in 1994’s Kigali was a complicate one, French, Belgian and other UN forces were in place, Akazu and other extremist movements were raising the hostility vis-à-vis of tutsis population, but at the meantime, a strong divergence existed in regard of Arusha Accords among hutu leaders. President Habyarimana for me is the key person; he was not only the head of the state but also the number one of Akazu clan. This leadership holds on the possibility of an open physical confrontation between hutu militias. As far as France and Zaire are concerned, their intervention was purely designed to back Habyarimana. Consequently, if FPR needs urgently to react, the best tactic is to remove Habyarimana. Because if the latter disappears, France has no more reason, at least temporarily to back a headless government. The hutu extremists would experience a period of chaos, and army will lose their leadership. At this moment, logically if FPR launch attacks from locations under their control including Kigali, they will quickly capture Kigali, avoids lethal confrontation towards FAR, and minimized civilian casualty.

National Post Source

As Kagame knew that Habyarimana was going to Dar es Salaam, he decided to eliminate him. So he alerts all his troops in April 3^rd, and sends his trusted assassination team, which could possibly be called the "Network", a team of ten FPR officers. However, according to the newspaper ⁴⁵ Kagame planed to eliminate president Habyarimana on or about March 15, 1994. According to the three tutsis informants, the plan of assassination of April 6^th consisted of five localities, two in Kigali and three in the surrounding area of the airport, then, the informants showed to the UN investigators three sites where they claimed to have planted rocket launchers and explained that two had been used to fire surface-to-air missiles at the president's plane. The overall control came from near the airport at Camp Kanombe. From my reading I have noticed that the Camp Kanombe was controlled by FAR’s Para-commandos, it is about two kilometers from Masaka hill and 300-350 meters to presidential garden where the plane crashed. The cause of assassination was because, according to the informants, "the group was not pleased with the slow pace of the talks".

I do not want to get involved on the credibility of this article, however, what is important is the UN report or a three-page internal memorandum. What the National Post claims is that they has obtained a hand-written comments from Michael Hourigan an Australian lawyer, in a confidential United Nations document. And "As is common in intelligence reports, a credibility rating is assigned to the details gathered from the informants. In this case, the rating was "two" (defined as probably true, but untested) on a scale ranging from "one" (true, corroborated) to "four" (cannot be verified)".

De facto, the report exists, According to UN official Mr. Eckhard "The secretariat has now transferred a copy of the memorandum to the tribunal, which will determine whether or not to make it available to lawyers for clients." According to AFP, Jacques Verges, a famous French controversial lawyer is now taking the case for Agathe Habyarimana. Mr. Verges and other Canadian lawyer were asking to the Arusha tribunal to read the UN report. And of cause, their target is Kagame now the president.

Conclusion

As a student, I do not have the means to meet with Kagame, Agathe Habyarimana, or Verges and captain Barril. And to have the access on the UN report or to go to Arusha personally, in fact I have never being in Rwanda. Therefore, with the few information that I have read, I believe it will be to early and not responsible for me to conclude who strike the airplane and for what motivation. In conclusion, I have two issues to rise. I don’t know what is going to be happened later because of this UN report, I am still not sure that if FPR, hutu extremists or France authored or co-authored the crash. But if the future and the peace of Rwanda is glued with it political institution, then I know for certain that the Nation State system is definitely not for her. Perhaps the exiling King should go back to Kigali from Virginia U.S. As far as president Kagame is concerned, I cannot imagine how the Kagame era is going to end, and the daily news come form Kigali, Kinshasa, and Kampala are not compromising for Kagame. Currently, by listen to BBC and RFI broadcastings and reading specialized magazines, I feel that the political dissidence against Kagame is rising among tutsis and hutus and monarchists. Every day, in order to secure the power, Rwandan governmental forces are killing civilians in Rwanda and Congo, but on the other hand, tutsis are being massacred by Mai-Mai, interhamwes, Congolese, ex-FAR and their Burundian counter parts. In my view, I am not so sure that the one who undermines the security of tutsis people is the Rwandan hutus. Perhaps in the future, historians will conclude that, for the reason of self-preservation, the tutsis did the same thing as Romans did to Caesar.

Related articles

• Descent into Mayhem (time.com)
• French judge files charges against Kagame allies (sfgate.com)
• French judge files charges against Kagame allies (foxnews.com)
• France investigates Kagame allies (bbc.co.uk)
• What caused the genocide in Rwanda? (guardian.co.uk)
• Roots of Genocide (time.com)
• Movie Review: Hotel Rwanda (brighthub.com)
• You: Rwanda: Kagame's dilemma (search.japantimes.co.jp)
• Tony Blair defends support for Rwandan leader Paul Kagame (guardian.co.uk)
• CORRECTED - FACTBOX-Key political risks to watch in Rwanda (reuters.com)