Na: Tom Ndahiro

Hashize igihe ntandika ku kibazo cy’Abapadiri babiri bo muri diyoseze ya Cyangugu bafite ubutumwa bwo kwigisha urwango.

Abo bapadiri ni Thomas Nahimana na  Fortunatus Rudakemwa. Ibyinshi byanditswe kanda aha urebe.

Naherukiye ku kwandika ko Musenyeri Jean Damascene Bimenyimana  yaba yarafatiye ibyemezo Padiri Nahimana akamwirukana/ akamuhagarika mu kazi kubera ko uwo mu padiri yahisemo kuba umuyobozi w’ishyaka rya PARMEHUTU mu mwambaro w’ISHEMA Party.

Nyuma y’ukwezi n’igice havuzwe ko hari ibyemezo byafashwe, amakuru aturuka i Cyangugu yaje ari ashidikanya ko hari icyemezo cyaba cyarafatiwe Padiri Nahimana.

Abahaba twavuganye bavuga ko umupadiri ahabwa ubupadiri imbere y’abakristu, bose babireba, kandi ko iyo avanyweho cyangwa ahagaritswe bidakwiye gukorwa mu ibanga.

Abo twavuganye bemeza ko nta kintu Musenyeri Bimenyimana yigeze yerekana nka gihamya ko Nahimana atakiri umupadiri. Ngo hari ababimusabye ko yabereka urwandiko ruhagarika “umunyapolitiki” Nahimana batahira amagambo adafatika.

Nagerageje guterefona Musenyeri Bimenyimana akanga kuyifata. Igihe cyari kigeze ko abantu bamenya ukuri kandi ngo n’amategeko ya kiriziya arabyemera.

Nahimana tuzaba tumugarukaho ubundi.

Hari Fortunatus Rudakemwa wavuye i Burayi akimukira cyangwa akimurirwa muri Canada. Kwambuka inyanja ya Atlantic ntibyamuvanye muri Leprophete. Aracyakoramo cyane.

Ubukana buba mu nyandiko z’urwango za Rudakemwa zagombye kuba zarashingiweho na Musenyeri Bimenyimana akamufatira ibyemezo. Niba yumva bikwiriye.

Inkotanyi ziracyitwa inyenzi

Ndagirango nibarize. Nyakubahwa Musenyeri Bimenyimana, mwumva ari ibintu byumvikana kuba mufite umupadiri ucyita abantu inyenzi n’imburagasani? Mu mwaka w’2012 na n’ubu? Agakomeza kwitwa umupadiri wigisha urukundo, akababarira n’abantu ibyaha?

Niba mutabizi reka mbibibutse. Mu kwezi kwa Gashyantare 2012, Padiri Rudakemwa yakoresheje ijambo ry’Imana yigisha urwango. Muzarebe aho avuga ko Uhoraho imana ababarira agira ati:

“Ikibazo cyo mu Rwanda si Abahutu, ikibazo ni Interahamwe. Kandi Abahutu bose si Interahamwe. Ikibazo si Abatutsi, ikibazo ni imburagasani z’Inyenzi-Inkotanyi. Kandi Abatutsi bose si Inkotanyi. Mu mateka ya vuba aha y’u Rwanda, Interahamwe zishe Abatutsi benshi zitaretse n’Abahutu. Ariko rero, Inkotanyi nazo zishe Abahutu benshi b’inzirakarengane, zitaretse n’Abatutsi bamwe na bamwe. Niba utabizi, amateka ya vuba aha y’u Rwanda yarakwihishe.”

Nongere mbaze Musenyeri—Gushyira Interahamwe n’Inkotanyi ku rwego rumwe mwumva ari ibintu by’umuntu muzima witwa ko afite ubwenge bwibuka ibyabereye mu Rwanda?

Nyakubahwa Musenyeri, amafuti menshi uwo mupadiri muyobora yanditse, nirinze kuyagarura aha bitavuze ko ntayabonye. Ariko se kandi, mwaba mwe mwemeranya nawe ko abatutsi bishwe n’Interahamwe batari inzirakarengane?

Icyo Rudakemwa we yemeza n’uko Interahamwe zishe benshi gusa ariko batarengana! Baziraga iki? Harya ngo Imana yari yabatanze?

Mubyo avuga mberetse, Rudakemwa ashimangira ko utumva ibintu kimwe na we amateka yamwihishe. Mwaba mubyumva kimwe ku buryo mukomeza kumubonamo umwigisha mwiza uhuza abantu na Kristu?

Nyakubahwa Musenyeri, umupadiri muyobora, Inkotanyi azise “Inyenzi” yumva bidahagije agerekaho “imburagasani”—namwe muracecetse! Muramwimuye avuye ku mugabane umwe w’isi mumwimuriye ku wundi mugabane. Mu rwandiko mwandikiye Musenyeri mugenzi wanyu wakiriye Rudakemwa muri Diyosezi ye, mwamubwiye ko yakiriye umupadiri cyangwa ari Impuzamugambi?

Na: Tom Ndahiro

Nanditse inyandiko yihariye ku mutwe wa FDLR, ingengabitekerezo ya jenoside n’ inkomoko yayo. Byandikwa, intego yari ukugaragaza ko ingengabitekerezo iyo ariyo yose itavukanwa ahubwo yigishwa.

Nta mwana muto cyane ugira idini kuko ntawuyivukana. N’umwana babatiza akiri uruhinja ngo ajye mu muryango w’abemera Kristu, ntahera ko aba  umukirisitu keretse akuze agatangira gukurikiza ibyo yigishijwe.

Nta muntu uvukana ingengabitekerezo y’ubukapitaliste cyangwa ikindi. Nta n’uvukana ingengabitekerezo ya jenoside. Irigwa, ikigishwa igakwizwa.

FDLR yari rumwe mu ngero z’ahabarizwa iyo ngengabitekerezo kirimbuzi, ariko siho honyine iba kuko hari n’ahandi yigaragaza. Hamwe muri aho iyo ngengabitekerezo yigaragaza ni mu ishyaka ISHEMA Party no ku rubuga Leprophete rw’abapadiri babiri bo muri diyosezi ye Cyangugu Nahimana Thomas na Rudakemwa Fortunatus.

Umwe muri bo, Nahimana Thomas, ubu ni umuyobozi mukuru mu ishyaka rya politiki ryiyise ISHEMA. Websites za Leprophete n’ISHEMA Party bihitisha inyandiko zimwe, kuko n’abaziyobora ari bamwe, kandi bahuzwa n’ingengabitekerezo igaragarira mu nyandiko zabo.

Muri izo nyandiko mvuga harimo iz’uwitwa cyangwa uwiyita Edmond Munyangaju. Usesenguye imyandikire ye ni umupadiri. Hari abavuga ko ari umwe muri abo babiri batangije urwo rubuga abandi bakavuga ko hari undi mugenzi wabo ubandikira agakoresha ako kazina k’umwuga.

Urwango ‘Munyangaju’ yigisha akoresheje izo mbuga, ruherekezwa n’amagambo yo muri BIBILIYA.  Gukoresha ibyanditswe muri Bibiliya cyangwa uburyo (style) y’icyo gitabo gikoreshwa n’abakirisitu, ni inzira yo kworoshya icengezamatwara n’ibitekerezo mu bakirisitu b’injiji. Si ubwa mbere ubwo buryo bukoreshwa kuko na FDLR na ALIR barabikoresheje cyane babyigiye no ku bandi bababanjirije nkuko tuzabyerekana.

Hari inyandiko zasohotse kuri izo mbuga navuze zivuga ko hari imirongo ibiri ya politiki idatsimbuka. Izo nyandiko ni izi: a) “Umurongo wa LUNARI n’uwa PARMEHUTU[1]: N’ubu ruracyageretse” b) “LUNARI na PARMEHUTU bubatse imirongo ibiri politiki y’u Rwanda yagendeyeho kugeza ubu” c) “MU RWANDA HABAYEHO IMIRONGO IBIRI GUSA YA POLITIKI: Uwa LUNARI n’uwa MDR-Parmehutu!”

Muri iyo mirongo ibiri, Munyangaju (Leprophete) bakaba bamamaza uwo bakunda, ariwo PARMEHUTU. Urwo rukundo bafitiye “umurongo” wa PARMEHUTU rubatera no kwifuza kutawamamaza bonyine, noneho bagasaba abantu kwitanga ngo bakore nk’ibyabo. Ubwo butumwa bwo gushishikariza abandi babutanga bakoresheje ijambo rya Bibiliya. “Amosi yahagaze yemye ati: mfite amasambu yanjye n’amatungo ahagije. Gusa Uhoraho yarambwiye ati bisige ujye guhanura. Ariko nari nitunze” (Amos 7, 14-15)

Abo muri Leprophete n’ISHEMA bemeza ko icyo amashyaka ya opposition ahuriyeho ari ubushake bwo gutsinsura/gukuraho ubutegetsi bwa FPR, ukabusimbuza Repubulika ishingiye ku mahame ya demokarasi…” Aha bagahuza na FDU-Inkingi ikomoka kuri PARMEHUTU.

 Muri Leprophete bashimangira ko ntakizahinduka kuri politiki ya PARMEHUTU, ngo kuko n’ijambo ry’Imana ariko ribivuga: “Ibyahozeho ni byo bizakomeza kubaho; ibyakozwe ni byo bizakomeza gukorwa, ugasanga nta kintu gishyashya cyaduka ku isi. Hari ubwo haba ikintu bakavuga ngo dore kiriya ni gishyashya! Burya na cyo kiba cyarabayeho mu binyejana byahise” (Umubwiriza 1, 9-10)

Aba Leprophete barahamya ko “Ibya PARMEHUTU” n’umurongo wayo ntaho byagiye. Kandi ko ngo “FPR ihora yikanga umurongo wa politiki wa Parmehutu ikawuhoza mu ngororero (target).” Basobanura ko “Ingororero cyari igiti bashingagaho intobo bitoza kumasha. Gufora umuheto rero babyitaga kugorora. Aha ni ho haturuka ijambo ingororero.”

Aha ngaha umuntu yavuga ko iyaba FPR ndetse n’amahanga bafatanyaga bagahoza iyi ngengabitekerezo mu ngororero nkuko Leprophete babivuga. Byaba ari byiza kurushaho babikoranye umurava kuko ibitekerezo bimunga umuryango biba bikwiye kuganzwa.

Leprophete iti: “Ubanza FPR yarumvaga PARMEHUTU yarapfuye buhambe. Ubu ariko itangiye kumva ko itanogonotse. Usibye no guteza ubwega ngo PARMEHUTU yazukiye mu Ishema, FPR izi ko umurongo wa politiki udapfa.” Igitekerezo cy’ingenzi muri ibi ni uko iryo shyaka Ishema rigendera kuli politiki ya PARMEHUTU kandi bikaba bibateye ishema. Abakurikirana iby’amashyaka y’u Rwanda nizeye ko ibi babyumvise.

Leprophete isubira mu kinyoma kivuga ko MDR-PARMEHUTU itavanguraga amoko. Ibi bikazasobanurwa bihagije twerekana ko iryo shyaka ryazanye Apartheid mu Rwanda, kandi ko n’abateguye bakanakora jenoside bashingiye ku musingi wubatswe na PARMEHUTU.  Ibyo bikanagaragara cyane aho Leprophete isobanura ko “umurongo wa Repubulika ishingiye kuri demokarasi urangajwe imbere na MDR-Parmehutu”. Iyo ikaba imvugo ihishe kandi igasobanura byinshi.

Uwo munyapolitiki/umupadiri, agaragaza itandukaniro rya ‘MDR 59’ na ‘MDR 91’ Ngo: MDR 59 yarwaniraga ishyaka umurongo w’ibitekerezo. ‘MDR 91’ ngo yo ikaba yararwaniraga imyanya mu butegetsi. Agasobanura ko kutarwanira imyanya kwa ‘MDR 59’ byatumye idacikamo ibice kandi ntiyigurishe ku Mwami. Bati: ‘MDR 91’ yo ni ko byayigendekeye. Yari igendereye imyanya, biyitera kwigurisha iburyo n’ibumoso.”

Uko kwigurisha bavuga ni ukuba MDR yarafatanyije na FPR kurwanya MRND. Ibyo gufatanya kwa MDR na FPR barabigaya bakabibonamo ubugambanyi no kwibeshya. “Bagomba (MDR) kuba baribwiraga bati reka FPR idufashe kugamburuza Habyarimana, tuzayikubita icenga tuyigobotore, cyangwa tuyereke igihandure mu matora.”

Udatinya iyo politiki ya PARMEHUTU n’utayirwanya ni abatayizi n’abo itahekuye ngo amenye ububi bwayo n’ingaruka zayo harimo na jenoside yakorewe abatutsi kuva yatangira mu 1959 kugeza mu 1994. Kwemeza ko iyo ngengabitekerezo ntaho yagiye, ntibabeshya. Hari abakiyifite, barimo ubwanditsi bw’ibyo bitekerezo kimwe n’abari kumwe nabo.  N’ubwo abagifite iyo ngengabitekerezo ari bake kandi nta mbaraga bafite, ubuke bwabo ntibwatuma abantu birara ngo ntacyo bitwaye, kuko uburozi butaba buke.

Jenoside yakorewe abatutsi mu 1994, yarateguwe neza uhereye mu mpera z’1990. Muri iyo myiteguro, ikinyamakuru Kangura cya leta ya Juvenal Habyarimana na MRND, cyasohoye amategeko 10 yiswe ay’abahutu. Itegeko rya nyuma muri ayo, ari naryo rihatse ayandi rishimangira uruhare rw’ingabitekerezo ya Leprophete kimwe n’abandi muri aya magambo: “Revolisiyo yo muri 1959, Kamarampaka yo muri 1961 n’ingengabitekerezo y’abahutu bigomba kwigishwa umuhutu wese kandi ku nzego zose; buri muhutu agomba kwigisha iyi ngengabitekerezo; azafatwa nk’umugambanyi umuhutu wese uzatoteza undi kubera gusoma, kwigisha cyangwa gukwirakwiza iyi ngengabitekerezo.”[2]

Kuba ayo mategeko yarashyizwe ahagaragara mu mpera z’umwaka w’1990, na n’ubu iyo ngengabitekerezo ivugwa muri iri tegeko ikaba igifite abayikwizwa bakoresheje Leprophete, ni uko hari abayimize bunguri ikabayoboka, ikaba inabayobora mu mitekerereze yabo. Kumenya uruhare rw’iri tegeko ni ukureba inshuro amagambo “Hutu” n’ “ingebitekerezo” asubirwamo. Warangiza ukareba uburyo Munyangaju ayamamaza.

Ibyandikwa mu mwaka w’2013 bifitanye isano n’ibyabaye mbere kubera inyigisho. Mu mwaka w’1987 Bikindi Simon yahimbye indirimbo yiswe ‘Twasezereye’ aho yaririmbaga ko basezereye ingoma ya gihake na gikolonize. Muri iyo ndirimbo Bikindi avuga aho ibyo aririmba abivana:

• Ndi muto cyane ibyo sinabibonye, narabibwiwe ndanabisoma;
• Maze kubyumva ndamya Rurema yo yandinze uwo muruho;
• Ngiyo impamvu itumye by’umwihariko njyewe nishimira ubwigenge.
• Ndashimira rwose byimazeyo Abarwanashyaka batubohoye
• Uwari ku isonga akaba Kayibanda, nkazirikana cyane Mbonyumutwa
• N’izindi ntwari bari kumwe,aribo dukesha ubu bwigenge.

Ibyo yaririmbye birasobanura ibyanditswe na Kangura muri iryo tegeko rya 10 ryagenewe abahutu. Ibyo yaririmbye biranasobanura ibyo  na Leprophete bandika bamamaza.  Ni inyigisho zituruka kuri PARMEHUTU n’abarwanashyaka bayo zagombaga kwigishwa utabikoze akaba umugambanyi. Na bikindi ubwe akemeza ko ibyo yaririmbye yabibwiwe akanabisoma gusa.

Mu w’1987 Bikindi yari afite imyaka hafi imyaka 33, kuko yavutse ku itariki ya 28 Nzeri 1954. Na Ngeze wandikaga Kangura yari afite 20 kuko yavutse kuri Noheli (25 Ukuboza 1957). Abaparmehutu bogeza bose ntibanganaga nabo. Barabize barabakunda babakundisha n’abandi igihe kigeze.

Mu gihe Ngeze na Bikindi bari muri gereza, babonye abasimbura mu gutanga amasomo. Abo basimbura si abandi ni abapadiri babiri ba Diyosezi ya Cyangugu bakoresha urubuga rwabo “Umuhanuzi”. Ibi kandi na Myr.Jean Damascene Bimenyimana arabizi.

From 1441 to 1888, a period 450 years, more than 29 million black Africans were terrorized and kidnapped from their virgin homelands and transported across the different oceans as slaves in a carefully planned operation. It was meticulous, discreet and handled by players who knew what would exactly follow. Though the exact number of victims will never be known, the degree of savage cruelty endured, and the consequences the barbaric trade left for Africa will never go away. Unfortunately today Africans themselves have forgotten the human plunder and mass atrocities against black Africans.

The owners of transatlantic ships made a fortune. Slavery created and then relied on a large support network of shipping services, ports, and finance and insurance companies. New industries were created, processing the raw materials harvested or extracted by slaves in the Americas. Along the west coast of Africa, from the Cameroons in the south to Senegal in the north, Invaders built ‘Doors Of No Return’ at Goree Island (Senegal), Bagamoyo and Zanzibar (Tanzania), Island of Mozambique, and hundreds others around Africa’s coast. These forts were no different from abattoirs for butchering Africans.

Africans were often treated like beasts during the crossing. Because a small crew had to control so many, cruel measures such as iron muzzles and whippings were used to control slaves. Over the centuries, at least three million persons died in the Atlantic crossing alone. This meant that the living were often chained to the dead until the corpses were thrown overboard. And then suddenly as the Africans got to understand the scale by looking at the petit materials exchanged for their children, the slave traders needed a new source of income.

By 1870, just about 10% of the continent was under direct European control, with Algeria held by France, the Cape Colony and Natal (both in today’s liberated South Africa) by Britain, and Angola by Portugal. And yet by 1900, European nations had added almost 10 million square miles of Africa – one-fifth of the land mass of the globe – to their overseas colonial possessions. Invaders ruled more than 90% of the African continent.

Blame it all on the Arabs!

One of the chief justifications for this so-called ‘scramble for Africa’ was a fake desire to stamp out slavery. The Invaders and Americans, the sole beneficiaries of the barbaric abuse of Africans, had to find somebody to blame. In May 1873 at Ilala in central Africa, celebrated colonial mastermind David Livingstone opened the blame phase by claiming slave trade had to be stopped because the Arabs inhumanely treated Africans. Livingstone even had a better formula of how to “liberate” Africa using the ‘three Cs’: commerce, Christianity and civilization. It is from this chemistry of “Cs” that Africa has ended up inhuman economic ghost it is today.

In a New York Times Op-Ed (22nd April 2010), author Henry Louis Gates Jr wrote: “While we are all familiar with the role played by the United States and the European colonial powers … there is very little discussion of the role Africans themselves played. And that role, it turns out, was a considerable one, especially for the slave-trading kingdoms of western and central Africa.”

The slave trader’s descendants are telling us ‘we had nothing to do with your demise’, blame it on yourselves. Why do Africans have to accept this state of affairs? Why do Africans in the first place teach this kind of twisted history to their descendants? If the “slave-trading kingdoms” as author Henry Louis Gates Jr calls them, were to blame, then why were Kings like Kabalega of Buganda banished? Why were tens of thousands of Mau Mau Kenyans slaughtered? Here is why; the next phase of the European orchestrated genocide was in the making; colonialism!

In Uganda, the 1900 Buganda agreement stated that the British laws imposed on Uganda would not be applicable over Buganda “in so far as they may in any particular conflict with the terms of this Agreement in which case the terms of this Agreement will constitute a special exception”. The Baganda were blinded to believe that their Kingdom was superior to all the others, and above all, Uganda. The strategy had worked!

By 1960 Buganda had outlived its usefulness. Six years later, Kabaka Mutesa II was deposed as Kabaka, and deported out of Uganda by the Northerners headed by Milton Obote. The north was the new poster boy as they had the guns because they were the army. The Kabaka died a lonely death in 1969 at a flat in London. Obote would also later learn that he was only a pawn on a much bigger chess board. At a Commonwealth summit in Singapore held from January 14 to 22, 1971, British Prime Minister Edward Heath stated that “those who are condemning the British sale of arms to South Africa, some of them will not go back to their countries.” The British had clearly orchestrated the coup against Obote and replaced with Idi Amin, one of the most barbaric criminals who they viewed as “someone we could do business with”.

In Algeria, nearly 2million Algerian Muslim Arabs were tortured and massacred as they fought to kick out their colonial master France who pumped Algerian oil out of their country like it was a gas station in Paris. Independence leaders were assassinated and more controllable brands were installed, only to also be thrown out in similar fashion. The same script took place across all Africa.

Moving further afield, the same anti-people forces silenced the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. It really isn’t that surprising a thing to expect the power-givers and takers to kill someone who threatened their authority and had the power to organize millions to protest it. Tens of millions joined his campaign against poverty wages and ruthless working conditions. Dr King fought against unending wars. It is his power to organize protests that threatened UNCLE SAM’s interests as they were profiting from the wars. When the human cargo was loaded onto the ships, the slave traders took off the ballast they’d brought from England. The pebbles are still scattered all over the shores of Bunce Island, in Sierra Leone.

Vultures fighting for Rotting Congo

Today, the immediate exploitation of “success” against the M23, by combined force of all sorts of armies, has been to voice concern against the disarmament of the FDLR by the neo-colonialist. The little-known “Kanyarwanda war” was the first public display of anti-Tutsi sentiment in post-independence Zaire. It lasted from 1963 to 1966 and resulted in large-scale massacres orchestrated by the politicians installed in Kinshasa. The war focus was the newly created “provincette” of North Kivu, one of the three entities that once formed Kivu province.

The crisis in east DR Congo has suddenly taken a different turn as M23 group is defeated militarily. One wonders whose victory this is – Congo’s army (FARDC), Rwandan rebels FDLR, the United Nations or just one of those battles won by the colonialist governors eager for another slice from part of rotting Africa. To have a better understanding of what happened in east DRC in the past 20 months, we should not lose sight of 1994 when the pitched battles of the Interahamwe genocide militia were explained as criminals carrying out isolated mass killings. It was not until the genocide against Tutsis had been stopped that the world understood the scale. The genocide ideology was designed and nurtured by the same neo-colonialists particularly the French and Belgians until its unsuccessful conclusion.

Twenty years on, the FDLR genocide militias have exploited unwarranted sympathy that has been publicized by the very colonialist forces whose primary investment is to use them as political and military mercenaries against a small African nation of Rwanda. As has been the agenda over the past 20 years, the immediate benefit will be another attempt to re-ignite the unfinished genocide.

At the 1971 UN General Assembly as the seeds of genocide ideology were sowing, Rwanda President Gregoire Kayibanda delivered this message: “The Hutu and Tutsis are two nations in a single state… Two nations between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy, which are as ignorant of each other’s habits, thoughts, feelings as if they were dwellers of different zones or inhabitants of different planets”.

Ironically, the closest aide of the same President Kayibanda, his wife, was a so called “Tutsi”. She had prepared his briefcase carrying the writing pad in which the same message condemning her was stored. Despite the openly genocide statement, nobody raised a finger, and Kayibanda’s godfathers shook their heads in approval. Their plan was going as designed!

The same colonialists created an occupation army with 22,000 men in uniform and costing $1.4 billion a year, the world’s biggest and most expensive peacekeeping operation. When FDLR trounced on villagers, nobody said anything, but when Tutsis rise up against abuses targeted at them, the same MONUSCO, suddenly has exploding love for “civilians”! What else can this state of affairs be described other than pure double standards at best?

Africa’s unsung heroes

In Zaire, the powers-be eliminated Patrice Lumumba in January 1961 because he wanted total independence of his country. The lives of African liberators Rwagasole of Burundi, Abdel Nasser of Egypt and John Muhima Kale of Uganda were decimated by the same forces that remain determined to keep Africa a victim of colonial horror.

According the Daily Monitor article of Dec. 2nd 2012, from Egypy Kale went to the UN General Assembly and submitted a petition for the UN Trusteeship to prepare Rwanda-Burundi for independence. Kale successfully defended the Rwanda-Burundi independence petition on November 17, 1958 and December 5, 1958, to start the independence programme. Kale was banned by the Belgians from ever stepping in Rwanda. He told the UN that Rwanda had no political borders and its people historically moved to and from within the region. That the Rwanda problem was political borders imposition and rearing Rwandans as labourers for Belgians in Congo. Kale died in a plane crash on August 17, 1960 at Kiev, Ukraine, on his way to Moscow, in the then Soviet Union. UNCLE SAM’s weapon of colonialism refused him a platform. His anti-colonial campaigns linked him close to other Pan Africanists like former Egypt’s President Abdul Nasser Jamal.

The Kenyan Mau Mau independence movement was eviscerated like rats. At the peak of their struggle, in April 1952, on Sir Evelyn Baring orders, 200,000 Kenyans were round up into 150 concentration camps littered around Kenya. The routine was severe beatings and assaults in systemized violence which had been approved at the highest levels of the British Government. In the course of interrogations guards would hang detainees upside down and insert sand and water into their anuses. And when the victims of these heinous sought redress in London court recently, all we could see was a media stampede to sanitise Britain.

Why does the world choose to be shamelessly selective in defining and condemning the minimum norms of human rights? How can we allow the colonialists to take us back to the dark days of African patriots whose demise facilitated unhindered proliferation of undemocratic forces and freelance spread of genocide ideology in the region? Why do these adventurists want to remind us of the barbaric acts of slave trade whose museum in Freetown is a display of what was left from their industrial dividends?

The neo-colonialists have occupied sovereign nations in the name of promoting democracy, but when people of Kenya elect their leaders, the goal posts are moved. The so called democracy is undermined with push for prosecution at the International Criminal Court. When will legitimate vote of a people count? Why should they vote, and then suddenly, the vote doesn’t count! There is no doubt the ICC was designed to target Africa and remains the most demeaning neo-colonialist instrument.

Genocidal forces are now the victims!

The fundamental reason for the poverty and underdevelopment of Africa – and of almost all “third world” countries – is neo-colonialism. The agents of the system will do everything possible to hide their guilt because they don’t want the young generations to learn and know the history. It is the same agents that have kept a lid over the 1994 genocide against Tutsis in Rwanda, a creation of the French establishment, by financing the genocide negationist lobby.

French officers directly commanded the pitched battles against the Rwandese Patriotic Army (RPA) which was single-handedly struggling to stop the genocide. Instead of condemning and silencing the interahamwe guns which were slaughtering children, the interahamwe supporters were commanding the genocide militia to counter the RPA advance! So the French were fighting to save the killers and destroy the dead! The French and Belgians have never hidden their antipathy to the RPF. The French allowed thousands of known genocidaires, to transit the Zone Turquoise, escaping the tightening noose of the RPA.

The killers reinvented themselves as leaders of refugee camps, supported by international aid agencies, under UNHCR auspices. International obligations under the humanitarian law and the Genocide Convention were subjugated to a general desire to save lives. The guilty were fed alongside the thousands of children whose images haunted Western television viewers. The administrative structures that had facilitated the massacres of Tutsis in Rwanda were reproduced in the camps.

A similar explanation is being advanced in an effort to sanitise the FDLR. Their neo-colonial supporters are explaining their existence as a force that has evolved and currently comprises people who were born after the genocide.

By Dr. Igban K. Adetunji

By Sophia stein

In Sweet Dreams, documentary film directors Lisa and Rob Fruchtman cleverly lead us into the darkest places to explore the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide of 1994; without dread or fear, we willingly follow them down that hole, because we are going in through drumming and ice cream and who does not love those things.  It’s simply a brilliant approach to story, that is as moving, as it is uplifting.

Ingoma Nshya, which means “New Kingdom,” is the first ever Rwandan women’s drumming troupe.  By custom, drumming in Rwanda was performed for the King only by men.  When the group’s founder, Kiki Katese inquired if drumming had been forbidden to women for any good reason, she was told “maybe because the drum was too heavy.”  Her response in forming the group was defiant, “Okay, then let’s see how strong we are!”

In 1994, close to a million Tutsis were killed by their Hutu neighbors, friends and in some cases family members.  Playwright and director Katese, like a Phoenix risen from the ashes of her country’s calamity, founded Ingoma Nshya in 2005 as a safe space where Tutsi and Hutu women could unite.  Katese becomes inspired to start an ice cream cooperative, “Inzozi Nziza,” (“Sweet Dreams”) with the women in her drumming troupe, and she partners with artisanal ice cream producers Jennie Dundas and Alexis Miesen of Blue Marble Ice Cream in New York to achieve that goal.  The film tracks the journey of the women to accomplish their sweet dream.

Sister and brother filmmaking team, Lisa and Rob Fruchtman are each expert filmmakers in their own right.  Lisa Fruchtman is an Academy-Award winning editor of The Right Stuff,her additional credits include, Apocalpyse Now, The Godfather: Part III, and Children of  Lesser God.  Rob Fruchtman is a Sundance Film Festival award-winning director of Sister Helen, his additional credits include Trust Me and Seeing Truth.  Their partnership is auspicious on this inspired first collaboration.

I had an opportunity to speak with Lisa Fruchtman, Producer/Director/Editor of “Sweet Dreams,” in anticipation of the upcoming premieres in Los Angeles and San Francisco.  We discussed Ingoma Nshaya, Rwandan genocide and mourning — and, of course, ice cream.

Sophia Stein:  The very first thing I notice when I look at the film is the joy, the sheer abandon with which these women drum.  It’s a tribute to the healing power of music.  When was the first time you saw Ingoma Nshaya play?

Lisa Fruchtman:  The first time I saw them play was when we arrived in Rwanda for our shoot.  We had no pre-production on this film.  I was advising at the Sundance Institute film lab in June, 2009, and someone told me a story about what had happened in the theatre lab when Rwandan playwright, Kiki Katese, and ice cream entrepreneur/actor, Jennie Dundas, met.  Kiki put the ideas together in her own head about ice cream, joy, respite, and the focus of her work in Rwanda, which is the rebuilding of the spirit, and she invited Jenny and Alexis (Jenny’s business partner) to come to Rwanda to help her drum troupe start an ice cream shop.  Together they formed a non-profit, and went off to research the idea.  It was a year later when I heard the story and thought, “Wow!  I’m so interested in that, personally.”  With my filmmaker’s brain, “What a way in!”  We instinctively want to turn away from the story of genocide in Rwanda, it’s so horrific, but now there’s another way into the story, something to shoot that might be really interesting or beautiful.  I phoned my brother, Rob, who is a documentary film director, and I pitched the idea to him.  He responded with cautious optimism; “Um-hmm … but Rwanda is very far away, how are we going to do it?”  We didn’t know, but we decided, “Let’s go see,” and we were on a plane for our first shoot within five months of that conversation.  We hadn’t met Kiki or seen the troupe perform, and on the plane we wondered to ourselves:  “How are we going to get the drummers to play for us?”  We were traveling to Rwanda with Alexis, who had completed their pre-production and was now ready to begin the ice cream store project.  We knew that we would follow that process of creating the business, and that the business might be a success or a failure (we didn’t know which), but we thought that it would be interesting.  We arrived in Butare, the Rwandan town where Ingoma Nshaya is located, and low and behold, Kiki was hosting a festival on art, culture, and violence, and the drum troupe was preparing to perform.  There were a hundred women on the grass rehearsing, and that was what we first started shooting.  We were so lucky.

S²:  Had you been to Rwanda, or Africa, for that matter, before?

LF:  I’m a world traveler.  I have done a lot of traveling, but never to Africa previously.  Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, is quite a beautiful city.  Butare is the second largest city, but it’s what we might call a “town.”  It has one very long paved street — that’s it, and some off-shoot dirt roads with houses and markets.  Kiki lives in Butare.  The National University of Rwanda is there, and that’s where we were based.  Most people live in villages in the hills that surround Butare.  Like you see in the film, one girl walks an hour and a half down the slopes to rehearsals in town.

S²:  What research did you do to prepare?

LF:  We read Philip Gourevitch’s fantastic book, We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families (1998).  Philip Gourevitch is a staff writer for The New Yorker and former editor of The Paris Review.  He wrote the book shortly after the genocide, which provides an in-depth immersion into the history, or “the accepted history.”  There are many narratives, depending on your politics.  This highly regarded book was our jumping off point in understanding the political situation during the genocide in Rwanda.

S²:  Kiki Katese is such a powerful and inspiring leader.  “People are not like roads and buildings,” she explains and asks, “How do we rebuild a human being?”

LF:  Kiki is a visionary.  There has been a tremendous amount of rebuilding of the country in Rwanda.  The economy is going great guns; there are women in Parliament, and there is a lot that is really working in Rwanda.  But emotionally, there is a lot of trauma as you would expect, and not a lot of ways of dealing with that.  The mandate of the government is:  “We are all Rwandans, we are going to give up those tribal designations.”  (Even though, of course, everybody knows, who is who.)  “We are going to rebuild this country as Rwandans, and we are going to move forward.”  That’s all very good, but it doesn’t address the emotional realities that this all occurred within one generation.  How are people really going to rebuild themselves?  There are many people who acknowledge that the people who lived through the genocide and even their children may never fully heal.  By introducing moments of healing and by introducing new possibilities, maybe the next generation will be able to move forward.  I think that what is brilliant about Kiki’s ideas are — they are new.  She brought Hutu and Tutsi women together, which was great enough.  She could have invited them to form a dance troupe, which is what already had existed in Rwanda for women, but she didn’t do that.  She founded a drumming troupe, which had never previously existed for women in Rwanda.  Kiki chose drumming, in part, because it is new.  When you introduce one new idea, it creates the space for other new ideas.  Ice cream is the same.  Kiki could have started a basket weaving business or a jewelry making business, any kind of business that already exists for these women.  There are collectives in Rwanda that are doing all of those things.  But she chose something new, something that nobody had ever tried before.

S²:  It is almost unimaginable for Westerners to think that Rwandans have never tried ice cream before!?  One man you interview comments that he has seen people eating it in film …

LF:  Isn’t that delightful? [That Kiki had the foresight to introduce them ice cream into the culture?]  It was delightful to us to see these women lined up to be part of a project when they actually didn’t know what the product was.  They had learned from their involvement with Kiki that something new could transform their lives, and they were willing to go on another journey, even though they weren’t quite sure where it would lead.

S²:  I take it you have tried the ice cream they craft at Inzozi Nziza (Sweet Dreams).  How is it?

LF:  It’s very good.  Blue Marble Ice Cream in New York city is absolutely fantastic; they know what they are doing.  Because of the electricity issues in Rwanda, they decided to make soft-serve ice cream, which is different than the style made at Blue Marble in New York city.  If the electricity goes out (which it does frequently), you may lose what you are in the process of making, but you will not lose stores and stores of inventory, which, of course, would break the bank.  That said, it’s artisanal ice cream — not in the precious way that we make it in this country.  They have local honey, they have local milk, they use local flavors, and it’s simply delicious.

S²:  When the women are forming the cooperative, there is a scene in the film where they are considering the economic commitment that will be required of each member – $10 or $6 a month to participate, and this clearly seems out of reach, impossible maybe, for many of these women.  I am curious, how was that tension resolved?

LF:  It wasn’t totally resolved.  We have hours of footage about that — many meetings that went on for a long time, where they tossed out different ideas about sweat equity and selling produce.  It’s still a work in progress, to be honest.  They have changed the dues structure many times over.  The ice cream store collective is evolving as they go along.  I think we will include information about that, at some point, in our community outreach modules.  The drumming collective, as we indicate in the film, is free and open to everyone.  A business is something different.  I think Kiki’s idea, besides the business realities which have to be addressed, is the commitment reality.  She is kind-of a tough love person – i.e. we don’t just get stuff just handed to us by businesses in New York, we have to step up to the plate.

S²:  At some point, Kiki tells the women that President Kegame has heard about the ice cream project and he wants to introduce himself to them.  We see him listening to his constituents in the village, one by one, as they communicate their various concerns and needs.  When one woman asks him with such care and respect for a cow, without hesitation he grants her request — “Give her a cow!”  “Keep developing yourselves,” he advises his people.  He seems like such a compassionate man.  What were your impressions of him?

LF:  As in many places, it’s a very complex situation.  It is a generous portrait, and that was our experience.  But it was also our decision not to make a movie about Kegame and the politics of Rwanda.

S²:  A sense of suspense builds about whether the shop will open in time.  I love it when the women are praying together for their supervisors.  It is priceless, that look on Jennie’s face – because clearly this is not her method of problem solving.

LF:  That is one scene in which they pray, but they pray a lot!  It’s a very religious country.  In fact, one guidebook on Rwanda specifically advises that it’s best not to express agnosticism in Rwanda because people are so very religious, and it is upsetting to them when somebody expresses a question about God.  The Catholic church was absolutely complicit in the genocide, so there was a movement away from the Catholic church into Seventh-day Adventist and other movements.  There is the whole story of Evangelical influence in Africa, but I’ll leave it that they are very religious and pray often.

S²:  To see the pride and joy of the women at being chosen to work in the ice cream shop – where here, working in an ice cream shop might not really be considered a desirable job – it puts into relief the Western sense of ambition and competition.

LF:  You have to understand that these are women who have never had jobs or training in job skills.  Only elementary school is mandatory in Rwanda.  With the exception of a very few, most of the women have only been educated up through the fifth grade.  Depending on what was happening politically at times, even that short window that they attended school may have been sporadic or disrupted.  This ice cream project has provided the women with business skills.  We show briefly a scene with the group called Business Council for Peace (Bpeace), that trains women in business skills in conflict-affected countries all around the world, including Rwanda, Afghanistan, El Salvador.  There was a lot of training given to all the women, not only the women who got the jobs.  They all learned how to open a savings account, about finance, customer service.  They all had English classes, English being the new language in Rwanda.  It was not previously taught in schools.  The training classes provided the women with lots of new skills that they could take into their lives.  As with people everywhere, some were more ambitious than others.  Some of them have really run with it, and others have not.

S²:  I often hear communicated by foreigners from less developed countries how they much they appreciate the “respect for the law” that they see as a hallmark of U.S. culture. From their perspective, “corruption” is much less an issue in business here, than in their countries of origin.  In the training sessions you film, the trainer emphasizes, “we will all use the same system,” “we will all count the same way.”  Later, one of the women is fired for her poor work attitude (arriving late to work) and for petty theft.  I was curious about your take on the cultural differences and values particular to the Rwandan culture and how those values might impact the conduct of business in the ice cream shop in Butare?

LF:  I think that this government in Rwanda now is promoting very positive values in the country.  There is a Community Service Day, in which everybody participates, called “Umuganda.”  [Rwandans are required to work in their communities from 8:00 am until 11:00 am on the last Saturday of each month.]  Rwanda is not a democracy, and there is a lot of oversight, shall we say.  So it is a controlled environment.  There is a lot of law and order.  How that effects businesses in general, I cannot say.  The training provided by Blue Marble and Bpeace did not emphasize law and order so much as how when you are building a collective, you have to consider the needs of the whole, and not merely yourself and your own individual needs — even if your family is hungry, even if your grandma would like a taste of ice cream.  The shop has to run as a business, and you have to put yourself together in the mindset of a businesswoman.

S²:  The woman who was fired seems to not even really understand her trespass, to her it does not seem like a big deal to arrive late to work –

LF:  Or to take something small, it could be some milk.  In a way, it isn’t a big deal, but it is a big deal.

S²:  Another one of the women is able to build a house as a result her earnings from the cooperative and working at the shop.  Did you have a sense of how much money the women were earning as shareholders in the cooperative and as employees of the shop?

LF:  I cannot recall the exact figure, but I’ll say it’s quite a decent amount of money.  They gave that a lot of thought.  The ice cream shop had to succeed as a business, to work within financial parameters to allow for the potential for success.  The ice cream couldn’t be too expensive because people needed to be able to afford to buy it, but it couldn’t be too cheap, or the women wouldn’t earn enough to cover their expenses.  The same types of considerations were made with regards to salaries for the workers — they were paid a pretty good salary because a portion of that salary went back into the cooperative.  It was a complicated equation.

S²:  During the month of April, you filmed during the National Month of Mourning, when the entire country remembers the 1994 genocide.  When you shot the footage in 2011, the Rwandans were commemorating the horrific events that had occurred seventeen years earlier.  Did you have a sense of what you were entering into?  Were you prepared for what you saw?

LF:  We actually learned about this during our first year of filming, but we made a decision not to return then.  We didn’t feel that we knew people well enough, and we had been told that it was an extremely traumatic time in the country.  We waited a full year, and we thought we were prepared, but honestly, we were not prepared emotionally for the experience.  It was so intense.  Rwanda was like a different country.  The level of depression in the country was just mind-blowing.  We are actually the first people to film the commemoration ceremony in the stadium.  There are a lot of good movies about the genocide and about Rwanda, but they all use archival footage.  This month of mourning is has a lot of elements.  The ceremony in the stadium is at the beginning, after which there is stuff happening everywhere — reburials, services, teach-ins, conversations in churches.  There are memorials sights with skulls and bones dotting the countryside everywhere that people visit.  There is a Holocaust type of museum in the capital.  No music is allowed to be played.  The whole tenor of the country changes dramatically.  Peoples’ emotional states, as you can see, change dramatically.

S²:  I wondered, how you imagine that national hysteria that precipitated the genocide?  Did you witness any evidence of lingering ethnic tensions while you were in Rwanda?

LF:  There are two primary tribes in Rwanda:  The Tutsis and Hutus.  They have both been in Rwanda together since the 17^th Century.  There’s a lot of intermarriage; they share the same language, the same culture, the same traditions, and the same religion.  The bifurcation is similar to that of farmers and ranchers.  Originally, the Hutus more worked the land, where the Tutsis owned cows.  The power relationships have shifted many times throughout history, but the colonial influence of the Belgians exacerbated ethnic tensions in Rwanda.  The Belgians introduced eugenics and a Rwandan version of what we know as the yellow star, identity cards, and assigning peoples these identities.  There is a tremendous amount of intermarriage.  We filmed Hutu and Tutsi women working together both in the drumming troupe and on this business endeavor, the ice cream shop.  The conflicts we witnessed between the women did not seem motivated by ethnic tensions.  Rather, they were the conflicts that arise from scarcity and poverty that besets the people of a small town.

S²:  Have the women seen the film?

LF:  Only the women who have traveled with us have seen the film so far.  Last year,Ingoma Nshya received the Common Ground Award in D.C., past recipients have included Archbishop Desmond Tutu, President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia, Jimmy Carter, and many others.  Five of the women traveled to D.C. to accept that award.  During that trip, we were able to sponsor the women at our screenings in New York and in Amsterdam.  Then they were invited to the Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship in Oxford, England, where they performed.  Kiki was present, and we showed clips from the film.  Now, the women have been invited to TEDWomen 2013, which is happening in San Francisco, December 4 and 5.  Kiki will be giving a TED Talk — which is pretty damn phenomenal — and the women will be performing.  We will be holding them over for our opening weekend of the film in San Francisco.  Starting Friday night, December 6, they will be present throughout the weekend at select screenings in San Francisco, Berkeley, and San Rafael.

S²:  Distribution in Rwanda – is that going to happen?

LF:  There are no movie theatres in Rwanda, and I imagine the film will air on Rwandan television. We plan to return to Rwanda in February and screen the film then.  We hope to show it to the President.  We are looking for outreach support to fund touring Rwanda, and possibly Burundi, with the women and the film.

S²:  Lisa, you are a phenomenally accomplished editor of feature films.  Was Sweet Dreams your first documentary film experience?

LF:  Sweet Dreams is my first documentary feature.  I have to say that I got my start in film as an apprentice with the first documentary film collective in the country – Kartemquin, which still exists.  They have made such fabulous movies as Hoop Dreams, and many others.  I never went to film school.  During my first year in the industry, I trained in documentaries by working at the National Film Board of Canada. Then I moved to the Bay area, and through a weird sequence of events, I was hired as an editor on The Godfather: Part III, and I went into the feature world.  I have had a wonderful, exciting, fabulous career, but in some part of my background and nature, I have always felt located in documentaries.  So I wanted to make this film.  Sweet Dreams is my first documentary, and it’s my first directing project.

S²:  Did you share the directing with your brother, Rob Fruchtman?

LF:  We co-produced, we co-directed, we co-edited; we shared everything.  We had a cinematographer with us for the first of four trips we made to Rwanda, but after that, Rob was the cameraman.  We sat side by side.  Our tiny crew — the two of us, essentially, and our Rwandan interpreter — proved to be perfect for this film.  Particularly in the interviews, where the space we had was less than the space that you and I have sitting across from one another.  We usually were knees knocking in a teeny-tiny dirt house.  It was intimate.

S²:  Was it a shorthand to collaborate with your brother?  Or were there unique challenges?

LF:  In retrospect, it was a little crazy to get on a plane never having worked together.  It worked really well.  I think what has been hardest about this film was not the creative aspect, but the funding aspect.  That has been kind of daunting.

S²:  Do you know anything about Kiki’s latest project – Book of Life – Letters from the Living to the Dead?

LF:  It’s a wonderful project that once again relates to the idea of memory and remembrance, but in a non-traumatic way — not being lost in the grief.  Kiki asked prisoners, perpetrators, as well as, widows, younger students, and survivors to write letters to the dead.  Those letters were whatever the writer wanted to say, such as “Mom, I wish you could have seen me today, I graduated from High School, and I was wearing my beautiful red dress.”  [She tears up.]  This always makes me weep, to be honest.  Kiki is engaged in keeping the connection to those who are gone, but allowing those connections to help the living move into the future, instead of only being focused on the past.  Those letters have taken years to transcribe into French.  Some of them were performed in a reading at the U.N. in 2012.  In April, 2014, for the twentieth commemoration of the genocide, Kiki plans to direct a project that involves these letters being performed along with songs that have been written to take the whole mourning process into a different place.  Provided that we are able to raise the money, we are planning to document that event.

“Sweet Dreams” opens November 29 in Los Angeles and December 6 in San Francisco.  Details here.

Top image: The drummers of “Ingoma Nshaya,” led by Clementine. Photo by Lex Fletch, courtesy of “Sweet Dreams,” the documentary.

View source here

BY JEAN D’AMOUR MBONYINSHUTI

For years, Major Sylvestre Muhirwa, was a spokesperson of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a terrorist group based in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Part of his job was to juggle between radio stations and other media houses operating in North Kivu, in eastern DRC, disseminating propaganda on behalf of the group.

This was before he decided to put down his weapon, and together with his wife and six children, returned home in March this year. He is among the 75 former militiamen who were discharged at Mutobo Demobilisation and Reintegration Centre in Musanze District, after a six-months training. The training entails civic and vocational training to help the ex-militiamen reintegrate in their respective communities.

Muhirwa said in an interview that he operated from an area called Walikale. He said despite being a senior officer in the militia, he was held ‘captive’ as a punishment meted out on those who top commanders suspected were planning to repatriate. “I was close to the senior commanders and interacted with them daily. This meant that organising my repatriation with my family was hard,” Muhirwa said.

Muhirwa on Tuesday rejoined his family in Nyamagabe District. Upon being discharged, they are given financial capital and equipment to help them start up businesses. Muhirwa went to DR Congo in 1994 as a civilian but was later recruited into FDLR and rose through the ranks to become a major.

The FDLR is largely composed of elements responsible for the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, which claimed the lives of close to a million people. “What hurt me most is the fact that I was a captive and yet had no reason to stay in jungles having done nothing wrong back home,” he said.

The escape:

Muhirwa said he got his escape opportunity when his wife fell sick and he sought permission from his commanders to take her to hospital. “Her sickness was a blessing in disguise for me and my family. My children now attend school and get medical care when they fall sick,” he said.

“It was not easy to reach the Monusco (UN) base. Along the way there were Congolese soldiers who were in contact with FDLR and if caught, they could easily betray us,” he added. Another senior officer who completed the course with Mwizerwa is Major Jean Paul Mbabazi, who commanded a unit within the militia group.

Jean Sayinzoga, the chairman of Rwanda Demobilisation and Reintegration Commission (RDRC) said it was a great opportunity for the ex-militias to play a role in the building of their nation. He urged them to integrate in their respective communities and work towards building a peaceful country.

Early November 2013, the rebel group M23 was routed by the United Nations forces known as MONUSCO assisted by the DRC army (FARDC). This was not in any way a promise of peace to the volatile region. As Human Rights Watch’s Ida Sawyer reports, much of Congo’s east remains under the control of other armed groups who filled a security vacuum left when Congolese forces turned their attention to the M23 rebellion over a year ago.

These groups prey on civilian populations: killing, raping, extorting illegal taxes, forcing children to become soldiers, burning villages, and ill-treating those who resist them. Most have taken advantage of and manipulated existing ethnic tensions in an effort to gain control of land and mineral resources, including gold, tin ore, and coltan (widely used in electronic devices). Their alliances, leadership structures, and even names keep shifting. Some have allied with or received support from the Congolese army — itself guilty of perpetrating atrocities; including rape, arbitrary arrests, and the mistreatment of suspected M23 collaborators.

The Congolese government and the U.N. have said one of their next main targets is the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). Many members of the FDLR — which, after earlier iterations, formed in 2000 in opposition to the government in Kigali — are Rwandan and ethnic Hutu. Some of them participated in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, which claimed more than half a million lives. Others, however, were too young at the time to take part in the horrific violence. Some were born in Congo after the genocide, to Rwandan refugee parents; others are Congolese recruits.

The FDLR has committed numerous abuses against Congolese civilians. Gen. Sylvestre Mudacumura, a Rwandan who has commanded the FDLR’s military forces since 2003, is already sought on an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes committed in eastern Congo. According to the ICC, he is allegedly responsible for “attacking civilians, murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, rape, torture, destruction of property, pillaging and outrages against personal dignity.”

The fight against the FDLR has been inconsistent: In late 2008, the FDLR was estimated to have at least 6,000 combatants, controlling large areas of North and South Kivu provinces, including key mining areas. For years leading up to that point, the Congolese government had turned to the FDLR for support in its fight against Rwandan-backed rebel groups and the Rwandan army. This shifted in early 2009, when Rwanda and Congo made a deal: In exchange for Rwanda’s assistance in removing the threat posed by another armed group, the National Congress for the Defense of the People, Congo’s President Joseph Kabila permitted Rwandan troops to conduct joint operations with the Congolese army against the FDLR. The Rwandan army left after just one month, but Congolese forces, together with the U.N. peacekeeping mission in the country, continued military operations against the FDLR. The U.N. also increased its efforts to encourage FDLR combatants to demobilize and return to Rwanda. By early 2012, the FDLR was much weaker and its number of fighters had decreased substantially.

Yet after the M23 rebellion began, and the Congolese army and UN re-focused attention on the new threat, pressure on the FDLR waned again. FDLR combatants began surrendering at a lower rate, and the group continued attacking civilian populations, often in alliance with Congolese Hutu militia groups. I spoke to a woman in October who told me that FDLR fighters had rounded up and raped her and more than 30 other women and girls from her village in the territory of Masisi last year. While they raped her, the FDLR fighters told her she was “worthless.” She lost consciousness, but she believes she was raped by at least five or six men. The woman also said that three girls from her village, ages 7 to 11, died after several FDLR fighters gang-raped them that same night.

Defeating the FDLR will not be easy: Its members, which have faced little government or U.N. pressure for months, are scattered in small groups across a vast territory, and they are experts at disappearing into the forest and blending in with civilian populations. Past military operations against the FDLR have also spurred the group to carry out large-scale attacks on civilians.

Several other Congolese armed groups claim to be protecting the population from the FDLR. One is the Raia Mutomboki (“outraged citizens” in Swahili). This is a loosely organized network of former fighters in other militias, demobilized Congolese soldiers, and youth who have armed themselves largely with machetes and spears. The Raia Mutomboki have killed hundreds of civilians since mid-2012: Often purposefully avoiding direct clashes with the FDLR, they have instead focused their attacks on dependents of FDLR combatants, Hutu women and children who are refugees from Rwanda, and Congolese who are ethnic Hutu.

Among the Raia Mutomboki’s victims is Ernest*, a 12-year-old boy. When I met him late last year, he told me how the Raia Mutomboki had attacked his village in Walikale territory in August 2012.He said the combatants, shirtless and wearing traditional raffia skirts, entered his village, beating on drums and shouting out that ethnic Hutu civilians should leave the village. Ernest and his family — who are Hutu — quickly fled and hid in a thicket of reeds on the outskirts of the village. They thought they were safe, but the Raia Mutomboki combatants found them and proceeded to hack most of the family to death with machetes and spears. Ernest had been carrying his baby niece on his back, and when the Raia Mutomboki killed her, Ernest was covered in her blood, so the attackers assumed he was dead, too. After the attack, he had made it on his own to a displacement camp in a neighboring village several miles away.

Ernest spoke in a soft voice, staring at the corner of the ceiling and fidgeting his hands. He told me the names of those he lost that day: his mother, his father, his four brothers and sisters, his aunt, his uncle, and four little cousins.

Another militia allied with the Raia Mutomboki and currently opposed to the FDLR — although it previously collaborated with the group — has been responsible for some of the most brutal attacks on civilians in recent months. It is led by Ntabo Ntaberi Sheka, a warlord wanted on a Congolese arrest warrant for crimes against humanity. Made up mostly of ethnic Nyanga combatants, Sheka’s militia has killed, raped, and mutilated scores of ethnic Hutu and Hunde civilians in western Masisi and eastern Walikale territories.

A Hutu woman named Janine and some of her grandchildren escaped an attack by Sheka’s militia in late September. Janine was going to her farm to look for food when militia fighters grabbed her and demanded money. She gave them what she had, and as they were counting the money, she managed to escape. She hid in the forest and soon heard gunshots coming from the direction of her village. When she went back the next day, she found that 11 of her family members and neighbors had been killed. Her eldest daughter had been shot in the head, and the daughter’s six-month old baby had been stabbed multiple times in the chest, head, back, and ribs. Janine said that when she found him unconscious next to his mother’s body, he had lost a lot of blood and was close to death. Janine and others took him to the hospital in the town of Bibwe, at least a seven-hour walk up and down several steep hills through the forest.

Janine was holding the baby when we spoke. She said she was worried because he wasn’t getting milk, and she didn’t know how she’d care for all her orphaned grandchildren — there are now 10 — on her own.

In the wake of defeating the M23, the Congolese government and the U.N. must address the threat posed by groups like the FDLR, the Raia Mutomboki, and Sheka’s militia. This should include efforts to encourage combatants to disarm voluntarily, restore state authority in areas controlled by armed groups, and arrest leaders wanted for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

To date, however, such efforts have been insufficient. Little has been done to curb abuses or investigate, arrest, and prosecute those most responsible for them. The government also has no official program for disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of former combatants. In the past, some combatants have gone to regroupment sites to await such a program, but many gave up on waiting and returned to their militia groups.

This is especially worrying given the recent wave of fighters turning themselves in after witnessing the M23′s demise. For these defections to be meaningful, the Congolese government, with international support, must act quickly to step up demobilization and reintegration initiatives. Otherwise, whatever improvements in security the M23′s surrender may have brought will be short lived — and the road toward peace will remain as long as ever.

Na: Tom Ndahiro

Ku wa 21 Mutarama  2013 kuri uru rubuga nanditse nibaza ku mibanire y’Umwepiskopi wa Cyangugu n’abapadiri be Thomas Nahimana na Fortunatus Rudakemwa. Kanda kuri Musenyeri Bimenyimana wa Diyoseze ya Cyangugu afitanye irihe banga na Le prophete? ubyisomere.

Ibibazo nibajije mu ntangiriro z’uyu mwaka byari bishingiye ku guceceka kwa Myr. Bimenyimana ku marorerwa akorwa n’abo bapadiri be.  “Ese guceceka kwa Musenyeri Bimenyimana byaba biterwa ni iki? Ni ububasha buke ahabwa n’amategeko cyangwa ni ukutayamenya? Byaba se biterwa no kuba atabona ububi bw’ibyo abapadiri Rudakemwa na Nahimana bakora, cyangwa ni ukwanga kwiteranya na bo? Byaba se bishoboka ko nta bubasha yaba akibafiteho? Aho nta banga baba bariya bapadiri na Musenyeri wabo baba bafitanye tukaba twibaza byinshi bitazabona ibisubizo?”

Nashoje iyo nyandiko mvuga ko ibyo byose ari byo byatumye twongera kubyibaza kandi tukazakomeza kubyibaza. Umwaka urangiye igisubizo kibonetse. Guceceka kwa Musenyeri Bimenyimana biraterwa n’uko hari ibanga agomba kuba afitanye na bariya bapadiri b’Impuzamugambi/Interahamwe.

Kenshi izina Impuzamugambi riza vuba iyo mbavuga kuko banyibutsa perezida wa CDR Martin Bucyana.

Soma kandi n’indi nkuru nise ‘Padiri Nahimana Yasabye Musenyeri Bimenyimana Gucisha Make’ nanditse ku wa 18 Gashyantare 2013.  Hanyuma unasome indi nahaye umutwe ‘Papa Benedigito XVI yiyemeje kwegura Myr Bimenyimana nafate icyemezo cyo kwitandukanya n’abigisha ubugome’ yo ku wa 26 Gashyantare 2013.

Vuba aha nanditse ko ‘Mu Rwanda hari Umupadiri Ucyita Abantu Imburagasani n’Inyenzi’ nkurikizaho indi ‘Abapadiri ba Cyangugu bigisha PARMEHUTU mu ijambo ry’Imana’.

Ibyo abo bapadiri baje kwandika ku rubuga rwabo, byatumye numva ko hari ibanga riri hagati yabo n’ubayobora. Myr. Jean Damascene Bimenyimana.

Nkuko basanzwe babikora ntibigeze banyomoza ibyo nabavuzeho, ahubwo barabishimangiye ko ntaho bibeshye cyangwa bakabije mu kwigisha urwango rubarimo. Uretse ko batazi ko ibyo bavuga ari bibi! Bafashe umwanya wo kwerekana inkomoko y’inyandiko zabo nari naraburiye umwanya mu zanjye.

Abo bapadiri bemeje ko ibyo navuze ari byo, bemeza ko Myr. Bimenyimana yabeshye abantu ko yahagaritse Padiri Nahimana. N’ubwo Nahimana ari umuyobozi w’ishyaka yiyemerera ko ari umupadiri uganje.

Hari inyandiko zibyemeza ko akiri Padiri. Reba aho kuri urwo rubuga bahitishije itangazo ryo ku wa 23 Ugushyingo 2013, rirwanya gahunda ya ‘Ndi Umunyarwanda’. Uwa mbere wasinye ni “Padiri Thomas Nahimana” nk’umuyobozi w’ishyaka ISHEMA. Abandi basinye ni Munyampeta Jean-Damascène (PDP-Imanzi) Kazungu Nyilinkwaya (PPR-Imena) na Ryumugabe Jean-Baptiste (PS-Imberakuri-PAWA)[1] 

Ahandi berekana ko akiri umupadiri munsi y’inkuru ifite umutwe “Interahamwe zirica ariko Inkotanyi zo zirabaga “, dixit Mgr Smaragde Mbonyintege.” Yo ku wa 29 Ugushyingo 2013. Iyo nyandiko bakaba barayirayeho kuko yasohotse mu gicuku saa sita n’iminota 16 bayita ngo ni “Gusubiza Tom Ndahiro” Reba Ubwanditsi bwa Leprophete-Umuhanuzi

Nizeye ko ibyo banditse kuri Myr. Mbonyintege w’i Kabgayi azabyivugira kuko abishoboye.

Leprophete yamamaza umujenosideri Bikindi

Kugirango abo bapadiri banemeze ko koko ari Impuzamugambi, ku wa 28 Ugushyingo 2013, Leprophete yanditse kuri Minisitiri Murekezi Anasthase[2] bamugaya ko yatanze umusanzu w’igitekerezo cye muri gahunda ya “Ndi Umunyarwanda”.

Kugirango bumvikanishe ko Minisitiri Murekezi yahemutse, bashyiraho indirimbo ya Bikindi Simon, n’ifoto ye munsi y’amagambo “Umuhutu Bikindi ntacyo atabwiye benewabo: Inda y’abahutu!!!!”

Munsi y’ifoto ya Bikindi Leprophete bati: “Abatazi Bikindi nguyu, n’ubwo hari abavuga ko indirimbo ze zabibaga urwango, njye (Leprophete) nasanze yarabwiraga inda bagira kuko nicyo kibazo cya mbere kibugarije kandi kizabasiga ku gasi.” Leprophete ikavuga ko ngo ahari kujya ubwenge usanga abahutu benshi barahashyize igifu. Agasoza gushimira Bikindi abwira (abahutu) ngo “nibakenyere bapfe nk’ibimonyo ni ukutumva kwabo.” Ibi ubisanga aha

Myr Bimenyimana akwiye kuvuga

Twizere ko Musenyeri Bimenyimana azagira icyo abivugaho. Kuko kutagira icyo avuga kuri iyi ngengabitekerezo y’urwango na jenoside itihishira bizasobanura ko ayishyigikiye. Kwanga ikibi no gutoza abandi kucyanga byagombye kuba mu nshingano z’umuyobozi nka Myr. Bimenyimana.

Kuri iyi ngingo ndagirango mbaze Myr. Bimenyimana. Igihe cyose nanditse ku bintu bibi bikorwa n’aba bapadiri be, nta na rimwe bari bavuga ko mbabeshyera ngo nibura bampinyuze. Icyo bahisemo ni ukwibeshya no kubeshya abantu ko ibyo nandika biterwa no kurwanya Kiliziya Gatolika.

Mu nyandiko y’abo bapadiri ya vuba aha navuze bemeza ko ngo nta cyiza “nshobora kwifuriza Kiliziya Gatolika.” Ngo ko ahubwo mpora nifuza “guteranya abayigize, cyane cyane abayayiyobora,…”

Ibi bitumye nongera kubaza Myr. Bimenyimana: Ibivugwa n’aba bapadiri abiha akahe gaciro? Ko azi ko ari ibinyoma, iyo ativugiye nta muvugizi agira muri Diyosezi ngo agire icyo abivugaho?

Ni ukuri kutari ibanga ko abantu bigisha urwango urwo arirwo rwose mbarwanya uko nshoboye nkanabigaragaza. Baba ari abari mu madini n’abatayarimo. Ese kuri Musenyeri Bimenyimana, ari urwanya urwango n’uwigisha urwango yahitamo nde? Hagati y’uwamamaza urwango n’urwamagana akanarurwanya, urwanya Kiliziya ni nde?

Ko inshingano y’ibanze ya Kiliziya ari ukwigisha urukundo, byaba byarahindutse? Ko abo bapadiri bavuga ko kugaya ibyo bakora ari “ukwanga no kurwanya Kiliziya”, ibyo bandika cyangwa bavuga by’urwango ni ubutumwa bwa Kiliziya?  Ese naba mbabangamiye Kiliziya kubera kurwanya ingengabitekerezo kirimbuzi nk’iya bariya bapadiri?

Ibi bibazo bimwe bifite ibisubizo byoroshye kubona, ariko birabazwa ngo n’abandi bantu bafata umwanya wo gutekereza ngo babyibaze.

Nta muntu washimira Bikindi ko ari umuntu mwiza w’umuhanuzi, azi ibyo yakoze atari nka we. Si we wenyine bashima. Hari inyandiko kuri urwo rubuga rwabo yanditswe n’uwiyise Umutaripfana Venant Nkurunziza ku wa 12 Ugushyingo 2013 bise “Tumenye neza intwari za Revolution ya 1959: Nyakubahwa Grégoire Kayibanda”.

Kayibanda yitwa intwari nka Mandela akitwa umuntu wagize “umuhamagaro” agatumwa n’Imana. Ibi nibyo bishimwa n’abapadiri bigize abavugizi ba ‘Kiliziya’. Kuri abo bapadiri Kayibanda akwiye kuba umutagatifu!

Na: Tom Ndahiro

Ukwezi kw’Ukuboza kwageze, ni ku itari ki ya mbere yakwo. Nsuye urubuga rw’abapadiri Thomas Nahimana na Fortunatus Rudakemwa ngo ndebe icyo batangiranye ukwezi kwa nyuma kw’umwaka w’2013. Reba aha

Binahuriranye ni uko ari umunsi w’icyumweru. Umunsi abakristu benshi batabonye umwanya wo kujya mu misa yo hagati mu cyumweru, bahurira muri za Kiliziya zitandukanye bagasenga.

Icyo nguyeho kuri urwo rubuga ni inyandiko ya Padiri Thomas Nahimana yise “DUSANGIRIJAMBO. Nta joro ridacya, Umukiza aregereje: Nidukanguke tube maso!”

Ni inyandiko yanditse ku buryo bukurikije gahunda isanzwe ya misa uretse ko nta ndirimbo n’amasengesho bisanzwe.

Umutwe w’iyi nyandiko sengesho utumye nibaza ko hari ibitangaza byabaye umwarimu w’urwango yamenye impuhwe n’urukundo.

Umwanditsi wayo niwe Musenyeri Jean Damascene Bimenyimana w’i Cyangugu avuga ko yahagaritse kandi ngo atari byo. Arcyari Padiri no kuri internet babireba.

Inyandiko ya misa yo kuli Leprophete, ndayisomye  mpereye ku masomo ya liturjiya ku Isomo rya mbere ni iryo muri Izayi/Yesaya 2,1-5.

Ndebye aho yanditse inyugutsi zibyibushye aho Izayi avuga ngo: “Nimuze tuzamuke tujye ku musozi w’Uhoraho, ku Ngoro y’Imana ya Yakobo. Azatwereka inzira ze tuzikurikire.”

Ibikurikiraho ni aho abo mu Nzu ya yakobo babwirwa ngo “nimuze, tugendere mu rumuri rw’Uhoraho.” 

Akurikijeho Zaburi ya 122 (121).  Nsomye uko bikurikirana ariko ijisho ryihutiye aho “Padiri” abyibuhije inyuguti handitse ngo “Nimuze dusange Uhoraho twishimye.”

Numvise nishimiye aho asoreza ngo “Kubera abavandimwe banjye n’incuti zanjye, mpimbajwe no kukubwira nti “Amahoro naganze iwawe!”

Nti noneho se atekereje amahoro? Ni icyizere gisa ntahiye!

Misa ya Leprophete irakomeje kandi igeze kure. Ni ku Isomo rya kabiri aho yigisha ibyandikiwe Abanyaroma 13, 11-14a.

Impuzamugambi Padiri Nahimana ati: Bavandimwe, mumenye ko aya magingo turimo ari igihe cyo gukanguka mukaba maso, kuko ukurokorwa kuturi hafi ubu ngubu kurusha igihe twakiriye ukwemera. Nongeye kureba inyuguti zibyibushye kandi ziciriwe umurongo, ndibajije.

Akurikijeho ni amagambo meza ariko aho avugiye  “gukanguka” no “kuba maso” binteye kugira amatsiko y’ibikurikira, cyane cyane ko muzi nk’Impuzamugambi.

Ibyo nsomye binyibukije ikinyamakuru Kangura n’ishyaka ry’abajensdieri rya  CDR. Kimwe cyakoraga akazi ko “kuvana abantu mu bitotsi”, abasederi bakavuga ko bo bahora “bari maso”.

Amagambo anteye amatsiko atumye nkomereza mu Ivanjiri ya Matayo 24,37-44. Impuzamugambi Padiri Nahimana akomereje kuri “Yezu abwira abigishwa be ati “Mu gihe cy’ukuza k’Umwana w’umuntu bizamera nko mu minsi ya Nowa. … Nuko rero murabe maso…”

Kuba maso birongeye bisubiye mu nyuguti zibyibushye zinacibwaho n’umurongo kwerekana uburemere bwayo. Araganisha he?

Ageze kuri “Tuzirikane”. Nyuma yo kuba maso ijambo “Tuzirikane” rinyibukije ikinyamakuru cyandikwaga n’ishyaka CDR cyitwa ZIRIKANA. Ikinyamakuru cyigishaga urwango ku buryo budasanzwe.

Impuzamugambi Padiri Nahimana inyandiko arongeye ayishyize mu nyuguti zibyibushye, aho agira ati: “Nta joro ridacya, Umukiza aregereje : Nidukanguke tube maso.”

Icyo akurikijeho ni ubuhanuzi ko atangiye kwiyumvamo ko “iyi Adventi dutangiye” idasanzwe ku Banyarwanda. Ati wagira ngo “ni iya nyuma, maze Umukiza agasesekara.” Ngo uwo mukiza ariko akaba atari wa wundi uzaza “ku munsi w’imperuka…abemera bategereje”.

Nti ese uyu ni umupadiri utagitegereje umukiza wa nyuma y’izuka? Nyamara niko bimeze!

Impuzamugambi Padiri Nahimana arakomeje na misa ye ati: “hagati aho hashobora guhita n’abandi bacunguzi banyuranye.”

Uwo mucunguzi aramusobanuye,  ko ari “nk’uwakiza abaturage ingoma mbisha ya “Ndi umunyarwanda.”  Padiri Nahimana agasoza iyo ntero yibaza k’uby’uwo mucunguzi ngo “na we ntiyaba ari Umutabazi?”

Harya kuba cyangwa kwiyibutsa ko turi abanyarwanda burya hari ababibonamo ishyano n’akaga? Uyu mupadiri w’impuzamugambi aragaragaza ko ari ko abibona.

Inyigisho ye irakomeza yibutsa ibya liturjiya agira ati: “Icyo liturjiya isaba buri wese ni ingenzi : NIDUKANGUKE TUBE MASO, DUTEGURE INZIRA . Ntabwo Umukiza mukuru akeneye kugaruka aje kureba imirambo y’abantu, “ikuzo ry’Uhoraho ni abantu babayeho byuzuye “. Kandi umuntu uriho byuzuye si urangwa n’amaganya ya buri gihe kubera incyuro ahozwaho ; si uhora abunza imitima kubera iterabwoba ahozwaho n’ubutegetsi bw’Abidishyi ; si uhozwa ku kenke z’intambara z’urudaca kandi zisesa amaraso ; ntakeneye guhora acishwa bugufi aryozwa ibyaha byakozwe n’abandi ; si umwenegihugu usabwa gutuka no gusebya uwamwibarutse kugira ngo abishuka ko u Rwanda ari umurage wabo bwite basigiwe na ba se, bakunde bamuhe uburenganzira bwo kukibamo!”

Ahandi ati: “Igihe cyo gukanguka tukaba maso, ni n’icyo kwanga AGASUZUGURO dushyirwaho n’abatemera Imana n’igikorwa kiruta ibindi yakoze cyo kuremana umuntu ishema n’ubwigenge bitavogerwa.”

Arasaba Imana ngo “Iyaba iyi adventi dutangiye yashoboraga gufasha abanyarwanda gushiguka mu bitotsi bagakanguka…”.

Ibyo yakurikijeho bindi ndabyihoreye njye aho asoza misa ye. Mbere yo gusoza avuga ngo “Uwanyu, Padiri Thomas Nahimana” abwira abasomyi be ngo: “Nifurije Adventi nziza abifuza gukanguka, bakinyagambura. Noheli nziza …”

Amatsiko arashize, nsanze Nahimana nzi akiri wa wundi wa Leprophete.

Ubutumwa burimo ni ubuhe?

Ibiri muri iyi misa mbigejeje ku basomyi b’Umuvugizi, ariko by’umwihariko abashinzwe gukurikirana imikorere y’abo Bapadiri. Musenyeri wa diyosezi ya Cyangugu niwe ubwirwa.

Ibyo gukanguka no kuba maso nsimbisubiramo kuko abazi ibyabaga mbere no mu gihe cya jenoside baribuka Kangura yiyitaga “Ijwi rigamije gukangura no kurengera rubanda nyamwinshi”. Baranibuka igitongero cy’impuzamugambi za CDR cya “TURI MASO”

Ijambo “Umucunguzi” Nahimana yakoresheje riraganisha ku ngabo za FDLR kuko ziyita “ABACUNGUZI”. Abatabizi nibabimenye ni uko bimeze.

Umutabazi uvugwa na Impuzamugambi Padiri Nahimana, si umutabazi w’abakristu. Ni “umutabazi” waririmbwe mu ndirimbo “INTABAZA” ya BIKINDI Simon. Muri iyi ndirimbo Mutabazi ajya kuraguza kwa BIRYABAYOBOKE ashakira intsinzi “Rubanda nyamwinshi” rwitwa ko rumarana.

Mutabazi uwo akaza guhindukamo guverinoma yahagarikiye ikorwa rya jenoside yakorewe abatutsi yiyise “Guverinoma y’Abatabazi.”

Incamarenga ziri mu bice bimwe biri muri iyi nyigisho ni aho abwira abantu bamwe, muri gahunda ya ‘Ndi Umunyarwanda”. Abo atongera mu ntonganya ni abavuze ku mugaragaro ko bagaye ibigayitse byakozwe n’ababyeyi babo cyangwa abavandimwe babo bazi.

Iyi nyigisho iratangwa n’umuntu ukiri umupadiri kandi ubifitiye ububasha bwo kwigisha. Niba Myr. Bimenyimana acyemera ubukristu, akaba akinemera ko Umupadiri (diocesan) ayoborwa na Musenyeri, akwiriye kugira icyo atangaza kuri aba bapadiri be.

Myr. Bimenyimana akwiye kugira icyo avuga kuri izi nyigisho z’urwango mu mwambaro w’ijambo ry’Imana. Icyo umupadiri avuze, n’ubwo yaba Impuzamugambi nka Nahimana cyangwa Rudakemwa kiba gitandukanye n’icy’abandi.

Iyi Mpuzamugambi irigaragaza ko ariyo yemera Imana kuko ivuga ko igihugu kibangamiwe “n’abatemera Imana”. Ese Myr. Bimenyimana abona inyigisho z’ubugome z’aba bapadiri ariryo yogezabutumwa bw’Imana riboneye?

Igihe cyose mu misa abantu basabira imbabazi ibyaha bakoze n’ibyo batakoze. Bakanasabira imbabazi ikintu kibi baba baratekereje. Ko ibi bisa nkaho bitakiba mu nyigisho z’aba bapadiri ba diyosezi ya Cyangugu, n’ubwo atari bo bonyine, iyi nyigisho yaba yaravuyeho?

Umuyobozi w’aba bapadiri, niba atabahannye ku bijyanye no kuba banyuranya n’amahame y’idini, n’abafashe gufasha abanyarwanda baharanira kugaruka mu nzira y’ubuzima bivana mu nzira y’urupfu nk’iyo aba bapadiri bahezemo.

Ni ah’ubutaha!

Na: Tom Ndahiro

Vuba aha hari urubuga rwiyita “Ijwi rya Rubanda” rwagiranye ikiganiro na Marie Claire Mukamugema.

Iri ni izina “Ijwi rya Rubanda” rikomoka ku gihe cya PARMEHUTU kuko aribwo hari ikinyamakuru gifite iryo zina.

Na nyuma yo kubaho kw’amashyaka menshi mu Rwanda mu 1991, ishyaka MDR ryagize ikinyamkuru nk’icyo kimwe nk’URUMURI RWA DEMOKARASI.

Uyu Mukamugema ni umukobwa wa Dominiko Mbonyumutwa wabaye perezida w’u Rwanda mbere y’uko rubona ubwigenge.

Muri icyo kiganiro Mukamugema yavuze ko ngo ahamagariye abanyarwanda kuvuga ibigwi bya Gregoire Kayibanda na Juvenal Habyarimana.

Mukamugema ati: “Kugeza kuri uyu munsi hari benshi bumva ko bari babayeho neza ku ngoma ya Kayibanda cyangwa se ya Habyarimana.”

Ibi rwose ni ukuri kuko mu gihe hari bamwe bapfaga abandi bahunga cyangwa babwerabwera, hari abari baryohewe. Hari abicaga bakagororerwa. Mukamugema yari muri abo bari bamerewe neza.

Uyu Mukamugema ni umugore wa Mbonampeka Stanislas.  Uyu Mbonampeka akaba ari umuntu wigeze kuba Minisitiri w’Ubutabera muri guverinoma yiswe iya Nsanzimana ataraba PL-PAWA.

Uyu Mbonampeka akaba yaranabaye Minisitiri w’Ubutabera wa Guverinoma y’Abatabazi yakoreraga i Bukavu na Goma. Guverinoma yagiyeho mu kwezi kw’Ukwakira 1994.

Muri icyo kiganiro Mukamugema yagiranye n’Ijwi rya Rubanda yavuze ko ngo “Niba hari umunyarwanda wakoze ibishoboka byose kugirango yunge abanyarwanda ni  Habyarimana.”

Ku rubuga rw’iki gitangazamakuru bafite ibyo biyama ngo: “Nyabuneka, Ijwi rya Rubanda ntiyemera abiyoberanya cyangwa batanga informations zitarizo kuri uru rubuga”

Ese koko ibyo Mukamugema yavuze kuri Habyarimana n’ubumwe ni ukuri si ikinyoma? Kuki atavuze Theodore Sindikubwabo, baba barapfuye iki ko nawe yari muri abo?

Ubumwe bwazanywe na Habyarimana tuzabugarukaho.

The institution dubbed the last colonial museum in the world is packing up its stuffed animals and controversial statues this weekend as it closes down for a three-year makeover aimed at modernising the monument to King Leopold II and his murderous reign in the Belgian Congo.

The Royal Museum for Central Africa, at Tervuren on the outskirts of Brussels, began life as a temporary exhibition in 1897. As accounts of mass murder, mutilation and enslavement began emerging from the Congo, which Leopold had been running as his private fiefdom since 1885, the king decided to host a show celebrating his great “civilising” mission and all the riches it would bring.

The exhibition was so successful that it was transformed into the permanent museum which stands today, all its neoclassical flourishes funded by money from the pillaged African nation. But while books such as King Leopold’s Ghost have exposed the brutal truth about the colonial occupation, the museum has remained frozen in time.

“The last time the museum was changed profoundly was in 1957, before the independence of Congo [in 1960],” said Guido Gryseels, the director, who is determined finally to haul the museum into the 21st century.

Entering the grand rotunda, visitors are greeted with statues of Europeans in gilded robes cradling naked African children, above plaques that extol Belgium for bringing “civilisation”, “security” and “well-being” to the Congo.

There is a wall devoted to the thousands of Belgians killed in the country, but barely a word on the millions of Congolese victims. Africans are portrayed as savages in loincloths and brandishing spears, while in almost every room there is a statue of a regal Leopold, including one bust carved entirely from ivory.

Belgium’s Congolese community has been lobbying the museum for decades to remove or contextualise the exhibits. Mr Gryseels said the turning point came in 2005 when the museum hosted an exhibition directly addressing colonial abuses. “Until that time in Belgium, everybody still followed the premise that Belgium had brought civilisation to Africa,” he said.

Now he feels the nation is ready for a museum reflecting modern Africa. When it reopens in 2017, the focus will be on showcasing the diversity of the continent in zones entitles “Man & Society” and “Landscape & Biodiversity”.

Visitors will no longer enter through the rotunda where the statues stand. Instead, they will pass through a tunnel explaining the context of the colonial-era exhibits, some of which will remain. “We are not going to throw everything out of this museum and just act as if the colonial past never happened,” Mr Gryseels said. “We will remain a place of memories on the colonial past but, at the same time, we want to become a window on contemporary Africa.”

View source

By Olivier Nduhungirehe

There is a general consensus that one of the root causes of the conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is the 1994 genocide perpetrated against the Tutsi in Rwanda. The former Government’s army (ex-FAR), the Interahamwe militias and other génocidaires fled to former Zaire in July 1994, where they were warmly welcomed and received support from former President Mobutu. Indeed, not only did they walk free, without being disarmed, demobilised or held accountable, but they were never separated from genuine refugees, allowing them to effectively control refugee’s camps, under the UN watch.

After the Congo wars and the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement of July 1999, the UN Security Council established, by resolution 1279 (1999) [1], the UN Observation Mission in DRC (MONUC), which mandate was expanded by resolution 1291 (2000) [2], to include protection of civilians “under imminent threat of physical violence”. In 2010, the Mission was renamed, by resolution 1925 [3], UN Organization Stabilization Mission in DRC (MONUSCO), with a mandate including the “support [to activities of DDRRR and to] strategies towards a sustainable solution of the FDLR issue, including repatriation, reinsertion or resettlement in other areas, or judicial prosecution as appropriate, with the help of all countries, especially those in the region”.

The mandate of both MONUC and its successor MONUSCO, vis-à-vis the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) was clear: (1) protection of civilians against an imminent threat from that movement and (2) support to strategies to find a sustainable solution to the FDLR, including DDRRR and judicial prosecution. However, it is regrettable to note that since the first deployment of MONUC, thirteen years ago, little was achieved by MONUC/MONUSCO on that front.

In the meantime, the Rwandan genocidal forces of 1994 were, in 1997, transformed into the Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR). In 2000, after the inclusion of ALIR on the US Terrorist Exclusion List [4] for the massacre of western tourists in Bwindi National Park in Uganda [5], the movement was renamed Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). According to MONUSCO, the FDLR currently controls different areas in North and South Kivu, with are even much wider that the territories formerly occupied by the March 23 Movement (M23). In December 2012, the FDLR were included on the UN sanctions list, for “serious violations of international law involving the targeting of women and children in armed conflict, including killing and maiming, sexual violence, and forced displacement” [6]. The movement is well known in eastern DRC for using “sexual terrorism” as a weapon of war. [7] For all those crimes, most of the FDLR leadership was indicted by international and European criminal jurisdictions, including Sylvestre Mudacumura, its force commander. [8]

It is here important to note that the FDLR are not only a threat to civilians in eastern DRC but are also a threat to Rwanda, where they have vowed to pursue the ‘unfinished job’ of 1994. In this respect, it is deplorable to note that the genocide ideology of this movement is even transmitted to their children, most of them enrolled as soldiers, to the extent that a young boy, born in the DRC camps after the 1994 genocide, can declare that his main objective is to “kill Tutsis wherever they are”. [9]

Since the genocide of 1994, the ex-FAR/Interahamwe/ALIR/FDLR attacked Rwanda and killed Rwandans on many occasions. On 18 March 1997, they attacked the Nyange High School, in western Rwanda, where they killed students (now celebrated as national heroes) who refused to identify themselves as Hutu or Tutsi, stating loud and clear: “Twese turi abanyarwanda” (‘we are all Rwandans’). [10] Several other attacks and incursions in Rwanda also took place, until recently, in November and December 2012, as well as in May 2013. During the final battle between the DRC’s Armed Forces (FARDC) and the M23, the FDLR were even amassing troops in Bunagana, near the border of Rwanda. [11]

It is in this context, in which MONUC/MONUSCO failed for thirteen years to protect Congolese civilians against the FDLR and to prevent attacks and incursions in Rwanda, that the Force Intervention Brigade (FIB), under MONUSCO, was created. Resolution 2098 (2013) of the Security Council gave the FIB an offensive mandate, which includes “to prevent the expansion of all armed groups, neutralize these groups, and to disarm them.” [12] A third mandate for a third force, in thirteen years.

Nonetheless, resolution 2098 was adopted unanimously and, in its explanation of vote, Rwanda stated that the FIB should “focus on the negative forces that are active in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, especially the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR).” [13] Regrettably, the MONUSCO FIB, upon deployment, chose to restrict its action on the M23. The head of MONUSCO explained before the Security Council, on 21 October 2013, that MONUSCO may have the capacity to target several armed groups at the same time, but noted that the FARDC would not follow through to occupy the liberated territories, as they were only focused on the M23.

But now that the M23 has ended its hostilities, we believe that it is time for MONUSCO to fully implement resolution 2098 and launch, together with the FARDC, operations aimed at eradicating, once for all, the FDLR from DRC soil. While encouraged by different recent statements by the UN Security Council, the MONUSCO leadership and the DRC Government, I remain sceptical on the will of MONUSCO and the FARDC to effectively fight the FDLR. And I am here backed by thirteen years of failure, the lack of interest shown by the FIB contingents, as well as by credible information on the collaboration between the FDLR and both the FARDC and some elements of the FIB. [14]

In any case, I believe that this time, MONUSCO could not walk away with its usual excuses. MONUSCO should be held accountable on action taken to fight the FDLR; and its activities must be closely monitored by the Security Council, in which Rwanda is currently a non-permanent member. This Mission is indeed the largest UN peacekeeping force, with nearly 20,000 troops and an annual budget of almost $1.5 billion. Therefore, the international community cannot afford any other ‘business as usual’, from a force that is unable or unwilling to address the main source of insecurity in eastern DRC since 1994.

Indeed, the FDLR is not an armed group like the others operating in eastern DRC. The FDLR is “a group under UN sanctions whose leaders and members include perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and have continued to promote and commit ethnically-based and other killings in Rwanda and the DRC”, as the Security Council qualified it in its presidential statement S/PRST/2013/17 of 13 November 2013. [15] In addition, it is one of the oldest armed groups established in eastern DRC, which threat posed to Congolese communities, including the Rwandophone community, triggered the creation of various armed groups in that region.

Therefore, the FDLR should be the top priority of MONUSCO, which current mandate expires on 31 March 2014. I therefore sincerely hope that the Mission would, by that time, have made concrete progress towards the eradication of the FDLR. This would undoubtedly be a decisive step towards the full restoration of the territorial integrity of the DRC Government, on its territory. It would also significantly improve bilateral relationships between DRC and Rwanda and enable both countries to focus on economic projects, including in the framework of the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Region (CEPGL).

In conclusion, I strongly believe that peace, which has been elusive in DRC for 50 years, can be achieved in that country. And the only way for meaningful success is, for the short term, to eradicate the FDLR and ensure that the territorial integrity of the DRC is restored, as requested by resolution 2098, and, for the medium and long terms, to address the root causes of the conflict, in particular by implementing the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework for the DRC and the region.

Olivier Nduhungirehe is Minister Counsellor, Deputy Permanent Representative of Rwanda to the United Nations. This article however reflects his personal views.

[1] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1279(1999)

[2] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1291(2000), paragraph 8

[3] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1925(2010), paragraph 12 j)

[4] http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123086.htm

[5] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/289196.stm

[6] http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1533/pdf/1533_list.pdf, page 31

[7] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/world/africa/23congo.html?_r=1&

[8] http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/situations%20and%20cases/situations/situation%20icc%200104/related%20cases/icc01040112/Pages/icc01040112.aspx

[9] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/may/16/congo.rwanda

[10] http://focus.rw/wp/2013/02/we-are-all-rwandans/

[11] http://www.newsofrwanda.com/featured1/20949/fardc-fdlr-clash-in-bunagana/

[12] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2098(2013), paragraph 12 b)

[13] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/PV.6943, page 2

[14] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2013/402

[15] http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/PRST/2013/17

View source

A new fleet of drones is set to make its first flight over the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo this week, an area where one rebel group, the M23, was recently defeated, but where many others still operate.

The Italian-built Falco drones, capable of carrying several types of high resolution sensors, will be used to monitor the movement of rebel groups.

DW: Now that M23 have been defeated, could the deployment of drones mean that the demise of the other rebel groups is not far off?

Phil Clark: I think this new use of drones by the UN raises a range of very important issues. The first one is that it highlights that Congo is in many ways a laboratory for UN peacekeepers with a range of equipment and a range of experiments being used. But I think there are big questions here – one is what is it like for a non-state actor to use drones and this type of equipment, what kind of information will it be gathering, who exactly will have access to that information and what will they do with it and so I think we need a lot more clarity from the UN as to exactly how these drones will be used.

You mention access to the information. Couldn’t it end up in the wrong hands?

Again, I think this is an issue the UN needs to clarify, because there hasn’t been a great deal of explanation as to how these drones will be used. There is a great deal of fanfare about this new technology, but I think we need a lot more information from the UN about this and, I think, guarantees that the information will be used by responsible parties. We need much more clarity about exactly what information will be gathered, who that information will be shared with, what kinds of policy questions that information can be used to address, and what the limits would be on this type of information.

The terrain of the DRC is full of thick and dense forest. How difficult will it be for the drones to detect any movement?

I think it will still be very difficult for anyone using these drones to get a clear sense of what’s going on the ground and I think what this highlights is that technology is never a substitute for knowledge and expertise. The UN peacekeeping mission over the last 15 years has often found it very difficult to operate in this complex terrain of conflict in eastern Congo and so even having drones and the information in the inside that might be possible, this isn’t going to do the UN any good if it is not coupled with a really deep-seated understanding of the dynamics on the ground. I think we should be cautious about expecting that new technology to solve all of these problems.

Neighboring countries like Rwanda have expressed concerns about these drones. Are such concerns justified?

I think many of the countries in the region have concerns about the new use of drones, particularly when it is a non-state actor that has access to this technology. I think the regional governments want to know what will the UN do with this information, how long will the drones be there. Could, for example, information gathered by the drones be used for means other than the peacekeeping mission? I think there is a great deal of clarity that is needed on these issues. What the UN has done in the last couple of days is emphasize that it wants to use the drones against the FDLR (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda) rebel group. This I think is a concession to Rwanda, in essence to say we are going introduce this new technology, but we are going to use it against some of your major rebel enemies in the region. So I think the UN is trying to play a careful diplomatic game here, and trying to assure Rwanda that the use of drones isn’t going to contravene their national sovereignty and could in fact be in their national interest.

Let’s talk about expertise. Does the UN mission in Congo have enough experts to operate these drones?

This I think remains to be seen. One thing we do know about the UN peacekeeping mission in Congo over the last 15 years is that it hasn’t always had the expertise at its fingertips that it needed. It didn’t always have experts with a detailed knowledge of the ethnic groups and the conflict dynamics, particularly in Ituri and North and South Kivu provinces of Congo. That is one of the reasons why this peacekeeping mission until recently has really struggled to fulfill its mandate. There really was a lack of knowledge about the terrain within the peacekeeping mission and so the introduction of drones doesn’t automatically deal with that particular issue. I think it is a challenge for the UN to make sure they’ve got the right people in the right places, that those people have a very in-depth knowledge of this very complex terrain and that ultimately they can do a better job as a result.

To return to my first question – are the days of rebel militia groups in Congo numbered?

I don’t think it is going to be as straight forward as that. We have seen the UN have this quite incredible military victory against the M23 rebels recently, but it remains to be seen whether they can do likewise against the FDLR and the ADF (Allied Democratic Forces) rebels which are the next two rebel groups on their list. We have to remember that there could be as many as 30 or 40 different rebel formations, particularly in North and South Kivu. Most of those groups have a very long history of operating in this area of Congo, some of them have a high degree of support from the local population and so it’s not going to be the flick of a switch that brings about change and ends these rebel movements. It’s going to be a long painstaking effort and I think we are only at the beginning of that process at the moment.

Phil Clark is a lecturer in international politics at SOAS, University of London

View source

Most people haven’t heard of him. But you should have. When you see his face or hear his name you should get as sick in your stomach as when you read about Mussolini or Hitler or see one of their pictures.

You see, he killed over 10 million people in the Congo. His name is King Leopold II of Belgium.

He “owned” the Congo during his reign as the constitutional monarch of Belgium. After several failed colonial attempts in Asia and Africa, he settled on the Congo.

He “bought” it and enslaved its people, turning the entire country into his own personal slave plantation.

He disguised his business transactions as “philanthropic” and “scientific” efforts under the banner of the International African Society.

He used their enslaved labor to extract Congolese resources and services. His reign was enforced through work camps, body mutilations, torture, executions, and his own private army.

Most of us aren’t taught about him in school. We don’t hear about him in the media.

He’s not part of the widely-repeated narrative of oppression (which includes things like the Holocaust during World War II). He’s part of a long history of colonialism, imperialism, slavery, and genocide in Africa that would clash with the social construction of a white supremacist narrative in our schools.

It doesn’t fit neatly into school curriculums in a capitalist society. Making overtly racist remarks is (sometimes) frowned upon in ‘polite’ society; but it’s quite fine not to talk about genocide in Africa perpetrated by European capitalist monarchs.1

Mark Twain wrote a satire about Leopold called “King Leopold’s Soliloquy; A Defense of His Congo Rule”, where he mocked the King’s defense of his reign of terror, largely through Leopold’s own words.

It’s an easy read at 49 pages and Mark Twain is a popular author in American public schools. But like most political authors, we will often read some of their least political writings or read them without learning why the author wrote them in the first place.

Orwell’s Animal Farm, for example, serves to reinforce American anti-socialist propaganda about how egalitarian societies are doomed to turn into their dystopian opposites.

But Orwell was an anti-capitalist revolutionary of a different kind—a supporter of working class democracy from below—and that is never pointed out.

We can read about Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, but “King Leopold’s Soliloquy” isn’t on the reading list. This isn’t by accident. Reading lists are created by boards of education in order to prepare students to follow orders and endure boredom.

From the point of view of the Department of Education, Africans have no history.

When we learn about Africa, we learn about a caricatured Egypt, about the HIV epidemic (but never its causes), about the surface level effects of the slave trade, and maybe about South African Apartheid (the effects of which, we are taught, are now long, long over).

We also see lots of pictures of starving children on Christian Ministry commercials, we see safaris on animal shows, and we see pictures of deserts in films and movies.

But we don’t learn about the Great African War or Leopold’s Reign of Terror during the Congolese Genocide. Nor do we learn about what the United States has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, killing millions of people through bombs, sanctions, disease, and starvation.

Body counts are important. And the United States Government doesn’t count Afghan, Iraqi, or Congolese people.

Though the Congolese Genocide isn’t included on Wikipedia’s “Genocides in History” page, it does mention the Congo.

What’s now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo is listed in reference to the Second Congo War (also called Africa’s World War and the Great War of Africa), where both sides of the regional conflict hunted down Bambenga people—a regional ethnic group—and enslaved and cannibalized them.

Cannibalism and slavery are horrendous evils which must be entered into history for sure, but I couldn’t help thinking whose interests were served when the only mention of the Congo on the page was in reference to regional incidents where a tiny minority of people in Africa were eating each other (completely devoid of the conditions which created the conflict, and the people and institutions who are responsible for those conditions).

Stories which support the white supremacist narrative about the subhumanness of people in Africa are allowed to enter the records of history.

The white guy who turned the Congo into his own personal part-plantation, part-concentration camp, part-Christian ministry—and killed 10 to 15 million Congolese people in the process—doesn’t make the cut.2

You see, when you kill ten million Africans, you aren’t called ‘Hitler’. That is, your name doesn’t come to symbolize the living incarnation of evil.

Your name and your picture don’t produce fear, hatred, and sorrow. Your victims aren’t talked about and your name isn’t remembered.

Leopold was just one of thousands of things that helped construct white supremacy as both an ideological narrative and material reality.

I don’t pretend that he was the source of all evil in the Congo. He had generals, and foot soldiers, and managers who did his bidding and enforced his laws. He was at the head of a system.

But that doesn’t negate the need to talk about the individuals who are symbolic of the system. But we don’t even get that.

And since it isn’t talked about, what capitalism did to Africa, all the privileges that rich white people gained from the Congolese genocide, remain hidden.

The victims of imperialism are made, like they usually are, invisible.

View source

Par : Umuvugizi

Vingt ans après le génocide des Tutsi du Rwanda, les victimes n’ont toujours  pas été dédommagées. La communauté internationale n’a pas pu prévenir le drame. Elle n’est pas intervenue pour arrêter la marche de la mort. Pire, elle s’est rendue coupable de « non-assistance à personne en danger ». Ancien chargé de l’information, à la MINUAR, la Mission des Nations Unies pour l’Assistance au Rwanda, Mr Venuste Nshimiyimana a livré, il y a 5 ans, à l’occasion du 15ème anniversaire, un témoignage poignant. En 2009, il est revenu à Kicukiro rendre hommage à ceux qui n’ont pas survécu aux massacres. Il avait trouvé refuge à l’école technique officielle de Kicukiro. C’est là que plus de 2000 personnes, sous la protection de l’ONU, puis abandonnées,  ont été massacrées. Nshimiyimana, occupait un poste important à la MINUAR. Il participait à toutes les réunions.  Il jouissait de la confiance de tous les dirigeants de la mission, civils et militaires. Il jouissait de la confiance du Général Romeo Dallaire et de l’Ambassadeur Jaques-Roger Booh- Booh.  Il savait ce qui se savait, confie un proche. Il savait donc que tout le monde savait que ce qui devait arriver, arriva. Le génocide des Tutsi. Journaliste à la BBC depuis près de 20 ans,   Mr Nshimiyimana affirme « porter au cœur » (…)« pour qu’on les oublie pas », dit-il. Avant le 20 ème anniversaire, nous publions ce témoignage dont la teneur interpelle encore la communauté internationale et  la conscience humaine.

Kicukiro: sortilège du Rwanda Eternel

Il y a 15 ans, jours pour jour, j’étais ici,  en ce lieu, communément connu sous le nom de « Ecole technique Officielle de Kicukiro », ou « Ecole Don Bosco », ou même « Don Bosco ».

J’y avais trouvé refuge et quelques deux milles autres compagnons d’infortune traqués par des tueurs qui semaient la mort dans les contrées aux alentours,  au printemps 1994.

A l’occasion d’un précédent voyage au pays natal, j’étais revenu discrètement me recueillir en ce temple, qui depuis  près de deux décennies, est devenu le sortilège du Rwanda éternel. Des victimes innocentes s’y sont abritées  et les démons de la mort sont venus les arracher, atrocement à la vie.

En franchissant l‘entrée de la concession, je me suis souvenu des mitrailleuses lourdes que les soldats belges y avaient installées pour protéger les refugies contre les miliciens endiablés qui rodaient, armés de machettes, de haches et de gourdins, et qui guettaient la moindre faille pour s’introduire dans l’école,  pour semer la mort et le désarroi.

Au fur et à mesure que je m’approchais  des bâtiments, je sentais l’odeur du bois mouillée  et de la rose matutinale qui nous rafraichissait après une nuit d’insomnie rythmée par les explosions et les crépitements d’armes automatiques.

Le deuxième génocide de ce 20^ème siècle venait de commencer. L’agenda n’était point caché. L’extermination des Tutsi était programmée. Nous avons accourus des quatre coins de la capitale, croyant que les soldats de la paix qui étaient ici  allaient nous protéger.

Je me souviens encore du dernier convoi qui  s’ébranla  à la date du 12  Avril, forçant littéralement son passage, car les refugiés s’agrippaient au dernier camion militaire qui fermait la marche.

Les candidats au départ étaient nombreux, mais il y a eu peu d’élus. Les soldats Belges, Français et Italiens, venus évacuer leurs  compatriotes, avaient leurs critères et il ne fallait pas être Rwandais pour prétendre à les remplir.

Les soldats qui sont venus ici n’étaient pas intéressés par le sort des Tutsi et des Hutu modérés qui étaient devenus la proie des extrémistes qui les pourchassaient comme des gibiers.

Aujourd’hui, quinze ans après les faits, lorsque je suis revenu en ce lieu désormais mythique, qui regorge des secrets que des milliers de fugitifs lui confirent bien avant d’être conduits au Golgotha de Nyanza, en regardant le ciel  bleu dégagé de nuages, je me suis rappelé des nuits sombres au cours desquelles les balles traçantes chassaient les étoiles.  La mort ne rodait plus, elle ne se cachait plus. Elle frappait à la porte, la forçait, et tuait. Nous l’attendions ici, dans cette Ecole,  chaque soir.

ETO: refuge paradisiaque

Lorsque je suis arrivé  à l’ETO le 7 avril, au crépuscule d’une journée  qui avait déjà compté ses morts de la première heure du génocide, nous n’étions qu’une trentaine.

Le premier locataire, l’ancien ministre rwandais des affaires  Étrangères, Boniface Ngulinzira, d’heureuse mémoire, y avait été conduit par les soldats belges qui étaient censés le protéger. Pourtant, ce sont les mêmes militaires qui refusèrent de l’amener à l’aéroport de Kanombe.  De plus, ils n’ont pas voulu le ramener chez lui comme il le demandait, en  espérant qu’il échapperait aux meurtriers, ou que du moins la mort y serait  digne.

Le lieutenant Lemaire qui commandait la compagnie belge que j’ai  supplié pour qu’il ne l’abandonne pas en lui  expliquant son important rôle dans le  processus de paix au Rwanda, me répondit : « Qu’il soit membre du gouvernent Dismas  Nsengiyaremye ou du gouvernement  Faustin Twagiramungu, on ne risquera pas la  vie des nos hommes pour lui ».

Cette déclaration de la part du commandant même de la compagnie belge qui assurait la sécurité de l’école  m’a choqué et je ne suis pas sur le point de l’oublier.

Lorsque je rapportais ces propos à Ngulinzira, il déclara fermement, en gardant son sang froid: «  Nous allons rester ici, ils ont décidé de nous livrer aux miliciens ». Quinze  ans plus trad., je me souviens de cette phrase comme si c’était hier.

Je garde un souvenir très ému et profond d’un certain Rugangura, marié a une employée du PNUD, Oda. Il l’a échappé belle aux tueurs qui l’ont pourchassés jusqu’à l’entrée de l’ETO. Les soldats belges ont refusé de lui ouvrir la porte, jusqu’à ce que sa femme fasse appel à moi, pour identifier son mari  afin qu’il puisse entrer dans notre refuge paradisiaque.

Nous avons quitté cette école ensemble, dans le même convoi, nous nous tenions les mains pour nous réconforter, et avons quitté l’aéroport de Kanombe à bord du même avion.

Arrivés à Nairobi, nous avons été logés par les Nations unies dans le même hôtel 680, au même étage. Nous étions devenus inséparables. La présence de l’un rassurait l’autre.  Le fait de le savoir vivant aujourd’hui me donne du réconfort.

Le  dernier convoi 

Le 13 avril 1994, lorsque l’avion C-130 de l’armée belge a décollé de Kanombe pour nous amener à  Nairobi, j’ai longuement pleuré, en pensant à toutes ces femmes, à tous ces hommes et à tous ces enfants, que l’ONU venait d’abandonner, en les livrant ainsi à la  merci des miliciens qui guettaient à l’entrée de cette l’Ecole.

Je me sentais d’autant plus mal pour la simple raison que le commandant du contingent belge de la MINUAR  qui  campait dans  cette école, avait fait appel à moi pour traduire en langue nationale son mot d’adieu, lorsqu’il annonça à cette foule de réfugiés  apeurés,  que  la MINUAR n’avait d’autre choix que de partir , tout en leur demandant de se défendre  alors qu’il  savait que les miliciens qui rodaient autour de l’Ecole était surarmés.

L’air ébahi, ils le regardèrent sans broncher, dignement, mais  avec un regard imbu de désespoir, à tel point que le Lieutenant Lemaire, touché dans l’âme,  fit un quart de tour comme il en avait l’habitude et alla digérer ses émotions loin des regards, derrière un camion bâché que l’on apprêtait pour le grand départ.

Toute la journée, des colonnes de voitures continuèrent d’arriver.  Les soldats belges et français sont allés chercher même le dernier des missionnaires qui était au fin fond de la forêt de Nyungwe. Les coopérants arrivaient  avec tous leurs bagages. Leurs chiens y compris. Jusque là rien de grave. Le comble est arrivé au moment de l’évacuation.

Etant donné que chacun conduisait sa voiture,  bien qu’on ait proposé à ceux qui avaient des places libres de les offrir à ceux qui n’avaient pas de voiture, je me souviens qu’au sein du premier contingent qui quitta Don Bosco le 11 Avril, se trouvait un coopérant qui ne voulait pas se séparer de son chien, un terrier allemand.

Et pourtant un ancien ministre du gouvernement sur lequel pesaient des menaces certaines de mort, ne sera même pas autorisé à faire parti du convoi, même à bord de sa voiture personnelle.  Comme si  l’ordre avait été donné de ne pas s’intéresser à son sort. Quand on se rappelle que les belges voulaient évacuer  Paul Secyugu,  et que c’est lui qui l’a refusé, il y a lieu de se demander, pourquoi l’un et pas l’autre.

Imana du Rwanda veillait encore

Le dimanche précédent le début du génocide, l’Eglise catholique universelle avait célébré la fête de Pâques. Dans la petite chapelle de Don Bosco, le cierge pascal était presque encore intact.

Les réfugiés qui s’y entassaient n’avaient pas osé prendre possession de l’autel par respect pour le Saint Sacrement qui y trône dans un Tabernacle doré couvert par une étoffe de soie d’Asie. Ce soir là, le 10 avril  vers 2 heures du soir, le courant électrique fut interrompu et nous fûmes plongés dans le noir. J’accourus aider les casques bleus à distribuer le peu de lampes tempêtes  et de bougies dont ils disposaient, et lorsque je suis entré dans la chapelle, je fus saisi d’une grande stupeur à tel point qu’instinctivement je me suis agenouillé devant le Tabernacle, puis je me suis avancé vers le cierge pascal que j’ai démonté, et amené à l’extérieur.  A l’aide d’un couteau, je l’ai découpé en morceaux que j’ai ensuite distribué aux réfugiés, surtout des femmes qui avaient des enfants en bas âge et qui étaient logés dans la chapelle. On nous disait depuis  notre jeune âge que Dieu passe la journée ailleurs mais qu’il rentre se reposer le soir au Rwanda. J’y croyais encore ce soir.

Avant de quitter l’ETO, à la demande des refugiés,  notamment les intellectuels réunis autour du ministre Ngulinzira, j’ai lancé un appel SOS  au commandant du secteur Kigali, à l’aide de ma radio Motorola. Etant sur le réseau civil et militaire de la MINUAR, le message avait plus de chance d’être écouté par plusieurs responsables de la mission.

Mes compagnons ont suivi la conversation. J’avais augmenté le volume à leur demande et  mis en marche le haut parleur. Le colonel Luc Marchal me demanda  de  les rassurer, ajoutant qu’il avait pris contact avec le chef d’Etat major de la gendarmerie et que ce dernier, le général Augustin Ndindiliyimana, lui avait assuré qu’il enverrait des gendarmes pour garder l’établissement après le départ des  Belges.

Le groupe a réagi avec prudence aux assurances données par le colonel Marchal.  Avec son calme légendaire, Ngulinzira ajouta «  Nous allons rester ici, ils ont décidé de nous livrer  à la mort».

D’ailleurs certains réfugiés qui avaient anticipé l’attaque avaient commencé à quitter discrètement le camp et à se réfugier dans d’autres endroits plus sûrs. Nous savions que le camp serait attaqué aussitôt après le départ des soldats Belges.  Mais entre nous, nous nous étions convenus qu’il fallait se préparer à mourir ensemble.  Des rumeurs faisaient état d’un déploiement imminent des soldats de la  garde présidentielle pour appuyer les miliciens.

Unis jusqu’à la mort

Bien que le Lieuteneant Lemaire ait refusé au ministre Boniface Ngulinzira de faire parti du convoi, il  avait pourtant autorisé à Paul Secyugu, un autre membre éminent de l’opposition rwandaise, député désigné du Parti Social Démocrate, à embarquer sur le prochain convoi.

Mais celui-ci a catégoriquement décliné l’offre. Il estimait que sa place se trouvait au milieu de ceux qu’il devait représenter au Parlement de transition. Il ne voulait pas les abandonner et préférera mourir avec eux. A son tour, sa femme déclina aussi l’offre de partir, en déclarant qu’elle ne pouvait pas se séparer de son mari.

Par contre, il insista pour que ses deux fils, Alain et Jean Claude Secyugu, puissent  sortir de Don Bosco. Le fils-ainé, Jean Claude, était en dernière année de médecine à Kinshasa. Il était venu passer des vacances au  Rwanda et s’était retrouvé au milieu de la tourmente. Son père, surtout sa mère, tenait absolument à ce qu’il ait l’occasion de terminer ses études.  Pour y arriver, nous avons prétendu que Jean Claude travaillait pour le PNUD, faute de quoi, on n’allait pas l’évacuer. Quant à son frère, nous lui avons donné pour mère, une  maman d’une soixantaine  d’années, évacuée pour la simple raison que sa fille était mariée à un européen et était à ce titre autorisé à se rendre en Belgique. Nous avons ainsi pu sauver deux jeunes gens. Mais Paul Secyugu et sa femme seront sauvagement massacres par les miliciens en furie qui envahissaient l’Ecole de Don Bosco après le départ des casques bleus des Nations Unies.

Dans le groupe des intrépides de Kicukiro, on peut citer l’ancien Bourgmestre de Gikondo, un certain Gasamagera. Il était venu se réfugier ici  à l’ETO, le 9 Avril, juste après le massacre survenu à la paroisse de Gikondo au cours duquel 500 personnes avaient été tuées.

Les miliciens et les militaires lui avaient  montré que son autorité ne valait plus rien. Ils ne pouvaient pas les empêcher de sévir, et  de tuer. De plus, il constituait une cible privilégie des tueurs. Il était originaire du Sud du pays, de Butare précisément, en commune de Kilembe. Il était membre d’un parti d’opposition, le PDS. De surcroît, il était marié à une femme Tutsi. Lorsqu’il est arrivé  à l’ETO de Kicukiro, il nous a raconté comment les militaires l’avaient menacé, l’accusant de cacher des éléments du FPR, et leurs complices.

Il avait donc quitte sa commune, sans regarder derrière lui. Mais il avait été obligé d’y retourner le lendemain, avec sa camionnette, pour chercher des sacs de riz et de haricots, lorsqu’il se rendit compte que les milliers de gens qui étaient entassés à l’ETO n’avaient plus rien à manger. Un acte de courage. Nous le regardions partir, avec deux de ses policiers armés de  kalachnikov, mais nous ne savions pas s’il allait revenir.

L’Ecole Don Bosco avait accueilli tout le monde. Des gens venus des communes voisines : Gikondo, Remera, Kanombe et même Kachiru Toutes les couches sociales s’y retrouvaient, toutes les ethnies y étaient représentées. Tous ces refugies, avaient un ennemi commun : les miliciens qui rodaient, de nuit comme de jour, autour de l’Ecole, tels des félins pour nous arracher les plus faibles, mais aussi qui tuaient à coups de massue ou de gourdins, les moins chanceux qui n’arrivaient pas à tromper leur vigilance pour se glisser à l’intérieur de l’école.

Une famille massacrée devant des soldats de l’ONU

Je me rappelle d’un jour où un soldat belge a failli péter les plombs après avoir assisté sans rechigner, à la mort d’une femme et de ses deux enfants, découpés en morceaux juste devant l’entrée de l Ecole.  Deux  mitrailleuses lourdes pointaient pourtant  leurs nez en direction des miliciens endiablés, mais le soldat expliqua plus tard qu’il n’avait pas reçu l’ordre de tirer.  Drôle de mandat ! Mais alors que faisaient-ils-là ? Officiellement, ils assuraient la défense de leur campement.  Nous avions donc bénéficié de leur hospitalité, ils nous défendraient tant qu’ils seraient là, mais nous allions tirer notre plan dès leur départ.

Le 10 avril, lorsque les paras commandos de l’opération Silver Back sont arrivés à Kigali, alors qu’ils se dirigeaient au centre –ville en empruntant la route Sonatubes –Rwandex, un groupe de miliciens tenant un barrage  à hauteur de Sonatubes a tiré sur le convoi des bérets rouges  qui avaient encore  la mémoire fraîche de la mort des casques bleus.  Ils ont riposté vigoureusement, indistinctement, tirant sur tout ce qui bougeait.

La plupart des victimes étaient des civils Tutsi ou Hutu modérés qui étaient sortis de leurs cachettes en apprenant l’arrivée des soldats belges.  Le soldat belge qui m’a rapport cette information était traumatisé. Il se souvenait que même des femmes et des enfants se trouvaient parmi les victimes, mais imputait la faute aux miliciens qui avaient déclenché les hostilités. Par la suite, les soldats belges ont demandé aux français de l’Opération Amaryllis de toujours prendre les devants, étant donné que les français se trouvaient en un territoire qui leur était favorable. A ma connaissance,  les Belges n’ont pas fait d’enquête interne pour établir les responsabilités.

Les victimes, les rescapés du massacre de Nyanza et moi-même,  ainsi que d’autres qui ont pris la tangente à temps et qui ont survécu, étions venus ici, parce que nous nous y sentions plus en sécurité. Comme je le disais plus haut, d’autres, à l’instar du Ministre Ngulinzira, y ont été  amenés par ceux qui assuraient leur protection. Dès les premiers jours de notre captivité, nous avons reçu beaucoup de visites, d’officiers militaires de l’armée gouvernementale, venus extirper les leurs pour les mettre en sécurité.

Mais personne n’a daigné déployer des hommes pour affronter les miliciens qui venaient narguer, jusqu’à l’entrée de l’école les soldats belges qui y montaient la garde, allant même parfois jusqu’à tuer leurs « proies » devant l’air hagard et impuissant des soldats de la paix.

Nous étions venus ici, car nous savions que des éléments de la MINUAR étaient là et espérions qu’ils allaient assurer notre protection en vertu de leur mandat. Ceux qui  avaient la possibilité d’aller vers d’autres cieux ne l’ont pas fait, et sont venus à l’ETO, car l’endroit était sécurisé. Pendant les 7 jours passés ici, encerclés par les tueurs qui n’attendaient que le moment propice pour entreprendre leur sale besogne, nous n’avons reçu aucune visite d’un responsable des Nations Unies.

Le seul patron, était le lieutenant Lemaire. Le seul responsable  qui faisait tout pour assurer notre protection mais que sa hiérarchie militaire qui dirigeait pratiquement les opérations à partir de l’Etat-major  bruxellois situé à Evere, a empêché d’intervenir, c’est le Colonel Luc Marchal. Il voulait maintenir ses hommes sur le lieu de campement, et il avait cru jusqu’au bout que des gendarmes rwandais y seraient déployés pour nous  protéger.

Tout le monde savait 

Apres, le génocide, des dirigeants du monde libre sont venus au Rwanda, et certains d’entre eux  ont reconnu leur manquement et  demandé pardon  au  peuple rwandais au nom de leur pays. L’ancien premier ministre belge Guy Verhofstadt l’avait publiquement  reconnu au stade Amahoro, vous vous en souvenez, le 7 avril  2004, lors des commémorations du 10 eme anniversaire du génocide. Il avait déclaré solennellement vouloir  « assumer   notre responsabilité », et il a reconnu « avoir failli au devoir élémentaire d’ingérence » mais aussi au « devoir de fraternité ».

Il est regrettable que le premier ministre belge  n’ait pas fait allusion   à l’abandon des refugiés par le contingent belge qui assurait leur protection ici a à Kicukiro. Les familles des victimes réclament toujours justice.

La communauté internationale avait l’obligation d’intervenir et d’essayer d’arrêter la marche macabre du génocide. Elle n’a pas bougé. Elle devrait aujourd’hui assumer son entière responsabilité.

L’ancien Président des Etats-Unis, Bill Clinton a reconnu que son pays a manqué à ce devoir d’ingérence, et l’on pourrait même parler de non assistance à personne en danger.  Nous savions que des soldats américains étaient à Bujumbura pour intervenir le cas échéant. Les Etats-Unis, après la déroute subie en Somalie, ne voulait pas s’engager  au Rwanda, mais le comble est qu’ils ont même empêché quiconque voulait intervenir de le faire.

L’ancien Secrétaire général des Nations, Koffi Annan, a reconnu que son organisation n’avait pas bénéficié du soutien nécessaire des pays membres lorsqu’il faillait réunir les troupes devant constituer la force d’intervention au Rwanda.

Le monde savait qu’un génocide se préparait. Les services de renseignements de certaines capitales occidentales savaient ce qui se tramait. Certains ont même pactisé avec le gouvernement  intérimaire qui a manqué à son devoir de protéger la population et dont certains responsables ont reconnu, devant le TPIR, qu’ils ont orchestré le génocide. Certains gouvernements résistent encore aujourd’hui et ne veulent pas reconnaitre leur responsabilité dans la tragédie rwandaise.

La France qui a formé et encadré l’armée rwandaise pendant plus de trois décennies  n’a jamais reconnu une quelconque responsabilité dans la tragédie. Des militaires français sont pourtant venus ici. Ils ont évacués leurs compatriotes et sont reparties. Ils étaient pourtant armés jusqu’aux dents. Les miliciens les respectaient et ne tiraient jamais sur eux. S’ils avaient voulu, ils auraient pu sauver tout le monde.

Voici venu le temps d’agir

Fini le temps des mots, voici venu le temps des actions concrètes. Aujourd’hui,  il faut procéder aux  dédommagements des victimes  du génocide. Un drame que nous avons tous vu venir, mais que nous n’avons pu empêcher ou arrêter.  Plus que jamais auparavant, aujourd’hui, les victimes de Kicukiro demandent justice.

Rien ne peut  réparer le traumatisme d’une mort atroce, mais les survivants de cet hécatombe, ou les proches des victimes qui considèrent ce lieu comment l’endroit qui a englouti une partie de leur vie, ont besoin d’un accompagnement adéquat. Le génocide des Tutsi, personne ne peut aujourd’hui prétendre qu’il n’en savait rien.

De New York à Bruxelles, en passant par Washington et Paris, tout le monde savait. Lorsque nous sommes arrivés à Kanombe, le soir du 12 avril, après avoir traversé le quartier de Nyakabanda et de Kabeza, jonchés de cadavres encore frais, un soldat belge m’a confié : «  Nous serions restés à l’ETO si on nous l’avait demandé ». Ils sont partis, abandonnant à une mort certaine ceux  dont ils avaient assurés la protection une semaine entière.

Quinze ans  après le génocide, cet ouragan de la mort dont les ravages restent encore visibles sur les visages de certains d’entre nous qui portent encore les stigmates de l’horreur, la justice n’est toujours pas encore rendue pour mes anciens compagnons d’infortune.  L’ONU les a abandonnés  dans cette école dont elle assurait la protection et ils seront par  la suite conduits comme un troupeau qu’on amène à l’abattoir sur le mont Nyanza, de triste mémoire. Un massacre sans précédent. Un génocide sans nom.

Pourquoi ne suis-je pas resté avec eux  à ETO ?  Très honnêtement, j’ai eu peur de mourir. Mais j’ai également eu beaucoup de chance.  J’étais parmi les  30 premiers  réfugiés arrivés à l’ETO, je  fus parmi les  rares rwandais évacués de Kicukiro.  J’étais membre de la MINUAR. Donc considéré comme expatrié. Ne m’ont-ils pas encouragé à partir, sans se soucier de la sécurité de ma femme, car elle était « rwandaise ».  Curieusement, je pouvais prendre ma fille, née de notre union. Mais quelle folie ! Je souffre beaucoup pour avoir survécu.

Aujourd’hui, je témoigne, pour rendre un juste tribut  de regret  à ces victimes innocentes de la barbarie humaine. La semaine que nous avons passée ensemble, dans la peur et le dénouement, m’a rapproché d’eux,  à jamais. A tous ceux, dont le sang verse s’est mélangé a la terre rouge de Kicukiro, je vous porterai  toujours au cœur de mon combat pour la justice, jusqu’à mon dernier souffle. Je vous dédie, le livre que je viens de terminer et qui raconte les moments forts que nous avons passés ensemble. Pour qu’on ne vous oublie pas.

Kigali, le 6 Avril 2009

The United Nations on Tuesday announced the deployment of two surveillance drones in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo to track down the numerous rebel groups operating in the area.

The two Italian-made drones will, according to UN officials, be followed by three more by the end of March, with one of them expected by the end of this month.

Pacifying this troubled part of the Congo that has for decades been the bedrock for instabilities in the Great Lakes region has recently featured prominently on the agenda of Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations Secretary General, and not unjustifiably.

The region habours groups that have not only destabilised the Congo but also neighbouring countries, including Rwanda, in the case of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) militia.

There are also rebel groups from Uganda and Burundi, while the majority are Congolese, including a myriad of Mai-Mai factions.

In the words of Hervé Ladsous, the UN chief of peacekeeping missions, the drones are the “tools of choice” to monitor the activities of the armed groups and civilians in this region and, if they succeed, they will be deployed in subsequent UN operations elsewhere.

The drones are being deployed within months of the deployment of the UN Force Intervention Brigade that has since repulsed the M23 rebels.

It goes without saying that the Intervention Brigade was the first UN force to be deployed with combat mandate. M23 was indeed neutralised, but of course there is no guarantee that similar groups will not arise if the root causes behind the group’s creation are not addressed.

For the record, I have totally been disappointed by the way people handling public relations of the M23 in the aftermath of their defeat have done their job, especially on social media, where in their quest for global attention they have gone overboard to publicise names of women they allege were raped by the Congolese armed forces after they were driven from their positions. For the victims, it’s rubbing salt into injury.

And so the drones are another ‘first’ in the peacekeeping history of the United Nations.

As had been reported in the media, next on the agenda of the Intervention Brigade was the FDLR, remnants of the militia that committed the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, and which has never hidden its mission of picking up where they left off 19 years ago (read completing the Genocide agenda).

Accounts by various commanders who broke ranks with the FDLR, and several reports, some by the United Nations Stabilisation Mission in Congo (MONUSCO), indicate that the group has penetrated into the ranks of the Congolese national armed forces, the FARDC. They are deliberately embeded with FARDC.

In addition, unlike the M23 which was engaged in a conventional war, most of the negative forces in eastern DRC are spread out across many villages and mixed with ordinary locals, which makes it a bit difficult to dislodge them.

One wonders how the drones will be able to sieve the rebels from the ordinary villagers and going by what drones have done elsewhere, especially in Pakistan and Yemen, MONUSCO clearly has its work cut out. Never mind that these are reportedly unarmed.

As Rwandan, naturally my primary concern is the FDLR, but how will the drones smoke them out of the Congolese army ranks?

It is also ironical that while the Special Representative for the UN Secretary General, Martin Kobler, sounds warnings to the FDLR, the group’s political leaders continue to roam western capitals without restraint!

View source

President Paul Kagame yesterday received Russell Feingold, US Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region of Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, at Village Urugwiro, Kigali.

President Kagame welcomed Russell Feingold’s and reiterated Rwanda’s support for regional and international peace efforts for the DR Congo.

The President and Russell Feingold shared ideas on the next steps in the implementation of the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework for the Congo and the Region.

They agreed on the need for initiatives that complement existing efforts aimed to assist the DR Congo Government to solve the root causes of recurrent crises.

Kagame and Russell Feingold also agreed that a sustainable solution must include the neutralisation of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) militia as a matter of priority.

View source

By Martin Kimani

In the years before South Africa became a beacon of democratic progress, it was the site of some of the world’s most notorious human rights violations. In addition to the crimes committed by the apartheid regime, there were violent clashes between supporters of the African National Congress and the Zulu nationalist Inkatha Freedom Party that left thousands dead. South Africa opted to grant amnesty for “political” crimes in exchange for truthful testimony through a restorative justice body known as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

But if the International Criminal Court had existed in the 1990s and applied the same evidentiary standards that were used to indict Kenya’s leaders in 2011, it might very well have sought to charge Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, and Inkatha’s leader, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, for the crimes that occurred on their watch, likely with fatal consequences for South Africa’s successful transition.

Many South Africans were skeptical of the idea of a T.R.C., with its parade of sordid killers walking off scot-free.

But South Africa was afforded — and afforded itself — an opportunity to pursue its own solution to its challenge. If it worked in South Africa, it can work in Kenya, too. Our recent record of reforms demonstrates that we have an appetite to take up this responsibility.

Peace will not come from a court case in a distant land. While there is certainly a place for punitive justice, Kenyans must ultimately seek ways to confront our history with an eye toward acts of restitution rooted in the customary practices so many of our people still live by and believe in. If such restorative justice is still legitimate, then democratic countries like Kenya must be given the space to reform themselves and deliver it.

It is no accident that African states adhered to the Rome Statute, which established the I.C.C., in large numbers: The thirst for accountability and justice in Africa is deep and real. Many Africans’ discomfort with how the I.C.C. prosecutors, first Luis Moreno Ocampo and now Fatou Bensouda, have pursued their mandate in Kenya should be understood in this light, and not as a cynical attempt to escape accountability.

Every Kenyan knows there have been serious violations of human rights here, and we have taken steps to deal with it. After the post-election violence in 2008, a coalition government was formed and we overwhelmingly approved a new constitution. We now have a real separation of powers, an independent judiciary and prosecutor, an imperial presidency trimmed to size, and power has been devolved to the local level.

Like South Africa, we have a truth, justice and reconciliation commission that completed its work this year. And an independent electoral commission and courts delivered a free and peaceful election in 2013 whose winners, Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto, were political rivals in an alliance that united the main ethnic communities at the heart of the 2008 violence.

Usually, these developments would have been hailed as a triumph of democracy. And an I.C.C. that truly acts on the principle of complementarity, establishing it as a court of last resort in the event of failed national systems, would have returned the cases to Kenya.

But the persistent response — particularly loudly proclaimed by the human rights community — has been that Kenya is unwilling or unable to confront its 2008 postelection violence. The dramatic and salutary changes we have made do not seem to dissuade this chorus. Nor do they seem to recognize that the I.C.C. indictments were overzealous and lacked rigorous investigations.

In April, the trial chamber in the Kenyatta case found that “there are serious questions as to whether the Prosecution conducted a full and thorough investigation of the case against the accused prior to confirmation.” The prosecutor depended mostly on reports by local intermediaries and a government commission that — operating in a politically poisonous environment — was subject to agenda setting and manipulation.

Mr. Ocampo took the case even though investigative systems were poorly developed, allowing warring politicians to transfer local political rivalries to The Hague. This was reflected in how the two wings of the coalition government could never agree on requests to refer the cases back to Kenya. At the time, the cases offered one part of the coalition the advantage of removing the accused as viable political actors in the 2013 election.

In the Kenyatta case, the I.C.C. relied heavily on a single witness to establish that the accused had conspired with others in helping facilitate atrocities. This witness later admitted to having lied, and the trial chamber admonished the prosecution of sitting on this potentially exculpatory evidence for months without releasing it to the defense.

Even the I.C.C.’s supporters like the Open Society Justice Initiative acknowledge there have been problems with its processes. Analyzing the cases in the Congo, they note that local intermediaries, who help the prosecutor collect evidence, might also be insiders who were involved in crimes themselves.

The I.C.C.’s decisions about certain countries’ readiness are also suspect. This October, the same week that Libya’s prime minister was kidnapped by one of the country’s many autonomous militias, the I.C.C. agreed that Libya’s courts were robust enough to try the case. If Libya can manage on its own, Kenya certainly can.

This matter goes beyond notions of state sovereignty. Countries should retain the right to pursue justice at their own pace, and using restorative methods in addition to punitive ones, if they believe that is more conducive to peace.

Those who believe in the I.C.C. should be the first ones to worry about its weak investigative capacities and vulnerability to manipulation. This gap has been obscured by the highly emotional standoff between Africa on the one hand and the I.C.C. and its diplomatic and human rights backers in the West on the other. The rhetoric from both camps makes it appear that for one side to win, the other must lose. But there are still constructive ways to move forward.

A first step would be improvements to the I.C.C.’s standards of evidence and procedure that make it less vulnerable to political manipulation. Then Kenya, like South Africa or Rwanda or Northern Ireland, must also be allowed the room to continue building our democracy by our electoral choices being respected, to deploy restorative justice approaches and to ensure that the political fractures we are trying to heal are not widened by the cases in The Hague.

Martin Kimani is Kenya’s permanent representative to the United Nations in Nairobi.

View Source

After the defeat of M23 rebellion, the FDLR and ADF rebels are supposed to be the next target of the intervention brigade of the United Nations, in its mission to neutralize armed groups in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo. However many people are asking what will happen to FDLR rebels and when that will be done. Jeune Afrique has attempted to analyze these issues and tell us the following:

The first question to ask is what threat do FDLR rebels represent in the Kivus? How many FDLR rebels are still there? Where do they hide? In which villages are they? To respond to these questions, everyone has his comment.

Figures and assumptions differ, depending on whether one is in Kigali, Kinshasa or New York at the UN Headquarters.

However, the FDLR are the next target of the intervention brigade of the United Nations whose mandate is to neutralize all armed groups that swarm for nearly two decades in the eastern part of the DRC.

In fact, after the misfortune of the Movement of M23, rebellion which controlled part of North Kivu for more than 18 months, the noose tightens around the FDLR.

“We will target them because it is our military priority at this time,” recently confirmed Martin Kobler , the Special Representative of the Secretary General of the UN in the DRC.

A position that is similar to that of the Congolese government, which says also ready to launch the attack, with the support of peacekeepers, a ” strong action ” against “negative forces ” still present on its soil, the first being Rwandan FDLR rebels and Ugandan ADF – NALU (Allied Democratic Forces – Army for the Liberation of Uganda) and, last, the national liberation Forces of Burundi (FNL) and all – mayi mayi fighters.

FDLR, the most dangerous?

On paper, and in reality, the FDLR rebels appear as the main threat to peace in the Kivus and in the Great Lakes region while in Kinshasa, it claims to have reduced the number of “over 80% “before the outbreak of the rebellion of the M23 in April 2012.

How many are they today? Around” 1,500 fighters,” according to estimates by UN experts who work on the issue of armed groups in eastern DRC. The number, however, according to come observers, could be somehow an underestimation.

“It is impossible to give an exact figure on the number of FDLR in the Kivus “explains Christoph Vogel, Independent Researcher.

“One thing is obvious. Nobody talking about 8000 or 10 000 FDLR rebels as in the past. “Vogel and many observers believe that “the power of the Rwandan rebels declined significantly “in recent years however they were not totally destroyed.

“In the long term, the DDRRR (disarmament, demobilization, repatriation, reintegration, and resettlement) of the UN Mission in Congo has reduced their number,” justifies the expert, noting also that “attacks conducted by Raïa Mutomboki [local militia anti- FDLR] have contributed to the weakening of the FDLR.”

Elected in Walikale, a territory of North Kivu often disturbed by the incursions of the FDLR, Juvenal Munubo confirms the involvement of local Mai-Mai militias in the hunt for Rwandan rebels.

“We must admit that these armed groups helped chase the FDLR. They accomplished what should have been the task of the government,” he told Jeune Afrique.

Therefore: “The FDLR are no longer the main threat [May be for Kinshasa],” argues Munubo.” But this is not a reason for Government and UN to fold their arms, they must continue until their last stronghold,” he adds.

Now UN has already sent drones to monitor the movements of armed groups in the Eastern Part of the Democratic Republic of Congo, including the mobility of FDLR rebels who are the first in the viewfinder of the brigade of the UN intervention groups.

“Two unarmed drones” were sent on December 3

“These devices will allow the peacekeepers to monitor the mobility of various armed groups to better position themselves and especially anticipating action to protect the civilian,” said a source in MONUSCO.

Since the end of the rebellion of the M23, fearing the possibility of a future attack of Congolese army supported by MONUSCO, several militiamen chose to disarm. But FDLR combatants, they have not moved or disarmed.

“They occupy some villages in Mwenga and Walungu in South Kivu and parts of Lubero in North Kivu,” recalls Christoph Vogel. “They are also located in Oninga the border between Lubero and Walikale, near the Maiko National Park in the Eastern Province,” says Juvenal Munubo.

FDLR rebels have not ceased to commit atrocities in the villages they occupy in Kivu. They are torturing men, enslaved or killed them and even raping women,” describes Kavota Omar, spokesman for the civil society in North Kivu.

“Weakened but not destroyed”

Lawsuits in Germany against two of their politicians and the arrest of their deputy commander, ” General ” Stanislas Nzeyimana , aka ” Izabayo Bigaruka ” in Tanzania are not likely to fix things for the rebels … “They are weakened, but so far not destroyed , “concludes Munubo Juvenal , the representative of Walikale .

View Source

By Paul Kagame

Few were less comfortable with the prospect of sainthood than Nelson Mandela himself. “One issue that deeply worried me in prison,” he wrote in Conversations with Myself, a collection of his writings published in 2010 “was the false image that I unwittingly projected to the outside world: of being regarded as a saint. I never was one, even on the basis of an earthly definition of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.”

A rush to secular canonization would squander Mandela’s memory to unquestioning adulation. If we are to learn from his extraordinary legacy—and, as leaders, to act on what we learn—we are surely obliged to reckon fully with its layers and nuance. Symbolism must not crowd out substance while we reflect on the depth and range of Mandela’s contributions, to South Africa and to the world.

Take as an example his legendary refusal to exact revenge on those who imprisoned and humiliated him during the Apartheid years, culminating in the appointment of former white supremacist F.W. de Klerk as his deputy president. It is true that this was an act of admirable personal magnanimity, and a great testament to Mandela’s character. But, as a straightforward matter of politics, it was also both pragmatic and necessary. No other path could have ensured South Africa’s viability as an incipient democracy under ANC rule, not to mention protect its short- and  long-term economic prospects.

In 1994, as the world cheered Mandela’s ascension to the South African Presidency, Rwanda emerged from a genocide that claimed more than a million lives. For 19 years, Rwandans have repulsed the urge to vengeance and instead placed reconciliation at the heart of our journey towards national recovery and progress. As with South Africa under Mandela, we concluded that the only path to healing and peace is to unequivocally reject—and never to replicate—the hatred, injustice and violence that inflicted our wounds to begin with. Given the unjustified basket-case reputation that our continent attracts in some quarters, it is notable that Africa has produced two stories of national reconciliation and renewal.

It is impossible to exaggerate the stakes for South Africa in the mid-’90s as the ANC took office. The Mandela government faced countless obstacles in 1994, including the real and imminent risk of economic collapse brought about by capital flight. This would have been daunting enough for an experienced government, let alone one made up of newcomers who had, until recently, been shut out of the political process by the white minority.

There was enormous pressure on the government to meet the long-repressed demands of an exhilarated but impatient population. Meanwhile, investors and the world community looked on for signs that the majority black rule would inevitably engender instability and dysfunction.

It is to South Africa’s enduring benefit that President Mandela was able to lead his country—and his party—through this period of turmoil. By applying his formidable skills as a communicator, politician and diplomat, he instilled confidence in his government and, by extension, in South Africa as a whole. Inevitably, the sky-high hopes and expectations of the population sometimes collided with the reality of managing a large, diverse and complex national economy. The difficult task of setting priorities and making tough decisions meant that compromises were made and promises broken. The euphoria that accompanied the end of apartheid inevitably faded. But, for the duration of his stewardship, Mandela’s rock-steady hand kept the ship afloat and eventually guided it on to calmer seas.

There is no doubting Mandela’s virtues as a moral exemplar and inspirational figure. There is no modern leader who has done more to deserve the waves of praise and mourning that his passing has unleashed.

But Mandela’s life’s work was, ultimately, politics. He worked for decades to advance his cherished political party, from exile to government. He defied his political enemies for 27 years, but did not hesitate to sit down with them when the time came to negotiate. He understood the power of his celebrity which he used to great and lasting effect. He never stopped striving towards concrete political ends; never missed a chance to plead his case or cause; never wavered from the struggle.

To point out that Nelson Mandela was, above all, a politician is not to diminish his remarkable legacy, but rather to remind the world that politicians are capable of remarkable things.

View source

By Angelo Izama

I had not read James O’Connell’s 1967 essay on the “Inevitability of Instability” in African post-independence settings until this weekend.

In broad brush O’Connell puts into clear perspective some of the situations this blog has tried to be a curator of, albeit from the lens of one journalist and one country. There are few political homes, outside ethnicity, that organized politics can make its bed. Ethnicity is the nesting place for individual political careers, where support is kept warm like fragile eggs in the so-called home district or home region. Until they become the golden eggs of the ethnic goose to be protected by national institutions upon the assent to power of one group or another that is.

O’Connell reflects on this and the missed opportunities of hurried de-colonization from which emerged a situation where mature politics was, according to him, impossible. One aspect he explores is how incompetent and utterly unprepared the post-colonial African politician was for “national” politics. The stain, and in some ways the necessity,  of “tribalism” to the lawful mobilization of competitive political support has created many distortions not least violent civil war and worse. Following our last post on how urban protest is ethnic competition given political meaning in Uganda the debate has continued. One of those whose career has been imperiled, along with that of the Kampala Mayor and several other journalists is Chris Obore the show host and head of investigative journalism at the Daily Monitor.

Following a post on how ethnic Banyarwanda were the bane of national problems in Uganda, a familiar refrain, the newspaper has announced some sort of internal review of that post.Banyarwanda Post Obore

His supporters or those who support his views have weighed in. On social media there is a split. Others have simply dismissed his post as hate speech (see ex-President Geoffrey Lukongwe Binaisa’s equally unsavory take on the issue during the chaos of 1994.)

Obore has claimed his FB account was hacked but many familiar with his past analyses will no doubt disagree. Earlier I learnt that he might be leaving NTV’s 4th Estate where I have been a co-panelist with him- permanently (I will not be returning to the show myself in the new year). The construction of the argument on ethnicity itself is problematic, not just for gatekeepers of the news or politicians, if only because seeking ethnic harmony through democratic institutions was always going to be problematic.

My view is that post-colonial African leaders (ala O’Connell) despite winning independence did not reconstruct and re-define the state or the political institutions they inherited. They instead accepted to be defined by them. It is the classic Weber-ian trap. Where colonial geography had mutilated ethnic settlements and reconstructed them as ties of citizenship were left unresolved- even as nationalists fought amongst themselves to say who belonged or who did not belong.

The ideas of the state, of nationalism and patriotism were all inherited. In some ways they are administered in the international system as some sort of patent owned by the colonial system that retreated. When we err, we are punished. Sanctions are imposed. Our own intellectual tradition is based on this patent agreement. International institutions police it and locally legitimacy is sought as the nearest interpretation of how these rules are applied ( or as O’Connell references is problematic in the way that ” men trained to play draughts are led to make those same moves in a game of chess, and that the result is neither chess nor draughts”). This is of course not to argue that it was a bad inheritance. O’Connell would say it was an inheritance that was bound to be badly managed.

The worst examples coming out of these contradictions is the mayhem in eastern DRC and its roots in the Rwanda situation of the 40’s, 50’s and 90’s. Many others have mined the depths of this. But like other situations contemporary politics often turns a blind eye to addressing ethnic core of the problem choosing instead to deploy post-modernist language of citizenship, equal rights, human rights and nationalism against it. Perhaps no nation in the Great Lakes has suffered as much as the Banyrwanda from these contradictions and subsequently suffered with the rest of the East African community.

Sometime back I ran into William Bahemuka, a cleric who is currently the Bishop of the Diocese of Boga in eastern DRC. I was getting ready to go to a radio show when he walked in, bespectacled, in a red t-shirt, in a café in downtown Kampala. Bahemuka, who is what I would call Congolese-Ugandan or the other way round, had accompanied his son who is starting university in Uganda. He too had grown up and studied in the country before he took on the holy orders. Bishop Bahemuka, a short man, who laughs a lot, speaks more than 6 local “Ugandan” languages, besides French, English, Swahili and Lingala. The last time we met was in Hoima where I had gone to facilitate a discussion of cross-border issues in the areas where Ugandan and Congolese oil is due to be exploited. It coincided with a royal event for the Omukama of Bunyoro. The Bishop surprised the Banyoro attending one of the parties for their Kingdom’s anniversary by speaking eloquently in that “mother tongue”.

It turns out however that the Bishop traces his ancestry along the border area to a cluster of clans related to the Banyoro. His story is not unusual. His language skills aside many “tribes” along the common border have ties on both sides. They belong to communities who had formed complex political relationships before these were broken up and reformed into modern national borders.

After all the entire border is simply geography not history. The border, however, is how power has been defined and competed for.

Many people are as multi-polar as the Bishop. No community is or can be pure (despite the experimentation of some of our worst leaders). And no purity certainly not based on nationalism fashioned out of artificial borders aught to be required.

In the new state of South Sudan senior officials speak the same mother tongue that I do. Or for that matter former Kenyan VP Moody Awori whose brother Aggrey Awori ran for President in Uganda. Ideas about nationalism or even pan-Africanism may not adequately address this issue as an ongoing and continuous crisis in most African countries. That requires domestic political arrangements that allow for truth telling and intellectual honesty.

What is emerging today is that poor economic management (weighed down by patronage politics) is creating additional problems in African towns and cities where national politics has turned into a game of “anger management”. The type, that Gidi Maji Maji sort of put to song unbwogable  that became the campaign slogan for the Raila/Kibaki campaign against Moi in 2002 (and fell apart in 08).

In any event the think tank I co-founded attempted to address the Ugandan version of this issue empirically ahead of the 2011 elections. Few read the study (ETHNICITY AND ECONOMIC WELL-BEING IN UGANDA 2009) but I have found it useful to return to and be surprised by it. Read for yourself.

View source and on http://mushakipager.blogspot.com/