The Hutus and Tutsis were not traditionally different, and ethnicity in Rwanda only became important during Belgium colonization when the more European-looking Tutsis were chosen as the aristocracy to rule over the Hutus. After Rwanda's independence in 1961 the Hutu majority, comprising roughly 85% of the population, ruled the country. Between 1961 and the outbreak of genocide in 1994 many Tutsis fled the regime due to its discriminatory practices and anti-Tutsi policies. Even after gaining control of the country, however, Hutus had been scared of a Tutsi coup or an invasion from the Tutsi refugees in neighboring Uganda. The regime of president Habyarimana played on these fears in order to distract Rwandans from failing policies and keep their declining party in power.
“Governments are mandated by international law to protect people from genocide,” said human rights activist, Bianca Jagger, referring to the law that the United Nations failed to uphold during the Rwandan genocide of 1994. The United Nations refused to send aid to the citizens of Rwanda claiming that the atrocities were a civil war. However, this was clearly not a civil war, because only one ethnic group was armed and prepared to exterminate the other ethnic group. The Tutsi ethnic group was defined as being superior to the Hutu ethnic group by early colonists because they possessed more caucasian like features. Over time, the Hutu grew hateful of the Tutsi, because they controlled more governmental power, had prefered access to education, and received higher social status.
This made the Hutus inferior to the Tutsi. The Civil war in 1990-1993 between the Hutus and Tutsis refugees led to more division between the two tribes. This led to the assassination of Rwanda Hutu President Juvenal Habyarimana, and the initial events prior to the Genocide. Also the media propaganda influenced Hutus to participate in the Genocide. In the 1950s, the Tutsi held a majority of power in Rwanda.
Between April and June 1994 warfare between the Hutus and Tutsis people struck in the East African country of Rwanda. To call it a tragedy would be an understatement when faced with the estimated death count of one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus over the span one hundred days. The genocide resulted from the desire to control and obtain power within Rwanda and stemmed from a history of cultural and social class conflict amongst the rival groups. This bloodshed proved to be one the most horrific events in history. The Tutsi people had joined the Rwanda population during the 1300’s.
In Conclusion the genocide of the Tutsi people by the Hutus was something that could not be prevented due to the inevitable rising ethnic tensions that have been occurring between them since colonial times. For example, the Arusha accords was established by countries such as the United States and France to begin peace between these ethnic groups, but as evidenced in my paper, even after the Hutus agreed to share power with the Tutsis they were still secretly planning the genocide of the Tutsi. That is why I believe that to stop this genocide there needed to be military intervention from other countries which did not occur. The result was the massacre of 800,000 men women and children.
Out of those three groups, the Tutsi occupied 10 percent of powerful leadership roles, which upset the Hutus (20th Century History). After the Germans invaded, Rwanda struggled for independence from Belgium. The Hutus, who were the majority of Rwanda’s population, were put in charge by the Rwandan government. This upset the Tutsis, sinc... ... middle of paper ... ...tal genocide. After their president’s unexpected death, the Hutus to the Tutsi unification was destroyed.
This gruesome war lasted for a 100 days. Up to this date, there have been many devastating effects on Rwanda and the global community. In addition, many people have not had many acknowledgements for the genocide but from this genocide many lessons have been learned around the world. To find the cause of the Rwandan genocide, many people had tried to follow the path of history from the colonialism of Rwanda to the Rwandan genocide. Belgium wanted to expand just like other powerful nations like Great Britain, Spain, and France due to the lack of space and resources provided to each nation in Europe.
Burundi and Rwanda went to war with each other because of the “need” for a class of people to be looked at as the “dominant race/class”. On April 6, 1994, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana’s personal plane, a gift from French president Francois Mitterand, was shot down as it returned to Rwanda, killing Habyarimana, Burundian president Cyprien Ntarymira, and members of their entourages. In this tense climate, the assassination of Habyarimana was an act akin to throwing a match on kerosene. The events surrounding the assassination itself remain obscure, with theories abounding as to what party was responsible. The most likely scenario suggests that Hutu militants arranged the President's death, which they required as a pretext for mass murder.
Not too long after the revolution started, one political party called the Girondins took control and led the revolution. The Moderates lasted about tw... ... middle of paper ... ...poleon was one of the greatest things that happened to France because his laws and codes that he made when he was the Emperor affected countries all around the world (Defronzo, 286). And while his laws did not consistently and continuously stay in France, some similar ideas came and went throughout the rest of the history of France. All of these points come together to show how important and significant The Reign of Terror was. It was a big part of the French Revolution which was an even bigger part of European history because it involved so many other countries as well.
However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on using the genocide label to create domestic constituencies especially in the Rwandan case. The Darfur case however, revealed that both of these strategies are not effective. Responding to the genocide in Darfur, the US officials declared the label genocide to be occurring.