Painting by Cheri Samba

Lokuta eyaka na ascenseur, kasi vérité eyei na escalier mpe ekomi. Lies come up in the elevator; the truth takes the stairs but gets here eventually. - Koffi Olomide

Ésthetique eboma vélo. Aesthetics will kill a bicycle. - Felix Wazekwa

Friday, August 27, 2010

Highlights of the UN mapping report: 1993-1996

As opposed to what some press accounts may have you believe, the UN mapping report is not a report on the Rwandan genocide of Hutu refugees in the Congo. The sections on the massacre of refugees is a small part of a 565 page report that chronicles many different mass atrocities between 1993 and 2003.

The purpose of the report is to jump-start the transitional justice process in the Congo. Other than a deeply flawed Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), nothing has been done to hold those accountable for the hundreds of thousands of violent deaths accountable. The report recommends a new TRC and a mixed tribunal to be set up to investigate and try the worst crimes, staffed by Congolese and foreign judges and prosecutors.

But you need to know what the report talks about, I don't expect you to read 565 pages. Here are the first highlights of the report, chronicling the period between 1993-1996. This period was less intensively documented, I think, as the team focused much of its efforts on the wars:

1. In 1990, Mobutu opened his dictatorship up to multiparty democracy. His main challenge came from civil society and particularly Etienne Tsisekedi's UDPS party, which had strong backing from the Kasaian community. In order to divide the opposition, Mobutu pitted the Katangan opposition against the Kasaian community in that province - hundreds of thousands of Kasaians had moved to Katanga to work on the railroads, in the mines and in public administration. Governor of Katanga Kyungu wa Kumwanza rallied his JUFERI youth militia to attack Kasaians and chase them out of the provinces. The team indicates that as many as 780,000 Kasaians could have been expelled from the province between 1993 and 1995, many of them crammed onto freight trains, "coffins on rails," in which many died. Thousands died in these cars, due to unsanitary conditions in IDP camps and at the hands of JUFERI thugs.

2. Tensions between local communities in North Kivu exploded into violence in March 1993. The main fault line was between "indigenous" and "immigrant" populations, the latter composed of descendents of Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi who had come to the area during the colonial period to flee famine in Rwanda and to work on colonial farms. These "immigrants" made up the majority of the population in Masisi and spilled over into neighboring Ruthsuru and Walikale territories. In March 1993, spurred on by speeches by the governor, militias from the Hunde and Nyanga communities killed dozens of Hutu in Ntoto and Buoye villages, Walikale territory. The violence quickly spread, and Hutu began forming their own militias and carrying out revenge killings, sometimes with the help of the Zairian army (FAZ):
153. On 22 July 1993, armed Hutu units supported by the FAZ killed at least 48 people, most of them Hunde but also three Hutus, in the village of Binza and the surrounding area, in the north of the Masisi territory. The victims were shot or killed by blows from machetes or spears. According to one eyewitness, some of the victims were maimed and a pregnant woman was disemboweled. Several other villages in the vicinity of Binza were attacked during this period, including Kalembe on 25 July 1993.
The team investigated seven such incidents in which hundreds of Hutu, Hunde and Nyanga were killed. Doctors Without Border put forward a figure, which the team cites, of 250,000 displaced and between 6,000 and 15,000 killed between MArch and May 1993 alone.

3. The arrival of 700,000 Hutu refugees from Rwanda further shattered the stability of the province, dividing the Congolese Hutu and Tutsi communities. Hutu joined the defeated ex-FAR, while Tutsi took part in the Tutsi-led RPF.
157. Between July 1994 and March 1995, over 200,000 Tutsis left the province of North Kivu and returned to Rwanda. Some left of their own volition to benefit from the employment opportunities offered in the army and administration of the new Rwandan regime. Others fled the growing hostility of the Hutu Banyarwanda and ex-FAR/Interahamwe attacks, as well as the resumption of the ethnic war between the Hutu Banyarwanda and the Hunde and Nyanga Mayi-Mayi.
The stance of the Mobutu's army became increasingly ambiguous. They sometimes protected Tutsi, but also victimized them, forcibly evicting many Tutsi living in Goma in early 1996. The army also launched two operations - "Kimia" and "Mbata" - in 1996 to disarm the Hunde, Nande and Nyanga militia that had been formed, but in other cases they collaborated with these militia.
164. On 29 May 1996, FAZ troops massacred over 120 civilians in the village of Kibirizi in the Bwito chiefdom, in the territory of Rutshuru. The FAZ fired at the village using heavy weapons and set fire to several houses.

In June 1996, FAZ troops massacred over one hundred people in the village of Kanyabayonga in the Lubero territory. Most of the victims were killed when the village was shelled using heavy weapons and hundreds of homes were torched. Kanyabayonga was considered a Ngilima stronghold and most of the victims were Nande armed units or civilians suspected of supporting the group.
The team was unable to confirm how many people died in total between 1993 and the beginning of the "real" war in 1996, but they cite an estimate of 70,000 to 100,000 deaths since 1993. In addition, they say 80% of livestock in the province was pillaged.

4. At the same time, many other areas of the country were experienced turmoil due to the transition to democracy. This was especially true for Kinshasa, where security forces rounded up a lot of people, accusing them of supporting the opposition, and tortured or killed them. The team has documented four specific incidents in the capital, including:
171. On 4 May 1994, elements of the security forces executed 15 people at the Tshatshi camp. The victims had been kidnapped by the security forces (notably the BSRS) two days previously at a protest march staged by the opposition. A further five individuals who had been kidnapped and transferred to the CIRCO military garrison were released after protests from human rights organisations.

On 27 May 1994, Civil Guard elements executed six UDPS activists in the Maluku district in Nsele commune. Their bodies were loaded on to a boat and dumped in the middle of the river. The activists had been kidnapped that day by the BSRS and taken to the Civil Guard training centre at Mangengenge. On 27 May, the opposition had called a day of ville morte in Kinshasa to demand the return of Étienne Tshisekedi to the Premiership. Between 1993 and 1994, the security forces killed a number of UDPS activists, including minors, during their crackdown on the movement.

27 comments:

Eugenia said...

Jason, where would one get the full 545 pages?

Giacomo Marinetti said...

Merci, Jason. Juste au milieu de cette guerre médiatique, vous permettez d'aviser les fronts et d'apporter de la force au camp volatile de la raison.

SimonChild said...

Hi,

This is great, thank you for this summary.

I'd also like to know where one could find the full report?

Thanks

Tony said...

It was posted to wikileaks but it takes som times before it appears I guess
in French I have found it here :
http://www.congoforum.be/upldocs/Mapping%20Report%2002062010%20(fr)%201.doc

Tony said...

Interesting reaction by the congolese minister of justice Luzlo Bambi http://www.portalangop.co.ao/motix/fr_fr/noticias/africa/2010/7/34/Kinshasa-transmis-des-observations-ONU,f4b705ac-639c-4558-9f7f-3f7f987859ad.html

onedeadbudgie said...

"157. Between July 1994 and March 1995, over 200,000 Tutsis left the province of North Kivu and returned to Rwanda. Some left of their own volition to benefit from the employment opportunities offered in the army and administration of the new Rwandan regime. Others fled the growing hostility of the Hutu Banyarwanda and ex-FAR/Interahamwe attacks, as well as the resumption of the ethnic war between the Hutu Banyarwanda and the Hunde and Nyanga Mayi-Mayi."

Hold on a minute. "growing hostility2?? Any Tutsi who left and went to Rwanda were in fear of their lives. The Hutu in the camps were part of those responsible for the killing of one million people. Those going to Rwanda were fleeing genocidaires whose mission was, fed by the international community and NGOs, and still is in the FDLR and their financial backers overseas, to "finish the job". These were not casual economic decisions by Tutsi. Remember killings of Tutsi by incomers was common then and and there was also the "insurgency" in the north west.

For the sort of people and ideas that the UN/leakers is now promoting see this (and this is in 2008). JS said on the BBC that there might now be pressure for the Rwandan govt to negotiate with these people. Incredible.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/16/congo.rwanda

Tony said...

@ onedeadbudgie, you should take position on this simple question : someone who kills an unarmed man, woman or child, is he or she a murder or not?
If the answer is yes, then the next question is: must there be a tribunal to judge?
what do you think about the idea of the congolese minister of justice that there should be formed a congolese tribnal that should judge on crimes committed in congo.

Peter said...

From the Guardian article linked by onedeadbudgie:

"The Tutsis stole our country and they are killing the Hutus or making them slaves. We have to kill them wherever they are. It is the only way to get our country back. When they are defeated I can go home," he says. "It's not hard to kill. You shoot."

Are we sure this boy doesn't belong to one of these NGOs?! Or maybe he's a HRW researcher! They sound so identical! Wow, scary stuff.

These NGOs are like pyromaniacs! No wonder this Jason Stearns fella is rubbing his hands in glee at the prospect of the region being ignited in a conflagration that sucks in and feeds on the oxygen provided by NGOs. It seems that chaos and NGOs have a symbiotic relationship, feeding of each other and needing each other to survive, like fire and oxygen.

Let's hope things can remain peaceful and such NGOs just go home and live more constructive lives.

Peter said...

"...someone who kills an unarmed man, woman or child, is he or she a murder or not? If the answer is yes, then the next question is: must there be a tribunal to judge?"

There should have been a tribunal or judge for Churchill and Truman then?

Such moral equivalence is itself the height of immorality. Such immaturity and irresponsibility will only bring about more suffering. Let's hope these misguided NGOs will come to their senses and realize that the world's a little more morally complex than they seem to be aware, and that dragging the region back into chaos and instability is not the way to help and move forward. The historical factors at play are rather complex, so grow up already!

onedeadbudgie said...

So this is how it goes, according to NPR in the US:-

"A draft United Nations report, leaked by French paper Le Monde, shows one million Hutus were slaughtered in the aftermath of the Rwanda carnage in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, at the hands of the Tutsi-led Rwandan Army and Congolese fighters."

A million? Er the link does not say so. This the NPR link.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/08/27/129470538/rwanda-rejects-un-draft-report-alleging-genocide

And this is the "million" article which does not say that of course.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iHjovKiN3t-t-a48NIm8Lxfrl6BAD9HRQ0QG0

Journalists eh?

onedeadbudgie said...

2. "the latter composed of descendents of Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi who had come to the area during the colonial period to flee famine in Rwanda and to work on colonial farms."

Before the Treaty of Berlin a large part of the Kivus was occupied by Rwandans. It was part of the pre-colonial Rwanda. While it is true that many more left Rwanda between the late 1950s and 1994 - Tutsi to flee discrimination and threats to their lives - Kinyarwanda speakers have lived in the Kivus since before colonial times.

Once again the motivation of people moving from Rwanda is treated as purely economic - in colonial times maybe but not after that. No doubt people in the Kivus are keen to describe Kinyarwanda speakers as incomers but that does mean that the UN should have treated that as fact.

Tony said...

@ Peter and ondedeadbudgie, Kagame had a big mouth against France, not because he is an anti-colonialst or an anti-imperialist but because he had mighty US and mighty Britain who were supporting him. How you can say Rwanda is realy independent when general Ward from AFICOM and the chef of staff of the British army come and supervise your actions in Congo?
Like Noriega from Panama and Mobutu from Zaïre, it is wake up time for Kagame. And the crimes that have been done in he name of etnicity will haunt those who commited them untill their dead.

Peter said...

"...but because he had mighty US and mighty Britain who were supporting him. How you can say Rwanda is realy independent when general Ward from AFICOM and the chef of staff of the British army come and supervise your actions in Congo? ...it is wake up time for Kagame. And the crimes that have been done in he name of etnicity will haunt those who commited them untill their dead."

So does that mean it's also "wake up time" for Britain and the US, since, as you suggest, they supervised Rwanda's actions in the Congo?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Any day now there will be a UN report pointing the fingers at these British and Americans who have played a supervising role in all this -- Blair, Clinton, Bush, Susan Rise, Claire Short, etc. Right?

Let's see some consistency from you, Tony. But I won't be holding my breath. ;)

Tony said...

"...So does that mean it's also "wake up time" for Britain and the US, since, as you suggest, they supervised Rwanda's actions in the Congo?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Any day now there will be a UN report pointing the fingers at these British and Americans who have played a supervising role in all this -- Blair, Clinton, Bush, Susan Rise, Claire Short, etc. Right?"

That's what guys as Noriega and Mobutu thought also. Do you realy think those people have only one playing card in their sleeve?
But, please don't hold your breath, Peter.

Peter said...

Mobutu couldn't go to the Chinese. Notice he only became useless after the fall of the Soviet Union, that is, after he had no option to go elsewhere.

Besides, you should be happy now. Since it is the British and Americans, as you say, who "supervised" the trouble in the Congo, now that Kagame is defecting to the Chinese -- that is, to the same side as Kabila -- everybody will be on the same side now!

But, no. You want to use this not as an opportunity to move forward but as an opportunity to return to chaos and violence. One takes two steps forward, you people take two steps back.

I think Rwanda and the Brits and Americans happened to have a confluence of interests for a while. Rwanda had for a number of years a clear and present danger across its border that threatened its very existence, with a psychopathic popolation very close by organized and armed and committed to "finishing the job".

There was no choice but to deal with the problem: release the majority who were being held hostage in the camps and return them home; and eliminate those who were so irrevocably hard core insane that there was no other way to deal with them. In the process, Mobutu needed to be gotten rid of, as he was giving succor to these genocidal elements.

This happened to suit the Brits and Americans.

But as time went by, this confluence of interests diminished. Kagame, as should be obvious, is passionate about developing his country. This passion also extends to Africa as a whole. It's become obvious that siding with the Chinese offers the best chance of achieving this desire, since the Chinese will actually DEVELOP the countries they're in -- infrastructure, soft loans, etc. -- in exchange for resources. This is something the Brits and Americans, as neo-colonialists, simply can't and won't bring themselves to do and are only interested in using Kagame as a continental cat's paw. (But that only worked as long as there was a confluence of interests, which has diminished over time as the genocidaire threat has diminished.)

[continued...]

Peter said...

[...continued]

So rather than celebrating at this prospect of common peace and development, you see this is an opportunity to take Kagame down for doing what he had NO CHOICE AT THE TIME to do. The refugee camps HAD to be closed down and the hostages returned home (where they have lived safely ever since in the safest country in Africa and one of the safest in the world). The remaining hard-core, deranged elements who could not be pacified or reformed had to be removed from the picture; or else they would eventually "finish the job" or leave the region in PERPETUAL chaos that would make the Israeli-Palestinian thing seem like a blink of an eye. These hard-core elements have continued to leave the region unstable, but the present situation is the BEST of a bad situation. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE ... But, alas, NGOs in their childish thinking see the bad that they see and don't wait to think how much worse it would have otherwise be. That would complicate their simplistic view of the world, where choices are always simply divided into absolutely good and absolutely bad rather than the more common choice between lesser of two evils.

Clearly, given the circumstances, Kagame and Rwanda acted in the most ethical manner possible. Not acting as they did would have resulted either in the bad guys "finishing the job" or in the chaotic, unstable situation remaining today AT THE SAME LEVEL as it did in 1995/1996. That's just horrible to imagine. Just endeavor to use your imagination ... for the sake of us all!

It is immature, and indeed immoral, to think otherwise. It is downright irresponsible.

Let's hope you people will stop your short-sighted glee at the prospect of returning the region into chaos (which is what will happen if you keep on following this track with fervor) and celebrate instead this opportunity to move forward, which Kagame's siding with the Chinese (at great personal risk to himself, as is becoming obvious) represents. Do it in the interests of peace and development. Have a longer-term view of things. Keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of people living in Rwanda today are "Hutu" (including in the military), and they live in and enjoy in remarkable peace. Let's not only leave it that way but build on it, extending such peace and development as we see in Rwanda today to as much of the rest of the continent as possible. The window of opportunity that the rise of China represents provides us with this prospect. Please, don't be so short-sighted and small-minded. For the sake of the region. (Keep in mind that you are being used now by the very same British and Americans you accuse of having "supervised" the troubles ... so for the moment you and the Brits/Americans have a "confluence of interests" ... which you can continue to provide them with ... or you can deny them, for the greater good of humanity.)

Peter said...

So rather than celebrating at this prospect of common peace and development, you see this is an opportunity to take Kagame down for doing what he had NO CHOICE AT THE TIME to do. The refugee camps HAD to be closed down and the hostages returned home (where they have lived safely ever since in the safest country in Africa and one of the safest in the world). The remaining hard-core, deranged elements who could not be pacified or reformed had to be removed from the picture; or else they would eventually "finish the job" or leave the region in PERPETUAL chaos that would make the Israeli-Palestinian thing seem like a blink of an eye. These hard-core elements have continued to leave the region unstable, but the present situation is the BEST of a bad situation. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE ... But, alas, NGOs in their childish thinking see the bad that they see and don't wait to think how much worse it would have otherwise be. That would complicate their simplistic view of the world, where choices are always simply divided into absolutely good and absolutely bad rather than the more common choice between lesser of two evils.

Clearly, given the circumstances, Kagame and Rwanda acted in the most ethical manner possible. Not acting as they did would have resulted either in the bad guys "finishing the job" or in the chaotic, unstable situation remaining today AT THE SAME LEVEL as it did in 1995/1996. That's just horrible to imagine. Just endeavor to use your imagination ... for the sake of us all!

[continued...]

Peter said...

[...continued]

It is immature, and indeed immoral, to think otherwise. It is downright irresponsible.

Let's hope you people will stop your short-sighted glee at the prospect of returning the region into chaos (which is what will happen if you keep on following this track with fervor) and celebrate instead this opportunity to move forward, which Kagame's siding with the Chinese (at great personal risk to himself, as is becoming obvious) represents. Do it in the interests of peace and development. Have a longer-term view of things. Keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of people living in Rwanda today are "Hutu" (including in the military), and they live in and enjoy in remarkable peace. Let's not only leave it that way but build on it, extending such peace and development as we see in Rwanda today to as much of the rest of the continent as possible. The window of opportunity that the rise of China represents provides us with this prospect. Please, don't be so short-sighted and small-minded. For the sake of the region. (Keep in mind that you are being used now by the very same British and Americans you accuse of having "supervised" the troubles ... so for the moment you and the Brits/Americans have a "confluence of interests" ... which you can continue to provide them with ... or you can deny them, for the greater good of humanity.)

Peter said...

Oops, somehow there was a double post above.

But realize that Kagame could have continued to side with the Brits and Americans for Rwanda's interests. But he's chosen to start breaking with them FOR THE INTERESTS OF AFRICA!

So he's being threatened and punished for thinking beyond Rwanda and in the interests of Africa ... and you myopic morons jump up and down and celebrate!!!

He could have continued to be the darling of the Brits/Americans and only had Rwanda's interests in mind, and the short-sighted and immature rage you people nurse would have remained impotent. But, no, he's thinking in the greater interests of Africa and you people are so myopic and unthinking to realize that you're now being used to hobble this tremendous opportunity.

Stop and THINK, people. Kagame did not need to put himself at such risk as he's doing now. Don't be so silly as to be used by the City of London and Wall Street. Don't be so naive.

Tony said...

Militarists who are not guided and commanded by politics think strategy is like playing chest.
But strategy is in essential politics and it is to difficult for such militarists. Ethics also is to difficult for such militarists.
I think Kagame is such a militarist and he would do better to listen to political wise people.
Such as Sebarenzi, Rudasingwa, Mberabahizi, Twagirumungu for example.
And outside Rwanda:men as Jospeh Kabila, Dos Santos and Zuma, for example.
But since august 1998 he has gone to far and I think it will be inevitable that sooner or later he should recognize the crimes that havec been commited uinder his command and on his orders.
Sorry for Your big hero, Peter. But then again, please don't hold your breath.

Peter said...

Tony, the problem with you is that you act as if there was ever any other option available. It really is an unfortunate attitude because so stupid. Care to suggest to us what options were available at the time?

And also, what do you suggest? Kagame sticks with the Anglo-Americans or go with the Chinese? If he sticks with the Anglo-Americans, then the Anglo-Americans won't "bring him to justice" and your rage will remain impotent. If he goes with the Chinese in order to look beyond Rwanda's narrow interests and towards the broader interest of his neighbors, then the myopic crowd will be the first to volunteer to help when the Anglo-American oligarchy comes about looking to punish him.

You people make me sad, because you cause so much suffering without intending to.

Nkunda said...

Peter,

You said, "The remaining hard-core, deranged elements who could not be pacified or reformed had to be removed from the picture; or else they would eventually "finish the job"

Are you referring to this:

'A soldier brought an eight-month-old (Hutu) baby so we could bury him,' said a Red Cross worker. 'But we said, "We can't bury someone living". He took a stick and he hit the child on the head until he was dead.'

or this:

They [Tutsi soldiers] separated the little boys from the girls...And they started killing the boys. First they shot them, and then they cut them in half. So that...if they came back to life they wouldn't be able to escape.

And anyway, if the interest of Rwanda was to return the Hutu refugees why would they massacre Congolese Hutu? or Burundian Hutu?

I'd rather you separate these instances of injustice from the China/Development debate.

Dan said...

Peter and Co ask if there were other options available?
Yes there was at least one other option available: looking for a true reconciliation and use justice for the guilty or ban them or marginalize them.

Kagame has continued and amplified the bloody madness started by the tutsi genocide and brought it to another dimension: 800 000 killed by the tutsi genocide, more than 4 millions killed since Kagame has started his campaigns in DRC....

And the cruelty and barbarism of the Kagame's men is as disturbing, as chilling and more widespread than these of the hutu's "genocidaires".


The Reality that this report reveals is that Kagame's rwanda government is a tutsi government which indiscriminately massacred Hutus, from Congo, DRC and Burundi. But I will add to that list Bantu congoleses, who for tutsi kagame are just Hutu's cousin. There have been massacres in Makabola, Kisangani, etc.. Massacres perpetrated by Rwandeses APR against local communities in Congo.

The reality is that Kagame has started a terrible , insane killing cycle in DRC. Kagame is the first responsible of the more than 4 millions people who died in DRC.

Because of Kagame's massacre against local population we have now in DRC the Mai-Mai, local population who originally organised in auto-defense millice against tutsi rwandese and who are now out of control.

Because of kagame who armed its ethnic tutsi cousin in Itury against the local population, we have Thomas Lubanga and Co and an ethnic mistrust never seen before between the different ethnic group in Ituri. That presage a volatile future.

All the rebel groups which are now out of control are all the results of Kagame's APR thirst of revenge.

Clinton, Susan Rice, Albright, Tony Blair and Co who helped, protected and gave Kagame a total impunity while they were in power are equally responsible. They have to pay as well.

Justice must be rendered for not only the hutus who were killed but also for all the congoleses who were killed, displaced and who are still today every day suffering of the consequences of the cycle of madness inflated in 1994.

People who said this report will re ignite tensions are wrong.
This report remove to kagame the moral ground that he has always used to justify his deeds and that has given him a total impunity from the international community.

Now Kagame knows that he is going to be taken accountable for the continuation of the chaos in the east of DRC and that he can not use the genocide as an excuse for continuing supporting people who kill in daily basis in DRC as he has done, and continues to do, in creating Nkunda, Mutebusi, Ntaganda and co.

We have been fighting for years for the truth about Kagame's evil influence in Great lakes region to be recognized. I am happy that "small pieces" of the truth start to emerge. I read the report and it is far to detail all the atrocities that happened, and continue to happen, in DRC and which directly are imputable to Kagame's regime.

Now that the world is ready to listen, I am waiting for the day Kagame will be indicted for Genocide and war crime.

Tutsis people look for a real leader that will bring peace and peaceful cohabitation upon you, not for one who is making you hated by all the communities surrounding you and preparing the future wars against you.

Dan said...

To Peter and co:
Yes there was at least another option available looking for a true reconciliation and use justice for the guilty or ban them.

Kagame has inflated the cycle of madness that started with the tutsi genocide of 1994. he did not stop it, he started his own and brought the all region to a new dimension of madness that has caused more than 4 millions of dead people, 5 time de Rwandese genocide....

Kagame thirst for revenge has created a situation which has got out of control and excruciatingly condemn millions of people of living in the worst condition ever.

Cruelty and barbarism demonstrated by Kagame's men is as disgusting, as chiling and more widespread than these of the hutu's genocidaire.

[continue]

Dan said...

Kagame's troops did not only killed hutu's from Rwanda, Congo and Burundi. But they also killed Bantu's of ongo who are Hutu's cousin. As the congolese government wrote in his response to the report, all the massacres of the Rwandese APR against congolese population are not considered. There were Makobola, Kisangani,etc...

Kagame has used the congolese tutsi as surrogate and armed them (Banyamulenge in south Kivu, Lendu in Ituri, Tutsu banyarwanda in North Kivu). Giving the image that the new power is tutsi and other community have to bow. In reaction there were creation of the Mai-Mai(the local auto-defense militia) and a myriad of other armed groups, to fight the perceived tutsi domination.

Kagame has exported the Rwandese ethnic conflict in Congo.
Now Kagame and all people who helped him, (Clinton,Blair, susan rice, Albright,etc) must pay.
TPI for the Congo that is what we want. Only justice will bring peace as it will deter all those who think that killing and throwing millions to distress on the name of your community has no consequences.

Peter said...

"Clinton, Susan Rice, Albright, Tony Blair and Co who helped, protected and gave Kagame a total impunity while they were in power are equally responsible. They have to pay as well."

Er, I think you'll find that these folk are above the law. Sorry to burst your bubble. Indeed, this is the sorry thing about you guys -- believing that the ICC represents a court that will apply justice. Ha! It's just a means for the Anglo-American powers to punish uppity leaders from Third World nations who don't ask "How high?" when told to jump. Mubarak behaves himself ... so you don't here a peep about him, even though the "repression" everybody's been hearing about Rwanda of late doesn't compare to Egypt.

So, no, Clinton, Blair et al will not see any court because they're on the side of the court that holds the whip to remind everyone who makes the rules (them) and who plays by the rules (the rest of us).

And behind them are the wealthy oligarchical families of Europe who are DEFINITELY beyond whatever law you may wish to throw at them.

So the threat of the "law" is hanging over Kagame's head now only because he's a little African who's getting too uppity for the liking of the Anglo-American oligarchy, what with misbehaving and flirting with the Chinese and all. He needs to be brought back in line!

Peter said...

I forgot to mention another country where the Anglo-Americans are not going to start to threaten with "justice". Saudi Arabia.

Just look at the issues and incidents that constituted the big song and dance that's been made about Rwanda in recent months ... and look at Saudi Arabia. Look at Saudi Arabia regarding women and look at Rwanda. Look at Saudi Arabia regarding "free elections" and look at Rwanda. Look at Saudi Arabia regarding "repression" and look at Rwanda. Look at Saudi Arabia -- indeed, the Gulf States -- on so many things and look at Rwanda.

And yet ... we barely hear anything about Saudi Arabia, or so many other countries one can think of that are way worse than Rwanda but barely attract any obloquy.

"Justice" is a tool applied by the Anglo-Americans against those who don't do as they're told. Look at Chavez. Look at Mugabe -- yes, Mugabe! The propaganda the Anglo-Americans do is so accomplished that I had no idea what this whole thing against Mugabe was really about! See link below:

http://gowans.wordpress.com/category/zimbabwe/

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.