European influence over the Hutu and Tutsi

Belgium ruled Rwanda up to the early 1960s. The Belgium rule tried to establish an ethnic stereotype between the Hutu and Tutsi; however it was impossible due to the common physical traits among these two tribes. Some people have states that the Tutsi had some ‘White’ blood in their bloodline. Some consider the Tutsi as having some ‘white’ facial traits. However, these tribes regularly intermarried and were very social with each other; this made it impossible to establish any differences. In response the Belgians established a class structure by identifying a Hutu as a person who owned nine cows and a Tutsi as a person that owned ten cows or more. From 1935 on, the Tutsi and the Hutu carried identification cards.

The Belgians then allowed the Tutsi (10 cow tribe) to be educated using the public education system. All one needed to be educated is to own ten or more cows! The Hutu (less than 10 cows) did not receive any education. The educated Tutsi, now educated, wanted to overthrow Belgium colonialism and to gain independence. The Belgians responded by switching their allegiance to the Hutu (uneducated, less than 10 cows). This produced a strong hatred for the Tutsi and the now appointed Hutu government killed approximately 100,000 Tutsi. The remaining Tutsi went to Uganda as refugees and formed the RPF which wanting to over-throw the Hutu government back in Rwanda.

The Hutu government led by President Habyarimana did not want to be removed from power and escalated state sponsored terrorism on the Tutsi. The administration formed civilian death squads to find the Tutsi and to eliminate them. In April 1994, Hutu President Habyarimana’s plane crashed creating a conspiracy theory that it was caused by the Tutsi. This gave the Hutu a green light for a massive wave of genocide against the Tutsi. Within a month nearly 500,000 Tutsi lay dead from this wave of terror. In 1994 Militia groups killed 800,000 Tutsis and Hutu civilians during the Rwandan civil war.

“The 1994 genocide was by no means the first time that the then government of Rwanda attempted to annihilate sections of the population they believed were opposed to their politics. throughout the 1960s the government of Rwanda launched vicious attacks on Rwanda's Tutsi population, resulting in a mass exodus into neighboring Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya and Congo. For the first time in Rwanda's six century long history, a large portion of the people of Rwanda became stateless, and were denied the right to live in their motherland. For the first time in Rwanda's long history, the Rwandan leadership preached a message of division, hate, and violence to the population, resulting in repeated cycles of genocide.” (www.gov.rw).

With all the horrors being committed in Rwanda, the United Nations was very slow in responding to the civil war in Rwanda. It is unclear why the United Nations was so slow to do anything about Rwanda or to even acknowledge to atrocities being committed there. Why is it that we are slow to react to anything in Africa? The United Nations may never have responded if it wasn’t for the media attention. By acknowledging the atrocities in Rwanda, the United Nations would have to acknowledge the European influence. There is also a lack of financial gain in helping the Rwandans. The United Nations had a lot to gain by liberating Kuwait (oil revenue), even though Kuwait is full of Palestinian refugees and the Kuwaiti public is very anti-Semitic. However, we are slow to respond to Rwanda requests since there is no economic gain.

The Europeans, mostly Belgian influence in Rwanda created enemies of long time ethnic tribes that have lived peacefully for many years with each other.

References:

http://www.gov.rw
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rw.html