The dictator Kagame at UN

The dictator Kagame at UN
Dictators like Kagame who have changed their national constitutions to remain indefinitely on power should not be involved in UN high level and global activities including chairing UN meetings

Why has the UN ignored its own report about the massacres of Hutu refugees in DRC ?

The UN has ignored its own reports, NGOs and media reports about the massacres of hundreds of thousands of Hutu in DRC Congo (estimated to be more than 400,000) by Kagame when he attacked Hutu refugee camps in Eastern DRC in 1996. This barbaric killings and human rights violations were perpetrated by Kagame’s RPF with the approval of UK and USA and with sympathetic understanding and knowledge of UNHCR and international NGOs which were operating in the refugees camps. According to the UN, NGO and media reports between 1993 and 2003 women and girls were raped. Men slaughtered. Refugees killed with machetes and sticks. The attacks of refugees also prevented humanitarian organisations to help many other refugees and were forced to die from cholera and other diseases. Other refugees who tried to return to Rwanda where killed on their way by RFI and did not reach their homes. No media, no UNHCR, no NGO were there to witness these massacres. When Kagame plans to kill, he makes sure no NGO and no media are prevent. Kagame always kills at night.

31 Dec 2012

USA: Experts Forecast the Cost of Failure to Compromise

Experts Forecast the Cost of Failure to Compromise


Even if President Obama and Republicans in Congress can reach a last-minute compromise that averts some tax increases before Monday's midnight deadline, experts still foresee a significant drag on the economy in the first half of 2013 from the fiscal impasse in Washington.
While negotiators in the capital focus on keeping Bush-era tax rates in place for all but the wealthiest Americans, other tax increases are expected to go into effect regardless of what happens in the coming days. For example, a two percentage point jump in payroll taxes for Social Security is all but certain after Jan. 1, a change that will equal an additional $2,000 from the paycheck of a worker earning $100,000 a year.
Many observers initially expected the lower payroll-tax deduction rate of 4.2 percent to be preserved. But in recent weeks, as it became clear that political leaders were prepared to let that rate rise to 6.2 percent, economists reduced their predictions for growth in the first quarter accordingly.
Largely because of this jump in payroll taxes, Nigel Gault, chief United States economist at IHS Global Insight, is halving his prediction for economic growth in the first quarter to 1 percent from an earlier estimate of just over 2 percent. That represents a significant slowdown in economic growth from the third quarter of 2012, when the economy expanded at an annual rate of 3.1 percent.
Mr. Obama has pushed to preserve Bush-era tax rates on income below $250,000 a year but Republicans have held out for a higher threshold, perhaps in the neighborhood of $400,000 a year. Republicans also favor deeper spending cuts to curb long-term budget deficits — a move many Democrats oppose.
While hopes dimmed Sunday afternoon that a deal could be reached before Jan. 1, most observers said they did not expect the full impact from more than $600 billion in potential tax increases and spending cuts to swamp the economy right away. Indeed, a compromise could be struck in the coming weeks that heads off the worst of the fallout.
In the event no compromise is found, however, the Congressional Budget Office and many private economists warn that the sudden pullback in spending and the rise in taxes would push the economy into recession in the first half of the year. Under this outcome, Mr. Gault said, the economy could shrink by 0.5 percent over all of 2013.
With the clock ticking, some observers bolstered their criticism of Washington. "If we have a recession, it's unforgivable," said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at the Economic Outlook Group. "For the first time in modern history, we will have a self-inflicted recession in the U.S."
Despite Washington's history of delaying fiscal compromises to the last possible minute — as in the fight over raising the debt ceiling in the summer of 2011 — investors had assumed until very recently that a deal would be completed before year-end.
But last week, stocks sold off as hopes for a quick compromise faded. More pressure on shares is expected beginning on Monday, especially if the fight does indeed slip into 2013. If anything forces politicians to act, Mr. Baumohl said, it could be a sell-off on Wall Street. "The politicians need to be pressed by markets to be forced to the table," he said.
Payroll managers at many companies are also watching the negotiations closely but have already prepared systems for the two percentage point change in payroll taxes, said Scott A. Schapiro, a principal at KPMG.
"We're primarily closed down from Christmas to New Year's," he said, "but our payroll folks are working. Payroll has to be around."
"This is one of the most obvious effects of the fiscal cliff," Mr. Schapiro added, "because it will affect all taxpayers." The Social Security payroll tax applies to the first $113,700 of annual income, he said. It was first cut by Congress in late 2010 to help give the economy a jolt, and was extended again last year to cover 2012.
Another big question mark is whether unemployment benefits for more than two million jobless Americans will be extended beyond Jan. 1. While there is still the possibility these payouts for the long-term unemployed will be preserved as the negotiations go down to the wire, failure to extend them would deliver another sizable blow to a still-fragile economy, experts said.
"This is not just an inside-the-Beltway-game," said Vincent Reinhart, chief United States economist at Morgan Stanley. "Both the payroll tax increase and the change in unemployment benefits would hit hand-to-mouth consumers hard. This has consequences for the whole economy."
Consumer spending is especially critical right now, because many businesses have pulled back already, citing the fiscal impasse in Washington as a prime concern. Until recently, consumers have been more optimistic about the economy, although sentiment has eroded in recent weeks as anxiety increased about just what policy makers would do in terms of taxes and spending.
If it were not for the uncertainty in Washington and the fallout from the fiscal impasse, Mr. Reinhart said, the economy would be growing at an annual rate of 2 percent to 2.5 percent. Instead, he estimated growth in the fourth quarter of 2012 at just under 1 percent, and said he expected it to edge up only slightly to around 1 percent in the first half of 2013. Unemployment, now at 7.7 percent, is about 0.3 percentage point higher than it otherwise would be, he added.
To be sure, the impact from some other scheduled changes will not be felt right away — and could still be reversed if a deal is completed in the coming weeks. For example, automatic spending cuts set to hit the Pentagon budget as well as nonmilitary programs are spread out between now and the end of the 2013 fiscal year in September, giving legislators time to change course and head off any major impact.
But the longer the standoff continues, the deeper the economic damage, experts said. "Because the politicians couldn't get out of the way," Mr. Reinhart said, "growth in the last quarter of 2012 and the first two quarters of 2013 will be below trend. There is a real cost of not coming to the table."
PHOTO: Shoppers in Atlanta. The confidence of consumers has eroded in the absence of a deal to avert a harsh budget package on Jan. 1. (PHOTOGRAPH BY DAVID GOLDMAN/ASSOCIATED PRESS) (B2)
Related Articles

30 Dec 2012

Region sucked into conflict as eastern Congo becomes theatre of war again - News -


Region sucked into conflict as eastern Congo becomes theatre of war again

M23 rebels withdraw through the hills having left their position in a village in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, on November 30, 2012. Hundreds of Congolese rebels left their frontline positions around Goma following a regionally brokered truce. Photo/AFP

M23 rebels withdraw through the hills having left their position in a village in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, on November 30, 2012. Hundreds of Congolese rebels left their frontline positions around Goma following a regionally brokered truce. Photo/AFP 

By Edmund Kagire, Rwanda Today

Posted  Friday, December 28  2012 at  19:03


  • The timeline of arguably Rwanda's big story of 2012 as it unfolded.


It all started in April with a group of soldiers formerly under National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP) — who had been integrated in the national forces under a March 23, 2009 agreement — mutinying and launching a rebellion against the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

The fighting would spiral into a full-scale war. Soon, Rwanda was being accused of lending support to the rebels against the government of President Joseph Kabila gaining momentum from June.

However, till the end of the year, Rwanda remained defiant amid intense pressure from the international community — and despite the consequences that came with the accusations, mainly donors withholding vital aid.

The following is the timeline of arguably Rwanda's big story of 2012 as it unfolded:

April 29, 2012: Soldiers, mainly Kinyarwanda-speaking, formerly aligned to Gen Laurent Nkunda's CNDP which had been integrated into the national forces FARDC stage a mutiny in eastern Congo. According to the rebels, about 600 men are part of the mutiny.

Early reports suggest that the mutineers are linked to Gen Bosco Ntaganda, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes. The group's spokesperson, Lt-Col Jean Marie Vianney Kazarama, however distances the rebels from the fugitive general.

May 8: In a press release, the mutineers announce that they have set up a new rebel movement known as M23, named after the date, in the month of March, of a 2009 peace deal which they accuse President Kabila and his government of failing to honour. The new rebel group also names its leader, Col Sultani Makenga.

May 28: Reports surface that Human Rights Watch (HRW) has a report in which it implicates Rwanda in the fresh conflict. BBC is the first to report it. Rwanda responds by labelling the rumours about its involvement in the conflict as "categorically false and dangerous."

June 4: HRW releases a report which, for the first time, accuses Rwanda of supporting the rebels and implicates top government and military officials in the fighting. The rebels launch an offensive, triggering an exodus of refugees crossing into Rwanda and Uganda.

July 6: M23 fighters capture the DRC-Uganda border town of Bunagana after two days of fighting that see some 600 Congolese troops flee into Uganda, according to the Ugandan People's Defence Forces (UPDF). An Indian peacekeeper with the UN Mission in DR Congo (Monusco) is killed in the fighting.

June 19: In a presidential press briefing, President Paul Kagame for the first time speaks about the renewed conflict. The Rwandan leader says the problems of governance in DRC are to blame, as well as the hypocrisy of the international community, which called on Rwanda to intervene and resolve the crisis but later turned around and accused the same country of fomenting the conflict.

June 20: A leaked draft report of a UN Group of Experts on the DRC crisis implicates Rwanda in the conflict but Rwanda condemns what it refers to as the leakage of a "one-sided preliminary document based on partial findings and is still subject to verification."

July 11: International Conference for the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) member countries meet in Addis Ababa on the sidelines of the African Union summit to discuss the conflict. Rwanda welcomes the development, saying a "regional solution" is needed to resolve the crisis.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page»

Rwanda schemed M23 war - UN expert

Rwanda schemed M23 war - UN expert

M23 rebels in Kivu recently.
M23 rebels in Kivu recently. PHOTO BY AFP 
By Steve Hege

Posted  Sunday, December 30  2012 at  02:00
The investigation. Rwandan involvement and orchestration of the M23 rebellion becomes more comprehensible when understood as a determined and calculated drive to spawn the creation of an autonomous federal state for eastern Congo.
Since the outset of the M23 rebellion, the government of Rwanda has provided direct military support to the rebels, facilitated recruitment, encouraged desertions from the Congolese army and delivered ammunition, intelligence and political advice to them.
Rwanda, in fact, orchestrated the creation of M23 when a series of mutinies led by officers formerly belonging to the group's predecessor, the Congrèsnational pour la défense du people (CNDP), were suppressed by the Congolese armed forces in early May.
But Rwanda continues to deny any involvement and has repeatedly claimed it was not consulted or given a right of reply to our investigations. This is not true. Despite the government of Rwanda's refusal to receive us during our official visit to Kigali in May, we purposefully delayed the publication of the addendum to our interim report in order to give the country's Minister of Foreign Affairs an opportunity to clarify the information. But she declined to do so and claimed her government was not privy to our findings.
Response without substance
Following the publication of the addendum on June 27, we met again with the government of Rwanda in Kigali and took into consideration its written response to our interim report. However, we found no substantive element of our previous findings that we wished to alter.
In our final report, we also documented support for the rebels from the government of Uganda. Senior Ugandan officials provided the rebels with direct troop reinforcements in Congolese territory. 
They also supported the creation and expansion of the political branch of M23 permanently based in Kampala even before President Joseph Kabila had ever authorised any interaction between the rebels and the government of Uganda.
Kampala acknowledged this support was indeed taking place in a meeting with the Group of Experts in early October. An appointed senior police officer said they would investigate and arrest those involved. 
The DRC government is aware of this support but has chosen not to denounce it in the hope of convincing the Ugandans they have more to gain by working with Kinshasa than with Kigali in this crisis.
What is Rwanda's motive?
Throughout our work, the question most often posed to us was: Why would Rwanda undertake such a politically dangerous endeavour? Some of the motives behind this war are as follows: 
As per their name, the rebels have claimed that the government reneged on the March 23, 2009 peace agreements.
However, this accord was merely an afterthought to formalise a bilateral deal between Kinshasa and Kigali which was predicated on affording the latter with immense influence in the Kivu in exchange for arresting CNDP chairman Laurent Nkunda, and forcing the rest of the group to join the national army under the leadership of Bosco Ntaganda.
M23 has also made many claims about human rights, even though nine of its members and associates have been designated for sanctions by both the US government and the UN's Sanctions Committee, most for egregious violations of international law, including recruiting child soldiers and violent land grabs.
Nevertheless, M23 similarly demands good governance, though they have attacked and appropriated numerous state assets provided by donors, including recently, 33 vehicles previously donated to the Congolese police.
M23 also claims they are fighting for the 50,000 Tutsi refugees who remain in Rwanda. A rebellion which displaces over 500,000 can hardly defend the rights of 50,000 refugees.
In recent months, M23 has increasingly claimed that they want a review of the discredited 2011 presidential elections, in an attempt to attract the sympathies of a broader constituency and further weaken President Kabila.
Finally, Rwanda and M23 have said the Congolese army's military operations against the Rwandan Hutu rebels of the FDLR have failed and the group remains a threat. However, not only did the Rwandan Minister of Defence recently say the FDLR could never threaten Rwanda, but the rebels are currently at all-time low numbers after thousands were demobilised by the UN.
Objectively, the greater security threat to Rwanda is represented by Tutsi political opponents who have fallen out with President Kagame in recent years.
Rwanda's regional strategy
Rwandan involvement and orchestration of the M23 rebellion becomes more comprehensible when understood as a determined and calculated drive to spawn the creation of an autonomous federal state for eastern Congo. 
Prior to the November 2011 elections, a senior intelligence officer within the Rwandan government discussed with me several possible scenarios for the secession of eastern Congo.
He said because the country was too big to be governed by Kinshasa, Rwanda should support the emergence of a federal state for eastern Congo. He said: "Goma should relate to Kinshasa in the same way that Juba was linked to Khartoum," prior to the independence of South Sudan.
During several internal meetings of M23 for mobilisation, senior government officials, including the Minister of Defence's special assistant, openly affirmed that establishing this autonomous state was in fact the key goal of the rebellion.
Several M23 commanders and allies have also openly confirmed this in interviews I conducted as part of the Group of Experts. Even senior Ugandan security officials also acknowledged this was the aim of the Rwandans in this M23 war.
One officer, who helped support M23 in co-operation with the Rwandans, told us: "They're thinking big ... you need to look at South Sudan." The objective of federalism also helps to explain in part, the involvement of individuals within the Ugandan government. If Rwanda achieves its goal, then Ugandans would need to ensure that their own cultural, security, and economic interests in the eastern DRC were not jeopardised.
Steve Hege is the former co-ordinator of the UN Group of Experts on the DRC. This is Hege's testimony to the US House of Representatives House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights on 11 December 2012

Final report of the Group of Experts on the DRC submitted in accordance with paragraph 4 of Security Council resolution 2021 (2011) (S/2012/843)

Final report of the Group of Experts on the DRC submitted in accordance with paragraph 4 of Security Council resolution 2021 (2011) (S/2012/843)

from UN Security Council
Published on 15 Nov 2012 View Original
Executive summary
The eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo remains plagued by dozens of foreign and national armed groups. Instability has increased since the mutiny by former members of the Congrès national pour la défense du peuple and the subsequent creation of the Mouvement du 23 mars (M23) earlier in 2012. The rebels expanded their control over Rutshuru territory with extensive foreign support in July 2012 and have recently taken advantage of an informal ceasefire to enhance alliances and command proxy operations elsewhere.
The Government of Rwanda continues to violate the arms embargo by providing direct military support to the M23 rebels, facilitating recruitment, encouraging and facilitating desertions from the armed forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and providing arms, ammunition, intelligence and political advice. The de facto chain of command of M23 includes Gen. Bosco Ntaganda and culminates with the Minister of Defence of Rwanda, Gen. James Kabarebe. Following the publication of the addendum to its interim report (S/2012/348/Add.1), the Group met the Government of Rwanda and took into consideration its written response. The Group has, however, found no substantive element of its previous findings that it wishes to alter.
Senior officials of the Government of Uganda have also provided support to M23 in the form of direct troop reinforcements in Congolese territory, weapons deliveries, technical assistance, joint planning, political advice and facilitation of external relations. Units of the Ugandan People’s Defence Forces and the Rwandan Defence Forces jointly supported M23 in a series of attacks in July 2012 to take over the major towns of Rutshuru territory and the Congolese armed forces base of Rumangabo. Both Governments have also cooperated to support the creation and expansion of the political branch of M23 and have consistently advocated on behalf of the rebels. M23 and its allies include six sanctioned individuals, some of whom reside in or regularly travel to Rwanda and Uganda.
Taking advantage of a lull in combat on the official front lines, M23 has sought to build coalitions with other armed groups throughout the Kivus and in Ituri and Kasai Occidental. Col. Sultani Makenga emerged as the coordinator of the armed groups allied with M23. In August and September, he ordered Raïa Mutomboki to carry out brutal ethnically motivated attacks, burning more than 800 homes and killing hundreds of civilians from Congolese Hutu communities in Masisi territory, whose militias refused to ally themselves with M23.
The use and recruitment of child soldiers by armed groups, notably by M23, has increased. In particular, several M23 commanders with histories of child recruitment have overseen the enrolment and training of hundreds of young boys and girls. Furthermore, some M23 commanders have ordered the extrajudicial executions of dozens of recruits and prisoners of war.
The many attempts by M23 to forge a common front with ethnic Hema and Lendu armed groups in Ituri and the Banyamulenge community in South Kivu have encountered significant resistance. The Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has sought to counter the efforts of M23 to expand its alliances by promoting integration processes with armed groups, notably in Ituri and in Masisi territory.
At historically low numbers, the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda (FDLR), although continuing to commit abuses against civilians, have become further isolated from external support and are focused on self-protection in the face of attacks by the Congolese armed forces and M23 allies. Junior FDLR officers have sought to ally themselves with the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo against M23, while some criminal networks within the Congolese armed forces continue to sell small amounts of ammunition to the rebels.
There is, however, no evidence of strategic cooperation between FDLR and the Government.
Among Burundian rebel groups, the Forces nationales de libération remain divided and reliant on local Congolese armed groups, while the Front national pour la révolution au Burundi has now transformed itself into the Front du peuple murundi and allied itself with M23 in South Kivu. The Ugandan-led Allied Democratic Forces have expanded their military capacity and cooperated with Al-Shabaab networks in East Africa.
The Congolese armed forces continue to be plagued by criminal networks generating revenue for senior officers through their control over natural resources and contraband, including the trafficking of ivory from armed groups. The land forces commander, Gen. Gabriel Amisi, oversees a network distributing hunting ammunition for poachers and armed groups, including Raïa Mutomboki. Disarmament and stockpile management efforts have also been undermined by the increased demand associated with the M23 rebellion as the market price for small arms has risen fourfold.
The requirement of the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo for mineral exporters to exercise due diligence in accordance with United Nations and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development guidelines has nearly halted all tin, tantalum and tungsten exports from the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, apart from north Katanga where mineral tagging was introduced in 2011. Smuggling into both Burundi and Rwanda is on the rise. The credibility of the mineral tagging system in place in Rwanda is jeopardized by the laundering of Congolese minerals because tags are routinely sold by mining cooperatives. Several traders have contributed to financing M23 rebels using profits resulting from the smuggling of Congolese minerals into Rwanda.
While tin ore production has decreased in the Kivus, tantalum and tungsten ore production has been resilient to international traceability demands, given that those minerals are more easily smuggled. Rwandan exports of tantalum and tungsten have experienced a corresponding increase during 2012, while tin ore exports have decreased.
Overall price and production decreases have had negative socioeconomic consequences in some mining zones. New commercial opportunities have, however, been created as mining communities have adapted to other economic sectors. Security has improved in most of the major tin and tantalum mining areas, which has led to less conflict financing and increased oversight and monitoring by civil authorities and non-governmental organizations.
Armed groups, criminal networks within the Congolese armed forces and miners easily shift to gold mines where due diligence requirements have not affected trade. Nearly all gold from the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo is smuggled out of the country and channelled through a few major traders in Kampala and Bujumbura who ship out several tons per year, worth hundreds of millions of United States dollars. In the United Arab Emirates, most Congolese gold is smelted and sold to jewellers. The assets freeze imposed by the Security Council has not limited the operations of the previous owner of the sanctioned entity Machanga Ltd., who exports through other front companies and transfers large sums of money to suppliers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Rapport final du Groupe d’experts sur la République démocratique du Congo conformément au paragraphe 4 de la résolution 2021 (2011) du Conseil de Sécurité (S/2012/843)

Rapport final du Groupe d’experts sur la République démocratique du Congo conformément au paragraphe 4 de la résolution 2021 (2011) du Conseil de Sécurité (S/2012/843)

from UN Security Council
Published on 15 Nov 2012 View Original
L’est de la République démocratique du Congo demeure la proie de dizaines de groupes armés congolais et étrangers. L’instabilité s’est accentuée depuis la mutinerie d’anciens membres du Congrès national pour la défense du peuple (CNDP) et la création subséquente, cette année, du mouvement du 23 mars (M23). Les rebelles ont, en juillet 2012 et avec une aide considérable de l’étranger, étendu leur emprise sur le territoire de Rutshuru et ils ont récemment profité d’un cessez-le-feu informel pour consolider leurs alliances et pour faire mener par des supplétifs des opérations dans d’autres zones.

29 Dec 2012

Rwanda: Victoire Ingabire’s Speech and Quotes

Victoire Ingabire's Speech and Quotes

I agree that there was a genocide by Hutu extremists against the Tutsis, that is the reality. The people who did this need to face justice. But there were also other crimes against humanity, including the killing of Hutus.
I don't believe in violence and war is not the solution to the problems that face this country.
People say there's stability in Rwanda but this stability is based on repression … We need stability based on freedom. I don't understand how democratic countries can remain friends with a government that doesn't allow democracy. The democratic UK is supporting a dictatorship.
Shall I die or live, be detained or released what we have achieved will not go back. This movement is stronger than me. Remanding me in captivity or silencing my voice can only postpone the revolution. It cannot stop the movement.

Unity and Reconciliation Speech at Gisozi Genocide Memorial Centre

On the 16th January 2010, Mrs Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, having stayed abroad for 16 years, returned to her country to register her political party and run for presidential elections. It was her first time back in Rwanda since the genocide committed against Tutsi people. On her very first day in Rwanda, she went to lay a wreath of flowers at the Gisozi Genocide Memorial Centre and made a speech on unity and reconciliation.
Her speech, translated in English below, has been submitted as evidence in the court of law on divisionism and revisionism charges leveled against her.
"I would like to say that today, I came back to my country after 16 years, and there was a tragedy that took place in this country. We know very well that there was a genocide, extermination. Therefore, I could not have returned after 16 years to the same country after such actions took place. They took place when I was not in the country. I could not have fallen asleep without first passing by the place where those actions took place. I had to see the place. I had to visit the place.
"The flowers I brought with me are a sign of remembrance from the members of my party FDU and its executive committee. They gave me a message to pass by here and tell Rwandans that what we wish for is for us to work together, to make sure that such a tragedy will never take place again. That is one of the reasons why the FDU Party made a decision to return to the country peacefully, without resorting to violence. Some think that the solution to Rwanda's problems is to resort to armed struggle. We do not believe that shedding blood resolves problems. When you shed blood, the blood comes back to haunt you.
"Therefore, we in FDU wish that all we Rwandans can work together, join our different ideas so that the tragedy that befell our nation will never happen again. It is clear that the path of reconciliation has a long way to go. It has a long way to go because if you look at the number of people who died in this country, it is not something that you can get over quickly. But then again, if you look around you realize that there is no real political policy to help Rwandans achieve reconciliation. For example, if we look at this memorial, it only stops at people who died during the Tutsi genocide. It does not look at the other side – at the Hutus who died during the genocide. Hutus who lost their people are also sad and they think about their lost ones and wonder, 'When will our dead ones be remembered?'
"For us to reach reconciliation, we need to empathize with everyone's sadness. It is necessary that for the Tutsis who were killed, those Hutus who killed them understand that they need to be punished for it. It is also necessary that for the Hutus who were killed, those people who killed them understand that they need to be punished for it too. Furthermore, it is important that all of us, Rwandans from different ethnic groups, understand that we need to unite, respect each other and build our country in peace.
"What brought us back to the country is for us to start that path of reconciliation together and find a way to stop injustices so that all of us Rwandans can live together with basic freedoms in our country."

Rwanda’s Rampaging Rebel Force -


Rwanda's Rampaging Rebel Force

  • SAVE
  • E-MAIL

Despite supporting a brutal rebel group in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda is about to take a seat on the U.N. Security Council.

Related in Opinion

Opinion Twitter Logo.

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow@nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow@andyrNYT.

Few countries dare challenge the Security Council the way Rwanda does; even fewer get away with it. Yet on Tuesday, despite backing an abusive rebel group that has attacked U.N. peacekeepers in the neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda will take a two-year seat on the council. At the famous horseshoe table, Rwanda will get to make life-and-death decisions on the future of countries in crisis, including the very neighbor it is accused of destabilizing.

How could this be? The facts came out in June, when a U.N. group of experts monitoring sanctions in eastern Congo published a report accusing Rwanda of supporting, as it had done before since the late 1990s, a Congolese rebellion this time named March 23. Even by Congolese standards, M23 has a sinister record: One of its leaders is Bosco Ntaganda, a fugitive from the International Criminal Court accused of war crimes, including murder, rape, sexual slavery and recruitment of child soldiers.

As our own research at Human Rights Watch confirmed, Rwandan Army officials were providing M23 with weapons, ammunition and hundreds of young Rwandan recruits, and even sending their troops into Congo to assist them. Despite Rwanda's virulent denials, the diplomatic machinery kicked into gear, with the U.S. government making discreet efforts to encourage its Rwandan ally to use its "influence" to stop the violence.

But throughout the summer Rwandan support continued unabated, enabling M23 to do what its leaders know best: commit widespread crimes, including killing civilians and summarily executing boys who tried to escape recruitment. A 32-year-old woman from Chengerero told us that on July 7, M23 fighters broke down her door, beat her 15-year-old son to death and abducted her husband. Before leaving, they raped her, poured fuel between her legs and set her on fire. In Muchanga, a 15-year-old girl described being raped by an M23 fighter who stole the money for her school fees. The list goes on.

According to the U.N. experts' report, M23's de facto chain of command "culminates with the Rwandan Minister of Defense General James Kabarebe." The experts concluded that in July Rwandan Defense Force commanders operated alongside M23 during operations that targeted a U.N. base in Kiwanja and killed a U.N. peacekeeper.

And yet the Security Council failed to put Rwanda on notice. Instead, on Oct. 18, benefiting from a practice of rotation among African countries, Rwanda ran unopposed for a Security Council seat, winning 148 votes among the 193 nations in the U.N. General Assembly. Even after M23 seized control of Goma, on the eastern border of Congo, in November, causing tens of thousands residents to flee in fear of their lives, the Security Council failed to confront Rwanda.

So how do you get away with arming a rebel force that attacks U.N. peacekeepers, rapes women and recruits children? You need powerful friends, and Rwanda has had one. Born from the guilt of the Clinton administration's inaction in the face of the Rwandan genocide, and a recognition of Rwanda's relatively efficient use of development aid, the United States has proven to be one of Kigali's staunchest allies. When the interim report of the U.N. experts came out in June, it was widely alleged that the United States delayed its publication, arguing that Rwanda, which had been uncooperative, should be given time to respond. The Obama administration suspended $200,000 worth of military aid, but only under a legislative requirement, all the while undermining efforts at the United Nations to denounce Rwanda's role in the crisis.

While other countries, such as Britain, were raising public pressure on Kigali, the United States was using all the diplomatic contortions in the book to avoid public censure of Rwanda's support for M23. Finally, on Dec. 18, President Obama called on the Rwandan president, Paul Kagame, to end "any support" for M23. Although couched in diplomatic terms, the appeal, along with candid statements by U.S. diplomats, amounted to a recognition that "quiet" diplomacy had failed to curb M23's abuses.

But as a grim new year is about to set on eastern Congo, the United States should go much further. On Jan. 1, it should greet Rwanda, its new fellow Security Council member, with long overdue sanctions against Rwandan officials complicit in M23 abuses, making clear that a seat at the table is no license to make a mockery of the council's resolutions.

Only once Rwanda ceases supporting M23 will it be able to make a credible contribution to the lifesaving work of the Security Council, drawing on its own tragic history as a victim of genocide, and its experience as a troop contributor to peacekeeping operations.

Philippe Bolopion is United Nations director for Human Rights Watch.

-“The enemies of Freedom do not argue ; they shout and they shoot.”

The principal key root causes that lead to the Rwandan genocide of 1994 that affected all Rwandan ethnic groups were:

1)The majority Hutu community’s fear of the return of the discriminatory monarchy system that was practiced by the minority Tutsi community against the enslaved majority Hutu community for about 500 years

2)The Hutu community’s fear of Kagame’s guerrilla that committed massacres in the North of the country and other parts of the countries including assassinations of Rwandan politicians.

3) The Rwandan people felt abandoned by the international community ( who was believed to support Kagame’s guerrilla) and then decided to defend themselves with whatever means they had against the advance of Kagame’ guerrilla supported by Ugandan, Tanzanian and Ethiopian armies and other Western powers.

-“The enemies of Freedom do not argue ; they shout and they shoot.”

-“The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.”

-“The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”

-“I have loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore I die in exile.”

The Rwanda war of 1990-1994 had multiple dimensions.

The Rwanda war of 1990-1994 had multiple dimensions. Among Kagame’s rebels who were fighting against the Rwandan government, there were foreigners, mainly Ugandan fighters who were hired to kill and rape innocent Rwandan people in Rwanda and refugees in DRC.



United Kingdom's Proxy Wars in Africa: The Case of Rwanda and DR Congo:

The Rwandan genocide and 6,000,000 Congolese and Hutu refugees killed are the culminating point of a long UK’s battle to expand their influence to the African Great Lakes Region. UK supported Kagame’s guerrilla war by providing military support and money. The UK refused to intervene in Rwanda during the genocide to allow Kagame to take power by military means that triggered the genocide. Kagame’s fighters and their families were on the Ugandan payroll paid by UK budget support.

· 4 Heads of State assassinated in the francophone African Great Lakes Region.
· 2,000,000 people died in Hutu and Tutsi genocides in Rwanda, Burundi and RD.Congo.
· 600,000 Hutu refugees killed in R.D.Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic and Rep of Congo.
· 6,000,000 Congolese dead.
· 8,000,000 internal displaced people in Rwanda, Burundi and DR. Congo.
· 500,000 permanent Rwandan and Burundian Hutu refugees, and Congolese refugees around the world.
· English language expansion to Rwanda to replace the French language.
· 20,000 Kagame’s fighters paid salaries from the British Budget Support from 1986 to present.
· £500,000 of British taxpayer’s money paid, so far, to Kagame and his cronies through the budget support, SWAPs, Tutsi-dominated parliament, consultancy, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs.
· Kagame has paid back the British aid received to invade Rwanda and to strengthen his political power by joining the East African Community together with Burundi, joining the Commonwealth, imposing the English Language to Rwandans to replace the French language; helping the British to establish businesses and to access to jobs in Rwanda, and to exploit minerals in D.R.Congo.

Thousands of Hutu murdered by Kagame inside Rwanda, e.g. Kibeho massacres

Thousands of Hutu murdered by Kagame inside Rwanda, e.g. Kibeho massacres
Kagame killed 200,000 Hutus from all regions of the country, the elderly and children who were left by their relatives, the disabled were burned alive. Other thousands of people were killed in several camps of displaced persons including Kibeho camp. All these war crimes remain unpunished.The British news reporters were accompanying Kagame’s fighters on day-by-day basis and witnessed these massacres, but they never reported on this.

Download Documents from Amnesty International

25,000 Hutu bodies floated down River Akagera into Lake Victoria in Uganda.

25,000  Hutu bodies  floated down River Akagera into Lake Victoria in Uganda.
The British irrational, extremist, partisan,biased, one-sided media and politicians have disregarded Kagame war crimes e.g. the Kibeho camp massacres, massacres of innocents Hutu refugees in DR. Congo. The British media have been supporting Kagame since he invaded Rwanda by organising the propaganda against the French over the Rwandan genocide, suppressing the truth about the genocide and promoting the impunity of Kagame and his cronies in the African Great Lakes Region. For the British, Rwanda does not need democracy, Rwanda is the African Israel; and Kagame and his guerilla fighters are heroes.The extremist British news reporters including Fergal Keane, Chris Simpson, Chris McGreal, Mark Doyle, etc. continue to hate the Hutus communities and to polarise the Rwandan society.

Kagame political ambitions triggered the genocide.

Kagame  political  ambitions triggered the genocide.
Kagame’s guerrilla war was aimed at accessing to power at any cost. He rejected all attempts and advice that could stop his military adventures including the cease-fire, political negotiations and cohabitation, and UN peacekeeping interventions. He ignored all warnings that could have helped him to manage the war without tragic consequences. Either you supported Kagame’ s wars and you are now his friend, or you were against his wars and you are his enemy. Therefore, Kagame as the Rwandan strong man now, you have to apologise to him for having been against his war and condemned his war crimes, or accept to be labelled as having been involved in the genocide. All key Kagame’s fighters who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity are the ones who hold key positions in Rwandan army and government for the last 15 years. They continue to be supported and advised by the British including Tony Blair, Andrew Mitchell MP, and the British army senior officials.

Aid that kills: The British Budget Support financed Museveni and Kagame’s wars in Rwanda and DRC.

Aid that kills: The British Budget Support  financed Museveni and Kagame’s wars in Rwanda and DRC.
Genocide propaganda and fabrications are used by the so-called British scholars, news reporters and investigative journalists to promote their CVs and to get income out of the genocide through the selling of their books, providing testimonies against the French, access to consultancy contracts from the UN and Kagame, and participation in conferences and lectures in Rwanda, UK and internationally about genocide. Genocide propaganda has become a lucrative business for Kagame and the British. Anyone who condemned or did not support Kagame’s war is now in jail in Rwanda under the gacaca courts system suuported by British tax payer's money, or his/she is on arrest warrant if he/she managed to flee the Kagame’s regime. Others have fled the country and are still fleeing now. Many others Rwandans are being persecuted in their own country. Kagame is waiting indefinitely for the apologies from other players who warn him or who wanted to help to ensure that political negotiations take place between Kagame and the former government he was fighting against. Britain continues to supply foreign aid to Kagame and his cronies with media reports highlighting economic successes of Rwanda. Such reports are flawed and are aimed at misleading the British public to justify the use of British taxpayers’ money. Kagame and his cronies continue to milk British taxpayers’ money under the British budget support. This started from 1986 through the British budget support to Uganda until now.

Dictator Kagame: No remorse for his unwise actions and ambitions that led to the Rwandan genocide.

Dictator Kagame: No remorse for his unwise actions and ambitions that led to the  Rwandan genocide.
No apologies yet to the Rwandan people. The assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana by Kagame was the only gateway for Kagame to access power in Rwanda. The British media, politicians, and the so-called British scholars took the role of obstructing the search for the truth and justice; and of denying this assassination on behalf of General Kagame. General Paul Kagame has been obliging the whole world to apologise for his mistakes and war crimes. The UK’s way to apologise has been pumping massive aid into Rwanda's crony government and parliement; and supporting Kagame though media campaigns.

Fanatical, partisan, suspicious, childish and fawning relations between UK and Kagame

Fanatical, partisan, suspicious, childish and fawning relations between UK and Kagame
Kagame receives the British massive aid through the budget support, British excessive consultancy, sector wide programmes, the Tutsi-dominated parliament, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs; for political, economic and English language expansion to Rwanda. The British aid to Rwanda is not for all Rwandans. It is for Kagame himself and his Tutsi cronies.

Paul Kagame' actvities as former rebel


UN News Centre - Africa

The Africa Report - Latest

IRIN - Great Lakes

This blog reports the crimes that remain unpunished and the impunity that has generated a continuous cycle of massacres in many parts of Africa. In many cases, the perpetrators of the crimes seem to have acted in the knowledge that they would not be held to account for their actions.

The need to fight this impunity has become even clearer with the massacres and genocide in many parts of Africa and beyond.

The blog also addresses issues such as Rwanda War Crimes, Rwandan Refugee massacres in Dr Congo, genocide, African leaders’ war crimes and crimes against humanity, Africa war criminals, Africa crimes against humanity, Africa Justice.

-The British relentless and long running battle to become the sole player and gain new grounds of influence in the francophone African Great Lakes Region has led to the expulsion of other traditional players from the region, or strained diplomatic relations between the countries of the region and their traditional friends. These new tensions are even encouraged by the British using a variety of political and economic manoeuvres.

-General Kagame has been echoing the British advice that Rwanda does not need any loan or aid from Rwandan traditional development partners, meaning that British aid is enough to solve all Rwandan problems.

-The British obsession for the English Language expansion has become a tyranny that has led to genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, dictatorial regimes, human rights violations, mass killings, destruction of families, communities and cultures, permanent refugees and displaced persons in the African Great Lakes region.

- Rwanda, a country that is run by a corrupt clique of minority-tutsi is governed with institutional discrmination, human rights violations, dictatorship, authoritarianism and autocracy, as everybody would expect.