Opinion
In France, when it comes to the Genocide against the Tutsi, pan-Africanists and anti -colonial activists are bipolar
For
10 years, I have been involved the fight for the preservation of memory around
the genocide perpetrated against the Tutsis in Rwanda. Through this work, I
have noticed how most of the people belonging to the Pan African and
Anti-colonial movements in France have shunned the cause against genocide
denial. I find this bizarre.
Every
7th of April, I search major social media such as Twitter, Face- book,
Instagram accounts, and the websites of these activist networks, but
unfortunately, nothing is being said about the genocide against the Tutsis. Not
the slightest declaration in favour of the protection of the memory of the
genocide against the Tutsi, or in support of the families of the victims and
survivors of the genocide; not a word of sympathy for those who are still
waiting for justice. Not even from our many activist figures who are used to
commemorating each anniversary of any historical event that proves that France
was and still is an imperialist state.
It
is indeed sad to note that despite 28 years of extensive research and writing
on the crime of crimes, the history of the genocide against the Tutsi, which is
highly complex and political, is still perceived as unimportant. One wonders if
the modest size of the Rwandan diaspora in France reinforces this feeling. So,
a question naturally arises: Why? Why is one of the darkest pages of the
France-Afrique relationship of no interest to its most vocal detractors? Why is
the impact of pan-Africanism, a decolonial and anti-racism movement which
implies certain solidarity in struggles led by Africans, not felt here?
Links
to the theory of double genocide
For
starters, the complementarity of these causes ought to be obvious to all.
Genocide is fundamentally an outcome of racism. European racism is what brought
about the classification of people into different categories, including the
Hutu-Tutsi dichotomy along the Hamitic mythology. These actions by colonial
powers planted the seeds of hatred that led to genocide against the Tutsi in
1994. Therefore, one cannot be anti-racism and indifferent to genocide denial.
What
I have discovered over time in my learning of the dynamics that attack the
memory of the genocide against the Tutsis is that the activists and their
associations which are mostly classified as “de-colonial”, “pan-African” or
“Afro-feminist” have not been impervious to the theory of double genocide. This
is a gentle euphemism. Beyond the silence observed every 7th of April, there
are numerous shares of negationist texts and videos from these same networks.
This is a de facto alliance with the genocidaires, and those who are guilty of
it seem unaware of the implications of their acts.
Since
the very beginning of my commitment to this cause, I have also noticed that any
effort aimed at protecting the history of the genocide against the Tutsis would
often receive the cold retort “Yes but, what about the Congo?” This is never a
harmless and innocent question but the result of a precise negationist
strategy: to make people believe that the Tutsis took revenge and committed a
second genocide as the RPF liberated Rwanda.
“Genocide
against the Hutus,” as some term it. Or a genocide “against the Congolese”.
“Some 6, 9, 20 million dead,” one sometimes reads, because of tiny Rwanda. This
is a heresy! And the lie has been exposed over and over again. But the rumour
is too powerful, too old, and the result is this: French pan-Africans will
objectively defend the denial, the lie, the minimization, the trivialization of
the genocide against the Tutsis. Indeed, when one is Afro-descendant and
anti-racist in France, the murderous conflicts around the minerals of the Congo
are a contentious issue. The size of the Congolese diaspora, the primary target
of these negationist ploys, which instrumentalize their pain, makes our problem
almost insurmountable.
As a
prominent example, the Umoja League is a respected pan-African organization in
the Francophone world. Its president, Amzat Boukari Yabara, is a historian. Yet
he has a real problem with the history of the genocide against the Tutsis.
Beyond some dubious statements shared with his fans on social media, we can
note his contribution in the magazine “Relations” for the 20th anniversary of
the genocide against the Tutsis in Rwanda: “Rwanda 20 years after the
genocide”. Not a single paragraph of this text unambiguously describes the
history of the genocide.
Worse,
one passage quietly unfolds the double genocide theory: “We shall recall that
the Rwandan genocide resulted in the displacement of more than two million
people, most of whom were hunted down and made refugees in the eastern
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where the continuing war killed more than
six million people living in the mineral-rich grounds of the Kivu [area].”
Amzat
Boukari should know that the genocide is not “Rwandan” because “Rwandans” did
not “kill each other.” The genocide was perpetrated “against the Tutsis” who
were targeted by a systematic extermination policy prepared and planned for a
long time. Nor did the genocide “result in the displacement of more than two
million people.” The Hutu extremists moved to Zaire, near the Rwandan border,
taking civilians with them as hostages and stealing absolutely everything they
could carry, in order to reorganize and finish “the work” – the genocide
against the Tutsis.
The
historical documents exist and prove that all this was facilitated by the
French Operation Turquoise. Moreover, a historian like Amzat Boukari should
know that not even the methodologically mediocre Mapping Report dares to assert
that “the continuation of the war killed more than six million people. There
was war and fighting, of course; above all, however, there was disease, famine
and cholera. The RPF kept calling on civilians to return to Rwanda; it first
and foremost invited them to stay away from the genocidal militias that were
using them as human shields. Again, all this is well documented.
But
this is of little importance to a ‘pan-African’ figure for whom popular
approval outweighs the veracity of the facts. The sensational effect sought is
there, and the effect of repetition gives credence to the denialist narrative.
Other more ethical association leaders have tried to justify their silence on
our memory in the following way: “If I speak about Rwanda at a conference, I
lose half of my audience”. Frightening, but very real.
Way
forward
The
way to overcome this chal-lenge is inscribed in the ideologies of pan-African
movements. The often proclaimed practical and political solidarity must be
inscribed in our lived reality. This is urgent. It is unbearable that our
memory is trampled on in a predominantly white context, of course, but it is
even more unbearable in my opin- ion as a pan-African activist that the denial
takes place in African and Afro-descendant circles that claim to be fighting
against the evils, such as Gobineau’s racist the- ories imported centuries ago
into our societies.
Decolonizing
minds should mean getting rid of the harmful ideologies imported by
imperialists every- where and at all times in order to exploit their victims
more easily.
The
work of decolonizing African minds must counter the conspiracy theory that led
to the genocide against the Tutsis and that is still going on around Kivu,
carried by the same murderous fervour as in the 1960s. For yes, anti-Tutsism,
its accusations which peddle a ficti- tious Tutsi’s desire to plunder and
dominate, has existed, developed and spread in people’s minds for all this
time. It is a question of putting an end to it collectively.
Source:
www.panafricanreview.rw