 Humanitarian Intervention and the Rwanda Genocide Jihoon, MOON Szu-Chieh, CHEN International Relation 2013, 06, 19

Outline  What is “Humanitarian intervention” ?  Historical background of the Rwanda  The trigger of the Rwanda genocide  Major events  The responses from international  Operation Turquoise  Society criticism  Conclusion

Humanitarian Intervention  An armed intervention in a state, without that state’s consent, to address (the threat of) a humanitarian disaster, in particular caused by grave and large-scale violations of fundamental human rights.

By the early 1990s, Rwanda, a small country with an overwhelmingly agricultural economy, had one of the highest population densities in Africa.

 Population : Hutu (84%) Tutsi (15%) Twa (1%) Historical background of the Rwanda

 1894 : Rwanda becomes part of German east  1916 : Belgian occupation  1959 : a hutu revolution  1961 : victorious hutu had forced Rwanda’s tutsi monarch into exile and declared the country a republic

 1962 : Belgium officially granted independence to Rwanda  1973 : a military group installed major general juvenal habyarimana, a moderate hutu, in power. Founded a new political party, the national revolutionary movement for development (NRMD).

Historical background of the Rwanda  1978 : juvenal habyarimana was elected president  1990 : forces of the Rwandan patriotic front (RPF), consisting mostly of tutsi refugees, invaded Rwanda from Uganda  1993 : habyarimana signed an agreement at Arusha, Tanzania

The trigger of Rwanda genocide  On April , The plane carrying Rwanda’s president was shot down.  Hutu extremists had taken over the government

 Blamed the tutsis for the assassination  Genocide began

The Genocide  The hutu extremist radio – RTLM, and also the state supported radio – Radio Rwanda, encouraged the mass murder of the “cockroaches.” These cockroaches weretutsis and hutu moderates

The Genocide  Most victim were killed in their own villages and towns by neighbors usually by being hacked to death by machetes.  Rape was also used as a weapon during the Genocide, up to 500,000 tutsi women were raped.

The Genocide  An estimated 10,000 people were murdered each day  An estimated 800,000 people were murdered in the course of roughly 100days, most of whom were tutsis.  400,000 children were left orphans

。。

The responses to the Genocide  The Security Council: should we help? Maybe?  Denial of the word “Genocide”  On 6 May, New Zealand proposed a draft resolution to create a new UN force to protect civilians in Rwanda. Rejected by USA  Authorizing UNAMIR 5500 troops with a mandate to provide humanitarian assistance. USA narrows down the number to hundreds

The responses to the Genocide  African States: No one helps! We have to do something  9 countries came forward with offers of troops for the deployment of UNAMIR Ⅱ.  Lack of equipment, heavy lift support, and costs The result – the equipment didn’t arrive until the end of June and it then took a further month for the vehicles to arrive. More Rwandans are dead…

The responses to the Genocide  USA: we cannot help with it  Avoiding a repeat of Somalia, 1993  No vital interests in Rwanda  Military personnel could not be sent to trouble spot

The responses to the Genocide  FRANCE: we want to help!!!  Has political and military involvement in Rwanda  Supporting the one-party state of Habyarimana (Hutu)  Maintaining its international prestige and bargaining power by controlling French-speaking Africa  Operation Turquoise

France’s Operation Turquoise  June 22 nd : UN approve France a 60 days Humanitarian Mission to protect civilians/ save lives.  2500 French troops  “safe humanitarian zones” in southwest Rwanda  The killings end before OT was replaced by UNAMIR Ⅱ. RPF took control over most of Rwanda in mid-July.  Humanitarian Intervention…?

France’s Operation Turquoise  Since the Security Council had acted as a global bystander to genocide, no one felt able publicly criticize to a French mission that was justified in terms of saving lives.  However, the french government’s priority was not to save lives but to demonstrate to Africa and the world that France could still rapidly project military power.

Society criticism  The non-humanitarian motives behind the French intervention led to means being employed that conflicted with its humanitarian purpose.

Conclusion  UNAMIR didn’t have a sufficient mandate; lack of resources; ill-equipped to stop the killings.  Stopping genocide requires a willingness to use force and to risk soldiers’ lives and it was this that was completely lacking in the Clinton Administration, USA.

Conclusion  France had national interests at stake, did not try to save Rwandan lives, but actively contributed to the genocide.  The media failed to report on the genocide, so there was no internal pressure from citizens that could have influenced policy makers.