Explain the conflict between the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda as discussed by Phillip Gourevitch. What lessons do we learn from the Rwanda genocide case? How would you apply those lessons to maintaining peaceful relations and preventing future conflicts from erupting in Kuwait?
What lessons do we learn from the Rwanda genocide and other cases of political violence discussed in class? How would you apply those lessons to preventing conflicts and violence from erupting in Kuwait?
Despite the ideology that ancient hatred always existed between them, the Hutu and the Tutsi have lived peacefully along side each other without murderous conflicts. All was at peace until Rwanda was declared a spoil of war to be given to Belgium after WW I. After Belgium colonized Rwanda, the priming process began. Since an ethnic divide already existed in Belgium, the tradition was brought to Rwanda where Tutsis and Hutus were segregated by ID cards. This tradition is an obvious outsider concept rather than one of traditional ancient tribal feud. Facial characteristics and measurements were what defined the favoritism by the colonizer of one group over the other. This was based off of the ancient myth of Tutsi superiority. Baring in mind that Tutsis are the minority and Hutu the majority, the favoritism was then switched around placing Hutus at the top of the hierarchy. When democracy was introduced in Rwanda, the Belgium colonizers pushed for elections between the Hutu and the Tutsi, which ultimately ended in the majority group winning. Belgium then handed Rwanda to the Hutus. Because of repressed feeling of former inferiority to the superior Tutsi, and due to the “political” conflicts prior to the elections, the Hutus hatred toward the Tutsis was already fueled. In attempts at achieving a democracy and a modern nation-state, Rwanda was then split into two nations residing in one state, which ultimately led to a chaotic dystopia. Post colonialism brought with it a tradition of Tutsi killing, as the author put it. All was kept relatively stable despite obvious hatred and death threats, until the assassination of the president on April 6th 1994. This was the event that triggered the genocide of the Tutsi minority by Hutu power. Within the span of 30 days, more than 8000,000 Tutsis had been massacred. In early summer of 1994, after most of the killing had taken place, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) began to chase of the Hutus who then went into exile. After that, a number of refugee camps were established in neighboring countries like Zaire and Uganda, Tutsi hatred continued to be induced in these camps by the same murderous Hutu Power leaders. Within these camps a great deal of brutality took place, terrorizing innocents into following their rule. After a while and with great difficulty, Hutu refuges were allowed to return to Rwanda, welcomed by its government but not so much by its people. The new government attempted to follow a law enforcement system that imprisoned many Hutus, some suspects and others not. The imprisonment was not only for the legal reasons but also to protect the Hutu from the Tutsis seeking revenge.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot to be learned from the genocide in Rwanda. First, one must understand that colonialism does take its toll on the colonized country, not only in resource exploitation but also in cultural liquidation. Leo Kuper mentions that genocide and colonialism often go hand-in-hand. In addition, decolonization, especially in the case of Rwanda, leaves the country in a state of confusion in regards to what to do with the freedom it has just acquired, and where to pick up since the spine that held up the county’s sense of structure has now disappeared. This freedom is often very intimidating. To overcome post colonial ideologies is not easily done, especially when the country has been colonized for a long time. These ideologies become imbedded into the social structure.
Second, Hannah Arendt’s Banal Evil, is very evident in the case of Rwanda, when the author interviewed a perpetrator asking why he and how he had managed to commit such crimes, he simply responded by saying that he didn’t know. The attitude of “just doing my job” was also a frequent answer. However, despite the horribly acts they had committed, these people admitted to feeling guilt, which leads us to understand that they are ordinary human being who do feel empathy but in a situation of authoritarian pressure and an ideology to back it, one can easily commit evil acts such as those committed during the genocide.
Third, its important to detect dangerous attitudes and ideologies before they get out of hand. In the novel, during the elections, many made the error of masking actual ethnic hatred with political feud, as if this was a temporary issue due to the heated elections, and that it would subside after the elections were won. The lesson to be learned here is that an awareness of the measures of an issue is a vital element of controlling and preventing further conflicts.
ReplyDeleteFinally, as the case has shown, what happened once can very easily happen again. It was interesting to see how the UNGC was developed and made to prevent genocide. The UN practically promised that after the Holocaust, nothing that dreadful would ever be allowed to happen again. Yet it did, and the international community just stood and watched as the genocide unfolded. After noticing that UNAMIR was practically useless, they came to an acceptance that no one was going to help them and that they were on their own. It is sad to say that if a country is not that interesting or useful to other countries, it could disintegrate and no one would care.
If applied to Kuwait, these lessons can help prevent any potential genocidal conflict that may occur. Firstly, although Kuwait was never truly colonized the way that Rwanda was, we can look at it from a different angle, focusing on countries that may influence Kuwait. Since Kuwait is a diverse country with citizens originating from other countries in the gulf, Iraq, and Iran, people in the Kuwaiti society often refer to their origins with a sense of patriotic pride. If a war were to happen between the surrounding countries (as has happened in the past), Kuwaiti citizens may feel the need to pick a side. As an example, with the current tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which is fueled by the religious conflicts between the Sunni and Shiite, many Kuwaitis have been discussing religious differences in a defensive manner, meaning that people have already started taking sides. To calm all of this down, the government is doing a good job at remaining completely neutral in all situations, which I believe to be the perfect image to present to its citizens. The government does not tolerate any acts that portray division or favoritism of a specific group over another, as to prevent the brewing up of a conflict.
Second, to avoid creating a nation of murderers, the banal must remain banal, and not be put in a position that allows evil to advance. Based off of my previous point, the government is controlling the development of any grouping that may occur, and without a group of perpetrators there isn’t a victimized group, as genocide is an act of collectivities. Another important step that has helped prevent conflict in Kuwait was the recent law stating that all guns are to be confiscated from citizens. Although this law was issued in response to the eruption of ISIS, it also helps reduce the risk of dangerous conflicts that would result in many deaths.
Third, although there are many discriminatory attitudes in Kuwait, it never gets out of hand as I mentioned above. The ministry of interior does keep a good grip on any racial, religious, political, ethnic, and national attitude that causes tension within the country. To the extent that even any offending or direct comment or opinion on social media is monitored by the cyber police and if need be, they interfere and stop a development. However, this is not to say that every single opinion is controlled, that would only make Kuwaiti no better than South Korea. Overall its good to see that there is an awareness of these sensitive issues and that it is controlled unlike the case in Rwanda, where neighbors were killing each other off before they knew it.
ReplyDeleteFinally, unlike Rwanda, Kuwait has a lot of interests in many different places due to its wealth. So if an issue were to blow up into a potential genocide, it is likely that neighboring countries would intervene and help disable the issue. However, this is not applicable to the Bidoon minority, because sadly they have no home in terms of legal citizenship. It would not attract much sympathetic attention from neighboring countries if they were the target group, unlike if the issue revolved around religion. It would require the government’s full force, not only ideologically but physically as well, to stop the conflicts and potential massacres. It is for that reason, I believe (and this is the fourth time I say it in all my blog posts) that the Bidoon should be granted protection from the ministry of interior. If the ideology of humanizing the Bidoon is enforced by the government, it will help shut down dehumanizing thoughts and attitudes towards them as a minority.
S0038344
Correction to the number of deaths in the first paragraph, I meant 800,000* without the extra zero
ReplyDeleteS00038344
Correction: Second to last paragraph I meant North* Korea not South.
ReplyDeleteS00038344
S00035252
ReplyDeleteThe conflict between the Hutus and the Tutsis, according to Phillip Gourevitch was mainly attributed to the Belgian colonizers. The Belgians had claimed that the Tutsi population is more superior to the Hutu population who were seen as inferior because it was believed that the Tutsis are closely related to Europeans. Thus, for a period of time the Tutsis had control, but once Rwanda became an independent nation, then the Hutus gained control and once the oppressed becomes the oppressor then conflict arises. This is one of the lessons that can be learned from the Rwanda case. Obviously, now since they are in power they (the Hutus) would want to get revenge, and they did get their revenge until “killing Tutsis was a political tradition in postcolonial Rwanda...and it brought people together (Gourevitch 95). Therefore, the lesson would be do not oppress certain groups because the world changes and those who were oppressed may one day be in power. In Kuwait, there are many groups that are oppressed, the shia, the bedou, the bedoun, and the expats, though at this point in time it seems like these groups will never be in power, but if they do get the chance to be in power they would want to attack those who had attacked them and just like in Rwanda, make a political tradition out of it.
Another conflict that occurred between the Tutsis and Hutus was the genocide itself. It was not a genocide that was directed at one group. Hutus were being killed for not killing or agreeing with the tactics. In other words, it was not the extermination of one tribe, but it was an outburst of anger that lead to the genocide and continued throughout the genocidal period. During this period where the 90 day genocide was taking place since April 6 1994, the international community stayed out of it. This is yet another lesson to be learned, one cannot rely on the international community, thus it is important to avoid conflict. For instance, if a genocide occurs in Kuwait between the bedoun and the kuwaiti citizens then there will be no one that steps in and stops what is happening, therefore a nation must avoid the priming stages of a genocide. In Kuwait, this can be prevented if anger is prevented, a group oppressed for years will have a wound deep inside that ferments overtime and eventually it becomes infected, infected with a hatred that infects other people. No one is going to come in and save Kuwait from the anger it produces over years, just like no one came in and saved Rwanda after the anger was released.
The Rwandan genocide was an event that occured in 1994 in the African country of Rwanda. The conflict was between the two tribes that are present in Rwanda: the Hutus and the Tutsis. The Hutus perpetrated the killing of a large amount of the Tutsi population starting in April 1994 and ending sometime in the summer. Phillip Gourevich discussed this genocide and presented possible reasons for the occurence of this genocide. However he pointed out that the main reason for this genocide is the colonial presence of Belgium in Rwanda. After Belgium took control of Rwanda after World War 2 they began to separate the Hutus and the Tutsis, giving them different ID cards to be able to distinguish between them. They gave the Tutsi minority the power over the Hutu majority, even giving them full access to Hutu labor. The suspected reason for this Belgian favoritism towards the Tutsis is their appearance, which was supposedly seen as perhaps more beautiful or elegant. After colonialism there was a push for democracy and because of their majority the Hutus are the ones that rose to power. From there they began to commit some acts of violence against the Tutsis, to which the Tutsis retaliated. After a while of back and forth conflict there was a buildup of rage on both sides, however due to a couple of factors the Hutus are the ones who started the genocide. One of the factors was the ideology of Hutu power which preached the superiority of the Hutus over the Tutsis through mediums like the radio and newspapers. However I believe the trigger for this genocide was the assassination of the president of Rwanda at that time. Hutus then blamed the Tutsis for that killing which is what triggered the genocide of the Tutsis.
ReplyDeleteI believe there are two lessons could be learned from the Rwandan genocide: the effects of colonialism on the colonized country and its population, and the unadvised trust of global powers such as the UN to solve local problems. Colonialism has a huge effect on a country while it is in control, however I believe it can have an equally large effect when the country is decolonized. First the way populations tend to be separated as a method of control by the colonizer can easily lead to violence, second the lack of identity a country may have can lead to conflicting ideologies becoming potentially radicalized. I believe that in Kuwait the issue of radicalized ideologies is a threat, however the way Kuwait has been dealing with these issues has been successful in dealing with that threat. As for the effect of other countries on Kuwaiti’s ideologies. I believe that is a main point of discussion in this thread. Specifically what conflicts could arise from a potential shia/sunni conflict erupting in neighboring countries. Whether it be between Iran and Saudi Arabia, or even within one of these countries.
Philip Gourevitch insists that Rwanda was demolished. At least one in 10 of the population were killed. Hundreds of thousands of Rwandans participated in the killing, with machetes and other violent weapons, murdering about a million people, including 70% of the entire Tutsi population, in six weeks. What the author describes about the genocide and what we watched in the movie “Sometimes in April”, I feel that there are no words that can describe what happened in appropriate or adequate for such horror. Before the genocide the two countries were neighbors and both had Hutus and Tutsi’s where the Hutus were the majority and the Tutsi’s the minorities and both became colonies of Belgium. Though historically they were always controlled by the Tutsi minority politically. They had some ethnic politics where they discriminated each other by features, The Tutsi’s were superior because of their Caucasian features and the Hutus were less superior and had lower societal and political positions because they had more African features. They identified each other by ID cards, that would state whether they are Hutu or Tutsi.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the Hutu’s and Tutsi’s situation it made me think about the Sunna and Shia’aa in the muslim world; because there was a history of a tensed relationship between the two groups, and in some cases still exists till this day. If a genocide was to occur in Kuwait relating to what happened in Rwanda, then in my opinion I think that it would be the Sunna against the Shia’aa and I think that there would be a similar discrimination like what happened between the Hutus and Tutsi’s; the identification cards would identifiy who is Sunni and whos is Shia’aa like for example the situation in Iraq after Saddam Hossain’s death there was a conflict between the Sunna and Shia’aa where they had check points in the Sunna areas, if a Shie’aa passed by and got stopped there was a high chance he would get killed and vice versa to when a Sunni would pass by the Shia’aa areas. I feel like if we wanted to avoid any conflict we should be aware of all the signs that occur between groups, like for instance the physical discrimination, either by characteristics or religion etc. Also, if a group wanted to take over or control another group, or if in society for instance this is something I see from time to time which gets me thinking if this could be a possible threat to a future conflict; where basically younger generations make jokes or call people names for their religion type and often the younger sunni generation would come up with jokes about the Shia’aa. I think that the younger generations should be more aware about the fact that this could be a serious situation which eventually would case hatred that could lead to a conflict.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs per Philip Gourevitch, in short, due to the preference that the Belgian colonists had given to the Tutsis in colonized Rwanda, for a period of time, the Tutsis were able to enjoy much of the power in the country over the Hutus who were considered to be the subordinate group. However, after the end of the Belgian colonialism in Rwanda, the Hutus wanted to take over that power of which they were deprived and hence conflicts between the two tribes started to worsen. When the U.N and the U.S. interfered and invited the Hutu President of Rwanda to sign agreements, he was assassinated. This was when the Hutus carried out the genocide where hundreds of thousands of Tutsis as well as moderate Hutus were slaughtered. Hutus had been practicing for this genocide for a while, and it was known and spoken about in the open. The genocide is thought to be clearly planned, however, the assassination of the President may have been used as a reason to finally carry it out. In my opinion, this is the result of a built-up hatred and anger that kept growing in the hearts of the Hutus towards the Tutsis ever since the colonialism period when they were oppressed, which led to brutal and unimaginable acts of violence.
ReplyDeleteWhat we can learn from this genocide is that when a group of people had been subjugated for a long time, especially if they were the majority in the country, end up taking over power in the country, the end results could be very brutal. Also, granted, colonialism sometimes has beneficial impact on a country, yet the negative effects that it leaves in the country are major, especially in the Rwandan case where the roots of the problem had originally stemmed from the colonial period. Those lessons can be used as illustrations on how to prevent genocides and how to maintain peace in the country. For instance, if we want to relate this to Kuwait, hypothetically if one of the oppressed groups in Kuwait such as the expats who are the majority in the country, end up taking over the power over those who oppressed them, the result of that could be genocidal, where the oppressed could end up taking out their years of built-up anger on those who once oppressed them. This can be prevented and the peace in Kuwait can be maintained by enforcing laws equally on all, and by forcing a humane treatment among all groups in the country, where everyone is given the same kind of job opportunities and health access in the country, and are also provided justice when needed.
It all began in the month of April, 1994. The Rwandan genocide was considered the most horrible and largest genocide after the extermination of Jews in the Holocaust during the Second World War. In fact, Rwanda was inhabited by the Twa people, whose group counts for less than one percent of the population. Hutus and Tutsis came later. Before the conflict between these two groups, Hutus and Tutsis were living peacefully. They spoke the same language, practiced the same religion, intermarried, and fought together in armies. Tutsis constituted 14% of the Rwandan population, Hutus 85% and Twa 1%. In 1916, the Belgian colonists arrived to Rwanda, as to bring order! They looked for citizens whom their features and characteristics fit their own idea of “mastery and subjugation”. The Belgians started this polarization between both groups mainly through ID cards identification and certain measures than distinguished Hutus from Tutsis so Tutsis could be systematically identified and killed. Belgians believed that Tutsis were in relation to Europeans and thus they were considered superior in comparison to Hutus. During that time, Tutsi elites were given the power to exploit Hutu’s labor. Open discrimination in favor of Tutsis was practiced in the Catholic schools which allowed Tutsis to enjoy better rights and political jobs. The Belgians made ethnicity the defining feature among Rwandans. Tutsis have been the ruling power for almost 30 years. After that, the transformation of power was smoothly moved to Hutus. After the Rwandan independence in 1962, the majority Hutus took the lead. On October 1, 1990, an insurgent army, which was known as the Rwandese Patriotic Front declared war against the Habyarimana regime in which all Tutsis were considered to be associated or supportive to the RPF and Hutus who did not support this idea of categorization were considered betrayers. The killing of Tutsis started. On April 6, 1994, the Rwandan Presidents Habyarimana’s plane was shot down. This is when Hutus started blaming the Tutsis as they are the ones who have killed the President, where in fact, the genocide was planned by Hutu extremists who “set it in motion within an hour of the President’s death”. During that time, Hutus were in control of political, economic, and military positions. The killing after that was an extension of the civil war with the RPF. Being a Tutsi in Rwanda meant death back then. Tutsis and Hutu traitors were killed in the most horrible way one can imagine. They were beaten until death, bayoneted, attacked with machetes, thrown with rocks, and shot more than once! Some were forced to kill their neighbors just to save their own lives. Attacks and massacres reached their peak. Hutu militias, mainly the interahamwe (those who attack together), were trained for “self-defense”. And here, self-defense is accomplished through the removal of those who are either Tutsis or Hutu traitors, but mainly Tutsis. In addition to other various groups who participated in the killing, the interahamwe have promoted genocide at a very stressful level.
ReplyDeleteIn these days, many Tutsis and Hutus flee to other camp areas that were temporarily protected, particularly in the eastern portion of Zaire, although in some of the camps, killing continued and many were tortured. A Rwandan radio station named Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) was a powerful medium that played a very important and huge role in the advocating of the genocide. Its messages were quite obvious, direct, and encouraging. On the 4th of July, the RPF defeated the Rwandan government forces in Kigali and on the 18th of July it had the control over some areas in the northwest, forcing the temporary government into Zaire and ending the genocide. At the end of July 1994, some forces controlled the country of Rwanda except for some areas that were led by the French. The aftermath of the genocide was horrible. HIV infection increased due to the high percentage of rape that was done during the genocide, illegitimate children were born, and there was severe depopulation which affected the overall economy of the country.
ReplyDeleteMany lessons could be taken into consideration form the Rwandan genocide case. First and foremost, one has to know that everyone is changeable! When I went through the novel, I realized that every single person has the ability to change under certain circumstances. And that everyone is able of good and bad. Neighbors were able to kill each other for money or power, or just to save their lives. Parents killed, teenagers killed, a huge number of people participated.
Second, one way of controlling the actions of a certain group of people is by appealing to their desire of power. The “us. Vs. them” scenario always generates mass hatred between the two groups, which was present in the case of Rwanda. This hatred targets the position of power of the superior group, in which the latter, always aspire to power. In addition, I think that it’s not the people who choose power, it’s the power that chooses people. This was evident before the Rwandan genocide, in which the Tutsi minority was in control of all the political, economic, and social positions within the country.
Moreover, a very powerful and effective mechanism that must be used cautiously is the media. In the Rwandan case, and in addition to those who held the power back then, the radio and the media in general were powerful war weapons in terms of sending messages and spreading ideologies between people.
Also, the consequences of indifference and inaction are outrageous. Indifference in the Rwandan case have generated hatred between the two groups which led later on to the terrifying acts that were committed either to defend oneself or to gain power. The Rwandan genocide was not only an act of a government or a group of people, but a complicity of a larger community.
Finally, and at any given moment the government of any country can consider its citizens a number and thus it has the ability to remove it from its structural scheme. In order to represent or maintain a good international image, the country could abide by a certain systematic actions towards its citizens that might be justified as a way to re-create social order.
This sum of lessons could be effectively used in an attempt to maintain peaceful relations in Kuwait and prevent future conflicts from occurring. First, Kuwait is a diverse country in which any fine tension between different groups could arise, and to keep its citizens safe and unchangeable due to any circumstances, it has to always find and promote for peaceful resolutions among its different groups. Second, the country could use what is pretty much in use now nowadays, social media, to spread awareness regarding such issues. Well-written messages could catch the reader’s eye and might have a positive impact on the reader in which would be reflected in his/her attitude. Third, Kuwait could establish a platform where those who are in power could discuss concerning issues and try to find solutions as fast and as efficient as possible. Furthermore, equality is key to success. Kuwait could accuse those who promote indifference. Treating all citizens with equality will build on their humanitarian sense which might change their way of looking at things, especially acts of violence and political-concerned issues. Finally, all Kuwaitis, expats, and Bedoons should be considered as a one unity that promotes positively to the country it is inhabiting and their security must be always a social concern.
ReplyDelete38550
s00038284
ReplyDeleteLong ago, Hutus and Tutsis lived amongst each other peacefully. There was no sign of conflict, until Belgium colonized Rwanda and started to enforce distinction and polarization. Belgian colonizers favored Tutsis as they believed they had French physical characteristics, and they had categorized the Hutus and Tutsis based of off identification cards. Naturally, because of the segregation and discrimination, Hutus received less benefits and treatments than the Tutsis did. And that bred rage and jealousy in Hutus, as they were living a life that used to be fair among all Rwandans, and seeing that their world has turned around so suddenly, this can infuriate them and push them to violent extremes. Phillip Gourevitch describes the Hutu and Tutsi conflict through the experiences and perspectives of those who lived through the drastic killings in 1994. Because of Hutu’s sudden power gain, the RPF formed which rebelled against the Hutus, yet that created even more problems because both identities didn’t want eachother in Rwanda. When Habyarimana was assassinated, there was no specific person to blame, however all fingers pointed at Tutsis, and that somehow managed to push Hutus to destroy, kill, beat, and torture any Tutsis that they encountered. To the Hutus, it was a plan that was developing for years. The killing of the Hutu president was the factor that insisted the Rwandan genocide. Gourevitch explains the Tutsi victims who were either being harassed or excluded from their own work or home, just because of the rage that had built in Hutus for so many years. This rage came to be, because of how the minority, whom were the Tutsis, gained much more power due to the Belgium segregation. It was all about power and something or someone had to stabilize it. With Rwanda, we learn that when shift of powers emerge, great violence and ‘extermination’ would be seen as a possible solution. Also, from the book we see that radios can act as a sort of weapon. This is because it was used as a way to brainwash and enforce people to think a certain way, and it did indeed have an effect on the level of hatred that exceeded. We also learn from this genocide, that countries won’t always offer a helping hand. This genocide was considered a ‘genocide’ after thousands of Tutsis were killed. It was as if countries watched without taking actions and that helped Hutus to continue to rise to power and kill more Tutsis. That can be applied to the UN as they weren’t quick to help, which worsened Rwanda’s conditions. With these lessons, I believe that we should take caution into what started the idea of genocide. That was the separation and discrimination of those identities who were different. If we were to apply this to the Kuwaiti/expat perspective, we should try to be more sympathetic towards the expats in order to prevent driving towards the path of discrimination and harmful treatment, in which raises hatred between both sides, which can end up with the idea of ‘extrermination.’
The conflict between Hutus and Tutsis it seems an old conflict but, what Gourevitch trying to say is the conflict began with several external factors that led to that genocide. What the author tries to say is that Hutus and Tutsis were living in peace for decades despite the ethnic differences between them, but one of the main reasons led to that conflict is the Western interference, in which, after the Belgians colonized Rwanda they made some decisions that could be the reason behind pulling the trigger, decisions such as giving identity cards for the Rwandan people to determine to what group the person is belonging, to Hutu or Tutsi. Moreover, they examined the physical appearance for the Rwandan people and they gave the Tutsi (the minority group) the superiority over the Hutu. For that, it seems that the Belgians were priming Rwandan people for genocide. Therefore, the lessons we must understand it from this genocide that we should not underestimate that small factors that might lead to a huge consequence, and to aware people of the risk of such actions. Therefore, to keep Kuwait in peace we should take the lessons from others, and we must study the history of conflicts and genocide to prevent it occurring in Kuwait, and we must aware people of the risk of hating speech, also we must enhance the notion of humanity.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Philip Gourevitch the Hutus and the Tutsis used to speak the same language and had the same religion and also married from each other so they used to be fine with each other until in equality emerged as Hutus were cultivators and Tutsis were herdsmen. It all started when they both had different ideas which lead them to not agree with each other until conflicts started, it is seen that Tutsis are the ones who had greater wealth and social status were in the other hand the Hutu’s were seen as being the lower class and that built hate in Hutu’s towards the Tutsis because they are getting compared with them and that made them fell less, what also made Hutu’s hate the Tutsis is that Tutsis were seen as top political and military officers so they are seen as the aristocrats as Gourevitch mentioned and that the Hutu’s are Vassals, so sense of hate started in the hearts of Hutu’s which made them kill Tutsis. The lessons that I learned from the Rwandan Genocide is to not downgrade and population because one day if they have the power they will exterminate the ones that were not treating them properly. I would apply those lessons to maintaining peaceful relations and preventing future conflicts from erupting in Kuwait by advocating people to not downgrade any group such as the expatriates (Philippines, Indians) and the way they are being treated by Kuwaitis because one day if the power is in their hands nothing good will happen to Kuwaiti’s they will take revenge as what happened in the Rwandan genocide.
ReplyDelete31871
To begin, the Hutus and the Tutsis were at peace with one another in fact they had similarities between them: they had the same traditions and spoke the same language, they lived in the same areas (or close by), and they even married each other. That was until the Belgians colonized them in 1916. Seventeen years later in 1933 the Belgians established ID cards, which according to Gregory Stanton is classification the first stage of genocide. The ID cards were used to categories people of being either a Hutu or a Tutsi. The Belgians believed that the Tutsis were superior over the Hutus, and so the two were distinguishable by their nose size, height, and eye type. As a result the Tutsis whom the Belgians favored received better privileges like education, heath care etc. unlike people who identify as Hutu. The Belgians favoring one group over the other built up some animosity and ethnic tensions from the ‘other’ side that did not receive such privileges, and might also be what primed the genocide. After the Belgians left and were no longer colonizing them and the Rwanda was independent in 1962 the balance of power was tipped over and the Hutus took over. Moving on to the year 1994 to the event that actually triggered the genocide; when the Rwandan presidents plan was shot down and as a result had many negative and devastating effects that came after. The Hutus including military officials as well as regular people started to kill Tutsis, they could’ve been neighbors or coworkers or people in the neighborhood killing each other. Now the Hutus were able to identify between who is a Hutu and who is a Tutsi was based on the ID cards the Belgians put in place during their colonization. According to Phillip Gourevitch there were Hutu extremists in radio stations directing and telling others to murder the ‘cockroaches’ (Tutsis) as they were thought to be an infestation and needed to be extinct; there were road blocks to stop passing cars to be checked for a the presence of a Tutsi if a Tutsi was present they were to be killed if not they were to be let through (women were sometimes raped before being killed). Also, Hutu militants were go door-to-door checking and killing any Tutsi. The Rwandan genocide resulted in a death toll of 800,000 to a million deaths. There are many lessons to be learned from the Rwandan genocide. The first lesson is it starts simple. Like every else it started small, like with a few jokes here and there, and with few choice words like cockroach then those words turn into stereotypes then a few acts of violence towards members of t he victims group then it escalates and escalates into a genocide.
ReplyDelete- part 1 S0003675
-part 2 S00036975
DeleteThe second lesson where there is violence or war there will be acts of violence against women. Sexual assaults on women are used and made as an addition weapon in war. A way to show the victimized group that they have no chance and no power to do anything, it is a degrading and dehumanizing, humiliating, and a form of torture. Torture, not only for the victim; but also for their spouse who is filled will horror and this vulnerable feeling where they are not able to help. It is also important to note that rape in wars does not only include women but also men. The third lesson is how power/privileges is distributed. Typically those who have power are not the ones being victimized it is those who lack it who are targeted because they are powerless and because they are vulnerable. If people where treated the same and given equal privileges then every one would have a chance. The last lesson is denial. Don’t pretend that nothing happened and that now that it’s over everything is fine. Yes it happened, yes its over, yes you were there or you didn’t do anything, but it still happened remember that don’t act like it didn’t, it may be officially over but the effects and consequences of the genocide remain and need to be dealt with and addressed, you did nothing so help now, make sure you do something to help the situation it could be to listen and help the healing process and most of all to make sure it doesn’t happen again. One way to maintaining peaceful relations and preventing future conflicts from erupting in Kuwait is to apply lesson number three, all citizens should be treated fairly, and by citizens- every one within the countries boarders, if people are in financial trouble make sure they have an organization to go to for help, if they need health care make sure their provided with a hospital that is free, raise the salaries for those who don’t get very much. It’ll make for a better country with better treatment for everyone, which will help in keeping the peace. - S0003675
The Rawandan genocide case was a conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi which generally was an act of revenge arising from the former oppressed population (Hutus). The Tutsis where the ones in power and they controlled the majority of the populations, however it when the Hutus took control the anger took over from being oppressed, starting a genocide. Making the conflict escalate to becoming a political tradition, and implicating genocidal acts to both populations. They are many lesson we as Kuwaitis being the “superior” or the ones in power can take from this genocide case. For one, acknowledging that there are other populations that are oppressed in Kuwait, rises the questions where what would happen if the tables were to turn. Where would the happen to the ones with power in Kuwait if they are overthrown by their own former oppressed population. For instance, the Bedoon, where not even good education is available for them, so let’s say they overthrow the ones in power, chaotic serial of events would occur due to the rage the would have in them from being mis-treated and given such limited rights. Preventing these acts from happening will require a long process of time, and they would have to consider perceived equality. The long process is required to satisfy both the oppressed and the oppressors, for we can’t upset any in the future. The treatment should consist of bringing them both sides closer and not giving them any reason to have conflict, so for further notice it would result into a peaceful relation between both sides.
ReplyDeleteS00039543
The divide between Hutus and Tutsis ethnic groups traces back during the Belgium colonization of Rwanda, when the Tutsi Kings ruled over Rwanda. During that period, the Belgians used priming methods, such as the use of IDs to differentiate between Hutu and Tutsi which consequently, was used by the Tutsi majority to oppress and kill Hutus. This was one of the key justification of the genocide of the Tutsis group by the Hutus during the Rwandan Civil War.
ReplyDeleteOne point that we can take out of Phillip Gourevitch is how powerful the imagination of people, of themselves, other groups and the world around them. As we have seen in Rwanda, when Hutus referred to Tutsis as “cockroaches” and murdered them after confirming their targets through IDs, all in the name of “Hutu Power.”
Looking back to our own society in Kuwait, we can see that the power of imagination has created stigmas against all groups in Kuwait. For instance, all Kuwaitis lazy because everything is paid for them, or expats are stealing all the opportunities. These forms of imagination, though they may not lead to extreme circumstances like in Rwanda, it creates a great divide amongst people.
However, at the end of Gourevitch’s novel, he brings up an incident where a group of militants from the former FAR force attacked a school and ordered the schoolgirls to separate between ethnic lines, but the school girls refused and simply referred to themselves as Rwandan. This shows that the power of imagination, the way we think of others as well as ourselves, cannot just be used as a tool of divide, but also can be exploited to bring unity amongst groups.
Isehaq Shamo
DeleteS00041632
One of the most horrendous genocides that were ever witnessed was the genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. An author by the name of Philip Gourevitch explains the civil war between the Hutus and the Tutsis in Rwanda and how the genocide of the group the Tutsi came about. He explains that the conflicts between the two groups began when Belgian colonists came to Rwanda in 1916. When the colonists came to Rwanda, they wanted to differentiate between the Hutus and the Tutsis because they had believed that the Tutsis were superior to the Hutus because of their physical appearances. The Belgian colonists first began by defining Hutus and Tutsis with identification cards that stated which group that they had belonged to. The Hutus were subjugated to high amounts of discrimination due to the fact that they were Hutus and the Belgian colonists deemed them inferior to the Tutsis. After the Belgian colonists had left Rwanda in 1962, it was natural that the Hutus had held resentment against the Tutsis because they were treated a lot better than they were. Due to their resentment against the Tutsis, the Hutus had created a shift of power in Rwanda in which they were now in control. In 1994, the genocidal procedures started to take place in which the rage in the Hutus against the Tutsis had grown so large that citizens started to gun down each other. Military officials of the Hutu tribe as well had seized most areas and were arresting or killing Tutsis solely based on the fact that they were Tutsis. The animosity that the Hutus had against the Tutsis granted the Hutus to commit genocide. The Rwandan genocide case had taught us that due to animosity, genocide can be committed. This unique case of genocide also had also shown first hand what the dangers of colonization can ultimately lead to.
ReplyDeleteFortunately, Kuwait is a rather peaceful country in which conflicts do not occur very often. However, the genocide in Rwanda had taught the dangers of colonization in which could turn extremely ugly after colonizers leave. This should place Kuwait in alert of colonizers, no matter how they come or how peaceful they are at first. However, there is an unfortunate group titled “Bidoon” in Kuwait, which are most likely susceptible to genocide because they already have identification cards that label them as such and they do not have any political power in which they are able to voice they opinion. These people should be given special protection by the government in order to avoid future disputes towards them because they are likely to be the most vulnerable group in Kuwait.
-29614
Written in an in depth manner, Gourevitch’s book seeks to address the genocide in Rwanda; the events that led to its occurrence and some of the factors that propagated it. He does this by conducting interviews from the people who survived the deadly tragedy. According to this author, the genocide was as a result of the conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi people. Even though he acknowledges their coexistence over the past years, he talks about the differences that were prevalent in the political, territorial and ethnic scenes of the people. These differences created a background upon which each group wanted power and dominance against the other. However, these factors are not entirely to blame for the tension that built up leading to the genocide. Gourevitch notes that, in the past, the colonialists in the country had used the differences between the two tribes to impact their colonial power. The antagonism between the Hutu and Tutsi was therefore propagated by the colonial powers. The colonial administrations came up with policies that revolved around ethnic myths that impacted heavily on how the people perceived themselves. The introduction of identity cards based on ethnicity worsened the conflict. Furthermore, this categorization of people based on their tribe is what was used to assign economic, social and political powers in the country. Without any doubt, one group was bound to feel superior to the other. This is the reason why the government at that time ordered for the murder of the minority group that was mainly comprised of the Tutsi people. The author also takes note of the escalating speed at which the atrocities were carried out. It was as though, the event had been well calculated and planned. The result of this was the displacement of people, loss of lives, loss of property, disruption of national activities and the increase in the number of refugees.
ReplyDeleteIn light of the Rwandan genocide, there are a lot of things that can be learned. First, genocides do not just happen. Instead, they are as a result of several factors relating to the need for dominance in the economic, political and social institutions. For this reason, it is important to ensure that all the people in the different ethnic groups have equal representation in these institutions to promote unity. The second lesson that can be taken from this case is that genocides should be avoided at all costs. This is because; they affect the national process as well as the lives of the people. The survivors of such events suffer from trauma and depression that is as a result of the loss of their families, their homes and property among others. Additionally, it takes a very long time for a country to get back on its feet in many aspects. Lastly, the case of Rwanda depicts the dangers of poor governance. It is the government that ordered the killing of the Tutsi people. As such, people should be on the fore front to fight bad leadership. As it is, every person regardless of their minority or superiority suffered from this event.
To prevent a similar event from occurring in Kuwait, the leaders and citizens need to learn about these lessons. They will help them knowing some of the practices to uphold and those which they should prevent. Ultimately, the promotion of good leadership will play a significant role in ensuring that peaceful relations prevail in Kuwait.
There have been numerous genocides throughout the history of humanity; people usually associate these words with Hitler or Stalin; however, most of them do not know about the Rwanda genocide. Nevertheless, this mass killing based on the conflict between Hutu and Tutsi minorities is considered to be one of the cruelest and the most tragic events in the history. More than 800 000 people were killed during 100 days because of the assassination of the Hutu’s president. Furthermore, the conflict still exists, and new genocides have chances to occur in Africa. Therefore, the US and all the other countries should understand that without their intervention the horrible events of 1994 can repeat.
ReplyDeleteThe conflict between Tutsi and Hutu in mostly based on the class differences, as all the other reasons are absent. Both minorities have no differences in race, religion, or even language. Accordingly, they both speak Bantu and French, practice Christianity, and have very similar genes so scholars could not find any significant difference. The only dissimilarity is that Tutsi came from Ethiopia, while Hutu migrated from Chad. Nevertheless, Tutsis were considered to be as chiefs for Hutus because they were more efficient at cattle breeding. Therefore, the actual differentiation between the minorities happened when the Belgian government conducted a census to issue identity cards, which labeled every Rwandan as either Hutu or Tutsi or Twa. Accordingly, the conflict was based on differences in social status and was not noticed by the officials at first.
The first massacre occurred in 1972 when Michel Micombero who was the Tutsi’s president ordered to kill Hutus after their policemen murdered 1000 Tutsis. Afterwards, from 100 000 to 300 000 Hutus were killed by the Tutsi’s army. Nevertheless, the conflict reached its peak in 1994, when the Hulu’s president Juvenal Habyarimana was assassinated during the flight, and the Tutsi’s activists were blamed for the killing. Afterwards, the government ordered to give weapons to the militia and kill all the Tutsi.
The events that occurred afterward are known as the Rwanda genocide and have left the crucial mark on the country and its society. Accordingly, more than 800 000 Tutsi were murdered in a brief period. Moreover, most of the murders were performed by machete and were enormously cruel. There were situations when people killed their neighbors or even relatives because of their origin, even priest and nuns murdered parishioners in churches(Gourevitch). Armed people entered the houses with the lists of people that must be killed and had no mercy to anyone.
The genocide was stopped by the Tutsi’s army which entered the country and saved the rest of their minority. On the other hand, they started to kill Hutu, and the number of victims did not decrease noticeably. Accordingly, neither the US nor other countries did not take part in the conflict and started to send troops only after several Belgian peacekeepers were killed. Nevertheless, their efforts were not enough to stop the massacre and establish peace agreement.
Accordingly, all the events in Rwanda show that the conflicts in Africa should not be left to resolve by themselves. Complete ignorance of fueling tensions between Tutsi and Hutu brought them to the genocides with hundreds of thousands of innocent people murdered, and numerous women and girls raped. Therefore, both USA and European countries should play the more active role in resolving such conflicts to prevent future bloodsheds. As for Kuwait, in order to prevent future conflicts from happening, one must put an end to the discrimination and lack of rights between those who are considered Bedoons/expats and the Kuwaiti citizens and not just ignore the situation at hand.
According to Gourevitch, in april of 1994, the government has ordered Hutus to kill Tutsis. This major conflict has caused hundreds of thousands deaths of Tutsis within a year, it was considered to be the most horrible genocide after the holocaust. However, there weren't any conflict between the two group until after Belgium colonised Rwanda, they lived with each other at peace until they were labeled. The colonisers wanted to reflect their customs onto the Rwandan customs, such as the establishment of ID cards to distinguish between people, such a divide between the groups that has caused the conflict between the Tutsis and Hutus. Another was that the belgian colonisers predicted that the Tutsis were superiors due to their European features, such as the size of their nose and their different eyes. The divide labeled the groups, giving labels can rise hatred between people of the group as it promotes the assumptions that one group is superior to the other, which is exactly what happened in the case of Rwanda’s genocide. During the colonisation the Tutus were in power, however after independents the Hutus were now in power. This takes us back to our argument in the last blog, where if the power was given to the oppressed over the oppressors, where we were asked to predict this swap of control from the oppressed to the oppressors, and predict the outcome, and this is a true case of such an example.Thus we would understand that the mass killing of the Tutsis was an act of revenge by the Hutus after independents where the Tutsis lost their power.
ReplyDeleteWe learn from this genocide, that colonisers, or the “other” are the ones that give arise to conflicts, because they want to reflect their norms onto the oppressed norms. We also learn that oppressor might one day be in power, thus everyone needs to treat others in an humane way. The last thing i learned is that labels can create conflict between people, because labels categorise people into groups of superiority, which can make the superior group believe they are in control of the less superiors group. or that one group is more important than the other.
Applying such cases to Kuwait, we can prevent such action by promoting equality and removing labels such as expats or bediuons or hadar or bedou. Another case, would be that we prevent any suggestion that goes against our cultural norms that other countries would suggest us to do.
The Hutus and Tutsis have lived peacefully alongside each other for years until the Belgian colonization of the country started. They were intermarriages between the two ethnicities, they spoke the same language and had the same culture. However this changed when the Belgians introduced ID cards, which determined whether you were a Tutsi or a Hutu. This can be though of as the beginning of integrating division into the bureaucracy. After that, the division of the Tutsi and Hutus started to create tensions until the tensions increased so much it triggered the genocide.
ReplyDeleteThe lessons that we should learn from the Rwandan genocide are not necessarily connected to the killings themselves. The international community knew about what was going on and saw the amount of deaths that were happening per day but refused to get involved. In the case of the United States, they were previously involved in another country that had tensions that consequently led to the death of American troops. This was what caused the unwillingness to involve themselves. The UN as an international governmental organization should have gotten more involved. Instead, the international communities stood as bystanders advocating for the genocide to stop but never doing anything. Condemning something bad that’s happening does nothing for the hundreds of people who died on a daily basis in Rwanda. This case, and history has taught us, that international community is selective when choosing who to help and who to leave to die.
In Kuwait, the society needs to get over the Iraqi invasion and move on. On august 2nd, which is a day that people commemorate the invasion. In social media, there are so many posts that say ‘we will never forget’ but this is wrong. There should be forgetting and forgiving. This should be taught in schools. However, instead in Kuwait the curriculum about the invasion is biased and one sided, so people grow up thinking that Iraqi’s are bad people and thus the stereotypes and discrimination is learned at a young age.
28850
In Philip Gourevitch’s book “We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will be killed with our Families”, he uses stories about the Rwandan genocide between the majority (Hutu) and the minority (Tutsi) that occurred on April of 1994 and took the lives of 800,000 Tutsi’s to show what actually happened. The government of Rwanda as said in Gourevitch’s book believed that if the Tutsi’s are destroyed the world is going to be a better place. This is the same thinking that drove Adolf Hitler into committing the genocide known worldly as the Holocaust. At the very beginning of his book, Gourevitch is at a town called Gikongoro, talking to a man who was a pygmy. According to Gourevitch’s book “We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will be killed with our Families”, he defined a pygmy as “Rwandas first inhabitants, a forest people, who were generally looked down upon by Hutu and Tutsi alike as a vestigial, aboriginal lot” (pg. 7). The topic they were discussing about was the concept of Homo sapiens. In the pygmy’s mind, he believes that Homo sapiens is a theory. The pygmy believes that the mission of Homo sapiens is that all humanity must bond together against the struggle against nature. In his book, Gourevitch stated that “this is a book about how people imagine themselves and one another----a book about how we imagine our world” (pg.6). If you take any genocidal events that happened, we often think about ourselves and one another. The main reason behind the writing of this book was to understand how the Rwandans understood what happened and the healing process they had to go through after the genocide. From the stories that were told in this book, the only case that was talked about in the class that a little resembles what the author wrote in his book was the Armenian Genocide. The reason for that is because the main causes of these genocides is because of political ideologies that targeted a certain type of ethnic group. During the Armenian genocide the perpetrators were called the Young Turks and the victims were the Armenians. After everything that was written, the best parts about Gourevitch’s book was his main argument, the organization of his book, his strengths and weaknesses, and how he influenced readers thinking.
ReplyDeleteThe author’s main argument was that the Rwandan genocide was a dark truth that needed to be shown to the rest of the world. This event took the lives of so many people, and some people around the world (including the author) needed to know the reason behind this and the healing process the victims went through after. In terms of the books organization, the book is very well organized and very straight forward in terms of storytelling. These are one of these books where the introduction must be read in order to know what the book is about. As people read the introduction, they will know the reason as to why the book was written in the first place. After the introduction you would go into the stories about Rwanda. The book was also very detailed on the massacre. From the first chapter, the author visited a school that was filled with dead bodies (women, men, and children). The description of the scene where the author enter a classroom was very detailed and disturbing because he described how the body looked like. One of the bodies had bones sticking out of the skin, and there were too many skulls without the rest of the bodies which showed that the killers also used a machete to kill these victims.
Work Cited
http://www.yale.edu/cgp
In terms of his strength and weakness, the author has more strengths than weaknesses. One of his strengths is that he took his time to write a very good and informative book about a tragedy. He did so well into bringing an event like the Rwandan genocide to a lot of people that did not know much about it. The authors also managed to bring in the hardship the Tutsi’s had to go through during and immediately after this event. The only weakness that this book has is that, I as a reader had a very hard time understanding if this was the author talking or a Rwandan trying to tell their story. When I started reading this book, I thought that this story about the author’s point of view of the genocide, and when I read it, I thought it was only the author trying to tell his story, but it was instead a collection of stories from Rwandans that were there during the event, and at some points during the book it was very hard to differentiate who was talking.
ReplyDeleteThroughout reading this book, I was shown a different view of the world we lived in. Gourevitch made me realize that there are no monsters other than human beings who do these things. There are no monsters that live in children’s closets, underneath beds, in our Televisions etc. The only monsters that walk among us are human beings who commit crimes against humanity. When I was reading this book, the thing that struck me the most was that the relationship between the Hutus ad Tutsi’s were completely different before the genocide. The Hutus and Tutsi’s (before the mass killing) were neighbors, friends, schoolmates, and colleagues; however, during the mass killing their relationship turned from friendly to unfriendly really fast. This goes to show that some people whether they are your friends, colleagues or neighbors are not what they actually are.
ReplyDeletethroughout that has been said, I think the best way to maintain peaceful and preventing an event like this from happening is we don't get politics to interfere in ethnicity and that everybody should be united instead of against each other.
ReplyDelete