Public International Law Project Paper

RWANDAN GENOCIDE AND THE PART OF UN

Anasuya Nair
BA0170008

Tamil Nadu National Law University

Tiruchirappalli

October 2019
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

In 1994, an attack was launched against the Tutsis of Rwanda by the Hutus. The mass slaughter
went on for 100 days, from April 7th to 15th July. It was organised by the Hutus and more than
one million people – overwhelmingly Tutsi, but also moderate Hutu and others who opposed
the genocide – were systematically killed in less than three months. The Rwandan genocide is
one of the most devastating tragedies that the modern world has seen. It was one of the most
violent events and did not confine to mass slaughter but included inhumane activities such as
the severing of Achilles tendons, genital mutilation, breast oblation, the construction of
roadblocks that served as execution sites, bodies being stuffed into latrines. It was the first time
that rape was recognised as a weapon of war. Rape of women and children was a weapon of
genocide in this case as the Hutu tribe wanted to ensure that the Tutsi tribe was wiped clean
and systematically made sure that they not only slaughtered the existing members, but also
wiped off any possibility of reproduction. Studies have shown that there was all women/girls
aged twelve or above currently living in Rwanda have all been raped at least once. 1 According
to certain officials who were involved with peace-making programs in Rwanda, "Rape was the
rule, and its absence the exception". “Although ultimately incalculable, the destructive force of
genocide is even more widespread as hundreds of millions of other people- generations of
survivors, perpetrators and by-standers and observers- have been struck, directly and indirectly
by the rippling waves of calamity.”2 The genocide was not the product of anarchy, but rather
"of order, authoritarianism, decades of modern political theorizing and indoctrination, and one
of the most meticulously administered states in history.”3 In this offset, the United Nations did
not intervene nor mandate any efficient peacekeeping missions. Despite having launched a
peacekeeping mission for Rwanda in October 1993, the organisation was unable to intervene
at the right time and curb the oncoming violence. UN’s response to the crisis was criticised,
including Mr Kofi Annan who was the UN Secretary General of United Nations. The
international community also stood by and watched. In this paper, the researcher aims to study
the part that UN played, why it failed and whether it is morally responsible for not preventing
the mass slaughter. Vis-à-vis the Rwandan genocide, the researcher will also look into whether

1
Walsh, Annelotte (2012). "The Girl Child". In Lisa Yarwood (ed.). Women and Transitional Justice: The
Experience of Women as Participants. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-69911-2.
2
Annihilating Difference: The Anthropology of Genocide, Alexander Laban Hinton
Volume 3 of California Series in Public Anthropology, ISSN 2575-6338
Volume 2 of Public Anthropology Series
3
Gourevitch, P. (1998). We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families: Stories from
Rwanda. New York: Picador.
international organisations and other states have moral obligations or a responsibility to prevent
crimes against humanity in the global setting. The researcher will briefly study the
“Responsibility to Protect”.
CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND

Rwanda is a country in Central Africa and come from one cultural and linguistic group i.e
Banyarwanda which has three sub groups called Tutsi, Hutu and Twa. The Berlin Conference
of 1884 assigned this area to Germany. Hence, the colonial period started.4 During World War
I, Belgium took control of Rwanda and administered a more direct control upon them. This
was mandated by the League of Nations. France and Belgium engrained the notion that there
was a division between Hutus and Tutsis and established that Hutus were the superior race.5 In
1990, the Rwandan Civil War was initiated by members of the Tutsi tribe who comprised the
Rwandan Patriotic Front. The President Habarimana’s was foced to sign the Arusha Accords
in 1992. The cease-fire ended on 6 April 1994 when Habyarimana's plane was shot down near
Kigali Airport, killing him.6 This triggered the Rwandan genocide which started a few hours
later and continued for the next 100 days. There were many factors which resulted in the
genocide. The organizers of the mass killings, a ruling clique of Hutus based in the northern
Gisenyi and Ruhengeri regions, acted out of fear of losing power to the aggrieved southern
Hutus, who were beginning to challenge northern dominance.7

Women and children were subject to inhuman sexual violence.The violent attitude was further
entrenched in the minds of the people of Rwanda through the media. Propaganda was spread
which reiterated the difference between Hutu and Tutsis. Hutu men were warned to beware of
Tutsi women as they were considered to be “beautiful and sexy” and will deceive and cheat
them. this inculcated in them a deep dislike for the females of the tribe which can be reflected
in the political status of Tutsi women and the extent of violence that was imposed upon them.
Further allegations were made against the Tutsi women for monopolising the work
opportunities in both private and public sector. They were said to only appoint those from their
own tribe i.e those with “thin noses”. Typical physical were also brought and scrutinised. Their
inaccessibility to the Hutu men and prevalent gender stereotypes of them being beautiful yet

4
Prunier, Gérard (1995). The Rwanda Crisis, 1959–1994: History of a Genocide (2nd ed.). London: C. Hurst &
Co. Publishers. ISBN 978-1-85065-243-4.
5
Appiah, Anthony; Gates, Henry Louis (2010). Encyclopedia of Africa, Volume 1 (illustrated ed.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-533770-9.
6
BBC News (III) (12 January 2010). "Hutus 'killed Rwanda President Juvenal Habyarimana'". London. Retrieved
10 November 2015
7
Gerhart, Gail M. Foreign Affairs, vol. 83, no. 1, 2004, pp. 186–187. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20033884.
deceiving spies fuelled the sexual attacks. A big part of propagating this stereotype can be put
to the media.

“All genocides in history have been instigated, organized, and legitimized by the state,'8 and
no explanation could be accurate without including the role played by local state
representatives in the "micromanagement of the genocide.””

According to Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the

Crime of Genocide,

“Genocide means any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in
part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”9

The horror of this genocide was the fact that it was done in a completely methodical manner
and was authorised by the state. It was systematic and was not prevented nor intervened by
anyone. It was not violent “bad, crazy men” but regular people. Doctors, lawyers, fathers,
brothers etc. Everyone took part in the genocide.

8
Wilhelmus P. Du Preez, Genocide: The Psychology of Mass Murder (London:
Boyars
9
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December
1948, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 78, p. 277
CHAPTER 3: UN’S PART: IS UN MORALLY REPONSIBLE

The United Nations in 1994 failed to prevent the genocide despite having information onits
happening and ultimately failed the international community. Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the
then Secretary General mandated the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda
(UNAMR) in 1993 in order to maintain peace and for humanitarian purposes. This could not
be efficiently achieved as there were many digressions coming from the internal political
scenario in Rwanda, making it difficult to maintain peace. These internal aggressions resulted
in violation of human rights. It was later found out that the Hutus merely used the arrangement
as a distraction to plan the mass murder of the Tutsi tribe. After the death of the President of
Rwanda, the Tutsis were hunted down and slaughtered. However, the United Nations were
unable to do anything due to the unwillingness of the member states to get involved with the
Rwandan War. They were not ready to bring in additional troops and this ultimately led to
UNAMIR being ineffective. After this, the French were given power by the Security Council
to conduct Operation Turquoise, which was a mission in order to save civilians and give them
a way out through areas controlled by them. However, killings in other parts controlled by the
government could not be limited and hence, millions died, either due to the violence or due to
various water borne diseases. Afater the end of the genocide, the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda was set up to "prosecute persons responsible for genocide and other
serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and
neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994." It was situated in
Arusha, Tanzania. Its Appeals Chamber was located in The Hague, Netherlands.

The United Nations could have prevented the genocide or could have had strengthened
peacekeeping mission had it acted when it had received information regarding the genocide. In
a report compiled by a Commission of Inquiry headed by a former Swedish prime Minister,
the UN is blamed for not taking actions to prevent the genocide of the Tutsi tribe.

The report describes the failure of the Secretariat, and Mr Annan, to respond to a cable sent on
11 January by the Canadian commander of the peace-keeping mission, General Romeo
Dallaire. he said “he had intelligence from an informant about plans by Hutu forces for mass
extermination of their enemies”. He said the plan foresaw “Tutsis being killed at the rate of
1,000 every 20 minutes.” The General’s permission was dismissed and signed by Kofi Annan
to intervene and take immediate action. "It is incomprehensible to the inquiry that not more
was done to follow up on the information provided by the informant," the report concludes.
CHAPTER 4: INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY
International law has established clear cut principles of state territory and the prohibition of
external intervention in such territory.UN Charter Article 2.7 states that “Nothing contained in
the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are
essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit
such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the
application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII.” This means that in case of domestic
abuse, as in the case of Rwanada, the UN is not authorised to intervene as there is no
international threat.10 The Genocide Convention, however authorises states to “prevent and
punish” genocide by approaching the United Nations Security Council.11 Hence the researcher
understands there to be a responsibility to protect within international organisations. It is a
commitment made by member states to protect the world from violence and persecution in any
forms like genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity. This was
established as a political obligation only after the genocide of Rwanda and Balkans. However,
even though there was no political obligation to prevent the genocide, there was a moral
responsibility with the UN to prevent the genocide of the Tutsis. There is a reluctance to attach
moral obligation on organisation merely because they are only perceived as a tool or machinery
of the states is prevalent. However, it does not seem to be the right path of thought as only
international organisations can do sufficient work for climate change, international disputes,
etc more than any individual. The UN is expected to act in cases which are not common crimes.
As the “guarantor of international security and peace”, it must coordinate the action of its 192
members12 and prevent or intervene in extreme situations such as ethnic cleansing and
genocide. Moreover, The UN is a bearer of ‘International Legal Personality’; legally, this
means that in the eyes of law, the UN is a person.13It is a separate person which has an internal
board that makes decision. This implies that into every decision, deliberation and
rationalisation are included. For each case pros and cons, right and wrong is discussed. It being
the authorised responsibility that is given the power to act, has the power to decide what the
best course of action in order to promote world peace is. There is a sort of accountability that
UN has. Hence, the researcher believes that international organisations, especially the United
Nations, must have moral responsibility and obligation and must step up when it needs to.

10
Doyle, M. (2011). International Ethics and the Responsibility to Protect. International Studies Review, 13(1),
72-84. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23016142
11
Article 1, Article 8, Genocide Convention
12
3 UN,ORG/1469 press release, ‘United Nations’ Member States’,
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/org1469.doc.htm (15 September 2009).
13
Erskine, ‘Blood on UN’s Hands?’, p.34
CHAPTER 5: INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER STATES
Through the involvement of the UN, some states were involved in the Arusha Peace Process,
which was between the government and the RPF. The international community failed to act
during the Rwandan genocide. The French Army sent in troops and there was immediate
mediation after the civil war began. United States also sent in troops to assist the negotiations.
UNAMIR had a discouraging number of participants and was severely understaffed. There was
a grane need for resources as well. In 1993-4, many organisations and non state actors like
IMF, World Bank etc. struggled to implement even simply plans due to the incompetence of
UNAMIR. Countries like America, Belgium, Russia were also a part of this. In fact, France
and China are were found to have provided the government with necessary weapons for the
genocide. Further, in the report made by the Commission of Inquiry, France and Belgium were
accused of directly aiding the preparation for genocide. French troops were also part of the
militia that took part in the systematic slaughter of Tutsi. After events surrounding the Battle
of Mogadishu in Somalia the year prior, the US refused to provide requested material aid to
Rwanda.14 The United States also refused help despite repeated requests and refused aids to
Rwanda at their time of need.15 Mucyo Commission, in its report also accused the French
government of “knowing of preparations for the genocide and helping to train Hutu militia
members.”16The world stood and watched by the sidelines as an entire tribe was wiped off the
planet. This was because of many factors that led to the non-participation of other states but
the fact was that, the Rwandan genocide could have been avoided.

14
Evidence of Inaction: A National Security Archive Briefing Book, ed. Ferroggiaro)
15
"Frontline: the triumph of evil". Retrieved 2007-04-09.
16
Asiimwe, Arthur (5 August 2008). "Rwanda accuses France directly over 1994 genocide". Reuters. Retrieved
13 July 2014.
The Rwandan genocide was one of the most abhorrent events of the twentieth century and
caused wide spread panic and destruction. As written in his book, We wish to inform you that
tomorrow we will be killed with our families: Stories from Rwanda, Gourevitch recounts how
the country was empty and that the people had died before they were killed as a result of the
horrors of living at a time of genocide. Genocide is a systematic methodical wiping away of
one class/community/tribe of people because of their difference from the majority. Why does
a class feel the need to abolish another? How do civilians turn into murderers overnight? These
are questions that have been researched in all fields of law, but still haunt minds as it still
continues to happen. Systematic persecution of a tribe lead to the mass killing of 1/7th of the
world population in a span of 7 days. This paper also looked into the interference or lack
thereof, of the international community and the moral responsibility of the United Nations.