During the Rwanda genocide, Paul Kagame and the fpr fiercely opposed external intervention to help stop the massacres

[Rwanda]

During the Rwanda genocide, Paul Kagame and the fpr fiercely opposed external intervention to help stop the massacres

No. 1: Paul Kagame: a Savior or a great impostor of absolute power?
The former rebel leader of the rwandan patriotic front and current rwandan President Paul Kagame is credited with arresting the 1994 genocide; he is at this point considered by many as a hero; he is enjoying this hero posture to install a very strong dictatorship. Repressive and bloody in Rwanda. But by analysing several facts and several testimonies, it appears that Paul Kagame’s role is more than disturbing in the outbreak and unfolding of the tutsi genocide in 1994.
What if, finally, Paul Kagame, who is still today revered as the one who arrested the genocide in 1994 was simply an impostor?
What if he had played a role in the massacre of the tutsis (his own) to seize power without sharing?
The facts before and during the genocide
The following facts have been widely documented and show how
Kagame and the fpr were not the saviors they claim to be:
1. many clues point to kagame as responsible for the terrorist attack of 6 April 1994:
The Fpr, with Paul Kagame at his head, was one of the main actors in the tragedy. There are strong indications that he was the one who lit the spark in a house full of explosives by shooting habyarimana’s presidential plane.
Former High-ranking officials and several other former compagnons comrades accused Paul Kagame of having ordered this act recognized by all as a trigger for genocide. (see, for example, Abdul Ruzibiza in his book “a secret story”, Jean Pierre Mugabe, noble marara and general kayumba nyamwasa.
In addition, two investigators from the international criminal tribunal for Rwanda (Ictr), Australian hourigan and American James Lyons reported that they had gathered information linking Paul Kagame to the killing of the presidential aircraft and had been forced to stop their investigations. .
The statements by successive prosecutors of the international criminal tribunal for Rwanda (Ictr), Louise Arbour and Carla Del Ponte, also appear to blame the criminal responsibility for this attack to President Kagame and his fpr rebellion.
It is important to note that a crucial element is almost completely ignored by the general public: The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Ictr) in arusha was established in 1995, 1995 years later, after investigations, interrogations and others. It has failed to establish and prove the planning of genocide against the tutsis. All defendants considered to be ” brains “, ” planners ” etc… were either acquitted or convicted but on other grounds than the planning of genocide.
It is clear from this that the real trigger of the genocide was the assassination of president habyarimana. The situation was so tense in the country that it was foreseeable that his assassinant would trigger large-scale massacres. Anyone who shot president habyarimana’s plane, in the precise situation of Rwanda in 1994, bears a heavy responsibility in the genocide of the tutsis.
But who was taking advantage of president habyarimana’s assassination?
Some investigations and testimonies clearly show the fpr and Paul Kagame. If that were to happen, Paul Kagame would bear a heavy responsibility because he would be the one who triggered the genocide.
2. Kagame was not concerned about saving the tutsis from the inside:
Several testimonies from the militaires military (including abdul ruzibiza in his book) speak of the refusal of the military authorities to rescue the tutsis, even where possible. Ruzibiza even spoke of some of the soldiers who committed suicide because they were prevented from going to save their families, when they had military capabilities. There had to be “enough dead” to justify genocide. It all suggests that general Paul Kagame sacrificed the tutsis from the inside. It is too cynical to sacrifice human lives and to say that we do not eat the omelette without breaking the eggs.
3. During the genocide, Kagame and the fpr fiercely opposed external intervention to help stop the massacres: 
A. According to hrw human rights watch / International Federation of human rights leagues, in its publication ” no witnesses shall survive. The genocide in Rwanda “,
Editions, 1999. Pages) on pages 814-815: when the security council considered sending a larger peacekeeping force to Rwanda with a broader mandate to protect civilians, the fpr Craignit that it does not interfere with its objective of military victory. Its leaders may be particularly concerned that the French can use force to protect the interim government. Rather than welcoming this initiative and calling for its immediate implementation, the porte spokesman in Brussels opposed it, claiming that there was no longer a tutsi to save (human rights watch, telephone interview, Brussels, 30 April 1994
B. A few other highlights showing the responsibility of the fpr and his chief Paul Kagame:
1. Early April 1994: gentlemen dusaidi and muligande (two senior leaders of the fpr) were sent to New York from the
First week after the culling of the aircraft to lobby and oppose any foreign intervention.
2. On 8 April 1994 le asked all foreign forces to leave Rwanda under penalty of being considered enemies.
3. On 13 April 1994 the fpr accepts only three days of truce with a view to allowing the evacuation of foreigners. Thus Rwandans were abandoned to their fate to continue killing each other while there were still opportunities to save many human lives. It should also be noted that at that time, according to Jacques-Roger Boo-Boo, Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the fpr regularly presented conditions that were impossible for each meeting to discuss a ceasefire because Paul Kagame did not Was interested only by a total military victory. In his book “Le’s boss speaks”, Jacques Boo reveals that the fpr has, on several occasions, derailed attempts to cease fire in order to come to the rescue of civilians.
4. On 30 April 1994 le rejected The Formule Ii Formula.
Indeed, gérard gahima and Claude Dusaidi of the political office of the fpr réaffirmèrent this position in the following statement: ” it is far too late for United nations intervention. The Genocide is almost over. Most of the potential victims of the regime were killed or fled “.
He continued: ” Therefore, the rwandan patriotic front is categorically opposed to the proposed united nations intervention and will not cooperate in any way with its organization or its implementation.
In view of the above, the rwandan patriotic front calls on the United Nations Security Council not to allow the deployment of the proposed force, since a united nations intervention at this stage can no longer be of any use to the Massacres. ” (gérald gahima and Claude Dusaidi, ” statement by the political office of the rwandan patriotic front on the planned deployment of a united nations intervention force in Rwanda “, New York, 30 April 1994).
It was only three weeks after the massacre. It took two months before the capital, Kigali, fell into the hands of the rebels.
According to Gérard Prunier: “when the genocide was initiated, the rescue of the tutsi was no longer priority 1 of the fpr”.
Luc Marchal, former Deputy Commander of the United Nations troops in Rwanda testified before the ictr on 2/12/2006: ” from my experience, my conclusion is that the fpr had a single goal, take all power by force and keep it for For me, he said, ” it was the fpr that carried out the attack on the presidential plane. At No time, I did not perceive the desire of him, to make concessions, to round corners, to reach a consensus “.
5. On 2 May 1994: the permanent representative of the former government of Rwanda to the United Nations, Ambassador Jean-Damascène Bizimana, sent a letter to the president of the security Council (S / 1994/531), requesting De to ensure respect for the ceasefire and to stabilise the situation in Rwanda. Thus, unlike the fpr, the government party called for strong intervention to stop the violence, stabilise the country and save lives.
6. On 5 May 1994, the Washington times wrote: ” The Rebel Movement Commander, Rwanda’s patriotic front, Kagame, said yesterday that a united nations force cannot bring peace to its Countries and only the victory of its movement can stop the massacres
7. On 13 may 1994, the BBC wrote: “the rebel leader Paul Kagame accepts the proposals for a greater strength of the United Nations, provided that it is confined to a purely humanitarian role”. But Kagame said that the 5,500 suggested by Boutrus Boutros Ghali Secretary-General of the United Nations to stop the genocide was too great.
8. On 18 may 1994, the Herald (Glasgow) wrote: ” if the strength of the United Nations stands between the two warring parties, it will be treated as an enemy said Denis Polisi, Vice-President of the fpr.
9. On 24 may 1994, the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote: “The Commander-in-Chief of the rebel forces urges United Nations forces on Monday to remain outside the war in Rwanda”.
10. On 4 July 1994, the fpr took control of the capital Kigali and the country continued to fall into the spectre of human rights violations.
Willy Claes, then Belgian Minister for foreign affairs, said that, after the massacre of the 10 Belgian Blue Helmets OF LA, Belgium sent military aircraft with troops to kigali to rescue Belgian Soldiers. He claims that they have received threats from Paul Kagame himself by saying that he does not want any belgian soldier on rwandan soil and that if they do not all leave, they will be regarded as enemy by the fpr and targeted. They had just “Authorization” to repatriate Belgian Nationals before leaving.
Boutros Boutros Ghali, then secretary-General of the United Nations, said that he had received the order under pressure from Paul Kagame to evacuate the minuar from Rwanda. Captain Lemaire of the Belgian contingent who kept the idp camp in kicukiro (eto) declared in October 1997, in his capacity as a witness to the international tribunal for Rwanda, that the United Nations troops in kigali were able to watch The Interahamwe had the security council simply changed the mission of LA.
General Anyidoho, then commander of the Ghanaian and adjoint contingent, stated in his book that the biggest problem was an ultimatum received from the haut high command to withdraw from Rwanda.
B-Kagame’s behavior after the genocide
Following the takeover by the fpr, a government of “Savior” full of good intentions could have acted as such and protected all survivors under his authority.
A posteriori observation of post-genocide management shows, on the contrary, a succession of facts that are far from characterizing a “Savior” Power, but rather an impressive succession of criminal facts and crimes against humanity and Anti-Democratic Behaviour:
– the brutal behaviour of the fpr troops after victory is more of a crime against humanity than a logic to stop genocide and save all survivors.
After taking kigali on 4 July 1994 and the establishment of the government on 19 July 1994, the troupes troops, although under the orders of the new government, did not act in logic. Restoration of peace and public tranquillity. They continued the killings of citizens as they had been used to since their invasion of Rwanda in October 1990., and there was a question of whether they were horrifiées by what had just happened (Genocide). Indeed, if that had been the case, they would have stopped the killing and there were no more deaths, and the orders of the authorities would have been clear and insistent for peace to come back for all. Instead, Rpa (Rwandan Patriotic Army) has engaged in killings and acts of barbarism on the hutus, thus prolonging the list of rwandans murdered by other rwandans. For example, in Rwanda, inhumane prison sentences have been found in unhealthy conditions (cachots cachots where prisoners die from asphyxiation, stampede, disease, cachots and other unknown places) as well as repeated massacres at Meetings organized at various locations, and particularly the massacre massacre, which resulted in more than 8000 deaths.
– the war in Congo (DRC) and the millions of massacres committed by rwandan troops on rwandan refugees and Congolese citizens.
The Macabre Statistics on violence in the Democratic Republic of the CONGO ESTIMATE MORE THAN 8 million deaths in a war punctuated by massacres of rwandan refugees and Congolese citizens by the army of Paul Kagame. An Army that would have stopped the genocide would not engage in such barbarity and bestialité.
As pointed out by a United Nations report, these crimes may be characterized by crimes against humanity or even genocide if a court is seized.
– the targeted killings of former comrades of war in dissent:
Colonel Karegeya was assassinated in South Africa in 2014 after being opposed to the fpr. General kayumba nyamwasa escaped several assassination attempts also in South Africa. Western intelligence services, including English, have documented the fact that Rwandan opponents in their territory had been targeted by assassination plans through the power of the fpr. Would it be because kagame fears that soldiers and survivors of the hutu and tutsi killings would be prepared to testify to what they have been through, seen and heard and demanding justice?
– a dictatorship that appears to be a shield against prosecution:
Kagame has put in place a dictatorship that violates human rights, emprisonne all opponents and opposantes who dare to challenge him democratically. The most emblematic cases are two women,
Victory Ingabire and Diane Rwigara, in prison today after trying to run presidential candidates against kagame. Many other politicians are in prison only for expressing an opinion different from that of power. Many others lost their lives. Kagame’s fpr has built a regime where every citizen is controlled and where any speech criticizing the government is a risk to his life.
As a result of his dictatorship, Kagame prevented the truth from bursting into the open, including his role in the genocide. What would he have to fear if he was the Savior, the one who stopped the genocide?
It is possible to conclude that kagame’s role in the genocide leads him to fear the prosecution, which pushes him through a survival reflex to lock up all the institutions (Army, Parliament, executive power…), to carve out the custom constitution. To Stand up to the head of the state indefinitely and to be cruelly threatened during his various speeches and speeches.
CONCLUSION
It is therefore believed that Paul Kagame in 1994 found a direct “interest” in the massacre of the greatest number of tutsis and in the characterization of genocide of what was happening. If not, how could we explain the refusal of the tutsis for several months to help the tutsis, while militarily he had the means?
How can we explain that he refused any presence of international forces that could have played an interposition role and limit the massacres?
It is possible to conclude from the foregoing that, for him, it was first of all the power to take military power and, incidentally, to stop the massacres against the tutsis in order to consolidate its power by taking the costume of the saviour who arrested the genocide. He has proved his interest in the least démesuré for absolute power:
By continuing his war in the Congo, there are millions of deaths.
By Verrouillant the political space in Rwanda, which prohibits dissent and emprisonne any serious opponent;
And amending the constitution to remain in power until 2034.
It is difficult to detect in his actions the gestures of a Savior. All indications are that Paul Kagame was just an impostor who would have taken advantage of the massacre of his people to rise to the top of power.
It is in the interests of justice and national reconciliation that the recommendations of the united nations experts and the organisation of African unity, the current African Union, for an international investigation into the assassination of president habyarimana are being implemented. Thus the role of Paul Kagame would be clear in the interests of all Rwandans.