Every Saturday morning one of Rwanda’s private radio stations carries a popular BBC programme known as Imvo n’Imvano. It is a syndicated talk show with target audiences among the Kinyarwanda and Kirundi speaking people of the Great Lakes region. A recent subject for discussion was particularly appealing: Were the Hutu, Tutsi, and Twa as ethnic identities a colonial invention or did colonialism find them here? The moderator was none other than the cantankerous Mr. Ally Yusuf Mugenzi. In the debate were five panelists drawn from three countries where the majority of the three groups reside. The first panelist was introduced as a Member of Parliament in the north Kivu Parliament and former ‘vice president of the Hutu.’ Then a former Senator, also from the DRC, was introduced and identified as a ‘member of the Tutsi community.’ The third panelist is the current spokesperson of Burundi’s ruling political party, the National Council for the Defense of Democracy (CNDD). I thought the selection of participants was strange. Ordinarily, participants in such a discussion should reflect the complexity of the question up for discussion. Would this not turn into a political discourse, I wondered. I shouldn’t be too quick to judge, I told myself. Then a forth panelist was introduced as a Rwandan living in London, without much being said about the basis for his selection in relation to what was to be discussed. To complete the lineup was a Rwandan researcher and author of a manuscript on the subject under consideration. My uneasiness increased. One after another, the panelists began to retreat to positions known to be politically driven. This transformed the debate into one critiquing the approaches to managing identity-based conflict in Burundi and Rwanda, and which one was more responsive and sustainable Most importantly, the discussion reinforced something fundamental about ethnicity and how it manifests itself in Africa. First, it revealed the role of elites in this manifestation. Secondly, it exposed the extent to which the elite are willing to go to drum-up real or perceived differences, while ignoring commonalities amongst groups. Take for instance when the moderator tasked the panelists to identify the differences between the Hutu and the Tutsi. This is when things became really interesting. Despite earlier protestations of ‘cultural’ differences, none could come up with the markers that distinguish the two groups. The debate cooled. The moderator pressed further. At this point one panelist gallantly proffered a difference: dance. Not satisfied, the moderator pushed for answers. More silence. Appearing stunned by the silence, the moderator raised a point of difference: naming. But of course there are no real differences in dance between the Hutu and Tutsi. Nuances that exist are more regional rather than ethnic. It is not surprising that the Hutu and Tutsi in the Kivus share cultural nuances with their counterparts in Ruhengeri, Gisenyi, Kibuye, and Cyangugu. The same is true when it comes to linguistic nuances. It goes without saying that what remained unsaid was what’s common among members of the communities under discussion. In fact, this commonality may well go beyond these groups. During a recent conference on peace and security in the Great Lakes region, the respected Tanzanian writer Jenerali Ulimwengu shared how astonished he was to find the same word for hippopotamus in Kinyarwanda, Kirundi, and Zulu is Imvubu. He went on to use this example to illustrate how unfortunate it is that we have not invested anything in knowledge generation that would help reduce some of these gaps in understanding of who we are in relation to our neighbors. Instead, the cultural brokers have taken charge. They seek to gain from drumming up real or perceived differences. It is the only way to make sense of the claim that someone is a president of the Hutu or Tutsi. This is their meal ticket; the people are their metaphoric stairs to the proverbial kingdom of political power. When it comes to the Hutu and Tutsi, this game assumes a life of its own, often leading to tragic consequences. If we do what Jenerali suggests above, we shall find that we have no enemies to fight, only cousins. One hopes that this realisation would, once and for all, put a stop to the senseless conflicts and wars. Presumably this would make some people very unhappy.