As Rwanda commemorates the 21st Liberation Day, achievements gained thus far can, to a significant extent, be attributed to the struggle that prepared the ground. Yet, it is not so much about the achievements, but what has sustained them two decades down the road. And, while it has not all been perfect, the legacy of the Liberation struggle has been dependent on the people. Rwanda has often stood out on issues of governance, helping to meet demands for public welfare. Experience from across Africa suggests that one needs to savour the fruitful outcome of a struggle to understand just how much liberation means to those who have trodden the long road to achieve it. Rwanda is among the few post-conflict countries on the continent that have actually delivered the aspirations of peace and popular participation in a national stance that delivers welfare to its citizens. There certainly is commitment to economic development, seeking to establish conditions amenable for private sector investment, even as it provides infrastructure and other basic services. But it is all about the people, of which explicit strategies for national integration and reconciliation have been articulated that must remain at the fore towards national development. Evidence abounds that the economy matters for sustainable peace. But while economic policies are important as a means of building peace, they are effective up to a certain point and need to be complemented by other policies that maintain the peace. Living in harmony is the essence of personal and national development, and is a socio-cultural and political process for self-rediscovery towards a dignified life. As research consistently shows, recovery is a process of socioeconomic transformation and not the mere restoration of past structures and dynamics, or a simple return to pre-conflict levels and trends. It is Rwanda’s testament that recovery is multidimensional and takes time. The extent to which the country is still “recovering” from conflict must be determined in the light of progress in all sectors of development. The story of liberation speaks of recovery policy that must begin with a robust understanding of homegrown drivers of recovery. With a little help from outside, Rwandans take charge of their lives with determination and ingenuity in resuming or developing new economic activities. With this it is also understood that recovery is likely to be more sustainable if it is grounded in the full understanding of these social dynamics and institutional processes, and if it fosters local capacities and initiatives. The story of liberation also speaks of policymakers who must take the special circumstances of their situations into account while successfully formulating and implementing policies to support socio-economic recovery at home. At the same time, they should be eager to draw lessons from other countries in order to shape their own policy responses and avoid unnecessary pitfalls. Rwanda has occasionally been cited to show how post-conflict political and institutional environment can be an important factor in recovery. According to economists, if a country emerges from conflict more politically stable or better governed than before, the capital stock in the final steady state (and economic growth in the transition) are likely to surpass pre-conflict levels. Twenty-one years down the road, Rwanda is in the “steady state”, and is reaping from the legacy of the Liberation struggle. And, as I began by positing, it is not so much about the achievements, but what has sustained them. The favourable political climate and a happy, contented populace underscore the commitment to national development. Therefore, the legacy of the Liberation struggle thrives on the people.
