For more than 10 years, Rusesabagina fashioned himself as a critic of the government of Rwanda in general and President Paul Kagame in particular. He would go around inventing lies, using his Hollywood popularity to draw crowds, and exploiting the ignorance of his audience about Rwanda and Africa. But these lies were not producing the effect Rusesabagina has hoped for: to discredit the leadership in Rwanda. He got frustrated and took to terrorism. “The time has come for us to use any means possible to bring about change in Rwanda, as all political means have been tried and failed,” Rusesabagina said in his recorded declaration of war, signaling his frustration. Being a “critic” was no longer enough for him. This turn for the worst is documented in a New York Times article by author Joshua Hummer titled “He was a Hero of ‘Hotel Rwanda. Now He’s Accused of terrorism.” Those who are sympathetic to Rusesabagina say that it is Kagame who drove him to frustration and ultimately to terrorism. They don’t deny that Rusesabagina took that path; they simply attempt to shift responsibility from him to someone else. Rusesabagina has since been convicted. The mountain of evidence was so overwhelming that those who used to claim his innocence have now turned to pleading that he be released on “humanitarian grounds” because he apparently suffers from hypertension. But terrorists seem to suffer from one sickness or another. At the time of Osama Bin Laden’s execution, it was reported that he was suffering from diabetes, among others ailments. However, no one ever said that he deserved mercy on humanitarian grounds, especially because the pain and suffering these terror masterminds cause remains with the families of the victims for a lifetime. In Rusesabagina’s case, nine people lost their lives and survivors remain traumatized. Some have injuries they will never heal from. If there was any humanitarian appeal, it should go to these survivors not the person responsible for their suffering. It is on this basis that the American congresswoman, Omar Ilhan appealed to her colleagues to see Rusesabagina for who he is: a terrorist. The Rusesabagina lobby also appears to have squared with the reality of the man they are defending although they, especially the children, can be forgiven for defending a loved one despite their guilt. They - Carine and Anais Kanimba- love their father. They couldn’t care less for the lives he ruined. However, they should know that the victims also had parents and that they demand for the opposite of what Carine and Anais demand: justice. The justice system exists to ensure that those who have been wronged do not suffer twice by getting their tormentor off the hook. But even as Rusesabagina’s daughters have, for the sake of credibility, toned down the claims that their father is innocent and are now also pleading for mercy, they are going about it the wrong way. This week they published an article in the Daily Mirror with the title “Exclusive: Arsenal’s Visit Rwanda sponsorship and the dark side to a hideous sportswashing agenda.” The article is entirely dedicated to slandering the only person vested with the authority to extend mercy to convicts: President Kagame. The article is also selfish. It attempts to blackmail Arsenal and Paris St Germain as a means to pressure Rwanda to release their father. They claim that these clubs are “risking their proud histories and reputation” by associating themselves with Rwanda. This can only be true if they assume that their vilification campaign has been successful. However, the facts contradict their assumption, and Rwanda’s good reputation precedes it. Its record in health - whether universal insurance, Covid response, even on the administration of vaccines - is exemplary. In security, Rwanda is celebrated for its peacekeeping missions and has been signing bilateral agreements with many African countries as a vote of confidence. There are many areas, but these suffice to say that Rwanda does not need to whitewash its image politically. However, Rwanda surely needs money from tourism. Rusesabagina understood this. This understanding is the reason why his FLN terror grouping deliberately targeted innocent civilians around a touristic area as a means to undermine this sector and discourage tourists from going about their business. The daughters are now walking in their father’s footsteps by attempting to undermine the Visit Rwanda campaign. Lest we forget, it is failure to achieve his objectives through slander and propaganda that frustrated their father into terrorism; it is now frustrating them, too. It is a masterstroke that a country without much natural resources and with no access to the sea can turn to tourism as a cash cow so much so that one year later “Rwanda’s tourism revenue increased by 17 percent and tourists from Europe increased by 22 per cent,” as Carine’s own article concedes. Only such bold steps can get the country from being among the most impoverished. Unless Carine and Anais, in their sadism that ignores the plight of the victims of their father, want also to see ordinary Rwandans remain impoverished. But for tourism to thrive, an environment free of terror is essential. This is the only rational link between Rusesabagina and Arsenal or PSG.
