US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has just left Kigali. The anticipated (by Congolese people) visit of US Secretary of State to Rwanda regrettably began on August 11th. First on Antony Bilken’s agenda was an audience with Rwandan President Paul Kagame. Blinken, likely as an intimidation attempt that doubled as pandering to our neighbours across lake Kivu, had claimed over the past few weeks that said audience would involve raising “American concerns” over the detention of Paul Rusesabagina, whose resume includes terrorism, the extortion of Tutsi genocide survivors who sought refuge in his hotel from the genocidaires, and brazen plagiarism of Schindler’s List. Needless to say, the strong-arming attempt failed, and Rwanda’s footing on Rusesabagina remained cemented into place. The terrorist is guilty, therefore he will serve his sentence; something admittedly incomprehensible to Secretary of State Blinken: in his country, bombs are sent to murder terrorists (or leaders they find problematic – re: Gaddafi) in their homes beyond US borders and sovereignty. But if Blinken was unaware that things work differently in Rwanda prior to his visit, I believe he has now been updated. During his short stay, Blinken deployed a few interesting tricks. Blinken arrived in Rwanda informed as we all are. He arrived at Urugwiro Village, the Rwandan Presidency, and later the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as briefed as we all are, on the overwhelming evidence that the man he was to champion was a liar, a crook, and greedy enough to be lured into capture by the sight of a private jet and the offering of champagne. He knew, for he has been made privy to the evidence against Rusesabagina, that the man he describes as “wrongfully detained”, is a criminal that his own country ought to have assisted Rwanda in capturing, had they an ounce of the decency they simulate. While he blamed a timing issue for his declining of a meeting with Rusesabagina’s victims, this intentional avoidance is merely a declaration of guilt. Secretary Blinken is aware that he is guilty of demanding the release of a harmful criminal, which ought to be considered support of terrorism – an actual universal crime. You would think this alarming enough and yet...there was indeed worse to come. I don’t think that the issue with the US top diplomat’s visit was the displaying of ignorance, or even hypocrisy. Blinken’s actions were intentional, and the intentions in question are a mystery to none. The age of America convincing the world that their involvement in foreign affairs is purely morality-based is far and gone. Whatever residue of faith persisted after George Bush lied about mass destruction weapons existing in oil-rich Iraq, as an excuse to invade the country and cause decade-long instability, was exhausted during the Barrack Obama years. Obama, who ran a successful campaign by feigning an impeccable moral core (which I suppose Americans did want to see in him to prove they were not racist) positioned himself as anti-war, only to line the pockets of gun lobbyists and drop bombs on innocent Syrian children when elected. As Antony Blinken will recall, having served as Obama’s close aide for years, the Obama Administration orchestrated the assassination of an African leader on African soil, despite the full awareness that it would send Libya and the entire region into deathly, dehumanizing turmoil. So frankly, I am dazed and amazed that a single American, State official or not, would think their act convincing when claiming to have the interests of the Africans they so casually kill at heart. As mentioned earlier, this is not the issue. The issue is that familiar as I may be with cowardice and shiftiness, on a man with so much power, it absolutely astounds me. In fact, it even terrifies me. What sort of person operates with so little...dignity? Rwandans have seen firsthand the dangers of lacking dignity. To lack human dignity is to be one step away from tolerating one’s own dehumanization, or the dehumanization of a brother. And once that tap is open, it can run endlessly, with blood. Blinken stood in front of Rwandan journalists at a press conference at Minaffet and, in between misnaming the terrorist he claims to so badly want to defend and dancing around a question about meeting the survivors of Rusesabagina’s crimes, made his impatience with insistence on the facts around the terrorist’s guilt evident. Then there are the double-standards he shamelessly deployed at the Kigali Genocide Memorial, where he purposely denied Tutsi Genocide victims the decency of acknowledging their history. He reduced a 100-day massacre that has been established by the UN and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda among others, as a Genocide with one distinct ethnic target, to a mere ‘violence’. To put this into perspective, to deem the Genocide Against the Tutsi to be random “violence” could be equated to calling the Holocaust “years of conflict”. An extermination attempt is not conflict. It is the culmination of decades of ethnic hatred that should be addressed as such, to allow the victims healing by establishing an accurate diagnosis of their wounding. It also is the only means of preventing a reoccurrence of the disease; one cannot effectively manage their diabetes if convinced they in fact have asthma. Blinken knows all this better than I do. So why would he intentionally refuse victims their right to healing, and to the pre-94 cancer not re-emerging? Well. For the same reason him and the team that drafted the message he left at the memorial chose to use the right appellation for the horror his ancestry has known (“Holocaust”) right above the referral of the Tutsi Genocide as “violence”. This reason is racism, and this time I’m afraid it is undebatable. Whoever drafted that message made, and of this I am deeply convinced, the choice to remind us Africans that we do not deserve to have our humanity acknowledged on the same footing as that of white people. What I wish those that strive to establish a ranking in human worth understood, is that they dishonor themselves more than they do their desired victims, by refusing to recognize our entitlement to common decency. Blinken will come to Africa to defend the interests of people who likely believe that his ancestors did deserve gas chambers. neo-Nazis are marching through the streets of America with their chests held high. And victim as he may perceive himself to be, he has shown this past Kigali visit, that there is much less difference between those neo-Nazis and himself than he might think. Fortunately, as H.E President Kagame stated, things don’t happen like this here. Try as “they” may, they will never re-spark the hate that led to the 94 blood spill. I suppose they’re going to have to find another way to justify or increase their presence in resource-rich Kivu but that’s a story for another day, I’m afraid. The views expressed in this article are of the writer.