Continued from Part 3. 3.4. The Tutsi, “authors of their own genocide” At the ICTR, Reyntjens repeatedly and vigorously attempted to convince the judges that the war started by the RPF was the direct cause of the genocide. He insisted that the RPF was responsible for the genocide that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of relatives of RPF members living in Rwanda. On 14 October 1997, Reyntjens appeared before the ICTR as an expert witness for the prosecution in the case of Georges Rutaganda, the Interahamwe militia’s second vice-president at the national level. Reyntjens used his position to deny the intentional nature of the genocide against the Tutsi ethnic group: “If there had been no war, there would have been no genocide,” adding that the RPF was “politically co-responsible for the genocide”. On 25 July 2005, in an interview with the newspaper POLITICS, Reyntjens vehemently accused the Rwandan head of state of responsibility for the very genocide he had fought to stop. He portrayed him as someone for whom the genocide meant nothing: “Kagame deliberately developed a strategy of tension; it was he who set the Hutu extremists on the path to genocide. The extermination of the Tutsi living in Rwanda was for him merely a tactical calculation to enable him to seize power. Confirmation of this hypothesis would make the RPF and its leader legally responsible for the 1994 genocide.” He repeated this absurd thesis in numerous publications and public statements: “When one of the judges asked whether there would have been genocide if there had been no war, my answer was that, in my opinion, there would have been no genocide without the war, and that in this sense the RPF was politically co-responsible for the genocide. I emphasized that this joint responsibility is political or historical, not legal. I maintain this point of view.” 3.5. The Tutsi as instigators of Hutu violence The accusation that the Tutsi provoked the Hutu into committing massacres, suggesting that the Hutu carried out the genocide in “self-defence”, is another recurring theme in Filip Reyntjens’ discourse. In June 1997, the Flemish magazine Wereldwild brought together Filip Reyntjens, Father Guy Theunis and Colette Braeckman to discuss Rwanda. The remarks made by Reyntjens and Theunis were intensely hostile, portraying the Tutsi as the principal provocateurs and the Hutu as supposedly peaceful. Let us revisit some of the questions and answers from this interview: Question: “In 1959, during the Hutu Social Revolution, did the Church betray the Tutsi?” Braeckman: “It was perceived as a betrayal. The Church changed course; it gave priority to the claims of the Hutu. This, moreover, corresponded to the political agenda of the colonial power, against which the Tutsi were rising up.” Reyntjens: “We should not present the Tutsi only as victims. One of the reasons for the revolution was precisely the inflexibility of a very small class of Tutsi, not the Tutsi in general. There were Tutsi who wanted democratization. (...) The Tutsi suffered violence, they were exiled. But they were not only victims. They pursued a policy of resistance to change.” Theunis: “It is a constant. The Hutu are generally peaceful. They wanted a non-violent evolution. Violence always comes from the same side. From only one side.” Question: “What does that mean?” Theunis: “On the side of the Tutsi. It is always the Tutsi who provoke, who in one way or another spoil things.” Question: “In recent months, there has been talk of a new dictatorship in Kigali. Some speak of persecution of the Church?” Reyntjens: “I do not mince my words. The Kigali regime is a brutal military dictatorship. I understand that there may be reasons for this. Rwanda is in a total deadlock. This deadlock produces so much violence that there is no longer any way out.” This excerpt shows how Reyntjens and Father Theunis employ language filled with hatred, racism, discrimination and denialism. The interview, conducted by Belgian journalists Guy Goris and Marc Van Laere, was translated into French and English and published by French- and English-language publications, including African News Bulletin/Bulletin d’informations africaines, owned by the White Fathers. The White Fathers, in turn, disseminated it through their information networks worldwide, including in Belgium, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, Canada and the United States, as well as numerous countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America where they maintain missions. 3.6. ICTR clarifications on the distinction between the war and the genocide In its first judgment, delivered on 2 September 1998 in the case against Jean-Paul Akayesu, the ICTR clarified the relationship between the war and the genocide, establishing the Genocide against the Tutsi as a distinct crime: “It is clear that the massacres that occurred in Rwanda in 1994 targeted a specific objective: that of exterminating the Tutsi, chosen specifically because of their membership in the Tutsi ethnic group (...) It is a genocide that was committed in Rwanda in 1994, against the Tutsi as a group.” The ICTR went on to draw a clear distinction between the armed conflict involving the RPF and the FAR, on the one hand, and the planning and execution of the genocide, on the other: “Parallel to the conflict, a genocide against the Tutsi group was indeed carried out (...) the execution of this genocide may have been facilitated by the conflict, in the sense that the fighting against the RPF forces was used as a pretext for propaganda inciting the genocide against the Tutsi, conflating RPF combatants with Tutsi civilians, reinforced by the widely disseminated media idea that every Tutsi was a collaborator of the Inkotanyi. (...) It is important to emphasize that the genocide against the Tutsi, although it occurred concurrently with the aforementioned conflict, is obviously fundamentally different in nature from that conflict.” In 2006, in the Karemera case, the ICTR established that the genocide committed against the Tutsi was a matter of common knowledge that was not subject to dispute: “The genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda is a matter of public knowledge that is part of world history. There is no reasonable basis for anyone to deny that in 1994 there was a campaign of mass killings aimed at destroying, in whole or in large part, the Tutsi population of Rwanda. Although the exact number cannot be known, the vast majority of Tutsis in Rwanda were murdered, and many others were raped or otherwise abused. These facts were widely known even at the time the tribunal was established (in November 1994), as reflected in the (UN) Security Council resolution establishing the tribunal.” 3.7. The Security Council condemns genocide denial and calls for action against FDLR leaders The UN Security Council has recognised the danger of genocide denial and the importance of preserving the memory of the Genocide against the Tutsi. On 16 April 2014, it adopted Resolution 2150, reaffirming the established facts of the genocide, expressing concern about its denial and the impunity of its perpetrators, and calling on Member States to uphold remembrance and justice, including by investigating and prosecuting FDLR leaders accused of genocide. The resolution states: “(...) There is overwhelming evidence that acts of genocide were committed against the Tutsi group (...); Recalling that the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has made a judicial finding that it is ‘a matter of common knowledge’ that ‘between 6 April and 17 July 1994, genocide was committed in Rwanda against the Tutsi ethnic group’, Recalling also that more than one million people were killed in this genocide, (...) and noting with concern any form of denial of this genocide; “Stresses the importance of learning the lessons of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda; Condemns unequivocally any denial of this genocide and urges Member States to establish educational programs to ensure that the lessons of the genocide are passed on to future generations, with a view to preventing future genocides; “Welcomes the efforts made by Member States to investigate and prosecute all persons accused of this genocide; Calls upon all States (...) to investigate the facts and to arrest, prosecute or extradite, in accordance with their international obligations in this regard, all other fugitives accused of genocide who are residing in their territory, including the leaders of the FDLR.” These decisions have the force of res judicata. This is the truth that must be remembered, yet Reyntjens continues to distort it whenever he chooses. To be continued in Part 5. The writer is the Minister of National Unity and Civic Engagement. This article was first published in Dialogue magazine, Special Edition No. 211, “The Prolonged Genocide”.
