[allAfrica.com] Kagame Accused of "War Crimes"! Who is Next? The Monitor (Kampala) OPINION December 2, 2006 Posted to the web December 4, 2006 By Angelo Izama The French-Rwanda diplomatic fall-out over recurring allegations about the alleged role of the Tutsi-led Rwanda Patriotic Forces (RPF) in the '94 genocide is less about the truth of the mass killings and more about the power of suggestion in a world where ideology is the favoured frontline of traditional socio-economic competition. There is no debate that France and the new leaders of Rwanda are on competing sides of the politics in this grave-filled but resource-rich Great Lakes region. The contest for who is guiltier for the genocide is a dangerous extension of that competition and sadly obscures the political and economic challenges, which in Rwanda and elsewhere have been the cause of recurrent social crisis. It is apparent that both groups, as participants on opposite sides of the civil war in Rwanda which begun in 1990, have their own share of responsibility. However, because political correctness on the international stage or the right ideology in this sense can fetch one powerful friends and enemies alike, both are keen to avoid the blame for what happened. Today, labels like terrorist, fundamentalist, genocidaire, and war criminal are recognisable weapons in confronting both domestic and external enemies. The arena of conflict and its players (powerful western and greedy African elite) remains the same. Helpless citizens bear the brunt of this phoney focus. In recent times, being on the right side, for example on the "war on terror" has intensified continental conflicts, adding to the stagnation of economic potential and strengthening the hand of corrupt and dictatorial regimes and militia across the continent. Since the genocide in Rwanda, the dominant theme of "guilt" for the deaths of close to a million Tutsi and moderate Hutus has been framed in ideological and therefore politically correct terms. Anyone who opposes the Kigali regime is in danger of being labelled a genocidaire. There is a feeling among observers for example, that while the tragedy of the genocide in 1994 was a horrific event, Rwanda's politico-military elite has cleverly used this piece of human history to justify a repressive and xenophobic police state in Kigali. People who make this argument say a guilty West, constantly reminded of its lack of action while thousands were hacked, raped and burned to death, now instead pampers the Tutsi-dominated regime there. If critical voices are drowned within Rwanda and outside of it because of the memory of the genocide, valuable advice is lost and some myths maintained. This situation does not help the ethnic powder keg. Debunking myth One of the myths, which the French government is selfishly trying to debunk, is that the RPF are not a guilty party in genocide. The other is that that the west stood by and watched the killings. The involvement of Western governments in arming both sides predated the 100- day genocide. According to hearings in Paris, France even sent crack troops and ammunition to Rwanda after the genocide had begun. In fact one theory is that the French, together with Hutu hardliners, were willing to sacrifice President Juvenal Habyarimana and actually sponsored the shooting down of his plane, using Surface-to-Air-Missiles (SAM) captured during the first gulf war in Iraq. The version of French Judge Jean Louis Bruguiere, which has led to the severing of diplomatic ties, is another. Monsieur Bruguiere contends that the RPF, on the orders of then Maj. Paul Kagame downed the aircraft. He is supported in this by the Association of Defence Attorneys working for those accused of participating in the genocide at the UN tribunal in Arusha who say they have evidence from court testimony -- enough to pin Kagame and his colleagues for the Habyarimana shooting. Part of this evidence is reportedly that the SAM missiles were indeed captured from Iraq but this time by the Americans who through the CIA passed them to RPF soldiers through Uganda. It is alleged that the soldiers who fired the missiles, like Kagame and many others, had received elite military training in the USA. What separates the two stories is that they separately justify the "innocence" of either France or the RPF/A. Uganda, similar fate? This distinction is not an important one to make in the rebuilding phase of Rwanda and shows the limitations of "ideologically" rich solutions to African problems, including long standing conflicts such as the Tutsi-Hutu one. There are interesting parallels that can be drawn between the call for Maj. Gen. Kagame to face trial in a UN court in Arusha and the indictments of leaders of the Lords Resistance Army by the International Criminal Court - - another UN justice organ. It is not just that both involve accusations of genocide or that in each case a President representing allied western interests is accused of abuse of human rights [opposition politicians claim that while President Yoweri Museveni accuses the LRA of massacres, his army, too, is guilty of genocide in the north]. The remarkable similarity is that both cases are ongoing conflicts and that the involvement of a UN court, its attendant logic and opportunities for political players does not provide a solution and in fact stands to aggravate the situation. In Rwanda's case, the Bruguiere allegations stoke up tribal sentiments in a situation where the Hutu, a majority still, are attempting to gain political traction through armed insurgents in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It would not be surprising if the French are funnelling arms to former Habyarimana fighters who are still active there. It would also not be shocking either if intelligence support were being passed to the Hutu fighters through the French dominated UN force that is currently stationed in the DR Congo. An argument can be made that the Kigali regime, rather than face an international court, will now fortify itself and so would Gen. Museveni if the ICC prosecution were to be expanded to include him -- as wished by his detractors. But if the French are willing to risk another round of killings, it appears to be the same menu for elements in Uganda and elsewhere who are opposed to a pragmatic settlement of the Northern Uganda conflict. Current negotiations in the Southern Sudan town of Juba have stalled because the rebels want international warrants for their leaders lifted. They are also aware that sections of the Ugandan military would gladly resume hostilities. One solution would be an outright cash settlement and relocation of the rebels -- a strategy that has worked for some Ugandan rebel groups. But these options are being blurred by political correctness. The LRA have been labelled terrorists, supported by the fundamentalist regime of Gen. Omar el Bashir in Khartoum. Sources in Washington told me that the State Department is reluctant to touch the group -- even if it is clear that the rebel leaders would take a deal from any corner including of course from Khartoum. LRA honcho Vincent Otti captured the situation well in a conversation I had with him -- in an attempt to convince him to look to more local solutions and ignore the threat of the ICC. "You can't trust these African governments," he said. One weapon in conflict-resolution today is based on the justice principle. Here, UN tribunals whose influence is littered all over the Great Lakes region are urged to bring to book errant leaders on behalf of victims of abuse of human rights. So we have Kagame and the Arusha tribunal, Bashir and possible indictments at The Hague over Darfur, DR Congo and the ICC, Museveni and the ICC and so forth.But if these courts and international justice operates as just another weapon in the arsenal western states are using to bully local leaders -- as it appears in the case of Rwanda - then a lot more bloodshed awaits the continent. And the circle will continue! Friends of Rwanda in the region are better off insisting on social justice based upon a fair society where opportunities are available to all and where everyone must work to guarantee those opportunities. That justice will not be found in Arusha or Paris -- and their involvement should be limited as much as possible. =============================================================================== Copyright © 2006 The Monitor. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). ===============================================================================