0
0
On 7th April 2024, Rwandans and the whole world commemorated, for the 30th time, the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. On that day, the government of Rwanda received many solidarity messages from around the world. While most messages were appreciated by Rwandans, who welcomed their enhanced moral clarity on the terminology, one controversial message created a storm on social media.
This was a post on X (former Twitter) by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken,, who expressed the solidarity of his government with the people of Rwanda “in remembering the victims of genocide”, mourning “the many thousands of Tutsi, Hutus, Twas, and others whose lives were lost during 100 days of unspeakable violence”. I will not dwell much on the deflated number of victims (“many thousands”), I will only react on the nomenclature used in the message.
First, according to the 1948 Genocide Convention, genocide is a crime committed “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”. This means that this crime, unlike crimes against humanity or war crimes, requires a special intent, as it must be committed against members of a specific group, targeted for who they are, with the intent to erase them from the face of the earth.
Therefore, based on this definition, it is impossible that the genocide in Rwanda could have targeted “Tutsis, Hutus, Twas, and others” altogether, unless Secretary Blinken suggests that 1) there were three separate genocides – one against each group -, or 2) a single genocide against the Rwandan national group, which would mean that the victims were targeted, not for their “ethnicity” but for their Rwandan nationality. And we know that both options are historically untrue.
Second, the crime of genocide in a specific place needs to be established by a court of law. For the case of Rwanda, genocide was established by the Trial Chamber of the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in its very first judgment “Akayesu” of 2nd September 1998. In this judgement, the Tribunal concluded that “the crime of genocide was indeed committed in Rwanda in 1994 against the Tutsi as a group”. Eight years later, in a judicial notice dated 16 June 2006, the ICTR Appeals Chamber confirmed all previous judgements by ruling that it was a “fact of common knowledge” that “there was a genocide in Rwanda against the Tutsi ethnic group”.
This judicial notice settled, once and for all, the legal debate on the qualification of the crime that was committed in Rwanda in 1994 – it was a genocide – and on the group that was targeted – it was the Tutsi ethnic group.
Third, the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda was also recognized by the UN. This crime was first recognized by the Security Council, through Resolution 2150 of 16 April 2014, and then recognized by the General Assembly in a Decision of 26 January 2018 and a Resolution of 20 April 2020, in which the General Assembly “[reaffirmed] 7 April as the International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda”.
These are facts, this is the international law and this is the constant jurisprudence of international jurisdictions, which should be respected by all countries, including the most powerful.
To conclude, an established crime of genocide cannot be mentioned in isolation, without adding the targeted group. We can’t just say “Genocide in Rwanda” or “Rwandan Genocide” because that would be incomplete and misleading. We should, as defined by the Genocide Convention, as established by the ICTR and as recognized by the UN, always mention the group that was targeted to be destroyed as such. And in the case of Rwanda, this group was the “Tutsi ethnic group”.
Actually, Secretary Blinken had understood it very well when he tweeted, in July 2022, a message about the Holocaust Remembrance, informing that President Joe Biden, while in Yad Vashem, had “laid a wreath to honor the memories of the 6 million Jewish people who were killed during the Holocaust”, without feeling the need to add “Germans, Polish, Catholics and others”.
And this is how this should be for all genocides, including the 1994 Genocide perpetrated against the Tutsi.
The author is the ambassador of Rwanda to the Netherlands and a former Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2010-2015)
