Remaking Rwanda: State Building and Human Rights after Mass Violence

1. Limitations to Political Reform: The Undemocratic Nature of Transition in Rwanda

25  1 Limitations to Political Reform The Undemocratic Nature of Transition in Rwanda timothy longman For much of the international community, post-genocide Rwanda stands as a glowing story of successful postwar reconstruction. The journalist Stephen Kinzer (2008) argues that Rwanda has “rebelled against its destiny. It has recovered from civil war and genocide more fully than anyone imagined possible and is united, stable, and at peace. Its leaders are boundlessly ambitious. Rwandans are bubbling over with a sense of unlimited possibility” (1–2). Diplomats and businesspeople praise the high level of competence displayed by civil servants and the government’s strong commitment to economic development (Chu 2009). International church and school groups now regularly visit Rwanda to learn about reconciliation and contribute to the country’s reconstruction (Smith 2009; Van Eyck 2009; Lerner 2009). Rwanda’s supposed remarkable recovery is generally credited to the postgenocide government led by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). Many observers heap particular praise on Paul Kagame, president of Rwanda since 2000. Shortly after the genocide, New Yorker writer Philip Gourevitch praised Kagame (then vice president) as a new type of African leader, both competent 26 L i m i t a t i o n s t o P o l i t i c a l R e f o r m and democratic, and such praise has only increased over time (Gourevitch 1997). Kinzer (2008, 337) writes: Two things about President Kagame are evident to all who consider his situation honestly. First, he has accomplished something truly remarkable. The contrast between where Rwanda is today and where most people would have guessed it would be today in the wake of the 1994 genocide is astonishing. Second, Kagame is the man of the hour in modern Africa. The eyes of all who hope for a better Africa are upon him. As this volume suggests, the image drawn by numerous scholars and human rights activists is at sharp variance with this generally positive view of Rwanda. Johan Pottier (2002) has effectively studied the RPF’s savvy manipulation of the international media to promote a restricted narrative about Rwanda’s recent history that paints the RPF in a heroic light. According to Pottier (2002, 51): Rwanda’s RPF-led regime has views about the past, present and future which are being propagated via a wide range of intersecting channels: academic outlets, diplomatic activity, media broadcasting, policymaking for refugees and the writing of rural development policy. Outsiders unfamiliar with the intricate interplay of local, national, regional and international dynamics have ended up “feeling inspired ” by the remarkable consistency with which Rwanda’s post-genocide leaders have spoken about society, history and economy. In this essay, I explore one aspect of Rwanda’s supposed miracle of recovery, the ostensible transition to democratic rule. Beginning in 1999, Rwanda’s postgenocide government began to organize elections, starting at the local level and culminating in 2003 with presidential and parliamentary elections. Many observers praised the RPF and its leader for courageously implementing a transition to democracy less than a decade after the genocide. In a recent Time magazine profile of one hundred of “the world’s most influential individuals,” Reverend Rick Warren, one of America’s best-known evangelical preachers, applauded Kagame for having “successfully modeled the transition from soldier to statesman,” and praised “his willingness to listen to and learn from those who oppose him” (Warren 2009). Based on an analysis of the elements that are widely recognized to constitute democratic governance, Rwanda continues to fall far short of the standards of liberal democracy. In the post-genocide era, Rwanda has made a transition from one type of authoritarian regime to another. The RPF regime has systematically intimidated, co-opted, and suppressed civil society, so that Rwanda today lacks independent social organizations capable of articulating most pub- T i m o t h y L o n g m a n 27 lic interests. The regime tolerates very little public criticism, strictly limiting freedoms of speech, press, and association. Political parties are restricted and intimidated, while constraints and manipulation of the electoral process have prevented elections from being truly free and fair. Defenders of the RPF regime simultaneously deny these criticisms and claim that restrictions on freedoms are necessary for national unity, given the history of genocide, and that benign authoritarian rule is necessary for economic development, their top priority . Rwanda’s persistent authoritarian...