In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

The Contingent Genocide Thierry Cruvellier Probably no mass crime on the African continent has been the subject of so many books, research papers, reports, documentaries, and even fictional accounts as the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Thirteen years after the extermination campaign against the Tutsi minority in this tiny Central African country, the stream of books and films has hardly dried out. Yet no other coverage, research, or literature on such a highprofile event in African history seems to have been so filled with ideological arguments, political polarization, ready-made ideas, and untested ‘‘truths.’’ Against this background , Scott Straus’s The Order of Genocide comes as an exceptional work of public and intellectual health. ‘‘Methods matter,’’ warns Straus from the beginning. Indeed, The Order of Genocide reads as a methodical, systematic, and disarmingly courteous enterprise to test (and undermine) nearly all of the most widespread theories explaining the crime committed in 1994 in Rwanda. No other serious writer has ever undertaken to question and evaluate with such good faith and such impeccable rigor the evidence and interpretations on what led to the genocide of the Tutsis and how it occurred. The importance of Straus’s book is straightforward: from now on, it will be essential reading for anyone who intends to write on the 1994 genocide. The decisive impact of Straus’s book is that it is based on unique fact collection and field research. Straus interviewed a total of 230 genocide perpetrators, including 210 convicted génocidaires who had pleaded guilty. In addition, he conducted a microcomparative study in five different parts of the country. His fieldwork was highly methodical and of rare scale, and so was his examination of existant research. Hardly any writing on Rwanda is not taken into account, given notice or consideration, either in the text of the book or in its bibliography. In fact, for the sake of being scrupulous, transparent, and fair, Straus may sometimes appear to accord too much importance or respectability to works that do not necessarily deserve it. If, as he writes, ‘‘what often distinguishes scholarship from journalism is the systematic collection and analysis of evidence’’ (xi), some of the works to which he makes several references in his book should probably be given less weight (Melvern) or simply be ignored (Scherrer).1 But Straus seems to be determined to show as much method as good manners on a subject that has sadly lacked both. Not every finding comes as an absolute surprise, of course. Other serious scholars have stated before Straus, for instance, that without a war, genocide would not have happened in Rwanda. But The Order of Genocide provides unparalleled and compelling evidence to support the analysis. ‘‘War underpinned the logic of genocide, war legitimized killing, war empowered hardliners, and war led specialists in violence to engage the domestic political arena,’’ Straus concludes from his research (7). He also concludes that genocide would not likely have happened if President Juvénal Habyarimana had not been assassinated on 6 April 1994. Again, this is not an extraordinary finding in itself. But what Straus’s work does here—as on so many other issues—is to make such points based on strong and systematic fact-finding and rich and transparent analysis, safely immune to the heavily ideological debate over Rwanda. Thierry Cruvellier, ‘‘The Contingent Genocide,’’ Genocide Studies and Prevention 2, 3 (November 2007): 271–274. ß 2007 Genocide Studies and Prevention. doi: 10.3138/gsp.2.3.271 The charts showing the speed of the killing are even more stunning. Reference to the ‘‘hundred days’ genocide’’ has become a common expression and a seemingly powerful way to describe ‘‘the fastest genocide in history.’’ Yet this may well be understated, as Straus’ research highlights an even more mind-boggling two-week period in which a great proportion of the killing was completed, once it began in one part of Rwanda. Other charts on the average age, education, and paternity rates of perpetrators are similarly astonishing. Then come more surprises. The weight given in so much of the literature to the role of the media, to the alleged ‘‘culture of obedience,’’ and to perpetrators’ greed is found to be significantly exaggerated as an explanation...

pdf

Share