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

157 7 Alliances That Bind— and Divide, 1919– 1922 Belgian Rule and the Court Inkomezi yacyaane ica imigozí [To pull too hard breaks the bonds] In the atmosphere of superficial cordiality that followed the Belgian decision to restore power to the Court and notables, Musinga and his representatives agreed to participate in a referendum meant to ascertain their preference of colonial administration. The Belgian Colonial Ministry organized the referendum in November 1918. As Woodrow Wilson’s ideas about the self-determination of peoples gained currency among the diplomats who were dividing up the spoils of war in Europe, the ministry was anxious to be able to present evidence of the Rwandan desire for continued Belgian rule. First Musinga pledged his loyalty to Bula Matari, as the Belgian administration was known.* Then the notables in *The term “Bula Matari” means literally “The Breaker of Rocks.” It originally applied to Henry Morton Stanley’s brutal conduct toward Africans as he forced workers to build the railway from the Atlantic coast to Léopoldville. But it became the general term applied to Belgian administration by Africans in the Congo. The fact that Rwandans also used the term “Bula Matari” to apply to colonial power only underscores the extent to which many colonial policies introduced in Rwanda originated (directly or indirectly) in Léopoldville, the administrative capital of the Belgian Congo. There were distinctions between the two colonial jurisdictions: as former German territories, Burundi and Rwanda were legally “Mandated Territories” under the League of Nations (and, after World War II, “Trusteeship Territories” under the United Nations); this gave them a the various regions solemnly declared their devotion to the Belgians, in their most elegant language. As one of the missionaries who observed the proceedings remarked, the Rwandans had no choice. Only one particularly bold notable declared that he was indifferent about which Europeans advised the Court, so long as none were Christian.1 Presumably his vote was not recorded in Europe. The Ambiguities of Indirect Rule As the Rwandans were proclaiming their loyalty to the Belgians, the Belgians were undertaking an even more significant commitment to the Court and notables. The Belgians were allocated control over Rwanda by the Orts-Milner Convention of 30 May 1919, although the formalities related to its status as a mandate territory under the League of Nations were not completed until 1924.2 Once the convention had guaranteed Belgian rule in Rwanda, the Colonial Ministry had to decide on a policy for administering the kingdom. Dissatisfied with the results of earlier direct administration in the Congo, and impressed by the economy and efficiency of the British administration in Uganda, the Ministry chose an approach of “indirect rule.”* Ministry officials optimistically 158 Alliances That Bind—and Divide, 1919–1922 distinct status from direct colonial rule. Jointly, Burundi and Rwanda also had their own “Vice Gouverneur.” While officially he served under the governor-general in Léopoldville, in practice he exercised considerable autonomy, reporting directly to the Belgian Minister of Colonies. In addition, many administrators and policymakers who served in Burundi and Rwanda had long experience in those territories; they developed a strong esprit de corps and were often acutely sensitive to the structural and historical differences between Burundi and Rwanda, on the one hand, and Congolese societies, on the other. Nonetheless, Congo remained the dominant concern of Belgian administrators, and many of the colonial policies drawn up for Congo also influenced the concepts and implementation of policy in Burundi and Rwanda. The use of the term “Bula Matari” in Rwanda alludes to this factor. *Many of these policies were instituted by Louis Frank, an influential Minister of Colonies of the Christian Liberal political party, and implemented by GovernorGeneral Maurice Lippens (until early 1923). As noted above, there was a complex relationship between Belgian colonial policy in the Congo and the policies implemented in Rwanda and Burundi; as Mandated Territories under the League of Nations (and later as Trusteeship Territories under the United Nations) these two territories were neither directly under the colonial governor-general, nor entirely autonomous administrative spheres. However, whatever the formal legal status might be, within Belgian politics Congo carried much greater administrative weight than did Rwanda-Urundi, and policy in Congo often influenced policy in the Mandated Territories. [3.144.36.141] Project MUSE (2024-04-25 14:26 GMT) predicted that Rwanda could be administered easily through its “natural ” rulers, with the subtle guidance of the colonial power, since it was one of the rare “nations...

Share