Jihoon, MOON
Szu-Chieh, CHEN
International Relation
2013, 06, 19


Outline
 What is “Humanitarian intervention” ?
 Historical background of the Rwanda
 The trigger of the Rwanda genocide
 Major events
 The responses from international
 Operation Turquoise
 Society criticism
 Conclusion

Humanitarian Intervention
 An armed intervention in a state, without that state’s consent, to address (the threat of) a humanitarian disaster, in particular caused by grave and large-scale violations of fundamental human rights.

By the early 1990s, Rwanda, a small country with an overwhelmingly agricultural economy, had one of the highest population densities in
Africa.

Historical background of the Rwanda
 Population :
Hutu (84%)
Tutsi (15%)
Twa (1%)

Historical background of the Rwanda
 1894 : Rwanda becomes part of German east
 1916 : Belgian occupation
 1959 : a hutu revolution
 1961 : victorious hutu had forced Rwanda ’ s tutsi monarch into exile and declared the country a republic

 1962 : Belgium officially granted independence to Rwanda
 1973 : a military group installed major general juvenal habyarimana, a moderate hutu, in power. Founded a new political party, the national revolutionary movement for development (NRMD).

Historical background of the Rwanda
 1978 : juvenal habyarimana was elected president
 1990 : forces of the Rwandan patriotic front (RPF), consisting mostly of tutsi refugees, invaded Rwanda from
Uganda
 1993 : habyarimana signed an agreement at Arusha,
Tanzania

The trigger of Rwanda genocide
 On April 6 1996 , The plane carrying Rwanda ’ s president was shot down.
 Hutu extremists had taken over the government

 Blamed the tutsis for the assassination
 Genocide began

The Genocide
 The hutu extremist radio – RTLM, and also the state supported radio – Radio Rwanda, encouraged the mass murder of the “ cockroaches.
” These cockroaches weretutsis and hutu moderates

The Genocide
 Most victim were killed in their own villages and towns by neighbors usually by being hacked to death by machetes.
 Rape was also used as a weapon during the Genocide, up to 500,000 tutsi women were raped.

The Genocide
 An estimated 10,000 people were murdered each day
 An estimated 800,000 people were murdered in the course of roughly 100days, most of whom were tutsis.
 400,000 children were left orphans

 。

The responses to the Genocide

should we help? Maybe?
 Denial of the word “ Genocide”
 On 6 May, New Zealand proposed a draft resolution to create a new UN force to protect civilians in Rwanda.
Rejected by USA
 Authorizing UNAMIR 5500 troops with a mandate to provide humanitarian assistance.
USA narrows down the number to hundreds

The responses to the Genocide

No one helps! We have to do something
 9 countries came forward with offers of troops for the deployment of UNAMIR Ⅱ .
 Lack of equipment, heavy lift support, and costs
The result – the equipment didn’t arrive until the end of June and it then took a further month for the vehicles to arrive.
More Rwandans are dead…

The responses to the Genocide

we cannot help with it
 Avoiding a repeat of Somalia, 1993
 No vital interests in Rwanda
 Military personnel could not be sent to trouble spot

The responses to the Genocide

we want to help!!!
 Has political and military involvement in Rwanda
 Supporting the one-party state of Habyarimana (Hutu)
 Maintaining its international prestige and bargaining power by controlling French-speaking Africa
 Operation Turquoise

France’s Operation Turquoise
 June 22 nd : UN approve France a 60 days Humanitarian
Mission to protect civilians/ save lives.
 2500 French troops
 “safe humanitarian zones” in southwest Rwanda
 The killings end before OT was replaced by UNAMIR Ⅱ .
RPF took control over most of Rwanda in mid-July.
 Humanitarian Intervention…?

France’s Operation Turquoise
 Since the Security Council had acted as a global bystander to genocide, no one felt able publicly criticize to a French mission that was justified in terms of saving lives.
 However, the french government’s priority was not to save lives but to demonstrate to Africa and the world that France could still rapidly project military power.

Society criticism
 The non-humanitarian motives behind the French intervention led to means being employed that conflicted with its humanitarian purpose.

Conclusion
 UNAMIR didn’t have a sufficient mandate; lack of resources; ill-equipped to stop the killings.
 Stopping genocide requires a willingness to use force and to risk soldiers’ lives and it was this that was completely lacking in the Clinton Administration, USA.

Conclusion
 France had national interests at stake, did not try to save Rwandan lives, but actively contributed to the genocide.
 The media failed to report on the genocide, so there was no internal pressure from citizens that could have influenced policy makers.