RWANDA: 100 DAYS
What should the US do????
C. Renee Bos
TAH
Background Essay
Genocide in Rwanda
Approximately the size of the state of Maryland, Rwanda is a tiny country in central Africa. In
Rwanda for hundreds of years three ethnic groups coexisted peacefully: the Hutu (85%) and
Tutsi (14%) tribes, and the Twa, a pygmy group that makes up 1% of the population. For many
years the only differentiation between the Hutu and the Tutsi was economic. The Hutus were
primarily farmers, while the Tutsis were herders or “ranchers” of cattle. Both groups
intermarried and socialized and movement between the two “tribes” was fluid. It wasn’t until
the Europeans’ scramble for Africa and subsequent control of Rwanda by the Belgians that the
distinctions between Hutu and Tutsi became physical and began to be traded on for power. The
Belgians defined the Tutsis as taller, lighter skinned, with straighter noses. According to the
eugenics of the day, this implied more Caucasian characteristics and greater “civilization and
intelligence.”
First the Belgians established a puppet Tutsi monarchy, and then in 1926 introduced
identity cards that included an ethnic designation of Tutsi or Hutu. Under Belgian influence
Tutsis, by far a minority in Rwanda, were given political and economic advantages including being
responsible for the forced labor of Hutus. Eventually and inevitably, this became an issue of
resentment for the Hutus.
In 1959, a few years before Rwanda received independence from the Belgians; the Hutu
majority formed a new political party, the Party for Hutu Emancipation (PARMEHUTU), and
overthrew the Tutsi monarchy. In a UN mandated and supervised election in September of 1961
the PARMEHUTU won an overwhelming (if not surprising) victory and was granted official
independence on January 1, 1962. George Kayibanda became the first president of Rwanda and
governed on a platform on Hutu supremacy. In fact, it is during the Kayibanda era that
‘cockroach’ became the most common slang for a Tutsi. Kayibanda controlled Rwanda from 1962
to 1973. During this time, “pogroms” of Tutsis became, if not regular, at least common enough
for many Tutsis to flee Rwanda and seek refuge in bordering African countries, especially
Burundi.
Kayibanda’s government became increasingly corrupt and inefficient in the 1960’s and was
eventually overthrown in 1973 in a military coup led by General Juvenal Habyarimana.
Habyarimana, a Hutu, became the new President. He outlawed the PARMEHUTU and
established the National Revolutionary Movement for Development (MRND) as the only political
party. Habyarimana’s government of military dictatorship is incredibly familiar to students of
African history. His government was corrupt but popular with some European countries,
especially France, because of the positive trade terms. Nepotism and the Hutu Power ideology
were to continue in Rwanda. The long term discrimination and periodic bouts of violence created
a problem for a number of bordering African countries as the number of Tutsi refugees
increased. Some countries encouraged Tutsis to repatriate to Rwanda, however Habyarimana
declared that Rwanda would not accept any returning refugees. In response, Tutsi refugees
formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) a para military organization committed to armed
struggle against Habyarimana for control of Rwanda. In 1990, the RPF made an attempt to
invade Rwanda and were rebuffed by Habyarimana’s army with massive support from the
French. This led to increased tension and racism against the Tutsis remaining in Rwanda.
Kangura, the country’s most popular Hutu power newspaper published an anti-Tutsi tirade known
as “The Hutu Ten Commandments.” The article defined the role of the Tutsi in Rwanda and
outlined what the relationship between a Hutu and Tutsi should be.
Habyarimana grasped the rising tide of anti-Tutsi feeling and used it to unify support for
his government. He began recruiting youths into anti-Tutsi “militia” or gangs that were together
called the Interhamwe. From 1990 to 1992 the Interhamwe increased acts of violence against
the Tutsis and the Rwandan military continued to scuffle with the RPF. The international
community began to pressure Habyarimana to decrease anti-Tutsi violence and negotiate with
the RPF. In 1993, with the help of the UN, Habyarimana and the leaders of the RPF negotiated
and signed the Arusha Accords. The Arusha Accords dictated that a new coalition government
combined from the MRND and the RPF would be formed, and that refugees would be allowed to
return to Rwanda. However, implementation of the Arusha Accords did not begin immediately.
Subsequently, Habyarimana, a president who had built his power base by founding the
Interhamwe and preaching Hutu power, began to lose popularity. In fact, Hutu power advocates,
including major newspapers and radio stations, began to call for attacks against Tutsis. By
March of 1994, many international human rights organizations said that the Tutsis were in grave
danger and began to warn the world that violence in Rwanda was imminent.
On April 6, 1994 unknown parties shot down President Habyarimana’s plane as he was
returning from further peace negotiations between the Hutus and the RPF. Habyarimana was
killed. Who shot down the plane is still a matter of contention. Certain factions believe he was
killed by the RPF, while other factions believe that Hutu power extremists shot down the plane
because the President was about to implement the Arusha Accords and the incident could be
used as justification to incite the violence that ensued.
On April 7, 1994, the Rwandan Armed Forces (FAR), with the help of Habyarimana’s
Interhamwe, set up roadblocks and moved from house to house killing Tutsis. Thousands were
slaughtered by machete and gunfire. The UN troops, already in Kigali (the capital of Rwanda)
and around the country to help implement the Arusha Accords were forbidden to intervene. The
RPF launched an offensive within days to attempt to stop the violence, while the UN actually
decreased its troops from 2,500 to 250 because 10 Belgian soldiers were killed by the
Interhamwe. UN forces were used only to evacuate all foreigners from the country, sometimes
UN trucks drove into compounds past waiting Interhamwe, removed all the Europeans and fled
to the sound of gunshots or screams.
The US and the UN were hesitant to refer to the violence in Rwanda as genocide on the
grounds that identifying the slaughter as genocide obligatedy the West to “prevent and punish”
perpetrators based on the Geneva Convention on Genocide. This UN agreement both defined
genocide and committed the signatory parties to specific actions.
Slaughter in Rwanda continued at an alarming rate. Approximately 8,000 Tutsi and Tutsi
“sympathizers” were killed every day. The RPF continued to fight their way across Rwanda to
stop the genocide and slaughter of Tutsis. On May 17th, the UN agreed to send troops to
Rwanda, but then spent more than a month arguing over who would pay for the troops, supplies,
and weapons. By the end of June the UN, who were still waiting for their own troops to deploy,
approved the deployment of French troops to aid the RPF in reestablishing order in Rwanda. In
July, the RPF took the capital of Kigali and the genocidal Hutu government fled to Zaire. In
approximately one hundred days the MRND and the Interhamwe had killed over 800,000 people.
They had raped and injured thousands more.
Order is slowly restored in Rwanda, although a late outpouring of aid and assistance from
Europe and the US actually provided more support to murdering Hutus fleeing from the RPF
than Tutsi genocide victims. Eventually, the UN established an international tribunal in Tanzania
and by December of 1999 had found six people guilty of a variety of crimes including genocide
and crimes against humanity.
Major Sources Used for this Essay
And
Resources for Further Study
Gourevitch, Philip. We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families:
Stories From Rwanda. New York: Picador, 1998.
Gourevitch began travelling through Rwanda in 1995. He talked with a number of principle players
in the genocide. It is remarkable for its clarity and readability. It is a great place to start
learning about the genocide in Rwanda beyond Hotel Rwanda.
Barker, Greg, dir. "Ghosts of Rwanda." Frontline. PBS: WGBH, Boston, 2004. Television.
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ghosts/>.
This is an amazing program and well worth showing clips to your students. In particular there is a
clip taken by multiple reporters of a UN group: entering a hospital past waiting
Interhamwe armed with machetes, extracting all of the whites while Tutsis beg for help
from the Europeans. As the Europeans leave they hear the gunshots and screams
beginning. It is all caught on tape. It is also connected to a tremendous website with a
timeline, survivors accounts, and updates on Rwanda after the genocide.
"100 Days of Slaughter: A Chronology of US/U.N. Actions." The Triumph of Evil. PBS, 1995-2012.
Web. 29 Jun 2012.
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/etc/slaughter.html>.
An excellent and concise timeline of the Western response to Rwanda. It includes brief
quotations from primary sources.
RWANDA: 100 DAYS
What should the US do????
KEY
Name:
Date:
Period:
Rwandan Background Questions
1. Which ethnic group is larger in Rwanda? HUTUs
2. Which ethnic group had control of the country under the Belgians? TUTSIS
3. Why do you think it is important that they created ethnic identity cards? So they could
identify who was who even without knowing them.
4. What is the PARMEHUTU? What do they believe in? PARTY FOR THE
EMANCIPATION OF HUTUS, They overthrew the Tutsis government and
established a government based on Hutu supremacy.
5. What happened to the Tutsis after Rwanda got independence? They became the
subjects of periodic discrimination and violence.
6. How did the Tutsis react to this treatment? Some Tutsis fled the country.
7. What was the Interhamwe? Anti-Tutsi youth groups trained as “militia” or gangs.
8. What were the Arusha Accords? Peace agreement between the RPF and the Hutu
government. It established a coalition government and allowed for the return of
Tutsi refugees to Rwanda.
9. What happened to President Habyarimana? Who was responsible? He was killed when
his airplane was shot down. No one is sure who was responsible.
10. What was the first UN response to events in Rwanda? Forbids UN troops in Kigali
from intervening in violence.
11. Why did the West not want to use the word “genocide” when referring to Rwanda?
Because of the UN then would be committed to preventing and punishing the act.
12. Approximately how many people died per day in Rwanda? 8,000
13. Approximately how many people died total in Rwanda? 800,000
Document A- Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide - Adopted by Resolution 260
(III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.
Article 1 - The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in
time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article 2 - In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent
to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
 (a) Killing members of the group;
 (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
 (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;
 (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
 (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article 4
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether
they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
Article 5
The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the
necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and, in particular,
to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated
in Article 3.
Questions:
Sourcing: When was this document written? December 9, 1948
Contextualizing: What major event in world history might have prompted the UN to write this
document? The Holocaust, WWII
Close Reading: How does the UN define genocide? “genocide means any of the following acts committed
with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”
Close Reading: What are countries who sign this document committed to do if there is a genocide being
committed? “prevent and punish”
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? If the US acknowledges that
genocide is occurring in Rwanda they would be obligated to become involved in the
incident.
Document B : The Hutu Ten Commandments – as published in Kangura, No. 6, December 1990
http://www.trumanwebdesign.com/~catalina/commandments.htm– Be sure to have
students source this document. It proves long time prejudice.
The Hutu Ten Commandments – as published in Kangura, No. 6, December 1990
1. Every Hutu must know that the Tutsi woman, wherever she may be, is working for the Tutsi
ethnic cause. In consequence, any Hutu is a traitor who:
-
Acquires a Tutsi wife
-
Acquires a Tutsi concubine
-
Acquires a Tutsi secretary or protégée
5. Strategic positions such as politics, administration, economics, the military and security must
be restricted to the Hutu.
6. The Rwandan Army must be exclusively Hutu. . . . No soldier may marry a Tutsi woman.
9. . . . Hutu must stand firm and vigilant against their common enemy: the Tutsi.
Questions:
Sourcing: Why did the author write The Hutu Ten Commandments? In order to show Tutsis
what these Hutus think of them, but also to warn Hutus how they should treat
Tutsis.
Close Reading: What does the author say about Tutsi women? They are constantly working
for the Tutsi cause. They cannot marry a soldier.
Close Reading: What jobs does the author say should be held only by Hutus? Politics,
administration, economics, military, security,
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? This proves at least to some
degree that the violence is racially motivated, this connects to Doc A because of
the definition of genocide.
Document C: Eyewitness Report From Rwanda – Hamis Kamuhanda, 11 years old in 1994
http://www.historywiz.com/rwanda-eyewitness.htm
“The following day we had rumors that Hutus were out to kill every Tutsi in the country,
claiming that we, the Tutsis had killed the Hutu president. We were advised to stay indoors.
I had never seen my parents so agitated and terrified all my life. Then there was a knock at
the door and before we could respond, the door fell in and about four or so people came in
and dragged my father out by his legs. That was the last we saw of him. We were hiding
under the bed but we could see everything. Mother told us to keep quiet. Then the shooting
began. The bullets came in and hit everything in the way. Yet no-one dared scream. Mother
could not cover all four of us. I could feel the blood coming from under my right shoulder
and I did not know whether I was hit or not. I could not feel any pain then. My mind was
occupied with the terror of being hacked to death. Suddenly the door burst open and they
came in praising themselves for a good job done. I was closer to the door and they kicked
me in my belly. It was painful, but the thought of being severed alive with their machetes,
made me stay as quiet as a mouse. One of them said: ’Let’s make sure that he is dead with
this.’ I didn’t move an inch, nor did I make any noise, they must have thought that I was
dead. I just felt a very sharp pain on my leg and I must have passed out. I don’t know for
how long but when I woke up; my mother was nursing my wounded leg. I was trying to look at
the wound when I lost consciousness again. The armed Hutu men, the Interhamwe, were
scattered and patrolling every corner. The situation was tense for a very long time and we
could smell the stench of the dead even inside out fenced house. We were terrified. We
thought those men were going to return and realize that we, a Tutsi family were still
breathing. . .”
Questions:
Sourcing: Who was the author of this document? How old were they at the time of the
genocide? Hamis Kamuhanda, 11 years old
Cross-Checking: Does this story line up with other documents? Why of why not? It aligns
to some degree with Doc B. The soldiers were in fact Hutu and there was a
hatred for Tutsis. You may want to have students come back to this question
after they have looked at other documents.
Contextualizing: How do you think this family felt during the time they were in their
house? Answers will vary, I suggest digging a bit beyond, “scared” although that is
a valid start.
Close Reading: Do you find this source believable? What words or phrases does the
author use to make this story believable or not? Answers will vary,
Believeable possible: “We were advised to stay indoors. I had never seen my
parents so agitated and terrified all my life”, “. I could feel the blood coming
from under my right shoulder and I did not know whether I was hit or not. I
could not feel any pain then.” “The armed Hutu men, the Interhamwe, were
scattered and patrolling every corner. The situation was tense for a very long
time and we could smell the stench of the dead even inside out fenced house. We
were terrified”
Unbelievable possible: “Suddenly the door burst open and they came in praising
themselves for a good job done. I was closer to the door and they kicked me in
my belly. It was painful, but the thought of being severed alive with their
machetes, made me stay as quiet as a mouse. One of them said: ’Let’s make sure
that he is dead with this.’ I didn’t move an inch, nor did I make any noise, they
must have thought that I was dead. I just felt a very sharp pain on my leg and I
must have passed out”
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? This kind of personal story
can motivate people to action. Also they are attacking families and children.
Document D: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/163857.pdf
Action Memorandum
TO: The Secretary [of State]
FROM: George E. Moose, John Shattuc, Douglas J. Berte ,
Conrad K. Harper
SUBJECT: Has Genocide Occurred in Rwanda?
ISSUES FOR DECISION
Whether (1) to authorize Department officials to state publicly that “acts of genocide have
occurred” in Rwanda and (2) to authorize US delegations to international meetings to
agree to resolutions and other instruments that refer to “acts of genocide” in Rwanda,
state that “genocide has occurred” there or contain other comparable formulations.
ESSENTIAL FACTORS
Events in Rwanda have led to press and public inquiries about whether genocide has occurred
there. In light of the stark facts in Rwanda . . . we believe that Department officials
should be authorized to state the Department’s conclusion that ‘acts of genocide have
occurred’ in Rwanda. This is the same formulation we used in respect to Bosnia.”
Questions:
Contextualizing: What is happening in Rwanda that caused this document to be sent? People
are being killed everywhere. See Doc C
Close Reading: What are the two questions that this document is supposed to address? A.
Should State Department officials say that “acts of genocide have occurred in Rwanda?” B.
Should US officials representing the US to international orgs (UN) agree that “acts of
genocide” have occurred in Rwanda?
Close Reading: What is the conclusion of State Department about this issue? “we believe that
Department officials should be authorized to state the Department’s conclusion that ‘acts of
genocide have occurred’ in Rwanda.”
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? The highlighted section is key,
because taken at face value this document means the US has already agreed to become involved in the
Rwandan conflict, they must “prevent and punish” however, the reference to Bosnia recalls both
Bosnia and Mogadishu, this gives the isolationists in your classroom a fighting chance.
Document E: “Ambush in Mogadishu” (edited) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/etc/synopsis.html
On October 3, 1993 elite units of the U.S. Army Rangers and Delta Force were ambushed
by Somali men, women, and children armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled
grenades. The Rangers were pinned down in the most dangerous part of Mogadishu,
Somalia and taking casualties. What had started out as an operation to capture warlord
Mohammed Farrah Aidid - - turned into a tragic firefight that lasted seventeen hours, left
eighteen Americans dead, eighty four wounded and continues to haunt the U.S. military and
American foreign policy. The ‘battle of Mogadishu’ – a planned 90-miunte mission which
turned into a deadly 17 hours – is generally forgotten by most Americans. But five years
later it continues to cast a long shadow on US military thinking and decision making about
humanitarian/peacekeeping operations. Its legacy, say many experts, was a continuing US
reluctance to be drawn into other trouble spots. . .”
Questions:
Sourcing: Is this a primary or a secondary source? Secondary, “But five years later it
continues to cast a long shadow on US military thinking and decision making about
humanitarian/peacekeeping operations.”
Contextualizing: How might Americans feel about the Battle of Mogadishu? Answers will vary,
however, frustration, rage, patriotism, isolationist, etc. all would work
Close Reading: What impact does the author claim that the Battle of Mogadishu had on US
foreign policy? “Its legacy, say many experts, was a continuing US reluctance to be
drawn into other trouble spots. . .”
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? Because of the possible loss of
life to Americans, the US military and State Department may be uinwilling to commit
troops to a battle that does not really involve US interests. Perhaps you need MORE
than a humanitarian goal to become involved in other countries’ fights.
Document F
Genocide Statistics, Taken from SURF Survivors Fund, Supporting Survivors of the Rwandan
Genocide http://survivors-fund.org.uk/resources/rwandan-history/statistics/

Over the course of 100 days from April 6 to July 16 1994, an estimated 800,000 to 1
million Tutsis and some moderate Hutus were slaughtered in the Rwandan genocide. A
recent report has estimated the number to be close to 2 million.

During this period of terrible slaughter, more than 6 men, women and children were
murdered every minute of every hour of every day.

There are between 300,000 to 400,000 survivors of the genocide.

Between 250,000 and 500,000 women were raped during the 100 days of genocide. Up
to 20,000 children were born to women as a result of rape.

More than 67% of women who were raped in 1994 during the genocide were infected
with HIV and AIDS. In many cases, this resulted from a systematic and planned use of
rape by HIV+ men as a weapon of genocide.

75,000 of survivors were orphaned as a result of the genocide.
Questions:
Sourcing: Why do you think this document was written? To show the extent of the damage
done in Rwanda and to gain support for survivors of the crisis.
Close Reading: List two statistics that you find shocking. Answers will vary, just check for
accuracy.
Contextualization: How do you think it would be to live in Rwanda at this time? Answers will
vary, this is a great formative check for their understanding of contextualization.
How might this impact US response to genocide in Rwanda? Based on these numbers it is
difficult to imagine having the power to stop the violence and not doing so. An interesting
conversation to have here would be, did they have these numbers? What did US leaders know
and when did they know it?
Name:
Date:
Period:
Rwanda: 100 Days
Assessment
STEP ONE: Brainstorm ten tools the US could use to respond to the events in Rwanda from
April to July of 1994.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
STEP TWO: Complete the graphic organizer below with five of your best ideas from STEP
ONE.
IDEA #1
• Positive Outcomes:
____________________
• Negative Outcomes:
IDEA #2
• Positive Outcomes:
___________ __________
• Negative Outcomes:
IDEA #3
• Positive Outcomes:
____________ __________
• Negative Outcomes:
IDEA #4
• Positive Outcomes:
_____________ __________
• Negative Outcomes:
IDEA #5
• Positive Outcomes:
________________________
• Negative Outcomes:
STEP THREE : List three to five steps you think the US should take in response to the events in
Rwanda. Then, try to find which documents support your idea. This is a variation on the
bucketing assignment.
Action #1:
Action #2:
Action #3:
_________________________
_________________________
_________________________
Action #4:
Action #5:
_________________________
_________________________
STEP FOUR: Create a sample outline for your intro, one of your actions, and the
counter argument.
I.
Tell the President what goal of foreign policy would be met by your actions in
Rwanda. (Be sure to review your notes on the five goals of foreign policy)
Explain how this goal is being met by the actions you suggest.
II. Responses
A. Tell the President one response that you think the US should take in
response to events in Rwanda. Be sure to explain why your reaction is
appropriate based on the sources you read.
III. Counter Argument – explain why some people might think your responses
would be bad. Then, (here’s the fun part) tell them why they are wrong!!!
STEP Four: Now write a brief memo to the President of the United States that outlines your
recommendations for US foreign policy to Rwanda . You may choose any of your ideas or
combine different ideas to create a plan. However be sure to include each of the following:
•What is the goal of this foreign policy?
•What tools are being used to meet this foreign policy?
•What are some reasons the US should use this foreign policy?
•COUNTER ARGUMENT: What are some objections other people might
have to this foreign policy?
•How do you defend your foreign policy from these objections?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Essay Scoring Tools
______/ 5
What is the goal of this foreign policy?
______/10
What tools are being used to meet this foreign policy?
______/15
What are some reasons the US should use this foreign policy?
______/10
COUNTER ARGUMENT: What are some objections other people might have
to this foreign policy?
______/10
How do you defend your foreign policy from these objections
______/50
TOTAL
Comments:
Alternative Assessment Tool for Argumentative Historical Investigations
(Adapted from Tracy Mai, Teacher, Howard High)
1
Intro/Conclusion
Justification
Counterclaim
3
Thesis statement is
present but
incomplete.
Thesis statement is
present and clear.
Evidence is used without
justification.
Evidence is used
without justification
clearly relating to the
claim.
The counterclaim is
present but not
supported. The
rebuttal vaguely
supports the original
claim.
Evidence is fairly
relevant, not used
frequently and the
documents are not
cited properly.
Weak claim that does
not include clearly
stated reasons. The
body paragraphs
vaguely address the
reasons as stated in the
claim.
Some major spelling or
grammatical errors.
Excessive use of
personal pronouns and
improper use of
capitalization rules.
Most justifications for
evidence clearly support
the claim.
No counterclaim is
provided.
Incorporation of
Evidence
Little to no evidence
from documents is used
in the body paragraphs
and no citations used.
Claim
No claim statement and
the body paragraphs lack
an organizational
structure.
Grammar
Major grammatical and
spelling errors. Personal
pronouns used
throughout and
improper capitalization
practices.
Comments
2
Topic is introduced
4
Score
Thesis statement is
present, clear and
supported.
The counterclaim is
present and sufficiently
supported with one
example and a rebuttal is
stated that supports the
original claim.
Evidence is mostly
relevant, used frequently
and documents are cited
properly.
All justifications clearly
support the claim.
The counterclaim is
present and supported
with at least two
examples and a rebuttal is
stated that supports the
original claim.
Evidence from documents
is relevant, used
frequently and cited
properly.
Strong claim and reasons
stated in the claim. One
claim may not be as well
supported as the others.
Strong claim and the
reasons are properly
incorporated into each of
the body paragraphs.
Few major spelling or
grammatical errors.
Some use of personal
pronouns and proper
capitalization is used.
No major spelling or
grammatical errors. No
excessive use of personal
pronouns and proper
capitalization is used.
Total=
/20
Alternative Assessment Tools
Multiple Choice Questions:
Weighted Multiple Choice:
Tutsis in Rwanda were not prepared for the genocide of 1994 because:
A. They trusted the relationships they had built with their Hutu neighbors (2)
B. They had no idea that the persecution was an imminent possibility (0)
C. They believed they would be protected by Europe and/or the West (3)
D. They believed the persecution would be minor; like previous persecutions (4)
Multiple Choice:
This is an excerpt from the Hutu Ten Commandments that was published in the newspaper Kangura
in December of 1990.
1. Every Hutu must know that the Tutsi woman, wherever she may be, is working for the Tutsi
ethnic cause. In consequence, any Hutu is a traitor who:
* Acquires a Tutsi wife
*Acquires a Tutsi concubine
5. Strategic positions such as politics, administration, economics, the military and security must be
restricted to the Hutu.
6. The Rwandan Army must be exclusively Hutu . . . No soldier may marry a Tutsi women.
The best description of the purpose of this excerpt is:
A. Hutus were scared of Tutsi women.
B. Hutus thought that Tutsis were too weak to fight in the army.
C. Hutus were being taught how to treat Tutsis.
D. Hutus were expressing pride in their ethnic heritage.
Which of the following goals of foreign policy would best have been met by US involvement in the
Rwandan genocide?
A. National Security
B. Economic
C. Ideology
D. Humanitarian
Historical Thinking Performance Tasks:
You are the President’s National Security Council. You have just gotten word that the following event has
occurred. You need to make some quick and wise decisions because the President wants to the briefed in
15 minutes. Be sure to express the opinion of the policy maker you are assigned to role-play. As a group,
complete the chart for the scenario. List the policy options the US could implement and the possible
consequences. Then state which option(s) you believe the President should choose and why.
Members of the National Security Council:

Secretary of State – represents the State Department – stresses diplomacy

Secretary of Defense – represents the armed forces – presents military options

Secretary of Commerce – represents the business and trade interests of the US

Director of Central Intelligence – responsible for accurate information about other countries

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – military advisor to the Council – presents information on
what is military possible and advisable
The small central African country of Rwanda has broken out into chaos and violence. The President’s
plane has been shot down, and the country has no definitive leadership. The majority ethnic group, the
Hutus, is roaming the country slaughtering the minority ethnic group, the Tutsis, with machetes and
guns. Thousands of people are dying every day. We do not have any major economic interdependence
with Rwanda, however many neighboring African countries are also being disrupted by fleeing refugees.
US Policy Options:
Possible Consequences:
(Consider possible instruments of foreign policy and
international organizations you could ask for help.)
Circle the best option(s) listed above. Explain why this plan is better than the options you did
NOT choose:
Historical Thinking Performance Tasks:
You are the new public relations director for one of the following international
organizations:

United Nations

European Union

International Red Cross/Red Crescent Society

World Bank

World Health Organization
It is your job to inform the American public about the current situation in Rwanda.
Based on what you have learned about the international organization and the
crisis in Rwanda create either:
A. A 1 minute public service commercial
OR
B. A 1 page layout to be run in a major US newspaper (New York Times, Washington Post,
Baltimore Sun)
Your layout could take the form of

an informative advertisement
OR

a letter to the editor
Your update should include:

a brief summary of current events in Rwanda

an international call to action – what would you like the international
community to do? (be sure and consider the position of your international
org. The Red Cross will not be calling for a military invasion!)

a personal call to action – what do you want individuals to do?

a justification for why you want these things to happen

a connection to the mission of your international organization