In 1994, the world witnessed one of the most horrific genocides in recent memory. As reported by the BBC, in the small African country of Rwanda, the conflict between two ethnic groups, the Hutus and the Tutsis, had been brewing for decades but throughout the colonial period, tensions rose substantially, ultimately ending in the bloody massacre now known as the genocide against the Tutsi. Belgian colonizers, who deemed the Tutsis to be preferable to the Hutus, created an even stronger divide by issuing ethnic identification cards and giving preferential treatment to the Tutsis. After Rwandan independence, the Hutus rose to power, proceeding to marginalize their adversaries and punish them for their years of Belgian favor.2 Finally, after nearly a century of build up, the war erupted after Hutu President Juvenal Habarimana’s plane was shot down on April 6, 1993. Both sides blamed one another for the attack: the Hutus claimed that the Rwandan Patriotic Front, a Tutsi refugee group based in Uganda, had shot down the plane and the Tutsis claimed that it was actually a Hutu attack
…show more content…
The United States followed suit. The Clinton Administration, now famously, refused to call the genocide by its name, although allowed that “acts of genocide may have occurred,” in order to acknowledge the bloodbath without being forced to intervene.5 Despite the United States’ formal commitment to ending genocide wherever it may arise, the Rwandan Genocide was allowed to go on for months without so much as a lifted finger from the American government.
The United States followed suit. The Clinton Administration, now famously, refused to call the genocide by its name, although allowed that “acts of genocide may have occurred,” in order to acknowledge the bloodbath without being forced to intervene.5 Despite the United States’ formal commitment to ending genocide wherever it may arise, the Rwandan Genocide was allowed to go on for months without so much as a lifted finger from the American government.