Revenons-en au sujet :

Hier soir BBC Kinyrwanda a volontairement voulu déformer l'information sur la culpabilité du rwanda dans les massacres et le génocide qui se pérpètrent encore sur le sol Congolais en accordant un interview au x rwandais et en particulier au Général de brigade Nzabamwita. et  c'était la seule info que plusieurs des rwandais n'ont peu recueillir plutôt que de savoir que leurs dirigeants sont des criminels inégalables et inégalés. Pour ce faire nous demandons à la direction de BBC de respecter les règles journalistiques en accordant interview aux deux "bérigérants".
Comparez vous mêmes les dires des journalistes de BBC et de leurs maîtres à Kigali :


The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

So long as justice and accountability for RPF past and current crimes are ignored and delayed, Peace and Stability will remain illusive and impossible in Rwanda=>AS International]






With These Facts Stated – Mankind And Rwanda IN Particular, Can Build Its Future!
United States of America have much to apologize for, including failure to understand the majority of Rwandans beginning the RPF invasion in 1990, refusal to defer sufficiently to the majority Hutu, selfishness in pursuing U.S. interests as opposed to global interests, and showing far too much concern for U.S. sovereignty, independence, and freedom of action. The second idea is that multilateral institutions offer the best hope for restraining U.S. power and moderating Rwandans' national assertiveness.

If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them."

If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them."
Democracy is defined in Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary as:

Government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them either directly or through their elected agents;... a state of society characterized by nominal equality of rights and privileges.



What is left out of the dictionary definition of democracy is what constitutes "the people." In practice, democracy is governed by its most popularly understood principle: majority rule. Namely, the side with the most votes wins, whether it is an election, a legislative bill, a contract proposal to a union, or a shareholder motion in a corporation. The majority (or in some cases plurality) vote decides. Thus, when it is said that "the people have spoken" or the "people's will should be respected," the people are generally expressed through its majority.

Democracy Requires Minority Rights

Yet majority rule can not be the only expression of "supreme power" in a democracy. If so, as Tocqueville notes above, the majority would too easily tyrannize the minority. Thus, while it is clear that democracy must guarantee the expression of the popular will through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must guarantee that the majority will not abuse use its power to violate the basic and inalienable rights of the minority. For one, a defining characteristic of democracy must be the people's right to change the majority through elections. This right is the people's "supreme authority." The minority, therefore, must have the right to seek to become the majority and possess all the rights necessary to compete fairly in elections—speech, assembly, association, petition—since otherwise the majority would make itself permanent and become a dictatorship. For the majority, ensuring the minority's rights becomes a matter of self-interest, since it must utilize the same rights when it is in minority to seek to become a majority again. This holds equally true in a multiparty parliamentary democracy, where no party has a majority, since a government must still be formed in coalition by a majority of parliament members.

And minority rule is antithetical to democracy. But the founders worried that the majority could abuse its powers to oppress a minority just as easily as a king.

Minority Rights I: Individual Rights vs. Majority Tyranny

Democracy therefore requires minority rights equally as it does majority rule. Indeed, as democracy is conceived today, the minority's rights must be protected no matter how singular or alienated that minority is from the majority society; otherwise, the majority's rights lose their meaning. In the United States, basic individual liberties are protected through the Bill of Rights, which were drafted by James Madison and adopted in the form of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. These enumerate the rights that may not be violated by the government, safeguarding—in theory, at least—the rights of any minority against majority tyranny. Today, these rights are considered the essential element of any liberal democracy.

The British political philosopher John Stuart Mill took this principle further. In his essay On Liberty he wrote, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others." Mill's "no harm principle" aims to prevent government from becoming a vehicle for the "tyranny of the majority," which he viewed as not just a political but also a social tyranny that stifled minority voices and imposed a regimentation of thought and values. Mill's views became the basis for much of liberal political philosophy since, whether it is free market or economic liberalism or social liberalism.

How do majority rule and the protection of minority rights function in practice? Clearly, the two can easily collide when the assertion of Madisonian rights and Millian liberalism confront an unmovable democratic majority. In politics, the regularity of elections and the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances (see "Constitutional Limits") are the means for ensuring debate over the people's interests and views.

Minority Rights II: Protecting Minority Groups in Society

Madisonian and Millian principles safeguard individual and political minorities. But the danger of majority tyranny lies not just in the infringements of individual rights or the marginalization of a political minority, but in the oppression of minority groups in society based simply on criteria such as skin color, ethnicity or nationality, religion, or sexual orientation. Judicial checks on majority tyranny were supposed to expand political and civil rights over time; however, the American courts were themselves often a part of majority tyranny, as numerous Supreme Court cases attest. The 19th-century Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson decisions ruled that African Americans were socially inferior and thus not guaranteed equal protection of the laws (see descriptions of these two cases on the African American History web page).

The African American Experience

In the United States, it is the African American experience that most warns of the danger of such majority tyranny. The Constitution, officially implemented in 1789, flatly contradicted the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Its infamous "three-fifths compromise" (which determined that a slave constitutedonly three-fifths of a person) sanctioned slavery and the terrible mistreatment of millions of Africans brought to America in chains. Even after the Civil War's end, amendments to the Constitution abolishing slavery and guaranteeing equal rights did not prevent the adoption of Jim Crow laws in the Southern states, which collectively maintained a system of institutionalized segregation, or pervasive discrimination against African Americans in the North. In the South, whites disenfranchised black voters through so-called literacy tests, poll taxes, and property qualifications that were never applied to poor and illiterate whites.

John Trumbull's famous painting of the Founding Fathers

To overcome this form of majority tyranny, maintained for nearly 100 years, the African American minority, just over 12 percent of the population in the late 1800s, had to confront the reality that nearly all political avenues were closed to it. In the South the right to vote had effectively been taken away, and in the North it was ineffectual. In the early 20th century, some African American leaders therefore adopted a strategy of nonviolence and civil disobedience that took the fullest advantage of the freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights and challenged American institutions to live up to America's democratic principles. In their strategy, the rational answer to systematic denial of freedom was the exercise of freedom. The answer to systematic denial of inequality was demanding legal equality and justice in the courts. The ultimate success of this strategy—which began in 1905 with the Niagara Movement of W. E. B. Du Bois and demanded equal rights and eventually led to the development of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)—fulfilled the stated ideals of American democracy and as a result made the African American civil rights movement an enduring international symbol for world freedom. Its nonviolent method has become a much-used model for how an oppressed minority can seek freedom through the peaceful use of democratic rights.

The Persistence of Discrimination

America's experience is unique in scope, but all democracies have witnessed "the tyranny of the majority" applied against different social groups. Nearly all democracies, for example, restricted voting to specific economic groups, most frequently to male property owners, and only slowly expanded the franchise to men generally. Women were systematically denied equal political and social rights. The first state to grant equal suffrage was Wyoming, then still a territory, in 1869; the first country to do so was New Zealand, but only in 1893. British women over the age of 30 were given the vote in 1918, and in 1928 the age limit was lowered to 21. Women in the United States gained suffrage in 1920, while France did not adopt universal suffrage until after liberation from the Nazi occupation in 1944. Despite having the right to vote in most countries today, women still suffer formal discrimination in many places in the world.

In Europe, minority Muslim communities from former colonies in northern Africa, the Middle East, and Southwest Asia have struggled against pervasive discrimination and the denial of equal opportunities in education, jobs, and housing. In India, the "untouchables," or harijan, have only recently gained rights to enter the mainstream of society. Majority indigenous groups in Bolivia and several other Latin American countries have long been treated as "the minority" for most of their countries' constitutional histories. Indeed, the issues of minorities seeking greater freedom, equality, autonomy, and protection against discrimination and unequal treatment are current throughout the world. Usually they are being addressed through nonviolent protests, legislation, the courts, protection of native lands, education, and other efforts granting regional autonomy or specific rights and privileges.

Conclusion

The Democratic Ideal

On a practical level, the application of majority rule and minority rights relies on a set of rules agreed to by everyone in a political community. How are majorities determined? What are the limits of debate and speech? How can members in a community propose a motion or law? Should a minority be allowed to prevent the majority's will by abusing its rights? There is no one answer to these questions, and many democracies have answered them differently.


The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

 BY ANJAN SUNDARAM

For years, Rwanda's budding dictator, Paul Kagame, has gotten away with murder, while winning praise (and billions of dollars) from the West. But is the blind support for this strongman finally drying up?

• Rwanda needs more than guilt money
• Rwanda loses £16 million of UK aid
• Washington signals shift in policy

"To exclude aggression from international judicial scrutiny is to grant immunity to those responsible for what the Nuremberg court condemned, and the United Nations unanimously affirmed, as ''the supreme international crime.'' Children, and their parents, are best protected where those responsible for illegal war are held accountable".

BENJAMIN B. FERENCZ
KIGALI, Rwanda — Despite years of credible accusations of repression and war crimes leveled at Rwanda, both within the country and abroad, the United States, Britain, and a host of Western governments have consistently looked the other way, showering this tiny central African country with aid, touting it as a paragon of post-conflict reform, and protecting it staunchly against criticism. The accusations have included killing tens of thousands of people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, supporting violent rebellions in that country, illegally controlling Congo's lucrative mineral trade, and running an authoritarian regime that severely represses political opponents, journalists, and citizens in its own country.


The Rwandan reputed bloods leader angrily speaks as the the UN experts found Him guilty of aiding, abetting war crimes and Genocide in Congo

 But this summer, after a U.N. Group of Experts report accused Rwanda of aiding a Congolese rebel group, many of these same donors -- almost inexplicably, given the gravity of the accusations they were willing to overlook in the past -- have suddenly begun to ask tough questions of Rwanda's president, Paul Kagame. U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said, "We have deep concerns about Rwanda's support to the Congolese rebel group that goes by the name M23." A number of countries have gone as far as suspending aid to Rwanda, which, until recently, was a darling of the international development community.
 
Aid going to the Kagame dictatorship and 90% of it is lining the pockets of the Rwandan  strongman and his cronies
The development community is heavily invested in Rwanda's success, providing over $1 billion annually in development assistance to this small country of 10 million people. To many, the country incarnates the hope that Africa will rise from its poverty. The government has reported an average 8.2 percent annual GDP growth rate over the last five years, even in the midst of the global financial crisis, and claims to have lifted 1 million people out of poverty during the same period. The World Bank unequivocally praises its progress on development. And Kagame -- along with Western governments -- has promoted a narrative of a country rising spectacularly from a horrific genocide in 1994, a shining example that foreign aid, if well managed, can indeed give poor countries a leg up.
But Kagame, who relies on Western aid for about half of his country's budget, has reason now to be alarmed. For weeks, his government has fended off the damning accusations, not wavering from its usual strategy of forcefully denying all criticism and claiming the evidence has been fabricated. Rwanda generally argues that the crimes it is accused of would be against its interests -- for instance, that a war on its border would hurt its own economic growth and development. But the old arguments seem to be no longer working for Kagame. While Western donors in the past seemed content to give the president the benefit of the doubt, it appears now that his staunchest friends no longer believe his repeated denials.
Don't Miss The Truth about ONE of the The delusional RPF bunc who help M23 rebellion in Democratic Republoic of The Congo (DRC) under his direct command with the preparation, instigation and execution of crimes by helping General Ntaganda and his M23 to design the  strategy of establishing business in blood diamonds & coltan in the Eastern region of DRC.
Kagame lashed out in late July, dismissing America's aid cut as stemming from ignorance and saying the international community -- once his unwavering ally -- has "twisted everything" and is not listening to him.
The U.S. government, Rwanda's staunchest ally and largest donor, began its surprising about-face with a July 22 announcement that it was suspending military aid to Rwanda. The amount of aid cut was minuscule -- only $200,000 -- and is unlikely to apply to the full extent of U.S. military support to Rwanda, which includes training Kagame's son at the West Point military academy, but analysts saw the announcement as deeply symbolic.

RPF crimes against Hutu refugees in Congo
Geüpload door SaveRwanda. - Bekijk de laatste nieuwscontent.
Are American and British friends that have sustained Kagame politically and economically ahead of Rwandans to change the regime?

Obama's ambassador at large for war crimes, Stephen Rapp, then issued an astounding warning, reported on July 25 by Britain's Guardian newspaper, that Kagame could be charged with war crimes for "aiding and abetting" crimes against humanity in a neighboring country. The Dutch government followed by suspending aid to Rwanda. Britain -- one of Rwanda's largest donors and strongest allies, which had facilitated the country's entry to the Commonwealth -- did the same. Germany also held back payments, with Development Minister Dirk Niebel saying, "The suspension of aid is an unmistakable signal to the Rwandan government." Even the African Development Bank -- usually apolitical, and headed by a Rwandan, Donald Kaberuka, who is sometimes mentioned as Kagame's successor (the president, who has run Rwanda for almost two decades, insists he will step down in 2017) -- has been forced by its Scandinavian board members and India to suspend aid payments.
The U.N. Group of Experts' late-June report that led to this surge of defection from Rwanda's camp alleged that the country had violated a U.N. arms embargo by providing troops and weapons to M23, the Congolese rebel group. The embargo, in place since 2003, was designed to help bring peace to a volatile region that the world has tried to secure for years. The United Nations' largest peacekeeping force, at a cost of $1.5 billion annually, has been deployed in this effort. The report laid out credible evidence that officials at the highest levels of the Rwandan government -- in Kagame's immediate entourage -- were involved in supporting the rebels.


M23, an RDF battalion

 M23 is made up of soldiers who defected from the Congolese army this year, and the group appears to be trying to carve out an area of eastern Congo for itself. It is composed of ethnic Tutsis who have been historically marginalized in Congo but also count among their ranks powerful politicians and wealthy businessmen, with ties to Rwanda, who are supporting the rebellion. Kagame -- and much of the elite in his government -- is also Tutsi. The rebellion has caused great turmoil, displacing more than 260,000 Congolese in the last four months as it has seized territory and successfully fought off Congolese government troops backed by U.N. forces. The U.N. report suggests not only that Rwanda has been subverting the world's attempt to bring peace to Congo, but that it seems, according to the report, to be helping the rebels take control of a part of its neighbor.
The charges are grave. But then again, Kagame has been accused of far worse in the past. And donors have been more than happy to ignore those transgressions. With few exceptions, they never withdrew their aid or even criticized his government.
** *
When Rwanda invaded Congo in 1996 and 1998, deposing Congo's longstanding dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko, and installing a new leader, Laurent Kabila, Kagame's forces were accused of systematically killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people, including unarmed women and children living in refugee camps. The invasions left a trail of mass graves across Congo. The Rwandan government has said it was pursuing the perpetrators of its 1994 genocide, in which 800,000 people were killed. But a 2010 U.N. report mapped the killings -- in which Rwanda was not the only foreign country involved -- and raised the question of whether Kagame's forces might have themselves committed crimes of genocide. Two previous U.N. reports had concluded that genocide might have been committed.
Since these invasions, Rwanda has plundered tens of millions of dollars annually -- by conservative estimates -- through control of lucrative tin, coltan, and gold mines in Congo. Rwanda has always denied these claims, and the plundered wealth does not appear on the national budget. But diplomats say Rwanda uses the Congo profits to finance the country's formidable army. Kagame's government has long supported proxy armies on Congolese territories, and his immediate circle has enriched itself immensely from these wars, as well as through corruption. The wealth is visible in Rwanda's capital. A newly developed boulevard in Kigali -- housing many of the government's elite, along with well-off expatriates -- is informally called "Congo Street" by residents who are well aware that it was funded with this illicit money.
 The Rwandan aggressive war is not a national right but an international crime
Six years ago, Rwanda supported a rebellion almost identical to M23's. That rebellion was accused of multiple war crimes -- including incidents of mass rape -- for which Congo issued an international warrant for rebel leader Laurent Nkunda. The Rwandan-backed rebellion acted with impunity, attacking and capturing cities almost at will, taking control of vast swaths of Congo, and displacing several hundred-thousand people. Nkunda eventually became a bit too hot for Kagame to handle, and Rwandan forces arrested him in 2009. He has been held in secret detention in Rwanda ever since.


Recruitment of Hutu children as a war crime misses a vital point

Kagame subsequently won the election with 93 percent of the vote. By the end of the election, according to Freedom House, "the government no longer allowed any independent media capable of criticizing it to function in Rwanda."
Rwanda has denied deploying assassins against its opponents abroad, though Scotland Yard has issued letters to critics of Kagame living in Britain, stating that the Rwandan government posed an imminent threat to their lives.
Remarkably, none of these transgressions led to any serious international penalties for Rwanda. Indeed, despite the gravity of the accusations and the degree of available evidence, the dominant narrative from the West has been not one of criticism, but of stunning praise for Kagame as a new breed of African leader.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton has called him "one of the greatest leaders of our time"; former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has described him as a "visionary." In fact, Clinton was in Rwanda with his daughter on July 19 to inaugurate a new cancer hospital and issue more praise for "the strong national leadership … from His Excellency President Kagame." (There are no reports that Clinton discussed the M23 allegations with Kagame.) Visiting U.N. supremos regularly say that Rwanda has much to teach the world about good governance. On June 23, 2010, the day before the journalist was killed in Kigali, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon named Kagame co-leader of a prestigious panel of development experts, dubbed the Millennium Development Goals "superheroes."

While all this was happening, aid to Rwanda kept steadily increasing, and more and more of it was channeled directly to Kagame's government. The adulation and money gave Kagame an aura of invincibility. If the president was seen as doing no wrong, it gave him the ability to act with impunity, whether overseeing repression in his own country or pursuing his opponents and interests in Congo and the world.
Such was the level of support for Rwanda that the United States has reportedly for many years helped block investigations into the crimes in Congo. The 2010 U.N. mapping report was issued more than a decade after the massacres and only as a result of an investigation conducted with an unusual level of secrecy -- to prevent Rwanda from mobilizing its allies to block the inquiry yet again, investigators have said in private.
Academics, diplomats, and journalists observing the region have long been intrigued by such total support from the West for Kagame. Adam Hochschild, author of a book on Congo, has written about Kagame: "How this media-savvy autocrat has managed to convince so many American journalists, diplomats and political leaders that he is a great statesman is worth a book in itself." Some have said it was due to Western guilt for not intervening in Rwanda's 1994 genocide, during which the Clinton administration in particular refused to act. Others have cited Rwanda's contribution of troops to foreign peacekeeping missions, relieving the burden of military intervention from the West.
There was also Rwanda's efficient autocratic state, which appeared to carry out foreign aid programs to their last details. Prominent development experts like Columbia University's Jeffrey Sachs champion Rwanda's programs. This led to Rwanda's emergence as a poster child for a global movement that believed in the power of foreign aid to turn around Africa. And Kagame has used his influence with astuteness, both to consolidate political power within his country and to make Rwanda the region's most formidable military force.
At a news conference in Kigali, the Rwandan president cut off a foreign journalist, ordering her not to even mention Human Rights Watch, which had been among the first to accuse Kagame of complicity in the Congo rebellion. It was a typical display of defiance -- and irritation -- from the president.

Rwanda must have assumed that it would be able to block or dismiss this report, as it had all the other accusations in the past. The U.N. investigative team has claimed that Kagame's government refused to engage with it on its findings, despite the team's efforts, as far back as this May.

After the team first presented its findings -- orally -- about one month ago at the U.N. Security Council, every member state, including China, Russia, and Britain, voted in favor of publishing the findings that were damaging to Rwanda, according to diplomats who witnessed the meeting and spoke with me under condition of confidentiality. But the United States blocked the release.
Then, suddenly, the U.S. government announced that, for the first time, it was suspending military aid -- to the tune of $200,000, which had been earmarked for a military training academy -- to its longtime ally. In an emailed statement, Hilary Fuller Renner, a State Department spokeswoman, wrote, "The United States government is deeply concerned about the evidence that Rwanda is implicated in the provision of support to Congolese rebel groups, including M23."
It was the first sign of a change in policy. And though Kagame dismissed the cut as "nothing," he was obviously concerned. A team of French journalists reporting on the president noted how much of Kagame's time was spent dealing with the M23 accusations -- and his government's denial has been swift and strident. But it seems the West's patience for Kagame's interference in Congo has run out. A Human Rights Watch director has claimed that the United States is "sick of being lied to."
Kagame is the region's most powerful figure, and his army could neutralize the M23 rebels if he ordered it. Additionally, if the alleged Rwandan support for M23 were to end and Rwanda offered the rebels no escape route, the rebellion would quite likely be beaten into submission by Congolese and U.N. forces. But there's no indication yet that Kagame intends to exercise either of these options.
The bottom line is that there's a long history of support for Rwanda despite evidence of human rights violations. The regime that Kagame toppled back in 1994, which was responsible for the genocide, also received large amounts of aid and support from the West. And that government was also praised for maintaining peace and stability in a troubled region and for managing foreign funds effectively. Kagame has been equally effective in casting a spell over donors and extricating himself from tight diplomatic situations. But one judges by the increasingly bitter tone of Kagame's public pronouncements, it seems that the Rwandan autocrat is tiring of constant Western scrutiny. And the West may be getting tired of him as well.
Should this money be strictly conditional on reform? Should it only go to civil society with the participation of the opposition parties inside and outside Rwanda? And are there any other ways out of the dilemma like a cutting of aid aiming to topple Kagame the dictator and the mastermind of the Rwandan and Congolese genocides?

We are very keen to hear what you think.
As International is an international nonpartisan charity organization devoted to defending human rights. It’s an organization working to promote democracy and national reconciliation, inside countries of the African Great lakes Region.
As International centers its work on the twin concepts of freedom of self-determination and freedom from tyranny. These ideals include the belief that all human beings have the rights to speak freely, to associate with those of like mind, and to leave and enter their countries. Individuals in a free society must be accorded equal treatment and due process under law, and must have the opportunity to participate in the governments of their countries;
As International’s ideals likewise find expression in the conviction that all human beings have the right to be free from arbitrary detainment or exile and from interference and coercion in matters of conscience. ASI does not support nor condone violence.
The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

28/08/2012 07:38:00 KongoTimes!



[Since 1994, the world witnesses the horrifying reality : the Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule, tyranny and corruption in Rwanda. The current government has been characterized by the total impunity of RPF criminals, the Tutsi economic monopoly, the Tutsi militaristic domination with an iron fist, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus), mass-arrests and mass-murder by the RPF criminal organization.


So long as justice and accountability for RPF past and current crimes are ignored and delayed, Peace and Stability will remain illusive and impossible in Rwanda=>As International]

Didier Reynders Vice-premier Ministre et Ministre belge des Affaires étrangères

Le patron de la diplomatie belge en appelle à des concertations à l'ONU et à l'UE en vue des sanctions contre le Rwanda, et promet la pleine participation de son pays qui compte également suspendre son aide au développement. Kigali a compris le message et s'engage à coopérer pleinement dès cette semaine.

Did
ier Reynders boucle sa mission congolo-rwandaise par Kigali. Le Vice-premier Ministre et Ministre belge des Affaires étrangères a été reçu le week-end par le Président Rwandais, Paul Kagamé, avant de tenir une conférence de presse avec son homologue Louise Mushikiwabo. A cette occasion, le chef de la diplomatie belge est monté d'un cran dans son discours pour appeler fermement le Rwanda à prendre une part active dans le processus de pacification de la région et à prouver qu’il n’est pas une partie du problème, sous peine de sanctions internationales.
Didier Reynders a, bien entendu, continué à laisser à Kigali le bénéfice du doute au sujet de son implication dans le conflit à l'Est de la RDC. Bruxelles n'a, en effet, pas encore décidé de suspendre son aide au développement au profit du Rwanda, mais le ton est bel et bien monté d'un cran face aux autorités rwandaises.

« Il est urgent de prendre des initiatives et si ce n’est pas le cas, il y aura une escalade. Et ce, pas seulement sur le terrain, mais peut-être au niveau international. La Belgique attend les discussions qui vont avoir lieu au Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU et au comité de sanction dans les prochains jours. Mais s’il en ressort une volonté de sanction au niveau international, nous y participerons", a prévenu Reynders.

Ainsi, Didier Reynders a demandé à Kigali de s'abstenir de tout soutien au M-23, sous peine d'une "escalade" dangereuse qui pourrait se traduire par des sanctions internationales. Quant à ce que la Belgique pourrait faire comme action, le patron de la diplomatie belge a laissé entrevoir des sanctions à la suite des précédentes. "Nous aurons peut-être des décisions à prendre", a-t-il menacé, faisant ainsi allusion aux mesures de suspension d'aide déjà prises par certains pays occidentaux.

Kigali ébranlé

Le discours semble acoir été capté 5/5 à Kigali où l'on a senti une sorte d'abranlement. Le Rwanda s'est engagé à coopérer pleinement à la pacification des Grands Lacs. En effet, réagissant aux propos de son homologue belge, Louise Mushikiwabo a affirmé l'engagement du Rwanda de prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires et de collaborer avec les pays de la région des Grands Lacs. Dès cette semaine, elle se rendra au siège de l’ONU à New York pour réaffirmer cet engagement, mais aussi défendre la ligne de communication de son pays.

En attendant, on peut constater qu'après les récriminations qui ont fusé de toutes part contre le Rwanda, avec des sanctions isolées à la clé, la position belge tend à organiser la réaction internationale contre le Rwanda en faisant entrevoir des sanctions concertées que Didier Reynders estime plus efficaces que les précédentes mesures plutôt symboliques et isolées.

« J’ai entendu l’annonce des Etats-Unis qui porte sur la suspension de son aide au Rwanda de l’ordre de 200 mille dollars. Je ne pense pas que ça fasse une pression importante », avait déclaré le Ministre belge des Affaires étrangères le jeudi 23 août à Lubumbashi après sa rencontre avec le Président Joseph Kabila. Il estimait donc que si l'on doit prendre des sanctions contre le rwanda, celles-ci devraient être consécutives à des concertations au niveau de l’Union européenne ou des Nations unies. « Moi je préfère travailler avec une coordination pour que si des mesures doivent être décidées qu’elles le soient pour tous ensemble dans l’Union Européenne ou aux Nations Unies. Les actions isolées semblent être des effets d’annonce », avait dit Didier Reynders qui préconisait la stratégie du dialogue pour mettre fin à la guerre.

L'étau se resserre sur Paul Kagamé

Cette nième pression diplomatique sur le Rwanda ne fait que conforter la position de la RDC qui a réussi à mobiliser la communauté internationale autour de la nouvelle agression rwandaise. Depuis le début du drame, Kigali est allé de dénégations en dénégations, mais sans parvenir à stopper la roue de la diplomatie. Dès le départ, presu'au même moment où l'ONU diffusait son rapport incriminait le Rwanda, Kinshasa avait donné l'alerte en engageant, sans attendre, une offensive diplomatique qui a justement commencé par Kigali.

Une première contre-vérification conjointe sur terrain se soldera par la première fuite du Rwanda dont les experts refusèrent de contresigner le procès verbal. Celui-ci établissait, en effet, l'éimplication du Rwanda par des preuves telles que des militaires rwandais recrutés et équipés au Rwanda, mais aussi des ex-FDLR retournés au Rwanda mais qui ont été réinjectés dans les rangs du M-23.

L'avalanche des sanctions préliminaires, les poursuites ouvertes contre Ntaganda et ses lieutenants à la CPI, les perspectives du même genre de poursuites contre Paul Kagamé et les hautes autorités constituant son régime, etc; autant donc de résultats qui indiquent, d'une part, que la diplomatie congolais carbure à plein régime et, d'autre part, que l'étau ne cesse de se resserer contre Paul Kagamé qui n'aura pas d'autre issue que de lâcher du lest. Au finish, le Rwanda va incontournablement s'en sortir sérieusement affaibli avec les sanctions multiformes qui sont attendues. Kinshasa compte, par ailleurs, saisir la Cour Internationale de Justice (CIJ) pour obtenir les réparations consécutives, notamment, à,la grave crise humanitaire provoquée par l'équipée de Paul Kagamé.

Jonas Eugène KOTA

Published By www.KongoTimes.info - © KongoTimes! - All Rights Reserved.
As International is an international nonpartisan charity organization devoted to defending human rights. It’s an organization working to promote democracy and national reconciliation, inside countries of the African Great lakes Region.


As International centers its work on the twin concepts of freedom of self-determination and freedom from tyranny. These ideals include the belief that all human beings have the rights to speak freely, to associate with those of like mind, and to leave and enter their countries. Individuals in a free society must be accorded equal treatment and due process under law, and must have the opportunity to participate in the governments of their countries;

As International’s ideals likewise find expression in the conviction that all human beings have the right to be free from arbitrary detainment or exile and from interference and coercion in matters of conscience. ASI does not support nor condone violence.

The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

 [Since 1994, the world witnesses the horrifying reality : the Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule, tyranny and corruption in Rwanda. The current government has been characterized by the total impunity of RPF criminals, the Tutsi economic monopoly, the Tutsi militaristic domination with an iron fist, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus), mass-arrests and mass-murder by the RPF criminal organization.


So long as justice and accountability for RPF past and current crimes are ignored and delayed, Peace and Stability will remain illusive and impossible in Rwanda=>AS International]

 

The Rwandan bloody criminal and dictator  allowed to run a country. 8 millions of assassinated Rwadans, Congolese Hutus plus Western citizens including priests and nuns.

Instead of arresting him and bring him before the bar of justice, Kagame was in March 2003 awarded the 2003 Global Leadership Award by the Young Presidents' Organization (YPO). He received the award in recognition of his "commitment and tireless work to address crises, to foster understanding, unity, and peace to benefit all people." YPO regard his role in reconciling the Tutsi and the Hutu differences in Rwanda and in developing a peaceful solution to the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo as a benchmark of great leadership, uncommon inspiration and remarkable achievement.




One of Kagame's achievements : Massacres of Hutu intellectuals, women and children in the Rwandan Auschwitz : Kibeho - Gikongoro



1. In April 2005, Kagame was awarded an Honorary Degree of Doctor Laws by the University of the Pacific in the United States.
2. In September 2005, Kagame was awarded the Andrew Young Medal for Capitalism and Social Progress by Georgia State University in the United States.


International Criminal Court: The right place for Paul Kagame To face his awful criminal charges The mastermind of the Rwandan Genocide has to be denied sanctuary.


3. In September 2005, Kagame was awarded the African National Achievement Award by the Africa America Institute in the USA. 
4. In April 2006, Kagame was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by Oklahoma Christian University in the USA. 
5. In May 2006, Kagame was given the 2006 ICT Africa Award, an award that is designed to recognize and reward organizations and individuals that have demonstrated excellence in promoting the use of ICTs for the overall development of the African continent.
6. In September 2006, Rwanda was listed as a Top-10 reformer on the Ease of doing business index by the World Bank.
   
   July 2007, Kagame won the Best Head Of State in Africa in Support of ICT Award. Kagame won the same award in May 2006, in an event that took place in Kigal.
7. In August 2007, Kagame was given the Hands Off Cain Award for his role in ending the death penalty in his country.
8. In November 2007, Kagame was awarded an Honorary Degree of Doctor in Law by the University of Glasgow in Scotland. 
9. In December 2007, Kagame was given the African Gender Award in Dakar, Senegal for his role in promoting gender equality in Rwanda.
10. March 2009, Kagame was awarded with “The Distinction of the Grand Cordon in the Most Venerable Order of the Knighthood of Pioneers” by Liberia’s President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf.The highest honour in Liberian was given to Kagame in recognition of his exemplary leadership and exceptional contribution to the promotion of women’s rights.
11. In June 2009, Kagame was awarded the Children's Champion Award by the US Fund for UNICEF for Promoting Children's Rights
12. In September 2009, Kagame was awarded the International Peace Medal from Saddleback Church for his support and role in the P.E.A.C.E. plan.
13. In September 2009, Kagame honoured with the Clinton Global Citizen Award in recognition of his leadership in public service that has improved the lives of people of Rwanda.
14. November 2009, Kagame was presented with the ‘Most Innovative People Award for Economic Innovation’ at the Lebanon2020 Summit.
15. May 2010, Kagame was awarded 'Lifetime Leadership Award for Development and Equality' by Rwandan Women in recognition of his efforts in developing the nation and promoting equality amongst Rwandans.May 2010, Kagame was awarded the 2010 Rwanda Convention Association (RCA) Award of Excellence in recognition of his role in steering Rwanda towards a knowledge-based economy and promotion of the private sector.
    Kagame and his RPF unspeakable crimes against the Hutu majority population in Rwanda
    
    
16. On 5 June 2010, Kagame was awarded the prestigious 'Energy Globe Award' on the occasion of World Environment Day celebrated in Kinigi, Rwanda. 
17. On 5 July 2010, Rwanda International Network Association (RINA) awarded Kagame for his continuous efforts in the promotion of Education.
18. On 27 September 2010, British Magazine New Statesman included Paul Kagame in the list of "The World's 50 Most Influential Figures 2010" on 49th place.[44]
19. On 19 November 2010, Kagame was presented the “Grand Croix – Ordre de merit du Benin” the country’s highest national award.
    
    The decoration is awarded exclusively to personalities of the rank of Head of State in recognition of outstanding achievement or to express esteem.
20. 1 June 2011: President Kagame was awarded the Chello Foundation Humanitarian Award 2011 for his “outstanding leadership of the Republic of Rwanda since 1994”
21. 1 September 2011: THE International Olympic Committee (IOC) awarded President Paul Kagame with the 2010 IOC award for 'Inspiring Young People' around the world
22. On 7 November 2011, AERG (Association des Etudiants Rescapes du Genocide) awarded Kagame "... in recognition of his efforts and courage to stop the Genocide as he led the Rwanda Patriotic Army,", at the cerebration of AERG 15th Anniversary

 As International is an international nonpartisan charity organization devoted to defending human rights. It’s an organization working to promote democracy and national reconciliation, inside countries of the African Great lakes Region.


As International centers its work on the twin concepts of freedom of self-determination and freedom from tyranny. These ideals include the belief that all human beings have the rights to speak freely, to associate with those of like mind, and to leave and enter their countries. Individuals in a free society must be accorded equal treatment and due process under law, and must have the opportunity to participate in the governments of their countries;

As International’s ideals likewise find expression in the conviction that all human beings have the right to be free from arbitrary detainment or exile and from interference and coercion in matters of conscience. ASI does not support nor condone violence.


The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

Related articles:

by Kevin Jon Heller
Rwandese and Congolese to the ICC: Indict Kagame
y Ann Garrison




The United States of America seems to have no permanent enemy or friend, but permanent interests. In pursuit of its interests, the US has created dictators in many countries gotten rid of them when they ‘threaten’ the US interests. Potentates like Mobutu, Hosni Mubarak and Ali Saleh were left to face the wrath of the mass after they proved to be a liability to the US. Dictators such as Theodoro Nguema Obiang, Denis Sassou-Ngwesso and Ali Bongo are still in power plundering and ruining their countries as they deem fit simply because they have not yet proved to be dangerous or independent minded in dealing with the US.
Rwanda, since its resurrection from the 100-day massacre became the darling of the West. Nobody lectured Paul Kagame on democracy or Human Rights.
 
Those who failed to interfere to stop genocide in 1994, especially the so-called world powers, had to pat him on the back to silence him from accusing them of their failure. Those who still remember how the international community failed Rwanda, wonder how Kagame would be key to the destabilization of DRC that was destabilized since it gained independence. Many still remember how the CIA killed the founder of DRC Patrice Lumumba and handed over power to puppet and thief Joseph Mobutu who ruined and plundered DRC for decades. Many wonder how, ironically, DRC 'stability and prosperity' can be in the agenda of the country that toppled and killed its founder. Still many wonder how invading, plundering and destabilizing DRC would be a crime while doing the same to Iraq would be deemed legal! What a contradiction!
Currently, the lovey dovey relationship between Kagame and The West has been stained. All results from the poisoned chalice known as DRC. Kagame is now openly assaulted and accused of aiding M23, a ragtag rebel group in DRC in order to destabilize the already destabilized DRC. Before long, Kagame and Museveni invaded DRC under the pretext of repelling and seeking to arrest Hutu militias. This reason was accepted for a while before the true motive came to the agora. Seriously, Kagame is threatened and warned that he can be indicted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague just like Taylor who was recently found guilty and sentenced to serve 50 years in the prison.


Stephen Rapp The Head of US war crimes office


Some western countries have announced the suspension of financial aid to Rwanda. This is a warning to Kagame to behave well. One Stephen Rapp, who leads the US Office of Global Criminal Justice was recently quoted by the Guardian saying, “Charles Taylor never set foot in Sierra Leone, and aided and abetted, and was convicted of aiding and abetting, the Revolutionary United Front with assistance that was substantial and, the judges said, without which the RUF could not have committed the atrocities to the extent they did commit them. Because of that evidence, Charles Taylor was convicted and sentenced to 50 years." if anything, this is a clear message to Kigali that the US can change the rules of the game anytime if at all and when at all.



Kagame remains at large despite war crimes crimes against humanity and genocide he com- mitted in both Rwanda and Democratic Republic of the Congo