Rwanda-Gate: The Forgotten (But NOT Gone) Scandal of the Clinton-Democrats in Africa

Ms Ingabire Victoire Umuhozawacu The Would-be President of Rwanda

Her trial in Kigali, which has been marked by due-process violations and frequent, prolonged postponements, has been decried by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International as a “travesty of justice.”

[Since 1994, the world witnesses the horrifying Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule with an iron hand, 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, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus)and mass arrests of Hutus by the RPF criminal organization =>AS International]





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 Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule with an iron hand, 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, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus)and mass arrests of Hutus by the RPF criminal organization =>AS International]

1. Kuba Abanyarwanda benshi muli mwe mwalizeye ko amashyaka aliho azagira icyo abagezaho aliko kugeza na n’ubu akaba ali nta na kimwe akora uretse gusoromera inda zabayarimo bitwa ngo ni aba leaders;
2. Kuba intérêt national yitiranywa cyangwa ifatwa nkaho ali iya famille cyangwa intérêt personnel;
3. Kuba bamwe bagitekereza ngo icyabazamura ni ya politiki ya Munyangire bigatuma ntacyo bo bageraho cyangwa uwo bafitanye ibibazo ntacyo ageraho ugasanga iyo myifatire ali iyo guha ingufu umwanzi twese tuzi;
4. Kuba tutaramenya umwanzi wacu ndavuga uw' Abanyarwanda uwaliwe;
5. Kutamenya kubabalirana kungira ngo maze dushyire hamwe ingufu maze dutsinde umwanzi tuzi twese aliwe utegeka u Rwanda uko ashaka muli iki gihe akaba anamaze kutumaraho abacu atarebye ubwoko cg akarerere;
6. Kuba dukomeje kubaka chapelles zikorera RPF na kagame cyangwa zimwe zaliwe n’amashyaka akorera umwanzi bijyujijwe ku muzungu, izo chapelle zikaba zitanakulikiza amabwiliza ya kiliziya (ali nazo zashyiriweho) kandi hali Eglise biteye ubwoba no kwibaza aho tujya cyangwa aho batujyana;
7. Kutamenya gufatanya n’abo duhuje ibibazo bijyana no kurwanya intare ilimo yica abacu tuzi ko kandi ko alitwe dutahiwe, tugakuliza cyangwa tugakora ibyo umwanzi ashaka bijyana na régionalisme, ethnisme na racisme bitagize icyo bitugezaho uretse kuduca intege;
8. Kuba abahuje idéologie imwe ku kibazo cy ‘u Rwanda cyerekeye génocide batinda gufatanya gukorera hamwe mu Mpuzamashyaka (Plateforme) kugira ngo barengere Abanyarwanda.

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 Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule with an iron hand, 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, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus)and mass arrests of Hutus by the RPF criminal organization =>AS International]

Rwanda: Cover-Up Negates Killings

(Brussels) – A report published on October 13, 2017 by Rwanda’s National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) attempting to discredit Human Rights Watch documentation of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances is full of falsehoods, compounding the injustice and abuse suffered by the victims’ families, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch has found that Rwandan government officials threatened and coerced victims’ family members to present false information about what happened to their loved ones. Human Rights Watch is deeply concerned about the family members’ safety.

“The allegations by the National Commission for Human Rights show that Rwandan authorities are unwilling to tolerate criticism or make meaningful attempts to improve the country’s human rights record,” said Ida Sawyer, Central Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Instead of discussing the findings with Human Rights Watch – before publication – as requested and opening serious investigations, Rwandan officials presented false accounts and threatened those who dared to speak out about the killings.”

Bwanakweli Charles Kizito Disappeared on January 23rd,  1997 He's reported to have be detained and then killed in military camp of Ruhengeri because of his relations to the French people before 1994

Human Rights Watch found that local officials or security forces detained family members of victims who refused to fabricate stories about what happened to their loved ones. “The local authorities asked me if I was ready to tell officials who would come to our village that [the victim] had died from illness at the hospital, but I refused,” a family member of one of the victims told Human Rights Watch. “I saw how [the victim] was killed, and I could not change the truth. A few days later, I was arrested.” He said he was released after several days.
A France 24 investigation, aired on October 31, found numerous discrepancies in the NCHR report and corroborated the circumstances surrounding four of the summary executions documented by Human Rights Watch.
Since the NCHR report was issued, Human Rights Watch has analyzed the report as well as the statements made during the October 13 news conference and the commission’s presentation to parliament on October 19. Human Rights Watch has also carried out further investigations into some of the killings. Some of the witnesses Human Rights Watch spoke to were shocked to learn what had been alleged in the NCHR report.
A case in point was the extrajudicial killing of Alphonse Majyambere. The NCHR produced a different person at its news conference – with the same name, but from a different sector and almost 30 years older than the person who was killed.
For the case of Elias Habyarimana, killed by security forces in March, the NCHR presented a woman named Pelagie Nikuze who said Habyarimana is her husband and that he is living in Belgium. Human Rights Watch found that the man who is said to be in Belgium is a different person. The man killed in March was a fisherman who never had a passport.

The NCHR acknowledged that Fulgence Rukundo was killed, contending it was for illegally crossing the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo. Yet several villagers confirmed to Human Rights Watch in late October that they and dozens of other people from their village had personally witnessed soldiers executing Rukondo for allegedly stealing and killing a cow on December 6, 2016, in Kiraga cell, several kilometers from the border.
“The death of [Rukundo] is a known story on the hill [where we live],” a witness told Human Rights Watch on October 24. “The human rights commission was too afraid to come here. If they dared approach me now, I would spit in their faces, ready to suffer the consequences.”
The cases are included in the 40-page July report by Human Rights Watch, “‘All Thieves Must Be Killed’: Extrajudicial Executions in Western Rwanda,” which documents the extrajudicial executions of at least 37 suspected petty offenders and the enforced disappearances of four others between April 2016 and April 2017. Human Rights Watch has since documented at least one additional killing by police of a suspected thief in the same period. Family members were threatened when they tried to recover the bodies of their loved ones, and authorities spoke about the executions in public community meetings, using the killings as a warning to other would-be thieves. Since the Human Rights Watch report was released in July, the killings appear to have stopped.
The Human Rights Watch report is based on research in Rwanda between January and July 2017, including interviews with 119 witnesses to the killings, family members and friends of victims, government officials, and others knowledgeable about the arrests and executions. All interviews were conducted individually and privately. Human Rights Watch explained to each interviewee the purpose of the interview, its voluntary nature, the way the interview would be used, and the fact that no compensation would be provided, in accordance with the methodology Human Rights Watch uses in its research in over 90 countries.
The July report includes the names and other details about all the cases it documented and photos of many of the victims. Human Rights Watch provided a list of cases and requested meetings with Rwandan authorities before publication.
Human Rights Watch stands by its findings and strongly rejects the allegations made by the NCHR. Despite the cover-up in the NCHR report, Human Rights Watch continues to call for a constructive dialogue with the government and the NCHR and remains open to meeting and sharing information before publication of major reports, Human Rights Watch said.
The NCHR report was released three days after Human Rights Watch published a subsequent report documenting the systematic use of torture in Rwanda. Over the course of 10 months, Human Rights Watch repeatedly sought meetings with authorities, including the NCHR, to discuss those research findings. None of these meeting requests were granted.
“Rwandan authorities have disparaged and attacked Human Rights Watch for speaking out about egregious human rights violations, while threatening family and friends of victims who have already suffered immensely,” Sawyer said. “The government should immediately cease all intimidation and harassment of family members and other witnesses, take reports of killings and other grave violations seriously, and join the ranks of countries that work toward respecting fundamental human rights.”
Attempted Cover-Up with Deceptive Cases
Of the extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances documented by Human Rights Watch, the NCHR claimed that seven individuals are still alive, that four died of natural causes, that six died in “various accidents,” that one was shot by Congolese soldiers, that eight were shot by Rwandan security forces while illegally crossing the border from Congo, that two were shot while resisting arrest, and that 10 others were “not known.”

The NCHR provided the most detailed information on two cases: Alphonse Majyambere and Elias Habyarimana. During the October 13 news conference, the NCHR presented a man named Alphonse Majyambere with a presumably valid national identification card from Bushaka cell, Boneza sector in Rutsiro District. Based on his ID, this man is 64 years old. The Alphonse Majyambere whose summary execution Human Rights Watch documented was from Nyagahinika cell, Kigeyo sector, in the same district. The Majyambere who was killed, a known thief in his village, was born in 1981 – making him around 35 years old at time of death. He was originally from Rukombe village.
In late October, Human Rights Watch spoke with people close to Majyambere in Rukombe who re-confirmed that Majyambere is dead and was killed by security forces in late September 2016. A family member who saw Majyambere’s body told Human Rights Watch on June 14 that, as the police were burying Majyambere’s body, “they announced to the crowd, ‘If we kill and bury him like this, let it be an example to those of you who want to steal.’” The same person told Human Rights Watch in late October that the NCHR report is “pure lies. Do these people think I am too stupid, as someone who saw his body, to not to know he is dead?”
“Alphonse was a vagabond and a thief,” a different witness told Human Rights Watch in late October. “He would steal cows and move to different areas. His death is known. He could not have been an old man. He was born in 1981.”
For the second case, the NCHR presented a woman named Pelagie Nikuze who said she is the wife of one Elias Habyarimana, a former soldier who has been living in Belgium since 2009 and who is originally from Nyarubuye cell in Rutsiro District.
While Human Rights Watch does not discount the existence of Nikuze’s husband, Human Rights Watch had documented the killing of a different Habyarimana in Gabiro cell in Rutsiro District. He was from Nyagahinga Nyagahinga village. Security forces killed this Habyarimana, who was approximately 30 years old, in late March on Lake Kivu for using an illegal fishing net. He was among 11 people executed for using illegal fishing nets in cases documented by Human Rights Watch. In late October, Human Rights Watch re-interviewed people close to Habyarimana and other witnesses to his execution. They confirmed that Habyrimana was indeed killed earlier this year.
“I heard that the government said [Elias] was alive,” someone close to Habyarimana said in late October. “I was shocked when I heard this. Elias is dead.” The Habyarimana who was killed was never a member of the army and was never in possession of a passport, the person said. “He did not even know how to read or write,” the person said. “How can people who did not know him be allowed to say that he is alive and living in Belgium? Instead of helping with his children who were made orphans by the state, they now persecute us with these lies.”
Government Intimidation and Threats
Numerous family members of victims told Human Rights Watch that local authorities had interrogated, threatened, or even detained them since the publication of the July report. Authorities attempted to coerce some family members to provide a false account of what happened to their loved ones. Human Rights Watch has also documented threats to local communities where the killings took place.
For example, in Nyagahinika, a resident said, “In August the local officials had a meeting and said, ‘We know some of you have been speaking to strangers about Majyambere [one of the victims]. Anyone who speaks of his death will have problems with us.” Another family member of a victim told Human Rights Watch that he was threatened repeatedly by local authorities who wanted to know everything he had said to Human Rights Watch.
The family member of another victim said, “In July, the radio talked about those killed by men from the security services in Rubavu and Rutsiro, including [the victim]. The local authorities started to threaten me to know if I was the one who gave this information to Human Rights Watch. Since then, the authorities suspect me. Then they used [the victim’s] second wife to say that [he] died of a disease in the hospital, but this was a pure lie.”
Human Rights Watch is not the only international body concerned with reprisals against those who dare speak out. On October 19, 2017, the United Nations Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, invited to visit Rwanda after its 2015 ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, suspended its trip due to obstruction from the government and a fear of reprisals against people the subcommittee interviewed. It is only the third time in 10 years that the subcommittee has suspended a visit.
Attacks on Human Rights Watch Staff
The NCHR report triggered a torrent of disparaging and unfounded allegations against Human Rights Watch staff from government officials and parliament members. On October 13, Justice Minister Johnston Busingye tweeted allegations that certain staff were sympathetic to the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda, FDLR), a largely Rwandan Hutu armed group active in Congo. On October 19, in an open debate at parliament, a member of parliament called the Human Rights Watch executive director a “dog of genocidaires.”
Human Rights Watch categorically rejects all accusations of collaboration with the FDLR or of political bias. The FDLR includes people who participated in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 and others who have committed, and continue to commit, horrific human rights abuses in eastern Congo. As the Rwandan government is aware, Human Rights Watch has documented and denounced the FDLR’s abuses in detailed reports and news releases, repeatedly called for those responsible to be brought to justice, and has testified in court about their crimes.
Rwandan officials have repeatedly accused those perceived to be “against” the government of collaboration with exiled opposition groups or armed groups such as the FDLR.
On October 19, the parliament recommended that the government re-evaluate its relationship with Human Rights Watch so that “ignominious acts tarnishing the image of Rwanda and Rwandan people could not continue.” The Memorandum of Understanding between the Justice Ministry and Human Rights Watch, which in theory allows the organization to be registered in Rwanda, expired in June 2017. Human Rights Watch requested a meeting with the ministry to renew this document but has not received a response.



Human Rights Watch (HRW) has released a report detailing unlawful detention and torture in Rwanda.
The 91-page report - We Will Force You to Confess: Torture and Unlawful Military Detention in Rwanda - alleges details widespread and systematic torture by the military and accuses judges of being complicit in the creation of a culture of impunity for the armed forces.
Victims were beaten until they signed confessions, often on fabricated charges, in a series of centres around the country, HRW says, claiming that Rwandan officials use torture whenever they please.
This is not the first time Rwanda has been accused of torture.
In 2012, Sarah Jackson, Amnesty International's acting deputy Africa director, said that though Rwandan military's "human rights record abroad is increasingly scrutinised, their unlawful detention and torture of civilians in Rwanda is shrouded in secrecy".
According to Tuesday's report, the use of unlawful incarceration and torture is continuing.
Al Jazeera spoke to HRW's researcher Lewis Mudge, who is based in Nairobi, about some of the details in the report, why torture continues to be used in Rwanda and if justice would be served for the survivors.
Al Jazeera: Your new report shows that Rwanda's military uses arbitrary arrest, and in many cases torture to force confessions out of suspects. How widespread is this practice in the country?
Lewis Mudge: Human Rights Watch confirmed 104 cases of people who were illegally detained and in many cases tortured or ill-treated in military detention centres in Rwanda during a seven-year period. This information came from speaking with 61 former detainees of this illegal detention and through trial observations.
However, these numbers scratch the surface. Detainees told us of many other people they saw in military detention camps. It is difficult to say how widespread this practice is as these issues, torture and illegal detention, are very sensitive in Rwanda. Many of the people we spoke to were threatened with detention or death if they spoke out about what they have suffered. Many people are simply too afraid to talk.
Only an independent investigation by the government of Rwanda could shed light on how deep this problem really is.
Al Jazeera: The report documents heinous methods. Could you elaborate on the types of measures being used on suspects?
Mudge: Beatings, asphyxiations, electric shocks, mock executions … these were just some of the types of torture used to extract confessions or get detainees to accuse others. Some men spoke of having weights tied to their testicles, others of being handcuffed with their hands behind their backs for days on end.
Many former detainees told us that in the end, they agreed to whatever they were told to say - they could not take the pain. There are also the inhuman conditions in which these people were kept. Many were given rations that could barely keep them alive through months of detention.
Al Jazeera: Is there a specific group or set of individuals that the Rwandan military is targeting? Is it also being used to quell political dissent?
Mudge: People who end up in military detention in Rwanda are accused of crimes against state security and terrorism. This is not necessarily being used to quell political dissent, rather, it is being used against those suspected of association with groups hostile to Rwanda such as the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) - an armed group based in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo - and, to a lesser extent, the Rwanda National Congress (RNC), an opposition group in exile. Some of the members of the FDLR took part in the genocide.
Al Jazeera: If the majority of victims or survivors are said to be belonging to the FDLR, is this partly why the issue is shrouded in secrecy?
Mudge: No, the FDLR is openly regarded as an enemy of Rwanda. And the FDLR have carried out, and continue to carry out, killings, rapes, and other serious abuses against civilians in eastern Congo. However, the majority of former detainees were not FLDR, but were suspected of having ties to the FDLR, hence their illegal detention and forced confessions.
Al Jazeera: This is not the first time that the Rwandan government has been accused of torture. Has there been any improvement in the way the country's deals with suspects seen as threats to the state?
Mudge: No, this is an ongoing problem. Our research is from 2010 to 2016, but we have cases suggesting this continues.
Al Jazeera: And yet, in 2015, Rwanda ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, allowing visits to detention sites by the protocol's Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture. But a national mechanism has yet to be set up. Surely, this is not positive.
Mudge: We are told the national mechanism will be set up "soon". We are also told the mechanism will likely be in the National Commission for Human Rights, a body which has shown a reluctance to investigate sensitive cases of human rights abuses in recent years.
It is imperative that the commission demonstrate independence and courage to investigate these sensitive cases if the national preventive mechanism is to be anything more than a cover for these crimes. The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture will visit Rwanda next week.
It should visit areas of unlawful detention and torture outlined in the report. The Committee Against Torture, the body established by the Convention Against Torture to monitor compliance by state parties, will review Rwanda's compliance later in 2017. It should ensure that Rwanda takes torture allegations seriously and carries out credible investigations.
Al Jazeera: How have Rwandan authorities responded to your findings and what are you expecting to happen, moving forward?
Mudge: We have shared research findings on numerous occasions over the past 10 months with the government of Rwanda and asked for meetings in order to further clarify our work. We have also asked for an official response to this report. Unfortunately, we heard nothing back.
The government of Rwanda must confront the systematic use of torture and unlawful detention. The government should immediately cease arbitrary and unlawful detention and torture in military detention centres and ensure that no one is held in unofficial detention centres.
It should then investigate all allegations of torture, enforced disappearances, unlawful and arbitrary detention and arrests and ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice.























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

“The rural sector has suffered enormous extraction under the post-genocide government, far more than what had happened before,” said one longtime researcher who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “There is a real increase in misery. When you speak of Rwanda as a volcano, that’s what’s involved.”

Will Rwanda explode again? The big, looming issue is the criminal dictator has won the so-called elections the last August 2017 by ignoring for what the Constitution calls. With so much to answer for, few expect a straightforward exit.

[Since 1994, the world witnesses the horrifying Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule with an iron hand, 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, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus)and mass arrests of Hutus by the RPF criminal organization =>
AS International]




Maybe we shouldn’t care that Rwanda’s recently reelected president is a mass murderer.
After all, he has become a reliable partner, who welcomes U.S. investors, improves public health, and sends peacekeeping forces to hellholes where we won’t, like Darfur.
Admittedly, he jails or kills his political opponents, but that eliminates the destabilizing uncertainty of elections.

Yes, he modified his country’s constitution to allow him to rule for up to 40 years, until 2034, but who expects true democracy in that part of the world anyway?
The crisis unfolding in South Sudan
Of course, it’s unfortunate that his ethnic Tutsi minority holds all key positions in Rwanda, repressing the overwhelming majority ethnic Hutu in a black-on-black version of apartheid, but some Hutu committed genocide in 1994, and so their children and grandchildren must be denied basic rights.
Call me a grudge-holder, but I just can’t forgive and forget that Paul Kagame ordered the killing of approximately 350,000 ethnic Hutu, in Rwanda and Congo, in the 1990s. This puts him in the pantheon of post-WWII murderers, alongside Pol Pot and Idi Amin.
Is there a statute of limitation for genocide? Should subsequent good deeds be exculpatory? By treating him as a valued ally, do we dishonor his victims? Do we violate the Genocide Convention?

Do we encourage repetition of such crimes?
For the uninitiated, here’s Kagame’s abridged rap sheet. Starting in 1990, he led a Tutsi invasion of Rwanda that displaced a million civilians and knowingly provoked the retaliatory carnage for which Rwanda is most famous.
‘The Uncondemned' is hard to watch, but a must-see: review
In 1994, as his forces seized control of Rwanda, they slaughtered an estimated 100,000 Hutu civilians. After many surviving Hutu fled to Congo, he pursued them in 1996, murdering another 200,000. When remaining domestic Hutu resisted his ethnic dictatorship in 1998, he ordered a brutal counterinsurgency that killed 50,000 more.

The only thing more despicable than the magnitude of this killing was its tactics. Kagame typically started by chasing Hutu civilians into harsh territory. As his victims confronted starvation and hunger, his officials would come forward with offers of humanitarian aid.
Gradually, the displaced would trickle in for food and water. When the desperate Hutu had fully assembled, his troops opened fire and killed them all. For more gruesome details, see authoritative reports by the United Nations and Human Rights Watch.
Why do we treat war criminals so disparately? In Libya, Muammar Khaddafy’s forces killed barely 1,000 people in February 2011, including armed opponents, according to judicial investigations. This equates to approximately one-third of one percent of Kagame’s victims.
Yet in response, the International Criminal Court indicted Khaddafy for war crimes, and NATO led an intervention that bombed his forces and assisted his rebel opponents until they captured, sodomized, and executed him. By contrast, Kagame is rewarded with honorary degrees and hundreds of millions in annual foreign aid.
I am not a naïf. I accept that world politics sometimes requires deals with the devil as the lesser evil. Perhaps it is understandable that Washington embraced Kagame in 1994 despite his crimes, in hopes of stabilizing a post-genocide situation. On the other hand we forget that a majority of the refugees are blameless, particularly because so many are children and bcause they happened to be bor n Hutus. And aside from the women and children who simply fled Rwanda with their husbands or fathers, many men joined the exodus not because they had taken part in the genocide but because they feared civil war and random violence.

The case of Victoire Ingabire, a politician from the opposition, was instructive. When she returned to Rwanda that year, having lived 16 years in exile, to prepare a run for president, her first stop was at the official genocide memorial. “We are here honoring at this memorial the Tutsi victims of the genocide.
There are also Hutu who were victims of crimes against humanity and war crimes, not remembered or honored here,” she said in a prepared statement. “Hutu are also suffering. They are wondering when their time will come to remember their people. In order for us to get to that desirable reconciliation, we must be fair and compassionate towards every Rwandan’s suffering.”

But such exigency disappeared long ago. Kagame has proved anything but a force for stability. He invaded Congo twice, spurring wars that resulted in an estimated 5 million fatalities. He continues to undermine democracy by hunting opponents and overriding term limits. Most perilously, he marginalizes Rwanda’s Hutu majority, brewing the next eruption of ethnic violence.
It is high time for a fundamental rethinking of U.S. relations with Rwanda’s leader. Military and diplomatic collaboration should halt. Kagame should be banned from entering the United States or participating in international fora. Humanitarian aid should continue, but other assistance should be curtailed now until he leaves office.
A hardline stance would also send a salutary message to the region’s other aspiring presidents-for-life: Our indulgence has limits.
Isolating Kagame will not by itself resolve the problems of Rwanda or its neighbors. But there can be little hope for peace or justice in central Africa so long as we embrace its worst war criminal.
Kuperman is associate professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin.


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