It is an embarrassment for President Paul Kagame’s regime and those, countries and personalities, who have been supporting Rwanda for the last seventeen years. One such evidence is the request that in his recent press conference in Kigali Kagame made to journalists demanding them not to ask him any question related to Victoire Ingabire. And they abided by his wish. Another indication that the ongoing court hearing of the opposition leader is a serious test of his credibility emerges from the fact that his image among his external supporters has significantly deteriorated; though he still needs their assistance, he cannot anymore treat political opponents as he likes as this was in the past. Everyone is watching him and probably seeking the right moment to get rid of him.
Since September 5th, 2011 the court hearing of Victoire Ingabire, imprisoned leader of FDU-Inkingi, main Rwandan opposition party, has been ongoing in Kigali [Rwanda]. Her case and political path since January 16th, 2010, date of her arrival in Rwanda from The Netherlands where she lived for sixteen years, have both exposed the flaws in the political system and policies of the Rwandan president. It highlights the apartheid –type discriminative regime he leads which treats Hutus as a second class group while favouring his Tutsi minority, and claims at the same time that all are Rwandans, or there are no ethnic communities in the country, to cover up existing segregationist policies.
Following the 1994 genocide, one billion $ from the US government, and millions Euros and £ from Europe have been provided to Rwanda. Some assistance was genuinely motivated for the inaction of the international community during the genocide. Non intervention came about, though Paul Kagame himself, just after the assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana on April 6th, 1994, threatened to fight any force including UN which would intervene in Rwanda affairs. Other assistance was a result of blackmail from the Rwandan government which claimed that the international community was responsible of atrocities the country experienced.
With time a clear picture of what happened then has emerged. All along, though Paul Kagame and his extremist Tutsi group have always pretended to defend the right of Tutsis to return to their home country, it appears they have been serving interests of a small selfish Tutsi elite while simultaneously serving their masters in US, UK and elsewhere who have supported them from the beginning until today. The invasion and ongoing looting of Democratic Republic of Congo have been in the grand design of their sponsors. The fate of Rwandans and Congolese who are victims of their actions does not and did not matter.
Paul Kagame is and has been all along a proxy of the West in the African Great Lakes region. Only fools could deny that fact. The looting of DRC for the benefit of Western governments and multinationals wouldn’t have been possible and continue even today without their support. Even the MONUSCO, with its 20,000 UN contingent personnel in DRC seem to play along the tune of the masters of the grand design for the region. Otherwise it could be very difficult to understand the inefficiency of the UN force in stabilising the region. Of course, to manipulate and propagate propaganda news which are the total reality on the ground, many stratagems have been developed and cleverly refined to deceive the general public.
Mainstream media are owned by powerful individuals and corporations with intertwined interests in what Paul Kagame has been preserving on their behalf. Exposing his flaws by reporting objectively and seriously on Victoire Ingabire case would be like shooting themselves in the foot. This explains in my views why they are not apparently reporting on her hearing as much and objectively as they should. The truth about what really happened in Rwanda does not serve their past and ongoing interests in the region. In the same light, they didn’t report anything on the conclusion of ICTR’s judges in the Military Judgement of February 2009 in Arusha [Tanzania] when the Chamber ruled that it was ‘not satisfied that the Prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the four Accused [Col. Theoneste Bagosora, Col. Anatole Nsengiyumva, Gen. Gratien Kabiligi, and Maj. Aloys Ntabakuze] conspired among themselves, or with others to commit genocide before it unfolded on 7 April 1994.’
There are truths we avoid deliberately because they would make us very uncomfortable if we confront them. That explains significantly the reason mainstream media is not covering the court hearing of Victoire Ingabire in Kigali. By reporting as this should on her case, this would expose many flaws, inconsistencies, conspiracies, responsibilities in atrocities committed. And the alternative becomes an embargo on the related news.