Politics staff on the ground and the lack of knowledge needed to contextualize Rwanda ’ s choices , or their determination to discredit the government .
Similarly , Rwanda will prosecute , through all means possible , whoever crosses the line of criticism and chooses violence as a means to express dissent . Remarkably , the resentment from members of INGOs and their aforementioned flirting with fringe elements have led them to justify violence against ordinary Rwandans , which they view as an acceptable way to express political dissent .
Rwanda ’ s refusal to allow unchallenged reporting makes members of the INGOs nervous since such an approach undermines their credibility whenever their reports are inaccurate , as is often the case . Ironically , they have never considered that their contemptuous and confrontational approach , which also undermines the government ’ s credibility , warrants a similar attitude on the part of their target .
This situation has left INGOs focusing on frivolous and controversial criticisms . One such criticism is that Rwanda ' s stability is a result of its tight control of the media , civil society and political parties . This idea fails to factor in Rwanda ’ s commendable socio-economic achievements , which might be the best explanation as to why no insurgent group has been able to gain the requisite popular support to challenge the government . It also fails to acknowledge that wherever such control or influence over the activities of the media , civil society and political parties was left to INGOs , it invariantly led to instability .
Another frivolous claim of INGOs is that the promotion of national identity , Ndi Umunyarwanda , is contradictory to the idea that the genocide was committed against the Tutsi as if Rwandans are incapable of understanding nuances . Or that the Hutu , Tutsi and Twa identities are banned in Rwanda , which is a misrepresentation meant to paint the government ’ s deliberate and intentional efforts in pursuing unity as forcing reconciliation upon Rwandans .
All these and many more criticisms rotate around the alleged absence of freedom of expression , which brings to mind an anecdote that is illustrative of the persisting misrepresentations of Rwanda . There was a small exchange between two Rwandans , a participant in a transitional justice study tour and a speaker to the group , who happens to be a strong supporter of Ndi Umunyarwanda . Paraphrased , the point put forward by the former to the latter was : " You know , when you see in Europe , after the Holocaust , it is the majority , the Europeans , who decided to never kill the Jews ( and other minorities ) again , and adopted several measures . But in Rwanda , we do not see the collective majority voice , expressed as Hutu , to give the assurance to Tutsi (‘ the minority ’) that the genocide will never happen again ." The speaker responded thus : " When we achieve Ndi Umunyarwanda , we will not have majority or minority anymore . We will all be Rwandans , and the protection will be extended to all nationals instead of being a sort of treaty signed between two groups or a promise from one group to another ." The reason I am bringing this story is to demonstrate that the idea that Rwandans are not asking each other hard questions by exercising their freedom of speech is a myth propagated by foreigners . This constant and internal conversation is not meant to attract international media , and , sometimes , it takes place in forums where INGOs are not involved .
Rwanda might not be providing space for street battles to visualize our freedom of expression , but we live in the assurance that all its government agencies will respond to a mere tweet reporting an injustice . And as long as this connection exists , INGOs will remain hostile to any positive development in Rwanda as the connection denies them the space to operate - supervise and arbitrate the disputes - in Rwanda as they do in some other African countries .
❧❧❧
Dr Alphonse Muleefu is a Rwandan academic .
77