Rwanda ‘ s Liberation insurgency wars that challenged RPF ’ s consolidation of power , as well as the multiplicity of armed groups that operate from the DRC , illustrate the resiliency of the ideology that since the death of Habyarimana in 1994 has lacked clear , uncontested custodians – except some pretenders to the throne , like Ignace Murwanyashyaka , who have surfaced only to disappear into obscurity and death without much fanfare .
In 2010 , Ingabire made a splash when she descended on Rwandan soil for the first time since the genocide in 1994 , and made two significant visits . First , she visited the Kigali Genocide Memorial , where she asked to see where the Hutu genocide victims are buried , in a veiled suggestion that what happened in Rwanda in 1994 were inter-ethnic killings , implying a double genocide , and referring to Hutu victims of the civil war as “ genocide survivors .” Second , she marched southwards to Monyumutwa ’ s tomb in Gitarama , the site of the passing of the ideological baton from an alien to a native authority during a revolution that ushered in the first systematic violence against Tutsi in 1959 .
By these visits and other actions , Ingabire was in reality announcing herself as the symbol of the resilience of that “ old ” ideology by connecting the generational thread from herself and Mbonyumutwa . Since that time , she has been tried and convicted for perpetrating the double genocide theory . Ingabire ’ s actions were predicated on a political mission whose aim is to discredit the emergence of any “ new ” value system that is counter to the kind that prevailed during the “ good old days ” in general and to pull the rug from underneath those who stopped the genocide .
She targeted these because they constitute the twin bases upon which the RPF-led government claims the moral mandate to shape society in its imagination . Consequently , Ingabire has been psychologically manipulating Hutu youth to , rather than dissociate themselves from the crimes of the old generation , justify its crimes and project onto themselves this criminality . An example is the Belgium-based Jambo ASBL whose membership reads like an ancestral “ who is who ” of the “ good old days ” with household names like Ruhumuza and Gustave Mbonyumutwa , the grandsons of Dominique .
Ingabire refers to these and other Hutu youth as genocide survivors , which is to suggest that no one should take responsibility for the dark days of the past since everyone , including the RPF , is responsible for the crime of genocide . They in turn accept this manipulation because they believe it shields them from the shame and guilt of the actions of their forbearers and provides psychological reprieve . But they are not their parents , hence the cynical manipulation and unconscionable exploitation on Ingabire ’ s part .
Further , by attempting to level the moral terrain on the genocide of 1994 , Ingabire hopes to beat the RPF with the stick of ethnicity , to kickstart the “ good old days ” as if they never ceased : once demystified in the eyes of the Hutu by the double genocide charge , the RPF would only retain legitimacy in the eyes of the Tutsi , which would strike the death knell for its vision for society . Most importantly , the political utility of this manoeuvre would be a backdoor reintroduction of ethnicity-based politics in the country ’ s body-politic that would conscript the RPF to a mere historical hiccup , an intervening variable or negligible footnote , in Mbonyumutwa ’ s imagination for Rwandan society .
Ingabire , therefore , presents herself as an idea , a symbol and embodiment of resistance and resilience in pursuit of a return to the nostalgic “ good old days .” But the “ good old days ” were anything but good . The abyss that this country fell into in 1994 was the outcome of those “ good old days .” And so , by positioning herself as the remaining custodian of resistance , Ingabire stands opposed to any future that doesn ’ t reflect this past . Crucially , her willingness to expose herself to criminality in the pursuit of this “ evil ” vision is what separates her from the rest . For her , the end justifies the means . As long as she is sabotaging and antagonizing the post-genocide vision for Rwandan society , she couldn ’ t care less if she is perceived as a criminal rather than a politician .
Unfortunately for her , as I recently argued , the moral aims of the RPF and their subsequent radicalization during the process of halting the genocide singularly committed it to confront , by any means at its disposal , anyone – including its own cadres – with the embodiment of destruction . In other words , the two visions for society – the old and the new – being diametrically opposed means that they cannot coexist in the same political space . One must supplant the other . From Mbonyumutwa to Kayibanda and Habyarimana , the “ who ” is entirely incidental to the “ what .” I suspect the liberation would never have succeeded if it had preoccupied itself with the who rather than the what , which , from the RPF ’ s perspective , is the terrain for existential contestation . To put this in perspective , experience from the “ good old days ” suggests that if Ingabire ’ s chances of success were only one per cent , it would still be far too high a risk to accommodate alongside the post-genocide vision ._
27