Guest entry by Claudine Kuradusenge
The following blog post is based on my personal research on Hutu Diaspora, which I interviewed in Belgium in the summer of 2014.
“Today, we are the Palestinians, the only problem is that we don’t have intifada and don’t have terrorists. Who knows, maybe they [the Rwandan government] are creating the terrorists of tomorrow,” said a concerned parent when talking about the impacts the current Tutsi government and its policies are having on the new generations of Hutu in diaspora’s communities. The Hutu identity, which in most cases has been equal to ‘perpetrators,’ not only stigmatized the majority of the Rwandan population, but it has also, in an interesting way, empowered many Hutu youth to undertake a struggle for freedom, rights of belonging to more than a legacy of genocide, and rights of victimhood.
The formation of the self and collective within Hutus in diaspora in Europe has highlighted important identity crises. The younger generations who were born in Rwanda but grew up in Europe had to struggle with who they wanted to be, what the society said they were, and their parents’ expectations. Also, the official narrative of the Tutsi government has helped crystallize the stigmas by refusing to be called victims. This narrative has encouraged the divisions within these communities and created more radical responses among the self-empowered Hutu youth.
Finally, as diaspora, the idea of homeland, Rwanda in this case, is essential in the development of their new sense of collectivism. Therefore, Hutu diaspora communities have embraced the role of watchdog and created an opposition movement aiming to bring to light abuses committed in Rwanda and aboard by President Kagame’s regime.
Damaged Identities
Seeking who we are and where we are from is part of the human nature. Yet, the sense of individual or collective identity is not as clearly defined within these communities. Many have decided to take on their host country’s identity and move on. Others have been confronted by the stigmas of their ethnic group’s labels and decided to engage in the identity struggle. They proclaimed that their ‘Hutuness’ is as important, or even more important, as any other identity that was imposed onto them.
Thus, a small group of people has been caught in an internal conflict where their identity was not only defined by what they had lost, but also by socially constructed labels. These people see themselves as ‘stateless, refugees, unwanted, and damaged.’ Their fight is not only within themselves but also with the society that has allowed President Kagame to create the dictatorship regime that has taken away their home, their loved ones, their dignity, and their pride.
The idea of damaged identity comes from the still existent legacy of genocide that has been hunting their past, present, and future. One young man portrayed the unease by saying:
“When we hear ‘Rwanda,’ we hear ‘genocide.’ I don’t think that there is a Rwandan…who is proud to hear genocide, which made them deny their heritage, their identity. When we hear ‘Hutu,’ it is even worst. People see genocidaire. If we did not commit the genocide, our parents did.”
Therefore, there is no way to escape the powerful labels that were put on ‘all’ Hutus in the aftermath of the genocide. They have caused ripple effects on the new generations that have been fighting for a personal identity in the chaotic situations they had to grow up in. Now these youth are caught in the middle of a struggle that started 20 years ago and is still ongoing.
Narratives of surviving in the Mystical Homeland
With these struggles of identity and narrative, Rwanda has taken a mystical place. Those who are old enough to remember their homeland are aware that things have changed, not always for the best. They recall a Rwanda where they were seen and considered, not labeled or stigmatized to be the ‘wrong’ kind of Rwandans. For those who have created a perception of Rwanda based on storytelling and personal research, Rwanda is the land of their ancestors; it is part of who they are and want to be. Consequently, they have undertaken the role of a guardian and done what they could to make their perceptions become reality, by being actively involved in the Rwandan politics.
Also, many have adopted a narrative of ‘surviving.’ Because their victimhood was ignored and they still cannot mourn their lost ones, they have developed ‘radical’ views and deny the term ‘genocide’ when it comes to Rwanda. Yes, mass killings happened, but politics and the law of the winner decided to label it ‘genocide’ as a way to gain power. What many agree on is that if we want to talk about genocide, we have to talk about a ‘double’ genocide in Rwanda and in DRC.
In conclusion, Hutu Diaspora communities have experienced two decades of individual and social identity transformation shaped by their chosen trauma, the stigmas of a legacy of genocide, and the dominant Tutsis stories promoted by the Rwandan government.
- Many have emotionally struggled to find their place in the host countries. They used the words stateless, refugee, and unwanted to identify themselves.
- The competing narratives of the 1994 genocide have shaped the perceptions of the actual events and victimized the new generations that grew up in the aftermath.
- Rwanda has become the land to fight for even if they might not be able to go back.
Now, what we need to ask yourselves is: ‘How will the new generations of Hutus in diaspora be able to be part of the peace process in their homeland if their own sense of self was constructed on ideas of ‘us against them,’ chosen trauma, and ignored victimhood?
Claudine Kuradusenge, originally from Rwanda, is a Master’s student at the School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution (S-CAR). She is interested in post-conflict identity formation in relationship to history, memory, and competing narratives. Although her background is in communications and public relations, she has worked with refugees, international students, traumatized youth, and Diaspora’s.
January 22, 2015 at 6:59 pm
Dear Claudine
I thank you for your article; however, I am somehow concerned by some people who are still ideologically charged and front ethnicity than Rwandan identity. It made me think of what could be the cause. I will absolutely disagree with their allegation that their unhappiness is caused by what the call Tutsis Government, because there no such a thing as Tutsi government. I am also concerned by the allegation that “Today, we are the Palestinians, the only problem is that we don’t have intifada and don’t have terrorists. Who knows, maybe they [the Rwandan government] are creating the terrorists of tomorrow,” said a concerned parent when talking about the impacts the current Tutsi government and its policies are having on the new generations of Hutu in diaspora’s communities” this is far from the truth in Rwanda and it is not a view held by all Hutus. No one is Rwanda is stateless, every has a right to be in Rwanda or any other country of choice. The Rwanda government has a program for Rwandans who reside out Rwanda called Come and See, where the Rwanda government pays for all expenses just for its nationals to visit Rwanda if you haven’t been in the country for a long time. Most so called Hutus and Tutsis residing in Belgium have benefited from this program. Check it out you will find these testimonies. No one had been denied a right of return to his/her mother land. The radical re-foundation of the inclusive and reconciling national identity, “Rwandanness”, promoted by the goverment is an excellent vector of effective citizenship and we should uphold it. The the Hutu, tutsi and Twa constitute the roots of its and must be permanently taught, fostered, encouraged and strengthened .When the genocide ended a trickle of returning Rwandans became a flood. Killers and survivors are living side by side today. Everyone knows it… at fist no-one felt safe, no-one trusted, but we Overcome the grief when many saw no possible future – no reason to live. But within 20 years Rwanda has brought itself back from the edge. If you may recall the Hutu refugee camps in DRC IN 1994, aid workers saw at first hand how local officials and the militia established their authority and control. There were gangs with guns, grenades and machetes. Some 4,000 murders took place in Goma in the first month of the exodus. Killings, threats, extortions, and thuggery were common. The Hutu Power ideology was as entrenched as ever with people openly expressing the view that it was correct to kill Tutsi. I am wondering if this is the same ideology that is still taught to the Youth in Belgium. I argue them to move beyond ethnic lenses. Under the current Rwanda, has introduced policies to minimise ethnic divisions, encouraged economic development partnerships, taken a strong stand against corruption, given Rwandans hope and encouraged them to be more self-reliant. And when you think of what this country has gone through and look at where it is now, it’s something you can hardly believe. Definitely the hatred which sparked the genocide is a living memory for most Rwandans, and maintaining social stability while allowing political openness is a complicated challenge for the government. This is not really a story of leaders, but rather a story of ordinary Rwandans. I still argue the older one not to teach their children hatred, believe the same hatred to you teach will soon or later get to you too. Stop preaching ethnicity because it breeds hatred.
On the issue of democracy which seems to be the alleged basis of the being fully ideologically charged: we have to face realities here. The question of democracy in Rwanda is a really difficult one. The first reason it’s a difficult question is that there’s a memory in this country of multi-party democracy in the early 1990s which opened up a space in which very extremist voices like these in the article, were heard, and extremist political parties emerged, and those things were contributing factors to the genocide in 1994. So there are real historical concerns about the impact and I think those concerns are genuine. Secondly, there’s a sense in Rwanda that, in recovering from the genocide, the country needed a very strong government. That what is paramount in Rwanda is stability, predictability, a government that was able to maintain cohesion within its own ranks and to deliver material benefits to its own population. I think Rwanda is at a stage now where stability has been achieved, where a high degree of development has been achieved. The challenge for the government as I see it is to allow a degree of political competition that best meets the needs of the population, but that doesn’t lead to extremist voices coming back in.
November 19, 2022 at 12:06 pm
I began to read the story of Rwanda in about 1996. It was a tragic story. There are so many like stories in the world and what differs is the magnitude. Rwanda, Burundi and the Jews have experienced extremely difficult circumstances. I must salute all Rwandese who have embraced peace and development in place of death and chaos. I salute the present administration for its effort to build a progressive Rwanda that is not afraid to face it’s past inorder to build a better future.
In addressing the current narrative of the history of Rwanda there are some questions that need to be answered.
1. For which generation is the present narrative addressing?. 30 years after genocide the witnesses of the violence are still there. So the narrative addresses this generation. It is a difficult and bitter narrative to all but it is the reality of the genocide and can never be better.
2. What is the purpose of the narrative? It is about facing the dark past so that by seeing it’s darkness the people can intentionally choose light.
Coming back to Claudine’s point. After 40 years which is a generation, the narrative should change because the narrative must look at the progress of the past 40 years. Hence the current genocide story should begin to fade and a new story told. This is the story that should save future generations. Most importantly, there should be an effort to remove the words Twa, Hutu and Tutsi and replace it with Rwandese or any other common identity. The narrative should unite all the people rather than emphasize the differences. For this to happen a collective effort is required from everyone inorder to ensure Rwanda remains on a progressive and peaceful trajectory. I don’t appreciate the idea of Intafada. Does it mean what happened in the past is better than what is happening now? If that is the view point it is really regrettable. We are all people, none is better than the other and we are temporary residents of the face of the earth. It is more valuable to make our temporary stay tolerant, joyful and peaceful.