Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley Podcast Transcript Exploring the Past with Tenley and May Episode 38: “Dear White People, Rwanda is not your personal Disneyland” *Fade in a soft and light background music (non-copyrighted) that will stay on throughout the entire podcast* Tenley: “Hello, and welcome to Exploring the Past with Tenley and May! Your hosts are Tenley and May, two amatuer historians who like to learn about history in their free time and want to share it with you! This is episode 38, and tonight's topic is “Dear White People, Rwanda is not your personal Disneyland.” In this podcast, we take a look at Rwanda pre- and post the 1994 genocide. Using the case of Paul Rusesabagina, a man who saved hundreds of people during the genocide in 1994 and was recently arrested in Rwanda on charges of terrorism just a few months ago, we are looking at the Rwandan Genocide and how both the international community and Rwanda have attempted to move forward through measures of transitional justice. We will give you some context on how events in Rwanda unfolded, how the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, also called ICTR, tried to move beyond the genocide and what lasting effects we see today - for the international community and for Rwanda domestically, guided by the case of Paul Rusesabagina. We hope to tell the audience about major cases throughout the trial that set important precedents for international law, and will simultaneously highlight the shortcomings of the ICTR as a tool of transitional justice. Page 1 of 11 Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley We hope you enjoy this podcast! Content Warning: Please be aware that this episode contains depictions of violence that may be disturbing or upsetting to our listeners.” *Fade out background music* *Audio clip from Hotel Rwanda* “Paul Rusesabagina : I am glad that you have shot this footage and that the world will see it. It is the only way we have a chance that people might intervene. Jack : Yeah and if no one intervenes, is it still a good thing to show? Paul Rusesabagina : How can they not intervene when they witness such atrocities? Jack : I think if people see this footage they'll say, "Oh my God that's horrible," and then go on eating their dinners.” *Fade back in background music* Tenley: “That was an audio clip from the movie Hotel Rwanda, which is based on events from the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. The West has long upheld the Rwandan Genocide and the ICTR as an example of how to deal with post-conflict reconciliation through legal pathways. We learn about the numbers of indicted and convicted individuals and how the ICTR has set so many legal precedents for genocides, but let us take a closer look at how the West has gotten everything wrong - once again. But first, some background: Following the assassination of Hutu President Habyarimana on April 6, 1994, the African country of Rwanda descended into civil war and genocide. Hutu Page 2 of 11 Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley extremists and the Rwandan Armed Forces launched an extermination campaign against moderate Hutu and the entire Tutsi ethnic minority. Today, the genocide is over, but ethnic tensions remain and the country (misspeaks country as company) suffers from a lack of stability. This is exemplified by the recent imprisonment and charge of terrorism against Paul Rusesabagina, a fierce opponent to the current government under President Paul Kagame in Rwanda that has been in place since the end of the genocide 27 years ago.1” May: “So, what was the Rwandan Genocide? For anyone who does not know, - and if you are a Westerner, your knowledge will likely be limited on this - the Rwandan Genocide was a result of divisions between the country's two main ethnic groups, which were randomly created by European colonizers.2 The Rwandan government, at the time controlled by extremist members of the Hutu ethnic majority, launched a systemic campaign to wipe out the Tutsi ethnic minority, slaughtering more than 800,000, eight zero zero zero zero zero, people over the course of a 100 days, according to the United Nations.3 Victims were predominantly Tutsis, cockroaches as they were referred to, and Hutus that were protecting them, Hutus that were called traitors. Rusesabagina’s role throughout the genocide and his ascent to a hero-like image is based on his mixed Hutu and Tutsi blood as well as the Tutsi ethnicity of his wife. He used his job as the manager of the Hotel des Mille Collines and his connections with the Hutu elite to protect the hotel's guests from massacre and offered refuge to many Tutsis, ultimately saving twelve hundred Rwandans.4 His story was later immortalized in the movie "Hotel Rwanda" with American actor Don Cheadle's portrayal of Rusesabagina, and if you have watched this movie: 1 2 3 4 Page 3 of 11 Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley Congratulations - You took one step towards learning how the international community has failed Rwanda and how it continues to be responsible, at least partially, for the genocide and everything that came after.” Tenley: “And what came after is what we want to delve deeper into today. The United Nations decided to establish an international criminal tribunal through Security Council resolution number 955,5 which came to be known as the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, or the ICTR. It was based in Tanzania, and charged with the mission of prosecuting individuals that commited war crimes and crimes against humanity during Rwanda’s genocide. The main purpose of this establishment was to quote: "put an end to such crimes and to take effective measures to bring to justice the persons (...) responsible for them" unquote. The ICTR was the first international court of its kind to prosecute high-ranking officials for violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Perhaps, the UN believed that creating such an international criminal justice mechanism would counter some of the responsibility that they had to shoulder for their failure to intervene before and during the genocide. After all, it was the UN who decided to pull out all of its people, instead of trying to stop the bloodshed that they could see coming; it was the UN who ignored the many cries for help from the Tutsis and watched passively as hundreds of thousands of Rwandans were murdered. Does the ICTR’s years of work in any way make up for the fatal negligence on the part of the international community? We don’t think so, but you should decide for yourself.” May: “Today we want to highlight three different cases that make the ICTR stand out internationally. One of the most remarkable cases that the ICTR sat on was on the role of the 5 Page 4 of 11 Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley media, also known as the Media Case. The ICTR became the first international tribunal to hold members of the media responsible for broadcasts intended to inflame the public to commit acts of genocide. Radio transmissions were widely used to incite Hutus to betray their fellow countrymen. This trial was the first time since Nuremberg that the role of the media was examined as a component of international criminal law and included three defendants, two leaders of the local radio station and the leader of the Kangura newspaper. The three Rwandans were convicted on counts of genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and crimes against humanity and sentenced to 30, 35, and 35 years. One of them has died while serving his sentence.6 Again let us not forget though the role that the West played in letting such atrocities happen. Western states, such as the US, the UK, or France could have silenced such inciting radio transmission - but chose not to. Allison des Forges reported extensively about the West’s negligence in a report for Human Rights Watch.7 So while Rwandans were prosecuted for their incitement, the West was not prosecuted for their negligence and shared responsibility.” Tenley: “Another remarkable case by the ICTR was the Akayesu (Ah- ka- ayesu) case. Jean Paul Akayesu was a mayor in Rwanda during the genocide, and he used his position and power to aid in the murder of the Tustis people and Hutu moderates in his area. Not only was this the first time that an individual was convicted based on the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, but it also established rape as an act of genocide, and therefore it could then be prosecuted as a war crime. Rape as part of genocide had been largely ignored in war trials previously, and now found itself in the spotlight with this case. The 6 7 Page 5 of 11 Podcast Script Trials May and Tenley presiding judge proclaimed quote: ‘We want to send out a strong message that rape is no longer a trophy of war’ unquote. And a strong message they sent - at least to Akayesu, who is serving life in prison in Mali after having been found guilty of nine counts of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide and crimes against humanity for extermination, murder, torture, rape and other inhumane acts.8 In addition to the important jurisprudence generated from the Akayesu trial, the ICTR also set two major precedents in the trial against Jean Kam-ban-da, the Prime Minister of the Interim Government of Rwanda throughout the entire 100 days of genocide. Kambanda was brought before the ICTR in October 1997 and pleaded guilty to six counts of genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, complicity in genocide, and crimes against humanity - basically anything to do with genocide.