Contact us: Kafir1@hotmail.com

And who is da wanker?

   

INTRODUCTION

In Africa and in developing countries, the fall of communism in the late eighties, has brought so much turmoil that it may seem crazy to try to understand each individual case. For all of them, there is only one cause: the end of the "cold war" and change in American policies toward all dictatorship they backed only to cut the way to communism. The direct effect of the end of cold war was whether "civil war" or coup d’Etat and assassination of political leaders in almost all poor countries. At some point, it is clear that the change in politics of the two superpowers (USA and USSR) did not expect so much trouble worldwide. The implementation of "Democracy" was the new condition for poor countries to gain support from Western Democracies. But conditioning everything by "Democracy" as defined and lived in the West, brought in poor countries mostly in Africa confusion and dreams. The concept was so confusely understood that the public was easily mislead by all kind of politicians. In summary it meant tribalism, ethnic competition and clashes in rushing for the political power. In central Africa, it brought first the question of political freedom and pluralist elections. Freedom of speeches and pluralist election led to tribalism. Tribalism led to civil war and to indescribible chaos. Today in 3 Central Africa countries also called "Great Lakes" countries (Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo) because of their similar geography and same history ( all are former Belgian colonies), still are victims of civil wars. Economically and politically, everything is almost dead. The impact of the civil war on the politics is indescribable. Politics, as say Marxists, are shaped by the economics but economics depend on social stability and security. In these three countries, civil wars have left no place for economics and therefore no place for politics: no social organisation, no order and security and above no obvious issue to the troubles. Political ideologies, forms of executives, elections, civil and political freedom are summarized in one sentence: military rule, coercion and arbitrary This essay will comprise two parts: a brief post-colonial history of the civil wars in these three countries and the compared impact of the civil war on the politics. A brief conclusion will end the whole.

Chap1. A brief history of the civil war in "Great Lakes".

Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo share three things in common: they share borders, they share same Belgian colonial past, they all have Tutsi and hutu communities. The difference is that while Congo is very big and have a mosaic of tribes where Tutsi and hutu are ignored, Rwanda and Burundi are small countries populated by only Tutsi and hutu in competition for political power. In general any conflict between these two communities affects all three countries. Rwanda and Burundi, prior to independence were highly stratified societies with power gravitating in the hands of a traditional aristocracy. (1)

A/ Rwanda

Between 1959- 1965; 1971-1973; 1989- 1994; 1996 - 2002 the clashes between Tutsi - Hutu and massacres that resulted every time provoked also a huge movement of people fleeing and seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. DR Congo, Burundi, Uganda, Tanzania welcomed number of these refugee. Until 1994 Rwanda’s political power being in Hutu’s hands, only Tutsis were forced to flee for their lives. The political ideology was based on ethnic discrimination. Tutsi were killed for any reason. They had no protection in Rwanda, almost no political right and their properties (land and herds) were not secured. For any reason they fled, their belongings were taken by their Hutu neighbours. Also for those who had fled, the Hutu government in place denied them the right to return and any right to citizenship. These Tutsi refugees in DR Congo, in Burundi, in Uganda had no other alternative then to organize a guerrilla movement ( since 1988 in south Uganda ) to force the regime in Rwanda to recognize their right. France and DR Congo secured the Hutu regime against the first attack in 1990. There had since been held some negotiation in Tanzania ( ARUSHA ACCORDS) but inside Rwanda, Hutu extremism became a powerful ideology to oppose any political and civil right to Tutsi refugees while, meantime, threatening all Tutsi living in Rwanda. But, under international pressure and UN supervision, the Hutu government had no other alternative then to agree on a "shared political" power. Shortly, in April 1994, extremists Hutu opposed to any agreement with Tutsi then assassinated their president Habyarimana and went on extermination war of Tutsi within Rwanda. The world 3rd genocide had happened with almost 1million Tutsi killed in less then three month! But as the Tutsi guerrilla finally won the war, the extremist Hutu and millions of militias fled to DR Congo. The Tutsi community living in Congo then become the target of these Hutu refugees. Meantime, with France and DR Congo’s help, these Hutu refugees organized their army and started to attack Rwanda and Burundi from Congo. This situation created two problem in Congo: the instability within Congo and the tension with Rwanda and Burundi.

B/ Burundi

Burundi’s situation is the opposite of Rwanda. In Burundi, the political power rest in Tutsi’s hands. Every time the Hutu tried to rebel they were repressed and thousand had to flee. Whatever happened in Burundi against Hutu was repercuted to Tutsi in Rwanda. But there is a big difference between Rwanda and Burundi. In Burundi Tutsi never refused citizenship to Hutu a or their right to return; Tutsi never steal Hutu’s properties; Tutsi do not kill their neighbours with kids and women… While Tutsi in Rwanda had no chance to survive, Hutu choose to flee for some economical reason Between 1962 -1972; 1988 -1993 and 1994 - 2002, wide-spread, often intense ethnic violence between Hutu and Tutsi factions in Burundi created hundreds of thousands of refugees and left tens of thousands dead. Although some refugees have returned from neighbouring countries, continued ethnic strife has forced many others to flee. At the end of cold war, in 1990s, Tutsi wanted to democratise Burundi on a Western schema. Also Tutsi are Minority, they accepted a principle of election. In Africa, election is based on tribalism: you vote for your tribe mate. As soon, as Hutu accessed to power, Hutu extremism was openly expressed and the threat that this posed to Tutsi led to assassination in 1993 of the tribal elected Melchior Ndadaye. His successor was killed with the Rwandan one in April 1994. The Rwandan genocide was spreading into Burundi. It was the end to Western made democracy. The In 1996 the Tutsi military seized again the power. But since uncontrolled hutu rebellion from DR Congo and Tanzania is very active. Burundian troops, seeking to secure their borders while confronted to internal civil war, have intervened in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

C/ DR Congo

DR Congo, being a vast territory ( bigger than whole Western Europe), it is very difficult to govern and control. The access to most part of the country are impossible and there is no means of transport. At the independence in 1960, the Belgians left in inexperienced politicians’ such a vast mosaic of people. For 5 years (1960 -65), it was a total confusion: a civil war ( and tribal activities) with multiple head and an uncontrolled territory mostly at the frontier with Rwanda and Burundi. Then in 1965, the military seized the power and the civil war was controlled under the hand of a charismatic and strong military leader ( Mobutu) helped with Americans. The country, says Gutteridge, ( 2)become at any rate, very much the kingdom of General Mobutu. The country was under control until the 1990s Tutsi guerilla against Rwanda threaten this fragile situation. In 1990 -94 the DR Congo intervened in Rwanda against Tutsi’s guerrilla. Between 1994 -96 the Rwandan extremist hutu that fled to DR Congo were reorganized by France and Congo on the DR Congo land. They had continued with the extermination of Tutsi living in Congo and started incursions into Rwanda. Then in in September 1996, Congolese Tutsi, with the help of Rwandan army (the former Guerrilla, Rwandan Patriotic Front that won the war in 1994) and Uganda launched a massive attack on Hutu refugees’ camps in eastern Congo. The Refugees with their Congolese ally were defeated, the camp dismantled and Mobutu had to flee in may 1997. His successor could not solve the problem of Congolese Tutsi right and a second Tutsi rebellion occurred in 1998: since the DR Congo is divided in three by different rebel factions. This civil war is referred to as the first African war because it brought face to face the Zimbabwean, Angolan, Botswana armies on one side against the Rwandan, Ugandan armies on the other. But as the DR Congo support Hutu rebellion in Burundi and organise extremist rwandan hutu to overthrow the new government, Rwanda and Burundi support the Congolese Tutsi and their allies in Eastern Congo against the military regime of Kinshasa. The threats stem from the flight of thousands of refugees from their homelands, resulting in a three way spill over anti regimes forces into adjacent national arena. In each state, domestic violence has generated massive involuntary migrations of individuals and groups into neighbouring territories. Each country has become host to a refugee community from one or other of its neighbours, a kind of privileged sanctuary for guerrilla operation, exposing so the host community to the threat of military retaliation. (3)

D/ Brief summary of civil war in "Great lakes",/p>

The military rule dominating the political scene, these three countries have problems of legitimacy of the authority, political strength and misinformation. Let us compare the rebel movements to the military regime in power and the public responsiveness.

1.legitimacy

2. Authority

3. status

4.wealth

5. Information

6. strength

Chap 2. Comparing the impact of civil war on politics in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo.

To understand political system, we have to define the word "government" ( a body of people who have the legitimate power to make their people behave in a certain way), "State" ( independent country, internationally recognised). I we add to these two words (quite static) the political dimension provided by the politicians and their activities, it becomes something dynamic: the political system. Comparing political systems of different countries, helps to understand how countries with different histories, different ethnic composition, different social problems and different philosophical backgrounds have created "satisfactory" institutions and have stimulated participation in the political process. A comparative political system focus essentially on

1/- The form of state

2/- The political ideologies

3/- The constitutions

4/- The executive Power

5/ - The Assemblies

6 - The political Parties

7/- The electoral systems…  

1. Form of state and government

A state is a country internationally recognised. Some states are unitary, some are federal. Depending on the form of government and he distribution of power, some are monarchies or empires, others republics. A republic has presidential system, most monarchies and empires opt for parliamentary system. None of these forms of government can be said absolutely the best: each has its merits and its weakness. While Burundi and Rwanda military government still control the whole country, DR Congo is divided in three autonomous rebel movement that control the territory it occupies.

2. The political Ideologies