By Michael Malakata
Little known by the outside world until genocide tore the country apart 15 years ago, Rwanda has become the first nation to launch a wireless broadbandI Internet facility in Africa.
Little known by the outside world until genocide tore the country apart 15 years ago, Rwanda has become the first nation to launch a wireless broadbandI Internet facility in Africa.
Unlike other countries in Africa, where mobile broadband Internet connection is restricted to a few buildings, Rwanda’s capital city, Kigali, has become the first capital city in Africa broadly offering high-speed services, overtaking Nigeria and South Africa, Africa’s biggest telecom markets in terms of both investment and users.
The launch of the wireless facility means that Rwandese will now be able to surf the Internet anywhere and anytime in the capital city using their laptops.
The US$7.7 million wireless internet facility has been built by Korea Telecom, South Korea’s largest fixed line operator. Korea Telecom is a prominent South Korean integrated wired and wireless telecom service provider. The contract to build the wireless Internet facility was awarded to Korea Telecom in 2007 by the Rwandan government. The service is based on WiBro technology, the South Korean version of the mobile WiMax IEEE 802.16e specification, and will offer 5.5Mbps and 2Mbps connection speeds.
The launch of the wireless internet facility also marks the entry of wireless broadband technology in Africa. “By launching the wireless facility, Rwanda has become the ICT hub not just in east Africa but the whole Africa. Other countries must surely follow the footsteps of Rwanda,” said Mwape Mutale, CEO of the center for ICT development in Africa.
In addition to the wireless broadband internet facility, Korea Telecom is also constructing a US$40 million Kigali Metropolitan Network project. The Kigali Metropolitan Network project is based on on a fiber-optic loop and will be the largest computer network in Rwanda, providing connectivity for local area networks. The Rwandan government claims over 45 government institutions have already been connected to the high-speed Internet facility.
The Rwanda Metropolitan Network will be completed next year, according to Rwanda Development Board (RDB) deputy chief executive in charge of information technology Patrick Nyirishema. Rwanda’s vision is to promote and facilitate modern infrastructure development by 2020. In the next three years, the Rwandan government is aiming to provide access to high speed Internet to more than 4 million Rwandans through the wireless Internet facility and the Kigali Metropolitan Network project.
Until last year, Rwanda was also the first country in Africa to have a mobile phone assembling plant through a company called A-Link Technologies. Early this year, the world Bank provided $24 million to Rwanda for the provision of broadband connectivity and access to low-cost international connectivity through the connection to the undersea cables in east Africa
Courtesy of IDG News
Saturday 8 May 2010
A crisis cannot be willed into happening!
By Pan Butamire
“There I was, standing in the rain, getting soaked while waiting for a cab……[when he] removed himself from his security detail……to walk over and ……share his umbrella with me,” said Tom Murro.
Murro was talking about Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who had just officiated over the launching ceremony of the Tribeca Film Festival in Manhattan, New York.
The president was walking out after watching the screening of “Earth Made of Glass”, a documentary on Rwanda. As it was raining outside, President Kagame walked over to where Murro was soaking in the rain.
Writes Andrew Lagomarsino: “Paul Kagame ……has seen a lifetime of pain and suffering……and his gentle act of kindness made an impression……[Can you imagine] helping a total stranger in public?”
Flash back to another scene in Rwanda. “‘Please call my father’, he whispered. ‘He has no idea where I am,’” wrote Jefferey Gettleman.
Gettleman is American, and he is the East Africa Bureau Chief of ‘The New York Times’. He was recounting the story of his visit to Iwawa, a Rwandan island in Lake Kivu.
He talks about a request made to him by a young Rwandan man whose names, he says, are Gasigwa Gakunzi.
The young Gakunzi is one of a number of young Rwandans who “are learning skills like bricklaying, hairdressing and motorcycle maintenance,” Mr. Gettleman assures us.
All very well, except that Mr. Gettleman reveals to us that the people on that island “describe it as an Alcatraz”. So, it is not an ordinary island.
Thanks to my privileged access to the Internet’s Google, now I can tell that Alcatraz Island is in the San Francisco Bay and was the seat of an impregnable prison until 1963.
But no, the people of Iwawa, who’d need to know English even if computers, leave alone the Internet, were to be available there, have beaten me to it. They know what an “Alcatraz” is!
That aside, anyway Mr. Gettleman continues to reveal their identities without the least care, in a country whose leadership he qualifies as “repressive and Orwellian”!
“‘We call it the island of no return,’ said Esperance Uwizeyimana, a homeless mother,” confirms Mr. Gettleman. And he quotes officials of the institution, too. “‘This isn’t a good place for children,’ one employee said in hushed tones because the minister was nearby. ‘They could get abused.’”
An “Orwellian state” and yet Gettleman mingles freely with people who’ve been banished to “the Alcatraz” of Africa, after which he exposes their names to a “repressive government” and then leaves them high and dry.
Moreover, the “Orwellian state” does not notice and stop him, despite his being the lone White man, dome covered in conspicuously bushy curls, amidst an ocean of maroon uniforms.
Suppose, anyway, that he was able to listen to them. It would mean that the young man, the lady and the “prison official”, on top of knowing what an “Alcatraz” is, speak English. Buggers belief!
In fact, Gettleman says the young man in the “prison camp”, Gakunzi, had all the time to tell him his names and the long story of how he (Gakunzi) was watching pay TV when he was “abducted”.
Surely, a man who travels all the way to Rwanda to expose the plight of the oppressed souls of that country would care to contact the father of that poor boy. But then, a scoop is what we want and, haven’t we got it?
And while we are at it, wouldn’t any one wonder why his camera does not capture any of the “children” in that “camp” that he talks about?
Among the glossy pictures that he splashes around showing uniformed young men and their mattresses, not a single one of those “children”?
However, first things first: the two scenes mentioned in the opening paragraphs. Two individuals: one a Rwandan in USA, the other an American in Rwanda.
The Rwandan tears himself away from his security minders to go to the assistance of someone in the rain. Always mindful of the other, whatever their colour or station. That is today’s Rwanda for you.
The American gladly accepts a ride from a Rwandan minister but his mission is to serve the order from his editor. I can imagine it: “There must something rotten in Rwanda. Get behind the façade and give me something I can chew into. Get me a scoop!”
And off goes Genttleman, always mindful of his job, whatever its accompanying damage or the inaccuracy of his story.
But the lies peddled are downright dirt. Yet, even later when the truth comes out, his editor will be more mindful of his newspaper’s reputation and will never want to reveal to its paying readership and advertising community that it erred.
It might earn Gettleman a reprimand and that will be it. But, surely, the most gullible world cannot believe that Rwanda has abducted and taken its youths into concentration camps in the name of showing a clean, orderly face.
Are members of the diplomatic corps based in Rwanda, or visiting dignitaries, so gullible that they can visit these young Rwandans without noticing that they are in a concentration camp? Or maybe all the uniformed pupils of Rwanda are in concentration camps!
How come whoever visits this rehabilitation and skills-acquisition centre always lauds the genuine efforts of the Rwandan government? Which is why Minister Mitali didn’t mind taking Gettleman along, in the first place.
It may take long, but Mr. Gettelman must realise that the world will in the end shed its gullibility and know that all this hype about a crisis in Rwanda before elections is a creature of the foreign media and job-and-name-seeking activists.
Even as a liberation movement, The Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) always advanced its objective as bringing justice to Rwanda, where no Rwandan ever exerted undue influence over any other Rwandan or anybody else.
To-date, RPF’s raison d’être is the eradication of injustice to any Rwandan, young and old. That is how Rwanda has become a country where everyone is accorded their dignity and impunity has been uprooted.
Instead of exposing a crisis, Gettleman only succeeds in showing us why he has a “t” where he should an “n”!
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
“There I was, standing in the rain, getting soaked while waiting for a cab……[when he] removed himself from his security detail……to walk over and ……share his umbrella with me,” said Tom Murro.
Murro was talking about Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who had just officiated over the launching ceremony of the Tribeca Film Festival in Manhattan, New York.
The president was walking out after watching the screening of “Earth Made of Glass”, a documentary on Rwanda. As it was raining outside, President Kagame walked over to where Murro was soaking in the rain.
Writes Andrew Lagomarsino: “Paul Kagame ……has seen a lifetime of pain and suffering……and his gentle act of kindness made an impression……[Can you imagine] helping a total stranger in public?”
Flash back to another scene in Rwanda. “‘Please call my father’, he whispered. ‘He has no idea where I am,’” wrote Jefferey Gettleman.
Gettleman is American, and he is the East Africa Bureau Chief of ‘The New York Times’. He was recounting the story of his visit to Iwawa, a Rwandan island in Lake Kivu.
He talks about a request made to him by a young Rwandan man whose names, he says, are Gasigwa Gakunzi.
The young Gakunzi is one of a number of young Rwandans who “are learning skills like bricklaying, hairdressing and motorcycle maintenance,” Mr. Gettleman assures us.
All very well, except that Mr. Gettleman reveals to us that the people on that island “describe it as an Alcatraz”. So, it is not an ordinary island.
Thanks to my privileged access to the Internet’s Google, now I can tell that Alcatraz Island is in the San Francisco Bay and was the seat of an impregnable prison until 1963.
But no, the people of Iwawa, who’d need to know English even if computers, leave alone the Internet, were to be available there, have beaten me to it. They know what an “Alcatraz” is!
That aside, anyway Mr. Gettleman continues to reveal their identities without the least care, in a country whose leadership he qualifies as “repressive and Orwellian”!
“‘We call it the island of no return,’ said Esperance Uwizeyimana, a homeless mother,” confirms Mr. Gettleman. And he quotes officials of the institution, too. “‘This isn’t a good place for children,’ one employee said in hushed tones because the minister was nearby. ‘They could get abused.’”
An “Orwellian state” and yet Gettleman mingles freely with people who’ve been banished to “the Alcatraz” of Africa, after which he exposes their names to a “repressive government” and then leaves them high and dry.
Moreover, the “Orwellian state” does not notice and stop him, despite his being the lone White man, dome covered in conspicuously bushy curls, amidst an ocean of maroon uniforms.
Suppose, anyway, that he was able to listen to them. It would mean that the young man, the lady and the “prison official”, on top of knowing what an “Alcatraz” is, speak English. Buggers belief!
In fact, Gettleman says the young man in the “prison camp”, Gakunzi, had all the time to tell him his names and the long story of how he (Gakunzi) was watching pay TV when he was “abducted”.
Surely, a man who travels all the way to Rwanda to expose the plight of the oppressed souls of that country would care to contact the father of that poor boy. But then, a scoop is what we want and, haven’t we got it?
And while we are at it, wouldn’t any one wonder why his camera does not capture any of the “children” in that “camp” that he talks about?
Among the glossy pictures that he splashes around showing uniformed young men and their mattresses, not a single one of those “children”?
However, first things first: the two scenes mentioned in the opening paragraphs. Two individuals: one a Rwandan in USA, the other an American in Rwanda.
The Rwandan tears himself away from his security minders to go to the assistance of someone in the rain. Always mindful of the other, whatever their colour or station. That is today’s Rwanda for you.
The American gladly accepts a ride from a Rwandan minister but his mission is to serve the order from his editor. I can imagine it: “There must something rotten in Rwanda. Get behind the façade and give me something I can chew into. Get me a scoop!”
And off goes Genttleman, always mindful of his job, whatever its accompanying damage or the inaccuracy of his story.
But the lies peddled are downright dirt. Yet, even later when the truth comes out, his editor will be more mindful of his newspaper’s reputation and will never want to reveal to its paying readership and advertising community that it erred.
It might earn Gettleman a reprimand and that will be it. But, surely, the most gullible world cannot believe that Rwanda has abducted and taken its youths into concentration camps in the name of showing a clean, orderly face.
Are members of the diplomatic corps based in Rwanda, or visiting dignitaries, so gullible that they can visit these young Rwandans without noticing that they are in a concentration camp? Or maybe all the uniformed pupils of Rwanda are in concentration camps!
How come whoever visits this rehabilitation and skills-acquisition centre always lauds the genuine efforts of the Rwandan government? Which is why Minister Mitali didn’t mind taking Gettleman along, in the first place.
It may take long, but Mr. Gettelman must realise that the world will in the end shed its gullibility and know that all this hype about a crisis in Rwanda before elections is a creature of the foreign media and job-and-name-seeking activists.
Even as a liberation movement, The Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) always advanced its objective as bringing justice to Rwanda, where no Rwandan ever exerted undue influence over any other Rwandan or anybody else.
To-date, RPF’s raison d’être is the eradication of injustice to any Rwandan, young and old. That is how Rwanda has become a country where everyone is accorded their dignity and impunity has been uprooted.
Instead of exposing a crisis, Gettleman only succeeds in showing us why he has a “t” where he should an “n”!
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
Rwanda shall blaze its own path
By Felicien Mwumvaneza
Editor,
In your paper yesterday [April 22, 2010] was the report in which the World Bank recognizes Rwanda as one the fastest growing economies on the African continent and one of its success stories, despite being a land locked country and having few natural resources.
While this affirmation from one of the world’s renowned development institutions should be truly commended, what is far more noteworthy is rather the real story that it tells.
It is the story of how the successful policies of a government and the firm resolve of a people are in fact transforming and improving the lives of the citizens with each passing day.
I recently read in the Economist magazine one of the ironic and contradictory stories you could ever expect to find in any news organisation that should otherwise be characterised by excellence in news reporting.
The magazine carried a story titled “Progress and Repression in Rwanda” in which it praises tremendous advances in the economy, Information Technology, education, infrastructure, agriculture as well in foreign affairs among others, but then shamelessly struggled to discredit all those positives with allegations of a lack of political and press freedoms.
This makes you wonder which benchmarks some critics use to understand the life of a nation and the progress of its people.
The World Bank statement certainly rejects the legitimacy of these and other critics and serves not only as a genuine vote of confidence, but also as one among many powerful bits of evidence that Rwanda is well on the road to prosperity.
What it simply means is that while the government and the people of Rwanda value true and accurate critical opinions, they should and will not relent or be deterred in their efforts to transform their nation with an eye fixed on noble national aspirations for progress and prosperity.
It should also serve as a reminder that in the short, medium or long-term, such grand national interests, objectives and goals may sometimes not coincide with those of the critics.
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
Editor,
In your paper yesterday [April 22, 2010] was the report in which the World Bank recognizes Rwanda as one the fastest growing economies on the African continent and one of its success stories, despite being a land locked country and having few natural resources.
While this affirmation from one of the world’s renowned development institutions should be truly commended, what is far more noteworthy is rather the real story that it tells.
It is the story of how the successful policies of a government and the firm resolve of a people are in fact transforming and improving the lives of the citizens with each passing day.
I recently read in the Economist magazine one of the ironic and contradictory stories you could ever expect to find in any news organisation that should otherwise be characterised by excellence in news reporting.
The magazine carried a story titled “Progress and Repression in Rwanda” in which it praises tremendous advances in the economy, Information Technology, education, infrastructure, agriculture as well in foreign affairs among others, but then shamelessly struggled to discredit all those positives with allegations of a lack of political and press freedoms.
This makes you wonder which benchmarks some critics use to understand the life of a nation and the progress of its people.
The World Bank statement certainly rejects the legitimacy of these and other critics and serves not only as a genuine vote of confidence, but also as one among many powerful bits of evidence that Rwanda is well on the road to prosperity.
What it simply means is that while the government and the people of Rwanda value true and accurate critical opinions, they should and will not relent or be deterred in their efforts to transform their nation with an eye fixed on noble national aspirations for progress and prosperity.
It should also serve as a reminder that in the short, medium or long-term, such grand national interests, objectives and goals may sometimes not coincide with those of the critics.
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
Nothing Good Comes Out of Africa
by Michael Fairbanks
I am a teacher, author and philanthropist, and I was a racist. Racism doesn't have to mean you hate those who are different than yourself. It can mean the subtle, pernicious accumulation of unconscious prejudices against those who see the world differently.
I was raised in Scranton, Pennsylvania and attended Catholic and public schools all the way through college. My first notion of the poor in other countries was when the nuns, dressed imposingly in black tunics covered with pulverized chalk, prevailed upon us to put our milk money into an empty can of Crisco marked in crayon, "For Pagan Babies."
I joined the Peace Corps and went to Kenya when I was twenty-one years old. I lived in a mud hut, learned Swahili, built a village school and returned to the USA to do my graduate degree in African Politics at Columbia University. I remain in touch with my fellow teachers and students from the village to this day. Still.
The values and norms of the institutions in which we live and work wash over us. I went into the development industry with sound intentions, and worked extremely hard, but my results were meager. I worked in 35 nations at a very high level. I wrote books and lectured at the world's greatest universities. After a while, my successful script became stale, and my resume grew like a tall tree with leafy branches, though its core was hollowing with age. I had fallen under the spell of the development industry. I was prey to donor fashions, the whims of the Ivy League, Capitol Hill and Brussels, and the cynical detachment of over-educated, under-appreciated international journalists and aid bureaucrats. I believed that nothing good comes out of Africa.
Dusty, Poor Nations
Then, ten years ago, I went to work in Rwanda. Leaders of the World Bank introduced me to Paul Kagame who had been president for a few weeks. I had no reason to believe he was anyone special. I committed to work hard, but if I am being truthful, I had no reason to believe my advice would amount to anything more than it did in Bolivia in the early nineties, Uganda or Tatarstan in the late nineties, or any number of dusty, poor nations in between.
My first meeting with Kagame was forty hours long, spread over five consecutive days. My experience was that no head of government ever worked that hard, ever focused like that. Over the next few years, I was privileged to learn from Rwandan leaders and observe first-hand how they grew their nation. Rwanda's leaders, not just Kagame, but also its Prime Minister, cabinet and the remarkable women who serve in parliament, have given me hope and courage.
Rwanda is one of the few nations in the developing world that spends more on education than on the military. Though Kagame is from one ethnic group, his Prime Minister and 70 percent of his cabinet are from the other, and a world-leading 56 percent of parliament is now women. The country is secure and the World Bank's Doing Business report recognized Rwanda as the greatest reforming nation in the world last year.
The economy has grown at an average of 8 percent since 2001. More important, wages in export sectors increased by up to 30 percent each of the last nine years.
Rwanda has a good neighbor policy. It played a key role in reducing recent tensions between Kenyans, vastly improved its relations with the Congo (the two presidents routinely share information), and was the first country to send peacekeepers to Darfur. Working side by side there, many of the Rwandan soldiers are children of both the perpetrators and victims of the genocide. The international press and sentimental filmmakers overlook these stories.
They prefer to speculate that Rwandan prosperity means they must be stealing minerals from Congo, that clean streets and rule of law mean suppression, that Kagame will not step down from power when his next term is up. They have seen the world like this for some time. I see it in their eyes, still.
A Tad Deeper, Please
In my view, one of those self-branded CNN shows focusing on what Bill Maher has called "Disaster Porn," spent way too much time asking Paul Kagame about a minor opposition candidate in the upcoming elections. The journalist didn't acknowledge that Victoire Ingabire had just taken a Rwandan passport, and arrived in January with close aide Joseph Ntawangundi. When allegations arose of his complicity in genocide, Ingabire persuaded diplomats, journalists, and NGOs that he was not only innocent, but that the charges against her aide were politically motivated. There was international silence in March, when Ntawangundi confessed to using a pseudonym to reenter the country, to killing 8 people in the genocide, and to previously being sentenced to 17 years in prison.
Now, due to international and regional cooperation, there is evidence of wire transfers showing that Ingabire sent thousands of dollars to Congo to pay for arms and ammunition. There are phone logs, emails and co-conspirator confessions concerning her contacts and coordination with FDLR leaders, and attempts to create a violent splinter faction. Ingabire was indicted on April 21st and released on bail the following day.
Rwanda's genocide denial laws have been characterized as "unique, vague, and overbroad." Rwanda has also been accused of using these laws to stifle free speech and government opposition.
But over a dozen European nations have specific laws criminalizing genocide denial and related speech. In fact, all EU Member States are now legally obligated to criminalize genocide denial when it is carried out to incite violence. The Rwandans have proposed an international conference where prosecutors compare genocide denial and hate speech laws and develop best practices for their use.
The Government of Rwanda has been accused of cracking down on so-called opposition newspapers. On April 13, 2010, the government issued six-month suspensions to two Kinyarwanda-language newspapers, Umuvugizi and Umuseso, for publishing language such as the following:
"He who refuses a peaceful political revolution makes a bloody revolution necessary... The queue of those who want change in the governance of this country, (and not a peaceful one since all avenues for peaceful revolution can no longer work) is growing by the day. This is leading Rwanda into total darkness. (Umuseso)
Their words became reality on February 19th and March 4th of this year when terrorists threw grenades into public establishments in Kigali and killed innocent civilians. Rwanda knows a lot about freedom of speech and the role of the press. After all, in 1994, it was the press that ignited the genocide.
I called the Communications Director for the President and formally requested the list of news outlets that work in the country that have not been banned. The office provided the list to me in a few hours, and I was told that no one else has ever made that request. It is a varied list of world-class organizations functioning well.
Time, Newsweek, New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, AP, AFP, NPR, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, CBS, CNN, NBC, CBC, Guardian, Times of London, Independent, Financial Times, Daily Telegraph, Economist, Al Jazeera, NHK, East Africa TV, SABC, ETV, France 24, TV5, FR3, TF1, RFI, Canal+, Jeune Afrique, Der Spiegel, Arte TV, VPRO
Also, during the time of the genocide, there was one radio station, Radio Rwanda. Today Rwanda has thirteen independent radio stations.
There are other illustrations, some of which are funny: the Rwandan general who recently ran from the country and claimed he was a political refugee. A senior military official informed me that the general was actually sleeping with the wife of another general who was away on duty, and was about to be indicted under military law. The general ran away and convinced the international press that he was a heroic figure standing up to oppression and asked for asylum. I bet he needs it, too, from the irate husband.
Or the Human Rights Watch employee who claims that Rwanda is preventing her from working there: She was given a work permit within three days-- until it was found out her papers were fraudulently signed by her organization to expedite the process. Still, her office remains open.
A fair-minded person might inquire: Why is all right for Germany to outlaw (Nazi) hate speech, but not so for the Rwandans? Why did journalists crusade for Victoire, but not subsequently report on her connections to aggressive splinter groups? Why hasn't anyone contrasted the activities of the three-dozen press organizations that thrive in Rwanda versus the two that were banned for six months? And, if working papers were rescinded in the USA when an international organization tried to take short cuts, Why would that not make the international news?
I believed for too long that not a lot of good comes out of Africa. The Rwandans held up a mirror to my face. I could see that my way of doing things wasn't helping, and I began to add value when I became willing to be guided by their vision.
I still tend to parentalize the poor, though I no longer believe the American conceptualizations of democracy and human rights are superior to all other peoples, or that the world should progress at the rate I determine. But one good thing about having been a racist, I can spot others a mile away.
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
I am a teacher, author and philanthropist, and I was a racist. Racism doesn't have to mean you hate those who are different than yourself. It can mean the subtle, pernicious accumulation of unconscious prejudices against those who see the world differently.
I was raised in Scranton, Pennsylvania and attended Catholic and public schools all the way through college. My first notion of the poor in other countries was when the nuns, dressed imposingly in black tunics covered with pulverized chalk, prevailed upon us to put our milk money into an empty can of Crisco marked in crayon, "For Pagan Babies."
I joined the Peace Corps and went to Kenya when I was twenty-one years old. I lived in a mud hut, learned Swahili, built a village school and returned to the USA to do my graduate degree in African Politics at Columbia University. I remain in touch with my fellow teachers and students from the village to this day. Still.
The values and norms of the institutions in which we live and work wash over us. I went into the development industry with sound intentions, and worked extremely hard, but my results were meager. I worked in 35 nations at a very high level. I wrote books and lectured at the world's greatest universities. After a while, my successful script became stale, and my resume grew like a tall tree with leafy branches, though its core was hollowing with age. I had fallen under the spell of the development industry. I was prey to donor fashions, the whims of the Ivy League, Capitol Hill and Brussels, and the cynical detachment of over-educated, under-appreciated international journalists and aid bureaucrats. I believed that nothing good comes out of Africa.
Dusty, Poor Nations
Then, ten years ago, I went to work in Rwanda. Leaders of the World Bank introduced me to Paul Kagame who had been president for a few weeks. I had no reason to believe he was anyone special. I committed to work hard, but if I am being truthful, I had no reason to believe my advice would amount to anything more than it did in Bolivia in the early nineties, Uganda or Tatarstan in the late nineties, or any number of dusty, poor nations in between.
My first meeting with Kagame was forty hours long, spread over five consecutive days. My experience was that no head of government ever worked that hard, ever focused like that. Over the next few years, I was privileged to learn from Rwandan leaders and observe first-hand how they grew their nation. Rwanda's leaders, not just Kagame, but also its Prime Minister, cabinet and the remarkable women who serve in parliament, have given me hope and courage.
Rwanda is one of the few nations in the developing world that spends more on education than on the military. Though Kagame is from one ethnic group, his Prime Minister and 70 percent of his cabinet are from the other, and a world-leading 56 percent of parliament is now women. The country is secure and the World Bank's Doing Business report recognized Rwanda as the greatest reforming nation in the world last year.
The economy has grown at an average of 8 percent since 2001. More important, wages in export sectors increased by up to 30 percent each of the last nine years.
Rwanda has a good neighbor policy. It played a key role in reducing recent tensions between Kenyans, vastly improved its relations with the Congo (the two presidents routinely share information), and was the first country to send peacekeepers to Darfur. Working side by side there, many of the Rwandan soldiers are children of both the perpetrators and victims of the genocide. The international press and sentimental filmmakers overlook these stories.
They prefer to speculate that Rwandan prosperity means they must be stealing minerals from Congo, that clean streets and rule of law mean suppression, that Kagame will not step down from power when his next term is up. They have seen the world like this for some time. I see it in their eyes, still.
A Tad Deeper, Please
In my view, one of those self-branded CNN shows focusing on what Bill Maher has called "Disaster Porn," spent way too much time asking Paul Kagame about a minor opposition candidate in the upcoming elections. The journalist didn't acknowledge that Victoire Ingabire had just taken a Rwandan passport, and arrived in January with close aide Joseph Ntawangundi. When allegations arose of his complicity in genocide, Ingabire persuaded diplomats, journalists, and NGOs that he was not only innocent, but that the charges against her aide were politically motivated. There was international silence in March, when Ntawangundi confessed to using a pseudonym to reenter the country, to killing 8 people in the genocide, and to previously being sentenced to 17 years in prison.
Now, due to international and regional cooperation, there is evidence of wire transfers showing that Ingabire sent thousands of dollars to Congo to pay for arms and ammunition. There are phone logs, emails and co-conspirator confessions concerning her contacts and coordination with FDLR leaders, and attempts to create a violent splinter faction. Ingabire was indicted on April 21st and released on bail the following day.
Rwanda's genocide denial laws have been characterized as "unique, vague, and overbroad." Rwanda has also been accused of using these laws to stifle free speech and government opposition.
But over a dozen European nations have specific laws criminalizing genocide denial and related speech. In fact, all EU Member States are now legally obligated to criminalize genocide denial when it is carried out to incite violence. The Rwandans have proposed an international conference where prosecutors compare genocide denial and hate speech laws and develop best practices for their use.
The Government of Rwanda has been accused of cracking down on so-called opposition newspapers. On April 13, 2010, the government issued six-month suspensions to two Kinyarwanda-language newspapers, Umuvugizi and Umuseso, for publishing language such as the following:
"He who refuses a peaceful political revolution makes a bloody revolution necessary... The queue of those who want change in the governance of this country, (and not a peaceful one since all avenues for peaceful revolution can no longer work) is growing by the day. This is leading Rwanda into total darkness. (Umuseso)
Their words became reality on February 19th and March 4th of this year when terrorists threw grenades into public establishments in Kigali and killed innocent civilians. Rwanda knows a lot about freedom of speech and the role of the press. After all, in 1994, it was the press that ignited the genocide.
I called the Communications Director for the President and formally requested the list of news outlets that work in the country that have not been banned. The office provided the list to me in a few hours, and I was told that no one else has ever made that request. It is a varied list of world-class organizations functioning well.
Time, Newsweek, New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, AP, AFP, NPR, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, CBS, CNN, NBC, CBC, Guardian, Times of London, Independent, Financial Times, Daily Telegraph, Economist, Al Jazeera, NHK, East Africa TV, SABC, ETV, France 24, TV5, FR3, TF1, RFI, Canal+, Jeune Afrique, Der Spiegel, Arte TV, VPRO
Also, during the time of the genocide, there was one radio station, Radio Rwanda. Today Rwanda has thirteen independent radio stations.
There are other illustrations, some of which are funny: the Rwandan general who recently ran from the country and claimed he was a political refugee. A senior military official informed me that the general was actually sleeping with the wife of another general who was away on duty, and was about to be indicted under military law. The general ran away and convinced the international press that he was a heroic figure standing up to oppression and asked for asylum. I bet he needs it, too, from the irate husband.
Or the Human Rights Watch employee who claims that Rwanda is preventing her from working there: She was given a work permit within three days-- until it was found out her papers were fraudulently signed by her organization to expedite the process. Still, her office remains open.
A fair-minded person might inquire: Why is all right for Germany to outlaw (Nazi) hate speech, but not so for the Rwandans? Why did journalists crusade for Victoire, but not subsequently report on her connections to aggressive splinter groups? Why hasn't anyone contrasted the activities of the three-dozen press organizations that thrive in Rwanda versus the two that were banned for six months? And, if working papers were rescinded in the USA when an international organization tried to take short cuts, Why would that not make the international news?
I believed for too long that not a lot of good comes out of Africa. The Rwandans held up a mirror to my face. I could see that my way of doing things wasn't helping, and I began to add value when I became willing to be guided by their vision.
I still tend to parentalize the poor, though I no longer believe the American conceptualizations of democracy and human rights are superior to all other peoples, or that the world should progress at the rate I determine. But one good thing about having been a racist, I can spot others a mile away.
Courtesy of The New Times, Rwanda
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)