Négationisme au Rwanda post-génocide
Mugiraneza, Assumpta
Négationisme au Rwanda post-génocide - 2009.
82
Historical revisionism in Rwanda after the genocide“It was in broad daylight, all eyes have seen that...” This is one of the phrases most frequently quoted in Rwanda, both by perpetrators and by victims. They point out the undisguised, public aspect in the implementation of the plan to exterminate the Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994. Nevertheless, this does not prevent the Rwandans from either denial nor negation of the events that all seem to have witnessed.Outside Rwanda, historical revisionism has taken shape with its string of publications, suggestions of role reversals, and theories of a “double genocide” and a “regional complot” of the Tutsi who wished to rule over the region, etc. With modern communication these publications have reached Rwanda. Without being able to evaluate their real impact, one may say that they complicate matters for Rwandans and endanger attempts by Tutsi and Hutu to live together again.In fact, the situation in Rwanda is unique. Perpetrators and victims live together, attend the same schools, pray in the same churches, and are treated in the same hospitals —they coexist on a daily basis. Hence, there is a need not to tell too directly the unbearable truth with its heavy burden. But what happens if this attempt to placate the other party is used in order to deny the genocide ? Will the hatred resulting from genocidal ideology eventually appear again ? How can the legislature be helped to contain the ideology of a genocide which it has not defined very well, or to punish an historical revisionism it has yet to identify ? What can be done when one realizes that our very words do not necessarily describe the cognitive universe of the Rwandans ?A wind of panic blows over Rwanda in view of historical revisionism and one must take account of its contingencies.
Négationisme au Rwanda post-génocide - 2009.
82
Historical revisionism in Rwanda after the genocide“It was in broad daylight, all eyes have seen that...” This is one of the phrases most frequently quoted in Rwanda, both by perpetrators and by victims. They point out the undisguised, public aspect in the implementation of the plan to exterminate the Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994. Nevertheless, this does not prevent the Rwandans from either denial nor negation of the events that all seem to have witnessed.Outside Rwanda, historical revisionism has taken shape with its string of publications, suggestions of role reversals, and theories of a “double genocide” and a “regional complot” of the Tutsi who wished to rule over the region, etc. With modern communication these publications have reached Rwanda. Without being able to evaluate their real impact, one may say that they complicate matters for Rwandans and endanger attempts by Tutsi and Hutu to live together again.In fact, the situation in Rwanda is unique. Perpetrators and victims live together, attend the same schools, pray in the same churches, and are treated in the same hospitals —they coexist on a daily basis. Hence, there is a need not to tell too directly the unbearable truth with its heavy burden. But what happens if this attempt to placate the other party is used in order to deny the genocide ? Will the hatred resulting from genocidal ideology eventually appear again ? How can the legislature be helped to contain the ideology of a genocide which it has not defined very well, or to punish an historical revisionism it has yet to identify ? What can be done when one realizes that our very words do not necessarily describe the cognitive universe of the Rwandans ?A wind of panic blows over Rwanda in view of historical revisionism and one must take account of its contingencies.
Réseaux sociaux