Jonathan Beloff, King’s College London

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) make for very unhappy neighbours. Both sides claim the other is set on bringing down their government, and violating past agreements and international norms.

Rwanda accuses the DRC of working with the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda) or FDLR. The rebel group’s stated aim is to overthrow the Rwandan government.

For its part, the DRC accuses Rwanda of violating its sovereignty by supporting the Mouvement du 23 Mars (March 23 Movement, M23). The rebel group, along with multiple others, is active in the DRC.

A recent United Nations report supports Kinshasa’s contention. The group of experts on the Democratic Republic of Congo detailed its accusations in a 131-page report. Kigali, however, dismissed the findings as “false allegations”.

Rwanda is a country of 13 million people and occupies 26,000 square kilometres. DRC, on the other hand, has 90 million people and covers a territory of 2.3 million square kilometres. The DRC lies to the west of Rwanda. The two countries share a border of about 217 kilometres. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rFkmp/2/

Tensions between the two nations date back to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda when an estimated one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. Many of the perpetrators of the violence fled to the DRC, at the time called Zaire. The post-genocide Rwandan government launched military operations in a bid to force the perpetrators back home to face justice.

Rwanda believes the DRC continues to provide refuge for those behind the 1994 attack.

The two countries have gone through two major wars and multiple skirmishes. They have also had periods of stability and trade growth. The latest tensions, however, are cause for concern. They risk destabilising the Eastern Africa region, disrupting trade routes and allowing for the establishment of opportunistic militia groups.

The issue is on US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s agenda as he tours three African nations in August 2022. He will meet with Congolese and Rwandan leaders to negotiate for a peaceful resolution to the current conflict.

But, based on a decade of research into relations between the two countries, I do not believe Blinken’s visit will to lead to any significant reduction in tensions. The most recent events are not new. Both nations hold old suspicions of each other.

How it started

Since the 1994 genocide, the Rwandan government has kept a close eye on DRC. While 4 July is marked in Rwanda as the day the genocide ended, it was a temporary pause.

After two years of inaction from the then Zaire president Mobutu Sese Seko, Rwanda went after those it believed were behind the attacks and were hiding in Zaire. It carried out military operations that triggered the First Congo War (1996-1997).

This war had two objectives. The first was to disband the refugee camps that were hosting the remnants of the genocide perpetrators. An estimated two million refugees were forced back into Rwanda.

The second objective was the removal of Mobutu on the grounds that he was providing a haven for genocide actors. The Zairian dictator was removed from power in May 1997.

Within nine months, the war was over. With Rwanda’s support, Laurent Kabila and his Alliance des Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Congo-Zaïre (Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo, AFDL) took over power.

But a much bloodier Second Congo War (1998-2003) soon followed. This was catalysed by two events. First, the dismissal of the Congolese defence minister James Kabarebe, who was Rwandan and largely responsible for conducting the First Congo War. Second, Congo’s support for the remnant genocide forces, Armée pour la Libération du Rwanda (Army for the Liberation of Rwanda, ALiR).

The Second Congo War dragged on for five years. It led to the deaths of millions of people. This was as a result of the actual fighting, and the increase in disease and malnutrition.

The lack of a quick resolution to the war resulted in various parts of the DRC being run by either militia groups, or the governments of neighbouring countries. Even allies during the start of the war, such as Uganda and Rwanda, fought against each other.

Eventually, the 2002 Pretoria agreement led to the withdrawal of the Rwandan military from Congolese territory.

Nevertheless, Rwanda continues to contend that Congo supports genocide remnants, now operating as the FDLR.

For its part, DRC accuses Rwanda of supporting Congolese rebel groups, such as the Congrès National pour la Défense du People (National Congress for the Defence of the People, CNDP) and the M23.

Divisions in Kigali

The Rwandan government is divided on the future of relations with its giant neighbour.

One group of policy leaders perceives the DRC as a continual threat to Rwandan security. They view the Congolese military as being ineffective in combating forces stationed in the DRC that are expressly against the Rwandan government, such as the FDLR.

This group often dominates public policy decisions in Rwanda’s foreign relations with the DRC.

But there’s a second group that focuses on the economic opportunities of closer Rwandan-Congolese relations. They believe that Rwandan development should focus on the export of domestically produced goods to the Congolese market of 90 million potential customers. Many within this group believe that the economic benefits outweigh the security concerns, which they argue have decreased in recent years.

Following the 2018 election, which saw Félix Tshisekedi become Congolese president, relations between Rwanda and the DRC improved. This included increased trade activity between the two nations.

It seemed for a while that the beliefs of Rwandans who wanted rapprochement with Kinshasa had the upper hand, hinting at a positive future for the two nations.

But in recent months, these hopes have been dashed. Once more, the dominant narratives involve allegations of DRC collaborating with the FDLR, and Rwanda with M23.

The two countries are likely to continue experiencing periods of stability and tension. Another major conflict, like the Congo wars, is unlikely, but the continual tensions prevent trade integration that would boost development and peace between the two nations.

Jonathan Beloff, Postdoctoral research associate, King’s College London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Jonathan Beloff, King’s College London

One of the primary points of discussion between Antony Blinken and Rwandan president Paul Kagame in the US secretary of state’s upcoming visit to Kigali will be the renewed tensions between Rwanda and its neighbours, particularly the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

According to a US state department statement, Blinken’s visit will focus on the role the government of Rwanda can play in reducing tensions and the ongoing violence in eastern DRC.

Tensions between Rwanda and the DRC are running high. The DRC has accused Rwanda of openly supporting the Mouvement du 23 Mars (March 23 Movement, M23) in eastern Congo. Rwanda has dismissed these accusations. It has instead claimed that the Congolese government is spurring violence against the minority Banyamulenge population, and working with the rebel group called the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, which holds pro-Hutu genocide ideology.

Regional actors, such as Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta, have tried to reduce these tensions. But there has been little progress.

The issue is of importance to the US based on its historical relationship with Rwanda and its past alleged interference in eastern DRC by supporting antagonist forces, such as the M23. The charge was laid by the UN Group of Experts.

It’s unclear if Blinken’s mediation efforts will be successful.

Relations between the US and Rwanda have had their high and low periods. One of the lowest points came in 2012, during Barack Obama’s tenure as US president. He cut military aid to Rwanda over Kagame’s human rights record, as well as Kigali’s role in supporting the M23 rebel group. The US cut $200,000 from a $200 million programme, a symbolic gesture from one of Rwanda’s staunchest defenders.

Since then, Rwandan-US relations have continued to grow, with a notable increase of American tourists and officials visiting the East African nation prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The ups and downs

Before the Rwandan genocide against the Tutsi in 1994, the country fell within France’s sphere of influence. Washington did not view Rwanda as a strategic partner.

But the US’s relations with Rwanda changed after the genocide, based on a desire to help support the new post-genocide government. The result was the forging of close diplomatic relations, a process described by Robert Gribbin, a former American ambassador to Rwanda (1996-1999), in his book, In the Aftermath of Genocide: The US Role in Rwanda.

Gribbin sets out how the US developed close relations with the post-genocide government and the victorious Rwanda Patriotic Front. This included providing military training for soldiers and commanders, which still continues.

Thanks to the efforts of former assistant secretary of state for African affairs Susan Rice (1997-2001) under the Clinton administration, the US became a close ally of Rwanda.

This relationship held despite turbulent times under the Obama administration (2009-2017), which led to a reduction in military aid and harsher critiques of Rwanda’s democratic and human rights record.

While there was some optimism about the Trump administration, disagreements on trade led to anger among Rwandan officials.

Nevertheless, Rwandan-US relations have remained relatively strong.

Kagame as a pull factor

Possibly the reason for America’s continued close relations with Rwanda stems from the stability of Kagame. First appointed as president in 2000, he presents a stable ally who knows the pro-western language of development and security.

Kagame, however, has come in for a great deal of criticism for his domestic human rights and political record. Blinken, according to the US State Department, will be raising concerns about this record during his visit.

Blinken will particularly focus on Kagame’s “transnational repression, limiting space for dissent and political opposition, and the wrongful detention of US Lawful Permanent Resident Paul Rusesabagina”. Rwanda sentenced Rusesabagina to 25 years in prison for his connection to terrorist attacks in 2021 that killed nine Rwandans.

For the most part, however, American officials have chosen to overlook concerns about Kagame’s human rights record. They are much more inclined to view Kagame’s support as instrumental to promoting American policies and interests in Africa. These include promoting a business environment that is favourable for US foreign investment, his soft power influence in African relations and Kigali’s peacekeeping contributions.

Peacekeeping

America’s willingness to send its military into peacekeeping missions was greatly hindered by the 1993 failed peacekeeping mission in Somalia. The US was seen to have been humiliated after 19 American soldiers died in the Battle of Mogadishu.

These events fostered great political backlash in the US. Many Americans failed to see the purpose of sending US military personnel in non-strategic military operations.

America’s reluctance to be involved in peacekeeping opened the door for Washington to offer nations political, diplomatic and military support in return for their participation in missions. In this way the US could meet its commitment to peacekeeping without sending its own soldiers.

There is no doubt that Blinken will seek Rwanda’s continued commitment to contributing military and police personnel.

This is a particularly tricky issue in the region at the moment. Over the past two weeks, the UN peacekeeping mission in the DRC has come under attack. In two separate incidents, at least 20 people have been killed. Among them were three peacekeepers. Additionally, Rwandan authorities have previously threatened to remove their soldiers from peacekeeping missions after receiving international criticism.

Investment destination

Even though Rwanda is a small country – it is a low-income economy with a population of just over 13 million – it is still an important destination for American multinational corporations seeking to invest in East Africa.

Rwandan officials, in particular Kagame, have developed close relations with international leaders of companies like Starbucks, Volkswagen, Costco, Macy’s, Visa and Marriott International Inc.

These companies have either opened factories, such as Volkswagen, bought commodities, such as Starbucks, or as with Visa, invested in financial growth services in the region.

Outcome

The current tensions between the DRC and Rwanda, as well as the holding of Rusesabagina, will not be solved by Blinken’s quick visit. But these issues are unlikely to cause any long-term damage to Rwanda-US foreign relations.

Jonathan Beloff, Postdoctoral research associate, King’s College London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

• Twitter
• Link

For roughly a year between 2013-2014, I resided in the neighbourhood of Kanombe in eastern Kigali. After nearly every day of work, I would walked home. The twelve kilometer journey allowed me to clear my mind. It allowed me to think of the work I was doing at the time, but also of grander questions of how Rwanda had and was continuing to influence my beliefs and opinions. 

Walking this route, I would travel around much of Kigali’s [at the time of writing this] only airport, the Kigali International Airport. As the airport stood on top of a hill, much of my walk would be around it. At one particular area, the arriving and departing airplanes were so close to the ground that if one threw a ball up, it would likely hit the plane! But it wasn’t until the near end of the walk, when I was in the new housing suburbs of Kanombe, that I would come across perhaps the most interesting part of the walk. 

Perhaps less than a kilometre from the end of my walk was the former Presidential Palace of Juvénal Habyarimana. During his Presidential reign from 1973 to 1994, his house was one of the most secure places in the whole country. Few would live nearby beyond his inner circle of political, economic and social power called the akazu. As guard towers surround the complex, I could not help but think of the horrific policies that originated from within the property walls. While Habyarimana’s predecessor Gregoire Kayibanda (1962-1973) was just as guilty of horrific atrocities against Rwanda’s Tutsi population, it was here that a quota system was created to establish a system of institutional racism within Rwanda. Additionally, it was here where a master plan to exterminate Rwanda’s Tutsi population would come to be in 1994. 

Around the corner, I would continue to walk on the dirt road. This area was largely empty during the time of Habyarimana in order to protect the privacy of the President. Now, it is filled with houses of a new middle class within Rwandan society. An old woman who lives nearby told me stories of what the neighbourhood was like back during Habyarimana’s regime. Still to my right, the old guard walls bare down on me with an abandoned service station to my left. From this angle, the house, largely left as a museum and a wedding venue, seems eerily abandoned. But I had yet to reach the true curiosity of the site.

I would always stop at the same spot and just stare out at one of the most notable aspects of this house: the remains of the Presidential plane. The 1994 Genocide against the Tutsis was ignited after the assassination of President Habyarimana. While there is great debate on who killed the President as he returned from Arusha, Tanzania one fateful night, the outcome was clear. After decades of anti-Tutsi propaganda and a failing Rwandan state, a genocide would erupt and kill an estimated one million Rwandan Tutsis and non-extremists Hutus. Unlike other genocides, this one’s primary weapon of choice was the machete and other farming equipment.

A strange yellow light would shine on the little remnants of the Falcon 50 plane during the night. Its tail wing was still upright with some engine parts, landing gear and fuselage still present. Much of the remains of the plane are in lands far away from here. Seemingly within minutes to a few hours after Habyarimana’s assassination, French, Zairian and Rwandan National Guard soldiers surrounded the crash site, preventing General Romero Dallaire, the commander of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda (UNAMIR) from reaching it. They collected much of the debris, seemingly being prepared for this event. Based on testimonies I’ve collected, within 45 minutes of the assassination, roadblocks were established in much of Kigali beginning a genocide that would continue until the 19th of July. 

At the time, there was little to stop me from just walking to the crashed plane site, a moment in history. While there were security guards at an outpost nearby, many had grown to know me as the smiling muzungu (foreigner) who would wave to them each morning and evening. For travellers now, there is a brick wall which prevents you from even seeing the crash site. You have to visit inside the museum to gain access to the crash. But for those twelve months, I would pass by this site and think of the ramifications everyday. It was this moment which triggered not only one of the most horrific genocides but also a pressing example of international abandonment. Some of those who sing, ‘Never Again’ turned their backs here and are doing so in Afghanistan.

For the last week, I have been talking to a close colleague of mine about the events unfolding in Afghanistan. Close to twenty years after the United States sent soldiers into the central Asian country to capture and kill Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies, the Taliban have returned to power. They gained their victory through the use of their weapons against a leader-less Afghan government on the graves of over 66,000 Afghan soldiers who tried to stop the Taliban.

The stories from around the country, with new videos and testimonies coming from Kabul remind me of the horror stories from Rwanda. While some researchers, focusing on Rwanda, are not particularly interested in conducting research in Rwanda with Rwandans, I have always felt it necessary as it brings a human element that often departs from narratives and experiences found within the Global North. Many in the Global North (thankfully) will never have to know the horrors and worst of humanity even if they claim to be ‘experts’ on them. But listening to Rwandans in Rwanda is a necessary experience to listen and perhaps try to understand the greatest horrors of humanity. They can be beacons for us to be aware of when chaos begins in another society so we can assist and prevent the loss of humanity. While two conflicts are never the same, there is always one similarity, the blood of innocent victims. The scenes at Kabul’s airport are some of the most graphic being displayed in news media outlets. 

The chaos at Kabul’s airport is filled with images of seemingly thousands of people desperate to try to flee the brutality of the incoming Taliban regime. With stories [and now video evidence] of Taliban forces torturing and killing any Afghan that engaged with not only foreign actors but anything that is seen as beyond their strict interpretation of Islam, people are growing desperate. Horrific scenes of people falling off of US military planes; families giving up their small children hoping that at least their children could escape; and the pleas for international help as the Taliban cut off roads to the airport. Rwanda didn’t exactly have a similar situation as during the genocide, Kigali International Airport was mostly under the control of the French during the early weeks of the genocide. People couldn’t flee for safety and escape. Rather, they would either try to reach UNAMIR locations or the incoming Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) army. This prevented any mass evacuation of Rwandans until the RPF took control over the airport and worked with UNAMIR to help people escape. 

However, there are multiple stories that follow closely with the scenes at the airport. In particular I remember some testimonies from the École Technique Officielle (ETO) school in Kicukiro, Kigali. It was here were Belgium UNAMIR troops protected over 2000 Rwandans. All were frightened that if the Belgium troops departed, they would all be killed. Interahamwe [genocidal murders] militias were known for shouting at the scared refugees that once the Belgiums left, they would all be killed. Their prediction came true with the removal of Belgium forces from UNAMIR shortly after the brutal murders of 10 Belgium forces. As news entered the ETO of the pending removal of Belgium forces, many refugees went to news media outlets begging for help. Similar to what we are now witnessing in Afghanistan, the news media seemingly took their pictures and videos and left. And like back then, the extremists, whether the Interahamwe or Taliban, moved right in.

The plane crash currently dominates my thoughts as I watch through news media as well as through social media sites of the hell engulfing Afghanistan. Despite not being a researcher on Afghanistan, as I focus on the African Great Lakes, I do feel some connection. Perhaps it is Mark Twain’s famous comment, History doesn’t repeat itself but it does rhyme. While staring at the Falcon 50 tail wing all those years ago, I would contemplate how the genocide would be different if the Global North, particularly the United States, sent some of its military might to help those who were going to suffer. If the Global North actually cared about one of their favourite slogans, Never Again, to go beyond their narratives to help their fellow human beings. 

We are now facing a similar situation and continuing to do nothing.  

While Afghans are being attacked by Taliban forces and pleading for help, President Biden is fumbling around the failures of the Afghan withdrawal. Very similar to his tweets during the collapse of Kabul, in a recent ABC News interview, he seemed to expose the reality of the situation. The Global North just simply doesn’t care despite all the window dressing that depicts it does. They don’t care about failing states like Afghanistan or Rwanda during the early days of the genocide. It is even more infuriating as President Biden campaigned as a foreign policy expert who would reintroduce humanitarianism in US foreign policy. 

While former President Trump acted in disgrace when he called some Global South nations as ‘sh-thole nations’, I find it even more disgraceful when President Biden claimed to promote humanitarianism within American foreign policy while completely abandoning Afghans. History does rhyme as President Biden held a similar position after the fall of Saigon. Even more disgraceful is what I am seeing from people who want to promote social justice but are applauding the horrors in Afghanistan. While I do not want to dive too much into the political dynamics within the Global North, especially in the USA, the hypocrisy of arm chaired ‘experts’ and ‘fighters for social good’ is even more disgraceful. Is fighting against what they perceive as Imperialism justified with the countless loss of life, massive curtailing of human rights, especially for women?

Are they so naive to ignore that everything they believe in will and currently is being violated by the Taliban? Or do they only claim these beliefs in the comfort of their safe and stable neighbourhoods thousands of miles away from the worst of humanity? Perhaps promoting their beliefs, in what some might call cultural Orietenlism or Neo-colonialism, is not that important when it comes to committing oneself beyond a few hashtags or protests thousands of miles away. Perhaps protesting for universal human rights is not worth it when the situation becomes more complicated than just a street protest or hashtags on social media? On the other side of the American political spectrum, why are many Republicans and Conservatives now fighting for Afghan refugees when they were so quick to turn a blind eye and even condemn the ones that were fleeing from nations just south of the US border?

I don’t want to be on a soapbox preaching my personal political opinions as very few people are interested in them. However, as someone who, while looking at the destroyed wreckage of the Presidential Plane, would speculate so much about humanitarian responses, I plead to anyone who will listen: the Global North and the world must not let Afghans fall into the worst of humanity. We cannot allow history to rhyme again. The United States alone has 5000 soldiers stationed at the Kabul airport. It has the largest military in the world with abilities that any historical empire would envy. It has the ability to save people. Let it use the military might for a humanitarian good and help evacuate as many people as we can. Unfortunately, there will be people left behind but saving as many as we can must be our goal. As the Jewish Talmud says: [paraphrasing] Save One Life, Save the Entire World. Let’s save as many worlds as we can. Let the detailed analysis, geopolitical consequences and so on be pushed to a later date as we cannot fail in Afghanistan as they did in Rwanda. Let’s stop the rhyming of history now so people won’t visit Kabul’s airport in the future and ask what could have been. 

Jonathan Beloff, King’s College London

French president Emmanuel Macron has just paid his first state visit to Rwanda. While many world leaders have visited the central African nation of 13 million, including past French presidents, such as President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2010, this trip was going to be different.

Sure enough president Macron would come the closest to apologising for France’s involvement during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis.

At the Kigali Genocide Memorial, Macron asked for forgiveness for France’s involvement in the genocide. He also expressed his desire to combat genocide ideology and denial in order to foster stronger relations with Rwanda.

The long-term impact of this trip will be based on building on this commitment. France’s tangible foreign policy mechanism will be committing itself to helping Rwanda through foreign aid development funding and COVID-19 vaccines. However, for France to gain the trust of Rwandans, the country has to commit itself to combatting genocide ideology and denial. A great start would be the arrest and extradition of Rwandans who participated in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis.

The history

Prior to the genocide, France was Rwanda’s closest European ally. It was never the colonising power. Rwanda was colonised by Germany (1884-1919) and later transferred to Belgium. It was during the Belgian colonial period (1919-1962) that socio-economic divisions of Hutu, Tutsi and Twa become immovable ethnic divisions. To justify Belgium’s colonial atrocities, the colonial government elevated some Tutsi elites into positions of power to illustrate local rule.

In a 1973 coup, Juvénal Habyarimana took the presidency. He developed a close personal relationship with French president François Mitterrand (1981-1995).

France under Mitterrand provided the Habyarimana regime with considerable financial and military support. Mitterrand’s backing helped create a sense of legitimacy for his Rwandan counterpart. This in turn aided the policies of ethnic divisionism, hatred and pogroms that would eventually result in the 1994 genocide.

Since then, Rwandan-French relations have been poor at best. Many within the Rwandan government, led by the Rwanda Patriotic Front, denounced France’s closeness to Habyarimana as unacceptable. Rwanda also demanded an acknowledgement of French involvement in the 1994 genocide. Unfortunately, this did not happen under the next French president Jacques Chirac.

Subsequently, president Sarkozy attempted to foster greater relations with Rwanda. He came close to admitting France’s role during the genocide, but blamed “political errors” for the country’s actions. Relations deteriorated again under president François Hollande who minimised France’s involvement prior to and during the genocide.

Now, however, Macron has gone beyond Sarkozy’s tentative steps.

How relations went south

As Cold War declined in the early 1990s, France began to apply pressure on its African allies – such as Habyarimana – to democratise. In Rwanda, however, the transition from dictatorship to open political competition did not go well. Rather than peaceful mobilisation, the opening of political space helped Hutu ideological extremists loyal to Habyarimana to propagate the ideology of genocide against the Tutsis.

At the same time, Rwandan exiles — mostly Tutsis – formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front signalling the start of the Rwandan Civil War (1990-1994) between government and well-organised rebels.

France backed Habyarimana’s regime by fighting back the first invasion by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (1990-1991). After this campaign, the French government provided its military assistance to rebuild Rwanda’s military against the party. They also secretly supported a government-backed militia, the Interahamwe (Those who fight together).

The genocide began hours after the assassination of Habyarimana. The presidential plane he was in was shot down by unknown assailants.

France remained steadfastly behind the new genocide government. While not providing military equipment or troops, it pressured for the removal of the United Nation’s peacekeeping force in Rwanda. It also moved the Rwandan government’s inner circle of power out of Rwanda in the early days of the genocide.

Later France was to send military troops under the UN-sanctioned Opération Turquoise. The French government publicly stated their substantial contribution of nearly 2,500 soldiers would help stop the genocidal killings. However, it became a safe zone for genocide perpetrators to continue the massacres as well as to flee into neighbouring Zaire.

Goodwill gestures

The political fallout from the 1994 genocide will remain at the heart of relations between Rwanda and France for some time to come. But the signs are promising. A great first step was made in 2019 with the creation of the Duclert Commission to investigate France’s role in the genocide.

The commission report expressed reasonable doubt as to whether the French government was fully aware of how its relationship with the Habyarimana regime and training of Interahamwe forces would lead to the genocide. It nevertheless acknowledged France’s involvement in the events leading to the mass killings.

The Rwandan government accepted the report’s findings and commented on how important this was to help restore trust between the two nations.

Macron and current Rwandan president Paul Kagame recently met in France. Macron publicly showed his desire for a friendship with his Rwandan counterpart.

During Macron’s Rwanda state visit some significant agreements were made between the two countries – for example a bilateral cooperation agreement between the two nations’ foreign ministers, financial support for development and for combating Covid-19.

But the highlight for Rwandans was Macron’s visit to the Kigali Genocide Memorial. While this might not appear to be a tangible benefit in foreign policy, it holds significant influence in Rwandan perceptions of France amid hesitation, scepticism and open hatred for France.

For many Rwandans, France represents a period in their country’s history that was filled with ethnic hatreds, instability and Habyarimana’s dictatorship. Many still hold France responsible for aiding the destructive ideology of the genocide.

It will take time for Rwandans, especially those who suffered or witnessed the genocide, to trust France again. Macron will be aware of these challenges and how French-Rwandan relations will require time, gestures of goodwill and actions addressing the past.

Jonathan Beloff, , SOAS, University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.