Pour les lecteurs de NanoJV, Albert Rudatsimburwa, analyse les divergences du Rwanda et de l’Afrique du Sud sur la question libyenne à l’aune des histoires respectives. Il montre que la vision du Rwanda n’est pas binaire (l’Afrique contre le reste du monde) mais multidimensionnelle face à un monde hétérogène en mutation. Quand l’Afrique du Sud en appelle à la Cour Pénale Internationale pour enquêter sur les bombardement de l’OTAN, le Rwanda apporte son soutien au CNT et à l’intervention…. Même si à ses yeux la Renaissance du Continent est l’affaire des seuls africains. Une vision volontariste qui ne plaît pas à tout le monde mais recueille selon Rudatsimburwa, les suffrages de la jeunesse afrcaine, engagée dans un combat quotidien pour la dignité et la reconnaissance de son rang.
Albert Rudatsimburwa est le fondateur et le directeur de la radio privée Contact FM, parmi les plus écoutées au Rwanda. Il fut précédemment directeur du marketing de l’opérateur rwandais MTN Rwandacell. Rudatsimburwa est aujourd’hui Président de la Rwandan Press House, un syndicat de journalistes rwandais soutenu par l’UNESCO. Il est également musicien, producteur d’artistes africains et européens, et s’exprime en dutch, en français, en anglais, en kinyarwanda et en swahili.
Libya between South Africa and Rwanda, two visions for Africa
Albert Rudatsimburwa, Editor and Political Analyst, Great Lakes, Kigali Rwanda
The early nineties will forever be a turning point for two major players on the African continent, namely South Africa and Rwanda. It is however interesting to note how different their approaches are in facing the many challenges of our continent today.
It was indeed the year 1994 that saw the end of the dark days of the Apartheid system in South Africa as well as the politics of ethnic divide that characterized both the colonial and post-colonial era in Rwanda. Both cases saw a government killing its own people for a mistaken sense of entitlement. It was then and there that a call for an ‘African Renaissance’ was heard and echoed all over the continent.
Never again will the Africans be idle bystanders in the face of similar tragedies on African soil and the World, nor will we let others decide for us how to best reach our goals of development and prosperity.
Fast forward to today:
Rwanda urges the AU to back the Libyan rebels, while South Africa is calling for the ICC to investigate into NATO war crimes. The disruption between the once close allies could not be greater. Forgotten are the days where Thabo Mbeki would launch the NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) and Rwanda would be NEPAD’s most fervent supporter.
The NEPAD’s ambition was to create a `new framework of interaction with the rest of the world, including the industrialized countries and multilateral organizations’–one that is sufficiently `radical’ to lift African GDP growth to 7% per annum.
Africa’ real GDP Growth is still growing as planned, however Africa’s political roadmap to globalization is no longer a shared vision between the two country’s leadership. For Rwandans after the genocide, nothing can remain unchallenged, nothing is certain anymore not even our enemy. As Tony Blair once said, the essential quality of a great politician is to be a student of history not its prisoner. Pretoria shared the vision of Kigali, that in as much as Africa continues to suffer from marginalization, this time unlike colonialism and apartheid, the enemy is not a western world that conspired to loot Africans. At a time of global markets and powerful non-State actors, the enemy is a moving target not racially defined.
Rwanda’s way from marginalization to globalization has a fundamental difference with South Africa’s experience: Rwanda experienced genocide by Africans on Africans, although its origin is colonialism. Rwandans does not have the luxury of an easily identifiable enemy (the West), Rwanda knows that in dark hours all hell would break loose, and an African would be the worst nightmare to his fellow African. Until today, African countries are the most reluctant to judge or extradite genocidaires.
Thus, Rwanda’s view of the international order is not bilinear (Africans vs. the rest); it is multidimensional (our Values vs. the variable rest). Rwanda will denounce international arrest warrants within the AU while at the same time being a champion in aid effectiveness. For Rwanda, the western world is no longer homogenous.
Rwanda will most certainly not claim that the NATO has not possibly committed war crimes, what Rwanda will claim is that it cannot support a government killing its own people and that any homegrown rebellion against such a government is legitimate. As for external interference, Rwanda prefers it instead of inaction.
Rwanda has its own painful experience with external interference, from the early days of colonialism to the genocide against the Tutsis, without external interference Rwandans would have made different choices.
Rwandans have however learnt that you cannot blame it on anyone else if you fail. We are responsible for the loss of our identity in the face of adversity and no one else will bring Africans the place they deserve in the world but the African people themselves. That is why Rwanda will denounce leaders killing the African sovereign, the people, just like colonialism did. As President Kagame has recently said to local authorities our sovereignty stands and falls with our people.
By taking such a bold stand, Rwanda might very be creating a deep schism in Africa. The articulation of the Rwandan vision will definitely alienate some Africans and Westerners.
But the good news is that an overwhelming majority of African Youth has shown its sensibility to it. While we will not forget the historical pain of colonialism, we know that our dignity is a self-evident truth we have to fight for everyday, with new ideas defining our own African piece of ground within this globalized world.
That’s Rwanda’s take on the ‘African Renaissance’