Reconciliation During The Rwandan Genocide

More than 1, 000, 000 people died during the Rwandan genocide and the South African Apartheid. The Belgian colonizers divided Rwanda into different ethnic groups in 1890s. The Rwandan Genocide was an event in which Hutus tried to exterminate the Tutsis, which were a different ethnic group. Genocide refers to the deliberate killing of a large specific group of people. The South African Apartheid was an event in which black South Africans were discriminated and treated differently than white South Africans in South Africa. Apartheid means “separateness” in Afrikaans. In this case it was the segregation of blacks and whites in South Africa. Reconciliation is defined as the restoration of friendly relationships. After conflicts such as these reconciliation
is needed to maintain peace. Reconciliation after major conflicts is possible when unity, trust and forgiveness are present.
Reconciliation Villages after the Rwandan genocide was a good reconciliation strategy because it provided victims and perpetrators with unity and a chance of starting over. For the villagers it can be tough to live so close to each other. There haven't been problems though, Frederic Kazigwemo says. "I can go and leave my kids with a Tutsi family," he adds. "I don't have to be afraid that they take revenge - that's impossible here.” (Durr) The reconciliation villages gave the victims and perpetrators the chance to trust each other. Although living together is tough, it gave Rwandans a chance to start again. Making victims and perpetrators have physical unity, it lead them to have complete unity and trust. Having an effective community requires collaboration and cooperation. “Anger and hatred have not yet disappeared. The stability is fragile. In many Rwanda people meet for debating clubs. Different generations, victims and perpetrators talk about their experiences, their feelings and emotions.” (Durr) Although living together has not extinguished all anger and hatred, it has given victims and perpetrators the chance to talk and try to understand each other. Debating clubs deal with disagreements between Rwandans, therefore they don’t always appease emotions but resurface them making the stability fragile. In debating clubs Rwandans also get to listen to other victims and perpetrators trying to create an empathetic atmosphere. Listening to each other was a step forward to creating a unified and forgiving atmosphere.
Mandela’s participation in The World Cup brought together the people of South Africa and it broke down some of the resentment and hatred South Africans had against each other bringing them together to support the Springboks. During the last game Mandela wore the captain’s jersey showing support to the team once hated by black South Africans. Mandela later called the Springboks his sons, when he did this “the mostly white crowd went wild at this magnanimous (and politically astute) gesture on the part of their new president. Africans too accepted this reidentification of the team, and when the Springboks beat the All Blacks in overtime, the Sowetan, a popular black newspaper, ran the headline “Amabokoboko” -Zulu for “Our Springboks” -the following day. Mandela was able “to teach a new way of thinking and behaving to his people, especially to black South Africans”. It was as if the game, which one typified white domination, “had magically drawn all sectors towards the centre and opened a new path, shown a new direction” according to Mail & Guardian.” (Graybill) Mandela was a very influential person at the time, him wearing the rugby jersey of the team once despised by the black community and referring to them as “my sons” was sending a peaceful and forgiving message to South Africa, promoting reconciliation. Mandela’s use of the jersey symbolized unity and forgiveness and it provoked unity in South Africa, which is essential for people to trust one another.
Amnesty is a good reconciliation strategy for perpetrators to have another chance in life, however amnesty gives controversial power and it is not always the best strategy of reconciliation.
Amnesty is most effective when it is the result of a negotiation for example “the 2002 ceasefire agreement between the Angolan government army and the military commanders of the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (União Nacional para a Independencia Total de Angola, UNITA) included the promise of amnesty for former UNITA rebels: a few days before the official signing of the agreement the Angolan Parliament passed an amnesty law. The Nicaraguan “general amnesty and national reconciliation law” of March 1990 was the result of negotiations between the Sandinista government and opposition parties.” (IDEA) When amnesty is the result of a negotiation it is more accepted and less controversial than when amnesty is enforced. People are likely to trust things when they have a choice in these decisions. This type of reciprocal amnesty is more accepted because there is mutual gain and when reciprocal amnesty occurs it is a step towards reconciliation. Many cases Amnesty is a good strategy of reconciliation because of the opportunity it gives others. Nkundiye had a chance of starting again because he was granted amnesty. He learned how to collaborate, forgive and be a unit again in the reconciliation villages after the Rwandan Genocide. Amnesty was a good reconciliation strategy for
Nkundiye because he was pardoned and he was given a second chance of life.“…I confessed all that I did during the Genocide, apologised and I was pardoned, which came as a relief,” said Nkundiye.” (Mugabo) Amnesty has been used in various conflicts. “Shortly after World War II, France and the Netherlands issued amnesty laws for those who had collaborated with the Germans in a move to bury the past and speed up reconciliation and national unity, but this proved to be little more than a “legal forgetting”. (IDEA) Amnesty can sometimes give the wrong message, in this case it gave the message that the act committed was not worthy of punishment or that the act was ignored or passed as a good act making amnesty not the best strategy for reconciliation. Amnesty can also be seen as a forgetting and accepting of events. Amnesty can implement forgiveness, but it can also give the wrong message making it a poor reconciliation strategy.
Unity, trust and forgiveness are important for reconciliation because if done acceptance and empathy will be created within the parties.
The Rwandan villages allowed Rwandans to have physical unity that lead to full unity between people. The World Cup made South Africans unite and accept each other to cheer for the Springboks. Amnesty could be an effective strategy if it comes as a result of a negotiation, however it can also give the wrong message to people by implementing dismissal and acceptance of the crime. Reconciliation is a difficult, but necessary process to go through after any conflict because it brings peace and unity to both parties. Reconciliation is a process that has been used throughout history to form the world we live in today. The process of reconciliation makes people grow as individuals as collectively within a community; it is not a process an individual can accomplish alone, however it is a process that requires cooperation and collaboration. Unity, forgiveness and trust are essential factors for reconciliation to be possible. Reconciliation is a long process that is possible with the cooperation of both parties, especially if trust, unity and forgiveness are factors involved in the
process.