Genocide - Sample Chapters

10664
Genocide So Th
due rder other people igious ic, racial, or rel ividuals against the ind
at I Wouldn
ment of (and an assort de, and ticide, democi ates. It nd relevant deb eloped at have been dev ocides Holocaustgen
't Be Among
ent people.
Genocide. eries entitled provide a hich together nds alone Each volume sta essment of f a broader ass
ir Auron the Silent Ya
the series, k and editor of ary Jewry and contempor n, erous books published num ies. in other countr
So Silent e Among the B
G he tnWo lcni d e d 't T a I ou
Genocide
Editor: Yair Auron

Frankfurt - Genocide.indd 1 20/09/2012 10:33:34
The Open Un iversity of Isr ael
Yair Auron
Frankfurt - Genocide.indd 2
20/09/2012 10:33:34
Genocide
On the following pages you will find sample chapters from our series, Genocide, edited by Prof. Yair Auron. Each of the volumes in the series Genocide describes and analyzes the ongoing and recurring phenomenon of genocide as one of the key perspectives of analyzing history since the beginning of the European colonial expansion. The books outline major genocide outbursts, beginning with the annihilation of the indigenous populations of the Americas in the 16th century up to the end of the 19th century; the destruction of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I; the Holocaust with the attempted extinction of the Jews, Gypsies and people with disabilities by the Nazi regime; politicide in the USSR; politicide in Cambodia; the destruction of Tibetan Buddhism and the traditional way of life by the Chinese; and the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. Four additional volumes are dedicated to an analytic-comparative perspective of genocide: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies, Genocide and Racism, psychological theories of the perpetrators, and the phenomenon of rescuers and active third-party participants. Each book was written by a specialist in the relevant area. The diversity of writers introduces a variety of attitudes and ways of writing history, and prevents readers from gaining only a single narrow perspective and narrative. The aim of the series is to present the common features of these very different cases and to analyze them according to different theories. Through the process of studying them, basic sensitivities are developed: sensitivity regarding the process of inclusion and exclusion of populations during the formation and reformation of modern political communities; sensitivity to the function and dysfunction of third party participants in genocide outbursts; and sensitivity to the dynamics of collective memory of past genocide events in the formation of national communities and a moral international conscience. All the books include a general introduction to genocide (on the following pages), and all are illustrated with photographs, maps and figures.
Genocide
3
20/09/2012 10:33:35
From the General Introduction, by Yair Auron

The first time it was reported that our friends were being butchered there was a cry of horror. Then a hundred were butchered. But when a thousand were butchered and there was no end to the butchery, a blanket of silence spread. When evil-doing comes like falling rain, nobody calls out 'stop!' When crimes begin to pile up, they become invisible. When sufferings become unendurable the cries are no longer audible. The cries, too, fall like rain in summer.1 Instances of mass extermination have taken place throughout human history. Still, some argue that the 20th century witnessed many more acts of genocide than any other century in the past. For this reason, the 20th century has also been referred to as "the century of genocide," "the century of evil," and "the century of violence." The 20th century also witnessed the Holocaust: the most severe blow to human rights, the most extreme display of indifference to human suffering, and perhaps the greatest moral failure that humanity has ever known. Nonetheless, we must always remember that acts of genocide occurred both before and after the Holocaust. In the 1990s alone a decade when more people in the world were well informed about the Holocaust than ever before and the world reiterated its promise of "never again," we witnessed genocides in both Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. These were two acts of genocide that could have been prevented. Studies, discussions, and debates on different acts of genocide often cause us to wonder whether it was truly genocide that took place. Answering this question requires, among other things, a standard definition of the term genocide, which is as important ethically as it is linguistically. Over the years, various attempts have been made to define the term "genocide." This series uses the standard definition employed by institutions of the United Nations (despite its deficiencies), as discussed below.
4
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
The term genocide was derived from two words: genos, which is ancient Greek for race, nation, or tribe; and caedes or cide, which is Latin for massacre or murder. Although the literal meaning of this linguistic combination is "annihilation of a race" or "murder of a race," it is generally used to refer more generally to the "murder of a people." The term was coined by Polish Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1901-1959), who is considered the father of the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Lemkin, whose entire family was killed in the Holocaust, managed to escape from Poland and eventually settled in the United States, where he dedicated the rest of his life to studying the phenomenon of genocide and working to incorporate crimes of genocide into international criminal law. Lemkin first used the term in the context of the Nazi extermination of European Jewry in order to refer to the racially motivated killing of a people. However, according to its definition, the crime of genocide also includes mass extermination that is nationally, ethnically, or religiously motivated. Lemkin's numerous studies delved more deeply into the definition of the term, expanding its scope and providing a thorough analysis. His texts repeatedly emphasize that the crime of genocide does not always entail the immediate and absolute destruction of a group of victims; rather, it can also be carried out by means of a series of planned actions aimed at the gradual destruction of fundamental aspects of the life of the group in question, such as the forced elimination of national consciousness, language, culture, individual freedom, and economic infrastructure, and the hindering of natural biological reproduction. International law incorporated the term, as expounded by Lemkin, as a generic classification referring to the extermination of a people. Today, the term is commonly employed within statutes, international covenants, judicial rulings, and academic and journalistic literature to refer to the killing of people due to their membership in a specific national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. In the view of many, genocide also includes the murder of individuals due solely to their membership in a certain political group in order to harm and eradicate the group as a whole (this form of genocide is not mentioned in the U.N. Covenant).
Genocide
5
20/09/2012 10:33:35
A Question of Terminology
Scholars are engaged in a never ending, extremely meaningful, and often bitter debate regarding the difference between "Holocaust" and "genocide." Some argue for a clear distinction between the two concepts, maintaining that, although the term genocide encompasses certain aspects of the Holocaust, the term Holocaust refers to a unique event in human history: an exceptional, total, all encompassing crime that transcends genocide. Such scholars emphasize the fact that the Nazi genocide against the Jews was directed against an entire people, regardless of their location and the historical circumstances in which they lived. A number of other scholars including some Jews, most living outside of Israel regard the Holocaust as falling under the general category of genocide, despite its unique characteristics. These scholars argue that every act of genocide is unique in its own way, and that the Holocaust is no different in this respect. In an effort to avoid engaging in the terminological debate surrounding the concepts of 'Holocaust' and 'genocide,' we make a methodological distinction between the two. Therefore, the 'Holocaust' and 'genocide' are used throughout the books in this series as separate but closely related terms. Historians, politicians, and legal experts also hold different opinions when it comes to applying the term genocide to some of the mass killings that took place during the 20th century, including a number of internal, politically motivated killings such as the ones committed by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union. One such debate relates to the question of whether the events that took place in the former Yugoslavia should be classified as genocide, or merely as a series of 'genocidal acts.' Under American pressure, the U.N. Security Council also refused to classify the events that took place in Rwanda in the summer of 1994 as genocide, albeit not out of disagreement regarding the nature of the events themselves but as a result of cynical manipulation. However, the case of Rwanda was made even more problematic by the fact that millions of people around the world sat in their living rooms and watched the atrocities live on television as they unfolded, and the fact that internal U.S. government documents from the period explicitly used the word genocide. Nonetheless, the U.N. recognized the events as genocide only after most of the extermination had already been carried out.
6
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
Such terminological debates have led to suggestions of using the term "politicide" to refer to politically motivated mass murders. Politicide refers to the killing of people whom the government of the country in which they live regard as adversaries or enemies for political or ideological reasons. To be clear, however, genocide and politicide should not necessarily be understood as two completely separate phenomena. Rather, mass killings may simultaneously be both genocide and politicide. Indeed, the Stalinist regime in the Soviet Union, the Maoist regime in China, and the Pol-Pot regime in Cambodia all committed internal mass killing for political reasons (politicide), as well as mass murders aimed at exterminating specific ethnic groups (genocide). In light of the differing opinions surrounding the semantics of genocide, some have also proposed using the term "ethnocide" to refer to the intentional destruction of the culture of an ethnic, national, religious, or other type of group that does not necessarily involve physical extermination. Due to the many different types of mass crimes and the numerous terms and definitions that have been proposed to describe them, some have suggested employing the broader term "democide" (from the Greek demos, meaning population or people) to encompass genocide, politicide, and ethnocide. When we consider the historical events that can be classified under this allencompassing term, the estimated number of people who were killed during the 20th century reaches incomprehensible proportions. According to the assessment of American political scientist R.J. Rummel, between the years 1900 and 1987, 169,198,000 people were killed the world over in events that can be classified as democide. This number does not include soldiers or civilians killed in wars.2 Rummel estimates that the overall number of victims of democide during the 20th century stands at 174,000,000. Regardless of the debates over semantics and terminology, it is important to never lose sight of the fact that every instance of mass killing in which people are targeted not for any individual reason but based solely on their belonging to a particular national, ethnic, racial, or religious group is a crime of the most serious nature.
Genocide
7
20/09/2012 10:33:35
The U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
On December 9, 1948, in the wake of Nazi war crimes in general and the extermination of the Jews in particular, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In the convention, the "contracting parties" confirmed "that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish." Article 2 of the convention defines genocide as follows: any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Like many other countries, Israel signed the U.N. Convention, and on this basis the Israeli Knesset enacted the Crime of Genocide (Prevention and Punishment) Law of 1950. In its formulation of the statute, the Israeli legislator reiterated the definition of the crime as it appears in the U.N. Convention, but its position on the punishment of perpetrators was much more decisive. The U.N. Convention leaves the punishment of perpetrators of genocide and the trial process undefined, resulting in loopholes that have enabled most who stood trial for such acts after the adoption of the Convention to go unpunished. In contrast, the Israeli statute unequivocally specifies that "a person guilty of genocide shall be punished by death" (except under certain circumstances which are not defined by the statute). The Israeli legislator stipulated the same punishment for those found guilty under the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law of 1950, which was first enforced in Israel during the trial of Adolf Eichmann.
8
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
Implementation of the U.N. Convention
In addition to its formulation and adoption, the primary importance of the U.N. Convention is linked to the question of what the U.N. and the international community actually does in practice to prevent acts of genocide. After all, it is well known that many acts of genocide have been committed throughout the world since the adoption of the Convention. In reality, the actions that have been taken under the authority of the Convention had more to do with providing aid to the injured after the fact than with preventing the acts themselves, despite the fact that the Convention clearly stipulates that genocidal acts are considered crimes under international law whether they are committed during wartime or peacetime. For this reason, some have called for formal revision of the Convention in order to create special tools for averting acts of genocide, in addition to the provision of aid to victims after the fact. To this end, it was decided in 1998 to establish the ICC (International Criminal Court). The court was established in July 2002, after the decision was ratified by 60 countries (which did not include Israel). Only time will tell if the addition of this body will serve to significantly improve the situation.
Perpetrators, Victims, and the "Third Party"
Every act of genocide involves at least three parties: the perpetrators, their victims, and a "third party" that is, people who neither take part in the killings nor are among its victims, but who witness the events and must choose how to react to the atrocities as they unfold before their eyes. It is important to emphasize that acts of genocide can only be committed when the balance of power in a society is such that the perpetrators have complete power over the victims. Such a state of affairs necessarily depends on the behavior of the third party, which almost always constitutes the great majority of society. The third party can be schematically divided into three groups: Those who collaborate with the murderers for different reasons, including the conviction that it is best to maintain positive relations with them because of the power they possess. Those who try to help the victims. These individuals always constitute a minority of the population and tend to be motivated by moral
Genocide
9
20/09/2012 10:33:35
considerations (in Israel, such individuals are known as "Righteous among the Nations"). Those who remain uninvolved, or bystanders. These individuals typically account for most members of the third party. This breakdown raises a question of the utmost importance: Should bystanders be regarded as partially responsible for and perhaps partially guilty of the crimes they witnessed and did nothing to prevent? Most countries in the world have tended to remain indifferent in the face of acts of mass extermination, and strong countries such as the United States are no exception. In an influential study, American foreign policy scholar Samantha Power analyzes the attitude of the United States toward the various acts of genocide that took place during the 20th century, including the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, and the genocides in Cambodia, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and other parts of the world. "What is most shocking," she concludes, "is that U.S. policy makers did almost nothing to deter the crime. Because America's 'vital national interests' were not considered imperiled by mere genocide, senior U.S. officials did not give genocide the moral attention it warranted."3 One reason that the problem of genocide is not high on the agenda of American politicians (and politicians in many other countries, for that matter) is that it is not a priority for American citizens. For this reason, the struggle of members of Congress (like that of members of the Knesset in Israel) against international indifference to the genocide in Rwanda, and against the policy of their own government, has no impact on their political careers and does not boost their chances for reelection. In her book, Trauma and Recovery: from Domestic Abuse to Terror, which explores the influence of different kinds of violence (from abuse in context of the family to political terrorism) on former combat soldiers, Holocaust survivors, prisoners of war, abused women, and victims of incest, American professor of psychiatry, Judith Lewis Herman, writes: The ordinary response to atrocities is to banish them from consciousness. Certain violations of the social compact are too terrible to utter aloud: this is the meaning of the word unspeakable. Atrocities, however, refuse to be buried. Equally as powerful as the desire to deny atrocities is the conviction that denial does not
10
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
work. Folk wisdom is filled with ghosts who refuse to rest in their graves until their stories are told. Murder will out. Remembering and telling the truth about terrible events are prerequisites both for the restoration of the social order and for the healing of individual victims To study psychological trauma is to come face to face both with human vulnerability in the natural world and with the capacity for evil in human nature. To study psychological trauma means bearing witness to horrible events. When the events are natural disasters or " cts of God," those who bear witness sympathize a readily with the victim. But when the traumatic events are of human design, those who bear witness are caught in the conflict between victim and perpetrator. It is morally impossible to remain neutral in this conflict. The bystander is forced to take sides [my emphasis, YA]. It is very tempting to take the side of the perpetrator. All the perpetrator asks is that the bystander do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander to share the burden of the pain. The victim demands action, engagement, and remembering.4 It can be argued that through their passivity, bystanders perhaps unintentionally provide support for the perpetrators, but never for the victims. In this way, when we choose not to take a stand, we are actually taking the side of the perpetrator. From a moral perspective, we simply cannot stand by while crimes of genocide are perpetrated. We also cannot accept common assertions such as "nothing could be done to stop it" or "such things happen." Injustice does not cease to be injustice just because it is visited upon someone else. As the Bible teaches, "Thou shalt not stand by the blood of thy neighbor" (Leviticus 19:16). At least morally, bystanders too bear responsibility, and perhaps also blame, for the killing. When the overwhelming majority of a society, or even a society in its entirety, chooses not to take action against evil, the result is moral disintegration. The events of the 20th century have taught us that evil is not only reflected in the perpetration of evil actions, but that it also taints those who stand idly by as it proliferates. People in many societies and countries
Genocide
11
20/09/2012 10:33:35
and in the vast majority of human civilization for that matter tend to take no action when they encounter situations in which someone else is suffering injustice. People tend not to fight for justice and against evil, as clearly illustrated by the case of Rwanda. U.N. peace-keeping forces and numerous other groups issued repeated warnings about what was likely to happen in the African country, and the strong, prosperous nations of the international community had ample opportunity to offer their assistance. Instead, the world chose not only to close its eyes to the situation but to add fuel to the fire in the form of arms deals during the very days that the genocide was taking place.
Reflections on Genocide Education around the World
Teaching about genocide forces us to confront a variety of weighty philosophical and didactic issues. In the context of Holocaust education, Elie Wiesel raises a poignant question that can be applied to genocide education as well: How do you teach events that deny knowledge, experiences that go beyond imagination? How do you tell children, big and small, that society could lose its mind and start murdering its own soul and its own future? How do you unveil horrors without offering at the same time some measure of hope? Hope in what? In whom? In progress, in science and literature and God?5 While Holocaust education has already secured a place within academic and educational frameworks in countries around the world, the broader field of genocide studies, which is extremely important in its own right, is still in its first stages of development. Without a doubt, the knowledge possessed by people in most countries about other cases of genocide that took place during the 20th century typically pales in comparison with what they know about the Holocaust. Some go as far as to argue that most acts of genocide committed during the past century (except for the Holocaust) can be thought of as "forgotten" or "unknown," similar to those that took place in the more distance past. That being said, we must also acknowledge that the past two to three
12
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
decades have witnessed a marked increase in general awareness regarding acts of genocide in many countries around the world, and that a degree of concurrent (albeit, extremely limited) progress has also been made in the field of genocide education (except in the distinct field of Holocaust education, where great progress was made). Careful observation of the development of genocide education around the world shows that progress has often been driven by the initiatives and campaigns of fighters for the cause, passionate and dedicated activists who make it their life work and simply refuse to let the subject lie. Not surprisingly, many of these efforts are led by Jews interested in developing the field of genocide education, in addition to the field of Holocaust education, out of a unique sense of identification with the suffering of other peoples. Such activists believe that, in addition to the contribution they make to the study of genocide in general, comparative studies (or 'genocide studies') also stand to contribute to the study of the Holocaust in various ways that Holocaust studies alone simply cannot. We too espouse this belief.
On the Universal Value of Human Life
For more than thirty years, Israelis have been engaged in bitter debates about acts of genocide that have befallen other peoples. These debates revolved around the controversial assertion that the Holocaust was a completely unique event. This claim overlooks the fact that the Holocaust's unique significance for Jews lies not in its uniqueness as a genocide that differs in nature from all other genocides (in that it was an 'industry of death' based on racist theory and ideology, which sought to exterminate all members of a specific people, regardless of their country of residence) but in rooting the Holocaust in Jewish historical consciousness, in which it plays a decisive role. In Israel in particular, the denial of genocide (of every kind of people), the indifference towards it, the disregard of it, is to be abhorred. The failure to acknowledge crimes committed against others typically emerges as a crucial and often preeminent aspect of the personal consciousness and worldview of victims. In some cases, such lack of recognition also has a decisive impact on victims' efforts to cope with the tragedy and to rehabilitate themselves, which may continue for long periods of time and,
Genocide
13
20/09/2012 10:33:35
in some cases, indefinitely. Primo Levi's book, The Drowned and the Saved, recounts how S.S. soldiers used to amuse themselves by cynically promising prisoners that even if some of them survived Nazi treatment, no one would ever believe their stories about what went on the camps. Levi also provides an account of a recurring nightmare from which almost all survivors suffered while in the camps. Almost all the survivors, orally or in their written memoirs, remembered a dream which frequently recurred during the nights of their imprisonment, varied in its detail but uniform in its substance: They had returned home and with passion and relief were describing their past sufferings, addressing themselves to a loved one, and were not believed, indeed were not even listened to. In the most typical (and cruelest) form, the interlocutor turned and left in silence.6 We need to be asking ourselves difficult questions such as how we respond to other victims' just demand that their murderers, and the offspring of their murderers, acknowledge their crimes? What role can we play in helping them achieve this goal? How do we relate to their demand that the world recognize the double-injustice they have suffered the genocide itself, and the disregard for it after the fact? How do we relate to their expectation that we (in the state of Israel), of all people, acknowledge the injustices they have suffered? One aim of the series, therefore, is to increase the sensitivity of students and readers to the phenomenon of genocide. Another is to cause them to question their own opinions and their sense of responsibility regarding such unjust acts and to consider the possibility of taking action to prevent them, whether as individuals or in conjunction with other members of their social reference groups. The fundamental principle underlying this series is the universal value of human life, wherever it may be found.
14
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:35
Notes
1 2 3 4 5 6 Excerpt from Bertolt Brecht's poem "When Evil-Doing Comes like Falling Rain." Bertolt Brecht, Poems, 19131956- (New York: Eyre Methuen Ltd., 1976), 247. R.J. Rummel, "The New Concept of Democide," in Israel W. Charny (ed.), Encyclopedia of Genocide (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 1999), 18-23. Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 504. Judith Lewis Herman, Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence From Domestic Abuse to Political Terror (New York: Basic Books, 1997), 1, 7-8. Elie Wiesel, "Then and Now: The Experiences of a Teacher," Social Education 42(4) (1978), 266-271. Primo Levi, The Drowned and the Saved (New York: Vintage International, 1989), 12. Jewish Italian chemist and writer Primo Levi was born in Italy in 1919. In 1944, he was sent to Auschwitz and survived. When he returned to Italy, he began to write books, all of which were directly influenced by the Holocaust. He took his own life in 1987.
Genocide
15
20/09/2012 10:33:35
20/09/2012 10:33:36
Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies

By Yair Auron
Genocide
Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies

Genocide: Reflections on the Incoceivable
Yair Auron
17
20/09/2012 10:33:40
20/09/2012 10:33:40
Chapter 1: Genocide: The Phenomenon and the Definition

I remember: it happened yesterday, or eternities ago. A young Jewish boy discovered the Kingdom of Night. I remember his bewilderment, I remember his anguish. It all happened so fast. The ghetto. The deportation. The sealed cattle car. The fiery altar upon which the history of our people and the future of mankind were meant to be sacrificed And now the boy is turning to me. T " ell me," he asks, " hat have you done with my future, what w have you done with my life?"And I tell him that I have tried. That I have tried to keep the memory alive, that I have tried to fight those who would forget. Because if we forget, we are guilty, we are accomplices.
Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, 1986
Genocide as a Part of Human History
Genocide is a human phenomenon that we wish to study and keep in our minds, as it is a part of our existence, albeit a repressed part of it. Engaging the subject of genocide raises fundamental questions about the human condition. People are capable of acting with exceeding cruelty, but can also achieve great heights of humanity, spiritualism, and culture. The deeper we delve into the subject of genocide, the more clearly these two aspects of the human condition emerge in their most basic forms. Although instances of mass extermination (which, as we will see below, is not always the same as genocide) have taken place throughout human history, the 20th century witnessed many more genocides and genocidelike acts than any other century in the past. As a result, some have noted a dehumanization of life during the 20th century a "culture of mass extermination" or a "culture of death." These genocidal moments must be considered in conjunction with our ability to use weapons of mass
Genocide
19
20/09/2012 10:33:40
destruction, which also raises challenging questions about the future of human society. In The Third Chimpanzee: the Evolution and Future of the Human Animal, Jared Diamond, a professor of physiology at the UCLA School of Medicine, explores the essence of genocide as a human phenomenon from an original and fascinating perspective.1 The book employs anthropological and sociobiological arguments to challenge some of the standard, agreed upon foundation stones of the study of evolution. Sociobiology uses biological explanations to understand human behavior, emphasizing that, like physical traits, some behavior occurs because it enables individuals to have more offspring, which of course inherit the same patterns of behavior. In contrast, anthropology bases its understanding of human behavior on culture, which is anchored in socio-economic, psychological, historical, and other factors. There are two types of chimpanzees, Diamond informs us: the common chimpanzee (homo troglodytes) and pygmy chimpanzees (homo paniscus). "The third chimpanzee," he posits, is the human species (homo sapiens), which shares over 98% of its genes with the two species of chimpanzees known to us. How does this relate to genocide? According to Diamond, it is precisely the unique traits responsible for our success as a species that make us capable of doing what no other creature can do bringing about our own extermination. Although chimpanzees, like humans, exhibit collective xenophobia (the fear and hatred of strangers and foreigners), humans have augmented this trait to an astonishing degree due to the link between modern technologies created by human cultures and the genes with which we, like chimpanzees, were endowed by our common ancestors. In human society, our instinct to kill is restrained by culture-based values, law, and morality. Nonetheless, our power, Diamond emphasizes, remains a threat to our very existence. Diamond traces the phenomenon of genocide in human society and analyzes the unique nature of its occurrence during the 20th century. Why have so many cases attracted such little attention, he asks? In his attempt to explain why people kill and simultaneously deny doing so, Diamond
20
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:40
directs the reader's attention to the human tendency to divide the world into 'us' and 'them'. This mechanism enables a person who has killed to feel as if he or she has killed one of 'them', not one of 'us'.2 Diamond offers a clear answer to the question of how modern day perpetrators of genocide succeed in reconciling the contradiction between their actions and universal rules of ethics: "They resort to one of three types of rationalizations, all of which are variations of a simple psychological theme: 'Blame the victim!'"3 The three types of rationalizations are self defense; either belonging to the "right" religion or the "right" race or holding the "right" political outlook; and comparing the victims to animals. Diamond also tries to explain the odd passivity of third parties, claiming that most people simply either do not care about injustices done to other people or regard them as none of their business. This is undoubtedly part of the explanation, but not all of it. The other part, he proposes, is "psychological numbing." When people are confronted with extreme suffering (of others or their own), they simply go numb. This dynamic finds an extreme manifestation in surviving victims of different kinds who suffer from feelings of extreme guilt because they survived. Another extreme manifestation is reflected in the failure of third parties to react. "Just as intense physical pain numbs us," Diamond explains, "so does intense psychological pain: there is no other way to survive and stay sane."4 Hundreds of thousands of Americans who fought in Vietnam suffered just this type of numbing. This reaction is also characteristic of the perpetrators of genocide and their offspring, who are clearly not responsible for the actions of their ancestors. Many possess a collective sense of guilt, and some even resort to rewriting history in order to relieve the pain stemming from their discomfort regarding the past.
The Challenges of Defining Genocide
It is common today to overlook the fundamental difference between everyday language and scientific language. Everyday language does not require the use of precise terms and definitions because, in addition to information, it is also used to convey emotion, opinions, and attitudes.
Genocide
21
20/09/2012 10:33:40
In scientific language, a distinction must be made between information, scientific principles, and findings on one hand, and evaluative content on the other, and this requires precise definitions and terms. Distinguishing between everyday language and scientific discourse is also sometimes difficult due to the expansion of education, the power of the mass media, and the popularization of science, which together enable scientific discourse to penetrate everyday language. When this happens, scientific terms and principles are imbued with political significance, and their everyday use obscures their original meanings and makes communication less accurate. The term "genocide" provides an illustrative example of this dynamic. The term genocide was derived from two words: genos, which is ancient Greek for race, nation, or tribe; and caedes or cide, which is Latin for massacre or murder. The term was coined during WWII by Polish Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1901-1959). The meaning of the term genocide endowed it with highly charged political significance, and it quickly entered widespread use. As a result, the term came to be used not only to denote its original meaning, but also to describe various kinds of negative, destructive processes involving no physical killing, such as the annihilation of national consciousness, languages, cultures, individual freedoms, and economic infrastructures; the supervision of birthrates; and, in some cases, certain types of medical studies. Reference has even been made to "psychological genocide." Some have intentionally falsified the meaning of the term genocide, while others, politicians among them, are accused of using the term casually and disrespectfully, as we will see below. The term "Holocaust" has undergone a strikingly similar process. Although the term refers specifically to the acts of extermination undertaken by the Nazi regime against the Jews and a number of other groups before and during WWII (as we will see, the question of whether the term also covers the Nazi regime's acts of extermination against other groups of victims remains disputed and controversial today), the word Holocaust has also come to be widely used in other broader contexts, depreciating the significance the historical events to which it refers and obfuscating their meaning. This linguistic process indicates, among other things, that the terms "genocide" and "holocaust" possess a great deal of emotional significance.
22
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:40
Although genocidal events are clearly laden with emotional meaning and arouse a multiplicity of attitudes and opinions, scientific use of the term requires us to address these emotions, attitudes, and opinions separately. Many troubling events such as wars, plagues, starvation, massacres, and natural disasters have taken place in the course of human history, and classifying them all under one term prevents us not only from understanding and foreseeing them, but from preventing them as well. Despite the extreme importance of studying the subject of genocide, the cruelty and brutality of the human condition throughout history is a subject only rarely addressed by high school curricula. Historical scholars and text book authors have paid insufficient attention to the horrific massacres of the past, and have instead highlighted the more positive events in human history that mark the victory of justice. For example, high school and university text books typically portray Athens as a prosperous city state, but make no mention of the Athenian army's massacre of the men of Milos.5 Similarly, while it is common knowledge that the Romans defeated Carthage6 and Corinth,7 the fate of the inhabitants of both of these cities remains virtually unknown. Overall, text book authors tend not to elaborate on the fate of the innocent residents of the innumerable cities and countries that have been conquered in the course of human history, and only rarely do they discuss the meaning of a city's destruction for its inhabitants. In this way, the cruel and unnatural deaths of millions of people have remained hidden from us and have not penetrated our consciousness. The situation will not change until researchers, historiographers, and educators make a conscious effort to shed light on all aspects of these occurrences. Through its neglect of such issues, at least until recently, most of the scientific community at times intentionally and at times unintentionally has been complicit in denying their existence and preventing their study. Many forces have come together to perpetuate this situation, including the fact that it has been the victors who have typically documented and written about their own actions, while the fate of the vanquished has been determined to be a natural part of their defeat. The concept of human rights is relatively new in Western society. Indeed, even today, many societies continue to emphasize only citizens' obligations to the state, and not their rights.
Genocide
23
20/09/2012 10:33:40
The tendency to deny past acts of murder and destruction has also played an important historical role in generating the philosophical tradition that views man as inherently good,8 and contributed to the rise of nationalism, including its extreme manifestations, as well. For most people, the concept of nationalism which in itself may encourage disregard for the fate of others and the massacre of members of other races, religions, and nationalities sparked neither moral questions nor ample consideration. According to nationalism scholar Ernest Gellner: It may bethat the tendency to make exceptions on one's own behalf or one's own case is the central human weakness from which all others flow; and that it infects national sentiment as it does all else, engendering what the Italians under Mussolini called the sacro egoismo of nationalism. It may also be that the political effectiveness of national sentiment would be much impaired if nationalists had as fine a sensibility to the wrongs committed by their nation as they have to those committed against it.9 We must therefore take heed of the relationship between the intensification of nationalist identities and their sometimes extreme manifestations since the late 18th century on one hand, and the acts of genocide of the 20th century on the other. At least on the level of decision making, people tend not to resolve to commit genocide based simply on a sadistic urge or the desire to do evil for its own sake. The horrifying truth is that perpetrators of genocide are usually convinced that they are simply doing what is unavoidable for the common good. Can we understand what Gellner refers to as sacro egoismo, based on its usage in the context of Italian fascism, as nothing more than an individual's extreme sense of commitment to the common good of their group, which results in excessive indifference to the suffering of others? The Holocaust was undoubtedly the most horrifying occurrence of the 20th century. For this reason, it shocked human society to such a degree that it put an end to its collective denial of its own brutality, or at least weakened it. The dissonance between the enlightenment ideal of man as inherently good, on one hand, and the disturbing realities of human society, on the
24
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:40
other, had now become too great to be ignored. If for years it had been the victorious rulers who had written and rewritten history, the Holocaust resulted in a situation in which we began to hear the voices of victims, and particularly Jewish victims. Only after the Jewish voices were heard and sympathetically received throughout the world did other victims of the Nazi regime (such as gypsies and homosexuals) begin to speak out. They were joined by the victims of other genocides, such as the Armenians and the Ukrainians, who also now felt the need, the urgency, and the right to be heard.
Raphael Lemkin (1901-1959), a Polish Jewish lawyer who lost his family in the Holocaust, is considered to be the founding father of the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. He studied law at Lvov University and after graduating was appointed to the position of district prosecutor. During the same period, he wrote a draft international law for the prevention of the intentional extermination of ethnic, national, and religious groups, which was a subject that had interested him since he was a boy. During an international legal conference on criminal law held in Madrid in 1933, Lemkin proposed incorporating two new crimes into international criminal law: "acts of barbarity" and "acts of vandalism." "Acts of barbarity" were intentional acts of repression and harm carried out against an individual by virtue of his or her membership in a national, religious, or racial group. "Acts of vandalism" referred to systematic destruction of works of art and cultural heritage.10 Lemkin subsequently combined these two crimes into the single generic concept of genocide Lemkin's effort to persuade the conference participants to adopt an international prohibition of mass killings was in vain. He did not use the term genocide during the conference but rather proposed a multilateral covenant that would classify the extermination of human groups as an international crime, like slavery, piracy, and other crimes that were recognized as detrimental to the "law of the nations." The conference took place during the period of international tension that followed Hitler's rise to power and Germany's withdrawal from the League of Nations, just as
Raphael Lemkin: Originator of the Term Genocide
Genocide
25
20/09/2012 10:33:40
the first Jewish refugees began to leave the country. Nonetheless, the report Lemkin prepared in his effort to convince the conference participants to support an international prohibition of mass killings made no direct reference to Nazi Germany. With the outbreak of WWII, Lemkin joined the Polish underground and was subsequently granted political asylum in Sweden. In 1941, after a short stay in Stockholm and after losing almost his entire family in the Holocaust, he was granted entry to the United States, where he taught law at Duke University and Yale University. During the same period, he also served as an advisor to the U.S. War Department and the Board of Economic Warfare, and later as an advisor to the chief counsel of the Nuremberg Trials. When WWII was at its height, Lemkin formulated a detailed definition and analysis of the term genocide, which was incorporated into international law as a generic classification for the phenomenon. It was Lemkin who urged the U.N. to draft the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which was unanimously ratified in December 9, 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly (despite a number of objections raised by a few countries) and came into force on January 12, 1951. Lemkin was a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize a few times during the 1950s, but his work was subsequently forgotten. The past few decades have witnessed a renewed interest in his work and his writings, but he still remains relatively unknown. In his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, which he wrote in 1943 and published in 1944, Lemkin makes his first use of the term "genocide." "New concepts require new words," wrote Lemkin, in justification of his proposal to define the term "genocide" as the destruction of a national or ethnic group. In general, the term does not refer to the immediate destruction of a national group, except in instances of mass murder of all its members. Lemkin envisioned the term as referring to a coordinated plan involving a number of actions intended to undermine the essential foundation of a nation's existence, implemented with the overall goal of its extermination.
26
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:40
Such plans strive for the disintegration of the social and political fabric of a national group and eradication of its cultural, linguistic, religious, and economic foundations. They are also meant to undermine the freedom, health, dignity, personal security, and life of individual members of the nation. Genocide is committed against a nation as an entity; the individual actions it involves are perpetrated against individuals not because of their own personal traits, but because of their belonging to a particular collective entity.11 Lemkin was also a pioneer in classifying different types of genocide in accordance with the intentions of their perpetrators, defining three forms which emerged in a chronological, evolutionary manner. The first form was characteristic of ancient and medieval times and involved the complete, or almost complete, extermination of a defeated population. The second form first appeared at the beginning of the modern era, and is characterized by an attempt to eradicate a culture without doing physical harm to the people who espouse it. The third form, which was perpetrated by the Nazis, incorporated the first two forms, but also designated particular groups for immediate physical extermination, while other groups were designated for only cultural eradication.12 According to Lemkin, all forms involve two stages: 1. Destruction of the oppressed group's national pattern. 2. Imposition of the dominant group's national pattern on the oppressed group, in the event that its members are permitted to remain in the territory in question; in the event that the oppressed population is physically exterminated or expelled, imposition of the dominant group's national pattern on the territory alone. In 1944, Lemkin wrote: "In the present war, however, genocide is widely practiced by the German occupant Some groups such as the Jews are to be destroyed completely." It is therefore clear that by using the term "national pattern," Lemkin did not intend to limit the definition to "national groups" but saw it as inclusive of racial, religious, ethnic, and political groups as well.
Genocide
27
20/09/2012 10:33:40
Notes
1 2 3 4 5 Jared Diamond, The Third Chimpanzee: the Evolution and Future of the Human Animal (New York: Harper Perennial, 1992). Ibid., p. 298. Ibid., p. 299. Ibid., p. 273. Milos was a colony of the Greek city of Sparta. According to the ancient Greek historian Thucydides, all the men of Milos were executed by the army of Athens and the Peloponnesian League in the year 416 B.C. due to their refusal to join Athens' war against Sparta. Carthage was a rich and powerful Phoenician city, located on the northern African coast, at the location of the modern city of Tunis, between the 6th and 2nd century B.C. As a result of a series of defeats in a number of wars known as the Punic (the Roman word for Phoenician) Wars, the city was razed to its foundations in the year 201 B.C. after a long siege during which a substantial portion of the population starved to death. Hannibal, the military commander of Carthage during the second and third Punic War, became well known for crossing the Alps by elephant on his way to Rome. Corinth is a Greek city located 78 kilometers west of Athens. The city reached its height of prosperity in the 6th century B.C. In the year 146 B.C., after a long siege, the Roman army killed all the men of the city and sold the women and children into slavery. Afterward, the city was set ablaze and razed to the ground. Augustinus, the Christian theologian who wrote during the 4th century B.C., maintained that people are born evil, but that education and culture enable them to overcome their evil nature and to try to be good. Although theological and philosophical objections to this conception were raised from time to time over the years, it was only in the 18th century, with the Enlightenment in general and the writings of French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau in particular, that the concept that man is inherently good was enrooted in Western culture alongside Augustinus's approach. According to the new conception, culture and education are the corrupting factors that make people evil. Since the 18th century, both approaches have been circulating in Western society, which has yet to decide clearly in favor of one approach or the other. Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism, 2nd Ed. (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006), p. 2.
10 Berel Lang, Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2003), pp. 5. 11 Raphael Lemkin, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Foundation for International Peace, 1944) [Reprint, Howard Ferting: New York, 1973] p. 79. 12 Ibid., pp. 7982-. Lemkin's private papers contain an unpublished three-volume manuscript entitled The History of Genocide. The first volume focuses on the ancient period and contains nine chapters on various instances of genocide, including genocide in the bible, the Assyrian conquests, the genocide committed against the first Christians, Carthage, and the genocide perpetrated in ancient Greece. The second volume examines the medieval period and contains thirteen chapters on the genocide against the Albigenses, the genocides carried out by the Huns and the Mongols, the Spanish Inquisition, the genocide carried out by the Vikings, and the Crusades. The volume on the modern period was planned to cover 41 cases.
28
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:40
Conflitural Encounter: The Destruction of the Indian Peoples of Spanish America By Eitan Finsberg
Genocide
Conflictual Encounter: The Destruction of the Indian Peoples of Spanish America

Genocide: Indian Peoples of Spanish America
Eitan Ginzberg
29
20/09/2012 10:33:43
20/09/2012 10:33:43
Chapter 5: The War: A Strategy of Cruelty and Destruction

The Logic of the Conquest: Violence, Theft, and Enslavement
The indigenous population of the Americas was subject to the cruel and barbaric acts of Spanish explorers and conquerors. For the most part, the historiography of the 16th century is in agreement with this assessment, regardless of whether individual authors supported or opposed the war against the Native Americans at the time. The excessive brutality of the Spaniards stemmed from three primary factors, all of which were related to the Spanish Crown: 1. the ambitious goals the Crown set for itself in the Americas (conquest, appropriation of wealth, exploitation, and conversion to Christianity); 2. the frugal methods with which it strived to achieve these goals (the use of commanders and soldiers who financed their own equipment and weaponry, and the other expenses stemming from their campaigns of conquest); and 3. the meager human resources at its disposal (a small number of trained fighters, professional commanders, and religious clergy). The discrepancy between the Crown's ambitious goals and the inadequate means it designated to achieve them required the use of particularly aggressive military tactics that were extremely violent by nature and that led the Spanish conquerors to the very center of the vast empires of the Americas. The discrepancy also made the conquerors completely dependent on the sustainable assets and the labor and fighting forces they exacted from the indigenous population for the purposes of war and shipping. Without these resources, the Spaniards would have been incapable of transforming their project of 'discovery' into a project of conquest, settlement, and culture. This combination of military and civilian circumstances helps
Genocide
31
20/09/2012 10:33:43
explain why the Spanish ended up resorting to extreme violence and oppression. Had it been possible to draw a clear distinction between the material goals and spiritual goals of conquest and to focus on the latter, as Las Casas proposed, the character of the conquest would likely have been altogether different. However, the true priorities of the conquerors were usually in the reverse order, with conversion to Christianity serving merely as a pretext. The handful of Spanish fighters, and the thin resources at their disposal, was insufficient for a patient, prolonged, and gradual campaign of subjugating the great empires of the Americas from the outside in. The Spaniards were in need of a quick victory to justify their campaign before the Crown, and to this end they took enormous personal risks which appeared to be based on incomparable courage, but which actually stemmed from the lack of any other option. In order to reduce the immense risks involved, the Spaniards adopted the horrifying tactic which seemed quite logical under the circumstances of instilling terror in their enemies by murdering large populations and exterminating entire communities in the process of carrying out their objectives. They also resorted to using the same approach to establishing complete control over conquered territory and to 'pacifying' the population.1 Under the circumstances, hesitation and efforts to maintain humanity would have likely prevented the Spaniards from achieving their goals from the outset. During their expeditions of conquest, the Spaniards needed to use immense force for many other reasons as well, such as the need to support the conquerors; to repay their investors (capital plus interest), preferably in gold or silver bullion; the ongoing need to convince the Crown that the adventure was worthwhile and that they should be awarded the legitimacy, rank, and status they believed they deserved. Their use of excessive force also stemmed from the fact that in order to persuade the Crown, they needed to provide it with abundant offerings, particularly the fifth of all looted property and income to which it was entitled under the Spanish laws enacted by King Alfonso X in the 13th century. In addition to all these considerations were the never ending personal gifts and honors which served to increase the kings' prestige. Corts, who had not been officially appointed by the Crown and simply behaved as if he had been,
32
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
had clear reason to use immense, and at times excessive force. Indeed, his only chance of escaping punishment by death for the charge of treason was complete and total victory in his expedition against the Aztecs. Force was also certainly required to bring about the mandatory conversion of the pagan population, which was perceived in Spanish consciousness as barbarians and cannibals and which on many occasions refused to surrender its property, its labor, and its soul according to the whims of the conquerors. There were also a number of political explanations for the use of force. The philosophy of the Spanish conquest as defined in Burgos cast the indigenous population of the Americas as vassals of the Spanish king and subject to the authority of the Pope and the Catholic Church. This meant that Native Americans had to surrender themselves completely and immediately to the Spanish soldiers upon their arrival. The edict of 'pacification' with which they were presented left them only two options: to surrender (which would make them subjects and therefore not liable for slavery), or to be charged with rebellion against the monarchy, which was punishable by death. Las Casas described the situation as follows: whenever the natives did not drop everything and rush to recognize publicly the truth of the irrational and illogical claims that were made, and whenever they did not immediately place themselves completely at the mercy of the iniquitous and cruel and bestial individuals who were making such claims, they were dubbed outlaws and held to be in rebellion against His Majesty. It also quickly became clear that the foreigners had no intention of waiting for their threats to be comprehended by the indigenous population before carrying them out, if they were ever actually articulated in the first place.2 As it turned out, those who surrendered also suffered a bitter fate. According to Las Casas: Even more shocking is the fact that when the local people do obey such commands they are harshly treated as common slaves, put to hard labor and subjected to all manner of abuse and to agonizing torments that ensure a slower and more painful death
Genocide
33
20/09/2012 10:33:44
than would summary execution. Indeed, for them the end result is the same: they, their wives, and their children all perish and the whole of their nation is wiped from the face of the earth.3 In most cases, the indigenous population refused to become the subjugated vassals of his eminence the King of Spain, especially after they came to understand the true intentions of the conquerors. As a result, the Spaniards employed the most extreme, brutal, and shocking modes of force possible during all phases of the process, from conquest and the search for booty, through 'pacification,' to settlement. The most serious atrocities were carried out during the Spaniards' efforts to locate stocks of gold, which was the primary factor motivating the adelantados and their men. The Spanish carried out a chilling repertoire of brutal torture in the new world, in the name of acquiring information regarding the whereabouts of hidden treasures. This repertoire included: using dogs of war to attack innocent people; burning groups of people to death in huts that were sealed shut from the outside; cutting off limbs (particularly of infants) and feeding it to the Spanish attack dogs; playing barbaric wartime games, such as the infamous montera infernal, or the "infernal chase"; and hanging those who displayed even the slightest bit of resistance. Particularly frustrating cases when no gold could be found resulted in additional acts of barbarism, such as the rape of women; the burning of crops; starvation; expulsion; the abduction of inhabitants for slavery or for sale; and murder for the sake of pleasure, retribution, or revenge. Was this chilling picture simply the creation of false accusations leveled against the Spaniards by their opponents in Europe, or was it an indisputable reality? The testimony of Las Casas who, as a resident of Espaniola and Cuba, appears to have personally witnessed most types of acts, and who described them in his detailed book on the Caribbean region Historia de las Indias leaves no room for doubt. The methods and ambitious goals of the Spanish conquest made it impossible for the Crown to cease the brutal witch-hunt it carried out in the Americas throughout the entire 16th century, out of fear that the soldiers and commanders that had in the meantime became settlers would turn against them. From their part, the conquerors demanded the remuneration they believed they deserved, not to mention the provision of the basic resources
34
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
necessary to ensure their physical existence so far away from home. Just as the Crown was unable to stem the violence, so were the Crown's representatives in the colonies: the King's viceroys in New Spain and Peru, judges, members of the audiencias (courts), and the Church representatives in the dioceses that continued to be established during the 1530s. Millions of inhabitants were left unprotected. Particularly bitter was the fate of Native Americans living in the peripheral areas of Nueva Galicia; Oaxaca; Yucatn; parts of Central America; Venezuela; the Orinoco Estuary and New Granada; the District of Quito; southern Chile; and the vast flatlands located west of the southern Andes. These areas constituted the territory of operation of bands of slave traders, who sold their merchandise on the markets of Espaniola, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, Cuba, Peru, and other locations. The number of 'Righteous among the Nations' priests, nuns, government officials, and even a few ecomanderos who were astonished by their own behavior was too small to significantly impact the situation, and members of the indigenous population was forced to find its own ways of coping. These included abandoning and eradicating entire villages; splitting up families; abandoning or killing infants; abortion; mass flight into the mountains; and the widespread phenomenon of suicide. According to the Spaniards, it was the Native Americans themselves who were responsible for the destruction stemming from the expeditions of conquest. "I did not want destruction," said Corts on the eve of the war against Tenochtitlan, "but their war left us with no choice." In other words, because the philosophy of the Spanish war cast the indigenous population as subjects of the King, they were expected to surrender and to hand over all their gold and possessions. Later, the indigenous population was also obligated to perform forced labor and pay a head tax. The moment they failed to correctly understand their place in the new colonial order or to adequately fulfill one of their obligations, the Spaniards classified them as rebels and, as such, were obligated to destroy them, or, as Corts phrased it, to cause them "as much damage as possible."
Conquest: A Ritual of Extreme Violence
Pedro de Alvarado's conquest of the Kingdom of Guatemala (1523) offers an illustrative case consistent with the paradigm of conquest as
Genocide
35
20/09/2012 10:33:44
extreme violence. We begin by presenting an account of the conquest and then analyzing its components. In Guatemala, the Spaniards were enthusiastically received by the Quich nation, who took advantage of the newfound opportunity to strike out against their eternal rivals, the Kaqchikel nation, with Spanish assistance. However, when the Quich finally realized that the completion of the conquest of the Kaqchikel would be followed by a new chapter in the Spanish conquest, it was already too late.4 The first violent confrontation between the Quich and the Spaniards took place in the town of Utatln, the capital of the Mayan-Quich Kingdom (which was located near the location of the modern day city of Santa Cruz de Quich). In strict accordance with the highest rules of ceremony, the king of Guatemala, who had prepared a glorious feast in their honor, was carried out to meet the new arrivals on a royal sedan chair to the blasts of trumpets and the thunder of war drums.5 That night, the Spaniards opted to camp outside the city, out of fear expressed in Pedro de Alvarado's report to Corts that the Quich would burn the town down around them while everyone in the camp was asleep.6 The next morning, Alvarado dispatched his messengers to invite the King of the Quich and his senior ministers to meet with him outside the town. Upon their arrival, Alvarado arrested them on the spot and demanded a specified quantity of gold. When they told him that there was no gold in Utatln or in the whole of Guatemala for that matter, he burned them alive. He then summoned the Kaqchikel from the town of Guatemala and permitted them to invade and loot Utatln and burn it to the ground. At this point, Alvarado appointed two of the slain king's sons to lead the city, and enslaved the rest of the inhabitants of the town. Next, he went about building up the town of Guatemala (July 1524), an act intended to provide him with the necessary political foundation for his rule of an area of 310,000 square kilometers. Upon completing this undertaking, Alvarado embarked on a 'pacification' campaign - or, to be more precise, a campaign of looting, terror, and enslavement, culminating in the execution of the first tier of local leadership.7 The 'pacification' pretext resulted from the urgent need of Alvarado and his three brothers (Gonzalo, Gmez, and Jorge) to locate the leaders of the Quich nation. As long as they were free, Alvarado knew that the
36
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
placating allegiance displayed by the local population would be strictly conditional. The conquerors' search for the leaders in hiding resulted in the destruction, burning, and murder of anyone and anything that crossed their path. This included entire villages, vast amounts of property, and human beings of all ages. The sporadic resistance they encountered here and there only intensified the anger and frustration of the Spaniards, and they threw infants, children, women and pregnant women, young people, and the elderly into traps that the local population had set for the Spaniards' horses. According to Las Casas, the Spaniards employed this method in the area for approximately seven years (between 1524 and 1530 or 1531). One of the most shocking instances, as recounted by Las Casas, took place in the town of Cuzcatln, which was located in close proximity to the town of San Salvador, the modern day capital of El Salvador. Here, the Spanish were met with a warm royal welcome by 20,000-30,000 of the town's residents, similar to their reception at Utatln. After the feast, and with no discernible reason, the Spaniards attacked the town, took its inhabitants prisoner, and divided them amongst themselves as slave servants. Each soldier received at least 50 local inhabitants. These people, Las Casas tells us, went "like lambs to slaughter."8 The Spaniards then demanded all the gold possessed by the local population, only to be disappointed by the amount that was ultimately turned over. In response, they enslaved the inhabitants, tying ropes around their necks, branding their bodies with the royal symbol of slavery, and then proceeding to drag them, shackled and holding on to one another, in a long human procession to their destination. "I myself saw the sons of one of the leading citizens of the city branded with His Majesty's mark as a common slave," Las Casas reports. When all those who remained were unable to pay the head tax, they were forced to send their sons and daughters into slavery. According to the account of Las Casas, the formerly heavily populated region now became desolate. The bloodletting was appalling. Between 1524 and 1540, 4-5 million people were killed in the region. It could be expected, he wrote, that the fate of those left alive would be similar to the fate of the dead.9 By exploiting old and new tribal rivalries, Alvarado and his brothers mobilized a force of 10,000-20,000 indigenous allies, inciting them against their Native American brethren. As was customary, payment for such service
Genocide
37
20/09/2012 10:33:44
was delivered in the form of looting, revenge, and cannibalism rights. The Spaniards, who were so hesitant when it came to sacrificing the human lives of their own people, were quite comfortable with the cannibalistic practices of their allies. They also used their prisoners as haulers, and each was forced to carry loads of 3-4 quintals (136-180 kilograms). The weight was so heavy that the natives collapsed under it one after another. In order to prevent holding up the marches (which proceeded the length and width of Guatemala), the Spaniards beheaded those who lagged behind; discarded their bodies from among the prisoners who were bound by the neck without untying them; transferred the cargo to a new carrier; and continued with the procession.10 The conquest of Guatemala incorporated elements that, since the conquest of Espaniola and Cuba, had been employed time and time again, through the conquest of Mexico, Central America, and Peru and the surrounding area. They included: Stern punishment (in most cases for refusing to divulge information or for suspicion of rebellion or subversion, whether real or imagined), which often took the form of destruction of towns and villages and enslavement of their inhabitants; Sudden and seemingly unexplained killings (aimed at instilling fear in the local population); "Pacification," which, as we have seen, was a euphemism for severe punishment involving systematic killings; Cruelty both on and off the battlefield, also aimed at instilling fear; Exploitation of rivalries between different localities and ethnic groups in order to recruit members of the indigenous population into the ranks of Spanish fighters in exchange for looting and vengeance rights; Enslavement of inhabitants under charges of noncompliance or treason, which under the laws of war and the edict of 'pacification' immediately transformed them into slaves; The use of weak and submissive alternative leadership; Acts of anthropophagy (the consumption of human flesh), looting, rape, humiliation, crop burning, and starvation;
38
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
A wide variety of creative forms of murder carried out for the sake of entertainment, which are not described here due to their appalling nature. The result was always the same: mass death and the depopulation of vast, fertile areas, some of which were rich in advanced infrastructure designed to meet the needs of normal life, such as irrigation channels, agricultural terraces, roads, and markets.
Mass Killings: A Method of Instilling Terror
Amidst the wars waged by the Spanish between the 'discovery' of the Americas and their final subjugation in the 1550s, we know of a number of large-scale massacres that took place. One such massacre was perpetrated in the large Cuban coastal town of Coanao, which was located on the coast of the major river that bears its name in the northern section of the district of Camagey. This massacre, which Las Casas himself witnessed, resulted in the murder of 3,000 people within a period of just a few hours. One day at dawn during the expedition in the district, a Spanish army force led by Pnfilo de Narvez, deputy of the conqueror and governor of Cuba Diego Velzquez, reached Coanao. The large meal prepared that evening in honor of the Spaniards in the main square, where some 2,000 Native Americans also sat looking at the Spaniard's horses with great interest, indicated relative prosperity. At the same time, 500 other locals who dared not enter the square (out of fear or for other reasons) sat in a nearby structure. A few of the Spaniards' Native American servants (which included approximately 1,000 people), some from Cuba and others from Espaniola, went to the structure and demanded chickens from those inside. While the officer responsible was still in the process of distributing the food that had been collected by the soldiers, one of the soldiers suddenly drew his sword, and, along with his comrades who immediately followed suit, turned the site into a killing field, quickly murdering all those in the square. According to Las Casas's cynical assessment, this part of the massacre took only "two credos" (the short time required to recite the main premises of the Christian faith). Afterwards, they entered the structure and began turning it into a slaughterhouse, butchering all those inside. A small number of occupants escaped massacre by hanging from the ceiling beams of the structure. The
Genocide
39
20/09/2012 10:33:44
massacre was orchestrated by Narvez himself, who sat on his horse and prodded on his men by yelling: "Let's see who can kill at least ten Indians!" The image is horrifying. The Spaniards spared no one, killing not only men, but infants, women, children, and the elderly. Later, they conducted a hunt for all those who fled along the path leading to the nearby river, leaving the entire length of the path littered with dead bodies. Those who carried out the massacre claimed that the local inhabitants had prepared an attack against the Spanish expeditionary force. However, Las Casas completely rejects this explanation, asserting that there was no one in the area that sought to do them harm. Even if there had been, he maintained, such a threat could have easily been countered in the same way the Spanish did so in other places: with a few galloping horses, which instilled a sense of terror in the natives. According to Las Casas, there was one, simple reason for the massacre: "Their custom, which they always practiced in Espaniola and which they brought with them to Cuba for practice, of never stopping anywhere for a significant amount of time without spilling human blood, because without a doubt, they [the Spanish] were guided and controlled by Satan."11 A simple interpretation of Las Casas's account is that this spilling of blood was intended to instill fear in the local inhabitants and to cause them to abandon their villages, leaving them empty and easy to loot. This arrangement was also more convenient for conquistadors, who were concerned about ambushes and other types of surprise attacks. Indeed, upon hearing about the incident, all the inhabitants of the district fled their homes for the islands adjacent to the coast, and some even hid under water.12 Although the Spaniards found no gold in this instance, they did acquire large numbers of slave-servants. Every soldier had at least eight or ten villagers to serve his many extremely varied needs.13 We have already discussed the Cholula incident, and here we will limit ourselves to reiterating the assertion that the massacre that took place at this location was almost certainly not the fault of the local inhabitants. Cholula was a religious center, and most of its residents were merchants who certainly knew how to hold a gun, but whose main occupation was not war. This assertion is supported by the fact that until just before the incident, Cholula was an ally of the city states of Tlaxcala and Huexotzinco
40
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
in the Flower Wars. As the "enemy of the house," Cholula had a number of advantages over the cities that were part of the Aztec Empire: complete autonomy, exemption from taxes, and exemption from the provision of services to Aztecs and the provision of human sacrifices for ceremonies. Just before the arrival of the Spaniards, Cholula withdrew from the alliance due to a dispute of some kind with Tlaxcala. This dispute was effectively exploited by Aztec agents, who summarily added Cholula to the Aztec Kingdom. Cholula's withdrawal angered the leaders of Tlaxcala, who waited for an opportunity to take out its anger on the town. However, the withdrawal does not appear to have created sufficient trust for the Aztecs to entrust the town with the task of stopping Corts. Furthermore, the Aztecs had a large army that was camping not far from the city. Corts knew this, and he mentioned it just before the massacre (and not after it, for understandable reasons).14 This version of events is supported by other evidence as well. In the concluding inquiry into Corts's military and political work, which was undertaken in Mexico after Corts was already living in Spain, his agent said that the killing in Chohula was meant "to establish law and order" and to instill fear of Corts within the local population. Before the royally appointed investigator (visitador) who conducted the hearing (a standard judicial proceeding in the colonies known as juicio de recidencia, or judgment of residence), Vazquez de Tapia testified as follows: The witness does not know the reason why don Hernando Corts assembled all the notables of the town, informing them that he was planning on leaving but that he first wanted to speak with them. The notables assembled. He told them to bring haulers, and they brought a large number of them, 4,000 or 5,000 Indians, according to the witness. Afterward, he had them all enter the main temple and the few courtyards and structures. Then he ordered the Spaniards who were with him to kill them, and this they did. As soon as they were dead, he left the town with all his men.15 Tapia's testimony is more reliable than that of Bernal Diaz, who, although he was a rank and file soldier, was nonetheless a supporter of Corts. In his book that was published years later, Diaz attempted to improve Corts's
Genocide
41
20/09/2012 10:33:44
image, and it is no surprise that he contested Las Casas's version of the episode. In contrast, Antonio Pagden adopts Las Casas's version, which maintains that Corts went to the town at the outset in order to secure the road and his route to the coast, even though he had other alternatives. According to Pagden, the correct estimate for the number of dead was between 3,000 (Corts's version) and 20,000 (Vazquez de Tapia's version), and most likely between 5,000 and 10,000 people.16 The massacre at Tepeaca will be the last massacre we discuss here. At Tepeaca, Corts resolved to use violence against the town for other reasons as well. Geographically, Tepeaca was located on an elevated ridge in the center of a flat, open area between the volcanic peaks of Popocatpetl, close to the Valley of Mexico, and Pico de Orizaba, the highest mountain in the country, which was located on the western border of Veracruz and on the steep descent of the Sierra Madre Oriental toward the Caribbean Coast. The town's strategic location on the short route from the Valley of Mexico to the Veracruz Coast, its political affiliation with the Aztec imperial coalition, and its rivalry with Tlaxcala all played a decisive role in the incident. On the eve of the massacre at Tepeaca, which took place at the end of the first week in August 1520, Corts was at his weakest point since he left Cuba and since he retreated from the capital by the skin of his teeth during La Noche Triste ("the Sad Night"). Tlaxcala was the only place he could take refuge, care for his injuries (a stone-inflicted head injury), and make preparations for a counterattack. However, La Noche Triste transformed Tlaxcala, where a fundamental debate erupted among the senior leaders on the question of whether to continue their alliance with the Spanish or to turn against them. After all, the Spaniards' performance until that point had been unimpressive, and they now appeared to have been defeated. For Tlaxcala, it was a critical moment. If the Spaniards were to fail, Tlaxcala would suffer the revenge of the Aztecs and would join the long line leading to the sacrificial stone at the entrance to the temple of Huitzilopochtli. The state of affairs in Corts's camp was also not ideal. An internal opposition began to form within the camp itself, consisting of the men of Diego Velzquez and Pnfilo de Narvez. As far as the Cubans were
42
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
concerned, Corts's desperate situation provided them with a golden opportunity to expel him and achieve glory by seizing control of Mexico in the name of Diego Velzquez, the territory's legal governor. If that was not enough, most of the gold and precious objects had either sunk in the waters of Lake Texcoco or was left in the palace of Atzayacatl for lack of any other option. This fact was also likely to cause unrest among Corts's officers and soldiers, as it severely compromised the chances of repaying their large debts, acquiring wealth, and attaining their own glory. Furthermore, the seizure of the entire Corts camp by Velzquez's men could have possibly ended in their defeat. It was therefore a moment of truth which forced Corts to think profoundly. He resolved to take action that would solve most of the problems he faced at the time, by restoring his soldiers' sense of confidence and hope of a decisive future victory; dispelling all doubts of the people of Tlaxcala; weakening the internal opposition; cleansing a crucial area and securing the routes for travel and reinforcements; frightening the Aztec loyalists in the area, and forcing them to carefully consider the benefit they stood to gain from joining Corts and turning on Tenochtitlan; strengthening the confidence of Carlos I, who had not yet responded to Corts's request to authorize him as the legitimate conqueror of Mexico; and finally, by showing the Aztecs themselves that he was still strong and that he had every intention of pursuing decision in the expedition. His response was the brutal attack, looting, and destruction of Tepeaca, the massacre of its armed inhabitants, enslavement of the rest of its residents, and the establishment of a lower Spanish city - preferably a city whose name would recall a heroic chapter in Spanish history. Again, the indigenous population was forced to pay the price of the conquest, including its political and symbolic costs. The murder of twelve officers of Narvez's force, which defeated Corts along the Veracruz Coast (1520) and were sent by foot to Tenochtitlan, provided Corts with a pretext. The fact that the murders had been carried out not by inhabitants of Tepeaca but rather by inhabitants of the nearby town of Quecchula did not particularly bother him. He decided to hold the people of Tepeaca responsible anyway, issuing them an ultimatum: either a team established by Corts would investigate the incident, or he would wage war on the city. The people of Tepeaca rejected the ultimatum, and
Genocide
43
20/09/2012 10:33:44
the war broke out on August 1, 1520. The conquering force consisted of 500 soldiers, a few dozen horses, and a supporting force of some 2,000 fighters from Tlaxcala. Corts dictated the reason for the hostilities to his notary, asserting that it was a campaign against a band of rebels who had killed 870 Spaniards and 60 horses after they had declared their loyalty to the King of Spain. According to this narrative, the people of Tepeaca needed to pay the price of the overall indigenous resistance to the Spanish seizure of Mexico, even though by that point they had not harmed a soul. In the battle that was fought on the open land just below the town, 100 Native Americans were killed immediately and the fighters were authorized to loot the town and massacre its people as they saw fit. The fighters then released their vicious greyhound dogs on the terrified town residents, who climbed onto the roofs of houses in hordes, pushing one another off into the arms of the ecstatic people of Tlaxcala, who hungrily devoured their bodies. According to rumors, dead bodies were dragged to the nearby Tlaxcala meat market to be traded for chickens and clothing. In accordance with the European practice vis--vis slaves and criminals, the children who had not been killed were branded with white hot irons, with symbol of slavery on one cheek and the letter G, indicating the eternal slavery stemming from the war (guerra in Spanish), on the other cheek. Later, the slaves were sold for a handsome profit of 10 pesos per slave. The war came to an end on September 4, 1520. Assessments of the scope of the massacre in Tepeaca, which was the first of a series of similar massacres in the region, differ greatly. Some range from 15,000 to 20,000 people, while another version speaks of much higher numbers. Hugh Thomas holds that although the numbers are inflated, there is no doubt about what actually transpired.17 Though these figures are doubtless exaggerated, this campaign was at once the most tedious, the most brutal and the most important of Corts' in New Spain. In the course of it, he won over half the country, he destroyed Mexico's links with the sea to the east, cut the Mexica off from much prized tropical vegetables and fruit and, by inspiring fear, he caused thousands of Indians to support him, and to accept to be vassals of the King of Spain18
44
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:44
In the opening of his third letter, Corts himself referred to "the great damage we did there."19 In his second letter, which describes the development of events at Tepeaca, he acknowledged the brutality of his actions, but justified them with the following narrative: As we were entering that province [the Tepeaca province, from the Tlaxcala province], many natives came out to attack us, defending the [Mexico-Veracruz] road, as best they could, by fortifying themselves in strong and dangerous positionsAfter the requirements had been made on the part of Your Majesty, that they should make peace, and they had refused to submit, we fought with them several times; and, with the help of God, and the royal good fortune of Your Highness, we always scattered them, and killed many, without their killing one of us in the whole course of the said war, or wounding one solitary Spaniard. Although, as I have said, this province is very large, I pacified many cities and provinces subject to it in about twenty days, and the lords and chiefs of it came and offered themselves as vassals to Your Majesty. Corts continued: In a certain part of this province, where they killed those ten Spaniards, the natives were always very active in the war, and very rebellious, and had to be reduced by force of arms. I made a number of slaves, of whom I gave a fifth part to the officials of Your Majesty. I did this especially as, in addition to their having killed the said Spaniards, and rebelled against the service of Your Highness, they eat human flesh, a fact so notorious that I do not send proofs of it to Your Majesty. I was also moved to make the said slaves in order to strike terror into the Culuans [allies of the people of Tepeaca], and also because there are many who will never mend themselves until great and severe punishment is inflicted upon them.20 Corts did not explain all his justification to the King; only the strategic, legal, and ostensibly moral (cannibalism) ones. His explanations also certainly did not reflect historical fact. Rather, they attempted to create
Genocide
45
20/09/2012 10:33:45
a reality from which the reader can learn nothing. Was Tepeaca truly a threat? Did Corts send the city a request for peace or an ultimatum? Did Tepeaca deserve to be punished for the murder of Narvez's officers? Were any officers actually murdered? As difficult as it may have been, did the war against the Tepeaca justify a massacre of the population? Corts was a master of concealment and the construction of desired images of reality, and his letters tell us nothing about the important questions listed above. Some of the true facts of the episode were revealed during the official inquiry that marked the conclusion of Corts's service (such inquiries were routine practice at the end of service of all senior officials in the colonies). A number of the people examined during the inquiry acknowledged that the aim of the massacre had in fact been to instill fear in the local population. Francisco de Flores, one of the witnesses, testified that the actions taken were necessary, "in order to put fear into the naturales so that they did no hurt to the Spaniards." The Tlaxcalans had other justifications: "because they had come to rob their farms."21 Overall, however, the inquiry reflects that Corts was forced to accede to the pressures of the Tlaxcalans, to ensure the loyalty and obedience of his own men, and to instill fear in the adversary who had just defeated him, lest they take advantage of their victory and expel him from Mexico altogether. In any event, after this act of 'pacification,' which resulted in the destruction of an unspecified number of villages and the devastation of an unknown number of indigenous inhabitants, Corts established a new locality named Segura de la Frontera on the ruins of Tepeaca. The new town appears to have been named after the town of Segura de la Orden in the Aroche Mountains in the Kingdom of Seville, which had played a decisive role in the Spanish victory over the Muslims at Grenada and in the end of the Reconquista.22 In this way, Corts suggested to the King of Spain, and to his soldiers and officers, that the battle for "Grenada" was approaching and that Tenochtitlan could fall within a year, just as Grenada fell within a year of the fall of Segura de la Orden.
The Routine of Violence: The Conquest of Mexico and Peru
Violence also had more routine manifestations. As we know, Corts crossed the territory of Tlaxcala and endured various trials of warfare. We also saw
46
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
how, between these tests, Corts carried out actions meant to clarify for the people of Tlaxcala that he was not interested in gestures but rather in concluding an agreement which they had better accept, or be prepared to suffer severe consequences. For this reason, while still engaging in frontal hostilities with the Tlaxcalan army,23 Corts made sure to burn a large number of villages, to enslave their inhabitants, and to either sell them or to assign them to his soldiers as servants. Although this is how he presented things, the reality was different. Homes were not always empty when they were burned to the ground. Corts often burned homes while their inhabitants were inside in order to provide the proper setting for the dedication of the Tlaxcalans. "I set fire to five or six small places of about a hundred houses each, and brought away about four hundred prisoners, both men and women, fighting my way back to my camp without their doing me any harm," wrote Corts regarding the events at Tlaxcala in his second letter to the King. At one point, he noted that he had set fire to more than ten villages, one of which had more than 3,000 houses. These are just a few of the many such descriptions that fill Corts's letters, which often use laconic wording along the lines of: "Before daybreak, I fell upon two towns, in which I slaughtered many." The indigenous inhabitants living along the Spaniards' main retreat route out of Mexico in the direction of Tlaxcala after La Noche Triste paid a heavy price. According to Corts's own undoubtedly inflated testimony, some 100,000 people met their death in the towns of Huexotzinco and Itzucar.24 At Itzucar, Corts implemented a policy of complete depopulation and destruction of the town. Here, there was no mass murder. However, expulsion in the midst of the war or mass flight, as the Spaniards drew closer, left the inhabitants with meager chances of survival25. The last battle for the capital, which was completely destroyed in the fighting, resulted in the greatest number of casualties at any single location: 100,000-240,000, according to varying estimates (in comparison to 50-100 Spaniards).26 In a letter to the King, Corts wrote that although "this last reason caused me the greater grief, for it weighed heavily on my soul," the Aztecs had "forced us to totally destroy them."27 It goes without saying that, during the commotion of the war, Spanish allies sent punishment teams to the cities and towns of the Valley of Mexico in order to cause them, in the words of Corts, "as much damage as possible."28
Genocide
47
20/09/2012 10:33:45
Between the lines of the many reports on the war and the 'pacification' efforts, Mexico was the site of innumerable acts of vandalism, killing, looting, enslavement, and expulsion. In the fragile living conditions of the time, such acts were generally precursors to extremely premature deaths for the local inhabitants, which helps explains the quick, sweeping reduction in the population of Mexico during the Spanish conquest and the years immediately following it. Corts's explanations for the devastating destruction he caused appear to be unfounded. Nothing required him to set the city ablaze. Rather, he did so as part of his effort to erase every memory of the pre-Spanish period and to clear a safe path for the next undertaking awaiting him: Christianization of the Aztec population and the rebuilding of Mexico City on a Christian-European urban foundation. Indeed, three years after the fall of the city, the first delegation of Franciscan nuns reached its gates. The war for Peru left thousands of Spaniards dead, as a result of the heavy toll on human life taken by natural disasters; disease; the fighting itself; dangerous campaigns of "discovery" and study; the raids of angry indigenous groups; the bitterness of the Native American population; mutual murders; and punishment by death. According to John Hemming, a senior expert on the history of Peru, the Spanish rarely killed Native Americans arbitrarily and for no reason.29 Las Casas asserts that most of the killing, which took the lives of some 4 million members of the indigenous population during the first decade following the conquest, was the result of more indirect factors for which the Spanish were nonetheless responsible,30 such as: neglect of the Incas' developed agricultural system, including its advanced water transport system, which was designed to sustain a large population; destruction of the terrace farming system, which was perfectly constructed for agricultural cultivation on many of the vast hillsides of the mountains in the region; the robbing of the cereal crop stores established for times of drought and other natural disasters; destruction of the system of roads and bridges, which were meant primarily for people and which collapsed under the weight of the heavy horses of war, wagons, and wheeled carriages of the Spaniards; and finally, the theft of vegetables and other crops from fields and from private homes. These actions completely destroyed the household economy of the Inca population, denying the indigenous population any possibility of material existence.
48
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
The Spaniards also quickly came to covet the economic potential of the indigenous population's llama and alpaca herds. Cieza de Lon, a contemporary historian who wrote during the mid-16th century, reported that the herds were immediately hunted down and transported to the market in Lima.31 According to Hemming, large herds were quickly hunted down not for the sake of meat for human consumption but rather for the production of bone marrow, fat, and candle wax.32 According to de Lon, the chaos that prevailed in Peru during the thirty years that followed the Spanish conquest also prevented the institution of protections for the indigenous population and its herds. The overall impact was intense hunger, a reduced ability to withstand the diseases that repeatedly plagued Peru, and death. In a letter to the King of Spain in July 1539, Pascal de Andagoya, a discoverer of Peru, wrote that the complete destruction of the indigenous population was not the direct result of fighting, but rather the fact that, despite their appeals, they were left to die of hunger.33 However, the destruction of essential infrastructure was not the only damage done. Others types of destruction stemmed from: The frantic quest for gold, silver, and other valuables to cover the cost of the war and generate wealth, respect, and status, and to establish the privately owned estates that the conquerors so yearned for; The recruitment of the indigenous inhabitants during the conquest to serve as haulers, oarsmen, concubines, and attendants, and later also as farmers, laborers, and builders; The burning of localities by the indigenous population themselves, in order to delay the Spanish advance toward Cusco and other areas; The Spaniards' burning of 'rebel' settlements, and the sale of survivors into slavery on the markets of Peru and the large Caribbean islands (Espaniola and Cuba); Ruthless suppression of the Native American uprisings; Fanning the flames of the deep rivalries between different indigenous groups; The widespread use of indigenous fighters in the civil wars that took place within Peru and as a fighting force during the conquest of Peru itself;
Genocide
49
20/09/2012 10:33:45
Cruel methods for the recruitment of Native Americans for forced labor in the encomienda system; The widespread killing that resulted from confrontations with indigenous armies that tried to block the advance of the Spanish from Cajamarca to other parts of Peru and Ecuador, which disrupted normal life and work; Establishment of a market economy, which completely undermined the autarchic economic systems of the Native Americans. All of these elements played a role in bringing about the fraying of the fabric of Native American existence.34 For many, the result was difficult to bear: "I moved across a good portion of this land and saw terrible destruction in it," wrote Vincent de Valverde to the King in 1539. "The sight of such desolation would move anyone to great pity." A few years later, Vaca de Castro, governor of Peru, wrote to the king that: "There has been and still is a great decline of the Indian natives, which I have seen with my own eyes on the road from Quito to Cuzco." In a letter to the King written during the 1540s, Cristbal Molina described the conditions as follows: I shall tell you about two provinces that were reputed to have contained 40,000 Indians when the Spaniards entered this country. One was Huaura beside Huarmey, which Almagro took as a repartimiento35 because of its large population and reputation for being very rich; the other is Chincha, which Hernando Pizarro took, and which also had 40,000 Indians. Today there are not more than four thousand Indians in the two provinces. In the valley of this city [Lima] and in Pachacamac five leagues from here, which was all one entity, there were over twenty-five thousand Indians. It is now almost empty, with scarcely two thousand.36 Similar reports, including warnings of the overall desolation that was so apparent, were sent to the King all the time. In this spirit, the Dominican monk Domingo Toms, one of Las Casas's men and one of the first Dominican monks in Peru, wrote to the King as follows: "Unless orders are given to reduce the confusion in the government of this land, its natives will come to an end; and once they are finished, Your Majesty's rule over it will cease."37
50
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
The Extermination of Culture
Over the years, the cultures of the Americas had produced a rich collection of systems of design, assimilation, and bequeathing. This included legends, pyramids, religious sites, astronomy observatories, codices and Stelas, everyday religious practices, and seasonal ceremonies and celebrations. It also included systems of education; the priesthood; the military; artistic creation supportive of the ruling order; communications media; and institutional cultural structuring. This diverse collection of systems, institutions, sites, and practices served to shape two major realms of tribal memory: the realm of popular communications and discourse on the one hand, and the realm of official documentation, encoding, structuring, and education, on the other hand38. The conquest completely destroyed not only the major components of this heritage but its entire foundation as a whole. It also resulted in the prohibition of all private and public religious practices. Books were gathered and burned; pyramids and sites of religious ritual were demolished; and churches and monasteries were built on their ruins. Civil and military leaders, religious priests, judges, and those engaged in education and communications (quipocamayo, for example), who together constituted an educated literate community, were either killed or recruited as converts to Christianity, and placed at the service of the colonies. Entire communities were moved away from their traditional sites of ritual practice, memory, and burial, and concepts of time and space underwent drastic reordering. The indigenous population of different peripheral areas were concentrated in missions and isolated from their heritage. From that point on, Native Americans were supposed to be Christians, and, to a certain extent, to adopt a European consciousness and way of life. The endeavor of cultural extermination and the eradication of memory became a joint project of the government authorities, the colonies, and their religious institutions. The major dilemma engaging the first missionaries and the generations of priests that followed had to do with the implementation and enforcement of Christianization. Overall, the dilemma was decided in favor of the more rigid, uncompromising approach. Later, we will discuss Las Casas's failure to promote a method of voluntary conversion in Mexico. Domingo Toms failed to institute a similar process in the Andes. Toms thought that the application of Christianity should incorporate the iconographic
Genocide
51
20/09/2012 10:33:45
world of the indigenous children, based on his belief that this world was nothing more than a mistaken reflection of Christianity. For this reason, he maintained that certain components could be incorporated into Christianity after being refined. Indeed, authors of Native American descent, such as Poma de Ayala and Pachacuti Yamqui, confirmed the assertion that the Christian saints brought their faith to the Andes prior to the conquest, in order to ensure the success of the conversion endeavor aimed at paving a natural path for the nonviolent transition from paganism to true faith.39 The Franciscans and the Jesuits espoused a different approach, one based on the belief that syncretism and persuasion alone could not ensure true conversion. They maintained that the simple mind and barbaric practices of the Native Americans, which had come from Satan himself, would eventually thwart the effort, which was better suited for more developed populations such as the peoples of the Mediterranean Basin. This rigid version of Christianization was adopted by the first three religious assemblies held in Lima (in February 1551, August 1567, and March 1583).40 In 1588, this approach was expressed in a more extreme manner by the Jesuit missionary Jos de Acosta in his De Procuranda Indorum Salute ("On Securing Salvation of the Indies," or the Americas), which called for the systematic decimation of all Pagan idols and rituals, in conjunction with the uncompromising coercion of strict Catholic orthodoxy. Francisco de Toledo, the Spanish viceroy in Peru from 1569 to 1581, adopted this approach, and combined it with an intense policy of population transfer, which he passed down to his successors. Under the syncretism of the Catholic Church, all the Native Americans were permitted to do was to paint the Christian images using color. In this way, La Virgen de Guadelupe (Our Lady of Guadelupe) in Mexico was painted black, and replaced the Aztec goddess Tonantzin or Tonatiuh, which was one of the goddesses of health and a devourer of human sacrifices, and La Virgen de los Remdios (The Virgin of Los Remdios), which the conquerors brought with them. The indigenous population was also permitted to dance their dances, play their musical instruments (except the trumpet), and engage in some other practices, on the condition that they do so within the framework of Christian celebrations. The local population in general, and the inhabitants of the rural colonial periphery
52
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
in particular, continued to maintain a largely traditional lifestyle, saturated with mysticism, mythology (including content written after the conquest), and innumerable practices, as described in the books Ambivalent Conquest: Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan, 1517-1570, by Inga Clendinnen, and Andean Worlds: Indigenous History, Culture, and Consciousness under Spanish Rule, 1532-1825, by Kenneth Andrien. This was not consistent with official policy, and stemmed from the powerlessness of the Church, which was unable to recruit sufficient personnel. Although the policy of the Church and the authorities in the colonies was quite clear, it was also extremely difficult to implement. This problematic situation, which would prove to be only temporary, was described vividly by Jesuit missionary Pablo Jos Arraiga as early as 1621: A typical error [among the Indians] is the practice of carrying water on both shoulders by taking refuge in both religions at the same timeMost of the Indians have not done away with their huacas and conopas41 or their wild festivals, and have yet to be punished for their deviations and their insignificant beliefs, and as a result they believe that their falsehoods are consistent with our truths, and that their worship of idols is consistent with our faith.42 In contrast to Arraiga, Archbishop Golnzalo de Campo, who was an opponent of the rigid approach to Christianization, wrote the following in 1625: I found a variety of opinions about this when I arrived in Lima: and among the serious and most important men there were those who told me there was much idolatry[O]thers told me that it [idolatry] was an invention [and a product of the] greed of the visitadores who used their titles to enrich themselves, and that this did serious injustice to the Indians. [O]thers said that there was some idolatry, but not as much as was claimed.43 The repeated campaigns of religious purification in the periphery, which continued until the end of the colonial period, undoubtedly indicate the determination of the colonies to uproot and halt the practice of all local
Genocide
53
20/09/2012 10:33:45
faiths and customs and to destroy the religious articles that still remained in the possession of the indigenous population.44 As the civil foundations of the colonies became increasingly established during the two to three decades following the conquest of the continent, the violence and terrors stemming directly from the war began to wane somewhat. However, it was actually the civil government that institutionalized slavery, which began just after the conquest, and officially systematized its functioning through a variety of institutions that will be explored in the next chapter. In this way, neither the violence nor the process of cultural extermination ceased to impact the indigenous population. They were simply better institutionalized and, ostensibly, under more effective supervision.
54
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
Notes
1 In contrast to the literal meaning of the word 'pacification', its real significance as used in this context was extermination. This term, which the Spanish used to conceal the true nature of their actions, remained a central component of colonial discourse until the 20th century. Las Casas, A Short Account, pp. 52-53. One of the charges against Corts in the Cholula incident was that the edict of 'pacification' was never read before the inhabitants and their leaders as required. Moreover, at Cholula, in contrast to most other cases, Corts had enough translators to explain the meaning of the curious document to the indigenous population. See: Corts, Letters, note 27, p. 454. Las Casas, A Short Account, p. 53. Kirkpatrick, The Spanish Conquistadores, p. 111. Las Casas, A Short Account, p. 57. Kirkpatrick, The Spanish Conquistadores, pp. 111-112. Ibid., p. 112. Las Casas, A Short Account, p. 60. Centuries later, the same biblical reference (Jeremiah 51:40) was used to describe the murder of the Jews during the Holocaust. Ibid., pp. 61-62.
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 Ibid., p. 63. 11 Bartolom de las Casas, Historia de las Indias, III (Caracas: Imprenca Ayacucho, 1986), pp. 113-116. 12 Ibid., II, p. 116. 13 Ibid., II, p. 117. 14 Corts, Letters, p. 466, note 28. 15 Ibid., p. 465, note 27. 16 Ibid., pp. 456-466. Because we have no reliable indigenous versions of the events, the historiography must be regarded as lacking and based only on partial facts and the circumstantial assessments of historians. 17 Thomas, Conquest of the Inca, p. 437, and note 30, p. 739. 18 Ibid., p. 438. 19 Corts, p. 161. 20 Ibid., p. 146. 21 Thomas, Conquest of the Inca, pp. 433-434, note 81. 22 Ibid., p. 738, note 12. 23 The Tlaxcalans tested Corts four times during four campaigns, each time suffering more casualties than the time before. Their aim was to assess his capabilities in order to determine whether to cooperate with him. From their perspective, cooperation with Corts entailed great danger because they were the standing enemy of the Aztecs, and their punishment for rebelling against their masters would be total extermination. In order to ensure that they did not throw all their support behind the wrong master, they repeatedly tested Corts's
Genocide
55
20/09/2012 10:33:45
strength. They only committed to cooperating with him (and subsequently used him to exact revenge upon others) when they were convinced that he could handle the Aztecs. 24 Corts, Letters, pp. 151-155. 25 Ibid., p. 153. 26 Ibid., pp. 203-204. 27 Ibid., p. 223. 28 Ibid., p. 231. 29 Hemming, The Conquest of the Incas, p. 350. 30 Las Casas, A Short Account, p. 114. 31 Hemming, The Conquest of the Incas, pp. 351-349. 32 Ibid., p. 351. 33 Ibid. 34 Kirkpatrick, The Spanish Conquistadores, pp. 200-201; William H. Prescott, History of the Conquest of Peru (New York: Heritage Press, 1957), pp. 252-257. 35 For a more detailed discussion of the evolution of the system of allocation, see the glossary of terms in chapter 6. 36 Hemming, The Conquest of the Incas, p. 348. 37 Ibid. 38 Megged, "Burying the White Gods." 39 Andrien, Andean Worlds, pp. 161-163. 40 The assemblies stipulated that the entire process be carried out in the native language of the indigenous population, including the provision of suitable written material. This, however, was far from what actually took place. The small number of missionaries working in the Andes, with their overall linguistic weakness, prevented implementation of most of the decisions made during the 16th century. The situation did not improve significantly in the centuries to come. For example, although the Council of Trent stipulated that a priest was supposed to serve 200-300 families, the Archdiocese of Lima included 162 parishes staffed by only 108 priests and 67 monks at the beginning of the 17th century. In this context, each priest and monk served 400-500 families, and in most cases did so without speaking their native language. 41 Huacas were natural sites (such as mountains, rivers, lakes, large boulders, and mountain peaks) that Native Americans considered to be deities or holy spirits. Conopas were small, attractive figurines made of stone or other substances that represented gods of the home such as llamas or alpacas, which were used for work. Conopas was the term typically used for these objects in the coastal regions, whereas in the mountain regions they were referred to as chances. 42 Arraiga's book from 1621 is a fascinating text that offers a detailed analysis of all types of traditional idols in Peru, and all the traditional social customs directly related to the beliefs of the past. See: Pablo Joseph de Arraiga, Extirpacion de l'Idolatra en el Per (1621) (Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Regionales Andinos "Bartolom de las Casas," 1999), pp. 2671.
56
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:45
43 Andrien, Andean Worlds, p. 153. 44 For example, see the incident of Gregorio Taco of the Arequipa region (1748-1754) in Andrien. Also see Clendinnen's account of the violent 1562 campaign to eliminate all the traditional beliefs and idols in the Yucatn village of Mani, which was carried out by Diego de Landa, the fanatical bishop of the Yucatn region and one of the most fervent book burners of the time: Ambivalent Conquest: Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan, 1517-1570 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 85102-.
Genocide
57
20/09/2012 10:33:45
20/09/2012 10:33:47
Rwanda 1994: Genocide in the "Land of a Thousand Hills"

by Benyamin Neuberger
Genocide
Benyamin Neuberger Genocide
Rwanda 1994: Genocide in the "Land of a Thousand Hills"

59
20/09/2012 10:33:50
20/09/2012 10:33:50
Chapter 2: The Road to Genocide (1990-1994) The Opposition Parties
1990-1994 seemed to be a period of democratization and liberalization in Rwanda, motivated by the pressure of the Rwandan intelligentsia on the home front and by aid-providing nations and a variety of international organizations. As a sign of change ushering in this new era, the ruling party changed its name from the National Revolutionary Movement for Development (Mouvement Rvolutionaire National pour le Dveloppement) to the National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development (Mouvement rpublicain national pour la dmocratie et le dveloppement), or the MRND(D). In July 1990, President Habyarimana appointed a national commission to carry out reforms. Among other things, the commission recommended transition from a single-party dictatorship to a multiparty system. In this context, 1991 witnessed the establishment of the following opposition parties, which from that point on played a pivotal role in Rwandan politics: The Democratic Republican Movement (Mouvement Dmocratique Rpublicain, or MDR) Heir to the ruling MDR-Parmehutu party of the First Republic. The party was headed by Fuastin Twagiramungu and its members were southern Hutus, primarily from the regions of Butare and Gitarama. The party was in favor of democratization, as long as it did not include steps that might threaten Hutu domination of the country. As Hutus constituted the decisive majority of the Rwandan population in any event, the party saw no contradiction between democratization and Hutu domination in the form of a majoritarian regime. The Social Democratic Party (Parti Social Dmocrate, or PSD) Also a party consisting primarily of educated southern urban Hutus.
Genocide
61
20/09/2012 10:33:50
The PSD supported democracy, peaceful interethnic relations, and social democratic social policies. The Liberal Party (Parti Libral, or PL) A predominantly Hutu mixed party that also represented many 'Hutsis' (children of mixed Hutu-Tutsi marriages), including some members of the party leadership. The party was supported primarily by the educated and relatively affluent urban middle class and espoused liberal economic policies. It was led by Justin Mugenzi (who murdered his wife in 1976 and was subsequently pardoned). Christian Democratic Party (Parti dmocratique Chrtien, or PDC) A Hutu party linked to the Catholic Church, with close relations to the Christian democratic parties in Belgium, Italy, and Germany. The Coalition for the Defense of the Republic (Coalition pour la Dfense de la Rpublique, or CDR) An extremist racist Hutu party located to the right of the ruling party. Its members were extremely active in inciting and carrying out the genocide. Ironically, CDR founder Shyirambere Jean Barahinyura, an educated man who studied at universities in Germany and the Soviet Union, had previously been a member of the RPF (see below) but left the party due to his assessment that it had nothing to offer Hutus. The first four parties joined together in August 1991 to form an opposition block and an opposition coordinating committee (Comite de Concertation de l'Opposition) that could be classified as democratic and as located to the political left of the ruling party. The combined international and domestic pressure resulted in progress in the democratization process and the establishment of a national unity government, which included the MRND(D) and the Leftist Opposition Bloc (for some reason, the parties that made up this bloc continued to be referred to as 'opposition' parties even after they joined the government). Habyarimana remained on as president, but now the prime ministers (Dismas Nsengiyaremye from April 1992 until July 1993, and Agathe Uwilingiyamana from July 1993 until his murder in April 1994) hailed from the opposition MDR. The coalition agreement stipulated that the government would consist of nine ministers from the MRND(D) and ten
62
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:50
ministers from the Opposition Bloc (three ministers each from the MDR, the PL, and the PSD, and one from the PDC). In January 1993, it was also decided to replace the single-party parliament with a temporary parliament in which the opposition enjoyed even greater representation. In 1992, the ministers of the Bloc, who represented the push for liberalization, enjoyed considerable influence on policy making in a large number of realms: extremist prefects were fired and replaced by members of the Bloc; the Minister of Education terminated the use of ethnic quotas in the administration of higher education (and as a result was attacked by Hutu thugs); and an attempt was made to limit the activities of the national security services. The Provisional Parliament (January 1993)
Party MRND(D) (Ruling Party) National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development MDR Democratic Republican Movement PL Liberal Party PSD Social Democratic Party PDC Christian Democratic Party Other No. of Representatives 11
11 11 11 4 11
Establishment of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF)
Concurrent with the establishment of the Hutu opposition parties and attempts to undermine liberalization in Rwanda, Tutsis began to organize themselves politically and militarily along the Ugandan-Rwandan border.
Genocide
63
20/09/2012 10:33:50
With this, a new force took the stage in the unfolding saga of Rwanda: the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF), a Tutsi guerilla movement that launched a war against the ruling regime. The movement organized itself in Uganda and its members were recruited primarily from among the community of Tutsi refugees who had fled Rwanda in the 1960s and 1970s. They were joined by members of Tutsi refugee communities from other countries such as Burundi, Tanzania, Kenya, Cameroon, Senegal, Congo-Brazaville, Belgium, the United States, and Germany. From the beginning of their exile, the Tutsi refugee community outside of Rwanda maintained strong ties to their homeland by means of a diverse network of organizations and newspapers, preserving their longing for "the land of milk and honey," and insisting on their right to return. Its members were persecuted and discriminated against by the regimes of Milton Obote (1962-1971, 1980-1985) and Idi Amin (1971-1979). In the 1980s, furious with the Rwandans for their support of the opposition Democratic Party (DP), Obote's party and government removed Tutsi refugees from their positions within the civil administration, turned a blind eye to attacks on their homes, and even began expelling them into Rwanda. In response to these policies, thousands of Rwandan Tutsis joined Yoweri Museveni's National Resistance Army (NRA), which had been fighting Obote's regime since 1980. When Museveni's forces seized the Ugandan capital city of Kampala in December 1986, 4,000 of his 14,000 soldiers were Rwandan Tutsis. The most prominent were Fred Rwigyema, commander of the NRA and the first defense minister in Museveni's government, and Paul Kagame, the NRA's deputy intelligence chief. Rwigyema and Kagame joined Museveni's Front for National Salvation (FRONASA) in Tanzania in 1973, and took part in the invasion of Uganda that led to the toppling of Idi Amin in 1979. Tutsis from Rwanda also served as heads of the NRA training structure, military police, and medical corps. In the late 1980s, the romance between the NRA and the Rwandan Tutsis came to an end due to the overall negative attitude toward Rwandans in Uganda, the hostility of the Bugandans1 (who regarded the Tutsis as economic competition), various commanders' resentment of the Tutsis' high status in the NRA, and Museveni's efforts to appease northern Uganda. These factors led to the removal of General Rwigyema as commander of
64
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:50
the NRA in 1989, an end to the promotion of Tutsis within the army, and a return to the policy of discrimination. In response to these developments, thousands of Tutsis left the Ugandan military, joined the Rwandan Patriotic Front (which was established in 1987), and began preparing an invasion of Rwanda based on the military skills they had acquired in Uganda. Ironically, the founders of the RPF were Hutu exiles and opponents of the ruling regime in Rwanda: Colonel Kanyarengwe, who until 1980 had served as defense minister in Habyarimana's government, and Pasteur Bizimunga, who would later serve as president of Rwanda after the victory of the RPF. Following the invasion of Rwanda in October 1990, the RPF grew at an unprecedented pace. A large majority of its soldiers were Tutsis, 20% of whom were university graduates. RPF forces between 1990 and 1994.
Year 1990 1991 1992 1994 Number of Soldiers 3,000 5,000 12,000 25,000
The Rwandan Patriotic Front developed a new ideology emphasizing Tutsi-Hutu national unity and denying the existence of different ethnic groups. Blame was placed on the white man, as expressed by the lyrics of the following RPF song:2 It is the white man who has caused all that, children of Rwanda. He did it in order to find a secret way to pillage us. When they [the Europeans] arrived, we were living side by side in harmony. They were unhappy that they could not find a way to divide us. They invented different origins for us, children of Rwanda: Some were supposed to have come from Chad, others from Ethiopia.
Genocide
65
20/09/2012 10:33:50
We were a fine tree, its parts all in accord, children of Rwanda. Some of us were banished abroad, to never come back. We were separated by this division, children of Rwanda, but we have overcome the white man's trap So, children of Rwanda, we are called upon to unite our strength To build Rwanda The RPF's message was one of democratic progressive Rwandan national unity, and the movement never reverted to the colonial racial doctrine that the country's Tutsi rulers had espoused until 1959. But despite its emphasis on Rwandan unity between Hutus and Tutsis, the RPF was a Tutsi organization in which few Hutus actually played a role. In fact, Hutu propaganda cast RPF members as "tribal," feudal, and proponents of monarchy (although there was in fact a conservative Tutsi "right wing," it was located in Burundi, not Uganda, and did not play an important role in subsequent developments). On October 1, 1990, the RPF invaded Rwanda. After only a few days of fighting, RPF commander General Rwigyema was killed and replaced by Colonel Kagame. Although the invasion was contained, the RPF nonetheless managed to conquer (or "liberate") part of northeastern Rwanda and, in April 1992, launched a major offensive. Hundreds of thousands of Hutus, who believed the government propaganda which maintained that the RPF intended on killing them, fled northeastern Rwanda for their lives, and France, Belgium, and Zaire (today the Democratic Republic of Congo) sent troops to support the government. Whereas French soldiers actually took part in the fighting, the Belgian government recalled its 400 member force after only a month. The Zairian forces also withdrew, although without orders to do so and in a direct breach of authority. The RPF invasion did much to strengthen the extremist racists among the Hutus, who now classified all Tutsis as a fifth RPF column of which Rwanda must be "purified." The RPF, they claimed, aimed to establish a "Tutsi empire" that would include Rwanda, Burundi, and parts of Zaire and Uganda.3
66
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:50
The Response of the Government Repression and Pogroms
The hard core of the Rwandan regime the president, "le clan de Madame" (or Akazu, a powerful clique of northern Hutus loyal to President Habyarimana and, particularly, to his wife Agathe), the ruling party and the defense establishment now found itself threatened by the opposition parties from within and by the RPF from without. The response was quick to come. Both Habyarimana's MRND(D) and the racist CDR began establishing armed militias, which received most of its weapons and training from France. The MRND(D) set up the Interahamwe ("those who attack together"), and the CRD set up the Impuzamugambi ("those who have a single goal"). The government's army (FAR) also grew at a tremendous pace, expanding from 3,000 soldiers in 1990 to 50,000 in 1994. In an effort to gain the support of the Hutus, the government organized anti-Tutsi pogroms which killed thousands. Large scale pogroms of this type took place in October 1990, January and February 1991, March and August 1992, January and February 1993, and February 1994. On October 4, 1990, just a few days after the onset of the RPF offensive, the government staged a RPF attack on the capital city of Kigali, and took advantage of the subsequent widespread panic to kill a long list of Tutsi leaders and to arrest thousands. "Internal" Tutsis were not the only ones accused of being "collaborators" (ibyitso) with the RPF (who were again referred to as iyenzi, or "cockroaches") in these developments. The "left wing" opposition parties, who were now part of the government, were also suspected of working with the enemy. For example, on November 22, 1992, the MRND(D) vicechairman in the prefecture of Gisenyi described the members of the parties of the "left" as follows:4 The opposition parties have plotted with the enemy to make the Byumba prefecture fall to the Iyenzi. [] They have plotted to undermine our armed forces [] The law is quite clear on this point. 'Any person who is guilty of acts aiming at sapping the morale of the armed forces will be condemned to death. 'What are we waiting for? [] And what about those accomplices (ibyitso) here who are sending their children to the RPF? Why are we waiting to get of these families? [] We have to take responsibility
Genocide
67
20/09/2012 10:33:50
into our own hands and wipe out these hoodlums. [] The fatal mistake we made in 1959 was to let them [the Tutsis] get out. [] They belong in Ethiopia and we are going to find them a shortcut to get there by throwing them into the Nyabarongo River [which flows northward]. I must insist on this point. We have to act. Wipe them all out! Following this speech, the Rwandan minister of justice, who was a member of the Liberal Party, called for the arrest of the local party deputy-chairman on charges of incitement. The army, however, prevented his arrest and instead forced the resignation of the justice minister himself. All this reflects the fact that by 1992-1993, the apparatus for genocide had already evolved, complete with bloodthirsty militias, murderous pogroms, and vicious acts of incitement.
The Arusha Accords
In June 1992, under the pressure of neighboring countries (Uganda, Tanzania, Zaire, and Burundi), aid-providing nations (France, Belgium, the United States, and Germany) and international organizations (the U.N., the Organization of African Unity, and the World Bank), a peace process between the Rwandan government and the RPF got underway. Both the Rwandan president and the MRND(D) opposed the process, and it was the opposition leaders in the government, who were in favor of the agreement, who conducted negotiations with the rebels. The three main government representatives in the negotiations (all moderate Hutus) were: Agathe Uwilingiyamana of the MDR, who served as prime minster between July 1993 and her murder on April 7, 1994, at the onset of the genocide. Defense Minister James Gasana of the MRND(D), whose dovish views made him exceptional in the ruling party and who, in August 1993, was forced to flee to Europe for his life. Foreign Minister Boniface Ngulinzira of the MDR, who was killed on April 11, 1994, at the onset of the genocide.
68
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:50
The parties reached a series of agreements stipulating a ceasefire (July 1992); the establishment of a 19-member Broad Based Transitional Government (BBTG with five ministers from the MRND(D), five ministers from the RPF, and nine ministers from the opposition parties: the PSI, the PL, and the MDR) to be headed by President Habyarimana; the establishment of a transitional parliament (January 1993); the withdrawal of all foreign forces (French); the return of all the Hutu displaced persons to their homes in northern Rwanda; disciplinary measures against the instigators of the antiTutsi pogroms (March 1993); and a protocol for the return of all the Tutsi refugees from Uganda to Rwanda (June 1993). In August 1993, all the above agreements were incorporated into the Arusha Accords (named for the city in northern Tanzania where they were signed). The agreement also included a decision to unify government forces and the RPF into one army (in which 50% of the officers and 40% of the soldiers would be RPF members), to reduce the joint-force to 19,000 soldiers (at the time, government forces and the RPF consisted of 30,000 soldiers and 20,000 soldiers respectively), and to dispatch a U.N. force to supervise its timely implementation (at the request of the RPF, the U.N. force was not to include French soldiers, due to France's support of the Rwandan government). Throughout the entire negotiation process, which lasted from June 1992 until August 1993, President Habyarimana and his associates expressed grave reservations about the peace process, repeatedly declaring that they were not represented there. The radicals in his camp (le clan de Madame, the militias, and the CDR) accused the opposition parties, and even a few members of the ruling party, of selling out the Hutus. Under pressure from the opposition bloc within the government, the RPF, and the countries engaged in mediating between the parties, the president was forced to sign the agreement, but apparently had no intention of implementing it. As a result, he too was accused by the hawks of defeatism.
Genocide
69
20/09/2012 10:33:50
Opposition to the Arusha Accords and Preparations for the "Final Solution"
Who will survive after the war? The masses will rise up with the help of the army And the blood will flow like water!
Excerpt from a poem published in a CDR magazine, February 1994.5
The poem quoted above clearly and succinctly expresses the position of the Rwandan military vis--vis the Arusha Accords, which it regarded as robbing it of victory. Opposition to the agreement further intensified after the military provisions it contained became known. Army personnel feared they would lose their jobs (as the agreement called for a drastic reduction in the size of the joint military force) and also feared that RPF members would take control of the military. In this context, a clandestine military group known as Amasasu ("bullets") organized itself, with the aim of preventing the unification of the two armies. Le clan de Madame was also staunchly opposed to the agreement, as was the overwhelming majority of the MRND(D), the CRD, and a large number of prefects and commune managers, who also feared losing their positions to members of the opposition parties and the RPF. At the same time, dramatic developments were also taking place within the opposition parties, as many members regarded the agreement as making too many concessions to the Tutsis and as too far-reaching. Extremist propaganda - which maintained that the RPF was bringing Tutsi rule and oppression of the Hutus back to Rwanda - proved to be effective, as each opposition party now split into two factions: an ethno-nationalist Hutu faction opposing the Arusha Accords and a faction that remained loyal to democracy and to the peace process. On October 23, 1993, in conjunction with President Habyarimana, the MRND(D), and the CDR, the extremist factions formed an extremist bloc that opposed peace and engaged in antiTutsi incitement. This bloc, known as "Hutu Power," was composed of the following elements: The MRND(D) The CDR
70
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:50
The majority of the MDR, including the Democratic Republican Youth (Jeunesse Democrate Republicaine, or JDR) The majority of the PL The minority of the PSD The minority of the PDC The Interahamwe (the militia of the MRND(D)) The Impuzamugambi (the militia of the CDR) Some of the slogans used at the founding assembly of the Hutu Power movement were: Hutu Power! MRND Power! CDR Power! MDR Power! Interahamwe Power! JDR Power All Hutu are One Power A number of senior government ministers of the opposition parties, including the prime minister and foreign minister, did not join Hutu Power and remained loyal to the Arusha Accords. As we have seen, they paid for this with their lives when the genocide began following the events of April 6, 1994. The extremists were not satisfied with organizing themselves politically. Thousands now joined the armed militias, and large quantities of weapons were distributed to the masses. A businessman with close ties to the president imported half a million machetes, and RTLMC (Radio Tlvision Libre des Mille Collines), an extremist CDR-run radio station, began to operate in July 1993. In this context, the need for a "final solution" to the Tutsi problem was discussed increasingly frequently. The United Nations Assistance Mission to Rwanda (UNAMIR) arrived in the country in November 1993. The next month, the RPF ministers who were slated to join the provisional broad based government in accordance
Genocide
71
20/09/2012 10:33:51
with the agreement arrived in the capital city of Kigali, escorted by a battalion of rebels which was supposed to provide them with security. The joint government, however, was never established, and in January 1994, the RPF ministers left the capital, and street battles erupted between supporters and opponents of the agreement.
From Summit Meeting to Genocide
On April 6, 1994, a summit meeting of the leaders of the region was held in the Tanzanian capital of Dar es Salaam to discuss efforts to implement the Arusha Accords. The summit was attended by the presidents of Tanzania, Uganda, Burundi, and Rwanda, and the vice-president of Kenya, and the first act of the assembly was a decision to establish the broad based transitional government. At the end of the day, the plane that was carrying President Habyarimana and President Cyprien Ntaryamira of Burundi back to Kigali was shot down by a missile fired from somewhere in the Rwandan capital city. Both presidents and a few other officials (including the C.G.S. of the Rwandan army) were killed instantly. The plane was hit at 8:30 p.m., and within just a few hours, the Interahamwe had already set up road blocks and began distributing lists of people to be assassinated. At the same time, the RTLMC began broadcasting calls to avenge the murder of the president. Although it is still unclear who shot down the plane, a number of interesting hypotheses have been advanced: The operation was an initiative of either the French authorities or a private French party This theory is based on the fact that the missile used to shoot down the plane was French, and that Franois de Grossouvre, French President Franois Mitterand's advisor on African affairs, who was close to President Habyarimana, committed suicide the following day. The act was carried out by Belgian soldiers serving in the U.N. force in the country (UNAMIR) This theory was espoused by a number of government supporters but has no factual basis. The act was carried out by former Rwandan army officers as personal revenge for losing their jobs in 1992 as a result of their failures in the war. The attack was initiated by Hutu opposition leaders who regarded the removal of Habyarimana as the last chance for implementation the
72
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
Arusha Accords. Prime Minister Agathe Uwilingiyamana was accused of involvement in the attack, although it can be assumed that the accusation was aimed at justifying her murder the next morning, on April 7, 1994. The plane was shot down by the RPF This was the explanation adopted by most Hutu extremists, who used it as a pretext to launch a campaign of murder and revenge against the Tutsis. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that the U.N. had concealed a secret report which maintained that the operation had been carried out by a secret RPF cell [codenamed "the net"] under the command of RPF commander (and subsequent Rwandan President) Paul Kagame. The paper also reported that, on April 6, 1994, RPF forces were instructed through the media to advance toward the capital. If in fact the RPF leadership regarded the president as an obstacle to implementing the agreement, this theory is logical. However, it is hard to believe that they did not realize that the alternative would be even more extreme. The plane was shot down by Hutu extremists, most likely army personnel or militiamen close to le clan de Madame. The last hypothesis listed above is the most likely one for a number of reasons: Within an hour of the time the plane was shot down, the militias began their killing spree, based on lists of people to be assassinated, which had been prepared in advance. It is unlikely that they would have been able to get organized so quickly unless they knew about the operation ahead of time. Immediately following the attack, the militias murdered the civilian population of the area in which the attack took place. We can assume that this was done to ensure there would be no eye-witnesses. The Presidential Guard prevented U.N. forces from reaching the scene. Colonel Bagosora, the extremist leader who had gone on vacation on March 30, suddenly returned to the capital on April 4, just two days before the attack. On April 3, 1994, a RTLMC broadcast announced that "something minor was about to take place."6
Genocide
73
20/09/2012 10:33:51
The March 1994 issue of the racist monthly magazine Kangura denonced President Habyarimana as a "collaborator" with the Tutsis. If we accept the last hypothesis, the question still remains: why did the Hutu extremists kill their respected president? The answer to this question is found in their anger at the fact that he yielded to pressure, signed the Arusha Accords, and, at the summit meeting, agreed to the establishment of the transitional broad based government. Despite his extremist opinions, Hutu extremist leaders expected that he would refuse to lend a hand to the "final solution" they had formulated. It is quite possible that they believed that accusing the Tutsis of the president's murder would mobilize all the Hutus for the extermination, and that the seemingly 'spontaneous' reaction would serve as an effective cover for what was actually a meticulously planned genocide.7 Immediately following the downing of Habyarimana's plane, reserve force colonels Thoneste Bagosora and Pierre-Celestin Rwagafilita (who were suspected of shooting down the plane) seized control of the political scene by ensuring that all moderate opposition ministers were assassinated, including the prime minister and foreign minister, who had initiated the Arusha Accords. After failing to persuade the army to seize control of the government, the two colonels established a Committee of Public Safety (Comit de Salut Public), which appointed an all Hutu Power government. The government consisted of the MRND(D), the MDR, the PL, the PSD, and the PDC. Pediatrician and former National Development Council President Theodore Sindikubwabo of the MRND(D) was installed as president, and Jean Kambanda of the Hutu Power faction of the MDR was appointed prime minister. However, the strong man behind the scenes remained Colonel Bagosora. For an unknown reason, the U.N. and the international community saw no reason to deny diplomatic recognition to the new radically racist government, which immediately began working to implement its murderous policies. The commander of the army and a few of the more moderate prefects who refused to take part in the "final solution" were immediately removed to ensure that the security-government system would be able to work unhindered toward fulfilling the 'vision.' Broadcasts of the RTLMC
74
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
left no room for doubt regarding the nature of this vision. Over and over again, the broadcasts encouraged the killing, with declarations such as "you have not yet caught all our enemies some are still alive," and "the graves are still not full keep up the good work until they are all filled up."8
Hutu Tutsi Rwanda Burundi / Melissa Osbourne9

In the land of our ancestors where Lucy10 roamed where now we send our guns and our guilty planes of useless food In a place where we stuff our thoughts and feelings so we can paint someone else so very black Can you see the soldier boys running in the streets? Can you hear the children crying? Do you know the dead and dying all about? In this shadow world is also grace and beauty In this shadow land is a distant cry to be free In this darkest night is the warmth of a fire long forgotten Cradle of civilization of man and womankind.
The Perpetrators
Who were the killers in Ntarama? Units of the Presidential Guard came from Kigali. The Interahamwe were brought in from neighboring communes. Youth who had been trained in selfdefense units after the civil war began provided the local trained force. But the truth is that everybody participated, at least all men.
Genocide
75
20/09/2012 10:33:51
And not only men, women, too: cheering their men, participating in auxiliary roles, like the second line in a street-to-street battle. When we captured Kigali, we thought we would face criminals in the state; instead, we faced a criminal population.
(An RPF Commander)
If the violence from below could not have spread without cultivation and direction from above, it is equally true that the conspiracy of the tiny fragment of gnocidaires could not have succeeded had it not found resonance from below.11 The killing of genocide is never sporadic it is always organized by the state, the government, and the ruling authorities. This was also the case in Rwanda. The killing was not perpetrated by a wild mob that lost control. The campaign of murder was well planned, well organized, and implemented in an efficient, systematic manner. It was led by political, military, administrative, economic, and intellectual elites. Prominent proponents, planners, and organizers of the genocide included: Prof. Ferdinand Nahimana, the historian who directed the campaign of incitement broadcast by the RTLMC. Colonel Theoneste Bagosora, the Rwandan Defense Ministry Cabinet director who became the most powerful figure on the scene after April 6, 1994. General Augustine Bizimana, who became defense minister after April 6, 1994, and who urged the army to join in the massacre. Major Aloys Ntabakuze, commander of the Rwandan military's ParaCommando Battalion Major Protais Mpiranya, commander of the Presidential Guard Battalion Joseph Nzirorera, Secretary General of the MRND(D) Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, leader of the CDR and commander of the Impuzamugambi Robert Kajuga, President of the Interahamwe
76
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
George Rutagbanda, vice-president of the Interahamwe Flicien Kabuga, a Rwandan businessman and bankroller of the RTLMC and the Interahamwe Pascal Musabe, a banker and commander in the Interahamwe Members of le clan de Madame or le clan des Beaux-Freres (Mme Habyarimana and her brothers) Although the genocide was planned and organized by only a few dozen members of the elite, these key individuals controlled organizations with tens of thousands of members. The institutional and organizational network that together formed the extermination apparatus was directed by the following groups: The militias of the MRND(D) and the CDR (the Interahamwe and the Impuzamugambi respectively) The Presidential Guard, which consisted solely of northern Hutus The Rwandan Gendarmerie (regional police) The Rwandan Armed Forces (FAR), which consisted of 40,000 soldiers, did not take part in the beginning of the genocide but joined in the killing on April 8, 1994, when the RPF resumed fighting. Government bureaucrats Prefects, sub-prefects, commune mayors, local council members, and the apparatuses at their disposal. However, not all extremist Hutu leaders affiliated with Hutu Power were in agreement with the "final solution." President Habyarimana also belonged to the extremist faction of the Hutus but was apparently unwilling to support the genocide. We can assume that his murder on April 6, 1994 was aimed at clearing the way for a pro-genocide leadership. Although the genocide was organized from above, the leaders engaged in the undertaking succeeded in mobilizing the masses of farmers, the hungry, and the unemployed. In this way, the genocide in Rwanda, in contrast to other genocides such as the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide, was ultimately a case of one people murdering another people. Indeed, the
Genocide
77
20/09/2012 10:33:51
number of suspected murders still being held in Rwandan jails in 2001 stood at 130,000. In addition, tens of thousands of Hutu refugees from Burundi were also extremely active in the killings in Rwanda, as an act of revenge against the Tutsi regime in their country. As we have seen, the Hutu churches and priests also took part in the killing. Moreover, on April 10, 1994, when the genocide was at its height, the bishops, who had been affiliated with the Hutu state for many years, declared their support for the new government. Not only did they fail to condemn the events, but they actually called upon their flock to follow the government's instructions. This provided the killings with religious and moral legitimacy in the eyes of the politicians, the bureaucrats, the propagandists, the officers, and the rank and file murderers. Some church officials even volunteered to help the government explain its policy before European countries, the United States, and the United Nations. On August 2, 1994, 28 priests wrote a letter to the Pope categorically denying that an act of genocide had taken place. As we have seen, many priests turned over religious Tutsis who had sought refuge in the church, and some even actively participated in the killing. The Protestant churches behaved similarly. Only a handful of lower level priests actually opposed the atrocities, a decision for which they paid with their lives. The medium strata of killers also included a large number of doctors and teachers. Astonishingly, human rights activists took part in the killing as well. For example, Innocent Mazimpaka - chairman of the League for the Promotion of Human Rights in Rwanda (Ligue Rwandaise pour la Promotion et la Defense des Droits de l'Homme, or LIPREDHOR) was involved, along with his brother, in the murder of Tutsis in the commune of Gatare. Of the commune's 12,263 Tutsis, only 21 survived.12 The murderers were not all motivated by the same factors. Many in the leadership acted out of a belief in a racist ideology that maintained that a "final solution" to the "Tutsi problem" was a necessity. Many others were pushed over the edge by their personal hatred for the Tutsis. Greed also played an important role in mobilizing both the elite and the masses. For the elite, the killing offered a way to acquire homes, cars, computers, and other property of the more affluent Tutsis. The farmers were guaranteed the
78
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
agricultural crops, livestock, and furniture of their Tutsi neighbors, who were taken to slaughter. From their part, a bit of food and alcohol was all it took to entice the hungry proletariat. The looting of property was therefore an important means of mobilizing the general public for the undertaking, and was carried out with the approval of the authorities. Some were also motivated by fear of the RPF, as a result of the official propaganda's stories about the "discovery" of Tutsi plans to kill the Hutus and steal their property. Others were drawn into the killing by their obedience to the civil authorities who had issued the directives to kill, including mayors, police chiefs, party leaders, teachers, and local priests. And as always, there were many who joined the killing simply because of their mob mentality.
The Victims
The enemy is known, And the enemy is the Tutsi.13 The genocide was carried out in two phases. During the first phase (April 6-11, 1994), the killing was selective and resulted in tens of thousands of deaths, including a majority of Tutsis and a minority of Hutus. The second phase was pure genocide, and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Tutsis. The first phase also involved the execution of moderate Hutus, to ensure that they would not serve as obstacles to the "final solution." Among others, those killed included former Prime Minister Agathe Uwilingiyamana (along with her entire family); former Foreign Minister Boniface Ngulinzira; Landwald Ndasingwa, leader of the democratic faction of the PL; Joseph Kavarunganda, President of the Rwandan Constitutional Court. Faustin Twagiramungu managed to escape before the murderers reached his home. During the same phase, thousands of Hutu intellectuals, journalists, human rights activists, lawyers, and priests associated with the opposition were murdered, all in accordance with lists that had already been prepared by April 6. For example, in Butare, the killers murdered almost all the professors and students of the local university, which consisted of a moderate Hutu majority and a Tutsi minority. Most of the Hutus killed were from the south and the center of the country and belonged to the democratic factions of
Genocide
79
20/09/2012 10:33:51
the MDR, the PL, the PSD, and the PDC. At the same time, thousands of Tutsis were also killed, including leaders, academics, the wealthy, and those known to support the RPF. After the ground was prepared during the first phase, the second phase began: the "final solution" to the "Tutsi problem." During this phase, some 800,000 Tutsis were killed (85% of the Tutsis in the country, which accounted for 10% of the population of Rwanda). Women, children, and babies were killed based on the justification that women needed to be killed because they bear children, and children needed to be killed because they would grow up to be the adult Tutsis of tomorrow. RTLMC broadcasts repeatedly called on listeners to not repeat the 'mistake' of the 1960s, when Tutsi babies were permitted to leave the country, only to return in the 1990s as commanders of the RPF. Most of the Tutsi were "small Tutsis" poor villagers who, as opposed to the Tutsis in the cities, did not belong to the socioeconomic elite and whose lifestyle was actually more similar to that of Hutus. Also murdered were Tutsi men with Hutu wives (as in such marriages the father was believed to determine the ethnicity of the children) and Tutsi women with Hutu husbands (in some cases, such men killed their wives themselves). Sometimes, Hutu men were murdered as punishment for marrying a Tutsi wife. The children of mixed marriages were also killed children of Tutsi fathers due to their Tutsi ethnicity, and children of Tutsi mothers in order to ensure that they would not avenge their mothers' murder in the future. The Hutu song quoted at the beginning of this chapter provides a good indication of the general atmosphere during the critical days of the genocide. It was not always easy to identify Tutsis, as they lived in the same villages and the same neighborhoods as Hutus. Identification was usually based on characteristic Tutsi physical traits such as tall body structure, a long straight nose, long fingers, and thin lips. In some cases, however, mistaken identification resulted in the death of Hutus just because their murderers mistook them for Tutsis, even though they could have also examined commune records or their identity cards, which indicated ethnicity. Some informed on their neighbors, making the murderers' work easier for them. Militiamen who could distinguish between Hutus and Tutsis were also located throughout the villages, and on every city street. The task of distinguishing between Hutus and Tutsis was made especially easy
80
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
in cities, where identification was sometimes based on dress alone. For example, well dressed people were typically identified as Tutsis and shot to death. General breakdown of victims of the two phases of the genocide.
Why? / Marie-Yolanda Ujeneza Ngulinzira14

Why did you die as if you loved no one? Why did you die as if no one loved you? What have they made of you? What have they made of us? You never harmed a soul, You shared so much love. And I am left with oceans of tears. All of a sudden, everything changed, They took you and left me, and later I grew. Your love is always here, but it is so far away. All its oceans have dried up. But when I again envision the day That I saw your face for the last time, The oceans roll back to me. Then we left, We tried to put together the pieces, But we will never be able to forgive. In the eyes of god, everything can be forgiven, I am certain. But how can we wipe away the hatred that refuses to disappear? How can we forget what shattered our lives? I think about it every day, everyday I suffer. Father! Oh how I wish you could see me growing up. Why? Why? Why?
Genocide
81
20/09/2012 10:33:51
The Method
Like all genocides, the genocide in Rwanda was planned and systematically implemented. It was not an unpreventable spontaneous outburst of primordial savage forces, and Rwanda was not a 'failed state' that had crumbled or deteriorated into anarchy. On the contrary, the totalitarian Rwandan regime was present everywhere and thoroughly prepared its representatives for the "final solution." A military planning team labored over detailed plans for the extermination of the "racial enemy." We also know that, at least in the first phase of the genocide, the authorities were provided with orderly lists of the individuals designated to be killed. It is hard to understand how the Tutsis did not sense what was happening, and this attests to the efficiency of the planning process and the high level of secrecy maintained. The killing apparatus operated in an organized and hierarchical manner. Orders were handed down from above; from the government to the army, the militias, and the gendarmerie; from command headquarters to units in the field; from the government to prefects; from prefects to sub-prefects and commune mayors; and from sub-prefects and commune mayors by means of popular meetings to the general public. Every echelon exerted constant pressure on the one beneath it to get the 'job' done, and the inciting radio broadcasts played an important role in creating the appropriate atmosphere.
As we have noted, communities in Rwanda have typically accepted the obligation of citizens to obey the authorities when being mobilized for public works, known as umuganda. Umuganda tended to include the paving of roads, the digging of wells, the construction of public buildings, and other such projects. Local government officials took advantage of this traditional practice in order to mobilize citizens for the killing as well. They summoned Hutus to meetings that included inflammatory speeches emphasizing the obligation to kill the "cockroaches" and the "collaborators." The meetings also involved ceremonies of song and dance, promises that looted property from bottles of beer to cattle would be distributed to the murderers, and intimidating threats against anyone who failed to take part in the undertaking.
Structure of the killing apparatus
82
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
The authorities also took care of all aspects of organization, such as the consolidation of victims' bodies in schools, hospitals, churches, and other public buildings; transportation; distribution of weapons; disposal of corpses; and distribution of looted property. Scholar Peter Uvin maintains that the mass mobilization for genocide in Rwanda succeeded because the order to kill was issued from above. This relieved the murderers from any moral hesitations they may have had by dehumanizing the victims who were referred to as "cockroaches," "feudalists," and "murderers" and by portraying the killing as a routine action. The complex system accustomed the general public to regard the killing as neutral and natural. In any case, when genocide is in the process of quickly and continuously unfolding in an organized manner, there is rarely time to ask questions.15 In summary, the system that so efficiently facilitated the work of the killing apparatus in Rwanda was based primarily on the following elements: Dehumanization of the enemy Inciting radio broadcasts Orders issued from above Mass mobilization Guaranteed rewards Intimidation The system was cruel and brutal. Neighbors murdered neighbors. Store owners murdered customers, and vice-versa. Hutu teachers turned over their Tutsi students to the militias or killed them themselves. The murderers were not even deterred from killing people in churches or in hospitals. Tutsi priests, doctors, and nurses were killed without hesitation, along with Tutsi patients and the wounded. Hutu women who were married to Tutsi husbands were forced to kill their children, because they were considered to be Tutsi. Many Tutsi women were raped before being killed, and the bodies of victims were often defiled in horrifying ways. As we have noted, Hutus who refused to take part in the killing were also murdered.
Genocide
83
20/09/2012 10:33:51
During the killings, official Rwandan propaganda painted a distorted and wholly false picture of the events. The propagandists speaking on the radio and at public meetings portrayed the Hutus as victims acting out of selfdefense. The Tutsis, in contrast, were depicted as subversives plotting to kill the Hutu, and the RPF was portrayed as planning to reestablish the kingdom, feudalism, and slavery. All the Hutus were doing, they maintained, was frustrating the Tutsi conspiracy that aimed at turning back the clock to the period preceding the "social revolution." The systematic killing of the Tutsis was portrayed as a product of the 'spontaneous anger' of the masses, who were mourning their beloved slain president. In fact, the events were not even referred to as murders, but rather as "war" and "battles," in order to convince the Hutus themselves that they were fighting in self defense, and in order to hide from the world what was actually going on in Rwanda.
The Media
The grave is only half full. Who will help us fill it? We will not repeat the mistake of 1959. The children must be killed too. By May 5, the country must be completely cleansed of Tutsis.
From a RTLMC broadcast, April 199416
As we have seen, the media in general, and radio in particular, played a pivotal role in the genocide. Most homes in Rwanda had a radio receiver and virtually the entire population heard radio broadcasts. Until April 1993, Radio Rwanda, with its periodic anti-Tutsi incitement, was the only radio station in the country. In March 1992, the station disseminated the rumor that the Tutsis were planning to kill Hutu leaders in the city of Bugesera. As a result of the broadcast, the Interahamwe instigated anti-Tutsi pogroms in which 300 Tutsis were killed. In April 1992, the opposition took control over the radio station, which subsequently ceased to serve as a mouthpiece for Hutu extremists. As a result, the racist radio station RTLMC, remembered by survivors of the genocide as "Radio Death," was established in April 1993. This station played a massive role in service of the genocide.
84
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:51
The RTLMC, which began broadcasting immediately following the signing of the Arusha Accords in August 1993, was run by members of the establishment. The station's steering committee included the son-inlaw and brother-in-law of President Habyarimana, government ministers, the governor of the National Bank of Rwanda, the secretary general of the MRND(D), representatives of the CDR, and the vice-president of the Interahamwe. The editor in chief was also the editor of the MRND(D)'s magazine and most of the journalists were affiliated with the CDR. Key personnel at the radio station included history professor Ferdinand Nahimana, mentioned above, and linguistics professor Lon Mugesera. All the equipment used by the station was owned by the government, which provided it with different frequencies. The station was casual and light in genre, and broadcasted in Kinyarwanda (unlike Radio Rwanda, which broadcasted in French), including slang, crude jokes, and an abundance of popular music. As a result, masses of Rwandans listened to it eagerly. The content of the broadcasts was brutally racist: Tutsis were portrayed as domineering foreigners, traitors, thieves, and murderers accused of taking control of Rwanda's wealth, the education system, churches, and aid organizations. They were also portrayed as aspiring to reestablish the "Nilo-Ethiopian feudal dictatorship." The station repeatedly called on listeners to kill, uproot, and cleanse. It also broadcasted lists of names of opposition members to be assassinated and directed the public to their places of hiding. In the course of the genocide, RTLMC developed its own glossary of terms which contained chilling metaphors for the killing that was underway.17 "The big job" = genocide "Uprooting trees" = genocide "Hurricane" = genocide "Cleaning the forest" = slaughtering the men "Pulling weeds out by the roots" = killing women and children The print media also played a role in preparing the ground for genocide. With a literacy rate of 50%, Rwanda was a relatively educated country.
Genocide
85
20/09/2012 10:33:51
Most daily newspapers, weeklies, and monthly magazines were affiliated with the racist Hutu establishment, and the monthly magazine Kangura was especially vicious in its anti-Tutsi content. It began inciting readers against the "cockroaches" as early as October 1990, and was known for its hate inspiring caricatures. The article excerpt presented below, which appeared in March 1993, is typical of Kangura content and style.18 We began by saying that a cockroach cannot give birth to a butterfly. It is true. A cockroach gives birth to another cockroach... The history of Rwanda shows us clearly that a Tutsi stays always exactly the same, that he has never changed. The malice, the evil are just as we knew them in the history of our country. We are not wrong in saying that a cockroach gives birth to another cockroach. Who could tell the difference between the inyenzi who attacked in October 1990 and those of the 1960s. They are all linked... their evilness is the same. The unspeakable crimes of the Inyenzi of todayrecall those of their elders: killing, pillaging, raping girls and women, etc. In December 1990, Kangura published the "Ten Commandments of the Hutu" which articulated the following main principles:19 [] any Hutu is a traitor who: marries a Tutsi woman; makes a Tutsi woman a concubine; makes a Tutsi woman his secretary or protg. trategic [] posts must be confined to Hutu. The Rwandan army forces must be exclusively Hutu. Hutu must cease to have pity on the Tutsi. Never before in the history of genocide had the media played as important a role as it did in the genocide in Rwanda. Radio broadcasts and print journalism clearly conveyed to the public the message that the "job" was being done with the approval of the authorities. The incitement from above, transmitted through all the communication media, systematically prepared the ground for the final solution. It is safe to assume that without the inspiration of the media, the hatred from below would not have resulted in genocide, and certainly not of such a scale.
86
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:52
Evidence from the Scene of the Murder20

Massacre at Kansi In the commune of Nyaruhengeri also, local leaders decided that April 18 was the time to begin large-scale killing. Until that day, Hutu and Tutsi had worked together at road blocks and on patrols. Near the church of Kansi, Tutsi teachers had at first been afraid to take their places at the barrier and did so only after Hutu had promised that they would not harm them. Thousands of people had sought shelter in the church and adjacent buildings after the burgomaster, Charles Kabeza, had refused to let displaced persons come to the communal offices. Saying he had been ordered not to allow them to gather at the offices, he had put a barrier in place to keep them at a distance. The parish priests had sought without success to get the Red Cross to provide food for the displaced, who were also lacking water.
In the afternoon of April 18, retired soldiers or military men in civilian dress came to goad Hutu into attacking Tutsi at the barrier near the church. At first the Hutu hesitated, but then they began to throw stones at the Tutsi, who threw stones back. That night, armed men attacked the church complex and killed some Tutsi. The next morning workers warned the priests, who had spent the night in the rafters of the church, that a major attack would come that night. The priests, who had not been able to get even food for the displaced despaired of getting any protection for them. They advised the crowd to flee, but leaders of the group asked " lee to where?"Many were already weakened by lack of F food and water. Unable to save the thousands of people, one of the priests gave them absolution and left. As he passed behind the church, he was caught by an assailant who put his machete to the priest's neck and warned him to stay clear of the killing that was going to take place. That afternoon assailants killed the director of the school outside the convent of the Bernadine sisters. Shortly after, former soldiers and communal councilors led thousands of armed men in attacking the church and school buildings, beginning with grenades and finishing with machetes. In a few hours of intense
Genocide
87
20/09/2012 10:33:52
slaughter, they killed between 10,000 and 10,500 persons. During the attack leaders used plastic whistles to direct the activities of the killers. Among the killers were Burundian refugees who had been housed at the Nyange camp not far from the church.
88
Genocide
20/09/2012 10:33:52
Notes
1 The Buganda people constitute the largest and best educated ethnic group in Uganda. For hundreds of years, they have maintained the traditional kingdom of Buganda, which, although still in existence today, currently does not rule Uganda. A. Des Forges (2000), op. cit., p. 693. G. Prunier (1995), op. cit., p. 138. Ibid., pp. 171-172. Ibid., p. 222. Ibid., p. 222. For further analysis of possible explanations for the murder, see A. Des Forges (2000), op. cit., pp. 181-185. G. Prenier (1995), op. cit., p. 224. http://www.lyricalworks.com/poetry/hutututsi.htm
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 Lucy was the name given to one of the oldest ancient human skeletons ever found in Africa, if not the oldest. 11 M. Mamdani (2001), op. cit., pp. 6-7. 12 Ibid., p. 228. 13 A. Des Forges, "The Ideology of Genocide," Issue: A Journal of Opinion 23(2), p. 203. 14 Marie-Yolanda Ujeneza Ngulinzira, "Why?" 15 P. Uvin (1998), op. cit. 16 A. Destexhe (1995) Rwanda and Genocide in the Twentieth Century (New York: New York University Press), pp. viii, 32; F. Chalk (2000) "Hate Radio in Rwanda," in H. Adelman and A. Suhrke, The Path of a Genocide The Rwanda Crisis from Uganda to Zaire (New Brunswick: Transaction). 17 H.M. Hintjens (1999) "Explaining the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda," Journal of Modern African Studies 37(2) pp. 268-269, 273. 18 A. Des Forges (1995), op. cit., pp. 73-74. 19 H.M. Hintjens (1999), op. cit., p. 265 20 The excerpts in this section represent only a small portion of the extensive documentation contained in A. Des Forges (2000), op. cit. They are based on interviews conducted by a Human Rights Watch team with murderers, survivors, and bystanders (pp. 452-454; 472487; 491-494).
Genocide
89
20/09/2012 10:33:52
Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4 Volume 5 Volume 6 Volume 7 Volume 8 Volume 9 Volume 10 Volume 11 Volume 12
Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies Between Racism and Genocide in the Modern Era Genocide in the "Land of the Free": The Indians of North America, 1776-1890 Conflictual Encounter: The Destruction of the Indian Peoples of Spanish America The Armenian Genocide: Forgetting and Denial Hurban: The Annihilation of the Jews by Nazi Germany Nazi Germany and the Gypsies Rwanda 1994: Genocide in the "Land of a Thousand Hills" Tibet 1950-2000: Destroying a Civilization Political and Ethnic Cleansing in the Soviet Union, 1918-1953 "And You Shall Destroy the Evil Inside of You": We are the Human Beings who Commit Holocaust and Genocide So That I wouldn't be among the Silent
THE OPEN UNIVERSITY OF ISRAEL 1 University Road, P.O.Box 808, Raanana 43537, Israel Tel. 972-9-7781811, Fax 972-9-7780664 http://www-e.openu.ac.il/
20/09/2012 10:33:55

Genocide - Sample Chapters

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Genocide - Sample Chapters

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

10664

ir Auron the Silent Ya

So Silent e Among the B

G he tnWo lcni d e d 't T a I ou

Editor: Yair Auron

The Open Un iversity of Isr ael

From the General Introduction, by Yair Auron

Implementation of the U.N. Convention

Perpetrators, Victims, and the "Third Party"

Reflections on Genocide Education around the World

On the Universal Value of Human Life

Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies

Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects in Genocide Studies

Chapter 1: Genocide: The Phenomenon and the Definition

Genocide as a Part of Human History

The Challenges of Defining Genocide

Raphael Lemkin: Originator of the Term Genocide

Conflictual Encounter: The Destruction of the Indian Peoples of Spanish America

Chapter 5: The War: A Strategy of Cruelty and Destruction

Conquest: A Ritual of Extreme Violence

Mass Killings: A Method of Instilling Terror

The Routine of Violence: The Conquest of Mexico and Peru

The Extermination of Culture

Rwanda 1994: Genocide in the "Land of a Thousand Hills"

Rwanda 1994: Genocide in the "Land of a Thousand Hills"

Chapter 2: The Road to Genocide (1990-1994) The Opposition Parties

Establishment of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF)

The Response of the Government Repression and Pogroms

The Arusha Accords

From Summit Meeting to Genocide

Hutu Tutsi Rwanda Burundi / Melissa Osbourne9

Why? / Marie-Yolanda Ujeneza Ngulinzira14

Structure of the killing apparatus

Evidence from the Scene of the Murder20

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen