Content deleted Content added
Indy beetle (talk | contribs) |
Indy beetle (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 56:
Lemarchand wrote that it was "not accidental" that most of the killings took place in Gikongoro, as it was a base of Tutsi political opposition to the government.{{sfn|Lemarchand|1970|p=224}} He noted that in October 1961 the Belgian Resident in Rwanda had predicted that a major UNAR attack on the country would provoke the government into committing massive reprisals against Tutsis, and the resident stated that the Tutsi population was generally conscious of this. Lemarchand concluded that the leaders behind the invasion were fanatical in their cause to restore UNAR and the monarchy to power and thus blind to the possible outcomes of their actions.{{sfn|Lemarchand|1970|pp=216–217}} According to academic Emmanuel Viret, the Gikongoro massacres "could only assume the scale they did because of the mobilization of the peasantry".<ref name= emmanuel/> Catholic historian J. J. Carney questioned the validity of the supposed list of the Inyenzi's desired ministers found on the dead Congolese, particularly its inclusion of domestic UNAR and RADER leaders, writing, "It seems more likely that PARMEHUTU fabricated the document and used it as a pretext to eliminate any remaining political rivals...there was no love lost between UNAR exiles and internal UNAR leaders...RADER leaders like Bwanakweli and Ndazaro never developed close relations with their rivals in UNAR."{{sfn|Carney|2014|pp=177–178}} Carney also criticised the response of Rwanda's Catholic leaders to the violence, writing "the bishops condemned the violence but did not hold anyone responsible for it." He conceded, "In fairness, the bishops did critique government detentions of the political opposition...[but] seemed to give the benefit of the doubt to the government."{{sfn|Carney|2014|pp=179–180}} Melvern compared the 1963 reprisals to the 1994 [[Rwandan genocide]] against Tutsis, writing "The planning and the methods used, thirty years apart, are similar."{{sfn|Melvern|2000|p=17}}
There is disagreement over whether the reprisals and killings of Tutsis constituted genocide.{{sfn|Stapleton|2017|p=41}} Lemarchand wrote "it would be...misleading to speak of genocide."{{sfn|Lemarchand|1970|p=224}} According to political scientist Deborah Mayersen, "Despite the many risk factors for genocide...the crisis abated relatively quickly."{{sfn|Rosenberg et al.|2016|p=287}} Melvern wrote that "the accusation of genocide against the Kayibanda regime was unproven."{{sfn|Melvern|2000|p=19}} She reasoned that it was "widely accepted" that the killings occurred due to the "extreme interpretation" by local officials of their mandate to organise self-defence groups and noted that the 6,000 Tutsis who fled to Uganda did so unhindered by the government.{{sfn|Melvern|2000|p=19}} Carney characterised the reprisals as a "genocidal event".<ref name= carney>{{cite web | url = https://blog.oup.com/2014/04/ethnic-violence-rwanda/ | title = A brief history of ethnic violence in Rwanda and Africa’s Great Lakes region | last = Carney | first = J. J. | date = 7 April 2014| website = OUPBlog| publisher = Oxford University Press| access-date = 6 June 2021|ref=no}}</ref> Historian Timothy J. Stapleton wrote, "In retrospect, the massacres of Tutsi in 1963–1964 would seem to correspond to the international legal definition of genocide; they were intentional and aimed at the extermination of at least part of a group defined along racial lines."{{sfn|Stapleton|2017|p=41}}
== Notes ==
| |||