How Is UNDP Helping Rwanda Build A Democratic Society?

We read on the website of UNDP Rwanda:

UNDP Programs in Rwanda support the work of the Government in finding and implementing solutions in the following two focus areas:

• Building a democratic society
• Fighting poverty and protecting the environment

UNDP Rwanda country director writes today how Rwanda is a lesson for others in fighting poverty:

• one cow per family policy 
•  annual poverty reduction rate of 2.4 percent could put Rwanda in the company of Asian Tiger

What programs, if any, does UNDP support which are focused on building a democratic society? Why don't we read anything about those programs?

The history of the American revolution teaches us that taxation and representation are linked. How is the upcoming taxreform in Rwanda discussed in the media? What are it's implications for Rwandan citizens? February 23d UDF-Inkingi released a document on embezzlement of public funds in 2009 and 2010. Maybe UDF-Inkingi should also discuss the upcoming taxreform, evaluate UNDP and IMF programs. Sofar the criticism of the Rwandan opposition has mostly been directed at the Rwandan government. It might be more effective to just quit discussing Rwanda's current regime and start discussing IMF and UNDP policies and public statements.

Was The US Founded On Enlightenment Principles?

A short phrase in the recent blogpost Ameritopia Lays Out the Logic Behind Mark Levin’s Rants by top blogger James D. Best has caught my attention:

"The thesis of Ameritopia is that the United States was founded on Enlightenment principles, and those principles made America exceptional. He believes that this exceptionalism is the basis of the American Dream and made us a beacon of liberty for the world. Unfortunately, Levin also believes those principles have been severely compromised and we have traveled a long way down the utopian path."

I don't believe this thesis to be uncontroversial. If Levin had written this at the end of the 19th century, Abraham Kuyper would probably have turned it into ground meat in his newspaper the Standard. A quick look at wikipedia gives us insight in the complexity of the background of the American revolution. Mark Levin leaves out essential elements of this revolution. For example, Jim DeMint's recent book "the great American Awakening",  the most talked-about book of the summer of 2011, refers to the role of the awakenings in Evangelical America during the 18th century and it's impact on the American revolution. Billy Hallowell notes in his blogpost Is the American Tea Party A Spiritual Movement?:

The connection between one of America’s most well-known political movements and the Christian faith is overtly made in DeMint’s words:

“(The Tea Party) is as much a spiritual awakening as a political awakening. The concern about our country…has awakened the faith of many people.”

In “The Great American Awakening,” DeMint goes as far as to tie concern over the government’s size and scope to religion. He writes:

“Big government is a religious issue. History shows in nations where there is a big government, there is a little God. When people are dependent on government, they are less dependent on God, and their spiritual fervor fades. Socialism and secularism go hand in hand, as do faith and freedom.”

 Mark Levin's regular rants against Ron Paul and his supporters might well be a strategy to avoid taking on the much stronger ideological ennemy: Jim DeMint.

A related question is Whats the relationship between the Enlightenment and the French Revolution? Three helpfull links:

• The French Revolution: Ideas and Ideologies
• The Influence of the Enlightenment on the French Revolution
• ASSIGNMENT THREE: Feb. 29: Enlightenment, French revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte

Ron Paul referred to Virginia's role in America's Revolution in his speech february 28th in Springfield Virginia. The ongoing fight against NDAA in Virginia and legislation limiting free speech #HR347 that just passed the house, as explained by John Whitehead here, should be mentioned here too. The ideological battle raging inside Evangelical America, as explained by John Whitehead in this interview, is directly linked to this discussion. Some good articles, blogposts and video's on the role of Patrick Henry , also from Virginia, in this revolution:

• Book Review – Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots
• Thomas S Kidd's lecture on Patrick Henry and his contest viewed with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison over the meaning of religious liberty in revolutionary Virginia
• Interview with Thomas S. Kidd on Patrick Henry

Munyenyezi Case: To A Carpenter Everything Looks Like A Nail

The Concord Monitor Coverage of the Munyenyezi trial went into high gear february 21 with the article "complex trial set to begin". An article that mischaracterized the outcome of the Lazare Kobagaya trial which, for propaganda reasons, was dubbed "the first genocide trial in the US". A grave error which was repeated in the following article february 23 "jury chosen for genocide case"!

Contrary to claims by Lynn Tuohy, Lazare Kobagaya's trial did not end in a "hung jury" and did not "locked on whether he played a role in the genocide". (Lynn Tuohy wrote the AP press release that messed up the facts concerning the outcome of the landmark ruling in the Lazare Kobagaya trial) . Lazare Kobagaya was acquitted of having played any role in the genocide whatsoever.

Ann Garrison, journalist in San Francisco, asked Kobagaya's lawyer Kurt Kerns august 27 2011 "What do you think the international implications of this case are?", his answer was:

"Well, I think maybe before you spend a couple of million dollars trying to prosecute someone, you really need to do a factual investigation. If the allegations are coming out of a country that has so many lies being perpetrated out of it, like Rwanda, you really need to do an independent investigation to see if you're really getting a true and accurate investigation or if you're really just getting a politically motivated accusation. So often now, at least right now in Rwanda, so many of the accusations coming out of that country are sadly, politically based."

Dan Gorenstein was in court the first day of the Munyenyezi trial in Concord New Hampshire february 23 2012 and confirms that this case is "about lies, both sides are accusing the other of lying". According to Concord Monitor's staffer Maddie Hanna, Munyenyezi's attorneys stated february 23, the first day of trial:

"Munyenyezi, who is charged with lying on immigration papers about the role she played in the 1994 genocide, took no part in the violence. Witnesses who claim otherwise are lying - either for self-gain or because of pressure exerted by the Rwandan government. They come from a culture where the government . . . has used the genocide as a tool of oppression,"

Today's blogpost on the Munyenyezi trial by Sarah E. Brown, a researcher of women genocide perpetrators in Rwanda and Congo is a good illustration of the proverb:

"to a carpenter everything in the world looks like a nail"

On twitter yesterday she allready claimed the defense avoided the word "genocide" in it's opening remarks:

Shameful - #Munyenyezi defense team avoids the word #Genocide. In opening remarks, used words like "situation" "war" and "RPF invasion"...

An easily verifiable falsehood. The defense used the word genocide several times in it's opening remarks, as I have demonstrated above. Her attempt to twist the facts continues today claiming:

"Munyenyezi’s wayward defense strategy mistakenly hinges on her gender and her status as a mother to prove her innocence."

This again is incorrect. The case, as Dan Gorenstein and Maddie Hanna have reported (see above), hinges on the credibility of the witnesses. In light of what we learned from the Kobagaya case extreme caution is warranted.

But I would add one other element: motive. As pointed out at the top, the Lazare Kobagaya case was used in the crucial fase of Paul Kagame's RPF PR effort the day he arrived at the Tribeca festival in New York. Paul Kagame's PR directed at a US audience was an essential element in his election campaign strategy.

Beatrice Munyenyezi was arrested june 25 2010, a week after the assassination attempt in South Africa on General Kayumba Nyamwasa's life and one day after the assassination of Rwandan journalist Jean-Léonard Rugambage in Kigali. In light of what we now know (through the Kobagaya case) the significance of the timing of Munyenyezi's arrest june 25 2010 should not be overlooked.

Predatory Nation-Building In Africa

What is the relationship between nation- and state-building? Originally, nation-building referred to the efforts of newly-independent nations, notably the nations of Africa to:

"reshape colonial territories that had been carved out by colonial powers without regard to ethnic or other boundaries. "

I got a valuable reacton to my blogpost "Does Africa Need Nation Builders?" focusing on the difference between nation and state:

" nation /= state. Author shouldn't blur them. And the dilemma of the state is far more complex than author seems to suggest."

I have to admit, when I wrote my blogpost, I myself had a similar gut feeling. As Wikipedia writes:

"Traditionally there has been some confusion between the use of the term nation-building and that of state-building (the terms are sometimes used interchangeably in North America). Both have fairly narrow and different definitions in political science, the former referring to national identity, the latter to the institutions of the state."

Apparently there is a lot of confusion surrounding the terminology. The term state-building was first used in connection to the creation of states in Western Europe and focused on the power enforcement of state in society(Charles Tilly, 1975 // a controversial scholar if you ask me) described advantages of state building in Europe as follows:

"State building provided for the emergence of specialized personnel, control over consolidated territory, loyalty, and durability, permanent institutions with a centralized and autonomous state that held the monopoly of violence over a given population".

There are two main theoretical approaches to definitions of state-building:

• Exogenous school: state-building is seen by some theorists as an activity undertaken by external actors (foreign countries) attempting to build, or re-build, the institutions of a weaker, post-conflict or failing state 
•  The endogenous school believes that countries cannot do state-building outside their own borders, they can only influence, support or hinder such processes.

The "exogenous" school influenced the UN report:“A more secure world: Our shared responsibility” Report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change A/59/565, or the Rand Corporations's Beginners Guide to Nation Building (see a discussion of nation building vs state-building.

To understand what the "endogenous" school is about read the he British Government's Department for International Development' 2008 Working Paper on state-building that helped bring together new thinking in this field. Apparently there is a "Whaites model" to state building.

The second school obviously accuses the first school of "having overtones of imperialism and colonialism". But I have to confess I find the second school pretty repulsive as well when I read phrases like this:

 "national leadership and vision is centrally important".

And have you ever heard of the predatory theory to state-building? Charles Tilly:

" Out of these four activities, war making was the main stimulus to increasing the level of taxation, thus increasing the capacity of the state to extract resources."

Jeffrey I. Herbst subsequently proposed allowing failed states to dissolve or engage in war to re-create the process endured by European countries. What a genius!

Ron Paul On Quran Burning & Iran's Right To Enrich Uranium

Ron Paul was in DC yesterday to again emphasize his views on monetary and foreign policy in Congress. The issue of Iran's nuclear program was also discussed in an interview yesterday with Konstantin Kosten – associate fellow at the DGAP and Desk Officer for Iran at Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation in Berlin who says:

"It is actually in Iran’s interests but not in Iran’s rights to enrich uranium as you said following the NPT."

In response to Ron Paul's simple question wether Secretary of State agrees that Iran has the right to enrich, Hillary Clinton seems to give an indirect answer.

A friday article in NYT writes:

"Even as the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb. "

Does Africa Really Need Nation Builders?

Severine Autesserre's article in African Affairs "dangerous tales: dominant narratives and their unintended consequences" describes the three main narratives that dominate wel-meaning international efforts in Congo:

• primary cause of violence: illegal exploitation of mineral resources
• primary consequence: sexual abuse of women and girls
• central solution: extending state authority

Good observation:

"Interestingly, nobody I met challenged the emphasis on state building as the indispensable response to the ongoing conflict. There was no narrative emphasizing other modes of social organization beyond the state."

This state-building narrative was promoted by Michael Gerson (communitarian and speechwriter for Bush) after his visit to Kivu. It's also promoted by blogger Pascal Zachary in his recent article "Africa's Amazing rise and what it can teach the world".
Johnnie Carson links to this article by Pascal Zachary on his facebook page in which this former Wallstreet journal journalist claims that strong nation-states should be the next talk of the village among those who discuss Africa and development:

"In the next wave of creative thinking about development, the nation-state must return as a subject of conversation. African states need to take a stronger role in promoting general welfare even as they cannot return to the practices of the past that stifled individual initiative, robbed "surplus capital" from the enterprising, and reinforced social inequality, consigning women and children to the worst forms of abuse. Only strong nation-states, committed to fairness, can manage the new tensions brought on by wealth and insure that the old risk-averse agenda of African development -- obsessing over preventing further slippage into poverty rather than nakedly pursuing legitimate achievable gains -- becomes an artifact of history."

Amazing how he portrays this dominant state-building narrative that has been around for over a decade as some kind of creative new idea. As so often the proposed solution is more government and more social engineering while the more pressing question remains unanswered: "Can the African nation have peace and prosperity without freedom?" The short history of African states, the accidental borders and tribal diversity have contributed to a weak and superficial national identity and nation-state.

However, this perceived weakness of the African state could easily be seen as an advantage to work towards strong and peacefull crossborder cooperation and instead de-emphasize the nation-state. It's precisely the utopian nation-building projects by visionary liberators that have led to tensions in Africa (as Pascal Zachary himself claimed in his article on Sudan's split and Congo's Kivu).

The tribal tensions and the emergence of all kinds of rebel groups which in turn are used as pretext to perpetuate dictatorial rule, should instead be tackled through regional cooperation and free movement, not by further increasing the role of the state. Let's not reinvent the wheel. The history of Europe is an example, albeit imperfect, of why nation-building should not be high on Africa's priority list.

To paraphrase John F. Kennedy, let me ask you as I close, to lift your eyes beyond the narrative of state- and nationbuilding of today.

U.S. in Congo: Kabila's still their man

Congolese Police rounded up young men near opposition candidate
Étienne Tshisekedi's party headquarters on December 12, 2011,
two weeks after the polls.

The United States gives more money than any single nation to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, almost a billion dollars this year, primarily in military and security aid. Last fall, just before the October 28th election, the U.S. Embassy in the country's capital, Kinshasa, announced a $500,000 contribution of police equipment. On Thursday, the Carter Center, which monitored the election, released its second report on the election, which said that it had not established the legitimate authority of incumbent President Joseph Kabila and his party majority, both of which claimed victory

For more, see http://www.anngarrison.com/audio/us-in-congo-ongoing-support-for-kabila.

Africom's Buzzword Dictionary, LRA & Acholi

Africom commanders (&State Department officials) love using fashionable and smart sounding buzzwords and buzzphrases when they explain their involvement in fighting indegenous insurgencies in Africa:

• country ownership
• the United States is engaged to support, not lead, the effort.
• it is Africans who are best-suited to address African security matter
• Military efforts to capture the LRA constitute only one part of a broader strategy, and must be nested within a program of civilian programmatic efforts

To keep it simple, let's start with the basics:

"Researchers who have studied the LRA say the group’s ideology remains based on revenge against Uganda’s government for past abuses on northern ethnic Acholi people."

Both Phil Lancaster (who headed predecessor of MONUC in Congo) and Joel Barkan from the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington are very sceptical for several reasons:

• A main partner of the U.S. mission is long-time and increasingly autocratic Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni. (This worries Joel Barkan.)
• “Unless there is a healthy relationship and particularly long-term peace, security and development in Uganda, it seems that the pursuit of the LRA will ultimately fail,” (said Barkan).
• "He [State Department official Karl Wycoff ] doesn't know any more than anyone else what is going on inside the LRA... The important thing now is what Kony is actually doing and as far as anyone can tell, he is still in control and calling the tune the rest of us dance to."(Phil Lancaster:").

Dwyer Gunn, in an article dated 8 march 2009, adds some numbers to grasp the Acholi grudge and the emergence of the LRA:

"In 1983, 123,375 head of cattle resided in the Gulu and Amaru districts. By 2003, that number was down to 3,000. Amidst these abuses and the widespread looting of cattle and crops, opposition to the Museveni government eventually coalesced in the north in the form of the Lord’s Resistance Army."

In his article (22 december 2010) Todd David Whitmore describes Yoweri Museveni's strategy to topple Kampala January 1986. First of all we should note how it is identical to Paul Kagame's strategy toppling Kigali in 1994:

"if Museveni's objective was a united Uganda, he had the opportunity to realize the objective before he seized Kampala. Museveni did not overthrow Obote; rather Tito Lutwa Okello and his brother Bazilio Olara-Okello—both Acholis—did. After the coup, Tito became President, and it was he who tried to unify the country by extending offers of peace to the remaining rebel groups. The efforts led to the Nairobi Agreement between the Tito Okello government and the NRA in December 2005. Elijah Dickens Mushemeza writes, On assuming power in 1985, General Tito Okello Lutwa invited all fighting groups, including the NRA, to join together and form a united government in the spirit of reconciliation and nation building. The NRA did not respond, and this led to Tito Okello's Government seeking a negotiated political settlement with the NRA. This resulted in the Nairobi Peace Agreement (17 December 1985), detailing power sharing arrangements and the composition of the Military Council. All parties also agreed to a ceasefire within forty-eight hours including the UNLA and the NRA.2
Instead of pursuing a united Uganda, Museveni used the time granted by the Agreement to build up his own army, and a month later he seized the capitol. These are not the actions of a leader seeking to unite a country."

Todd David Whitmore adds three valuable observations concerning Museveni and the Acholis:

• Museveni, as we will see, is a theorist of social evolution and an advocate of modernization.
• The Acholi would be a drag on his new industrializing economy. As it turns out, he has developed that economy while leaving out northern Uganda—the poorest region in the country, with 42.6% of the population living on less than $1 a day
•  the contradictions built into Museveni's presumed nationalism are not dissimilar to the contradiction in earlier stages of United States political history between the claim that "all men are created equal" and the reality of the exclusion of African-Americans from participation in governance

Interesting definition of the term modernisation.

Further reading: february 26 2012 In northern Uganda, a difficult peace by Michael Deibert and february 28 2012 Uganda: Acholi people face second genocide with U.S. troops in country by Ann Garrison. An older article may 15 2009 Uganda's Genocidal President Eyes Kenya by Milton Allimadi gives background and some idea of the regional implications.

Unified French-US Sub-Saharan Strategy

In 2006 we read:

"The Great Lakes Centre for Strategic Studies (GLCSS) believes the French and US military build-up may be part of a unified Sub-Saharan strategy. Both countries currently cooperate in Djibouti in a resource sharing arrangement. In the last two years, the United States has aided the French-backed Chad government in the fight against Algerian Salafist guerrillas operating in Chad."

Chad and Libya are also related argues Bernard Lugand in his "Libyan insurection anniversary blogpost". In his last post Africom watcher Roger Pociask asks the question "Why does Africom minimize contact with South Africa?" with a nice map. Also noteworthy, as posted by Rorger february 22, to fight the LRA Africom troops now in four countries.  Yesterday Johnnie Carson posted another LRA Africom story on his website, apparently he thinks it's great.

Has Rwanda Restored An Independent Judiciary?

Dr. Wolfgang H. Thome  wrote february 24:

"Rwanda’s contributions to UN peace-keeping missions in Darfur and the long-term deployment of police contingents in Haiti have earned Rwanda the respect of fellow AU member countries. Rwanda was given provisional clearance to step into a two-year term, from January 2013 onwards, of the UN Security Council."

In a blogpost about this diplomatic success,  he writes:

 "Rwanda has restored an independent judiciary" 

Let's examine how true this statement really is. In july 2008 Alison des Forges wrote:

“We identified serious problems in such areas as judicial independence, the right to present a defense, and the right to equal access to justice for all. It’s still the case that defendants in Rwanda may be denied their right to a fair trial.”

July 27 2010 the Dutch representative at the ECHR writes (posted on RNW website september 27 2011):

"Rwanda has, “over the years (made) substantial and fundamental progress in furthering the rule of law’’. Since the mass killings of 1994, Rwanda has – through Dutch financial support – built new court houses and the “state-of-the-art-prison “Mpanga”, and has trained judges. Among the “most relevant developments’’ are the abolition of the death penalty and of life imprisonment in isolation." 

The judgment by the ECHR october 27 2011 in the extradition case case of Ahorugeze v Sweden  (reported on RNW website  november 7 2011) is noteworthy and a milestone in this regard. An ECHR press release, october 27 2011, reads :

 "Finally, the ICTR had decided, for the first time in June 2011, to transfer an indicted genocide suspect - Uwinkindi - for trial in Rwanda. It had found that the issues, on the basis of which it had refused to transfer genocide suspects to Rwanda in 2008, had been resolved to a degree which made it confident that the accused would receive a fair trial in Rwanda in line with internatonal human rights standards."

However, the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR) has, in two rulings last week, delayed the transfer of Genocide suspect Jean Uwinkindi to Rwanda, citing outstanding monitoring and logistical issues. As The New Times writes:

The ICTR Appeals Chamber on Thursday (february 23 2012) and yesterday (february 24 2012) made two separate rulings putting on hold the transfer of Uwinkindi to Rwanda until it was satisfied the monitoring mechanism the government has to put in place to ensure that he receives a fair trial.
According to the Tribunal's spokesman, Rolland Amoussouga, the Appeals chamber had made two decisions; one being not to consider the ICTR Prosecution's request to dismiss Uwinkindi's application to review the December 16 decision to refer him to Rwanda.
And the second was to look into the issues of the monitoring of the case as well as the availability of the resources required to effect the referral.
"In light of the precedence of the case and the competence of the Tribunal, it was decided that the transfer be suspended until such a time when the president of the tribunal is satisfied with the monitoring mechanisms in place," Amoussouga told The New Times by phone from Arusha. 

"Uwinkindi will be transferred to Rwanda but not before all these processes are reviewed and a monitoring committee is established".

These two rulings will no doubt impact future extradition to Rwanda from Europe, keep in mind what  Jurgen Schurr, legal officer with REDRESS, reports in his november 7 2011 article on the ECHR ruling in the Ahorugeze case:

"It is therefore important to bear in mind that the ECHR has decided solely on the case of Ahorugeze. Future cases, where suspects request the ECHR to review a positive extradition request may have a different outcome, including where judges are not convinced that Rwandan authorities have the capacity to bring extradited suspects to trial within a reasonable time."

The Rwandan prosecutor Martin Ngoga, who played an important role in spearheading the character-assassination campaign against Lazare Kobagaya and others, states in a reaction to being dismayed by further delay of the transfer:

"Rwanda feels as if it is being used as an "experimental piece" by the ICTR."We are uncomfortable with this development; the over-emphasis of monitoring and issues about funding. It calls for so much resilience for us to entertain it as a country.It is as if we are a piece of experimental sample. Nevertheless, we have come a long way and have braved much more than this. We remain ready until they are. He doesn't think that the ICTR is backtracking on its decision to transfer Uwinkindi to Rwanda, but the Prosecution is not aware of what is going on, specifically about budgetary issues. "

Rwanda has in the past, helped by Pierre Prosper and others, played games with the ICTR, are the tables turning? Is the outcome of the Lazare Kobagaya case, may  31 2011, finally sinking in? A case which has put the spotlight on how Rwanda's current RPF regime uses false allegations against Rwandans abroad for propaganda- and intimidation purposes. As Kandy Kobagaya said August 28 2011:

"This begs a question of how such a tiny country of Rwanda can have so much influence to such as large country as the United States ... that the U.S. government can drag an innocent man through that kind of mud,”

The Lazare Kobagaya case was a crucial test of Rwanda's judicial independence at which it failed miserably. In the words ofRwanda's prosecutor general Martin Ngoga: "it was a huge setback". The implications of the outcome for evaluation of Rwanda's judicial independence are quite straightforward as  one of Kobagaya's Lawyers, Kurt Kerns, succinctly summarized in August 2011:

 "So often now, at least right now in Rwanda, so many of the accusations coming out of that country are sadly, politically based."

The outcome of the Kobagaya case was indeed a huge setback in a propaganda and intimidation effort of Rwandans abroad orchestrated by Rwanda's prosecutor general. The case played a central role in Rwanda's propaganda campaing inside the US during the election rigging process. If such a thing would have occured in the Netherlands, Martin Ngoga would have been asked to reconsider his position or step down either immediately or temporarily pending a thorough investigation. Also,  the Dutch parliament would have probably started a parliamentary inquiry. In light of these developments claiming that "Rwanda has restored an independent judiciary" is either setting the bar too low or simply ignoring major cases and rulings.