Crossing Borders Test 4
Terms
undefined, object
copy deck
- Race
- A category of people consdiered to be similar because they share socially recognized physical characteristics (skin pigment, hair texture, facial features). People BELIEVE this distinction to be biological, though it is not, and therefore they percieve race to be an impermeable boundary (racial groups are supposedly based on genetic features, but seriious challenges to a purely scientific reading have been mounted)
- Ethnicity
- A social category based on common "cultural" concepts such as ancestry, language, religion, nationality, and traditions (These are lEARNED THINGS aka whatever seperates "use" from them")
- Refugees
- persons outside their country who cannot return owing to a well founded fear of persecution in their homeland (Un has an obligation to help such people)
- Forced Migrants
- those who, owing to ar easonable fear of persecution, have abandoned their home for a new one WITHIN the borders of hteir home country (idps) or abroad (refugees)
- IDPS
- fear of persecution in homes and therefore relocate without crossing national borders
- Who killed whom?
- Hutus killed Tutsis and Tutsi sympathizers
- How many people were killed?
- approximately 800,000 people were killed
- Who was the US president at the time?
- William Jefferson Clinton
- Who was the US ambassador to the UN during the Rwanda crisis who later became US secreatry of state
- Madeline Albright
- Which UN official involved in the genocide later became the UN secretary general?
- Kofi Annan was the chief of peaceepping and he later became the secretary general of the UN
- What does the word interahamwe mean?
- Those who attack togetehr
- When did Rwadan gain its indepence?
- 1962
- What is your definition of a state?
- Using the Weberian definition, I will define a state as a body of individuals that declare the monopoly over the legitimate use of violence in a given region.
- Which sates were involved?
- In the case of Rwadan, I would say that Rwanda, The Democratic Republic of Congo/Zaire, Uganda, Burundia, andT Tanzania were the states involved . It was primarily Rwanda, but refugees fled to these other states.
- What is your definition of a nation?
- My definition of a nation is a group of people concious of forming a community, sharing a common culture, sharin ga common past, sharing a projet for the future, claiming the right to rule itself.
- What nations were involved in this case?
- Initially, only the Rwadan nation was involved in this case because the differences between Hutus and Tutsis were seen as more ethnic than racial or national. However, later, the Hutu Power leaders began to percieve the Tutsis as a seperate racial national group and proclaimed that Tutsis no longer belonged in the Rwandan nation. Therefore, though many Hutus still considered themselves Rwadans, at least some people's understanding of the sitution included the notion of a Hutu and a Tutsi nation with seperate interests, projects for the future, and belonging in different "demarcated territories."
- What is the beginning of the periodization?
- winter between 1963-1964 when massacres of Tutsis by Hutus occured. UN employee called these massacres as "veritable genocide"
- What is the end of your periodization
- Today. The ramifications of the genocide still live on in the minds of survivors and perpetrator still living in Rwanda, in the political system and societ of Rwanda, and in the outside world's way of dealing with/ commemorating/ apoloigzing for what happened.
- Transnational organization(s) involved?
- the united nations
- What role did the UN play?
- Present before the genocide, pulled troops out as genocide started did nothing to stop it) pot-genocide, inovolved in the refugee camps that harbored many people who committed the genocide and allowed regular Hutus to be used as a cover for these criminals, allowed Hutu Power organization to occur, etc.
- Did imperialism, colonialism, and decolonization impact this case?
- Most certainly. Before the genocide occured, the Germans and later teh Belgians colonized the region. The Their understanding of Rwanda as a place in accordance with the Hamitic hypothesis created a situation where Tutsis could practice dual colnialism against the Hutus. It set up a system of inequality. Its ideas were the basis of the Hutu cal to rid Rwanda of the "foreign" Tutsis. Right before Belgium left, the nation began to suppor the Hutu power regime. As the country tried to decolonize, Hutu Power leaders came to power and their views reflected the understanding of the world imposed upon them by the colonizers
- Who were the people who no longer "fit" in Rwanda?
- Hutu Power leaders, in accordance with the Hamitic Hypothesis, believed that the Tutsis were "foreigners" who did not belong in Rwanda. They also felt that Hutus who were Tutsi sympatheier also did not belong in Rwanda.
- Who decided that they needed to be moved or eliminated? What rationale was used? Who killed whom?
- Hutu power leaders decided that the Tutsis and Tutsi sympathizers needed to be removed. Their rationale was both that these people supported the RPF and therefore were enemies of the government and that the Tutsis were "foreigners" (Hamitic Hypothesis) whod did not belong in Rwanda and their sympathizers were bad for sympathizing.
- About how many people were killed?
- approximately 800,000
- How were the groups of people involved (the people killed and the people who wanted to kill them) defined?
- The groups of people were seperated by ethnic ID cards issued by the Belgians. These cards initially distinguished between people seperated by the porous boundary of ethnicity but this boundary eventually became more impermeable (a racial or a bioloigcal differenc base on apperarnce that one CANNOT acquire) in a way that made kiling another seem like less of a crime.
- Was there a gender component involved and, if so, how are people using gender and how are you, the analyst, using it?
- Here referencing gender as the social constructed understanding of human intentity that assumes "manliness" goes along with male atatomy and that "feminity" goes along with femaleleness that assumes that women have no place in warfare, par t of the way to demonstrate that these events were in fact genocide was the fact that women were killed along side men seperates this from the category of traditional war. Otherwise, gender did not play a huge part in these events as both males and femalees were targeted for being Tutsi or for being a Tutsi sympathizer.
- How did hte actors involved invoke history to make a case fo expulsion one way or the other? Is there evidence to support or refute their telling?
- Part of Hutu Power's justication for the killing was based on the Hamitic Hypohesis, a faulty, pseudo-scientific understanding of the world which seperates Tutsis from Hutus and claims that Tutsis descend from a Chrisitan and more European race, g. They claimed that the foreign Tutsis did NOT belong in Rwanda when, in truth, they were not really "foreign. " Foreign powers excused their own inaction based ont he fact hat Africa is a place of ancient tribal hatreds a that cannot be controlled and failed states that are disastorous. In fact, these hatreds were extremely new and essentially brought on by European colonizers and the geoncide occured because Rwanda had too strong of a state, not too weak of a state.