This paper seeks to examine, with emphasis to the Rwandan ethnic conflict, how post-cold war ethnic conflicts can be appropriately managed. To achieve this general objective the following steps will be used:
1. Investigate how the ethnic conflict was managed internally using state structures and institutions;
2. Review the role played by the international community in the management of the Rwanda ethnic conflict from 1990 to 1994;
3. Study different challenges to the management of ethnic conflicts.
The following hypotheses apply to the objectives mentioned above:
1. Post-cold war ethnic conflicts need to be effectively managed to enhance national and international security;
2. The existence of ethnic management mechanisms are primordial in multi-ethnic states;
3. Ethnic conflicts are a threat to international peace and stability.
The post-cold war period has witnessed a rise in ethnic awareness and consciousness, which has led to the proliferation of conflict in less developed countries. Due to that rise, ethnicity and identity have become a major force in the world, and this has negatively impacted the international political stability. These developments are also a source of concern for international peace and security. As a result of the instability associated with the politicization of ethnicity and identity, there is a need for the establishment of a powerful conflict management regime, which will contribute to the understanding and management of post cold war conflict.
It is, also, important to pay attention to the dynamics of ethnic conflicts, and how they are managed in Africa. Indeed, ethnicity has always been a major factor in the shaping of a states relations and has also been the source of inter- and intra-state conflicts. This underscores the importance of ethnic conflict management in Africa. Using the latest Rwandan conflict, this paper will put in perspective the potential danger that lies in not managing ethnic relations in Africa, in this post- coldwar era.
The end of the Cold War ushered in a new era of optimism in the management of international conflicts. This was mainly due to the accompanying collapse of the East-West ideological divide, which resonated most in the Third World and particularly in Africa. Post-Cold war conflicts have been characterized by a marked shift from state-to-state conflicts to intra-state conflicts often based on ethnic and identity differences. This is the case, for example, in Eastern Europe, Rwanda and Burundi.
The Rwanda ethnic conflict of 1990-1994 is a clear indication of the impact of such conflicts on human lives and the well being of states in Africa. Within 3 months, over 800,000 Tutsi and Hutu moderates were massacred, in what is now called one of the worst human tragedies. This puts into clear perspective the role of efficient conflict management in the post-cold war context. African states contain myriad ethnic groups which have coexisted within modern states. The rise of ethnicity in the post-cold war period is a central factor in the ability to manage conflicts, it transcends national boundaries and has impacts on regional and international security. The politicization of ethnicity poses a threat to regional and national security. The ethnic conflict in Rwanda, for example, has had a negative impact on the security of the Great Lakes region. Before the outbreak of the 1990-1994 conflict in Rwanda, there were various efforts by the international community to quell the rising fears. Rwanda’s neighbors, led by Tanzania, started various mediation processes. These regional efforts aimed at finding a consensus amid the ethnic tensions.
The first tangible result was the signing of the Arusha Accords between the Rwandan Government and the Rwandan Patriotic Front [RPF]. The involvement of the United Nations was also important. It led to the establishment of a United Nations Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR), which was assigned to oversee the implementation of the Peace Accords. Despite the accords and other conciliatory moves, the conflict intensified. This raises the question of whether appropriate measures had truly been taken to solve the conflict.
Various approaches were used to manage the Rwandan conflict. Some of the measures used were aimed at diffusing the ethnic tensions, while others were directed at the maintenance of the status quo. It is possible that some part of the external involvement served to aggravate the ethnic tensions. The Rwandan conflict has had great implications on the regional and international system, especially in ethnic conflict management. The implication of the Rwanda conflict on the International system needs to be closely analyzed in order to institute effective measures for the management of ethnic conflicts.
Theoretical framework
This research project uses two theoretical frameworks to analyze the Rwanda ethnic conflict and its management process, the conflict research and the peace research paradigms. The conflict research paradigm represents the thoughts of the world-society school of thought in international relations. The conflict research paradigm aims at establishing legitimized relationships in the society which are self-sustaining. For the conflict research paradigm, conflictual behavior arises from the actors’ perception of their involvement. It further argues that it is possible to manipulate the environment that generates conflict.
The conflict research paradigm argues that for a conflict to exist it must be subjectively perceived, and its effects felt by the actors. Therefore, for the conflict research paradigm, a conflict must be dysfunctional for it to be recognized. Also, the conflict research paradigm considers a conflict resolved when the post conflict relationship is legitimized and self sustaining.
Conflict should, therefore, be resolved without the imposition of conditions on the parties. The post-conflict relationships are based on understanding and acceptance of the parties about their interactions. The conflict research paradigm is relevant in this study because it will enable the analysis for the Rwandan conflict and management process to be sufficiently analyzed.
The second theoretical framework is the peace research paradigm. The peace research paradigm views structures in the society as being responsible for conflict. The main tenet of this paradigm is the existence of structural violence. It argues that social structures cause conflict in the society and that the actors might not realize that they are in conflictual relationship.
The peace research paradigm explains social and political relationships by reference to their underlying structures. This is because the peace research paradigm argues that it is possible for people to be in a conflict situation even though they do not immediately or readily experience it. Because of its objective view of conflict the paradigm identifies conflict before it becomes dysfunctional or its effects seen.
The peace paradigm argues that if there is a structural conflict in the society, then the structures must be changed and a symmetrical relationship established, free of structural conflict. It advocates the polarization of the conflict, in order to make the effects of the conflict felt; this entails introducing a third party to perform this task. Polarizing the structural conflict might make the conflict dysfunctional so that the parties feel and experience the effects of the conflict. The peace paradigm supports the empowering of the weak party or disempowering the stronger party in order to promote values of justice. The third party plays an active role and is instrumental in the process of changing the structures responsible for conflict and the establishment of new structures.
The peace research paradigm has been criticized for being activist in nature by taking sides in the conflict. It has also been criticized for imposing its values on the conflict. The peace research paradigm is necessary for analysis of structures responsible for the Rwandan 1994 conflict especially in order to define the role of different external factors.
Literature review
The literature is reviewed according to the following broad themes:
• Literature on conflict and ethnic conflict,
• literature on ethnicity and ethnic conflict in Africa,
• literature on conflict management, resolution and settlement,
• literature on post-cold war challenges,
• And finally the literature on Rwanda.
Conflict and Ethnic Conflict
The term conflict is often used to refer to armed conflict. Mwagiru defines conflict in reference to the existence and pursuance of incompatible goals by two or more parties. Burton makes a distinction between disputes that are over interests and conflicts from those that are over values. He also observes that conflicts of interests can be negotiated, mediated or subjected to judicial determination while conflicts involving needs, values and identity can not be subject to compromise. Mwagiru concurs with Burton’s definition about conflicts involving values, wants and interests.
‘Conflict’ has been perceived differently by diverse scholars. There are those who view conflict to be subjective. To them for a conflict to exist, it has to be dysfunctional and its effects must be felt by the parties. This group identifies itself with the conflict research paradigm.
The other group of scholars argues that a conflict need not be felt by parties to the conflict; this group perceives conflict to be objective. The objective view is propounded by the peace research paradigm, which argues that there exists structural violence which is not felt or realized by the parties.
Vayrynen observes that a conflict is not static and that each conflict has a life and autonomy of its own. The life of a conflict is carried by the parties to the conflict because they experienced it and took part in the conflict. He further argues that because a conflict has a life it also has a memory. The memory of a conflict is carried by the parties to the conflict and passed on to other generations.
Brown defines ethnic conflict as a dispute about important political, economic, cultural or territorial issues between two or more ethnic communities. He observes that ethnic conflict is differentiated from other conflicts because the battle line is defined on ethnic identity. Stavenhagen argues that ethnic conflicts start out as internal disputes and become internationalized when neighboring states, and other international actors, become involved.
Horowitz explores important themes and frameworks in ethnic conflicts. He argues that symbolic politics and ethnic status are important in understanding the underlying causes of ethnic conflicts. He observes that symbolic politics and ethnic status are important in determining group status in post-colonial societies and cannot compete effectively with the state in the allocation of prestige. Secondly, under colonial rule attributes and economic benefits were based on ethnic status and became matters of state.
Moreover, Steve employs the internal colonialism model to explain the existence of ethnic conflicts. He identifies political, social and economic domination of one ethnic group by another as the underlying cause of the dominated group to mobilize on an ethnic basis. The internal colonialism thesis can be traced back to the debate between Europe and America on the question of the self-determination of colonial people. The thesis is also used to explain the extent to which ethnic sentiments are in part a product of tolerance or intolerance of the central state.
Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in Africa
Asiwaju provides an African perspective on the effect of partitioning in Africa, which resulted in ethnic groups being divided between two, or more, states. He argues that this was manifested by efforts to emphasize separation and the systematic applications of different ethnic names for the same ethnic group, in order to distinguish between those on different sides of particular inter-state boundaries. Asiwaju agrees that colonialism played a role in dividing and identifying different ethnic communities in Africa. According to the author, it has had political implications on ethnic groups and resulted in the marginalization of some ethnic groups in several states.
In tracing the historical origins of ethnic conflicts in modern Africa, Mwagiru concurs with Asiwaju about the effects of partition in Africa. Moreover, Vail argues that the creation of ethnicity as an ideological statement of popular appeal, in the context of profound social, economic and political change in Africa, is a result of historical experiences in colonial Africa. First, he identifies the European nationalism and its implantation in Africa, which was perpetuated by African intellectuals and which created an ethnic awareness among African populations. Second, the indirect-rule which defined the boundaries and texture of ethnicity. Third, ordinary people had a need for traditional values, at a time of rapid change, which led to acceptance of ethnicity as ideology. He adds that intellectuals and ethnic elites carefully crafted their ideologies, in order to define the characteristics of members of various ethnic groups. He also identifies the role of missionaries as crucial in providing cultural symbols that could be organized into a cultural identity. This served to unify and to produce divisions by establishing firm boundaries between ethnic groups.
Berman argues that the African response to colonial change animated ethnic identity and consciousness, particularly in the pursuit of power and economic prestige. This resulted in the institutionalization of patronage in colonial politics, which continued in the post colonial African states. He states that this has contributed to the growth of ‘uncivil nationalism,’ which has undermined the legitimacy of the state and efforts of democratization in Africa. He also observes that the post-colonial state has shaped the modes of ethnic identities through ethno-political mobilization.
This has acted as a catalyst to the ethnic tensions and conflicts in Africa. Moreover, ethnicity has been recognized and exploited in African authoritarian politics and has, at the same time, provided an excuse for the suppression of popular expression. Berman argues that democratization provides opportunities and constraints for ethnic conflict management through institutional mechanisms. He further adds that ethnicity is not incompatible with institutions of democratic government, if it finds expression as group interest among other interests, and if its means of expression provide rewards and not losses to the group. He also says that ethnic competition does not always need to be violent, and can become an accepted form of political manifestation.
Conflict Resolution, Settlement and Management
Mwagiru argues that there is a difference between conflict resolution, settlement and management. He observes that settlement is anchored on the notion of power, while resolution rejects power as the dominant approach for managing a conflict. He adds that settlement does not address the causes of the conflict, but readjusts and regulates conflict relationships. The outcome of conflict settlement is determined by the power relationships of the parties. Conflict resolution stresses the importance of addressing needs, which are neither negotiable nor in short supply. The parties can, therefore, redefine their needs. Conflict management, according to Mwagiru, refers to a process by which parties to the conflict are encouraged to come together and do something about their conflict. Thus, parties to the conflict can negotiate about the issues of the conflict.
Bercovitch argues that the negotiation process can only be conducted when parties to the conflict agree to manage their conflict jointly. The structure of negotiation is dyadic, if only two parties are involved, and triadic when a third party is involved. The third party has its interest in the conflict and its outcome.
Zartman identify three phases of negotiation process: the pre-negotiation, negotiation and implementation phases. He observes that in the pre-negotiation phase, the parties reach a consensus or differ before the actual negotiation. Therefore, the pre-negotiation is the phase that determines the negotiation and implementation phases. With regards to the mediation, he considers it as a peaceful process of conflict management which also introduces a third party in the conflict. Bercovitch observes, further, that in the mediation process, the parties to the conflict seek assistance of, or accept an offer for help from, a third party, in order to facilitate the settlement of the conflict without using force. It is a voluntary process.
Furthermore, Mwagiru classifies the mediation process into two tracks. Track one is formal, governmental and official while track two is non-official and informal. Mwagiru advocates for a dual-diplomatic approach in mediation, where the two tracks of diplomacy work in tandem. Regarding the classification of mediators, Mwagiru observes that traditionally there are two types of mediators, the exogenous mediator who comes from outside the conflict and is able to keep a distance from the stresses of the conflict, and the endogenous mediator who comes from within the conflict and may affect the outcome.
He argues that the traditional classifications fails to identify another type, which is the heterogeneous mediator who displays both the characteristics of an endogenous and exogenous mediator. A heterogeneous mediator comes from the conflict system and, therefore, is endogenous but is also exogenous because of coming from a particular sovereign state within the conflict system. Mwagiru’s classification of the mediator broadens the scope of analysis of mediators to encompass the role of neighboring states in the mediation.
Bercovitch argues that determining mediation outcome is a difficult task. He identifies temporal problems in determining how the whole examination of outcome should start, and the criteria to be used in determining the outcome of the mediation. Zartman views a successful mediation as the conclusion of an agreement bringing an end to the conflict. He also states that what constitutes a successful mediation is debatable. Burton, on his part, argues that a successful mediation is one in which resolution, rather than settlement, is achieved. He observes that a settlement addresses negotiable interest, is power based and, therefore, is short-lived and cannot withstand the changes in the balance of power between the parties. Resolution involves values that are non-negotiable. If successful, it presents a win-win situation and is self-sustaining.
Ethnic Conflict Management
Rothchild argues that an ethnic conflict can be mediated. He adds that ethnic conflict mediation, as a strategy, is based on a mutual acceptance of the legitimacy and survival of the state and ethnic identities, and also the willingness to concede a degree of autonomy and participation to other partes. He further argues that mediating ethnic conflict is distinct from mediating disputes between sovereign states.
Because ethnic conflicts involve internal conflicts between communal groups and states, third party mediation entails intervention in the domestic affairs of a state. In the mediation of ethnic conflict, emphasis should be placed on the leverage of the mediator. This is due to the fact that the entirety of the mediation process is inter-linked, and includes pre-negotiation, negotiation and implementation. The outcome of mediation depends on the mediator’s role in structuring incentives, like distribution, or symbolic rewards, to the parties involved in the conflict. But, at times, it also depends on pressure, threats and consequences to the parties. The pressure could come from the international community, for example, in form of sanctions. According to Rothchild, mediation, as a strategy for ethnic conflict regulation, cuts across all other strategies of federalism, power-sharing, and other efforts aimed at managing, and not eliminating, ethnic differences.
O’Leary and McGarry provide several distinct methods of ethnic conflict regulation, which can be divided into two groups. Firstly, the methods of eliminating ethnic differences, which include genocide directed towards an ethnic group, from a state, require self determination, integration and assimilation. Secondly, methods of managing ethnic conflicts, which include hegemonic control of an ethnic group over others, requires arbitration involving third party intervention, cantonisation, federalism, consociationalism, or power sharing.
The first group, composed by Genocide, mass population transfer, partitions and integration are political strategies aimed at eliminating ethnic differences within a state, while arbitration federalism and consociationalism are strategies that seek to manage ethnic differences through control measures. Often, the different methods operate in joint efforts and are targeted at the same ethnic group or, alternatively, different strategies are aimed at different ethnic groups within the state.
Kuper, on his part, argues that the plural society provides the structural base for Genocide. This does not imply that Genocide is inevitable in plural societies, but that these societies provide necessary preconditions for genocide. Using the example of the genocidal conflicts of India upon partition with Bangladesh, Rwanda in 1962 and Burundi 1975, Kuper finds an intimate relationship between the plural society and Genocide.
He also observes that a plural society, in its extreme form, is characterized by inequalities, where sections of the society dominate the political structure, economy, opportunities for education, human rights and access to public amenities. This superimposes the conflicts along the lines of cleavages; therefore, such conflicts are likely to escalate into Genocide. Kuper identifies colonization as a major creator of plural societies, which makes former colonized societies conform to the extreme type of plural society.
Post-Cold War challenges
Slater argues that the Post-cold war period is one of continued violence, coupled with marginalization and potential elimination not only of Third World nations, but also of many ethnic minorities. He observes that events in the Post-cold war period, especially in Yugoslavia and Somalia, are evidence of apparent incapacity, or unwillingness, of the new international system to address the clash of ethnic groups. He further argues that the major characteristics of the Post-cold war Third World are shaky regimes, contested border and ethnic tensions which require mobilization of troops to face armed troublemakers, and obtain their unconditional surrender.
Because of that, the Post-cold war world is characterized as highly intense and deadly conflicts are defined along ethnic lines. The Post-cold war world has also seen external support for insurgencies evaporate, and major powers have found it unnecessary to support insurgencies and autocratic governments. This has weakened Third World states, which survived primarily because of economic and military support. Slater identifies ethno-nationalism, which is oriented toward secession, alternation of borders or a rearrangement of power, as a major challenge to the legitimacy of a state.
Ottaway argues that Post-cold war nationalism has come to be associated with ethnic nationalism, which can be democratic or authoritarian, divisive or unifying. That renders ethnic nationalism a force inimical to democracy and unity of modern state. She adds that the Post-cold war period has witnessed a new wave of ethnic nationalism in Eastern Europe and Africa, and that this has been escalating steadily since the 1950s. Ethnic nationalism is now a destabilizing force not only in the affected states, but internationally. Therefore, it can no longer be treated as an internal problem of sovereign states in whose domestic affairs the international community should not interfere.
She also provides an analysis of relations between the early phases of the democratization process and the appearance of militant ethnic nationalism in South Africa and Ethiopia. Ethnic conflict presents complex challenges to which neither the parties to the conflict, nor the international community, have been able to provide adequate responses. Moreover, she says that ethnic conflict can be managed by democracy, political will to accept compromise by the parties to the conflict, self-determination and revival of the concept of group rights.
Capson, in his study of the possibilities of peace in Post-cold war Africa, observes that despite the favorable developments in the regional and international system, conflict remains a serious problem in Africa. He advocates for an in-depth examination of many factors that lead to warfare and violence, and an evaluation of all the changes that might affect these factors. He adds that the causes of conflict in Africa are rooted in African states and societies, which include ethnic and regional factors, reinforced by economic and class differences which make conflicts protracted. Capson is pessimistic about the future for peace in Africa, despite hopeful trends and developments in the international system.
The Rwanda conflict
Prunier provides an elaborate historical, and chronological, record of the Rwandan conflict from the colonial period to the spring of 1994. He outlines the period from 1959 to 1990 as the Hutu republic, characterized by the suppression of the Tutsi. This created a problem of Tutsi refugees in the Great Lakes region. The Tutsi refugees provided a constant challenge to the Hutu republic. This crisis grew with the formation of the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF). This compounded the political problems, and democratization made the crisis transform itself into a conflict.
Davidson observes that the move towards centralized power developed the dominance of a minority Tutsi over the majority Hutu. He argues that in 19th century Rwanda, ethnicity was mild and regulated by feudalism. This kind of dominance was mutually acceptable to both parties. He further argues that, after the independence struggle, ethnic tension increased in Rwanda and, ultimately, resulted in a protracted ethnic conflict between the Hutu's and the Tutsi's.
Kamukama observes that, unlike independence struggles in Africa which were directed towards imperialism and colonialism, the independence struggle in Rwanda was an internal one, whereas the Hutu were fighting and resisting Tutsi domination. This resulted in the post-independence political power shift to the Hutu and the fleeing of many Tutsi to neighboring countries after the 1959 civil war.
He also argues that it is this refugee problem that has continuously hounded the successive Hutu dominated regimes in Kigali. The refugees desire to return to Rwanda caused a great debate that met resistance from the government. The Habyarimana regime argued that it could not permit the return of all refugees, unless the operation was well planned. According to Kamukama, this is one of the root causes of the Rwanda conflict.
He further observes that the Rwanda conflict has two dimensions. Those dimensions are internal and external. The internal dimension was political and socio economic development which caused a lack of peace which is an essential prerequisite for development. The internal problem resulted in more ethnic tensions and occasioned a new wave of refugees mostly Tutsi who were accused of being RPF collaborators in the early 1990s. Subsequently, the Habyarimana regime was weakened by internal and external demand of democratization and economic reforms. Kamukama concludes that the underlying causes of the conflict are ethnicity and modernization.
Conclusion
M. Twagiramungu, a former Rwandan prime minister, finds that all these issues can be solved if all Rwandan were to sit together and agree to share power, misery and poverty. He adds that all sides should reach a consensus on the shared history which would be a big step forward. Genuine reconciliation will depend on the resolution of the long standing differences between Hutu and Tutsi ethnic members.
Hutu ethnic members want democracy and majority rule while Tutsi ethnic members want justice for the Genocide victims and assurance that if Hutus are allowed to have the electoral majority they will respect equal rights for Tutsis. Finally, Rwandan historians recognized that Rwanda is in a very critical period. They also established that those who are in power or the generation alive today leave without resolving the problem between the Hutu and the Tutsi which essentially evolves around the problem of power sharing; future Rwandan generations will never be safe.
More than anything, what is needed in the Rwandan society is the promotion of a culture of human rights, starting with the most important of all rights, "the right to live".