In 1994 by the international human rights groups. Three months before the genocide.
2. Besides the warning given by one of the planners, what were other warning signs of the genocide?
The other warning signs were training of militias in Rwanda, government also openly sponsored hate propaganda, and death list were circulated.
3. How did state-sponsored propaganda present the Tutsi group?
They presented the Tutsi group as evil and manipulative people who were cockroaches and snakes and whose ultimate goal was to regain power and return Rwanda to a country that mistreated teh Hutu people.
4. What prevented the international community from calling the violence in Rwanda "genocide"? What would have happened if they had?
Because of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide agreement. It made them more cautious to calling it genocide because it was a mass killing and had other criteria so they would have to be legally obligated to intervene and stop the violence. If they would of called it genocide they would be legally obligated to intervene1. When did Un officials receive warnings about the genocide?
In 1994 by the international human rights groups. Three months before the genocide.
2. Besides the warning given by one of the planners, what were other warning signs of the genocide?
The other warning signs were training of militias in Rwanda, government also openly sponsored hate propaganda, and death list were circulated.
3. How did state-sponsored propaganda present the Tutsi group?
They presented the Tutsi group as evil and manipulative people who were cockroaches and snakes and whose ultimate goal was to regain power and return Rwanda to a country that mistreated teh Hutu people.
4. What prevented the international community from calling the violence in Rwanda "genocide"? What would have happened if they had?
Because of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide agreement. It made them more cautious to calling it genocide because it was a mass killing and had other criteria so they would have to be legally obligated to intervene and stop the violence. If they would of called it genocide they would be legally obligated to intervene there and send troops and other support to stop the genocide. There would of been a lot less people that died and it would of ended much sooner.
5. Once the international community withdrew its troops, what did the militia decide to do?
The militia intensified the genocide, targeting resistors and officials who opposed the genocide.
6. Who does President Clinton say must share responsibility for the genocide?
President Clinton says that the international community, together with nations in Africa. there and send troops and other support to stop the genocide. There would of been a lot less people that died and it would of ended much sooner.
5. Once the international community withdrew its troops, what did the militia decide to do?
The militia intensified the genocide, targeting resistors and officials who opposed the genocide.
6. Who does President Clinton say must share responsibility for the genocide?
President Clinton says that the international community, together with nations in Africa.
Review Questions 4
-In what ways did genocide impact the development of this developing country?
The genocide obviously halted the development of the country. Many workers such as lawyers, and all sorts of people were killed. The government lost control, that would hurt any country.
-Where does the rebuilding of a country shattered by genocide begin? What can people do? What can the government do? What can the international community do?
The rebuilding of a country shattered by genocide begins with justice. They need to begin lots of trials to sort of give the people of Rwanda their confidence back in the government, from there you need to start building your economy again. The people can learn to forgive and forget, and get on with their lives. Even though that would be almost impossible. The government needs to make sure that its people have confidence in it again. The international community needs to stop a genocide from ever happening again.
-How can justice be found in post-genocide Rwanda?
Justice can be found in post-genocide Rwanda by holding the many trials that need to happen in order for the survivors to heal emotionally as much as they can and install confidence back into the government.
Which can bring justice to the people of Rwanda, international courts or community courts?
I personally think community courts would bring more emotional stability back to the people of Rwanda because they are the ones deciding if the person is guilty or not, and what they deserve because of their actions.
