Canadian Senator Romeo Dallaire accuses France of messing up the situation during the crisis in Rwanda. Personally, I think other nations are just as guilty for ignoring the situation.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
CV990A From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1383 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Did you read the book he wrote? Shake Hands With the Devil It was a very well-written book, and an emotionally hard one to get through as well. But he was VERY critical of France and the US in it, so I'm not surprised by his comments here at all...
CPH757 From Denmark, joined Sep 2005, 684 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 858 times:
There has been done extensive research on this. You can argue whether other nations and UN had direct responsibility, but there is no doubt that France directly supported the Hutus for geopolitical or francophone interest even before the situation escalated. Even when the genocide had begun, the French didn't withdraw financial support, and sold arms to the Hutu rebels.
Nice to getting some attention to it again. Wonder if someone will someday understand French foreign policy, or that we can just rely that it is based on close friendships between French presidents and maniac dictatorial leaders around the world.
I suggest reading Martin Meredith's "State of Africa" which is a comprehensive work on post-colonial African history. He has a good mix of credible sources on the Rwanda question.
Edit: should probably emphasize that i don't have any discontent with the French, but rather many of their actions on the world policy stage. Not that other nations doesn't, but that's an entire different story.
[Edited 2007-10-04 13:31:08]
Last flight: SAW-CPH on H9 on 02/11/09 - Next Flights: 23/12/09 CPH-AAL on QI, 30/12/09 CPH-LHR on SK, 19/01/10 CPH-CDG-
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting TheCol (Thread starter): I think other nations are just as guilty for ignoring the situation.
Guilty? No. That's like saying you are guilty if you saw a train wreck and did not rush in to help.
The only people who caused the terrible things there were locals. Outsiders might well feel ashamed they did not help, but that's very different than guilt - guilt comes from doing something wrong, not from omitting to do something good.
AndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3): guilt comes from doing something wrong
They committed guilt by ommission, and the involved countries were more directly guilty of what happened.
Relavant paragraphs:
"Frightened by the deaths of their soldiers and aware of the international embarrassment the United States suffered in Mogadishu, Somalia after the civil war there claimed the lives of several American troops, the Belgian government quickly called for the withdrawal of the Belgian contingent of UNAMIR. After the withdrawal of other nations' contingents, UNAMIR was left with 270 soldiers supported by less than 200 local authorities. General Dallaire, despite orders to withdraw from Kigali, refused to abandon the country to the genocide, and remained to lead what forces remained."
"Understaffed and abandoned, UNAMIR did the best it could with what forces remained. As individuals and as a group, members of the UNAMIR forces did manage to save the lives of thousands of Tutsis in and around Kigali and the few areas of UN control. General Dallaire requested the immediate insertion of approximately 5,000 troops, but his request was denied."
Unfortunately, in the face of the mayhem in Rwanda and this diplomatic watering down of UNAMIR's mandate, many UN member states delayed contributing personnel for some time, until the main wave of killings ceased.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 4): Absolutely unforgivable and disgusting behavior.
No. The behavior of the waring tribes was unforgivable and disgusting. That of the contributing member states was cowardly - hardly on the same level of wrongdoing.
YOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4661 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 5): No. The behavior of the waring tribes was unforgivable and disgusting.
I suppose you knew that the "tribes" in question were in fact one people till they were divided into two by colonial powers I realize the bulk of that instance will go to Belgium but let's not dwell on that.
Your example about the train wreck though colorful is not appropriate. One human can not stop a train. France could have stopped or minimized the bloodshed.
Andessmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 5): That of the contributing member states was cowardly - hardly on the same level of wrongdoing.
The contributing members were discussing what to do in a commitee till it was too late, and they could have done plenty. And these same members would be quick to criticize the current bloodshed in Iraq, making them quite hypocrites in my book.
Connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 2743 posts, RR: 12 Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting CV990A (Reply 1): Did you read the book he wrote? Shake Hands With the Devil It was a very well-written book, and an emotionally hard one to get through as well. But he was VERY critical of France and the US in it, so I'm not surprised by his comments here at all...
Man, what a depressing read that was.
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3): Guilty? No. That's like saying you are guilty if you saw a train wreck and did not rush in to help.
The only people who caused the terrible things there were locals. Outsiders might well feel ashamed they did not help, but that's very different than guilt - guilt comes from doing something wrong, not from omitting to do something good.
That is so shallow. France actively supported the Hutus and other 'nations with means' did nothing. There's enough blame and guilt to be distributed widely. Canada could and should have done more, for example.
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3080 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 4): General Dallaire requested the immediate insertion of approximately 5,000 troops, but his request was denied.
Oh, so the western nations are guilty because we refused such a simple request as sendingo 5,000 troops into combat immediately? If General Dallaire had asked 100,000 troops and been given 50,000 would we still be guilty.
This whole "western countries are the cause of all the problems in Africa" talk is really starting to get old.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 59 Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 10): This whole "western countries are the cause of all the problems in Africa" talk is really starting to get old.
Well, it could be argued that this happened because a European power decided that these two tribes that have never got along should live in the same country. But, that's neither here nor there.
No one is talking about how the West is the cause of the problem. What we're talking about is how the West WASN'T part of the solution. Fact is, the West is the cause of many of the problems that Africa has suffered through in the past. But in this case, the West turned a blind eye to a serious problem while 500,000 people were slaughtered rather than trying to do some humanitarian good.
LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
AndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 10): Oh, so the western nations are guilty because we refused such a simple request as sendingo 5,000 troops into combat immediately?
It wasn't refused, it just came too late to help anyone.
Imagine what would have occurred if Western powers had diddled for a month after the 2004 tsunami. Would there have been MORE deaths due to inaction? Yes.
Same here.
When a drowning man is asking for help, you don't have much time to react. You do it then or not at all.
The help was not refused, it came too late to help.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 1816 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1383 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Sep 2005, 684 posts, 
I realize the bulk of that instance will go to Belgium but let's not dwell on that.
From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3080 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
