In today’s issue, one of our colleagues, Kenneth Agutamba, touched on a very pertinent issue that defines our political choices; politics based on consensus as opposed to confrontations.

There is no better explanation of consensus than when more than 9.8 people out of ten decided to retain President Kagame as their torch bearer.

It therefore beats logic when the self-imposed guardians of democracy (will of the majority) find fault with Rwandans OVERWHELMINGLY exercising their democratic rights. The margins of the outcome of the just ended referendum would be a western politician’s wildest dream, but no, vested interests, especially from lobby groups would not allow for it.

When a bipartisan vote sails through the US Congress it becomes a great victory and sometimes it is a result of tradeoffs behind the scenes or when the nation is at stake, such as terror attacks.

Today, the world’s major capitals are awash with heavily armed security forces, the latest technology has been deployed to counter terror threats. The police and army have taken over the streets and major installations.

When Rwanda deployed security forces on our streets in the wake of terrorist attacks a few years ago, it came under heavy criticism and labeled all kinds of names: But the threats ceased, and now the world has learnt something about robust deterrence and followed suit and no one is condemning them.

Defence of national interests is the bottom line, but above all, it is the people’s welfare that really matters, and that is not negotiable.