Editor,

RE: "WWII fighters were simply victims of colonialism” (The New Times, February 11).

That’s true—WWII African fighters were simply victims of colonialism. Like others, I am not disputing their bravery in fighting, but one has to ask what they were fighting for.

To begin with, they weren't recruited as Rwandans fighting for their country’s cause; they were recruited as migrants on assumptions that they were nationals of the British colonies, fighting for the British imperialism—nothing more nothing less.

We also have similar cases of those who died fighting along the Belgians and French. In fact, they were helping colonialists to strengthen their hold on our countries, and chasing away another colonist.

Secondly, the writer is wrong to suggest that should those evidences present at the time of our application to join the Commonwealth, Rwanda should have automatically qualified. Really?

Irrespective of their countries of origin, these men were conscripted into the British army on assumption they were national of their host. There was no ties between Rwanda and the Commonwealth.

I would rather think that they were buried there because in any case Belgians were part to the allied forces, and as they progressed eastwards, they couldn't bring back fallen soldiers to Rwanda. You might find that there are also French and Belgians in that cemetery.

However, I should commend you for your research, I was not aware that such cemetery existed.

Emmanuel Nibishaka