Rwandan troops are in Mozambique in the Cabo Delgado region to help fight terrorists, stabilise the area and restore the authority of the state. That is a fact. They are there on the invitation of the government of Mozambique and bilateral agreement between the two countries. That is also a fact.

For several years now terrorists have ravaged the Cabo Delgado region. They have killed and displaced thousands of citizens, destroyed property and made the area ungovernable. For all this long, no one has done anything about it and the situation has grown worse. That is also a fact.

The Rwandan troops have now been there for nearly two weeks. It is no longer news. Yet the story remains in the media. Some have clearly been irked by the development and have been questioning why it should be Rwanda to act where others have been indifferent or refused to do so.

They may pretend, but these questions and objections and other attitudes are not in defence of a sacred principle that has been violated. They are signs of hypocrisy, guilt and embarrassment, pique or simply a dislike for Rwanda doing what they failed to do.

Intervention by foreign countries to help sort out a domestic issue that threatens the very existence of the state or regional security and stability, whether home-grown or imported, is not new. Also not new is the existence of terrorism in Africa. It has been around for some time now The novel element here is that this time it is an African country involved, and that not one of the continent’s heavyweights.

European countries and the United States of America have always intervened in one form or another. France regularly does in its former colonies in central and west Africa to quell domestic dissent or fight terrorism. No one complains. It is accepted as normal.

The United States has been involved in Somalia for decades and now increasingly in west Africa and the Sahel. We do not hear loud howls of protest or condemnation as we do now. The only complaint often is that the intervention is not big or robust enough.

Both and other European countries combined to destroy Libya. Everyone looked on as the country was torn apart.

Of course, we hear noises about leaving Africans to solve their own problems or slogans like African solutions to African problems. But the reality is that conflicts are not solved by handwringing, expressions of righteous indignation or pious statements. They are resolved by bold action.

In any event, inaction for whatever reason or delay while debating issues of pre-eminence in any operation or other diplomatic niceties abet the work of terrorists. They achieve their primary objective to undermine the legitimacy of the state by eroding its ability to govern and to protect its citizens from attack, and generally make it a failed state. If this state lasts long enough, the population grows disenchanted with the government and embraces the terrorists as the only available alternative.

Someone had to act to prevent this situation developing in Mozambique. And so enter Rwanda to the chagrin of some. But I think those unhappy with Rwanda’s deployment are asking the wrong questions. They should be asking whether Rwanda has the cause, capacity and experience to intervene successfully. They will find the answer in the country’s recent history. They will find useful precedent, resoluteness and success rate to match.

Few other people are aware of their history and their politics and international relations shaped by it as Rwandans. In recent times, that starts with the genocide against the Tutsi in 1994. That horrific period is a pivotal moment in this history.

No one, inside or outside Rwanda, can ever run away from it. Some may try to ignore or deny it or pretend it did not happen; they can never wish it away or erase it. It happened and more than one million people were killed because the world chose to look the other way and gave the killers a free hand. It could have been prevented or stopped once it had started with minimal intervention. It was not. We know the results. And even as Rwanda rebuilds, the consequences are still with us.

Rwandans learnt lessons from that. Lives matter and none should be needlessly lost. They cannot be saved by endless debates and discussions or chest-thumping, but by decisive action. That is how the RPF was able to stop the genocide in 1994.

The defeated genocidal government relocated across the border in Zaire, now DR Congo with their administrative and military structures and arms, and created an extra-territorial state. Again, no one intervened to disarm them or break up this semblance of a state, or move them farther from the border. Instead, they were allowed to reorganise and rearm and plot incursions into Rwanda.

It again fell on the government of Rwanda to break these structures and repatriate civilians that had been held hostage. The hard-core genocidaires scattered in the D R Congo forests. True, they regrouped into the FDLR terrorist group and later its many splinter factions and continued to mount sporadic attacks on Rwanda, but the greater threat had been removed.

It is not only in war that Rwanda is ready to lend a helping hand. See how it has taken in migrants stranded in Libya when few others were willing to do so. Or its response to covid-19 and natural disasters. Saving lives and preserving human dignity is paramount and a duty. Rwandans have learnt that from their history.