Last week, the president of Guinea Bissau was in Rwanda on a three-day official visit. As official visits go, it was much like that by any other head of state. There were the usual activities accompanying such high level events – bilateral meeting and signing of different Memoranda of Understanding, state dinner, tour of areas of interest in the city, and so on. In that sense, it was a normal, ordinary event.

But in another sense, the visit was remarkable for its near anonymity among many Rwandans, even in the City of Kigali that hosted the president. True, his visit was carried by the national media. But for many it was simply another item in the news dominated by weightier global issues. 

And so few seemed to be aware that an African dignitary was in town. They did not know how he looks like or what his name is, or the country he leads. Even those with some idea could not identify which Guinea he came from.

The fact that ordinary Rwandans may not have noticed that President Umaro Sissoco Embalo was visiting is not in any way a sign of discourtesy or disrespect. Nor is it because it was low-key because there hasn’t been much dealings between the two countries in the past.

It only marks a shift in the way Rwandans now regard such visits. They have become regular, frequent and normal events and are seen as such. In this sense Rwanda has become a regular, normal country where exchange of visits is an ordinary occurrence.

In the last ten years or so, visits to Rwanda by heads of state of neighbouring and other African countries, and even beyond, from the smallest to the most powerful, have become frequent and do not cause as much excitement as in the past. 

And it is not only heads of state visiting. Other high level visits have also taken place. In the past one year alone, countless number of such visitors ranging from defence and security chiefs from east and southern Africa, to ministers and diplomats have been here.

They have become normal events as indeed all visits should be. Rwandans have become used to them and are interested more in what comes out of them than the public spectacle. They recognise the different reasons people, whether ordinary individuals or representatives of groups, organisations or even states, visit each other. 

They may do so because they are friends or neighbours. Or because they hold each other in such esteem that they find it important to pay their respects. They may do it because they see value in the other and seek to benefit from it. Or they want to establish relations or cement existing ones, or for support and assistance or any other mutual reason.

These visits, even at the personal level, are more than mere courtesy calls. Important matters concerning both and even others are discussed. Their public aspect is only a part of the story. The other, and more significant, is done in private.

To appreciate the shift in attitude to, and even significance of, official visits by heads of state and other dignitaries, one needs only to recall that there was a time when this was not the case, when they were rare or exceptional happenings that were talked about for years and became historical reference points. And that a mere three decades ago.

A visit by a head of state – a very rare thing – brought the country to a standstill. Schools, public offices and businesses would close. School children, public servants and ordinary citizens would be made to line the road from the airport to wherever the dignitary would be received. 

The national ballet would be at hand to entertain the visiting president. It would be the same wherever he was taken in the country and on the day of departure.

The spectacle was the thing, elaborately planned and executed, like it was the sole purpose of the visit, which it probably was. That is what would be remembered and talked about for a long time.

They were also a sort of favour to the country and the people had to show special gratitude.

The public display was, however, not random. There was a method to it. It was meant to wow and cow. Being seen in the company of another head of state, especially if he was thought to be more powerful and influential, was a form of validation for the president and an important prop to his power and stature.

Sometimes it is a useful measure of the strength of the state and the values its leaders hold when the public display element becomes the heart of a state event.

Today that, obviously, is not necessary. There is no need for such props or legitimisation. These come from within, from doing what is right for the country. Actually, more leaders are visiting because of the stature of President Paul Kagame and the standing of Rwanda among nations. This also has become normal. 

More visitors will come and will be warmly received. But the country will not come to standstill while they are here. Life will continue. That too is normal.