In the previous article of these series, we saw how René Lemarchand, the French-American political scientist, attributed the success of UNAR to nationalism. This political scientist stood out as an objective thinker. Col. Guy Logiest, on the other hand, in the name of Belgian colonialism, stood out as a subjective thinker. His actions negated the logic of nation-state building. We will continue to witness this as we move forward through this series. ALSO READ: How colonialists supported divisionism in Rwanda’s first multiparty politics Logiest gave a reason for his opposition to the UNAR party. To him, the party was looking for support from political parties in Congo (DR Congo now) and the UN to tip international opinion in its favour. He viewed UNAR as planning to neutralize other political parties and stir up an anti-Belgian uprising. Logiest, who was Belgium’s special resident in Rwanda, wanted to assume the king's traditional powers. He used propaganda statements, confined the king to Kigali and made him understand that opposition to the trusteeship was suicidal. He went on with the policy of replacing chiefs and sub-chiefs with those deemed favourable to the trusteeship authority. He gave financial, political and organizational support to other parties but UNAR. He set up a propaganda department under a specialized staff. It influenced the public opinion through radio, newspapers, cinema, leaflets, brochures, mobile groups, and photos, among other things. ALSO READ: Rwanda’s first multiparty politics reflected divisions of late colonial period Logiest hosted the Belgian minister of colonies in Kigali who was amazed by the policy he used. Col. Logiest was made to exercise the functions of a civilian administrator under the title of “a special civil resident”. He enjoyed exceptional and unlimited powers. To achieve his objectives, measures were taken to put UNAR out of politics. He worked tooth and nail to keep the Tutsi out of state machinery. The first step in the process of PARMEHUTU’s access to power was to dismiss a big number of chiefs and their deputies. Members of PARMEHUTU and APROSOMA took over. After the violence of November 1959, 23 chiefs out of 45 and 158 sub-chiefs out of 489 were out of their functions. They had been arrested under the pretext of having fomented violence in their constituencies. Some fled the country; others were killed, while others were imprisoned or had their property destroyed. On November 23, 1959, Logiest explained why there were reforms. Hutu chiefs and deputy chiefs were appointed to replace Tutsi chiefs and their deputies who had been dismissed. He said that it was not done to harm the Tutsis but for the good of the Hutu majority in those territories who had been demanding to be governed by fellow Hutu. ALSO READ: A glance at socio-political chaos that followed Rudahigwa’s sudden death The king protested against these measures calling them illegal, but in vain. Article 17 of the 1952 decree gave Logiest powers to appoint chiefs and their deputies. The colonial administration made new appointments and gave funds to new authorities and their parties to expand geographically. With these means their expansion became possible. At a glance, the government declaration suggested that autonomy and independence were to come in the near future. Belgium set a condition that it was not ready to withdraw when Rwanda and Burundi were still poor. UNAR did not agree with it because of the lack of a set timetable for independence. For Hutu parties, it put an end to what they termed Tutsi feudalism and racial discrimination. The declaration aimed at calming people down. It was too late because the trusteeship administration had done enough damage by taking sides with PARMEHUTU. The trusteeship authority assigned chieftaincies and sub-chieftaincies to PARMEHUTU. Another reform was made and the higher national council was replaced with a provisional special council. Despite protests by UNAR, the trusteeship administration organized elections. The provisional special council was charged with monitoring the king’s activities and replacing his authority. That was the reason why the king rejected its proposals. This meant separation between the king and the forum composed of PARMEHUTU, APROSOMA and RADER parties. Local council elections were planned under the decree of July 14, 1952 and the declaration of November 10, 1959. UNAR sought withdrawal from the provisional special council due to the violence of November 1959 and the state of emergency that was declared in the country. The UN mission made the same claim. The trusteeship authority refuted it and the elections would take place in June 1960. UNAR withdrew from the special provisional council and boycotted elections, which were preceded by campaigns where the trusteeship administration favoured PARMEHUTU openly. The administration warned the population against UNAR. The special resident said that PARMEHUTU was a spotless party. He went on to say it was a party that defended the rights of the Hutu. The Belgian administration suppressed forces that were against elections. There were acts of violence which, in most cases, targeted UNAR and its sympathisers. More about the Belgian administration’s manipulations and its surrogates in Rwanda will be unpacked in this series.
