On April 25, 2023 African Arguments published an article by Victoire Ingabire titled “Rwanda, too, needs to make amends.” In it, Ingabire claims to advocate for the repatriation of Rwandans who have not returned to their country since the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. Her professed advocacy is startling in the current context of Rwanda because the Rwandan government, unlike the previous genocidal regime of Habyarimana, does not claim that the country is too small to accommodate all Rwandans. Ingabire’s obsession with discrediting Rwanda’s government necessarily leads to her to undermining the country’s foundation for unity and invariably discredits the cause she claims to fight for; it reveals her hidden agenda: an unbridled thirst for power, at whatever cost to society. In other words, it’s nothing but narcissism. Otherwise, how does one explain a situation where someone attacks the very policies they claim to care about. Consider the fact that the government has done everything in its power to get Rwandans to return home. It has maintained a consistent position on this issue. For Rwandan leaders, providing security and protection for all Rwandans regardless of their ethnic, regional, and religious identities is the surest path to full repatriation. Different initiatives, from military and diplomatic ones to direct engagements of Rwandan communities in their host countries, have been undertaken towards this pursuit. Accordingly, since 1995 more than 2 million Rwandans have been repatriated home; even members of the genocidal army (ex-FAR and FDLR) who have decided to return have been reintegrated into society. Indeed, it is due to the success of these initiates that the country found itself in a unique situation where genocide convicts live side by side with genocide survivors. The international community agrees with the government, which is why the cessation clause was invoked and came into effect in 2013, meaning that the reasons for a particular refugee crisis have ended and that Rwanda is a safe country. For Ingabire, however, Rwanda cannot be a safe country as long as it doesn’t accommodate ethnic politics. Indeed, those unwilling to return home advocate for the reinstallation of ethnic politics that led to the genocide against the Tutsi. In this pursuit, they have sought alliances with host countries and have developed tensions with local authorities where such support has not been forthcoming. This is a choice that has come with consequences in terms of relations with the Rwandan government. Ingabire’s disagreement with the Rwandan government on the matter paints a clear picture of the kind of politics she wishes for the country. Significantly, if she agrees as the government does that all Rwandans have the right to live in their country, it is as clear as day that her disagreement and point of contention is on the means to achieve this objective. On this disagreement Ingabire doesn’t just disagree with the government, she is in confrontation with Rwandan society whose consensus – Urugwiro consultations – is that all political organizations that operate in the country must (not should) never subscribe to or accommodate Hutu Power politics, actively participate in genocide denial, revisionism and minimization, and use violence as a means to advance their sectarian objectives; indeed, this consensus recommended the banning from the country’s political landscape any such political organizations. In other words, Ingabire wishes to overturn society’s consensus by deceitfully depicting it as the RPF’s intransigence. “There are Rwandan political groups that oppose the ruling party in Rwanda and agitate for a voluntary and safe return to their motherland so they can exercise political rights without any restrictions,” Ingabire writes, while conveniently omitting the reason why these political parties are not allowed to operate in Rwanda. This is not surprising. Ingabire is the former leader of the Rally for the Return of Refugees and Democracy in Rwanda (RDR), a “political” party formed in Mugunga – former Zaire now DRC – refugee camps by the masterminds of the genocide against the Tutsi, including the notorious ICTR convicts Theoneste Bagosora and Ferdinand Nahimana, who led the Cameroonian branch of the party. Ingabire took the helm of RDR in 1998 and de facto became the political voice of those she now describes as “remnants of defeated Rwanda forces and militia responsible for the genocide”, who coalesced in genocidal armed groupings known under different names such as ALIR, FDLR, FLN, etc. Ingabire even tries to sanitize one of these groupings, stating “The FDLR is an armed group formed by Rwandan refugees in DRC who, following their forcible eviction from Rwanda during the genocide, resorted to armed struggle as a means to retake power in Rwanda.” Make no mistake; it is not by accident that Ingabire tries to sow confusion between refugees and genocide fugitives; she aims to portray the FDLR terror entity as an outfit with legitimate grievances. Evidently, while Ingabire has changed her affiliation numerous times since 1998 (from RDR, FDU-Inkingi, to DALFA-Umurinzi), her criminal ideology and objectives have remained constant. It is not surprising, therefore, that she continues to advocate for her colleagues without any consideration for the fact that overturning the post-genocide consensus and inviting violent extremists into Rwandan politics is the first step towards the recurrence of genocide; it is also not surprising that she chooses to publish such bile during the genocide commemoration period. It is part of a pattern where she confuses her criminal conduct for politics.
