Kagame's Use of the Genocide Narrative for Political and Diplomatic Gain

Introduction

Paul Kagame has ruled Rwanda since 1994, first as de facto leader and Vice President, then officially as President since 2000. While often portrayed internationally as a model of African leadership, this characterization ignores Rwanda's lack of democratic governance and persistent poverty. Kagame has carefully cultivated an image of success by showcasing development in the capital Kigali while rural areas remain among the poorest in Africa. Throughout his nearly three decades in power, he has leveraged the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in which an estimated 800,000 to one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed, to consolidate control and silence opposition.

Through a combination of diplomatic pressure, suppression of dissent, and historical revisionism, Kagame has made his version of events the only acceptable account, both domestically and internationally. He has used this control to silence critics, justify his continued authoritarian rule, and deflect accusations of human rights abuses and military interventions in neighbouring countries.

Controlling the Narrative of the Genocide

The Rwandan government has imposed strict laws criminalizing "genocide denial," which, on the surface, appears to be a legitimate attempt to prevent historical revisionism and the spread of hateful propaganda. However, these laws have been used to suppress alternative perspectives, particularly those that point to crimes committed by Kagame's Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) before, during, and after the genocide.

While there is no doubt that the genocide was a horrific tragedy targeting the Tutsi population, Kagame's regime has actively suppressed discussions about RPF atrocities against Hutus, particularly the mass killings that occurred in the aftermath of the genocide and during Rwanda's military interventions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

This selective memory has allowed Kagame to present himself as the saviour of Rwanda and the sole architect of peace and progress. Any alternative narratives—whether from political opponents, human rights organizations, or foreign governments—are dismissed as "genocide denial" or support for the former genocidal regime.

According to a 2010 UN report, the RPF may have committed war crimes and possibly genocide against Hutu refugees in the DRC following the 1994 genocide. However, Kagame's government rejected these findings, and international pressure to investigate these allegations has been minimal (UN Mapping Report, 2010).

Rwanda's Economic Reality vs. Kigali Showcase

Despite Kagame's carefully crafted image of Rwanda as an economic success story, the country remains among the 25 poorest nations globally. The development frequently highlighted by the government and international observers is largely confined to the capital city of Kigali, which serves as a showcase to impress foreign visitors and investors.

Rural Rwanda, where approximately 83% of the population lives, continues to face extreme poverty, with limited access to adequate healthcare, education, and economic opportunities. According to World Bank data, Rwanda's poverty rate remains high at around 38%, with rural poverty significantly higher than urban rates (World Bank, 2020).

The government's development strategy has prioritized visible infrastructure projects in Kigali while rural development has lagged behind. This urban-rural disparity is deliberately obscured in government statistics and promotional materials that present Rwanda as uniformly developing and prosperous (Ansoms et al., 2018).

Diplomatic Cancellations as a Political Tool

Kagame has also used diplomatic relations as leverage to control Rwanda's image internationally. Whenever a foreign country or organization challenges his narrative, he is quick to sever ties or retaliate diplomatically.

Recent Diplomatic Break with Belgium (March 2025)

In March 2025, Kagame severed diplomatic relations with Belgium in response to European Union sanctions imposed over Rwanda's military incursion into the Democratic Republic of Congo. This dramatic move represents the latest example of Kagame's pattern of using diplomatic ruptures to deflect criticism of his regional military interventions. By cutting ties with Belgium, Rwanda's former colonial ruler, Kagame attempted to frame the sanctions as neo-colonial interference rather than legitimate international concern over Rwanda's destabilizing actions in the DRC.

This diplomatic crisis follows years of mounting evidence of Rwanda's support for armed groups in eastern DRC, including the M23 rebels who have been accused of numerous human rights violations. The EU sanctions targeted key Rwandan officials involved in the military operations, prompting Kagame's retaliatory diplomatic break.

Historical Pattern with France and Belgium

Two other notable examples of Kagame's diplomatic manoeuvring are his historical relations with France and Belgium.

France: In the years following the genocide, relations between Rwanda and France became highly strained. Kagame accused France of complicity in the genocide, pointing to the French government's historical support for the Hutu-led government before 1994. In 2006, when a French judge issued arrest warrants for high-ranking RPF officials over the assassination of former President Juvénal Habyarimana (an event that triggered the genocide), Kagame cut diplomatic ties with France. This move was a direct warning to other countries that any challenge to Kagame's version of events would come at a diplomatic cost.

Relations began to normalize in 2010, but tensions resurfaced in 2014 when Kagame accused France of direct involvement in the genocide during a speech commemorating the 20th anniversary of the tragedy. In 2021, the Duclert Commission in France acknowledged "overwhelming responsibilities" of the French government in the genocide, which led to further normalization of relations (Duclert, 2021).

Belgium: Prior to the 2025 diplomatic break, Belgium and Rwanda had experienced periodic tensions. Belgium, as the former colonial power in Rwanda, has had a complex relationship with the country. Whenever Belgian politicians or human rights organizations have raised concerns about Kagame's human rights abuses or political repression, his government has responded by reducing cooperation or accusing Belgium of neo-colonialism.

In 2018, when Belgium announced a reduction in aid to Rwanda over human rights concerns, Kagame responded by publicly criticizing Belgium and suggesting that Rwanda did not need Belgian assistance (Human Rights Watch, 2018).

These diplomatic cancellations have served as a warning to other nations that Kagame will not tolerate any questioning of his rule or the official genocide narrative.

Absence of Democratic Governance

Despite regular elections, Rwanda under Kagame cannot be classified as a democracy by any meaningful standard. Elections are characterized by intimidation, harassment of opposition candidates, and tight control over the electoral process. In the 2017 presidential election, Kagame won with a reported 98.8% of the vote, a figure that independent observers consider impossible in a genuinely competitive democratic system.

Freedom House consistently rates Rwanda as "Not Free" in its annual Freedom in the World reports, citing severe restrictions on political rights and civil liberties. The country scores particularly low on political pluralism, with opposition parties facing systematic harassment and obstruction (Freedom House, 2024).

The Rwandan parliament and judiciary lack independence, with both institutions effectively serving as extensions of executive power rather than providing checks and balances. Critics argue that Rwanda has established a sophisticated system of authoritarian control disguised with democratic trappings to satisfy international donors (Sundaram, 2016).

Using Genocide Commemorations for Political Legitimacy

Each year, Rwanda holds elaborate genocide commemoration ceremonies, which serve not only to honor the victims but also to reinforce Kagame's political authority. These ceremonies are highly controlled, and participation is often mandatory for government officials, businesses, and even ordinary citizens.

Foreign dignitaries who attend these events are expected to adhere strictly to the official government narrative, and any deviation from this can result in diplomatic consequences. Meanwhile, opposition leaders, journalists, and activists who challenge Kagame's rule during these periods are often arrested or forced into exile.

This strategy allows Kagame to consolidate power by constantly reminding both Rwandans and the international community that his leadership is necessary to prevent another genocide. He positions himself as the only leader capable of maintaining peace and stability, making any opposition seem like a threat to Rwanda's survival.

Scholars like Filip Reyntjens have argued that Kagame's government has effectively "instrumentalized" the genocide to justify its authoritarian rule and to deflect criticism from the international community (Reyntjens, 2015).

Suppressing Opposition Under the Pretext of "Genocide Denial"

Kagame's government has been ruthless in suppressing political opposition, often using accusations of genocide denial or revisionism as justification.

Victoire Ingabire: A prominent opposition leader, Ingabire returned to Rwanda in 2010 to run against Kagame in the presidential elections. She was arrested and sentenced to prison for "genocide ideology," a vague charge used to silence dissenters. Her crime was merely suggesting that Hutu victims should also be acknowledged. After serving eight years in prison, she was released in 2018 but continues to face significant restrictions on her political activities (Amnesty International, 2018).

Diane Rwigara: Another political opponent, Rwigara was arrested after announcing her candidacy for the presidency in 2017. Her family's businesses were targeted, and she was accused of politically motivated financial crimes. Although she was eventually acquitted, the case demonstrated the risks faced by those who challenge Kagame's authority (Freedom House, 2019).

Bernard Ntaganda: The founder of the PS-Imberakuri party was sentenced to four years in prison in 2011 for "divisionism" and "threatening state security" after criticizing government policies. His case exemplifies how genocide laws are applied to virtually any form of political dissent (Human Rights Watch, 2011).

By labelling political opponents as genocide deniers, Kagame ensures that there is virtually no room for political competition in Rwanda. The international community, wary of being perceived as supporting genocide sympathizers, has been largely hesitant to challenge these actions.

Human Rights Abuses and Military Interventions

While Kagame's government enjoys praise for Rwanda's purported stability, it has also been responsible for severe human rights violations, including political assassinations, suppression of press freedom, and military interventions in the DRC.

Kagame has been accused of backing armed rebel groups in the eastern DRC, particularly the M23 group, which has committed numerous atrocities. However, whenever these accusations arise, Kagame deflects by invoking the genocide and accusing critics of being complicit in supporting Hutu militias that fled Rwanda after 1994.

This strategy has been effective in discouraging Western powers from taking strong action against Rwanda's involvement in the DRC's conflicts. Kagame portrays his military actions as defensive measures necessary to prevent another genocide, thus maintaining his grip on power while destabilizing the region.

A 2012 UN Group of Experts report provided substantial evidence of Rwanda's support for the M23 rebellion in the DRC, yet international response was muted, with some countries briefly suspending aid before resuming it without significant changes to Rwanda's regional policies (UN Group of Experts, 2012).

The March 2025 EU sanctions and subsequent diplomatic break with Belgium represent one of the most significant international responses to Rwanda's continued destabilization of eastern DRC, though it remains to be seen whether this will lead to meaningful changes in Rwanda's regional policy.

Constitutional Changes and Extended Rule

In 2015, Kagame orchestrated a constitutional referendum that allowed him to run for additional terms, potentially extending his presidency until 2034. The referendum passed with 98% approval, a result that many international observers found suspicious given the lack of political space for opposition.

During the campaign for the referendum, those who opposed the constitutional changes were often accused of wanting to destabilize Rwanda and return it to the chaos that preceded the genocide. This effectively silenced meaningful debate about the merits of term limits and democratic transitions of power (International Crisis Group, 2015).

International Complicity

Western powers, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, have been criticized for their uncritical support of Kagame despite his authoritarian tendencies. This support stems partly from guilt over the international community's failure to prevent the 1994 genocide and partly from Rwanda's perceived stability and the carefully cultivated image of economic growth.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton, who was in office during the genocide, has maintained close ties with Kagame and has praised Rwanda's development without adequately addressing its human rights record. Similarly, the UK has been one of Rwanda's largest donors, with limited criticism of Kagame's authoritarian rule (Straus, 2019).

This international complicity has emboldened Kagame to continue his control over Rwanda's political landscape without fear of significant consequences. However, the recent EU sanctions and diplomatic tensions may signal a shifting international stance toward Rwanda's actions in the region.

Conclusion: The Consequences of Kagame's Strategy

Paul Kagame's ability to control the genocide narrative and use diplomatic retaliation has allowed him to remain in power unchallenged for nearly three decades. While Rwanda has seen some economic growth and development, particularly in Kigali, these limited achievements have come at the cost of political freedoms, human rights, and regional stability, with the majority of rural Rwandans continuing to live in poverty.

By criminalizing alternative narratives, severing diplomatic ties with critics, and portraying himself as Rwanda's indispensable leader, Kagame has effectively shielded himself from accountability. However, this strategy has also left Rwanda in a precarious position—where political dissent is crushed, history is manipulated, and relations with key international partners are dictated by a rigid and self-serving narrative.

The March 2025 diplomatic break with Belgium over EU sanctions represents a critical juncture in Rwanda's international relations. It highlights the growing international concern over Rwanda's destabilizing role in the Great Lakes region and may signal increasing challenges to Kagame's ability to act with impunity.

As the years pass, the question remains: will Kagame's grip on power remain unchallenged, or will Rwandans and the international community eventually push back against his authoritarian rule? The answers may determine whether Rwanda can achieve true reconciliation, democratic governance, and broad-based economic development that benefits all citizens, not just those in the showcase capital.

References

Amnesty International. (2018). Rwanda: Release of prisoner of conscience Victoire Ingabire must be followed by freedom for others. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr47/9123/2018/en/

Ansoms, A., Marijnen, E., Cioffo, G., & Murison, J. (2018). Statistics versus livelihoods: questioning Rwanda's pathway out of poverty. Review of African Political Economy, 44(151), 47-65.

Duclert, V. (2021). The Duclert Commission Report on France's Role in the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda. French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

European Union. (2025). Council Decision concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Official Journal of the European Union.

Freedom House. (2019). Freedom in the World 2019: Rwanda. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/country/rwanda/freedom-world/2019

Freedom House. (2024). Freedom in the World 2024: Rwanda. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/country/rwanda/freedom-world/2024

Human Rights Watch. (2011). Rwanda: Prison Term for Opposition Leader. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/02/11/rwanda-prison-term-opposition-leader

Human Rights Watch. (2018). Rwanda: World Report 2018. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/rwanda

International Crisis Group. (2015). Rwanda at the Crossroads: Constitutional Amendment Undermines Democracy. Africa Report No. 223.

Reyntjens, F. (2015). Political Governance in Post-Genocide Rwanda. Cambridge University Press.

Straus, S. (2019). The Limits of a Genocide Lens: Violence Against Rwandans in the 1990s. Journal of Genocide Research, 21(4), 504-524.

Sundaram, A. (2016). Bad News: Last Journalists in a Dictatorship. Bloomsbury USA.

UN Group of Experts. (2012). Final Report of the Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. S/2012/843.

UN Mapping Report. (2010). Democratic Republic of the Congo, 1993-2003: Report of the Mapping Exercise documenting the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between March 1993 and June 2003. United Nations.

World Bank. (2020). Rwanda Poverty Assessment. World Bank Group, Washington, D.C

_____________________

Prepared by African Rights Alliance, London, UK