The UK's Enduring Relationship with the Kagame Regime: A Complex and Controversial History

The UK's Enduring Relationship with the Kagame Regime: A Complex and Controversial History

Introduction

Since 1990, the United Kingdom has played a significant role in supporting the regime of Rwandan President Paul Kagame. This support has taken multiple forms, including diplomatic backing, financial aid, military assistance, and policy alignment on key international issues. The UK's engagement with Rwanda has often been framed in terms of development aid and post-genocide reconstruction, but critics argue that this support has also enabled human rights abuses, suppression of opposition, and regional destabilization. This article explores the various dimensions of the UK's support for the Kagame regime, examining the motivations behind it and the implications for Rwanda and the broader Great Lakes region of Africa.

Early Support During the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) Insurgency (1990-1994)

The UK's support for Paul Kagame can be traced back to the early 1990s, when the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), led by Kagame, launched an armed insurgency against the Hutu-dominated government of Juvénal Habyarimana. At the time, Kagame, a former intelligence chief of Uganda’s National Resistance Army (NRA), maintained close ties with Western powers, including the UK.

In 1990, the RPF, composed primarily of Tutsi refugees, launched an invasion from Uganda into Rwanda, seeking to overthrow the Habyarimana government and secure the right of return for exiled Tutsis. Through various direct and indirect channels, the UK supported this movement, aligning its foreign policy with broader geopolitical interests in Africa—particularly in ensuring regional stability, securing economic opportunities, and expanding influence over former French-controlled territories.

The UK provided diplomatic backing to Uganda, where the RPF was based prior to the invasion. Uganda, under President Yoweri Museveni, was a key British ally, with strong ties to UK officials. British assistance to Uganda indirectly benefited the RPF, enabling it to gain momentum. As Kagame’s forces advanced, key figures in the British government largely overlooked his military strategies and alleged human rights violations.

While direct UK military support remains disputed, there are indications of indirect assistance that bolstered the RPF’s campaign.

• Military Training and Intelligence Sharing: The RPF had contacts with British intelligence and received military training from British and US forces in Uganda prior to the invasion, likely enhancing their operational capabilities.
• Political Support: The UK expressed support for the RPF's objectives of political reform and democratization in Rwanda, providing a degree of international legitimacy. However, this is not is happening in Rwanda now.
• Diplomatic Stance: The UK's emphasis on diplomatic solutions, alongside a reluctance to strongly condemn the RPF's military actions, contributed to a perception of implicit backing. The UK, alongside the US, pushed for power-sharing through the Arusha Accords, which the RPF used to gain political legitimacy.

Post-Genocide Reconstruction and Financial Aid

After the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, in which an estimated 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu were massacred, the UK emerged as one of Rwanda's most significant donors. The genocide led to an international outcry and a commitment to rebuilding Rwanda under the new RPF-led government, with the UK playing a leading role in this effort.

From the late 1990s onward, the UK provided hundreds of millions of pounds in aid to Rwanda. The Department for International Development (DFID) channelled substantial financial assistance to support:

• Infrastructure development
• Education and health services
• Economic development
• Governance and security sector reform

While these efforts were presented as humanitarian and developmental, critics argue they also served to consolidate Kagame's control by strengthening state institutions under his firm grip. The UK's sense of guilt over failing to prevent the genocide, combined with a desire to support Rwanda's reconstruction, became a significant driver of UK aid and engagement.

Diplomatic and Political Support

The UK has been one of Rwanda's most ardent supporters in international forums. This was particularly evident in how Britain defended Rwanda's human rights record despite concerns raised by international watchdogs. The UK has consistently blocked or downplayed efforts to hold the Kagame regime accountable for its authoritarian governance, political repression, and human rights abuses.

One of the most significant moments of British diplomatic support was in 2009 when Rwanda was admitted into the Commonwealth despite concerns about its human rights record. Rwanda, a former Belgian colony with no historical ties to the British Commonwealth, was fast-tracked into the organization under strong UK advocacy. This move was seen as part of a broader effort to integrate Rwanda into Western economic and political structures.

Key UK Figures and Their Roles

Several high-profile UK figures have played pivotal roles in shaping Britain's relationship with Rwanda:

• Clare Short: As Secretary of State for International Development (1997-2003), Short championed Kagame's leadership and channelled substantial UK aid to Rwanda, viewing it as a model of development success.
• Tony Blair: The former Prime Minister developed a close personal relationship with Kagame, viewing him as a visionary leader. Blair's Africa Governance Initiative provided advisory support to the Rwandan government, further strengthening UK ties.
• Cherie Blair: Tony Blair's wife worked with Rwandan women's groups and advocated for their empowerment.
• Jack Straw: As Foreign Secretary (2001-2006), Straw shaped UK foreign policy toward Rwanda, emphasizing stability and development while often overshadowing human rights concerns.
• David Cameron: As Prime Minister, Cameron continued strong support for Rwanda, praising Kagame's leadership and highlighting Rwanda's economic progress.
• Andrew Mitchell: As Secretary of State for International Development (2010-2012), Mitchell maintained a close relationship with Kagame and defended UK aid to Rwanda, even amid growing concerns about human rights abuses. He authorized the resumption of aid to Rwanda in 2012 despite concerns about its involvement in the DRC conflict.

UK Support in the United Nations Security Council

The UK has played a crucial role in shielding Kagame's government from international scrutiny within the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Despite multiple reports from UN experts detailing Rwanda's involvement in destabilizing the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) through its support for armed rebel groups like M23, the UK has often blocked or watered down resolutions aimed at holding Rwanda accountable.

For example, during discussions on imposing sanctions against Rwanda for its alleged backing of M23 rebels, the UK reportedly opposed strong measures, arguing that engagement with Kagame's government was preferable to punitive action. Similarly, the UK has refrained from endorsing robust international investigations into Rwanda's political repression and human rights violations, often aligning with the United States and other allies who see Kagame as a stabilizing force in the region.

Critics argue that the UK's position in the UNSC has provided Kagame with a degree of impunity, allowing his government to continue its military incursions into the DRC and suppress political dissent at home without facing significant international consequences.

The UK’s Role in Rwanda’s Political System

Marginalization of the Hutu Population

One of the major criticisms of the Kagame regime is the marginalization of the Hutu population. Following the 1994 genocide, the Rwandan government promoted a narrative of national unity while systematically sidelining Hutus from political and economic opportunities. UK support has played a role in sustaining this imbalance by backing Kagame unconditionally, despite evidence of discrimination and exclusion.

Institutionalized Discrimination and Apartheid Against Hutus

Rwanda under Kagame has developed a system of governance where economic, political, social, and financial power is concentrated in the hands of the Tutsi elite, particularly those linked to the ruling FPR. This has created a de facto apartheid system where Hutus face significant discrimination in multiple aspects of life:

1.     Political Exclusion – Hutus are largely excluded from positions of power. The government is dominated by Tutsi individuals who control the military, intelligence, and executive branches. Political opposition, especially those associated with Hutu leadership, is not tolerated.

2.     Economic Disparities – Key industries, businesses, and financial institutions are controlled by a small Tutsi elite, leaving the majority Hutu population economically marginalized. Government contracts and economic opportunities favor Tutsi-run enterprises, further deepening inequality.

3.     Social Discrimination – The official narrative of post-genocide unity has been used to suppress discussions about ethnic disparities. However, many Hutus report systemic discrimination in education, employment, and access to state resources.

4.     Land and Property Seizures – Many Hutus lost their land during the post-genocide period, and redistribution efforts have disproportionately favored Tutsis. Government-led land reforms and evictions have further displaced Hutu communities.

5.     Restricted Civil Rights – Any public discussion of ethnic inequalities is criminalized under Rwanda’s strict laws on “divisionism” and “genocide ideology.” These laws have been weaponized to silence critics of the regime who highlight discrimination against Hutus.

6.     Targeted Repression – Hutu political leaders, activists, and intellectuals who challenge Kagame’s government face imprisonment, exile, or even assassination. International human rights organizations have documented systematic repression of those advocating for equal rights.

This system of exclusion has reinforced a political and economic hierarchy in Rwanda, where the Tutsi minority, particularly those linked to the ruling elite, hold disproportionate control over the nation’s resources and governance structures.

Political Exclusion, Lack of Freedom, and Dictatorship

Kagame’s government has been widely criticized for its lack of political space, suppression of opposition, and human rights abuses. Opposition leaders, journalists, and activists face harassment, imprisonment, or even assassination. The UK’s continuous support, despite these violations, has emboldened Kagame’s authoritarian tendencies.

Concerns About Human Rights and Political Repression

Despite the UK's substantial support, concerns about human rights and political repression in Rwanda have persisted. Critics argue that the UK's focus on stability and development has come at the expense of promoting democracy and accountability:

• Political Landscape: The RPF, dominated by Tutsis, has maintained a firm grip on power since 1994. Critics argue this has led to the marginalization of Hutus in political and socioeconomic spheres.
• Human Rights Concerns: Organizations like Human Rights Watch have documented instances of political repression in Rwanda, including harassment and imprisonment of opposition figures.
• UK's Response: Despite these concerns, the UK has continued its support, often emphasizing Rwanda's developmental achievements over its democratic shortcomings.

Allegations of Misuse of Aid

Concerns have been raised regarding the potential misuse of international aid by the Rwandan government:

• Diversion of Funds: Allegations suggest the Rwandan government may have diverted aid funds to finance military operations in the DRC, though concrete evidence directly linking UK aid to arms purchases is limited.
• Support to Rebel Groups: Reports indicate Rwanda has provided support to rebel groups like M23 in the DRC, leading to regional instability. In response, the UK suspended aid to Rwanda in 2012 over such concerns.
• Migration Partnership Concerns: The UK's controversial migration partnership with Rwanda has raised questions about whether financial support could be used to fund military activities in the DRC. Critics argue that the lack of transparency surrounding aid funds has fuelled suspicions.

Rwanda as a Dictatorship

Paul Kagame has maintained an authoritarian grip over Rwanda for decades, consolidating power through constitutional amendments, electoral manipulation, and suppression of dissent. Key characteristics of Rwanda’s dictatorship include:

1.     Lack of Free and Fair Elections – Kagame has consistently won elections with over 90% of the vote, a clear indicator of electoral manipulation. The 2015 constitutional amendment allowing him to remain in power until 2034 was widely seen as undemocratic.

2.     Suppression of Opposition – Opposition parties face severe restrictions, and their leaders are often arrested, exiled, or assassinated.

3.     Control Over Media – Independent journalism is nearly nonexistent in Rwanda, with the government censoring and intimidating critical media outlets.

4.     Human Rights Violations – Reports of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and torture are rampant, with government critics frequently targeted.

5.     Absence of Judicial Independence – The judiciary operates under Kagame’s control, with courts used to silence opponents rather than uphold justice.

6.     Surveillance and Fear – Kagame’s government employs widespread surveillance to monitor and suppress dissent both domestically and abroad, extending its influence into the Rwandan diaspora.

7.     Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances – Human rights organizations have documented numerous cases of political opponents and critics being assassinated, both within Rwanda and abroad. Rwandans in exile have been targeted, raising concerns about Kagame’s reach beyond Rwanda’s borders.

8.     Arbitrary Imprisonment – Political opponents, journalists, and activists are frequently arrested on trumped-up charges, often without fair trials. Prisons in Rwanda are filled with individuals who have simply expressed dissenting opinions against Kagame’s rule.

9.     Lack of Political Space – Rwanda operates as a de facto one-party state, where any political movement that challenges Kagame's leadership is systematically repressed. Laws on political participation heavily restrict opposition parties, making it nearly impossible for any real democratic competition to exist.

What the UK Could Have Done Differently

To ensure human rights are respected, democracy is upheld, and political space is open for all Rwandans, the UK could have pursued different policies, including:

1.     Conditioning Aid on Human Rights Improvements: Linking financial assistance to measurable improvements in human rights, press freedom, and democratic governance with strict accountability mechanisms.

2.     Encouraging Political Reforms: Actively pushing for political pluralism by supporting independent institutions, civil society groups, and opposition parties.

3.     Holding Rwanda Accountable in the UNSC: Supporting resolutions demanding accountability for Rwanda's actions in the DRC and its human rights record.

4.     Ending Silence on Political Repression: Publicly condemning Kagame's suppression of opposition figures, extrajudicial killings, and restrictions on freedom of speech.

5.     Supporting Ethnic Reconciliation and Equality: Promoting policies ensuring equal representation and opportunities for all Rwandan ethnic groups.

6.     Restricting Economic Benefits for Elites: Ensuring investments benefit all Rwandans rather than just Kagame's inner circle.

7.     Enhancing Press Freedom: Supporting independent media to counter state-controlled narratives.

Recommendations for the UK's Future Engagement with Rwanda

Moving forward, the UK must reassess its engagement with Rwanda to ensure its support does not contribute to authoritarianism, repression, or regional instability:

• Reevaluating Aid Distribution: Conduct independent audits to ensure UK aid directly benefits the Rwandan people rather than entrenching Kagame's power.
• Strengthening Accountability Mechanisms: Introduce benchmarks for governance and democracy as prerequisites for financial support.
• Encouraging Diplomatic Pressure: Use diplomatic leverage to push for fair elections, release of political prisoners, and expansion of political freedoms.
• Imposing Targeted Sanctions: Consider targeted sanctions on high-ranking officials responsible for human rights abuses if violations continue.
• Promoting Regional Stability: Work with international partners to address Rwanda's role in the DRC conflict and push for peace efforts in the region.
• Increasing Transparency: Ensure full transparency regarding the migration partnership with Rwanda and guarantee funds are not used for military purposes.
• Supporting Democratization: Shift focus from supporting the Kagame regime to supporting the Rwandan people and democratic processes.

Conclusion

The UK's relationship with Rwanda is complex and multifaceted, marked by both positive contributions and significant shortcomings. By adopting a more critical and balanced approach that emphasizes human rights alongside development goals, the UK could foster more sustainable and just outcomes for all Rwandans. A recalibrated approach that balances development support with a firm commitment to democratic governance could create a more inclusive and stable Rwanda.

References

1.     Human Rights Watch. (2022). Rwanda: Events of 2021. World Report 2022. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/rwanda

2.     United Nations Security Council. (2012). Final Report of the Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo (S/2012/843). New York: United Nations.

3.     UK Parliament. (2012). UK Aid to Rwanda: International Development Committee Report. London: House of Commons.

4.     International Crisis Group. (2020). Averting Proxy Wars in the Eastern DR Congo and Great Lakes. Africa Report No. 150. Brussels: ICG.

5.     Department for International Development (DFID). (2019). Development Tracker: Rwanda. London: UK Government.

6.     Zorbas, E. (2011). Aid Dependence and Policy Independence: Explaining the Rwandan Paradox. In S. Straus & L. Waldorf (Eds.), Remaking Rwanda: State Building and Human Rights after Mass Violence (pp. 103-117). University of Wisconsin Press.

7.     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. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

8.     Reyntjens, F. (2013). Political Governance in Post-Genocide Rwanda. Cambridge University Press.

9.     Beswick, D. (2010). Aiding State Building and Sacrificing Peace Building? The Rwanda–UK Relationship 1994–2011. Third World Quarterly, 31(3), 513-528.

10.  Marriage, Z. (2006). Not Breaking the Rules, Not Playing the Game: International Assistance to Countries at War. Hurst & Company.

11. Amnesty International. (2022). Rwanda 2021/2022. Annual Report. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/africa/east-africa-the-horn-and-great-lakes/rwanda/report-rwanda/

12.  UK Government. (2022). UK-Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership. Policy Paper. London: Home Office.