{Change with stability debate has drawn some reactions though muted than would have been expected, and more so from wrong quarters/characters and most if not all of these from abroad. The two wrongs (quarters and characters) then questions the authenticity and intention of some reactions and which renders them irrelevant and out of context to our debate. This debate is about the existential threats to Rwanda, and Rwandans that is most likely with change and instability rather change with stability. }
{{External Media.
}}
Some external media and especially VOA Kinyarwanda edition and to some extent VOA African service, has been hosting some of the these characters who when asked to introduce themselves, belong to parties whose voices cannot objectively represent the views of Rwandese for the very reasons why they happened to talk from western capital and social media. These can categorized as follows:
{{Renegades (Bigarashas)}}
These are characters who have committed crimes in our country for which they are wanted back home. They are criminals that can’t and should don’t be seen to represent the views of descent Rwandans. Some of them failed accountability demands of our system of governance and had to flee after questioning only to pose as oppositionists in western capitals where they now claim to be experts of our system to which they outdated or of touch or both. Kayumba, Rudasingwa, Himbara and Rene Mugigenzi and the likes fall into this category. Problem is, serious media outlets which consults them for an opinion choose to ignore their troubled background and why there are where they are now. How would any serious journalist interview a criminal (except may be with regard to criminal activities which is not possible) and purport his views to represent the views of a descent Rwandese. Besides, their criminal activities deprives them of their voting rights and by extension no say in the governance of our country.
{{FDLR members and or their associates}}
These are extremist Rwandans and wanted criminals who took part in genocide against Tutsis in 1994, and roam western capitals freely despite warrant of arrest which a number of western govern countries have chosen to ignore because they immanent from Rwanda, a poor Africa country. Contrast this with holocaust criminals who are hunted even in the advanced ages and brought to justice by the state of Israel with the support of a super power USA. You see double standards in dealing with similar criminals. So our genocidaires are not as bad as Nazis just because they are black? One of the many explanations one can advance with regard to muted attention of the world range from support these terrorist had before, during and after genocide especially from their supporters in Europe mainly some French interested parties and systems. These also have wide networks in the western world that waters down and revises genocide in Rwanda. These have found natural allies from Rwandese who either committed genocide or their relatives did or were party to the system in Rwanda that planned, directed and executed genocide. These groups which as former President Bush would put it form a strong and a strange axis of evil, which is why in part FDLR could not be fought in DRC when M23 was destroyed quickly for it was against these interests. And so, these groups will fight tooth and nail to discredit anything Rwanda including our 2017 project. The only consolation is that, we defeated these before, and we are more prepared in every sense to keep them in check as long as we maintain our exemplary leadership in place. As President Kagame once put it when we invaded Congo in 1999 to flush out interahamwe across our boarder ‘we shall pay any price/ use any possible medicine to treat/ defeat these elements”. He is model worked as it did when he defeated a combined force of Habyarimana’s army (inzirabwoba or ingirabwoba?) and their French financiers and supporters. This was not an ordinary defeat. It was extra-ordinary and cannot be replicated. Our peace and security model which Presidnet Kagame has used with the highest degree of precision known and a case study for that matter, is a major factor in our 2017 project. FDLR and their cohorts cannot reverse it, despite their foreign campaigns to do so. Induru ntirwana ningoma (loosely translated as ‘war cries cannot dethrone a state/Kingdom). FDLR ideologue of the extermination of Tustis has been, is, and will be a strong for these terrorists are supported by powers that be. One wonders how these same powers would feel if any country would support ISIL with their zeal to exterminate westerners. Isn’t this double standard in extreme sense. Or is a terrorist dangerous only if they target western interest only? Or it is pure racism where blood of Africans doesn’t matter a narrative held be many western racists? If countries get polarized in fighting terrorism in whichever form or substance, winners will be terrorist and the rest of us losers including westerners. Think of FDLR as ISIL in DRC is it not a threat really? The narrative that they a few is bizarre. Dangers in ideological orientation is not a function of numbers nor age. Even one is too many for their venomous outbursts appeals to masses who harbor similar orientations in silence and they are many. The argument that, they are young combatants born after 1994 makes no sense either for these are feed into their parents’ ideologue which becomes their faith. How else would one explain a young person loaming the forests of DRC if such is not immersed in such ideologue? As the Swahili saying goes ‘mtoto wa nyoka, ninyoka, ‘umwana winzoka ninzoka loosely translated as ‘ a child of a snake is a snake’. But also this cements our conviction of sustaining our stability under President Paul Kagame who is the only guarantor of our security as he has been.
{{Constitutional Conformists and Simplisticists:}}
This constitutes media groups who succumb/fall prey to the manipulations of FDLR groups and their sympathizers. They also include activists whose duty is to preach to Africans and African leader how to behave and govern. They are also other interest groups to which Africans should be perpetual slaves real or psychologically to the extent that, they are not allowed/able to make informed choices. As pointed earlier, they have held Africans constant. On one side Africa is rising and it is. Africans are rising too. Rwandans arose much faster and are on course in defining their future, their destiny. And the above groups will not reverse the wind of change and our right to choice, and through the leadership we need and deserve. Thus for instance, Sam Nujoma, the father of Namibia nation went for third term at the request of the Namibians, much for the his track record and what he did for Namibians. And although there is no parallel with Rwanda for Namibia was only a post conflict country at that time, whereas ours is a combination of post conflict and post genocide, a situation that has no precedent in the history of mankind, and begs unique measures to fix both.
It is a fallacy to suggest that democracy is a panacea to Africa’s problems and less that term limits can solve them. Even the “greatest” democracy in the world, the United States of America, has many problems because of a political system which marginalizes people and favours corporations. Of course, it is equally fallacious to suggest that external interest can sort out Africa’s problems. In our case, the end state is not term or not term. This is confusion. It is sustainance of stability and miraculous socio-economic transformation President Paul Kagame has ushered in our country. Term limits happen to be in our path to that end state, a path we did define and redefine as circumstances demand. And they very meuch do.
This begs the question, does third term affect the level of development of Africa? My answer is absolutely NO. There is no correlation between third term and development or two terms and development. Term limits don’t impact on country’ development. Leaders do.
Countries such as Nigeria, Malawi, Zambia and Burkina Faso rejected third terms. These countries have economic, social and political problems such as corruption, because of weak institutions. It is fair to say that third terms per se do not inhibit a country’s development. On the contrary, if we take Singapore as an example of no term limits development paradigm. This was also true for western Europe. Much of their development from industrial development to their emergency as developed economies had no term limits. They were ruled by Kings/Queens until recently. Now the decedents of these systems now in office, want us to believe that, they had term limits as long as these have been nation state. Far from that. We are at the development stage at which they had Kings/Queens only that we late comers. But this does not negate the challenges of development they faced then, and which we face today.
And as such when Rwandese have seen beyond number 3rd, but rather at the exemplary leadership of President Paul Kagane in these numbers, which is the end state. There is no powers whether external or otherwise that can reverse, nor shake this conviction. The above parties few as they are, and irrelevant to our case/destructive as they are, can never reverse the will and wishes of 4 million Rwandans. It is a well informed decision that correlated our past, our present and futuristic scenarios and by so doing avoided existential threats inherent.
No one can reverse an idea whose time has come. This is one.
{ {{To be continued… }} }
Professor Nshuti Manasseh.
Economist and Financial Expert.
Email: nshutim@gmail.com.
Leave a Reply