Genocide Denial: A Threat to Rwanda's Security and Stability
The Importance of Confronting Genocide Denial
Genocide denial, the assertion that a genocide did not occur, is a phenomenon that is integral to any genocide story. It is an attempt to minimize, negate, or distort the historical truth about a genocide, and it can have far-reaching implications for the survivors of the genocide, the country in which it took place, and the international community. In the case of Rwanda, genocide denial poses a significant threat to the country's security and stability.
The Three Forms of Genocide Denial
According to scholar A. Dirk Moses, genocide denial can take three different forms: outright denial, partial denial, and distortion.
- Outright denial: This form of denial completely rejects the occurrence of a genocide.
- Partial denial: This form of denial accepts that a genocide occurred but minimizes its extent or impact.
- Distortion: This form of denial acknowledges the occurrence of a genocide but attempts to reinterpret or revise the historical facts.
All three forms of genocide denial can be harmful, but they can also be used for different purposes. Outright denial is often used to delegitimize the claims of survivors and to create a climate of fear and intimidation. Partial denial and distortion can be used to manipulate public opinion and to undermine the authority of international institutions such as the United Nations.
The RPF's Perception of Genocide Denial
In Rwanda, genocide denial is perceived as a threat to the legitimacy of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the ruling political party. The RPF came to power in 1994 after a long civil war that culminated in the genocide. The RPF has worked to promote reconciliation and unity in Rwanda, but it also views genocide denial as a threat to its authority. As a result, the RPF has taken a strong stance against genocide denial, and it has passed laws that make it a crime to deny the genocide.
Comments