Skip to main content

B.Clinton:we Could Have Saved 300,000 Lives in Rwanda


 
Clinton is wrong and he is lost.
 
Rwanda claims that 1,000,000 Tutsi were killed by the genocide. Clinton says that he could have saved 300,000 Tutsi ( without Hutu). So, who could have saved the 700,000 Tutsi ?
 
Did the genocide take place from refugee camps in Zaire or before  people fled to Zaire to settle in these camps ?
 
Will now Kagame  continue to point out his finger to France while Clinton admits his role in the Rwandan genocide ?
 
 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100546207

Former U.S. president Bill Clinton admitted that if the U.S. had gone into Rwanda sooner following the start of the 1994 genocide, at least a third or roughly 300,000 lives could have been saved.

Speaking to CNBC Meets' Tania Bryer, Clinton explained that the failure of his administration to act during the genocide, which claimed the lives of around a million Rwandans, was one of the reasons behind the establishment of the Clinton Foundation.

"If we'd gone in sooner, I believe we could have saved at least a third of the lives that were lost...it had an enduring impact on me."

While Clinton added that the U.S. didn't have the same presence in Africa in 1994 that it does now, if he had sent around 10,000 troops into the country thousands of lives could have been spared.
In the 19 years since the atrocities, many historians and analysts have criticized the inactivity of the U.S. and other Western nations for not supporting the small UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda at the time.

Classified documents released in 2004 revealed that the Clinton administration knew of a "final solution to eliminate all Tutsis" well in advance of the genocide.

In a reference to the tribal tensions between the Hutus and Tutsis that were at the center of the genocide, Clinton explained the Foundation's goals: "I want people to revel in our diversity and respect it without thinking that we have to refer to each other in negative terms. That is, I can be proud of my heritage without dismissing yours."

Clinton said he was proud of other international efforts during his eight-year presidency between 1993 and 2001, including peace efforts in the Middle East which culminated in the 1993 Oslo Accords and the Northern Ireland Good Friday agreement, as well as the resolution of the Bosnian War.

"We tried to pull the world together. I think that's a good model for America's world today…Make it work for everybody, prove what the role of government is, and then just try to keep pulling things together by building new networks," he said. "You can't stop every bad thing from happening."





__._,_.___

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines contre le Rwanda sont-elles si importantes ?

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines contre le Rwanda sont-elles si importantes ? Auteur : The African Rights Campaign. Londres, Royaume-Uni Publié en : mars 2026   Introduction Lorsqu'un gouvernement est accusé d'exécutions extrajudiciaires, de déplacements massifs, de violences sexuelles, de violations des droits de l'homme et du pillage systématique des ressources naturelles d'un pays voisin, la réponse diplomatique attendue est un démenti catégorique, étayé par des preuves. Le Rwanda ne l'a pas fait. Lorsque le département américain du Trésor a imposé des sanctions aux Forces de défense rwandaises (FDR) et à quatre de leurs commandants les plus haut placés, le 2 mars 2026, la porte-parole officielle de Kigali, Yolande Makolo, a délivré une déclaration que les analystes diplomatiques étudieront attentivement pour ce qu'elle omet conspicuement. Elle a dit que les sanctions étaient « injustes », qu'elles ciblaient « uniquement...

Le Rwanda au Mozambique : qui les a placés là, pourquoi ils ne peuvent pas rester et pourquoi la SADC doit les remplacer avant que les dégâts ne deviennent permanents

  Qui a placé le Rwanda là-bas, pourquoi la France refuse de le remplacer, comment le déploiement est devenu un bouclier contre les sanctions, et pourquoi la SADC doit agir avant que les dégâts ne deviennent permanents Mars 2026   Résumé exécutif Les sanctions occidentales contre les Forces de Défense du Rwanda (RDF), imposées par les États-Unis le 2 mars 2026 en vertu du Global Magnitsky Act et relayées par une pression croissante de l'Union européenne, ont mis à nu une contradiction stratégique de premier ordre. La même force militaire sanctionnée pour son soutien opérationnel direct au groupe rebelle M23 en République démocratique du Congo est simultanément le principal garant sécuritaire d'un projet de gaz naturel liquéfié (GNL) de 20 milliards de dollars exploité par le géant français TotalEnergies à Cabo Delgado, dans le nord du Mozambique. Cette analyse répond à trois questions interconnectées dont les réponses définissent ...

Why US Sanctions Against Rwanda Are So Important

Why US Sanctions Against Rwanda Are So Important Author: The African Rights Campaign. London, UK Published: March 2026   Introduction When a government is accused of extrajudicial killings, mass displacement, sexual violence, human rights abuses, and the systematic pillage of another country's mineral resources, the expected response in international diplomacy is an unequivocal denial backed by evidence. Rwanda did not do that. When the United States Department of the Treasury imposed sanctions on the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and four of its most senior commanders on 2 March 2026, Kigali's official spokesperson Yolande Makolo made a statement that diplomatic analysts will study carefully for what it conspicuously omitted. She said the sanctions were 'unjust,' that they targeted 'only one party to the peace process,' and that they 'misrepresent the reality and distort the facts.' Rwanda's government, described by Bloomb...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

Migration Policy Institute