Skip to main content

[RwandaLibre] Clinton documents reveal response to Rwanda genocide criticism

 

Clinton documents reveal response to Rwanda genocide criticism

- Papers suggest range of responses to 1994 crisis
- Clinton aide: administration 'responded to danger signs'

James Ball in New York
theguardian.com, Friday 28 February 2014 15.31 EST
Jump to comments (…)


Former President Bill Clinton and Rwandan President Paul Kagame at a
2012 event in Kigali. Photograph: Ed Ou/Getty Images

Newly released documents from the Clinton presidential library reveal
how the administration worked to explain the often-criticised US
response to genocide in Rwanda.

Documents preparing President Bill Clinton for an interview with a
Washington Post reporter, Tom Lippman, suggest a range of responses to
possible criticisms of the administration's response to one of the
most serious post-war humanitarian crises.

Over around 100 days in the summer of 1994, members of Rwanda's Hutu
majority slaughtered between 500,000 and a million people,
predominantly Tutsis. The international community was condemned for
its slow reaction, which was in part attributed to the killing of
several US troops during an earlier United Nations mission in Somalia.

The memo for the president, written in September 1994 by a close aide,
Tara Sonenshine, attempts to rebut potential criticisms in turn.

If Lippman suggested the USA's experience in Somalia had prevented
Clinton from doing "the right thing", Sonenshine suggested the
president should respond: "If we were truly spooked by Somalia, we
would have turned away entirely, instead of committing 4,000 American
troops and spending $500m to give the people of Rwanda humanitarian
help."

Another answer suggests an earlier deployment of peacekeepers to the
region should be used to say the administration had "responded to
danger signs – not ignored them", and makes a defence of a US decision
in April, weeks before the genocide began, to push for the UN to
withdraw its peacekeepers.

Sonenshine was, however, unable to offer a rebuttal to every line of
questioning she could foresee.

"On the decision NOT to provide US peacekeepers and the notion that
PRD 25 [Likely a typographical error in a reference to PDD-25, a
Clinton directive governing US involvement in UN peacekeeping
missions] was designed to limit peacekeeping," she wrote "with Rwanda
fast-becoming the litmus test of that unwillingness — I leave that to
you!"

A later note from Sonenshine to one of Clinton's speechwriters, Bob
Boorstein, returns to the subject of Rwanda, gently admonishing some
in the administration for spurning the idea of a "moral" foreign
policy.

"I know you bristled at the term "moral" especially vis-a-vis foreign
policy," Sonenshine wrote, "but the reality is that this president has
a moral compass … we fail to trumpet the fact that he has the moral
courage to take on difficult issues such as staying in Somalia even
after the killing of US servicemen, bringing the force of the entire
US military to bear on the crisis in Rwanda [and] sticking up for
democracy in Haiti."

http://www.google.ca/gwt/x?gl=CA&hl=en-CA&u=http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/28/clinton-documents-rwanda-genocide-response&q=Clinton+documents+reveal+response+to+Rwanda+genocide+criticism



--
SIBOMANA Jean Bosco
Google+: https://plus.google.com/110493390983174363421/posts
YouTube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9B4024D0AE764F3D
http://www.youtube.com/user/sibomanaxyz999
***Online Time:15H30-20H30, heure de Montréal.***Fuseau horaire
domestique: heure normale de la côte Est des Etats-Unis et Canada
(GMT-05:00)***

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
.To post a message: RwandaLibre@yahoogroups.com; .To join: RwandaLibre-subscribe@yahoogroups.com; .To unsubscribe from this group,send an email to:
RwandaLibre-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
_____________________________________________________

More news:  http://www.amakurunamateka.com ; http://www.ikangurambaga.com ; http://rwandalibre.blogspot.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

__,_._,___

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...

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...

Rubaya Mine Under USA’s Control: Kagame Has No Grounds to Object.

Rubaya Mine: Strategic Interests, Regional Conflict and the DRC–USA Cooperation Framework Rubaya mine, located in Masisi territory in North Kivu, eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, is a Congolese resource. It was a Congolese resource before the M23 advanced on it, it remains a Congolese resource today, and it will remain a Congolese resource regardless of what any regional actor claims, implies or pursues. That is not a political position. It is a statement of international law and sovereign right. This foundational point must be stated plainly because it is frequently obscured in discussions about the conflict in eastern Congo. Debates about security narratives, mineral partnerships and geopolitical alignment risk creating a false impression that Rubaya's ownership or governance is somehow open to negotiation between external parties. It is not. The Democratic Republic of the Congo holds sovereign authority over its territory and its natural resources. N...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

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

Migration Policy Institute