Question 1
Africa has always been studied by Eurocentric scholars who tend to write about Africa pointing out the negatives. For example Araya (2007) states that Africa as a continent continues to be misrepresented as ‘victims of poverty, violence and ridden with HIV/AIDS’ rarely looking at the positives of how the continent has changed and in some instances improved politically, socio-economically and citizens well-being. Those who write about African’s diaspora have often never touched African soil, yet write about these experiences as though they have lived through them. This has resulted in the stereotyping of the continent as being in despair and in need of foreign aid to come to its rescue. Arguably this has resulted in the conditioning of not only Western first world countries citizens but African’s themselves in seeing all the negatives and never celebrating all the positives that the continent has and what countries have achieved. The continent is viewed as this large country, where people speak the same language, dress a certain way (animal skin clothes) and eat unconventional foods (Wainaina, 2005).
But what the world does not know is that our cultures, religions, races and languages differ greatly, we are all bound only by the geographical borders of continent, but more importantly, by the intangible belief that this is home (Soyinka-Airewele and Edozie, 2010). The media continues to broadcast Africa as this needy child that is starving, with its women being helpless, with the continent and its countries having no past or history (Wainaina, 2005). Most white Eurocentric scholars write about colonisation as if it came to save Africa from its ‘uncivilized’ ways, yet not holding colonises accountable for their contribution to the wars they perpetuated. This has not only resulted in the gap between how Africa is written about but how Africa has been represented and framed to the rest of the world lacking accurate, truthful and authentic representation by African writers. Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2015), argues that this therefore requires that one digs deeper into the complex systems of thought rather than just relaying on the process of decolonization but look at historical processes of constitution and configuration of specific colonial structures of power that produced Africa as a an idea that has been reproduced as a dependent subject constantly experiencing war and terror from their brutal governments. For Mbembe (2001), Africa is never seen as possessing proper attributes of ‘human nature’, if this was the case how were the pyramids of Egypt built and are still standing today.
The epistemic violence related to knowledge about how Africa is written about has resulted in African people losing their agency in making and writing about their own history and experiences (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2010). This is not to say work written by Western/Eurocentric scholars should be completely taken away and disposed but rather, there should be more African scholars who have had a lived experience of what it means to be African in order to write more comprehensively on the African experience. African scholars who in their literature go beyond then just writing in response to the discourse presented by Eurocentric scholars but bring forth practical solutions and academic literature that engages on the African experience and how Africa is more that just war and terror or tourism when it suits Eurocentric media. To re-represent and reframe Africa’s agency in positive literature that acknowledges Africa’s human experiences interpreting the literature from all the different lived experiences of all scholars from the continent which would be the first indication to the West that Africa is not one large country but is has different countries within the continent. Therefore, there should be careful treading on each person’s experience of how Africa should be studied as each individual’s experiences is different and will never be the same.
In conclusion, having an ‘outsider’ write about what is happening in your home will never capture the true essence of one’s lived experience. If their definition of what it means to be Africa is being black, then a Eurocentric white scholar will never be able to unpack this philosophy in an objective manner. How to study Africa should be from a lived experience. It does not just end in scholarly writings but is a day-to-day lived experience for many. Thus to just look at the skewed representation in most academic literature takes away in how ordinary African’s decide how they want to study Africa.
Question 2a
What it means to be Rwandan when using a general explanation is when you are born in Rwanda and fall under one of the three ethnic groups namely the Twa which was the first group to exist when tracing back their origins, the Hutu’s and the Tutsi’s. If one belonged to any of these groups they were seen as being Rwanda. Considering Rwanda’s history and the central concern being violence in terms of identity-based conflicts has played a central role between the controversies facing the Hutu’s and the Tutsi’s (Des Forge, 1999). Rwanda pre-colonial was under the rulers-hip of the Tutsi kingdom prior colonisation (with the Tutsi seeing themselves as being superior).
The controversies related to the Hutu and Tutsi identities can be linked back to the Hamitic hypothesis of Ham which involved the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of a certain group, which started off with the Hutu’s assimilating into being Tutsi because of their social and financial standing but changed when the genocide began which saw the brutal killings of many Tutsi’s as a result of them oppressing the Hutu’s. When the scramble for Africa took place in 1884-1885 Rwanda was under Belgian colonial rule, this later saw the beginning of ethnic divisions between the two groups (Hutu and Tutsi) (Mamdani, 1996). The theory states that the Bantu which included groups such as Nande, Nyanga and Hutu were autochthonous (indigenous individuals who belong to a particular place) inhabitants of Central Africa and that the Nilotes being the Tutsi were historical ‘invaders’ of the area (Mamdani, 1996). In addition to the theory, ethnicity defined the social memories that have produced different historical myths and conceptual frameworks between the region’s Hutu and Tutsi (Deforges, 1999). This later became increasingly politicised especially after the colonial government issued ethnic identity cards in 1933 to distinguish who was a Hutu, Tutsi or Twa (Mamdani, 1996).
For Shyaka (2008:6) colonial political aspects contributed to the identity-based controversies that happened in Rwanda, not disputing the fact that there were existing tensions between the Hutu and Tutsi’s but colonial powers used this as a tool to further oppress the two groups through the indirect rule of ‘divide and rule/conquer’, which increased the identity conflict of Rwandans born of parents from different ethnic groups (Shyaka, 2008). This led to the de-legitimization of traditional structures breaking down any confidence of peace building as a result of the politicising ethnic identities of the Hutu and Tutsi, making it difficult to define what it means to be Rwandan (Shyaka, 2008).
Question 2b
Identity is a concept that is surrounded by imperatives of power, resistance, subjection and citizenship, (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2010). With migration playing a huge role in the DRC because of the war many citizens moved to neighbouring countries in fear of their lives and safety. Years later some returned to their homes only to be told that they do not belong and not considered to be Congolese. So the question of what does it means to be Congolese, especially for the many that moved during war times has resulted in many losing their ownership of land because they are not seen as being Congolese.
Boas and Dunn (2013) date back their argument to the 1800s, stating that there has been a lot of migration by Rwandaphones who commonly spoke Kinyarwanda including both Hutu and Tutsi who lived in the eastern part of the DRC. After the genocide 1994 however, many Rwandan Hutus fled to the Kivus because they feared being killed by the RPF government who was in control at the time (Boas and Dunn, 2013). As a result of the migration many difficult questions are still unresolved of whether any of these Rwandaphones can be considered to be Congolese. This has therefore made it difficult to distinguish between invaders and other Rwandans who may have a family history that is more than 100 years in the Congo (Boas and Dunn, 2013:86).
Tracing this back to the Congolese constitution of 1964, there exists only one Congolese nationality which was granted certain rights dating back to 30 June 1960 and stated that: ‘all persons having now, or at some point in the past, as one of their ancestors a member of a tribe or the part of a tribe established on the territory of Congo before the 18th of October 1908’ was seen as being Congolese (Boas and Dunn, 2013:88). This enabled the Banyarwanda eligible in claiming Congolese citizenship on the basis of their ancestors being native to the DRC as of 18 October 1908. However, this changed in 1972 when Barthelemy Bisengimana the Director of the Office of the President, a Congolese Tutsi and Mobutu strongman, established a new citizenship law. The new law gave Congolese citizenship on all migrants living in the Congo before 1950, thus giving a number of Banyarwanda political and economic rights which they had never accessed before (Mamdani, 2011). This framework changed again in 1981 when Anzuluni Bembe, another Mobutu strongman and autochthonous from South Kivu, convinced the legislative council to reopen the nationality question (Mamdani, 2011). This changed in 2005 when the Congolese constitution, dated citizenship back to ancestral connections showing a step in the right direction (Mamdani, 2011).
However, these shifting rules regarding citizenship have greatly contributed to insecurity among who can be considered as Congolese. Even with laws being implemented, the practicality of them is still not evident in reality. There is still a lot of contestation over who is Congolese and seen through the occupation of land, especially among those who left during the war which resulted in their land being taken by the rebel groups or the RPF. But it should also be considered that individuals also decide if they want to take on Congolese identity, one might have the privilege but still not want to identify themselves as being Congolese.
Question 3
Rwanda has the highest representation of women in parliament which is at 63.8%. However, there have been great concerns regarding the extent of transformation and meaningful women empowerment in parliament. Ndung’u (2013:2) is sceptical on these gains as she believes that they have masked ongoing difficulties faced by Rwandan women in parliament in terms of their representation and participation in other decision-making positions outside of parliament. For Ndung’u (2013:2) the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) pushing for its own female candidates in being elected in reserved seats whether it is to achieve a required quota or due to the women being loyalty to the RPF-led government, rather than their actual capabilities and competence in being able to occupy the office is concerning. This has become a major critic against the RPF government by analyst and argued as a possible fronting of women in these parliamentary seats for political expediency as a rubberstamp of the government’s agenda (Ndung’u, 2013).
The advocating of women’s inclusion in politics in the hopes that it will calm the political climate yet excluding them from political dissent is problematic (Hogg, 2009). The idea that having women in power will foster a more cooperative parliament, political stability and less conflict is not always the case as seen through Margret Thatcher who was cut throat ruthless in her approach to politics. For Hogg (2013:36) Thatcher showed little interest in dealing with issues that ‘commonly’ affected woman. In the case of Rwanda the discourse surrounding ethnicity is still not addressed despite there being an increase of women parliamentarians. The ethnicity issue in post-conflict Rwanda is a sensitive one and if women were to speak directly to the latter this would give them a more meaningful position, leaving a legacy of transformation that would define their involvement in Rwanda’s political space. Policies alone will not resolve the ethnicity base conflict but rather intense talks and mediation is needed to move forward (Hogg, 2013).
During the genocide, many women and children were rxxxd, sexually assaulted and impregnated by rebel groups, which the RPF government only recently addressed after women parliamentarians pushed for an Act to be implemented to protect the rights of women and children. The Gender-based violence (GBV) Act was adopted on August 3rd 2006 by general consensus in the Rwandan Parliament (Devlin and Elgie, 2008). The bill was adopted after a two-day deliberation that ended unanimously among the parliamentarians decision to adopt it. The law aimed for the prevention, protection and punishment of any GBV and was prepared by the Forum for Rwandan Women Parliamentarians (FFRP) (Devlin and Elgie, 2008). Women parliamentarians met with various ministries, the public prosecution, and communities at a grass-root level throughout Rwanda, illustrating hands on approach and utilization of their position of power meaningful to fight a good cause (Devlin and Elgie, 2008).
In conclusion, although Rwanda has the highest number of women in parliament and is applauded for promoting their participation in leadership, the level of violence against women remains high. This has shown that the women in parliament have a voice and the 2006 GBV bill speaks to this empowerment. This is one of the many mild stone achievements in women empowerment but there is still a long way to go before women are given ‘proper’ equal rights and recognition as their male colleagues in power.