“arkivex”
HALMSTAD UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES
Rethinking Democracy and Development
-A Minor Field Study of the Political Sphere in Rwanda
Author: Petra Spencer Supervisor: Jonna Johansson Political Science 30 credits Progression: 61-90
Thesis
Preface & Acknowledgements:
Some words of acknowledgment are undoubtedly in place, as I am most grateful to the Swedish International Cooperation and Development Agency (SIDA) for its support to this initiative. Many thanks to Rwanda Civil Society Platform (RCSP) for taking me in as a member in the Civil Society Election Observation Mission (CSEOM) during the Presidential election of 2010, and again for the local elections in 2011, thanks for all your support and guidance, it is a life experience hard to forget. Many thanks go to the Government of Rwanda and especially the National Election Commission (NEC) for having welcomed me twice and accredited me as an election observer. Many thanks also go to my friends in Rwanda- David, Elie and Emmanuel, for without your help my research in Rwanda would have been a struggle. My great appreciation also goes to all the people in Rwanda—this proud and strong people with unique gifts of rebuilding a country. I would like to thank all who supported me in my work, interviewees, the EU delegation to RCSP, Kigali Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) and Kigali Liberal University (ULK). I also would like to thank my family for all your support.
Many thanks to the tutors at Halmstad University—you taught me about purpose, goals, and that hard work indeed gets you somewhere in the end. You have made me fulfill my dream! After visiting Rwanda my first time I felt more alive, more myself, and I began to understand why I had hitherto not lived my life to the fullest extent. I dare a huge generalization: in the midst of our profligate prosperity and bustle of life we have lost human values, which is still rich in Rwanda.
Murakoze!
Abbreviations:
CDR The Coalition for the Defense of the Republic
CoR The Constitution of the republic of Rwanda
CPPCG Convention on the Prevention & Punishment of the Crime of Genocide CSEOM Civil Society Election Observation Mission
DRC The Democratic Republic of Congo
FDLR The Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda FFPP Forum for Political Parties
GoR Government of Rwanda
ICTR International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
LP Liberal Party
LTO Long Term Observer
MDR Democratic Republican Movement
MHC Media High Council
MFS Minor Field Study
MRND National Republican movement for Democracy and Development
NEC National Election Commission
Parmehutu Party of the Hutu Emancipation Movement
PPC Party for Progress and Concord
PSD Social Democratic Party
PSP Prosperity and Solidarity Party RCSP Rwanda Civil Society Platform
RPF Rwanda Patriotic Front
RTLM Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines
STO Short Term Observer
TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission
UN United Nations
UNAMIR United Nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda
Glossary:
Banyarwanda (Kinyarwanda) “Those who come from Rwanda”
Banyamulenge Ethnic group of people in eastern DRC from
Rwanda
Divisionism Ethnic divisions
ex-FAR Former Rwandan army, supplanted by FDLR
Gacaca (Kinyarwanda) grass; name given to system of community-
based courts for prosecuting genocide suspects
Inkotanyi (Kinyarwanda) a tireless warrior; self-referential term for the RPA
Interahamwe (Kinyarwanda) “those who work together”;
term given to genocidal militias
Inyenzi (Kinyarwanda) cockroach; derogatory term for Tutsi rebels or
Tutsi generally
Murakoze (Kinyarwanda) Thank you
Muzungu Comes from the Bantu language and means
White person
Négationisme (French) denial (e.g. of the genocide)
Reseau Zéro (French) zero network (“inner circle” close to the
Habyarimana regime)
Abstract:
Title: Rethinking Democracy and Development -A Minor Field Study of the Political Sphere in Rwanda.
Author: Petra Spencer
Purpose and Questions: There seem to exist diametrically different views regarding Rwanda’s political sphere, whether the country has made any progress at all since the 90s, and if they have been successful in establishing democracy or not. A field study was therefore carried out, plus additional research to get a more comprehensive view of the political sphere of Rwanda. The purpose of the field study was to experience and analyse the political ambiance and developments by personal experience and interview people on the ground, rather then just rely on books, media and other academics, in order to clarify if the country is progressing or not. These questions guided my research:
Has Rwanda been successful in establishing democracy, in terms of fulfilling the criteria’s that constitutes “polyarchy”?
- What are the democracy attitudes of the citizens?
Has Rwanda made any progress at all the last decade (not just politically, but socio- economically as well), in other words is the country undergoing a modernization process?
Method: This research took its first step in a minor field study (MFS), conducted in Rwanda in the summer of 2010, and later as field research again in February/ March of 2011. In order to fulfil the purpose this research undertook both qualitative and quantitative methods, in a two-part analysis, in which there are a total of one qualitative part and two more quantitative parts.
Results and Conclusion: The analysis shows that Rwanda is progressing, not just politically, but socio-economically as well. The qualitative part shows that some political and civic rights seem to be curtailed, but it is important to remember the legacy of a genocide. The survey however shows that over half of the respondents believe (to some extent) that democratic principles are being respected, and that there exist political pluralism and political space in Rwanda. The genocaidaires could come back to power through democratic practices, therefore it is important that things develop carefully and that a strong leadership rules the country. The government has really managed to bring Rwanda back up on its feet and the country is clearly progressing. Rwanda can serve as a model for other countries to follow. Despite the war and ethnic diversity Rwanda has come a long way. The country seem to have established some form of democratic principles, not the same as we have in the West off course, but maybe they can’t and shouldn’t follow the models of the West since they have their own special context they have to live up to.
Key words: Democracy, Authoritarian, Development, Modernization, Progress.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Table and Figures:
Table 1. Socio-‐economic development. ... 20
Table 2. Analytical guidance ... 25
Table 3. Rwanda's progress the last decade ... 45
Figure 1. Democracy attitudes; survey question1………....43
Figure 2. Democracy attitudes; survey question 2. ... 44
Table 3. Rwanda's progress the last decade ... 45
Table 4. Rwanda and polyarchy………...49
Preface and Acknowledgement Abbreviations and Glossary Abstract 1. Prelude; Rwanda Democracy and Development ... 7
1.1 Purpose & Questions ... 9
1.2 Delimitations ... 9
1.3 Disposition ... 10
2. Previous Research; The Academic debate on the Politics of Rwanda ... 11
2.1 Filip Reyntjens; From genocide to dictatorship… ... 12
2.2 Ensign and Bertrand; History and Hope ... 14
3. Theoretical framework ... 16
3.1 Dahl’s Polyarchy ... 17
3.2 Modernization theory ... 19
4. Methodology ... 21
4.1 Selection of Case and Sources ... 22
4.2 Operationalization ... 23
4.3 Criticism of Method and Sources ... 25
5. The Context of Rwanda ... 27
5.1 The past is the prologue ... 27
5.2 The genocide ... 29
5.3 Post-‐war reconstruction ... 30
6. Rwanda and Democracy ... 32
6.1 Elected officials ... 32
6.2 Free and fair elections ... 33
6.3 Universal suffrage ... 36
6.4 The right to stand for election ... 37
6.6 Alternative sources of information ... 40
6.7 Freedom of association ... 41
6.8 Democracy Attitudes; Survey ... 42
7. Assessing Rwanda’s progress ... 45
7.1 CPI ... 46
7.2 HDI ... 46
7.3 KOF ... 47
7.4 GNI/Capita ... 47
8. Concluding discussions; A wider perspective ... 48
8.1 Rwanda’s Past and Ethnic Diversity ... 51
8.2 Are there any Lessons to be learnt? ... 53
Bibliography
Appendices
Appendix 1. A Brief Context of Rwanda Appendix 2. Campaign Rally Report Appendix 3. Survey form
1. Prelude; Rwanda Democracy and Development…
The image the word Africa evokes in most people represents the dark continent, the heart of darkness, a terrible resident of brutality; inhumanity. Yes, it is true, this is also found in Africa. Hell has taken parts of the continent, and the country that was tormented the worst was probably Rwanda in 1994. 1 Imagine a country with the highest proportion of women legislators in the world, and a country where the president is committed to gender equality and poverty reduction, where both urban and rural schools are being wired to internet, and where the government is committed to becoming a knowledge based economy and middle income country by 2020 (Ensign and Bertrand, 2010:1). Imagine that this country is located in the heart of Sub- Saharan Africa and that this progress comes in the wake of one of the 20th century’s worst nightmares, i.e. the genocide in 1994, a mass genocide that resulted in the deaths of approximately one million people (ibid.).
We in the West are accustomed to hearing and accepting negative news, particularly when it refers to Africa, but one can never imagine the horror that ravaged Rwanda, and which are still haunting the country. Often when it comes to the debate on the politics of Rwanda the word authoritarian comes up, and what seems to be lacking in the debate are discussions on the transformation of the country. Surely Rwanda must have made progress since the genocide, but one begin to wonder after having acknowledged what e.g. well-known scholars like Filip Reyntjens (2010) and Gérard Prunier (2011) argue on this matter. 2 According to others academics like Ensign and Bertrand3 (2010), the country seems to have made a huge progress since 1994.
Rwanda’s past has to be put into the context when we are discussing their politics and development paths, which is the main purpose of this paper. The actions of the International community (or in this case, the lack of it) during the 100 days in 1994, has to be remembered as well when discussing Rwandan politics, and it is no wonder why they wanted to deal with the offenders after the genocide in their own way, with assistance from abroad only playing a secondary role (Schabas in Clark and Kaufman, 20009:213). There may be some authoritarian tendencies within Rwanda, but the country is coming from such a dark place very few countries have been in recent years. Rwanda today however presents a model of hope, innovation and human development (personal field notes).
1 In the mid 90s thirty-one countries was tormented by civil wars or serious civil unrest. These wars became fewer after the millennium, but their main cause, the lack of a common national feeling remains. Africa’s nation-states were created by foreigners, with limits drawn by Europeans over areas on maps where they for most part never had set foot (Dowden, 2010:10)
2 Filip Reyntjens is Professor of African Law and Politics and Chair of the Institute of Development Policy and Management, University of Antwerp. Gérard Prunier is a French academic and historian specializing in the Horn of Africa and East Africa.
3 Margee M. Ensign is dean of the School of International Studies and associate provost for International Initiatives at the University of the Pacific. William E. Bertrand is the Wisner Professor at Tulane University. Both has spent a decade in Rwanda conducting research for their book “Rwanda- History and Hope”.
While the gains are impressive, Rwanda still faces challenges in (re)building and consolidating democracy, and concerns have been expressed over reported incidences related to security, governance and growth of democracy. However, what has become particularly ambiguous is the degree of political space in Rwanda. The Hutu diaspora, DRC-based militias and occasionally media and human rights organizations cite the alleged lack of political space in Rwanda (Waugh, 2004:147ff; Bekele, 2011). 4
Reyntjens (2004:177) argue that Rwanda suffers from a genocide but thus since this has fallen in the hands of a new dictatorship. He claims that Rwanda constitutes by being a dictatorship under the guise of a “paper democracy”. Others like Ensign and Bertrand (2010:125), argues that Rwanda has made a tremendous progress since 1994 and now constitutes by being a democracy.5 In my opinion it is very clear that further attention needs to be directed to the political sphere of Rwanda, to justify and to obtain a more comprehensive understanding, since it obviously exist diametrically different views on the subject whether Rwanda have been successful in establish democracy or not, and overall if the country is progressing. Maybe the country still struggle hard with democratization processes, maybe Kagame is ruling the country with an iron fist, but maybe these tendencies are necessary in order to not let extremist into government again.
During a visit to Copenhagen (010411) the author of this paper met with both Gérard Prunier and Linda Melvern, both which are well known scholars, and Melvern agreed with the author of this paper, that not enough attention seems to be given to Rwanda’s modernization process, i.e. their development path. 6 The discussion on political and socio-economical transformations of Rwanda is therefore something this study intends to contribute to and extend into the academic debate on Rwanda, especially since many explanations of democratization refers to socio-economic developments.
Using a modernization approach, positive correlations between development and democratization are profoundly significant (Allen and Thomas, 2000:370).
4 Much of the publications from media and human rights org. involve extremist elements, such as the political party FDU-Inkingi and the Green party.
5 Per se, the author of this study knows that there exists a “paper democracy”, constitution-making analyse since former research and essay.
6 As mentioned, Gérard Prunier is a French academic and historian specializing in the Horn of Africa and East Africa. Linda Melvern is a British academic and investigative journalist, expert in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Both have served as consultants in issues related to Rwanda.
1.1 Purpose & Questions
What seems very obvious to me is that there exist diametrically different views regarding Rwanda’s political sphere, whether the country has made any progress at all since the 90s, and whether they have been successful in establishing democracy or not. What’s clear, in my opinion, is also that not enough attention has been given to the Rwandese citizens and their views in this matter. According to the author of this paper the issue whether Rwanda has made any progress has not been adequately addressed and needs further attention, a field study was therefore carried out, plus additional research to get a more comprehensive view of the political sphere of Rwanda.
The main purpose of this research and field study, (MFS), which this dissertation is based on, was to experience and analyse the political ambiance and developments by personal experience and interview people on the ground, rather then just rely on books, media and other academics, in order to clarify if the country is progressing or not. It is important to point out that it is not in this study’s interest to find easy syntheses, but rather contribute to the debate on the politics of Rwanda. 7 These questions guided my research:
1.Has Rwanda been successful in establishing democracy, in terms of fulfilling the criteria’s for Dahl’s democracy theory “polyarchy”?
2. What are the democracy attitudes of the citizens?
3. Has Rwanda made any progress at all the last decade (not just politically, but socio- economically as well), in other words is the country undergoing a modernization process?
1.2 Delimitations
Since the area of interest and research is very wide we need to make some delimitations on how much to analyse, and be more specific in our selection of which specific parts are of most interest to analyse. It is of special importance to point out the special conditions under which this field study was carried out, since the author of this paper was in Rwanda conducting research as a student as well as an accredited election observer. 8 The survey, which was carried out by the author in Kigali, is not representative for the whole population since the number of interviewees were limited to 700, end therefore lacks in external validity.
7 These synthesis referred to could probably not be reached anyway without severe distortions of all views considered, remember the legacy of a genocide (and not just only tutsis were killed). It is my opinion that some times a state needs “restrictions” in its constitution in order to hinder new outbreaks of violence etc.
8 The author was both in Rwanda as a student carrying out research, but when accredited as an election observer one is obligated to obey to the “code of ethics” for election observers, which limits one that is interested in politics since you cant really interview anyone you whish to interview. There was also some confusion involved from specific politicians whether the author really was an election observer or media (even do obvious accreditation card was carried).
The author is fully aware of this, but this was necessary due to time and resource limitation. The survey is instead intended to function as material that can contribute to the debate on Rwandan politics for a more comprehensive view in order to create a wider understanding. In order to analyse Rwanda’s modernization process we need to limit the time frame, and since the country was in ruins after the genocide in 1994 it seems more appropriate to analyse the country’s development path over the last decade, rather then the years directly after the war. Due to both time limitation, as well as some lack of resources this study fails in a way to fully address the area of interest, but the author intends to follow the country for many years yet to come.
1.3 Disposition
This dissertation is structured according to “classical university disposition”, the so- called logic disposition that is suitable for academic text. This dissertation begins with a preface and acknowledgements (for which the reader can skip if not interested), the reader is then introduced to abbreviations and glossary, in order to understand any difficult terms used. After this the reader can find the dissertation summarized in an abstract. The introductory part in this dissertation consist of a introduction to the problem, purpose and questions, description of methodology used and last but not least the context and the academic debate on the politics of Rwanda. The analysis part consists of a two-part analysis, for which there is a total of one qualitative part and two more quantitative parts. The first analysis chapter puts focus on Rwanda’s political situation, and the second analysis chapter has focus on Rwanda’s modernization process (political, but socio-economic aspects as well). The concluding chapter consist of conclusions and discussions, and there is also a part containing if there are any lessons to be learnt. Finally the reader can scrutinize bibliography and, if interested, go through appendices.
2. Previous Research; The Academic debate on the Politics of Rwanda In order to fully understand the politics of Rwanda I emphasise the need to analyse what’s been written before on this ambiguous and opaqueness topic.9 A lot of research projects have been carried out in Rwanda, especially after the genocide in 1994. Much of the focus has been placed on justice and reconciliation processes (Clark and Kaufman, 2009) and not so much has been written about the political sphere with focus on the citizens and their views regarding the politics of Rwanda, neither has much been written about the socio-economic dimensions and transformations of Rwanda. However, the stories about Rwanda are almost entirely one sided and biased, but not everything is either white or black. Nor is it in this papers agenda to analyse unilaterally, but rather to give a more comprehensive and accurate view on the issues regarding Rwandan politics.
‘ What are currently lacking in the growing literature on Rwanda and the genocide are holistic, multi-disciplinary analyses. Standing in the way of holistic analyses, the legal paradigm has become dominant in the study of conflict and post-conflict societies, proffering procedural, academic and institutional “remedies” that too often fail to recognise other important perspectives’ (Clark and Kaufman, 2009:1).
According to the well-recognized professor Filip Reyntjens (2004:177) Rwanda is not experiencing democracy and reconciliation, but dictatorship and exclusion. He argues that the international community has been complicit in the rebuilding of a dictatorship under the guise of democracy. Ensign and Bertrand (2010:125) claim however that Rwanda has made a tremendous progress since 1994 in areas such as democracy and governance. People in Rwanda are, according to them, participating and are elected freely at all levels of governments and politics. 10
9 I wish to emphasise on critical review of different authors, scholars etc. since the context is of special importance, but also with focus on media since they play a crucial role in affecting our minds and have different agendas. One must also remember that Rwanda is a former German colony and later a Belgian trustee ship, protectorate under the League of Nations (later UN). E.g. Academic Filip Reyntjens was close to Habyarimana and his regime (personal notes from discussion with Gérard Prunier in Copenhagen, 110401).
10 Filip Reyntjens is Professor of African Law and Politics at University of Antwerp Belgium and has contributed a lot on what has been written about Rwanda. As mentioned, Reyntjens was very close to the Habyarimana regime, according to Prunier (Interview with Prunier in Copenhagen 1 April 2011). Ensign and Bertrand have spent a decade in Rwanda carrying out research. The book “After Genocide” by Clark and Kaufman collects some of the worlds most leading scholars and practitioners, it constitutes the most comprehensive survey to date of issues related to post-genocide Rwanda and the anthology incorporates chapters from Rwandan practitioners and academics.
2.1 Filip Reyntjens; From genocide to dictatorship…
Reyntjens (2004:177) claims that after the genocide in 1994, Rwanda is experiencing not democracy and reconciliation, but dictatorship and exclusion. Reyntjens argue that despite the fact that the RPF has achieved rapid institutional reconstruction and relatively good bureaucratic governance, it has also concentrated power and wealth in the hands of a very small minority, practiced ethnic discrimination, eliminated every form of dissent, destroyed civil society, conducted a flawed democratization process and massively violated human rights. According to Reyntjens (ibid.) the government of Rwanda succeeded in avoiding condemnation by astutely exploiting the “genocide credit” and by skillful information management. Reyntjens accuse the international community for have being complicit in the rebuilding of a dictatorship under the guise of democracy.
Reyntjens (2010:1) argues that post-genocide Rwanda has become a “donor darling”, despite being a dictatorship with a dismal human rights record and a source of regional instability. Reyntjens claims that although donor assessments differ considerably, and despite concerns over political governance domestically and the country’s interference in the DRC, many in the international community have given the post-genocide regime the benefit of the doubt. According to Reyntjens (ibid.) most observers would agree that the regime has achieved impressive results since 1994, and many are ready to support it without asking too many questions.Yet, he claims, there is consensus in the international scholarly community that Rwanda is run by a dictatorship with little respect for human rights, little attention to the fate of the vast majority of its population, and little awareness of the structural violence its ambitious engineering project engenders.
Reyntjens (ibid) argues that, although a report by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative expressed major concerns, and concluded that the state of governance and human rights did not satisfy Commonwealth standards, Rwanda was admitted to the club without much debate in 2009. Reyntjens also (ibid) claims that there is overwhelming evidence of responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity against President Kagame, but despite this he is given red carpet treatment on his frequent international visits. Reyntjens however also states that the Rwandan leadership’s vision is lauded in many respects and Rwanda is often presented as a model11, a perspective Reyntjens clearly doesn’t support.
11 Kagame’s model for progress, economic growth is the “Singapore model” (Gérard Prunier, Copenhagen 010411). The so-called “Asian tigers”, using strong and capable bureaucracies, developed a deliberate set of programs and policies that focused on mobilizing savings and investment, and integrated these growing economies with the international trading system while at the same time expanding access to education and health (Ensign and Bertrand, 2010:10; Inglehart and Welzel, 2005:18, 47).
Reyntjens (ibid, 31f) highlights a number of transversal trends that have emerged clearly over the past fifteen years. Prominent among these is the incremental way in which the RPF has monopolized power and eliminated countervailing voices. 12 Referring to opponents Reyntjens claims that Kagame eliminated individual domestic and external troublemakers one at a time. Kagame had neutralized the political opposition, the civil society and the manipulation of elections allowed him to confer a layer of democratic legitimacy on what was in reality the gradual closing off of political space (ibid.).
Regarding the lack of condemnation from the international community, Reyntjens (ibid, 32f) claims that the major instrument for achieving this tolerance has been the skillful and cynical use of the genocide credit, which allowed the regime both to capitalize on the guilt feelings of the international community and to present itself as the victim of genocide. According to Reyntjens strong information management is an important element in Rwanda, and monitoring and disseminating information is part of a strategy for both external and internal consumption in order to silence dissent etc.
Reyntjens (ibid.) states that in Rwanda, history is a highly political stake of the present and the future rather than a way of analyzing and understanding the past. He further argues that its manipulation contributes to the structural violence so prevalent, yet apparently so invisible to outsiders.
“The so-called international community bears overwhelming responsibility in allowing the RPF to deploy its skills successfully. It has been a willing hostage to Kigali’s spin, whether it be on political governance and human rights, on massive violations of international humanitarian law, on the aggression and plunder of the DRC, on its dangerous social and economic engineering exercise, or on the way it has injected structural violence across the country and the region” (Reyntjens, 2010:33).
12 Reyntjens (ibid, 187f) refers the hold of power by RPF on the system as “Tutsization”, “RPF-ization”, and the
“new akazu” (akazu- ‘little house’ was first used to refer to President Habyarimana’s inner circle). By this he means hegemonic strategies of small tutsi élites.
2.2 Ensign and Bertrand; History and Hope
According to Ensign and Bertrand (2010:62f) the fundamental priority for Rwanda, especially in the transition period 1994-2003, was to establish peace and security.
Ensign and Bertrand (ibid.) states that serious challenges continued after 1994, with Ex-FAR, Interahamwe and FDLR, the perpetrators of the genocide, since they continued to operate from Eastern Congo. As a result they couldn’t focus whole- heartedly on democratization processes. 13 In Rwanda today, a constitution is in place that guarantees separation of powers for the first time in the country’s history (ibid, 46). An independent judiciary is in place and Gacaca trials14, representing one of the greatest legal challenges is underway. Ensign and Bertrand (ibid, 66f) argue that the first post-genocide election from 2003 did suffered from numerous complaints from human rights and election monitoring organizations that the process wasn’t transparent, but most agreed that Kagame had won the election, if not at the reported rate of 96%. However, they conclude that it was the only one (as of 2010) who has suffered from such flaws.
An Ombudsman and auditor general’s office have been established to ensure accountability and reduce corruption (ibid, 46). According to Ensign and Bertrand, as a result numerous senior political figures have been jailed. They also state that in several international rankings, including a World Bank governance index, Rwanda has ranked as one of the least corrupt countries in the region and most improved in the rule of law. Ensign and Bertrand (ibid.) argues that through processes called Ubudehe and Imihigo, poor people are deeply involved in solving their own problems through representative leaders. 15 The performance contracts, the Imihigos holds leaders accountable, and citizens can dismiss leaders if they don’t perform well. Ubudehe is an inclusive and participatory process and system, it is a way for all, especially for the poor, to have input into decision-making processes that can improve their lives (ibid.).
According to Ensign and Bertrand (ibid.) Rwanda today presents a model for success, and a great deal of this success of present day Rwanda is because of decisions made at the conclusion of the genocide. These decisions have focus on reconciliation, policies enacted by the legislature, the development of an independent judiciary and a strong and clear vision that emerged from the President. Ensign and Bertrand (ibid, 10) claims that many, especially those in the human rights community have accused Rwanda, and President Kagame of being authoritarian, of running a one-party state.
13 And as a result of this they had to control the political domain in order to prohibit extremist elements. In Rwanda political parties has to be approved and registered in a forum for political parties (FFPP).
14 Gacaca is based on traditional methods of conflict resolution, where trials are held outside on the “grass”.
Gacaca is the Kinyarwanda word for grass. The last Gacaca trials ended in 2010 (personal fieldnotes, Kigali 2010).
15 Remarkable and unique changes in political structures and authority have occurred at the local level in Rwanda.
In only fifteen years, central control has evolved into devolution of power and resources to the lowest levels.
Exclusion has become inclusion, voices are heard from the weakest. Imihigo was a traditional ritual that occurred when a group of people came together and engaged publicly in activities. Now it is a public declaration of what is valued and needed by individuals and communities and a commitment to achieve a specific sets of goals. The process of determining community needs are called Ubudehe (Ensign and Bertrand, 2010:75f). In 2008, Ubudehe won the prestigious UN Public Service Award (ibid, 79).
But according to Ensign and Bertrand these people haven’t looked at the evidence, and that many in these communities have allowed themselves to embrace the conventional wisdom that arose soon after the genocide ended. 16 Contrary to public perception and conventional wisdom, Ensign and Bertrand (ibid, 125) argues that Rwanda has made tremendous progress in democracy and governance, in improving basic needs especially in education, health and gender equity, and in pro-poor economic growth. Rwanda has more women in Parliament than any country in the world, and is committed to gender equity in all areas of society. In Rwanda, nine years of schooling are free, and enrolment is high and growing, the health care system is using information technology in a creative way, and the people are participating and are elected freely at all levels of politics (ibid).
However, they (ibid, 126) also conclude that a key question related to political development will occur in 2017, when Kagame is suppose to step down from his post as President. They discuss whether Kagame will go the same path as Museveni in Uganda who successfully re-wrote the constitution to serve additional terms. They conclude however that the strength of the grassroots democratization and accountability programs, the political freedoms for the media, the strength of new political leaders, parties and Parliament, and the unique vision of President Kagame and his top leaders that is embedded in the constitution, make this path extremely unlikely (ibid.).
16 Certainly Rwanda has taken a very hard, principled stand on how it thinks it should deal with the perpetrators after the genocide, and the “culture of impunity” that led in part to the genocide, and has been resistant to calls from the West to follow a traditional model of justice and reconciliation. But the country seems to have succeeded in the best way it could, in my opinion. One must remember the huge number of perpetrators, and the fact that the country was in ruins after the genocide, still the international community focused on the “refugees” in the Eastern DRC instead (Ensign and Bertrand, 2010:48f).
3. Theoretical framework
The theories used in this paper are intended to form a framework and foundation for the research and are both theory testing (theory in the centre), as well as theory consuming (the case in the centre) (Esaisson et al, 2009:99). The purpose with the theories is to help explain democratization and development processes in Rwanda.
The relevance of using these theories depends on their analytical approach and perspective, which can help explain the democratization processes in Rwanda. This study’s relation between theory and empiricism is deductive, in terms of that conclusions are drawn from the theory (ibid.). This study is however also inductive, in terms of a starting point in the empiricism (ibid.p.124).
Dahl’s democracy theory “Polyarchy” enhances us with the opportunity to test how well Rwanda complies and live up to the criteria’s for polyarchy, i.e. democracy. The modernization theory help us understand and interpret the development path Rwanda has taken over the last decade, as well as an understanding over their political situation. The intention with these theories is that they put forward a “continuum”, a coherent framework. The theories will in this way help to create an understanding and explain the data collected about the case. It is this study’s intention to try use democracy indicators from a normative to a more empirical theoretical approach for a wider perspective. My discussion and analysis may not always be so empirical, but rather accumulative, i.e. the discussions will be some what built up as this paper progresses.
The major theories in this study are what Bryman (2011:23) calls “grand theories”, which is more comprehensive and abstract, on the verge to more intermediate theories. This approach is more suitable here since it can be trivial to measure the political situation and development processes in a country from more of a qualitative angel. Polyarchy will be used in order to measure civic and political rights, from a more qualitative angel in order to create an understanding of the area of interest, but this doesn’t help explain the bigger picture, in which the author therefore emphasise the need for a modernization theory as well. Only with the help of modernization theory can we get a full understanding of the development path and progress of Rwanda. 17
17 The author of this paper looked how other students had done when using polyarchy, and many used a complimentary approach and theory, an approach this paper will take as well.
It is not this papers intention to give a full empirical explanation, but rather contribute to the debate and give a more comprehensive and interpretive view on the debate on the Rwandan politics. The theoretical basis in this research is Robert Dahl’s democracy theory “Polyarchy”. We will use this theory order to describe the nature of and measure democracy, civic and political right. This study will also use modernization theory in order to help explain the development path of Rwanda, not just political but socio-economical developments as well i.e. development that often comes hand in hand with democratization processes in order to understand the wider perspective.
How can we be quick and rough in our judgements on whether a country constitutes by being a democracy or an authoritarian regime before we have a clear definition on necessary terms that is so often used, and (maybe) before we have all the facts necessary to do this judgment?18 Despite such variations on terms used, liberal democracy, with its limitations, is still the standard model of a democratic regime used in the huge literature on patterns of democratization. Describing actual examples of democratization using these patterns involves making rough judgements regarding various complexities. However, rough judgements are required when trying to assign any country to one of the ideal types of regimes, as done by academics, in the media and elsewhere all the time. 19 This study will however not be limited to assign Rwanda a certain ideal type of regime, rather discuss around it, to describe and explain democracy processes for a more comprehensive view.
3.1 Dahl’s Polyarchy
Robert Dahl is a famous democracy theorist who has formulated the term
“polyarchy”. Dahl (2007:38) claims that democracy in its pure form no longer exists, and that polyarchy is the political order that currently exists in the world. Polyarchy is a simplified, quite limited form of the original meaning of what Dahl refers to as
“real” democracy, ideals in which he claims no regime today can fulfill. According to Dahl the best we can do in our quest for democracy is to try to come as close as possible to fulfilling the following criteria’s for polyarchy. 20
18 I here refer to the media foremost. Academics like Filip Reyntjens have a huge experience of the politics of Rwanda, however, we need to keep in mind his link with the former regime, possible interest etc. Its my opinion that much in the academic world is intersubjective, by this I here refer to the intersubjective meaning within scientific theory that a hypothesis or an argument in principle is judged the same, regardless of who investigates its accuracy.
19 Regarding the concept of authoritarian regimes, Allen and Thomas (2000: 365f) claims that there exist no single model for an authoritarian regime, the closest seems to be Linz & Stephan’s identifications of it. In my opinion this study can contribute more to the academic debate, and more fair, using polyarchy than analyze along authoritarian features.
20 The citizens in a modern state today are a more heterogenic than the Greeks regarded as desirable; we are often diverse in terms of religion, education, culture, ethnicity, race, language and economic positions (Dahl, ibid).
The polyarchy criteria’s (Dahl, 2007:343f):
1. Elected officials: the control over the authorities political decisions is located according to the Constitution to elected officials;
2. Free and fair elections: the elected officials are appointed in frequent and impartial elections in which coercive elements are far limited;
3. Universal suffrage: Virtually all adults have the right to vote of officials;
4. The right to stand for election: Virtually all adults have the right to candidate for the publicly elected positions, even though the age limit may be higher for holding an elected position than to vote;
5. Freedom of Expression: Citizens have the right to express their opinions regarding political issues in a broad sense without risking serious punishment. This includes criticism of those in power, the state, the government, the socio-economical system and the prevailing ideology;
6. Alternative sources of information: The citizens have the right to seek for alternative information sources. These exist and are legally protected;
7. Freedom of Association: To secure their respective rights, including the aforementioned, citizens also have the right to form relatively independent associations and organizations, including political parties and interest groups.
In the public debate on democracy there exist no legal or “right” definition of what democracy is or constitutes by, but there exist definitions that are more or less accepted. Robert Dahl’s definition of polyarchy has come to be widely accepted in the academic debate, although almost every researcher in the field has its own definition of the term. We seem to be stuck with democracy as the catchword of contemporary political discourse. It is de facto that democracy the last century has become an established term and the use of it has increased considerably. How the definition of democracy is formulated seem to no longer matter, just the word itself creates the satisfying legitimacy users wants to achieve.
“ …Today democracy /.../ has become a common component in every prevailing ideology, shadow ideals and a justification myth of the rulers. In authoritarian systems /.../ the leaders of these regimes not just only claims that their rule is for the people’s best- so it is been everywhere and at all times /.../ As an ideology, at least not the reign of the people, for the people and by the people has not disappeared from the surface of the earth; it is a principle almost every regime claim to value.” (Authors own translation. Dahl, 2007:360).
According to Dahl (2007: 19f) the term “democracy theory” is very wide and its use in a specific research area, for analysis, empirical testing and theorizing is rather new.
And its still unclear of what reasonably is included in the democracy theory. The term can refer to an “ideal”, and at the same time refer to regimes in the “reality”, many which are far away from this ideal (ibid). This dual meaning can cause great confusion, and it is therefore necessary to limit the meaning of “democracy theory”.
There are plenty of indicators, we therefore need to limit us and will use Dahl’s democracy theory polyarchy in order to answer the research question whether Rwanda has been successful or not in establishing democracy.
3.2 Modernization theory21
With the help of modernization theory Inglehart and Welzel (2005) claim to have a clear idea of how and why the process of democratization happens. Inglehart and Welzel (2005:15) argue that modernization is a process of human development, in which economic development triggers cultural changes that make individual autonomy, gender equality, and democracy increasingly likely. The authors (ibid, 20ff) argue that democratic institutions tend to emerge only when certain social and cultural conditions exist, and economic development and modernization push those conditions in the right direction and make democracy increasingly likely.
Inglehart and Welzel (ibid, 18) argue that in recent years, it has become apparent that export-oriented strategies were more effective in bringing sustained economic growth and even, eventually, democracy. A Western capitalist version of modernization regained credibility. The rapid development of East Asia, and the subsequent democratization of Taiwan and South Korea seemed to confirm Western capitalism claims.22 According to Inglehart and Welzel (ibid.) the conditions conducive to democracy can and do emerge, and the process of "modernization," according to abundant empirical evidence, advances them. Once modernization is set in motion, it tends to penetrate all aspects of life, bringing occupational specialization, urbanization, rising educational levels, rising life expectancy, and rapid economic growth. These create a self-reinforcing process that transforms social life and political institutions, bringing rising mass participation in politics and, in the long run, making the establishment of democratic political institutions increasingly likely (ibid, 22ff).
21 Modernization theory originated in the Enlightenment era, and Antoine de Condorcet [1795] was among the first to explicitly link economic development and cultural change (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005:16). The most influential version of modernization theory was propounded by Karl Marx in 1858 (ibid.). Competing versions of modernization theory enjoyed a new resurgence after WW2 when the capitalist and communist superpowers espoused opposing ideologies as guidelines of the best way to undergo modernization (ibid, 17). In the 1970s and 1980s modernization theory seemed discredited, and dependency theory came into vogue (ibid, 18). Dependency theory however fell out of favour while the Western capitalist version of modernization regained credibility (ibid).
22 Export of low-cost for the world market initiates economic growth, and reinvesting the returns into human capital qualifies the workforce to produce goods, whose export brings even higher returns and enlarges the educated urban middle-class. Once the middle-classes become large enough its pressure for liberal democracy can no longer be resisted (ibid.).
The authors (ibid, 25) argue that socio-economic developments have emancipative effects. By this they mean that economic growth and the welfare of the state increase people’s economic resources, people become materially more secure, this leads to rising levels of education, expanding mass communication and increasingly knowledge-intensive work widen people’s intellectual resources. People also become cognitively more autonomous, and constraints on human choices will diminish with growing emphasis on human autonomy. They argue that growing social complexity and diversification of human interactions broaden people’s social resources, and this will result to the fact that people do become socially more independent. See below table from Inglehart and Welzel (ibid.) for visualization over how socio-economic development trigger democratization.
Table 1. Socio-‐economic development.
The Emancipative Effects of Socio-economic Development:
à Eco growth and the welfare state increase people’s eco resources à People become materially more secure à Rising levels of education, expanding mass communication, and increasingly knowledge- intensive work widens people’s intellectual resources à People become cognitively more autonomous à Diminishing constraints on human choice à Growing emphasis on human autonomy à Growing social complexity and diversification of human interactions broadens people’s social resources à
People become socially more independent à One outcome of this causal primacy of socio-economic development; democracy…
The authors (ibid, 23) argue that socio-economic development is crucial because it impacts powerfully on people’s existential conditions and their chances of survival.
And this should be particularly true in societies living in scarcity. Survival is such a basic human goal that when it is uncertain, one’s main purpose in life is the struggle for survival. Whether people grow in a society with an annual per capita income of
$400 or $40,000 has more direct impact on their daily lives than whether they grow up in a country which is holding free and fair elections or not (ibid.). Therefore, when a society is developing socio-economically survival is no longer precarious and human choices not so restricted, and new trends towards increasing emphasis on individual autonomy and self-expression values tends to emerge (ibid, 25).
The world is flourishing of different modernization theories, in order to operationalize and make it concrete, and in order to answer the research question whether Rwanda has made any progress at all the last decade, in other words if the country is undergoing a modernization process we will in this research use below stated indicators to analyze Rwanda’s modernization process. Following indicators will be used; a Corruption Perception Index (CPI), a Human Development Index (HDI), a globalization index (KOF) and GNI/ Capita. This approach seems to be the best one in order to define modernization, and the best evidence about whether Rwanda has made any progress at all the last decade; simply if the quality of life has improved in Rwanda. More about these indicators under “Operationalization”.
4. Methodology
The basis and interpretative perspective for this paper is of hermeneutic character, i.e.
interpretation and understanding, science that seeks an interpretative understanding of social action in order to reach a causal explanation of actions processes and effects (Bryman, 2011:32). This research took its first step in a minor field study (MFS), with a scholarship from Sida, conducted in Rwanda in the summer of 2010, and later as field research again in February/ March 2011.23 This case study therefore includes longitudinal components, especially since the author has spent a couple of months as both a short-term observer (STO) and long-term observer (LTO) in the team of the Civil Society Election Observation Mission (CSEOM) in Kigali, Rwanda.
In order to fulfil the purpose with the research this paper consist of both qualitative and quantitative methods, in a two-part analysis, in which there are a total of one qualitative part and two quantitative parts. The data collection techniques of the qualitative parts consist of ethnographic methods; participating/ direct observations, in which field notes were taken and sometimes structured observation forms were used, as well as qualitative interviews that were both semi structured and open, as well as text analysis. The first analysis chapter also contain a fully structured survey, which was carried out in Rwanda by the author. The survey questions were inspired from another survey, which was carried out in Rwanda’s pre electoral climate of 2010, for which results are implemented as complimentary evidence. Data collection techniques of the second analysis chapter consist of a (foremost) quantitative part, of an analysis of official statistics in a comparative perspective.
The first qualitative part consists of an analysis of democracy (polyarchy) in the country, with a brief comparison between theory (short extracts from the constitution) and practise (foremost material collected by the author as both interviews and observations), as well as an analysis of democracy attitudes of the Rwandese citizens, conducted as a fully structured survey. The second foremost quantitative part analyses the countries modernization processes, in which data is (foremost) collected from official statistics in a comparative perspective with a time frame of ten years. There is no use of analysing the country directly after 1994, since the country was in ruins.
Hopefully the part with the modernization theory and perspective can help explain if and how Rwanda is progressing, information which might not appear in the other parts, and if socio-economic developments seem to trigger democratization. Further the intention is to reveal the views of the citizens, their attitudes towards democracy in Rwanda, since they are the ones best to judge the democratic situation in Rwanda, in my opinion.
23 Organized solely by the author and RCSP.
The observations made it possible for me to better understand the political situation and developments in Rwanda. Through the field study I could access more information, and sometimes inside information which otherwise might have got lost.
It was also critical to do the MFS in order to fully understand whether democratic principles are respected or not, as well as to get a sense of the political ambiance. As Bryman (2011:539) argues a mixed method of research is of relevance if you have both an epistemological and ontological interest24, as this paper emphasises on. See below for the selection of interviewees.
4.1 Selection of Case and Sources
Rwanda was an obvious choice when it came to choose which country to conduct research in since the author had a big passion for the country. 25 The research began as an MFS, which eventually developed to this dissertation. Primary sources consist of data collected during the MFS; observations as well as interviews. Primary sources also consist of interviews from Copenhagen, and short extracts from the constitution.
The secondary sources in this paper consist of text analysis, such as scrutinization of existing literature in the area of interest, books, reports and journals, as well as official statistics.
In order to asses the socio-economic situation; i.e. the modernization process in Rwanda, the selection of the secondary analysis of official statistics from below organizations seemed to be good indicators for this type of analysis. This analysis relays on a Corruption Perception Index (CPI) from Transparency International, a Human Development Index (HDI) with data collected from United Nations Development Programs (UNDP), a globalization index (KOF) from Dr. Axel Dreher at Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich and GNI/ Capita from the World Bank (using the World Banks Atlas method).
The selection of people to interview were for the most part strategically planned, but sometimes depending on the mission as an election observer, the interviews were not planned ahead. The interviews were conducted as both open and semi-structured.
Sometimes the interviews were conducted as the author being a LTO, and sometimes as a student. Depending on if the author conducted interviews as an LTO, or as a student, different political wings could be accessed.
24 By this I mean that this paper emphasizes a combination of our perception of reality, and the base and validity of knowledge.
25 However, the summer of 2010 was my first time to visit the country and I can easily say I was positively surprised, it was much better than I ever could imagine.
Most of the interviewee was people from political parties, but also from the National Election Commission (NEC), former MP, locals, NGO:s and governmental organisations. The observations was conducted as direct and participating since the author was a member in the team of CSEOM (2010/2011), and the author became involved in the social environment of Rwanda, under a total period of three months.
The field study offered a greater coverage of the area of interest.
The fully structured survey, which was carried out in Kigali, consists of both convenience samples as well as of strategic choice. 26 The survey was distributed to seven hundred Rwandese students at two different universities, Kigali Institute of Science and Technology (KIST), and Kigali Independent University (ULK). It was hard to reach out to a bigger number of students at KIST, therefore only one hundred questionnaires were distributed to them, and ULK the rest. The author had help distributing the questionnaires at KIST. More on this under “Criticism of Method and Sources”.
4.2 Operationalization
In order to operationalize the democratization process of Rwanda this paper will first do an analysis with the help of Dahl’s aforementioned democracy theory,
“polyarchy”. Please see theory chapter “Dahl’s Polyarchy” for a wider explanation of these criteria’s.
1. Elected officials;
2. Free and fair elections;
3. Universal suffrage;
4. The right to stand for election;
5. Freedom of Expression;
6. Alternative sources of information;
7. Freedom of Association.
This study however likes to emphasize the need to go deeper than this in order to fully understand the development paths of Rwanda, hopefully also to a wider understanding of the politics of Rwanda and due to the fact that socio-economic developments and democracy often comes hand in hand.
26 This mission was a bit complicated since the author was a member of CSEOM and followed the code of conduct (synonym to code of ethics). It was also a bit of a language barrier, and it was hard to reach out to a bigger number of people to introduce the survey to, who were literate as well. The research was also conducted with a time and resource limit. Hence the choice of conducting the survey in the capital of Rwanda.
