Playing Politics with Tragedy

Writing about the tragic history of violent ethnic division in Burundi is a political enterprise for many foreign scholars. Some take a Tutsi extremist stance while others take a Hutu extremist one. It is a sad case of historical manipulation that has led to justifications for massacres.

Rene Lemarchand and Peter Uvin are two scholars that acknowledge the massacres committed by all sides. Lemarchand's analysis in his 1994 book on Burundi is especially poignant. He notes that Hutu extremists refuse to acknowledge the massacres of Tutsi , which was committed by Hutu militants, that preceded the Tutsi army's massacres of Hutu in 1972, 1988, 1991, and 1993. Tutsi extremists fail to mention that the Tutsi-controlled governments that practiced discrimination against the Hutu created the anger within the Hutu community to spark militant action.

Both Lemarchand and Uvin note the complicated role that Pierre Buyoya has had in Burundi's history. Buyoya, during his non-consecutive terms as president, nominally worked to ease the tension between Tutsi and Hutu. But his reasons are not entirely pure. The two authors also note the divisions and rivalries within the Tutsi community. By explaining the context of the massacres and laying blame at the feet of those who committed the massacres, Hutu and Tutsi alike, they are working towards building a more peaceful Burundi.

The worst case of revisionist history with regards to Burundi I've read is a book by U.S. Ambassador Robert Krueger. Krueger sides with Hutu extremists. Reading Krueger's book, you would think the Tutsi-controlled army, which slaughtered educated Hutu in what was a genocide, did so without any provocation. He doesn't explain that the Tutsi, who are the numerical minority in Burundi and tend to have a fear of extinction should the Hutu majority ever gain power, were massacred by Hutu militants first. That is not a justification for the army's actions, but it is an important fact.

Krueger describes President Melchoir Ndadaye, a Hutu, as Martin Luther King. He describes President Pierre Buyoya, a Tutsi, as Adolph Hitler. This type of hyperbole is not productive. To claim that one ethnicity is Good and the other Evil, is to provoke and justify further massacres. Krueger, who presents his book as unbiased, is disingenuous. He does not put the numerous tragedies that have taken place in Burundi into context.
(more at The HQT-IE)