A Decolonial Rwanda: NGO’s Empowerment Will Unlock a Truly Decolonial Approach to Post-Genocidal Reconciliation
Rwanda’s turbulent past, shaped by colonial legacies and the devastating 1994 genocide, demands a profound re-evaluation of its post-genocidal reconciliation efforts. The current framework, heavily influenced by colonial undertones and international norms, poses significant barriers to achieving genuine equity in social policy outcomes. To navigate this complex terrain, Rwanda must adopt a comprehensive decolonial approach that extends beyond mere de-ethnicization, addresses dependency on foreign aid, and reimagines nation-building projects. If this is to be achieved, non-profit organisations will need to be positioned at the heart of the design and implementation phases of policy creation.
The roots of Rwanda’s contemporary challenges can be traced back to the colonial era, particularly Belgian colonization, and French influence. These external forces played a pivotal role in reshaping Rwanda’s socio-economic landscape, often through coercion and manipulation. The Belgian colonizers, in particular, exacerbated existing social hierarchies by reclassifying the inhabitants of the land into ethnic categories, laying the groundwork for future conflicts and divisions (Nikuze, 2014).
The aftermath of the 1994 genocide, which claimed the lives of approximately one million people and left countless others traumatized, further underscored the urgent need for reconciliation (UN, 2019). However, the reconciliation process has been hindered by lingering colonial influences and the perpetuation of Western-centric norms (Prunier, 2009). Despite assertions of post-colonialism providing avenues for decolonial processes, international norms continue to reflect Western hegemony, perpetuating colonial systems in countries like Rwanda (Flaherty, 2020). This has resulted in a prioritisation of funding to international organisations and NGO’s ran by non-natives. As a consequence, the division of funding often lacks cultural sensitivity, is not optimised to make long-term impact and sees local NGO’s neglected.
NGO’s power to influence discourse
One manifestation of this colonial hangover is evident in the development discourse, particularly through modernization theory. This theory, rooted in Western ideals of progress, imposes a linear trajectory of development that often fails to account for the unique socio-cultural contexts of countries like Rwanda (Rostow, 1997). In other terms, the theory understands development as a process recognisable by societies transitioning from a ‘traditional’ to ‘modern’ society — strongly linked to the idea of emanating Western versions of progress — with an expectation of sorts that societies will pass through the stages of development mirroring experiences of the Global North (Rostow, 1997).
In the case of Rwanda, this can be most closely connected to cultures of administration and justice, knowledge production and the dependency on foreign aid (Flaherty, 2020). Factors which all deeply impact NGOs, ranging from how funding is divided to which NGO’s receive national recognition. Post-developmental thinkers challenge the virtue of this reality, calling for an active dismantling of the entrenched hierarchies in knowledge and power that have shaped the discourse on development (Esteva and Babones, 2013). This serves as an acknowledgement that, ‘development’ is not an objective concept; instead, it is subject to debate and contention. The enduring impact of historical colonial power structures, characterised by the centralisation of authority and resources in specific groups or regions, is shaping contemporary governance practices and socio-political dynamics in Rwanda (Purdeková and Mwambari, 2022). As a result NGO’s are left to balance turbulent political landscapes that do not respect or aim to increase NGO representation. Consequently, this is reflected in the architecture of de-ethnicization policy which has not prevented emergent forms of ‘regionalism’ from reflecting a persistence of colonial influences in identity politics, including, and extending beyond considerations of race and ethnicity (Purdeková and Mwambari, 2022). NGO’s are forced to limit their capacity to avoid discrimination from the government. These demands leave NGO’s grappling to gain communities trust whilst not upsetting political actors across the political hierarchy.
To confront persisting systems enabling colonialism in the Rwandan landscape, the post-genocidal reconciliation approach must extend beyond tackling de-ethnicization. It should embrace a comprehensive decolonial approach to reconciliation that makes greater consideration of the cultures of administration and justice, knowledge production and dependency on foreign aid, ensuring that Rwanda actively pursues development rooted in decolonisation. NGO’s are best positioned to inform these discussion due to their unique connection and understanding with the people they seek to help.
The relationship between NGO’s and ODA
Overseas development aid (ODA) for Rwanda was 18% of gross national income in 2009 (Fee, 2012). This has enabled a perpetuation of a cycle of dependency that hampers genuine autonomy and development (Fee, 2012). To break free from these entrenched systems of colonialism, Rwanda must embrace a decolonial approach to reconciliation. This entails going beyond surface-level de-ethnicization efforts and addressing deeper structural issues such as dependency on foreign aid. Rather than merely reducing aid reliance, Rwanda must develop a concrete strategy for achieving autonomy and self-sufficiency, empowering its population to drive their own development (Fee, 2012).
The governments ‘New Rwanda’ efforts highlight a goal of reducing dependency on foreign aid. However, there is little discussion of a concrete strategy for achieving this objective, and there is no mention of an aid exit strategy ultimately seeking to remove any dependency on aid (Purdeková and Mwambari, 2022). An aid dependency exit strategy will require a radical change in the mindset and development approach of Rwanda, along with a more active participation of their population in driving their own development which could be successfully facilitated by NGO’s (Fee, 2012). In doing so, conditionality’s would no longer be a factor in Rwandan development, providing autonomy and control that would facilitate them to use their superior positionality to understand and respond to the unique socio-economic and cultural contexts within their borders (Fee, 2012). Resultantly, more equitable social policy outcomes could be achieved through the maximisation of NGO’s knowledge and experience in supporting communities.
Moreover, reconceptualizing nation-building projects is essential for fostering inclusivity and unity in Rwanda. Rather than perpetuating top-down approaches rooted in Anglo-European ideas, Rwanda should strive for inclusive civic nationalism that celebrates diversity and empowers marginalized groups (Green-Pedersen, 2019). This requires a fundamental shift in mindset and a rejection of preconceived notions of nation-building inherited from colonial powers.
Conclusion
Rwanda’s complex history, marked by colonial legacies and the 1994 genocide, underscores the critical need for a comprehensive decolonial approach to post-genocidal reconciliation. The current reconciliation framework, influenced by colonial undertones and international norms, hinders genuine equity in social policy outcomes. To break free from persistent colonial systems, Rwanda must extend reconciliation efforts beyond de-ethnicization, address dependency on foreign aid, and reconceptualize nation-building projects. A radical shift towards autonomy, cultural understanding, and inclusivity, coupled with a decolonial mindset, is essential for fostering truly equitable social policy outcomes in Rwanda. The potential for this to be achieved lies in the empowerment of NGOs.
