Africa: Your Brother’s and Sister's Blood Cries Out to Me
from the Ground
“Your brother’s [and sister’s} blood cries out to me from
the ground” Genesis 4:10 – The reason for addition of “sister’s” will
be obvious later in this essay.
This essay is quite long and filled with a lot of disturbing
information. For way too long, the
world has been willfully ignorant of this information. Please read this entire essay – not for
my sake, but for the sake of the millions whose blood cries from the ground –
for the sake of the millions who live on that same ground now – and so that
future generations may not have to face the same terrible fate. If you have to, bookmark this page and
come back to it. Print it
out. But, whatever you do, read
the entire essay. Do not stop there! Pass it on. Write a better essay.
Write to your legislators.
Make more people aware.
These crimes against our brothers and sisters must come to an end!
Preface – How This
Project Started
 |
| President Paul Kagame of Rwanda |
In May 2012, Paul Kagame, the President of Rwanda, one of the
official “heroes” in recent African history was invited to speak at the
Graduation at a Quaker University – William Penn University in Iowa. Knowing what I know through much
research (which will be described later), I wrote a letter of protest asking the
university to rescind their invitation to President Kagame. I initially received no response. I wrote a second letter of protest and
was accused by the School Administration of Bullying and Harassment. I find that a far cry from Genocide –
the crimes of which I was addressing.
They refused to listen to my argument. Many Rwandans and others concerned with this complete
mockery of the 6 million dead (a very
conservative estimate) at the hands of Kagame (Rosen, Washington Diplomat) or those under his command apparently also
filed letters of protest and phone calls.
We were ignored.
My letters were some how leaked to or discovered by Rwandan
authorities here in the United States.
Within a day of sending them, I began receiving emails to intimidate me
– we know where you live – we know what
you do – we know who your friends are. Of course, all of this could be found with a simple “Google
search,” but the invasion of my privacy was at issue. I responded by telling the person who wrote to me that I’m glad
that he knew so much about me, and I’d be glad for him to now introduce himself
to me. He never did so. He only told me he’s an evangelist upon
learning I’m a pastor. Evangelist
of what god?
My letter then appeared in an English Language Rwandan
Internet Newspaper and attributed to a US Defense Attorney, C. Peter Erlinder
(RNA Reporters) who was arrested in 2010 in Rwanda for Genocide Ideology (that
is, not sticking to the Official Rwandan Version of the 1994 Story of Genocide
Events) (Erlinder was released on bail on June, 18, 2010). (No,
I promise I’m not making this up, and I promise my mental health is stable).
Ramifications
I fully expect the same responses from this essay. But if you plan to respond in such a
manner, please answer these questions:
1. If you are telling the truth, why are you so
defensive and threatening?
2. If you are telling the truth, please give me
official and credible citations as I will do throughout
this essay. (My
citations are parenthetical or within the text itself and listed in the
bibliography
at the end).
3. If peace is your goal, then let us come together
as 1 People, as God’s children, and realize we
ALL need to repent. Let us dialogue. No person is unworthy God’s Love.
4. If peace is not your goal, what do you hope to
attain by perpetuating hatred and violence?
5 5. I am not a Rwandan. I am an American.
I have no ties to Africa or Rwanda except for friends
and acquaintances. But, my ties run deeper in the fact
that all of God’s children are my brothers
and sisters. It just so happens that Africa, and
later, Rwanda, are the topics of this essay. If you
think I have overstepped my bounds, where does a
person such as myself fit?
If anyone who disagrees with me can answer those 5
questions, I will listen to his or her argument and engage in serious
dialogue. If you respond to me
with intimidation or threats or violence, you only strengthen the cause of this
essay. Threats of violence will only prove what I have to say. I realize this is an emotional
issue. I realize that passions
will be raised and pushed. I
welcome civilized discussion, but again, threats and intimidation will only
strengthen what I say.
Introduction: Principalities and Powers
Ephesians 6: 12 For
we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against
powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual
wickedness in high places.
What follows is a historical and theological look at the history, the
current situation, and the future of Africa – its land and its people. Over the centuries Africa has been the most
victimized continent on the planet.
Africans have been the most oppressed people. To narrow the reasons down would be next to impossible. But, throughout this essay I will
attempt to name a few. Names will
be named. Issues will be
named. “-Ism’s” will be
named. What we need to remember,
however is that this was, is, and will be a more complex situation than any one
essay can present.
There are no “clean hands” when it comes to the pillage of
Africa. If you are reading this
essay, you are guilty by association.
I am guilty by writing this.
I am currently typing on a Mac Laptop. You are reading my writing. We all most likely have goods that were produced from
immoral and unsafe work practices forced upon African people so that we can
have cheaper products. Even the
African people themselves are not innocent. Most groups have not looked out for other groups unless it
was beneficial to their own interests.
Much blood has been shed in the name of tribalism. Much hatred and vitriol has been passed
from generation to generation.
Where does all this come from?
While we want to point fingers at people, I believe the problem is much
larger. The problem is in demonic
systems. I do not use the term
“demonic” entirely metaphorically.
The problem is not individual people. The problem is Powers and Principalities. They are forces beyond what can be
controlled by any one person or group of people.
We should not look at this without hope, however. While we cannot control the Powers and
Principalities, God can. Through
God, we can resist them. Not only
will I present problems, but I will also present solutions – or rather, paths
to solutions. The problems did not
start overnight, and we cannot expect them to be solved overnight. We can, however, live in hope of
redemption.
Part 1: A History of the
Powers at Work
(References to the Powers are from Campbell and
Stringfellow)
The Curse of
Canaan
Genesis 9: 20Noah, a man of the soil, was the
first to plant a vineyard. 21He drank some of the wine and
became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent. 22And
Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two
brothers outside. 23Then Shem and Japheth took a
garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the
nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see
their father’s nakedness.
24When Noah awoke from his wine and
knew what his youngest son had done to him, 25he
said, “Cursed be Canaan; lowest of slaves shall he be to his brothers.”
Genesis 10: 6The descendants of Ham: Cush,
Egypt, Put, and Canaan.
European and Western persecution of Africa and the
African people were at first justified based on these two seemingly inane scriptures. “God ordained these savages to be servants.” “God cursed these
heathens.” It’s right here, not so
plain but simple, in the Bible – God’s word. That’s what the Europeans and Western Nations told
themselves – “It’s justified.”
While one would be hard pressed to find this line of reasoning used
today, the attitude still remains.
Africans are “savages” and “uncivilized,” or so the Powers would have us
believe.
Before looking at modern issues, let’s take a look at
and try to understand the misuse of the Scriptures above. First of all, notice that God never
does the cursing – Noah does. Also
notice that Noah is drunk, or at least “hung-over.” How many people make their best decisions when they are in
either state? How many people say profound
words of wisdom when they are inebriated or when their heads are pounding after
a “night on the town?”
Next, look at whom Noah is cursing. If we can get past his obvious state of
intoxication or it’s after-effects, we see that Noah is cursing Canaan – not
Ham, and not Cush. This will
require some explanation – the information comes from the “Table of Nations” in
Genesis 10.
Ham is the father of Canaan. Canaan is the Biblical Ancestor of the people who would
eventually inhabit the land that would become Israel. Noah is setting the stage for the Exodus and Joshua’s
takeover of the Promised Land.
Ham is also the father of Cush. Cush is the Biblical name for what is considered
to be the area around modern day Ethiopia and/or Sudan. In other words, Cush represents the
people with dark skin – Black People.
When European and Western Exploiters landed on the
shores of Africa, these verses justified their rape and pillage of the African
Land and People – at least in their own minds.
Dr. James H. Cone of Union Theological Seminary, author
of A Black Theology of Liberation
states in this monumental work that “God is black.” While he is mostly addressing racism of the United States,
his theology can be put into use almost anywhere people are oppressed. When Cone says, “God is black,” he is
speaking metaphorically. He means
that God is on the side of the oppressed.
If Cone is correct, and it is my argument that he is;
God is on the side of the oppressed African people, land, and plight. The Curse of Canaan was used as a
mockery of the intention of God.
God intended for the land of Canaan to be given to the People of Israel
to be a “light unto the nations” (Isaiah 49:6) to bring all people to know
God. This passage was not intended
to divide God’s creation based upon a human constructed theory of race.
Genetically speaking, all races have very little difference. Skin color, bone density, body shapes,
and so forth are all due to breeding and survival issues. Imagine a Scandinavian person living in
ancient Africa. That person would
die of skin cancer because of his or her fair complexion. It’s biology, NOT theology.
Bricks
Without Straw
Exodus 5: 6That same day Pharaoh commanded the
taskmasters of the people, as well as their supervisors, 7“You shall no longer give the
people straw to make bricks, as before; let them go and gather straw for
themselves. 8But you shall require of them the
same quantity of bricks as they have made previously; do not diminish it, for
they are lazy…
Ships arrived upon the coasts of Africa. This was the dawning of the Colonial period. Of course, every Colonial Power brought
with them an army, weapons, strategies of conquest, but they also brought with
them missionaries and clergy. They
brought with them the Gospel as they understood it – or rather, they brought
with them the Gospel as they wanted to understand it – They brought with them
the European Gospel.
Each nation that landed upon the shores of Africa had a different
strategy in their quest for domination, but their goal was the same – total
domination. They wanted the land,
its resources, and its people. I
hesitate to use the word, “people.”
I hesitate because most of the Colonial Powers did not see the native
Africans as equal human beings, but they saw them as less than human. At best, they saw them as savage
people, at worst, they saw them as animals in human form.
Manifest Destiny was their motivation. They believed they had a God Given Right to conquer these
lands in the name of the Almighty.
They were the New Israel.
Just as the Puritans who came to America in the 17th Century,
the Europeans who Colonized Africa were creating a “City upon a Hill” (a
statement made by John Winthrop – Puritan MA Governor).
It does not take a genius to figure out that God was the last thing on
the minds of the conquerors. They
were possessed by a Power of Greed and Entitlement. They wanted the resources of the land and the labor of the
people of Africa. They wanted
bricks without straw. They wanted to receive but not to give.
Colonialism led to slavery.
The African “savages” were being “saved” and “civilized” by being
captured and put on a boat and shipped to the mother-land (and then to other
colonies) and forced to work in inhumane conditions. At least, or so the logic of the Colonists goes, they would
be introduced to Christianity.
Those who remained in Africa would also make “bricks without straw.” The invasion of foreigners into their
villages and the building of new towns, cities, and the drawing of colonial
boundaries would disrupt their way of life. Here, the tribes of Africa would be divided by these
boundaries from foreign nations.
Here, the names of the African lands would be changed.
By naming something or someone, one gains power over that something or
someone. In Alex Haley’s book and
movie Roots, there is the famous
scene where the protagonist Kunta Kinte is renamed Toby by his slave
master. Though he fights it at
first, he finally accepts his fate.
By accepting this fate, he has given up power of himself to the slave
master.
When the foreign powers were in Africa, there were name changes. Changing
a name is a way of exerting oppression. DO NOT MISS THIS SIGNIFICANT ACT!
Colonial names of African countries included Italian Libya (Libya – Held by
Italy), Gold Coast (Ghana – Held by Britain and Germany), French Sudan (Mali –
Held by France), Belgian Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo – Held by
Belgium), Ruanda-Urundi (Rwanda – Held by Belgium), and Rhodesia (Zimbabwe –
Held by Britain), among others.
As the Colonial Powers exerted their control, the native populations
became the powerless majority. The
native population became the Israelites who could outnumber the Egyptians, but
lacked the power to do much damage.
The native population was forced into a subservient position to “make
bricks without straw” for their Colonial Rulers.
-
For a fictionalized but accurate and emotional
account on Colonialism in Africa, read Things
Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe.
The Lion of
Judah
1 Kings 1When the queen of Sheba heard of
the fame of Solomon, (fame due to the name of the Lord), she came to test him
with hard questions. 2She came to Jerusalem with a very
great retinue, with camels bearing spices, and very much gold, and precious
stones; and when she came to Solomon, she told him all that was on her mind. 3Solomon answered all her questions;
there was nothing hidden from the king that he could not explain to her…13Meanwhile King Solomon gave to the
queen of Sheba every desire that she expressed, as well as what he gave her out
of Solomon’s royal bounty. Then she returned to her own land, with her
servants.
I do not want to leave the impression to readers that Africans
were or are inferior to any other nation in terms of intelligence, leadership, or
character. The African people,
have the same wants and needs, but also gifts and talents as any other people
on the planet. The only
“inferiority” – if one can even call it such – is due to the mass exploitation
and pillage of the land and people of Africa. Africa could not develop at the rate of other nations due to
outside factors beyond its control.
I want to give an example of a leader who was the first
African Leader in modern times who was influential on an international
scale. I hesitate here for a
second because I am only giving a semi-detailed example of one African Leader
when in fact, there have been strong Africans for millennia whether or not they
have been in official leadership positions or not. The point of this example is not to downgrade the nameless
and countless Africans whose deeds I do not mention, but rather to show that
Africa was in fact historically active in Global politics during the 20th
century – a time when many Westerners still discounted Africa as “backward.”
The African Leader who stood up to Western pressure very
early in the 20th Century and led his nation to become a competitive
nation was Emperor Halie Selassie I of Ethiopia. Selassie was born Tafari Makonnen in 1892, and he was
Emperor of Ethiopia from 1930-1974.
His lineage can be traced back to the 13th Century, though
legend states that it goes back to the Biblical account in 1 Kings 10 of the
supposed union of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. This union (if there was a union) is in
1 Kings 10:13 where Solomon “gave the queen of Sheba every desire that she
expressed.” The legend (if it is legend) of the line of Solomon is traced in
the Kebra Negast – The Glory of the Kings,
a 700-year-old work important to Ethiopian Christians and Rastafarians (a
religion and/or culture that worships as God Incarnate or holds Emperor
Selassie I in high esteem which began in Jamaica). The power in the narrative of the Kebra Negast should not be ignored. In this narrative, the Ethiopian People find meaning from a
long storied history. Whether this
story is entirely factual is insubstantial. There is power in history; both in fact and legend.
Upon inheriting
the throne, Makonnen took the name Halie Selassie I – which translates to
“Power of the Trinity” and was also his Baptismal Name.
On November 2, 1930, Selassie was named King of Kings in
Ethiopia. Many world leaders and
influential people from many nations attended his coronation. The following year, Selassie introduced
Ethiopia’s first Constitution that at first kept the power in the monarchy, but
provided a transition that allowed power to be transferred slowly to the people
to elect their leaders.
In 1935, Selassie’s rule was challenged. Under the leadership of Fascist Benito
Mussolini, the Italians invaded Ethiopia with Colonial interests. Ethiopia was able to defend its
homeland for a while despite the power of the Italians. In 1936, after much debate within the
Government of Ethiopia, Halie Selassie determined to go into exile and address
the League of Nations – the precursor of the United Nations – to ask for
international assistance. While
Selassie knew French – the official language of the League of Nations – He
addressed the body in his native language, Amharic. While this speech did gain him recognition by Time Magazine as “Man of the Year,” he
was largely ignored by the world community (Again, I would assume that racism
and political gain had a lot to do with his being ignored). Some nations did
impose symbolic, yet ineffective sanctions against Italy while others
recognized Italy’s conquests as legitimate. Most likely, this recognition of Italy’s conquest had ties
to racism, the belief the Europe and America were the Global Centers of
Control, and the “might makes right” belief.
Because the world ignored his plea for help, Selassie was
forced into exile in England until 1941.
Finally, with the help of British forces, and Ethiopian backed African
and South African forces, the Italians were expelled and Selassie returned to
rule Ethiopia.
Despite being ignored by the League of Nations, Emperor
Selassie became a charter member of the United Nations formed after World War
II. He worked on tax reform to
ease the burden on peasants, but due to political factions, he had trouble and
the burden remained upon the poor.
In the 1950’s, Selassie introduced a new Constitution that
still kept most of the control in the monarchy. He also introduced education reform and modernization
plans.
Selassie became a firm ally of the West, though he was a
hard line opponent of African Colonization by outside nations. In 1966, Selassie attempted to develop
a progressive taxation system for Ethiopia based upon income that would lower
the burden on the peasants, but this led to revolt by the aristocracy and was
abandoned.
Marxism made its way into the minds of people in Ethiopia,
especially among those who had studied abroad. In a complicated series of events, this led to riots and
revolution. On September 12, 1974,
Emperor Selassie was deposed by a group of low ranking military members and put
under house arrest. He died on
August 27, 1975. Official reports
are that he died of respiratory failure due to complications during a prostate
surgery. That, of course, is
subject to many doubts.
Halie Selassie’s rule was much more than symbolic. His 1936 League of Nations Address made
him one of the world’s first Cultural Icons against Fascism, a form of
government that would come to haunt the world a decade later in World War
II. His eloquence before the world
in standing up to the Italians in his native Amharic in that same speech is
unmatched by any other.
By all modern thoughts and senses, the Selassie’s forces
should have been no challenge for the invading Italians, but for 2 years, he
was able to fend them off. Even
after those two years, the Ethiopian Forces continued to present a challenge to
the Italian forces.
At a time when African nations were seen as “backwards” and
“uncivilized,” Selassie and Ethiopia was one of the founding members of the
world’s negotiation body – The United Nations.
As all political leaders, Selassie is not without
criticism. Some say he should have
not gone into exile during the Italian invasion, but had he not gone, he would
have not made his League of Nations address making him a world figure and
putting Ethiopia on the world’s “radar screen.” Others criticize how he stayed in exile in England while the
Italians occupied his nation.
Those who do are following the theory that “the captain goes down with
the ship.” This theory is not
without merit, but by going into exile, Selassie was able to come back and lead
forces to liberate Ethiopia with the help of the British and other African
forces.
Someone can criticize every action. Hindsight is always 20/20. I believe that history has shown that
during his rule, Selassie had the best interest of his homeland in mind at all
times. He modernized Ethiopia. He attempted to create a fair economic
system, but some of the elite of the country undermined his plans. That cannot be blamed on him. During his rule, Ethiopia was a world
player among the nations. Selassie
should at the very least be
remembered as a modern ruler on the world’s scene in Africa at a time when
Global Power in Africa was limited to Colonial Powers that controlled the
continent.
 |
| Emperor Halie Selassie I |
I could not conclude this section about Emperor Halie Selassie I
without quoting an English translation of his prophetic speech given to the
United Nations in 1963. Reggae
Musician Bob Marley popularized these eternal words in his song “War.”
-That
until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
finally and permanently discredited and abandoned: That until there are no
longer first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; That until the
color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes;
That until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard
to race; That until that day, the dream of lasting peace and world citizenship
and the rule of international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to
be pursued but never attained and until the ignoble but unhappy regimes that
hold our brothers in Angola, in Mozambique, and in South Africa in subhuman
bondage have been toppled and destroyed; until bigotry and prejudice and
malicious and inhuman self-interest have been replaced by understanding and
tolerance and goodwill; until all Africans stand and speak as free human
beings, equal in the eyes of the Almighty; until that day, the African
continent shall not know peace. We Africans will fight if necessary and we know
that we shall win as we are confident in the victory of good over evil.
Live
by the Sword; Die by the Sword
Matthew 26 51Suddenly,
one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword, drew it, and struck the
slave of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 52Then
Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the
sword will perish by the sword.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the African
people have constantly lived in defense mode since outside forces invaded
Africa. For hundreds, if not
thousands of years, somewhere in the continent, people were being kidnapped as
slaves, land was being raped for its goods, and societies were being conquered
as colonies by other nations.
The native African population, while sometimes living in
and uneasy and very uncomfortable peace with their oppressors, still had to
“keep one eye open” in order to survive.
The oppressors had one thing in mind, and that one thing was profit.
Of course, there will always be examples of “the gentle
colonist” or “the kind slave owner,” but one must never forget that even these
people were first and foremost oppressors. We would never dream of speaking of the “compassionate
murderer,” or the “caring rapist,” so any justification of oppression in any
form is simply unacceptable.
We can “split hairs” and talk about the morality and
virtue of the slave owner who bought a family of slaves to free them from being
beaten by a crueler slave owner in a society where freeing slaves was not
possible, and while that has some merit, the overarching narrative is still one
of oppression. We can look back at
history and say, “that’s just how things were back then,” but still, the people
“back then” had the same feelings, desires, dreams, biology, etc., that we do
today. True, that may be making a
judgment out of context, but to say that oppression at any time is acceptable
is morally unacceptable. From the
time of the beginning of time to Modern Times, God has always been on the side
of the oppressed.
As oppression was the meta-narrative of the African
Continent, the African people felt there were two equally damning choices. First, they could live with the status
quo and continue to live under oppression. That option is unacceptable to any human group. Second, they could fight for their
freedom and emancipation. This too
was a sad choice because of the violence and loss that they know it would
ultimately bring.
The majority of the African people chose the second
option – Fight for Freedom.
Colonists were not willing to negotiate or bargain, and even if they
were, they African people hardly had anything with which to bargain that the
colonists did not already hold.
They could not appeal to morality because the colonists had already
formed their own morality. It
seemed that fighting – violence – was the only option. Even with that, victory was far from
certain. The Colonizers had the
advanced weaponry, but the Africans had the attachment to the Land, and this
cannot be understated.
The majority of African nations suffered losses too
numerous to count in their freedom fights. Some fights were longer and bloodier than others, but
eventually freedom came.
The term “freedom” is difficult to define, and I will
not even attempt to define it here other than to say that the African nations
were free of Colonial rule. The
exception was South Africa that continued its fight even into the 1980’s (and
some would say to present day).
South Africa is also different in that the Colonial powers had since
become “Africans” themselves. They
white South Africans ceased to answer to a “Mother Nation,” but yet continued
to rule in colonial style oppressing the black South Africans. To a lesser, but also damaging degree,
the same was true in Zimbabwe.
As freedom from Colonial Powers came, freedom from oppressive
power did not come. Those who
helped liberate the various nations then began fighting among themselves jockeying
for power. They learned this
through the models of the nation state as set up by Colonial Powers (Katongole,
2). Humans worship the “Idolatry
of Might” (Heschel, 202). The one
who is strongest is the one to be honored…or so the “logic” goes. Or more accurately, the one who is
strongest is the one to be feared, and the one to be feared is the one who
holds power…until one stronger comes along.
Examples of the “Rule of the Strongest” are not hard to
find in Africa. Mummar Gaddafi
ruled Libya with an “Iron Fist” from 1977 until a rebellion brought him down in
2011. Robert Mugabe, one of the
leaders of the rebellion against white-rule in Rhodesia and was a leader in the
“Bush War” to bring about the independence and renaming of Zimbabwe. He was elected President in 1980 and as
of September 2012 still holds that position. At first, he was the hero of Zimbabwe, but in 2012,
loyalties are divided and his reputation is disputed – Is he holding onto power
just to be in power? Or is he truly a good president? Idi Amin of Uganda seized control in 1971. He was erratic, and some would say he
was mentally deranged. While his
rule was celebrated by many at first, soon, he ruled by fear. He was forced into exile to Libya in
1978 then Saudi Arabia where he died in 2003.
It is here that I must pause to talk about
Globalization. After World War II,
the United States and the Soviet Union emerged as the two Superpowers. Every nation in one-way or another had
to fall in line behind one of the two Superpowers. While this was not “Classic Colonialism,” it was still a
form of Colonialism. While the US
or USSR did not physically (in most cases) occupy other nations, they
controlled them through very tough economic rewards and punishments. Yes, some nations refused to fall in
line, but they were the exception, not the rule.
Globalization coupled with the Idolatry of Might
(Heschel, The Prophets) led to many
violent and power-hungry rulers in Africa. Those who were once oppressed now became the oppressors at
the promise of “rewards” from the USA or USSR (and at the collapse of the USSR;
only the USA followed by lesser powers such as the UK, France, China, and so
forth). These leaders (and we need
to remember that not all African leaders are or were this way), believe that
“might makes right,” and that one must rule with an “iron fist.”
For centuries, Africa was ruled by outside forces in
this “might makes right” manner. This
is the Nation State model. Nations
are formed by violence. They are
maintained by threat of violence.
There can be overt threats (visible military) or implicit threats (the
knowledge that rebellion will lead to military response – as in the 19th
Century US Civil War). Governments
can be sustained for long periods of time through elections, or appointments of
officials, or new governments can overthrow governments through coups or
revolutions.
Little if any regard by Colonizers was placed on the
individuals or even the nation as a whole. The goal was money and profit. When Africans themselves gained power, they knew no other
style of leadership. They had no
internal models to imitate. On the
other hand, these leaders had (and have) choices. Many of them went through the violent regimes of past days,
and could (or should) try to offer better situations to their people. But, the Idolatry of Might is a
powerful force. Power poisons the
mind. When one rules a nation,
especially if there is no established rule of law, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to make up the rules as you go along – And these rules will most
likely always include self-preservation.
This in no way means that oppressive regimes of African
Leaders should be considered victims of circumstance. They are fully aware of their decisions and the impact those
decisions have on other people.
They are fully responsible for the lives and deaths caused by their
decisions.
The Idolatry of Might makes one forget his or her own
people he or she rules. The people
become a mass of faceless and nameless plebes rather than individuals. Ruling with an Iron fist, is not as
tough as it may have previously seemed.
The masses of people become an inconvenience to the ideal rule, and
therefore must be dealt with in whatever means necessary.
However, in the timeless words of Jesus Christ, “all who
take the sword will perish by the sword.”
Part 2: The
Powers At Work
Who
is Isaac? Who is Ishmael?
Who is the Child of the Covenant? According to the Bible, it is
Isaac. According to the Quran, it
is Ishmael. This question has been
the central cause of wars, hate, and violence for over 1,000 years. Who owns the land? That is a question that is very similar
in Africa. It is one we will take
up in this part of the essay.
In the next section, I will be using Rwanda as a case
study, but in order to understand Rwanda, there are some demographics that one
must understand. There are 2
dominant groups and 1 very small group within Rwanda.
First, let me define terms as they will be used and
should be understood:
Race – a political designation. Race
has no genetic differentiation.
Race may include
skin color, but at the scientific level, this is due to adaptations made to sun exposure over time, not due to genetics, and has no bearing on intelligence,
personality, or any other traits.
Ethnicity – a cultural group from which
one comes. Again, this is not a scientific
designation, but rather a geographical and/or a cultural/religious designation. For the purpose of this essay, Tribes are Ethnic Groups. (I
will use
the terms “Groups” and “Tribes” interchangeably).
Tribe – For the purposes of this essay,
a Tribe is an Ethnic Group. After Colonialism,
African Nations were not divided based upon Tribal groups. This
mixed random groups into nations.
In theory, this diversity could be a good
thing, however, each tribe had different customs, and no account was taken
of this reality. The word “Tribe,”
should in no way imply any primitive or
uncivilized connotation.
The largest tribes are the Hutus and the Tutsis. The smallest group is the Twa
group. The Hutus are the majority tribe
making up 84% of the population.
The Tutsis make up 15% of the population. The Twas make up 1% of the population.
This case study will focus only on the Hutus and Tutsis
due to the events cited – no disrespect or neglect is intended toward the Twa
people as they too were victims. I
focus on the Hutus and Tutsis because they were the active participants. The Twa, while still victims, due to
numbers had little to do with events in Rwanda.
There are two theories as to the origin of the Hutu tribe. The first (and most credible in
according to scholars) is that the Hutus are descendents of the Bantu people
from Central and West Africa and came to the Great Lakes Region (the region in
and around Rwanda) in the Great Bantu Expansion. The second (and less credible – and possible historical
revisionist) view is that Hutus and Tutsis are actually of the same Bantu
origin, but were artificially divided based on appearance by the Germans and
Belgians whereby the Tutsis were given authority positions over the Hutus.
Genetics also prove that the Tutsis have Bantu origin,
but there is also genetic evidence that their origin comes from the Horn
(Northwest) of Africa. Europeans
first defined a Tutsi as one who owned 10 or more cows, had a longer nose,
and/or longer neck than a typical Bantu person.
While the social categories are real, as we shall see,
there is very little genetic difference between Hutu and Tutsi (Miller). All Genetic Difference is in terms of micro-difference. I am not a genetic expert, but I do
understand that each person has a unique genetic pattern. All humans have genetic
similarities. While Races have no
significant differences, there are some minute genetic traits from one race to
another.
A
Case Study: Rwanda 1994-Present
The Unbiased Facts:
· * April
6, 1994 – The airplane carrying Rwandan (Hutu) President Juvenal Habyaimana and
Cyprien
Ntaryamira (Hutu) President of Burundi was shot down killing all on
board as it prepared to land in
Kigali – The Capital of Rwanda.
· * Following
the shooting down of the airplane, mass killing began inside the borders of
Rwanda.
· * Both
Tutsis and Hutus were killed in this Genocide inside Rwanda. Death toll
estimates are between
500,000-1 Million. (It is generally accepted that the
victims were Tutsis and “Moderate” Hutus –
those who did not strongly identify
with their Hutu label – The main perpetrators of the violence
were the
Interahamwe – a Hutu militia)
· * Part
of the Genocide included organized rape and sexual violence against female victims.
There was
also sexual mutilation against male victims.
· * A
UN Peacekeeping force was sent in with strict orders not to engage except under
extreme conditions
for self-defense (due to strong objections from the UN
Security Council – made up of the USA,
Russia, China, France, and the UK).
· * The
UN Peacekeeping Force could not respond to the actual events they saw (because
of their rules of
engagement determined by the Security Council). There are several accounts of where
they
evacuated foreign nationals leaving native Rwandans to be massacred.
· * Under
the leadership of President Bill Clinton, the USA did not want to get involved
in a “local
conflict.” He refused to use language of “genocide.” This is a
decision President Clinton later stated
he regretted in a “Frontline”
interview.
· * At
the same time of the Genocide, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) – a rebel
group - was leading
attacks against Rwanda and the Habyaimana regime.
· * As
the genocide escalated, RPF General Paul Kagame and the RPF renewed their attack
on Rwanda,
and by July 17, 1994 had seized control of the country.
· * The
RPF victory started a mass exodus of Hutus to Zaire (now the Democratic
Republic of the Congo
<DRC>).
· * 2
Million Hutus fearing retaliation fled to the DRC, Burundi, Tanzania, and Uganda. This sparked a
humanitarian disease
crisis including dysentery and cholera.
· * The
2 Million refugees in the DRC (then called Zaire) destabilized the
country. The corrupt president
of
Zaire, Mobutu Sese Seko, allowed extremists among the refugee population to act
with impunity.
This sparked the
First Congo War.
· * Mobutu
was overthrown in May 1997, and the new leader of the DRC was Laurent Kabila –
who
renamed Zaire the Democratic Republic of the Congo. His relationship with Rwanda soured,
and
Tutsi rebels supported by Rwanda and Uganda began a rebellion leading to
the Second Congo War.
5 Million
people were killed.
All of the above information is generally accepted as
fact. The most controversial point
that I made was my third point where I said, “Both Hutu and Tutsi civilians were
killed in this genocide.” While
that IS a fact, it opens up a controversy and a “crime.” It labels me in current Rwandan
politics as a Genocide Denier – A “crime” in Rwanda. Please note that NOWHERE did I deny that genocide took
place! The “crime” I committed was
in acknowledging that Hutus were also killed. I do not recognize what I said as a crime. Truth is not criminal. I will get to that controversy in the
next section.
Why
the “Official Version” Is Not Accurate
The events I stated above are mostly accepted as the
“official version” of events. The
“official version” says:You would have to emphasize that the Hutus were
responsible for the Genocide. You
would have to say that the only Hutus killed in the Genocide were the “Moderate
Hutus” who were defending Tutsi lives.
You would have to say that the RPF and Paul Kagame were the Heroes who
saved Rwanda from further violence and killing.
That would make a great story. That is the “official story.” That is the “legal story.” Any deviation from that story in Rwanda is a crime called
Genocide Denial. Then Soldier
Kagame is now President Kagame.
In 2010, Kagame won another landslide election with 95%
of the vote against 3 little known challengers. “Several opposition candidates were refused permission to
take part, while at least three government critics have been attacked – two fatally…” (Rice, Guardian). To this, I ask these questions:
1. In
what free and fair national election does ANY candidate win with 95% of the
vote?
2. In
what free and fair election are opposition candidates refused permission to
take part?
3. While
Kagame nor his government was not outright implicated in the attacks and
murders cited above, is it just coincidence?
But, let us return to the Genocide – Before President
Kagame was President.
Who shot down the Airplane that killed Rwandan President
Habyaimana sparking the Genocide?
While several rulings and guesses have been made, Former Secretary
General of the Rwandan Patriotic Front under Paul Kagame, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa attests that in July 1994, Paul
Kagame confessed to him that he was responsible for the shooting down of the
airplane (Rudasingwa, RwandaInfo).
To present a fair case, in
2012, a French Investigation said that the missile that shot down the airplane
was shot by President Habyaimana’s own soldiers, thus recanting a previous
French Investigation that held Kagame in suspicion (Bryant, VOA). To this I ask the following: How can lawyers argue an
investigation? Do not investigations
involve police? Forensic experts? Detectives? In every case I know of, Lawyers come in after a charge has
been made to prove the case in a court of law.
 |
Dr. Rudasingwa
Former Sec. Of State for Kagame |
While a French investigation
is meaningful and should not be taken lightly, Dr. Rudasingwa was President
Kagame’s “right-hand man” until 2005 when he fled Kagame’s control and claimed
that he feared for his life.
Rudasingwa was in on Kagame’s day-to-day decision-making process. Rudasingwa was at one time of the same
mindset as Kagame. A French Investigation
is much further removed.
On at least two occasions, the
Rwandan Military, under the orders of President Kagame have invaded the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. They invaded because of “fear
of the génocidaires, a lust for revenge and a growing appetite for
diamonds. This launched the first Congo war. (Stearns, Economist).” Had these
invasions been to capture and/or kill those who perpetuated the original
Genocide, those who justify war may be apt to say these invasions were
justifiable. However, there was
unspeakable brutality to innocent civilians accompanied by these invasions.
“Half a million women [were]
raped, some young girls of only five raped with gun barrels or sticks, pregnant
women [were] disemboweled. Mr. Stearns has met men who routinely killed 100
people a day, using a rope to crush their windpipes and strangle them
(Stearns)”.
Sadly, this barely begins to
describe the brutality. How can
ANY nation defend such brutality as even “collateral damage? Between the First Congo War (sparked by
the Rwandan Genocide as described above) and the Second Congo War, there have
been over 5 million deaths (that is a very conservative estimate) (Modern estimates say that at least 10
million have been slaughtered or starved due to these conflicts started by
Kagame)
Paragraph 513 of the UN Mapping Report of the DRC Mapping Report 1993-2003 completed
by the United Nations states that Rwanda (under Kagame) is guilty of crimes of
Genocide against Hutu refugees (NOT Hutu militias – we are talking about INNOCENT Hutu Refugees). It goes on to state that ALL Hutus were
targets. Paragraph 514 tells that
refugees were tricked to coming to meetings and then systematically killed in
brutal manners (meaning not shot, but bludgeoned, tortured, etc.). Paragraph
515 of the same report shows that no distinction was made regarding age or
gender of the victims (Stearns, RwandaInfo).
Finally in 2012, the United States (Rwanda’s Main
Financial Ally) has finally faced reality. The United States has finally decided to say to President
Kagame that his brutality is unacceptable. “The head of the US war crimes office has warned Rwanda's leaders,
including President Paul Kagame, that they could face prosecution at the
international criminal court for arming groups responsible for atrocities in the
Democratic Republic of Congo (McGreal, Guardian).”
Kagame is suspected of aiding and arming M23, a militia using very inhumane
tactics in the DRC – a charge he denies.
Human Rights Watch (an International Humanitarian Organization) reports
the following: M23 engages in “forced
recruitment and …executions, [and] Human Rights Watch found that M23 soldiers
raped at least 46 women and girls, including one who was only eight years old.
(Gouby, Associated Press)”
The “goal” here is minerals.
The DRC is rich with minerals – These minerals supply equipment for our
computers, televisions, cell phones, among other things. But I ask, are “cheap” minerals worth
millions of human lives? Can we
say that because we can’t see our brothers and sisters in the DRC that their
lives matter less than our own?
Recently (in 2012), the United States has suspended some aid to
Rwanda. This is a monumental move,
though it will take time to see what, if any, result it will have.
Part 3: Conclusion
Is there a
Theology of Salvation – Can Africa be Saved?
When we speak the language of Salvation, we must be careful. While most Christians understand that
language, I think it would be more helpful to speak in language of
Redemption. When we use the term
“salvation” or “saved,” we understand that an outside person or force is needed
to solve the issues and problems. That is true that an outside person and force must and will
save Africa (as well as all of Creation), and that person (if I dare use the
word “person”) is Jesus Christ – The embodied God - The Savior of the World –
The One who Set the Captives Free.
I hesitate to use “saved” language because of the past sins of outside
humans. Slave owners justified
their oppression by claiming they were “saving” the African Slaves from their
“heathen ways.” Colonizers said
they “saved” the natives by bringing missionaries – all to justify rape and
pillage of the land and people of Africa.
Instead, we must focus on the Redemption of the People and Land of
Africa. Redemption points to God’s
ultimate purpose for all of creation – to return it to its original created state
before it was corrupted.
So, I return to my modified question, "Can Africa be redeemed?" The answer to this is not as simple as it may seem. First, and foremost, the answer is, "Yes!" The Book of Revelation talks about the New Heaven and the New Earth. This is Biblical language of redemption. The old passes away, and the new comes forth. The era to tyranny is gone, and the reign of God comes to the fore. The whole world, Africa included, becomes what God intended.
That answer, however, is not hopeful to many people. It speaks of a future time. It speaks of a time that none of us can predict. Can Africa be redeemed now? Can Africa be redeemed soon? To answer this question, I begin with two contradictory answers:
*NO - As long as there is sin in the world, NOTHING can be redeemed on the earthly level. Souls and spirits can be redeemed, but physical bodies and land cannot.
*YES - Only if the people of the world recognize their need for God and bow under God's Reign.
Neither of these answers provide much hope. These are the answers of Christian Realists (a la Reinhold Niebuhr). Very simply stated, Christian Realism basically states that the Gospel Message is true, but in this world, we have to act contrary to it in order to survive. Therefore, according to the Christian Realist, we continue to wage war, but we try not to kill too many. We continue to do politics as usual, but we try to minimize our damage as much as possible. I find this theology simply unacceptable.
Either Christ is Lord or Christ isn't. The matter is plain and simple. If God isn't God, then there is no hope. There is no message of redemption. But, if what Christians profess to be the truth is indeed the truth, then we must act like it's the truth and live like it's the truth.
So, I pose my question again, "Can Africa be redeemed?" Now I answer it in light of my previous truth claim that God is God, Christ is Lord, and the Holy Spirit dwells among us.
*YES - Africa in one way has been redeemed with the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. This does not negate the rape and pillage of Africa, it rather further affirms it. This suffering Messiah felt the pain that Africa felt and continues to feel. But, this Messiah rose from the dead defeating the last possible power. Since death no longer has a voice, it is now the oppressors who need to bow their heads in shame. It is now the oppressors who need to change their names in shame. It is now the oppressors who need to feel the slavedriver's whip upon their back. It is now the Colonizers who must live under tyranny. It is now the rapist who will be violated. It is now the murderer whose life will be lost in some form.
Most importantly, since death is dead, Africans can now hold their heads up to the One who defeated all powers of death. They can walk with pride. As they continue to face oppression, they can look at their oppressor in the face - eye to eye - and say, "No! No more!" Yes, they may be beaten, killed, but that does not end the story. As more and more Africans live into this narrative of saying, "No more!" the tide will turn, and we will see it.
Oppressors, beware. God will not be mocked!
Practical
Applications for Everyone
Let me be clear – I am a Christian Pacifist. I do not advocate violence. I do not wish to see Kagame’s regime
violently toppled. That would not solve the problem, but would only perpetuate
the problem.
 |
| Weapons of War into Instruments of Peace |
Is there hope for Africa – or Rwanda and the DRC? In Christ there is always hope! Do I
get discouraged? Yes.
To claim Jesus as Lord is to claim the crucified
Savior. That is to say that Jesus
is with those who have been victims in the Genocides, the Slaves of Slave
trade, the Victims of Colonization, and so forth.
So, what do I want. Let me be clear that what I want is not important. We should seek what God wants.
· -- We
should seek to eliminate labels.
While we are still Hutu and Tutsi, White and Black, American or African; We are Human – Hand crafted by God with the breath of life breathed into
us by the Creator.
· --We
should seek to reconcile. That is
hard. We need to have the hard
discussions, the painful discussions, the emotional discussions. While I am not African, I have enough
“American Issues” that I could address and I am willing to do so. But, all “issues” are human
issues. We are all bound together
in unbreakable ways. What affects
one of us affects us all. Your
issue is my issue, and vice versa.
We need to say, “I’m sorry.”
Even harder, we need to say, “I accept your apology.”
· --We
need to repent from our ways and seek God’s ways. That will mean humbling ourselves. Even victims will have to humble themselves from their
righteous and deserved desire for revenge and seek reconciliation and
love. That does not mean that
Justice should not be carried out.
Those who commit a crime should be held accountable. But as God deals with sin, so must
we. God punishes, but God is
merciful – God Redeems.
· -- Rwanda,
or any nation, will not survive the test of time until all people realize we
all are one people – children of God.
True – we have differing conceptions of God and Truth. God will sort that out. Our job is to live humbly before our
God and seek God’s will in all we do.
· -- Finally,
we must remember that All People are capable of being redeemed. That is tough to read – especially for
the victims of the Genocide and Kagame’s incursions. But in order to live as brothers and sisters, we must accept
this fact. Then we can look forward to the day when “6The wolf shall live with the lamb,
the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the lion and the fatling
together, and a little child shall lead them. 7The
cow and the bear shall graze, their young shall lie down together; and the lion
shall eat straw like the ox. 8The nursing child shall play over
the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put its hand on the adder’s
den. 9They will not hurt or destroy on
all my holy mountain; for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord
as the waters cover the sea. (Isaiah 11:6-9)
What
Can You Do?
· -- Pass
this article on to someone else – Publicity breeds knowledge. Knowledge of this problem has been
willfully ignored for too long.
· -- Write
to your legislators, President, the United Nations, leaders in other
nations. Make your voice heard.
· -- Write
a better essay than the one I’ve written here! Make it public – Yes, you will be criticized, be ready for
that – Call people to action.
· --Pray! Pray with your words. Pray with your thoughts. Paraphrasing Abraham Joshua Heschel
said during the US Civil Rights Movement, Pray with your feet (or hands, or
talents) – do something to bring awareness to this travesty. The Prophets in the Bible are full of
“sign acts.” They did something to
represent the problem. Do a sign
act – write, draw, sing, act, sculpt!
 |
| In Christ there is Always Hope! |
· -- Do
not get discouraged. Doing something is better than doing nothing. None of us will stop this by
ourselves. But we all can bring
awareness and outrage to this crisis to the people who can.
· --Most
of all, feel! Yes, feel. Feel,
then act. Do not act out of anger
but out of empathy. The Biblical
Prophets felt the hurt of idolatry and sin and then acted as God told
them. Feel the hurt of the
Idolatry of Might and the Idolatry of Greed, and the Idolatry of Consumption
that is so prevalent. After you
feel the hurt, then act. Yes, you will be angry. Wait for that to pass.
Then act out of empathy – Empathy toward our brothers and sisters and
Empathy toward God.
Bibliography
James H. Cone, A
Black Theology of Liberation
For a concrete example of non-violent resistance in the
face of the horrible brutalities of war, I highly recommend the documentary Pray the Devil Back to Hell. A video
about a group of women who form a prayer group and through insistance and
prayer force a negotiation to the Liberian Civil War.
Alex Haley, Roots
Chinua Achebe, Things
Fall Apart
William Stringfellow, An Ethic for Christians and Other Aliens in a Strange Land
Charles L. Campbell, The
Word Before the Powers: An Ethic of Preaching
The
Kebra Negast (The Glory of the
Kings)
Rwandan News Agency (RNA) Reporters, Rwandan News Agency, “US University Dismisses Kagame Award Critics”
(Published on May 4, 2012) Accessed from
Abraham Joshua Heschel, The
Prophets
Joseph C.
Miller (ed.), New Encyclopedia of Africa, Volume 2, Dakar-Hydrology,
Charles Scribner's Sons (publisher) – Cited from Wikipedia.org.
The Holy Bible
The Holy Quran
Emanuel Katongole, The
Sacrifice of Africa: A Political Theology for Africa
