Constructing the truth, dealing with dissent, domesticating the world: governance in post-genocide Rwanda
Constructing the truth, dealing with dissent, domesticating the world: governance in post-genocide Rwanda
复制标题
构建真相、处理异议、驯化世界：种族灭绝后卢旺达的治理
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
F. Reyntjens
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Reyntjens
种族灭绝后的卢旺达已成为“捐助宠儿”，尽管它是一个人权记录惨淡且是地区不稳定根源的独裁国家。为了理解国际宽容，本文研究了该政权的做法。它分析了它处理外部和内部批评声音的方式、它设计的压制这些声音的工具和策略，以及它的信息管理。它探讨了国际社会如何成为卢旺达爱国阵线的牺牲品，让自己受到操纵，关注卢旺达体面的技术官僚治理，而忽视其存在严重缺陷的政治治理。这种容忍导致了相当程度的结构性暴力的发展，从而使卢旺达面临新一轮暴力的风险。程序不能完全分开，重叠是不可避免的）。我分析了该政权处理外部和内部批评声音的方式、它为压制这些声音而设计的工具和战略、它对该地区和世界其他地区的自信，以及它对信息和“真相”的管理。我研究了国际社会是如何成为卢旺达爱国阵线的牺牲品的，他们任由自己受到操纵，更愿意看到卢旺达体面的技术官僚治理，而忽视了其存在严重缺陷的政治治理。我会涉及大量可能显得乏味的细节，但只有这样我才能展示这个政权如何以零碎的方式逐步测试其支持者所能容忍的极限。
Post-genocide Rwanda has become a ‘ donor darling ’ , despite being a dictatorship with a dismal human rights record and a source of regional instability. In order to understand international tolerance, this article studies the regime ’ s practices. It analyses the ways in which it dealt with external and internal critical voices, the instruments and strategies it devised to silence them, and its information management. It looks into the way the international community fell prey to the RPF ’ s spin by allowing itself to be manipulated, focusing on Rwanda ’ s decent technocratic governance while ignoring its deeply fl awed political governance. This tolerance has allowed the development of a considerable degree of structural violence, thus exposing Rwanda to the risk of renewed violence. procedure cannot be fully separated, and that overlaps are inevitable). I analyse the way in which the regime dealt with external and internal critical voices, the instruments and strategies it devised to silence them, its assertiveness towards the region and the rest of the world, and its management of information and ‘ truth ’ . I look into the way the international community fell prey to the RPF ’ s spin, by allowing itself to be manipulated and by preferring to see Rwanda ’ s decent technocratic governance while ignoring its deeply fl awed political governance. I go into a great deal of detail that may appear tedious, but only in this way can I show how the regime, acting in a piecemeal fashion, tested step by step the limits of what was tolerated by its backers.