Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Comparative Politics
Mr. Perry
Throughout history different ideas have greatly affected peoples lives. From
Christianity to Fascism to Manifest Destiny, ideals have driven men to do great admirable
deeds as well as horrible contemptible crimes. One of the more controversial ideas of the
last two hundred years is that of colonialism. Most agree that the effects of colonialism
were detrimental to the development of those peoples who were colonized. Horrible
atrocities were made in the name of profits and egotism. It is therefore important to
examine this period in order to understand the problems that have occurred in the nations
that have been colonies. Citizenship is often a question that arises when dealing with
formerly colonized nations in Africa because there are often people being governed who
are not being represented in the political process or are simply being oppressed and
attacked.
The nations of Rwanda and South Africa are two good comparisons of the affect
that colonialism had on citizenship and social structure. In Rwanda an existing social
structure was exploited in order to help the Belgians and fell into utter chaos after the
Belgians left do to its perversion under colonialism. In South Africa an oppressed group
rose to power and seized the reigns of government and enforced racially restrictive policy
on the native Africans. In both cases it is obvious the role that colonialism played in the
development of the social conscious of the nation. The colonizers created a system that
was doomed to failure and did not take responsibility for there creation. They exploited
the people in order to extract resources for their own wealth, not caring what the
repercussions would be. Therefore, the cases of Rwanda and South Africa are worth
Rwanda’s social troubles began with the arrival of the Germans in 1897 (Foreign).
The Germans desired to build themselves an imperial empire the likes of Great Britain
and at the same time milk the colonies of their resources. In order to do this the Germans
took advantage of the already existing social structure within the country. This system
was called the ubuhake. Ubuhake was a traditional social system of loyalty and
allegiance, which a Hutu gave to Tutsi lord. The ubuhake system had been in existence
since the Tutsi invaded the area of Rwanda and subjugated the Hutu, making themselves
the aristocracy and the Hutus the laborers. The Germans decided that the best way to get
what they wanted from Rwanda was to use this system with themselves as administrators
and the Tutsi as their lackeys. German rule in Rwanda, however, was short lived. With
World War I raging in Europe, the Belgians invaded in 1916 and assumed control
(Foreign).
The Belgians desired to have tighter control of Rwanda than the Germans did; and
their means of doing this was the Tutsi. Mgr. Classe, a highly respected German
missionary, who had spent many years in Rwanda and was acculturated in Rwandan
Mututsi caste. Such a revolution would lead the country directly to anarchy and
more intelligent chiefs than the Batutsi. They are the ones best suited to
understand progress and the ones the population likes best. The government must
The Belgians, who greatly respected Mgr. Classe, followed his advice and continued the
practice of Tutsi rule. Instead of using the traditional ubuhake system the Belgians
desired to consolidate Tutsi power and strengthen their own control. Under the
traditional ubuhake system there was still a large amount of social mobility for Hutus and
they had a limited amount of autonomy. Under the new Belgian system all power was
placed in the hands of the Tutsi. Of the 559 chiefly seats 549 were Tutsi (Prunier). This
greatly agitated many Hutu who had held important positions since the pre-colonial days.
Since many of the administrators and civil servants of Rwanda were Tutsi, they were in a
far better position to take advantage of the system, which many did. Beginning in the
1920’s Tutsi leaders began stealing lands that had traditionally belonged to the Hutu,
Another aspect, which needs to be considered during the colonial period, is the
interested in the peoples of Rwanda, especially the relationship between the Tutsi and the
Hutu. They examined the physical characteristics of each and declared that since the
Tutsi had such a strong resemblance to the fairer skinned people to the north that they
were descended from these people and therefore an ethnically superior group to the Hutu.
This idea was driven into the minds of both the Tutsi, who began to believe that they
were indeed superior, and the Hutu, who began to resent being deemed a lesser ethnic
group. Eventually even the lower class Tutsi, who were no better off than their Hutu
counterpart, began to believe that they were superior and separated themselves from the
Hutu. The racial myths and ideas that were created during this period led to the division
After World War II Rwanda was among the many colonies desiring independence.
The Rwanda freedom movement was predominately led by Tutsi leaders who desired the
continuation of the colonial system except without the Belgians. Belgians saw this as a
stab in the back and switched their support to the Hutu. This put Rwanda on its head. In
1959 the Hutu took revenge by attacking and burning the villages of Tutsi throughout
Rwanda (Prunier). The Belgians simply turned their backs as many Tutsi were killed and
their villages were destroyed. Tutsi were also removed from their posts within the
colonial government and replaced by Hutu who were seen as loyal to the Belgians. In the
demanding a say in the future Rwandan government. These parties demanded the end of
what they saw as Tutsi feudalism and majority government ran by the Hutu. As the
Belgians trusted the Tutsi less and less, they began to give support to the Hutu. In 1961,
a group of Hutu nationalists within the government declared all emblems and symbols of
the Tutsi illegal and seized control of the government (Foreign). The Belgians again
turned their backs on their former henchmen by allowing the coup the go forward.
Luckily For the Tutsi the UN stepped in a demanded that legitimate elections be held.
This however did little to change the outcome considering that the Tutsi were a very
small minority compared to the Hutu. With the new open elections, held under the
watchful eyes of the UN, a Hutu majority government was elected and in a matter of
In retrospect one can see the mistakes that were made that led to the troubles of
the later half of the twentieth century. Instead of trying to unit the peoples of Rwanda to
see themselves as Rwandans, the Belgians caused large amounts of social friction and
division. Throughout Rwanda’s colonial period the Tutsi were the favorite son of the
Belgian authorities. They were entrusted with running the nation as well as maintaining
aspects of the economy. The Tutsi were the pinnacle of African development where as
the Hutu were seen as sub-people. The Hutu were relegated no authority and were
considered second class citizens. Therefore, it is no surprise that when the Hutu seized
power they made the Tutsi second class citizens. Years of old animosities, fostered by the
Belgians, emerged and found a voice in Rwandan politics. For decades Tutsi either fled
Rwanda or lived in fear of the sporadic purges that would occur whenever the
government felt threatened. For a large part of the twentieth century the Tutsi population
lived in constant fear of their jobs being taken away or even their own death.
Colonialism deeply affected the psyche of the Rwandan people and set the stage for the
South Africa is another example of a nation where citizenship was been affected
by colonialism. Initially settled by Dutch, French and German settlers, South Africa was
an escape route for many oppressed people in Europe during the 17th and 18th century. In
the early 19th century control of South Africa switched from the Dutch to the British. The
descendents of the Dutch, French and German settlers, who were known as the Boers,
chaffed under the restrictive rules of the British and moved beyond the frontier of the
colony. Throughout South Africa’s British colonial period the Boers and the British
authorities regularly clashed. The Boers hated being told where they were to stay and for
how long; and the British regularly did this. However, even though the Boers and
English did not get along and fought a series of wars at the end of the 19th century, the
Boers were not below the status of the native Africans. Until the 1830’s slavery was still
permissible within Cape Colony and after emancipation there was very little change in
the life of a native South African (Lacour-Gayet). The views of the white South Africans
were very similar to that of American Southerners after the Civil War; those who were
slaves might now be free but that would not make them citizens. The natives Africans
were now free but the colonial government made sure that they would never be of equal
status compared to the white South Africans. Segregation laws, similar to those in the
United States, were passed which created separate facilities that were by no means of
equal quality. White South Africans enjoyed the finest facilities while the blacks dealt
with the most meager accommodations. In 1913 this policy was carried even further
when the colonial government created special reserves for the Africans to live on
(Lacour-Gayet). Under apartheid this reservation system became a way to ensure that
native Africans would never become citizens of South Africa. These reservations were
deemed the homelands of the native Africans and that in order to leave them one needed
to carry a passbook. If a native African was caught in white South Africa without a
In South Africa the colonial government paved the way for apartheid by creating
segregation and bestowing favorable treatment to the white population. The British
fought a war against the Boers but they still considered them members of the Cape
Colony. In South Africa the restriction of the native Africans occurred long before the
rise of the Nationalists in the 1960’s, it began in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Apartheid’s roots can be traced back to the many of the acts which were passed by the
colonial government; acts that denied the native Africans citizenship and relegated them
to lives of misery.
Both South Africa and Rwanda have experienced a large amount of ethnic
struggle. In Rwanda and South Africa the colonial governments bestowed special
treatment on one group while at the same time encouraging policies of separation. In
Rwanda the Tutsi were the servants of the Belgians and they were in return granted
special privileges over the Hutu population. In South Africa the black population was
suppressed and even denied citizenship because the white population saw them as
inferior. In both instances, under colonialism there was a denial of equal rights as
citizens that had long term and very ugly consequences. For Rwanda the results were
ethnic conflict which cost the lives of over a million people; and in South Africa it was
Foreign Areas Studies, Rwanda: A Country Study, The United States Government
1978.
Prunier, Gerard, The Rwanda Crisis: History of a Genocide, New York, Columbia
Sociology, 1999.