Rwanda: Between Civil War and Democratic Transformation

The process of democratic transformation has gained significant importance in political science since the mid-1970s, coinciding with what is known as the “third wave of democracy.” This wave involved countries such as Spain, several Latin American nations, Portugal, and some Asian countries starting in the early 1980s, extending to certain African nations from the late 1980s. This transition was successful in some countries that established democratic governance based on the separation of powers, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, while it failed in others that remained under autocratic rule characterized by a single party or individual. In light of this, scholars have sought to understand the prerequisites for democratic transformation and the reasons for its failure in some regions. This study aims to explore the democratic transformation in Rwanda and assess that process, given that Rwanda emerged from one of the most horrific civil wars of the previous century, which claimed nearly a million lives due to ethnic discrimination between the Hutu and Tutsi communities. This conflict severely impacted the economy, led to widespread poverty, and caused political instability. Eventually, Rwanda transformed into a politically stable nation with high economic growth rates, embarking on a democratic transition while overcoming the war’s devastating effects—a compelling model for nations experiencing sectarian violence and civil wars.

This study will be divided into three sections:

1. A conceptual framework for the democratic transformation process.
2. The civil war in Rwanda (1994).
3. The democratic transformation process in Rwanda.
4. Assessment of the democratic transformation process in Rwanda.

Section 1: A Conceptual Framework for the Democratic Transformation Process

A. Definition of Democratic Transformation:

Democratic transformation is characterized by its complexity and intertwining aspects. There are multiple definitions of democratic transformation due to the extensive research on the subject and the various interpretations of democracy itself. As the definitions of democracy increase, so too do the definitions of democratic transformation, highlighting the close interrelation between the two concepts. Initially, democracy can be defined as a term without roots in the Arabic language, derived from the Greek words “demos,” meaning people, and “kratos,” meaning rule. Thus, its direct linguistic meaning is “rule by the people.” Historian Herodotus defined democracy as the rule of the majority, emphasizing a society where individuals are equal before the law and where rulers are held accountable for their actions.

From this, we can define democracy as a system that fosters political participation, respects human rights, and ensures equality before the law for all individuals—both rulers and the ruled. It operates under the concept of citizenship, which clearly delineates citizens’ rights and obligations. Notably, democracy is linked to concepts such as respect for human rights, freedom, citizenship, and political participation, granting it significant value. Even the most authoritarian regimes attempt to associate themselves with democracy, leading to various expressions of it, such as liberal democracy, consensual democracy, and social democracy. Therefore, democracy can be described as a system that institutionalizes popular participation in decision-making, ensuring that decisions are made in the interest of the people.

In its broadest sense, democratic transformation refers to the shift from an authoritarian or totalitarian system to a democratic system that upholds the rule of law, equality, and respect for human rights. Ahmad Tehami Abdul-Hai defines it as “democratization,” meaning transitioning from any authoritarian system—whether a single-party regime, military dictatorship, totalitarian system, oligarchy, or dictatorship—to a system based on citizenship, personal freedom, and political participation. This indicates that democratic transformation begins with an authoritarian regime undergoing democratization to emerge as a democratic system that recognizes citizenship rights and responsibilities.

According to O’Donnell and Schmitter, this process involves applying citizenship rules and procedures to political institutions previously governed by different norms, allowing previously marginalized groups—such as youth, women, and religious or ethnic minorities—to participate in state institutions and political parties. Additionally, democratic transformation can be understood as a change in the political, social, and economic system, whether towards democracy or the opposite. It involves moving from one state to another through a series of continuous interactions that include both value-based elements and practical manifestations.

From this discussion, the definition adopted in this study is that democratic transformation signifies the transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic system that achieves the principles of the rule of law, respects human rights, and enhances political participation without marginalizing any social group, such as youth, women, or religious or ethnic minorities, thereby fostering political participation and facilitating changes in the political, social, and economic systems toward democracy.

B. Motivations and Patterns of Democratic Transformation:

The process of democratic transformation is driven by several motivations, including:

1. Erosion of Legitimacy (Public Acceptance and Approval): The failure of an authoritarian regime to address political and economic crises creates public discontent, which pressures the regime, leading it toward democratic transformation. However, this reason is not necessarily associated with the onset of democratic transitions, as an authoritarian regime may remain in power despite losing legitimacy.
2. Strengthened Civil Society: This factor can disrupt the authority of authoritarian regimes. Social, economic, and urban development tends to create and strengthen interest groups and voluntary associations. Many of these regimes— as noted by Alexis de Tocqueville—serve as the foundation of democracy, presenting alternative information and communication sources that directly challenge authoritarian regimes.
3. Increased Political Awareness and Culture: Higher levels of political awareness and culture empower individuals regarding their rights and responsibilities, promoting their desire to engage in political participation, paving the way for democratic transformation.

Democratic transformation can manifest in various forms when transitioning from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one, which can include:

1. Top-Down (Reformist) Transformation: In this model, the regime or its reformist wing itself initiates the transition to democracy, allowing limited freedoms to protect its existence amidst tangible threats. An example includes Spain, where this type of transition occurred following an evaluation of political practices.
2. Bargained Transformation: This form of democracy emerges from a collaborative effort between the government and opposition groups, characterized by agreements or compromises that lead to political reforms through cooperation between ruling elites and opposition movements.
3. People-Led Transformation: This pattern results from popular demands arising from violent conflicts or protests against the existing regime. The authoritarian leaders yield to public pressure and initiate essential reforms to avert crises, ultimately avoiding regime collapse. An example of this is South Korea, where the pressures from the public led to significant reforms.

Indicators of successful democratic transformation (democratization) include:

1. Peaceful power turnover.
2. Stability of the democratic system after consecutive elections.
3. Establishment of effective institutions and reform of outdated ones.
4. Existence of a constitutional framework and competitive systems.
5. Political stability without civil war threats.
6. Membership in international institutions and global recognition of the democratic system.
7. Civilian control over the military.

Section 2: The Civil War in Rwanda (1994)

The last decade of the 20th century saw Rwanda engulfed in one of the most brutal civil wars in Africa, resulting in the deaths of numerous Rwandans. This conflict stemmed from the tensions between the Hutu majority and the Tutsi minority, characterized by a severe absence of coexistence and acceptance of each other. The legacy of colonialism played a significant role in intensifying these hostilities; Belgian colonial practices deepened the animosity between these groups.

Colonial policies favored the Tutsi minority over the Hutu majority, using the former to repress and control the latter, leading to a culture of resentment. This hostility culminated in the “Hutu Revolution” of 1959, resulting in widespread violence against Tutsis and their exodus from Rwanda. Following Rwanda’s independence in 1962, the Hutu took control of the government, but tensions remained as Tutsi refugees organized to reclaim their positions.

The civil war began in October 1990, when the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), composed mainly of Tutsi exiles, launched an attack on Rwanda from Uganda to overthrow President Juvénal Habyarimana. This military conflict escalated into a full-scale genocide in 1994 after the assassination of Habyarimana.

From April to July 1994, a systematic campaign against the Tutsi population resulted in approximately 800,000 deaths and significant social, economic, and infrastructural devastation. The RPF eventually took control, ending the genocide but leaving behind a country in ruins, with vast economic challenges and political instability.

Section 3: The Democratic Transformation Process in Rwanda

After the civil war and the intervening violence, Rwanda faced an urgent need for comprehensive reconstruction across political, economic, and social spheres. The war had devastated the economy, created political instability, and destroyed crucial infrastructure, necessitating immediate reform initiatives.

The process of democratic transformation cannot be detached from concepts like modernization and liberalism, as it closely intertwines with the political, economic, and civil liberties landscape. Consequently, the democratic transformation in Rwanda can be divided into two main areas:

A. Political Reforms in Rwanda

Following the establishment of a new government led by the RPF, efforts focused on reconciliation and rebuilding a unified national identity. The National Unity and Reconciliation Commission was formed in 1999 to foster national unity. A new constitution established in 2003 guaranteed equal rights for all citizens and criminalized discrimination and genocide ideology. The constitutional provisions mandated the establishment of legislative and executive bodies through multiparty elections.

Moreover, Rwandan leadership emphasized building strong military and security institutions as foundational to the new Rwandan state. History was re-taught with a narrative of tolerance and inclusion, combating the ideologies that had fueled the previous ethnic divisions. Community courts called Gacaca were established to address genocide cases, promoting local involvement and healing through shared remembrance.

Additional initiatives, like “Umuganda,” fostered community cooperation to rehabilitate infrastructure, while the “Imihigo” program held government officials publicly accountable for development objectives. Gender equality became a cornerstone of development efforts, leading Rwanda to attain the highest percentage of female representation in parliament globally after the war.

B. Economic and Social Reforms in Rwanda

The Rwandan government under President Kagame initiated substantial economic reforms to recover from the war’s devastation. The focus on agriculture led to significant agricultural development, improving productivity and increasing food security. External investment attracted through new investment laws and a “one-stop-shop” system encouraged economic growth, as Rwanda’s GDP grew significantly.

Surveys reveal a dramatic drop in poverty levels due to government initiatives aimed at increasing agricultural production. Rwanda committed 20% of its national budget to education, while health care reforms ensured over 90% of citizens had access to health services, drastically lowering infant mortality rates.

Section 4: Assessment of the Democratic Transformation Process in Rwanda

The evaluation of Rwanda’s democratic transformation process through previously mentioned success indicators illustrates notable progress:

1. There has been progressive and peaceful power transitions following elections since 2003.
2. The continued stability of the democratic system reflects potential for long-term governance, despite critiques concerning constitutional changes allowing Kagame extended terms.
3. The establishment of formal governance institutions underpins constitutional democracy.
4. Significant advancements have been made toward a comprehensive constitutional framework promoting democratic practices.
5. Rwanda has avoided the threats of civil war post-genocide.
6. International recognition is evident through Rwanda’s membership in multiple global organizations and economic partnerships.
7. The military is positioned under civilian authority, focused on national rather than ethnic loyalty.

Overall, Rwanda has made impressive strides toward democratic governance while achieving economic growth, showcasing resilience in the face of past turmoil.

Conclusion

Rwanda’s journey from a devastating civil war to a leading African nation serves as a beacon of hope for countries grappling with sectarian conflict and division. It demonstrates that with resilience, planning, and a commitment to reconciliation, countries can transcend their brutal pasts and build cohesive societies, ultimately achieving peace, stability, and development. Rwanda has become an inspiring example for other nations facing similar challenges, illustrating the possibility of overcoming divisions and achieving national unity.