One case, which our reading by J.G. Stein briefly touches on, where psychological explanations are useful to understanding conflict is the mass murder of Tutsi's during the Rwandan 1994 genocide. An ethnic divide between the Tutsi's and Hutu's in Rwanda has been a source of conflict since the colonization of the country. Rwandan's were placed into categories by their colonizers which were based on the looks of the natives. Over time, these distinction led to the Tutsi's being viewed as land owners and the Hutu's as land workers (PPU). The Tutsi's status and the Hutu's poorer, but larger, class is the source of the ongoing conflict. The genocide was due to many aspects, but one can make a strong argument that psychological motives were used to perpetuate violence form the Hutu's towards the Tutsi's.
Stein discusses this conflict saying, ""[Hutu] leaders...chose to execute others [Tutsi's] rather than accept a diminished political status. They were able to...mobilize support for genocidal action because they expertly played on long-standing ethnic fears" (Stein 300). Group decision making played a huge role in this genocide. Public messages were regularly broadcast throughout the country which violently described the way to eliminate the Tutsi's. As more Hutu's joined the violence, their in-group status became dominant over the out-grouped Tutsi's, which spread the violence.
This conflict can be related to the diversionary war theory as well. In an article written by Moise Jean entitled, The Rwandan Genocide: The True Motivations for Mass Killing, the author discusses how the Rwandan president at the time, Habyarimana, supported the Hutu attacks in order to remain in power. By supporting the Hutu's, the author argues that the president was trying to gain political support by the large Hutu population, since his reign was currently in jeopardy.
This genocide illustrates several theories we have been discussing in class and shows a shocking example of how group think, rational choice, pre-existing beliefs, and diversionary intentions can lead to conflict. In and out group beliefs led to the mass murder of Tutsi's throughout Rwanda and these class separations were used to justify killing ones own neighbor. By analyzing this situation, we can see why understanding psychological motives for conflict and violence plays a huge role in international politics.
JG Stein
Moise Jean
Economist
I really thought you did a good job finding a way to link this back to more than one reading from class. The diversionary war theory i thought was a pretty accurate description for being able to describe why the Rwandan President was fully supporting the attacks and killings that Hutu leaders were heading. The groupthink reference was a great example of when people are in groups and decisions need to be made, they make a decision based on what they feel will satisfy one person who has more say than thinking it through and making a rational decision.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Rwandan genocide is a very good example for demonstrating the psychological processes that occur in the international setting. It is very evident that the Rwandan president, Habyarimana, followed the rational choice theory. The president supported the genocide because it aligned with the overwhelming majority. He was solely self-intersted and focused on staying in power and maintaining popular support. I think that this conflict was very much centered around group decision making and the self-interest of leaders to stay in control. On the other hand, I think that it is a lose example of diversionary war because the leader does not stir international crisis to rally support at home. The leader just stirs the conflict between the two parties by siding with the Hutus.
ReplyDeleteGreat job tying the concepts and readings we've learned in class to this tragic event in history Jacob. The Rwandan genocide was something I read about when I was younger and saw the movie 'Hotel Rwanda' a couple years after it came out. The whole thing is so messed up. First off, what kind of president allows the genocide of nearly 20% of his country's total population occur in order for him to stay in office? It serves him right that he got assassinated. Over 100 days, the death toll ranged from 500,000 to 1,000,000 people and for no good reason. The genocide definitely is an example of Groupthink I agree with you and it's crazy that it resulted because of tribal differences. Each side had a long messed-up ideology of one another; the Hutu's more than the Tutsi's and it turned sour. Really sour. Hopefully people and states will learn from this horrific occurrence and something like this will never happen again.
ReplyDeleteDo you think in this case diversionary war theory worked? I feel like in terms of civil war or genocide it is hard for a political leader or government to look towards diversionary war because the problems are all domestic. It is as if it does not distract the public from domestic problems, but more amplifies the issues at hand. In my opinion I see diversionary war theory to be more of an interstate conflict tool. This is just an idea so let me know what you think.
ReplyDeleteFantastic post and the link between a diversionary war theory combined with the post-war psychological reasoning for understanding how Rwanda was affected was spot on. It proves that as president and by aligning yourself with the majority that is all that is needed to maintain power and popular vote. And in the case of Rwanda it came with a great price of the killings and torture of thousands of individuals.
ReplyDelete