Thedouble genocide theory posits that, during theRwandan genocide, theTutsi-ledRwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) engaged in a "counter-genocide" against theHutus.[1] Most scholars of Rwanda, such asScott Straus andGerald Caplan, say that RPF violence against Hutus does not fully match the definition of "genocide", considering that it instead consisted ofwar crimes[2] orcrimes against humanity.[3]
Black Furies, White Liars, a book by French investigative journalistPierre Péan, accuses the RPF of genocide against Hutus. Jean-Pierre Chrétien, a French historian, criticized Péan's "amazing revisionist passion".[4] A 2003 study by Philip Verwimp, based on 8 months of field research in central and southern Rwanda over a period of 2 years, found that the absolute number of Tutsis killed was double that for Hutus, and that the patterns of killing for the two groups differed.[5] Verwimp acknowledged that his study was only a partial test of the double-genocide thesis as it excluded the prefectures where most RPF killings were purportedly committed, yet concluded by arguing that "for those prefectures in which we performed our fieldwork, the termgenocide should be reserved for the killings committed by theInterahamwe and theFAR, and another word should be used for the killings committed by theRPF. That word could bemassacre orterror or another word, depending on the event."[6]
A great deal of effort has been extended to make sure the focus stays exclusively on the Francophone Tutsi victims and their Hutu executioners. But of the estimated one million people killed, between 300,000 and 500,000 of them were Tutsi, according to best estimates. What about the other 500,000 to 700,000 people? Who is responsible for their deaths?[7][8]
In 2009, scholarsChristian Davenport of theUniversity of Michigan andAllan C. Stam ofDartmouth College argued that the anti-Tutsi genocide constituted only part of the slaughter of spring and summer 1994; that the RPF was "clearly responsible" for another major portion of the killings; that the victims were "fairly evenly distributed between Tutsi and Hutu"; that the majority of the dead were Hutu, rather than Tutsi; and that, "among other things, it appears that there simply weren't enough Tutsi in Rwanda at the time to account for all the reported deaths".[9]
In October 2014, a BBC documentary,Rwanda: The Untold Story, was aired featuring interviews with Davenport and Stam. It suggested that Kagame's RPF was involved in the shooting down of Habyarimana's plane. It aroused considerable controversy.[10] Following this, the Rwandan government banned the BBC's Kinyarwanda-language radio broadcasts from the country[11] before conducting a three-week inquiry into the documentary.[12]
In 2018, the Canadian journalistJudi Rever released a book titledIn Praise of Blood. Based on interviews with RPF defectors and top-secret documents that were leaked from the ICTR, Rever argued that ethnically targeted killings of Hutus by the RPF, beginning in 1990 in Rwanda and in 1996 in Zaire, should also be called "genocide."[13] Scholars had mixed reactions to Rever's description of these killings as "genocide."René Lemarchand called the book a "path-breaking inquest", "destined to become required reading for any one claiming competence on the Rwanda genocide".[14] Political scientistScott Straus was critical, writing that in his opinion the evidence showed that the RPF killings of Hutu civilians constitutedcrimes against humanity, but not a double genocide.[3] Similarly,Gerald Caplan said that RPF had committed "war crimes" against Hutus but those crimes did not meet the definition ofgenocide.[2]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
