Essay about Hotel Rwanda Human Rights Violations

In today’s increasingly interconnected and globalized world, it is easier than ever to determine whether countries are engaging in gross violations of human rights. The information revolution and other media platforms allow individuals to view violations of human rights occurring in countries on the other side of the world. When violations of human rights become evident, it begs the question whether ethical nations should intervene in the violating countries and restore order, or whether such an intervention is an infringement on state sovereignty.

Such violations also bring to light the role of the United Nations, and can help evidence whether the United Nations is an effective medium for addressing these violations. The Rwandan Genocide in the late 20th century is an example of a recent and brutal contravention of human rights. The events of this genocide are well covered by two cinematic works, Hotel Rwanda and Shake Hands with the Devil: The Journey of Romeo Dallaire.

Both of these cinematic works not only cover the brutality of the Rwandan Genocide, but also explore the issues of whether or not intervention was necessary and whether or not the United Nations was effective in enforcing human rights Both of these films also draw the same conclusion, which is that the international community failed to intervene in a horrific event where intervention was necessary, and that the United Nations proved to be an ill-equipped and organization in terms of dealing with human rights violations.

Before exploring the ethical issues discussed in these films, it is necessary to understand the context of the Rwandan Genocide. When Rwanda was colonized by Belgium, the Belgians created two distinct groups of Rwandans, the Hutus and the Tutsis. The Belgians believed the Tutsis were closer to Caucasian and therefore more superior, and they created this divide by offering the Tutsi administrative positions and by putting this distinction on their identification cards. In the middle of the century the Hutu revolted and overthrew the Tutsis and forced hundreds of thousands of Tutsis into exile.

The Tutsis sought to return to Rwanda, and in 1990 they attacked and began a Civil War against the Hutu government. The international community sent in UN peacekeepers and pressured the nation into an uneasy peace, but soon after the agreement in 1994 the Hutu president was assassinated and the Interhamwe, a Hutu paramilitary group, radicalized. After this assassination peace ended and a brutal genocide, led by the Interhamwe and extremist Hutus, began, and this resulted in the death of approximately 800,000 mostly innocent Tutsi.

It is also necessary to understand a synopsis of these cinematic works before analyzing their message. Hotel Rwanda is a 2004 historical drama film directed by Terry George that looks at the Rwandan Genocide through the eyes of Paul Rusesabagina, a man described as the African Oskar Schindler. Rusesabagina is a Hutu manager of the affluent Hotel des Mille Collines and his wife Tatiana, is Tutsi. Once the genocide breaks out, Paul sees his neighbors brutally murdered and barely manages to safely shelter his wife, family, and friends in his hotel. Paul eventually shelters hundreds of other Tutsis in his hotel.

The film looks at how Paul manages to divert the Hutu soldiers, care for the refugees and his family, and plead for intervention to save the inhabitants of the hotel. The film explores the brutality of the genocide itself, the ineffective role of the United Nations peacekeeping force in Rwanda, and the reality that the Tutsi desperately needed international intervention. Despite many near death scenarios and extremely trying circumstances, Paul and the hotel refugees eventually receive a UN convoy and are safely placed behind Tutsi rebel lines. It is estimated that Rusesabagina saved 1,268 Rwandan efugees in total.

Shake Hands with the Devil: The Journey of Romeo Dallaire Is a 2005 documentary film directed by Peter Raymont. The documentary looks at the Rwandan Genocide through the eyes of Romeo Dallaire, the Canadian Lieutenant-General who commanded the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda. While the film also looks at the brutality of the genocide, it places particular emphasis on the role of the United Nations and its peacekeeping force. The film discusses how the force was sent to maintain the peace treaty between the rebels and the government, but how it was ineffective in dealing with the ensuing genocide.

The documentary explores why the United Nations refused to send adequate aid and why Western nations refused to intervene. It also looks at the enormous psychological toll the genocide had on Dallaire, who was haunted by the events to the extent that he was forced to resign and subsequently became suicidal. The film ends by looking at the 10-year anniversary of the genocide held in Rwanda, as Dallaire returns to see little Western support and a Rwanda that criticizes powerful countries for abandoning them in its time of need. Both films use ample evidence to demonstrate that the Rwandan genocide was a flagrant violation of human rights.

Hotel Rwanda opens with a voiceover by George Rutaganda, an Interhamwe leader, on the radio that says: “When people ask me, good listeners, why do I hate the Tutsi, I say, read out history… They are cockroaches. They are murderers. Rwanda is our Hutu land” (George 2004). This detestation of the Tutsi people manifests itself in the genocide. In Shake Hands With the Devil, General Dallaire describes the brutality of the genocide by describing streets littered with Tutsi bodies that were stacked like potatoes and being eaten by dogs (Raymont 2005).

In Hotel Rwanda the atrocities are on full display, with scenes like Rusesabagina driving on a road littered with dead bodies and with the Red Cross volunteer detailing the Hutu plan to kill Tutsi children to wipe out the next generation. Another shocking scene was when Rusesabagina met with Rutaganda, and Rutaganda earnestly expressed a desire to kill every single Tutsi. When justifying intervention, theorist Michael Walzer looks towards events that shock the collective conscience of mankind. To any individual paying remote attention to Rwanda, these atrocities would certainly shock his or her conscience.

Both movies demonstrate that the Rwandan Genocide was one of the worst perpetrations of human rights violations since the Holocaust, and an event that provided significant justification for intervention. The movies also evidence that the Tutsi saw intervention as their only chance for survival, implying that intervention is not only justified but also a moral requirement. In Hotel Rwanda, after witnessing ruthless attacks by the Interhamwe, Rusesabagina begins to express that intervention is the only chance for survival for those in his hotel.

Early on before Western citizens evacuated, Rusesabagina strongly encourages a newscaster to shoot and display footage of the genocide, by saying: “I am glad that you have shot this footage and that the world will see it. It is the only way we have a chance that people intervene” (George 2004). Rusesabagina, the Tutsis sheltered in his hotel, and even the white foreigners all share sentiments of seeing foreign intervention as an absolute necessity to stop the genocide. Throughout Shake Hands with the Devil, General Dellaire also expresses sentiments that the international community should assist and more effectively intervene in the genocide.

Both cinematic works demonstrate that the Rwandan Genocide was horrific enough to not only justify intervention, but also to demand intervention, as it was the only hope for hundreds of thousands of Tutsis. After explaining the necessity of intervention, Hotel Rwanda reveals that powerful nations viewed this African country as ultimately irrelevant and not worthy of intervention. The journalist that Paul explains the necessity of Western intervention to attempts to forewarn Paul of Western indifference, by saying: “I think if people see this footage they’ll say, ‘oh my God that’s horrible,’ and then go on eating their dinners” (George 2004).

This journalist understands that while powerful nations will superficially acknowledge a terrible event is occurring, in reality they will not care enough to actually aid the Tutsi people. Rusesabagina begins to understand this reality when the United Nation sends a convoy to the hotel solely to evacuate foreign nationals and none of the refugees. After this moment, Colonel Oliver also becomes disappointed that no one will intervene, but he comprehends the reason why the international community is failing Rwanda, and explains it to Rusesabagina by saying: “They think you’re dirty.

They think you’re dumb. You’re worthless…. you’re black. You’re not even a nigger. You’re an African” (George 2004). Colonel Olliver attempts to explain this international failure to uphold human rights to Paul by saying the Western nations simply do not value the lives of an African enough to intervene. This is further evidenced by United States’ state representatives admitting acts of genocide occurred, but refusing to call it a genocide, as such a recognition would place more pressure on the United States to intervene.

Powerful nations ultimately failed Rwanda by allowing the perpetration of this genocide. Shake Hands with the Devil also explores why powerful countries refused to intervene and allowed the genocide to transpire. The documentary looks at moments where Western nations sent in convoys to rescue their nationals but no refugees, and explains in general that the world failed to aid the Tutsi. In an interview, one analyst explains why they abandoned Rwanda by comparing Rwanda to Yugoslavia, where human rights violations and genocide also occurred.

The analyst notes the world showed more interest in restoring order to Yugoslavia, because it is in the middle of Europe, whereas Rwanda is just viewed as a random African country. The documentary also evidences that Rwandans are fully aware of being abandoned and blame Western nations for the genocide. In the 10-year anniversary festival, the president says the following about Western nations: “They were irresolute. They try to dictate our behavior but ignore us when in times of need” (Raymont 2005). Clearly Rwanda holds powerful nations in disdain for seeing them as lesser and allowing the perpetration of genocide.