ルワンダにおける二つの紛争－ジェノサイドはいかに可能となったのか

独立直前の「社会革命」と1990年代の内戦というルワンダにおける２つの紛争を比較し、後者が50万人以上の犠牲者を生んだジェノサイドへと至ったメカニズムを考察する。２つの紛争はいずれも国家権力闘争に発する内戦であり、それがエスニックな紛争へと転化した点で似ているが、犠牲者の数は圧倒的に異なる。ジェノサイドが可能になったのは、権力喪失の危機感を抱いた急進派が特定のエスニック集団の殺戮を正当化するイデオロギーを流布し、かつ地方行政機構をはじめとする国家機構を動員して民間人の殺戮を実践したからであった。こうした国家機構を通じた動員は、冷戦下に存立した国家のあり方に由来する。国際環境の変化がこうした国家を脆弱化させて紛争を引き起こす一方、従来の体制下で成立した動員システムを急進派が利用し、組織的な暴力が行使されたためにジェノサイドに至ったといえる。

ルワンダの紛争とエスニシティ－創られた民族？

1994年に100万人近い犠牲者を生んだルワンダの虐殺では、トゥチという民族が殺戮の主たる対象となった。言語、宗教、居住地に違いがなく、植民地化以前からの長い歴史を共有するルワンダにおいて、なぜ一つの民族名が殺戮の符丁となったのか。植民地化以降の国家の変容とエスニシティ創出の過程を歴史的に分析した。

Conflict and land tenure in Rwanda

The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the historical relation between conflict and land tenure in Rwanda, a country that experienced a harsh civil war and genocide in the mid-1990s. The victory of the Tutsi-led rebel, Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) at that time triggered a massive return of refugees and a drastic change in land tenure policy. These were refugees who had fled the country at around the time of independence, in 1962, due to the political turmoil and persecution (the "social revolution") and who shared the background of the core RPF members. The social revolution had dismantled the existent Tutsi-led political order, compelling many Tutsi families to seek refuge outside their homeland. Under the post-independence rule of a Hutu-led government, the Tutsi refugees were not allowed to return and the lands they left behind were often arbitrarily distributed by local authorities among Hutu peasants. After victory in the mid-1990s civil war, the newly established RPF-led government ordered the current inhabitants of the lands to divide the properties in order to allocate portions to the Tutsi returnees. Different patterns of land holding and land division will be explained in the paper from data gathered through the authors' fieldworks in the southern and eastern parts of Rwanda. Although overt resistance to land division has not been observed to date, the land rights of the Tutsi returnees must be considered unstable because their legitimacy depends primarily on the strength and political stability of the RPF-led government. If the authority of RPF were to weaken, the land rights will be jeopardized. Throughout Rwandan history, in which political exclusion has often led to serious conflict, macro-level politics have repeatedly influenced land holding. Promotion of an inclusive democracy, therefore, is indispensable to escape the vicious circle between political instability and land rights.