警惕盧旺達種族屠殺捲土重來

Twenty years on, the debate about the Rwandan genocide in which up to a million people lost their lives still reverberates. The question of why Rwandans did this to each other and why the world stood by remains bitterly contested.

20年前，多達100萬人在盧旺達大屠殺中喪生；20年後，關於它的辯論仍在迴響。盧旺達人爲何自相殘殺？爲何世界袖手旁觀？這兩個問題依然是激辯的焦點。

What is not in doubt is that over a period of 100 days the most widespread horrific massacre of modern times took place as the victims perished, mostly killed by hand with machetes. And even as that history is still fought over, an even angrier, more contemporary dispute rages about the nature of today’s government that first took power in the genocide’s aftermath.

但毫無爭議的是，在爲期100天的時間內，發生了現代歷史上蔓延最廣的一次恐怖大屠殺，受害者大多數是被砍刀砍死。就在那段歷史仍深陷爭論之際，一場更爲激烈、更爲現代的爭議正在上演，爭議的主題是如何評價大屠殺後首次掌權的現政府的性質。

Has it brought reconciliation, stability and recovery? Or merely substituted a new Tutsi minority for the ruthless Hutu regime that preceded it? Rwanda, and these questions, fundamentally influenced my years at the top of the UN. Five years after the killings, I joined the UN as head of its development agency, UNDP. Helping President Paul Kagame and his government overcome the legacy of lost life, lost capacity and lost growth was a permanent priority.

它帶來了和解、穩定和復甦？還是說，它只是用占人口少數的圖西族的政權，代替了之前冷酷的胡圖族政權？盧旺達和上面這些問題對我在聯合國(UN)高層任職的數年產生了根本影響。大屠殺5年後，我加入聯合國任開發計劃署(UNDP)署長。幫助盧旺達總統保羅•卡加梅(Paul Kagame)及其政府克服生命、生產力和經濟增長損失帶來的遺留影響，曾是我的長期工作重點。

Among all of us there was a sense of exceptional obligation and reparation to a country that had been deserted at its moment of need by a UN Security Council that had simply lacked the courage to act. The world looked the other way. President Bill Clinton and Kofi Annan (then head of UN peacekeeping, before becoming secretary-general) have both eloquently acknowledged this.

面對這樣一個曾被遺棄的國家，我們所有人都懷有一種特殊的責任感，特別想去補償它。盧旺達在需要聯合國安理會(UN Security Council)干預之際，後者卻完全缺乏行動的勇氣。國際社會也對盧旺達視而不見。美國總統比爾•克林頓(Bill Clinton)和科菲•安南（Kofi Annan，當時主管聯合國維和行動，尚未成爲聯合國祕書長）都痛快承認了這一點。

In Mr Kagame, I and others had a rigorously focused development partner. Per capita incomes have more than doubled since 1995 and growth has recently been a robust 8 per cent a year. This small country of 11.3m people has a disciplined leadership that many of its neighbours lack.

對於我和其他人而言，卡加梅是個極爲專注的發展合作伙伴。盧旺達人均收入自1995年以來翻了一番還多，近來經濟每年增速達到8%，十分強勁。這個有1130萬人口的小國擁有一個自律的領導層，這是它的許多鄰國所不具備的。

The trouble is that a government that deliberately prioritised development and inter-ethnic concord above its citizens’ freedoms, as an antidote to the environment of Hate Radio and rampant populism that triggered the events of 20 years ago, now does not know how to slacken its grip. As the range of government opponents grows, the crackdowns become more severe.

問題在於，爲了化解“仇恨電臺”(Hate Radio)和民粹主義猖獗的環境（它是20年前大屠殺的導火索），盧旺達政府刻意將發展和民族和睦置於公民自由之上，結果是它如今不知道如何放鬆掌控。隨着反政府的勢力不斷成長，鎮壓變得愈加嚴厲。

Mr Kagame’s former intelligence chief Patrick Karegeya, who had accused him of dictatorial tendencies, was found dead – allegedly assassinated – in South Africa at the beginning of this year and Rwanda has a 20-year history of incursions into the neighbouring Democratic Republic Congo in pursuit of Hutu rebels. The details are contested by Mr Kagame who regularly denies his government’s involvement in such matters. But a regime that was born out of its heroic resistance to genocide has descended to one that is preoccupied with survival.

卡加梅的前情報部長帕特里克•卡雷蓋亞(Patrick Karegeya)曾批評前者有獨裁傾向，他今年初被發現死在南非，據稱是遭暗殺。盧旺達過去20年屢次侵入鄰國民主剛果，追剿胡圖族叛軍。這些細節受到卡加梅的駁斥，他屢次否認他的政府捲入此類事件。然而，這個當初脫胎於對大屠殺的英勇抵抗的政權，已淪爲一個只關注自身存亡的政權。

The wider ramifications continue. The stain of Rwanda was the impetus for much of the demand for the doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect or R2P. This doctrine, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2005, insists that when a government commits major crimes against its own people the world should try and stop it. In that sense, too, Rwanda’s legacy was misused. The doctrine has been stretched and twisted to justify interventions in Iraq and Libya.

更深遠的影響還在持續。盧旺達的污點促使許多人呼籲建立“保護責任”(Responsibility to Protect)原則。聯合國大會(UN General Assembly)於2005年通過了這項原則，它主張當一國政府對本國人民犯下重大罪行時，國際社會應當努力阻止。但在這方面，盧旺達的遺產卻遭到濫用。該原則被拓展和扭曲，爲干預伊拉克和利比亞正名。

When I moved from the development side of the UN to its political operations as Mr Annan’s deputy, the shadow of Rwanda came with me. If there was an abiding lesson for me of what had happened earlier in Rwanda, it was that UN officials had sleepwalked into catastrophe. In vain, UN colleagues in the field called the alarm. Their words fell on the deaf ears of officials in the rut of UN routine. When my turn came to be the New York point person for UN operations in difficult places I made my colleagues wear green wrist bands bearing the words “Never Again”. Whether it was Darfur or elsewhere we sought to ensure that there would not be another Rwanda.

當我從聯合國發展部門調動至政治部門擔任安南副手時，盧旺達的陰影仍伴隨着我。如果說盧旺達的經歷給我帶來了什麼永恆教訓的話，那便是聯合國官員在夢遊中走向災難。聯合國駐盧旺達的同事曾發出過警告，但徒勞無功。墨守聯合國刻板流程的官員們對他們的警告置若罔聞。當我成爲聯合國總部主管在困難地區行動的負責人時，我讓同事們戴上寫有“Never Again”（絕不要重蹈覆轍）字樣的綠腕帶。不論是達爾富爾還是別處，我們都努力確保盧旺達的覆轍不會被重蹈。

Yet events in Sri Lanka five years ago or in the Central African Republic today show that genocide has not been consigned to history. The Rwandan genocide may have once tugged at our conscience but the debate since over its causes and consequences – and over the resulting doctrines of intervention – has blurred our outrage. We and Rwandans need to demand of leaders everywhere: Never Again. I still wear my wrist band.

但5年前斯里蘭卡和今天中非共和國發生的事件表明，種族屠殺尚未成爲歷史。盧旺達大屠殺或許曾經刺痛過我們的良心，但之後對其原因和結果的爭論——以及對隨之而來的干預原則的爭論——稀釋了我們的憤怒。我們以及盧旺達人有必要要求各國領導人：絕不要重蹈覆轍。我現在仍然戴着我的腕帶。