Burundi Civil War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Burundi Civil War | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||
| Combatants | |||||||
| National Council for the Defense of Democracy-Forces for the Defense of Democracy FNL Various Hutu groups |
|||||||
| Commanders | |||||||
| N/A | N/A | ||||||
| Strength | |||||||
| N/A | N/A | ||||||
| Casualties | |||||||
| N/A | N/A | ||||||
| Burundi |
This article is part of the series: |
|
|
|
Other countries · Atlas Politics Portal |
Lasting from 1993-2005, the Burundi Civil War was the result of long standing ethnic divisions between the Hutu and the Tutsi tribes in Burundi. The conflict began following the first multiparty elections in the country since gaining independence from Belgium in 1962 and is seen as formally ending with the swearing in of Pierre Nkurunziza in August of 2005. The estimated death toll stands between 300,000 and 400,000 people over the 12 year period.
The origins of the Hutu/Tutsi ethnic division are less than clear. A number of genetic identifiers have been evidenced and were published Yearbook of Physical Anthropology. This 1987 study titled, “Genetics and History of Sub-Saharan Africa,” found that theTutsi and Hima, despite being surrounded by Bantu populations, are "closer genetically to Cushites and Ethiosemites." Another study concluded that, while the sickle cell trait among the Rwandan Hutu was comparable to that of neighboring people, it was almost nonexistent among Rwandan Tutsi. “Presence of the sickle cell trait is evidence of survival in the presence of malaria over many centuries, suggesting differing origins.”
No such testing was available to the Belgians, however, but were instead guided by one of the more dominant racial theories of the time known as the “Hamitic Theory.” Early version of this theory had identified the whole of the African race as descendant from the biblically cursed liniage of Ham. As European understanding of racial diversity in Africa increased and racial theories became more complex and convoluted, the term Hamitic was adapted in different ways. The hierarchical nature of the racial theory was applied to a variety of tribes in an effort to construct a racial history that fit these ideas.
In the case of the Belgians, and the Germans before them, casual observations revealed varying height differences among the resident peoples: the Twa who were short, the Hutu who were of medium height and the Tutsi who were tallest among them. It was also documented that in many cases, those who were among the tall group also raised cattle and tended to be politically and economically dominant. Those in the middle height group, on the other hand, tended to be poor and more agrarian. This prompted the use of what became known as the “ten-cow” rule. Those individuals who owned more than ten cows were described as “well-born,” equated with caucasians, and given privilages by the colonists.
The ten-cow rule was not universaly applied, however, and the existence of “petits Tutsi” continues to cause much debate in thie field. This much is clear, the Belgian census of 1933-34 and subsequent division of “races” exaserbated latent regional and ethnic conflicts.
Burundi’s first multi party national elections were held on June 27th, 1993, thirty-one years after the country gained its independence from Belgium in 1962. These elections were immediately preceded by 25 years of Tutsi militray regimes beginning with Michel Micombero, who had launched a successful coup in 1966 and replaced the monarchy with a presidential republic.
The last of the coups was in 1987 and installed Tutsi officer Pierre Buyoya. Buyoya attempted to institute a number of reforms to ease state control over media and attempted to facilitate a national dialogue. Instead of helping the problem, these reforms instead served to inflame ethnic tensions as hope grew amongst the Hutu population that the Tutsi monopoly was at an end. Local revolts subsequently took place by Hutu peasants against several Tutsi leaders in northern Burundi; these Hutu militias killed hundreds of Tutsi families in the process. When Buyoya sent in the army to quell the uprising, they in turn killed thousands of Hutu.
This violence prompted Buyoya to speed up liberalization and national dialogue, allowing other political parties to compete in the 1993 election. Melchior Ndadaye was democratically elected and became first Hutu president in the country’s history. He was assassinated three months later, in October 1993, by Tutsi army extremists. The country’s situation rapidly declined as Hutu peasants began to rise up and massacre Tutsi. In acts of brutal retribution, the Tutsi army proceeded to round up thousands of Hutu and kill them. The Rwandan genocide in 1994 further aggravated the conflict in Burundi by sparking additional massacres of Tutsis.
A decade of civil war followed, as the Hutu formed militias in the refugee camps of northern Tanzania. An estimated 300,000 people were killed in the clashes that followed and the reprisals against the local population. Under international pressure, the warring factions negotiated a peace agreement in Arusha in 2000, which called for ethnically balanced military and government and democratic elections. Two powerful Hutu rebel groups (the CNDD-FDD and the FNL) refused to sign the peace agreement and fighting continued in the countryside. Finally, the CNDD-FDD agreed to sign a peace deal in November 2003 and joined the transitional government. The last remaining rebel group, the FNL, continued to reject the peace process and committed sporadic acts of violence in 2003 and 2004, finally signing a cease fire agreement in 2006. Today, while some factions of the FDD have abided by a peace agreement signed with the government, the largest faction continues to carry out attacks.
- Burundi Civil War, globalsecurity.org
I just spoke to a woman who left Burundi, Africa in January 2007. There is still a war going on there. It has not ended.12/19/07