If these two countries did not transfer to Belgian rule and was still under Britain, by the time the country gains independence could the genocide be butterflyed?
Burundi and Rwanda Still Part of Tanzania = No Genocide
- Thread starter TickTock The Witch's Dead
- Start date
Yeah. So if Britain decided to keep it, how would it go?
Why is this a problem? So was Tanzania (or rather Tanganyika). Just keep the whole ex-German colony together, instead of hiving some off, and joining the rest with another colony.
I recall, but I can't remember or attest to the validity of the source, that the Belgians were responsible for there even being Hutus and Tutsis. So the British colonial adminstration might not follow the same path the Belgians took in polarizing the population, averting the impetus for genocide (the civil war and assassination of the President).
However, there are still massive societal issues in Rwanda, the land is very fertile but hard to work, and Rwandan culture creates an over-abundance of people for the land there is while attempting to divy it up among sons. Eventually, pressure is going to reach a critical point and there won't be enough land to feed everyone.
That second paragraph is based off of Collapse by Jared Diamond, so I don't know how valid of an analysis it truly is.
However, there are still massive societal issues in Rwanda, the land is very fertile but hard to work, and Rwandan culture creates an over-abundance of people for the land there is while attempting to divy it up among sons. Eventually, pressure is going to reach a critical point and there won't be enough land to feed everyone.
That second paragraph is based off of Collapse by Jared Diamond, so I don't know how valid of an analysis it truly is.
The 'Belgians invented the Hutus and Tutsis theory is pretty much false. The Tutsis were relative newcomers in Rwanda-Burundi, having migrated in from the North-East (IIRC) and inserted themselves as rulers over the Hutu. When the Europeans came and colonised the area, they left that structure intact, subverting the Tutsi aristocracy into a collaborationist bureaucracy.
Yeah, I can't see the British not using the same method, given their track record around the world (especially India) of divide et impera.
The butterflies will all be flapping, but would Rwanda and Burundi be part of Tanzania post-col?
I assume so. Looking at maps of East Africa at the time, it seems that 'Ruanda' and 'Urundi' are treated as colloquial regions, as opposed to administrative units.