[pikachu]

Paul Kagame, the Rwandan president, holds France responsible for the slaughter of as many as one million of his people in the 1994 massacres. He claims that Paris supported, funded and trained the "genocidal regime" that carried out the 100-day slaughter of Rwandan Tutsis and moderate Hutus. He announced in February 2007 that he intended to break away from the Francophone (French)-grouping (of countries) and apply to join the Commonwealth of Nations. He applied for membership in 2008 and as of November 28 2009, Rwanda is the Commonwealth's newest member - despite having never been a British colony.

After the recent and highly unwelcome defeat of the Tigers in Sri Lanka, finally a victory for the British.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/africa/29rwanda.html

[millie_(A)TCK]

France has officially lost the war.

[Zyx]

The 100 years war? To what war do you refer?

The Africans seeking assistance without Africa is a particular delusion that irks me. I suppose that it's no different than the Europeans, but the Africans seem to 'volunteer' to subordination. Naturally, and as usual, their 'volunteering' is rather forced.

I claim shame for the world order and my helplessness for effecting it.

[pikachu]

Rwanda is a small but disproportionately powerful country, by African standards. It wrecked havoc is DR Congo - the third largest country in Africa, twice in less than 10 years and fully got away with it. Still, it has no oil, it's geostrategic value is very limited, and its economy is tiny - it's a wonder that the Europeans pay so much attention to it. I understand Sudan for example, that country is a clusterfuck of significant international interests, but Rwanda?

[millie_(A)TCK]

People, people its all about anglophone versus francophone domination of Africa.
Rwanda is important to the anglophone-francophone war because of it's strategic location. It sits between the divide of former British colonies and former French ones. The Rwanda genocide was fueled in part by the former French president Mitterand. The senile old french guard was paranoid that its domain in central Africa would fall into British influence. Tutsi refugees in the early 90's had been recollecting themselves in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda which are all former British colonies. In revenge for what the saw as French support for the regimes in Rwanda and Burundi, they aligned themselves with the British.

After the genocide occurred, Rwanda under Tutsi president Kagame began its transformation from a francophone to an anglophone country. French used to be the unofficial second language, now it's English.

[Ter]

I am quite happy to see the French lose influence.

But

After the recent and highly unwelcome defeat of the Tigers in Sri Lanka, finally a victory for the British.

I fail to see why you think the British supported the Tigers in Sri Lanka in any way.

Please explain.

Ter

[Potemkin]

People, people its all about anglophone versus francophone domination of Africa.
Rwanda is important to the anglophone-francophone war because of it's strategic location. It sits between the divide of former British colonies and former French ones. The Rwanda genocide was fueled in part by the former French president Mitterand. The senile old french guard was paranoid that its domain in central Africa would fall into British influence. Tutsi refugees in the early 90's had been recollecting themselves in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda which are all former British colonies. In revenge for what the saw as French support for the regimes in Rwanda and Burundi, they aligned themselves with the British.

After the genocide occurred, Rwanda under Tutsi president Kagame began its transformation from a francophone to an anglophone country. French used to be the unofficial second language, now it's English.

Precisely. Both sides gain from this: Kagame is intelligent enough to know that Rwanda is going to be somebody's bitch, and he'd rather it was Britain's bitch than France's bitch. Besides, the British have more of an easygoing 'hands-off' approach to their former colonies than the French, who are obsessed with imposing their own culture on their former colonies. And Britain gets to stick it to the French, which is always a good thing.

Oh, and the defeat of the Tamil Tigers was not 'unwelcome' to the British. The Tamil Tigers were as creepy as fuck, and Britain understands very well that supporting creepy third world terrorist groups is generally a very bad idea. In fact, one of the reasons for the collapse of the Tigers was the fact that they had absolutely no friends in the international community.

[pikachu]

The Tamil Tigers were as creepy as fuck, and Britain understands very well that supporting creepy third world terrorist groups is generally a very bad idea. In fact, one of the reasons for the collapse of the Tigers was the fact that they had absolutely no friends in the international community.

Perhaps they lost their friends rather. That LTTE used to be a British tool (and to certain extent India's) is well known, even the LTTE headquarters is in London. Sri Lanka is for Britain the same as, for example, Moldova is for Russia, and Britain has a whole bunch of those. Creepy or not - sometimes you've got to deal with what you have. Judging by how much the British recently tried but failed to persuade the Sri Lankan government to stop its final offensive and declare ceasefire, its victory over LTTE must have still been unwelcome.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/british-tamils-held-regular-meetings-with-special-branch-while-supplying-terrorists_100181374.html
http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=30476

[Zyx]

What's disturbing about this Pro-Imperialist thread is how its being lead by Africans and Communists.

Britain versus France is the oldest imperialism in the book, maybe the largest drive to Capitalism's rise, yet it's like the gospel to modern proles. How sickening!

[Political Interest]

One wonders what Gaddafi would have to say about this? With episodes such as these, there is even more to be said for a political union of Africa.

[millie_(A)TCK]

Who cares what Gaddafi thinks. He isn't much better than the west. Does he condemn Sudan? No. Does he condemn Mugabe? No. Did he say that there are no real refugees in Africa? Yes.

He knows how to point the finger at the west and ignore oppression on Africans by Africans.

[danholo]

I'm sad to see the immaturity of African nations with this "anglophone" vs. "francophone" thing. Really just ridiculous. Call me insensitive, but this is just stupid.

[Ombrageux]

A strange moment for a strange institution. Still, France "lost" Rwanda in 1994 and the whole of Central Africa in 1997. This is a mere symbol, and not one marking any particular expansion of British influence.

[Potemkin]

A strange moment for a strange institution. Still, France "lost" Rwanda in 1994 and the whole of Central Africa in 1997. This is a mere symbol, and not one marking any particular expansion of British influence.

That's what you think, Ombrageux. Our secret plan to re-establish the British Empire is proceeding according to schedule....

[Cartertonian]

Our secret plan to re-establish the British Empire is proceeding according to schedule....

How could you possibly know that, Blackadder? That's classified information!

[Zyx]

How could you possibly know that, Blackadder? That's classified information!

Everyone in the world knows about it. You snobs don't even clean up for yourselves.

I remember it like it was yesterday, me and a group of other Americans were told to pick up the documents after a meeting and one of us said "This shit's classified. How lazy are these schmucks?" From then we disseminated and talking about Britain's imperial ambitions is like asking "How's the Weather?"

It's funny that some of you guys still think that it's secret.

[millie_(A)TCK]

and the whole of Central Africa in 1997.

How. They're still are heavily in involved in CAF for example.

This is a mere symbol, and not one marking any particular expansion of British influence.

Of course it does. How can you say it doesn't.

[Ombrageux]

Millie - The Commonwealth is a marginal institution, as is Britain outside of Europe and whatever leverage they get out of the American relationship. It is not different from the CIS or the Francophonie. You are correct that not all French influence is gone, but Central Africa is essentially Congo and the Great Lakes, two areas France is now marginal where it was influential

[Le Rouge]

I have mixed feelings about this. It's a certain sign of a material recuperation of Rwanda after the genocide. Membership in the Commonwealth of Nations holds a certain status and throws up some economic green lights. It also means Rwanda becomes a functional protectorate of Britain in some international cases which comes with certain privileges and setbacks. Overall, it's definitely not a total setback. It advanced Rwanda's position in a lot of cases and only restricts them in a select few. But, I don't think this greatly upsets the pursuit of proletarian social justice in Rwanda except in the area of trade. However, it is unfortunate that by being a member of the CoN that Rwanda has to support the feeble and comic remnants of a feudal aristocracy--a burden mostly funded by the working class.

[Ombrageux]

"Proletarian social justice" in Rwanda.. I am sure that is the primary concern. Not the hatreds and tyrannies manifested in the bones of 800,000 slaughtered on the nation soil, or the many millions dead in neighboring Congo. (Or, less prosaically, the perennially explosive situation in the Kivus).