Jessica Mwiza is a Franco-Rwandan researcher and activist whose work focuses on understanding social vulnerabilities, racism, and the ideology of genocide. Currently a PhD candidate in sociology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, she is a member of a Franco-Rwandan research group in transcultural child psychiatry and has participated in numerous conferences on colonialism and anti-Tutsi ideology in the African Great Lakes region.
In this interview, Mwiza offers a lucid and radical perspective on Rwandan politics, deconstructing some of the dominant narratives in the West. With a critical approach, she questions the way Rwanda is analyzed through Eurocentric lenses, which often fail to grasp the complexity of its historical and social context. Mwiza highlights how the country remains deeply marked by the 1994 genocide and how political stability and the current development model are perceived nationally as a vital necessity rather than a system imposed from above.
The interview addresses some of the most controversial topics in the international debate: the definition of Rwanda as a “dictatorship”, accusations of exploiting Congolese minerals, the role of President Paul Kagame, and tensions with neighboring countries, particularly the Democratic Republic of Congo. Mwiza dismantles many Western criticisms of the Rwandan government, emphasizing that they often reflect a lack of understanding of regional dynamics and a colonial legacy still deeply embedded in the way Africa is perceived and analyzed.
With incisive and uncompromising analysis, this conversation with Jessica Mwiza offers a valuable opportunity to understand Rwanda through the voice of someone who intimately knows its history and challenges—without filters and without simplifications.
—
- What is your analysis of Rwanda’s political situation? Can it be defined as a dictatorship, or is this definition misleading?
This question is one which I have long found confusing. I feel like some people in Europe are trying to force their own attitudes and beliefs on Rwandans, which comes across as paternalistic.
I have never asked myself whether our leadership is supposedly «dictatorial», nor have my friends in Rwanda, nor my broader acquaintances.
There is a research principle that I particularly value as an academic: If the questions asked on the field don’t connect with the relevant populations and this is repeatedly evident, there is a reason for it. It is likely because they reflect the researcher’s internal projections onto the populations or phenomena studied, rather than carrying any element linked to reality.
We do not debate this issue simply because it is not relevant. Rwandans are not passive actors in their history, waiting melancholically to “graduate” to the level of white democracies. This should not be analyzed as some sort of defensive conspiracy reaction, implying an attempt on our part to deceive anyone trying to understand our political system. Collectively, we know where we come from and where we stand as a nation and as a people. Especially in the current context—one of conflicts and regional economic instability.
Rwanda is still in a post-genocide context, whether foreign observers understand and accept it or not. Our economy is still under construction. Our healthcare system grapples with the consequences of the genocide, as indicated by addiction rates, depression, and trauma. During the 30th commemoration in April 2024, survivors talked about how much their psychological wounds had worsened over time. Time seems to deepen the suffering, and the next generation must carry the torch without wavering or burdening their elders—who have already endured so much—with their own emotions and pain.
Take my case, for example, within my immediate Rwandan family. I have no grandparents left, no parents. In terms of direct family, I have only two relatives from the generation before me, both too unwell to socialize. Is this normal? Do international observers realize how insensitive they are when they ask us to “move on”? To “return to normal”? And by the way, why should returning to normal mean copying the same norms and fragile façades that led to our destruction?
The fact that we are doing better—psychologically, economically, and politically—does not mean that we are doing perfectly well, or that political stability is no longer a vital necessity at this very moment. It is more crucial than ever.
While we feel the progress made in our society—on all fronts over the past 30 years—we know that our choices are essentially twofold: either continue on this path or go backward. When we analyze the data, rather than external perceptions or opinions, we know that everything we have is due to a specific symbiosis between the people and their leaders. President Paul Kagame works tirelessly and possesses an impeccable political vision for emancipation and genuine independence. Not to stay in power, but precisely to leave it, ensuring that Rwanda remains peaceful, secure, and prosperous.
Every member of his cabinet, every minister, heads of public institutions, their staff, and so on, act according to his model. The entire system is designed so that the fruits of this hard work do not get lost in corruption, violence, or inefficiency. Thus, the general opinion among Rwandans is that, for now, it is critical and fundamental that this configuration remains unchanged.
It is very troubling to witness international debates about—just as an example—the so-called “censorship” of Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza’s candidacy before various election periods. She has been positioned as the acceptable face of the genocidal organization in its post-exile form in Congo. To us, she is the barely disguised face of death. She proudly aligns herself with those who murdered our families and represents an ideology that sought the brutal eradication—the annihilation—of every Tutsi. However, in Europe and the United States, she is still celebrated as a courageous woman “daring to oppose” the man whom these same people insist on calling a dictator. And why? Because it has been decided for us, without us, that our president is not the right one. In Rwanda, we see Westerners siding with Victoire Ingabire as objective allies of the genocidaires, ultimately wishing for us to return to the abyss. So, we move on and remain focused on what matters because, whether Western politicians, parliaments, or NGOs want to decide Rwanda’s future for us, we will still say no. And with this mindset, we went to the polls, in a celebratory atmosphere, last July.
- In your opinion, what are the main strengths and weaknesses of Rwandan leadership and its actions?
The main strengths of our leadership lie in its ability to identify talent and, most importantly, to provide opportunities for young people. Within every institution, it is possible to find competent individuals between the ages of 22 and 35 holding high levels of responsibility.
Certainly, the President of the Republic is important because he imposes upon himself a level of discipline, hard work, consistency in ideas, and a firm fight against corruption. This is the foundation of everything that can be achieved within society. The same level of discipline and dedication he requires of himself is, at least in theory, what public officials impose upon themselves. No one serves the country to get rich (the salaries are far too low for that) or to become famous. The challenges remain immense, as Rwanda is still a poor country.
No one is irreplaceable in the hierarchy of responsibilities. If a minister remains idle for several months and nothing significant happens within their department, they will likely be questioned by citizens (as happens in the traditional Umushyikirano debates) and then dismissed. This is another strength of our political system: the continuous organization of consultations between the people, their numerous representative bodies—such as elders, women, youth—and the leadership. This system works and offers a level of civic expression that I have never experienced in France, for example.
The main weakness in Rwandan leadership’s political action remains linked to the post-genocide context and cannot be solely attributed to elected or appointed officials. Even though security is ensured within Rwanda’s borders, there are still influential groups working to disrupt peace from the outside. In recent months, for example, the President of the DRC, Félix Tshisekedi, has extended invitations to warlords and genocidaires, publicly admitting to supporting plans for coups in Rwanda. The Burundian leadership has also chosen to ally with these harmful groups, carrying out attacks along the borders.
Being the only country to bear the consequences of the genocide—despite shared responsibilities—and continuing to fight against genocide ideology is no easy task. Regional specialists are well aware that neighboring countries cannot govern or consolidate power without dividing their populations along so-called “Bantu” and “Nilotic-Hamitic” lines [Madam refers to a colonial-era ethnic and racial classification applied particularly in the African Great Lakes region (Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo), editor’s note]. The fathers of European racism could not have dreamed of better heirs.
When we observe how citizens of Burundi and Congo navigate daily life—without basic infrastructure, without security, plagued by unparalleled corruption, and the return of medieval diseases—it would be dishonest to pretend that Rwanda’s progress is not mechanically hindered by these factors. We assist our neighbors, as evidenced by the many who own businesses or work in Rwanda, a country where they will not be extorted by public authorities if they succeed. The same, however, is not always true in reverse. This serves as a constant reminder that we live in an increasingly interconnected world.
- Rwanda is often accused of supporting its economy through the illegal trade of Congolese minerals. To what extent are these accusations accurate? How can Rwanda’s rapid economic and infrastructural development be explained? What growth models has Kigali adopted?
Rwanda’s economy is built on many factors, beyond the post-genocide challenges previously discussed. It is worth noting that the Belgian colonial model was designed to keep populations in constant dependency, reliant on aid. As a result, some institutions did not simply have to be rebuilt—they had to be entirely reimagined and recreated. Some essential needs, necessary for a thriving economy, such as access to electricity, have seen unprecedented progress over the past two decades. In 2009, anyone landing at night, flying over a pitch-black Rwanda, would be struck by the contrast with neighboring Uganda. Since then, electricity access has risen from 6% to 75%.
In this context, Rwanda has built an economy based on tourism and event hosting. Conferences, symposia, and other high-profile events—whether continental or international—now take place successfully within the country’s many infrastructure facilities. It was a bold gamble, but it makes sense given Rwanda’s geographical position on the map of Africa and the world. Alongside this, the national airline, RwandAir, seeks to normalize intra-African travel, fostering development based on South-South solidarity and exchanges, while maintaining North-South partnerships. Several other sectors of the Rwandan economy are also making their mark on the global stage, such as the fashion industry. For instance, Moshion has become a respected brand. And of course, the majority of Rwandans, especially outside major cities, remain engaged in agriculture. Finally, Rwanda also possesses gas, as well as minerals and metals—tin, tantalum, tungsten, sapphires, and gold, to name a few.
This economic model is primarily based on a strong work ethic—both in terms of strict working hours and annual output—combined with unique solidarity mechanisms. Rwanda is a poor country, and it is not always easy to maintain financial stability without a high income. The cost of living has increased due to the pressures of deregulated capitalism, which seeks to keep African nations in a perpetual cycle of aid dependence while extracting their resources. This is why, domestically, the government has implemented taxes linked to social redistribution programs that have no equivalent elsewhere. This is no secret in Rwanda, yet it remains a blind spot in Western perspectives on Rwandan politics—though it should command respect. I think of my peers, working from 7 AM to 10 PM, seeing a significant portion of their salaries deducted each month for anti-poverty programs. For all Rwandans, without racial distinction—and I want to be very clear on this point.
The lobbying and pressure groups tied to genocidaires who fled to Belgium, France, the United States, South Africa (and elsewhere) loudly lament alleged human rights abuses against their families and allies in Rwanda. (They mean “the Hutu”—a label that is no longer accepted today because colonization created these artificial racial categories, which were originally fluid and unequally applied and understood in Rwanda, depending on the era and region). They want us to remain racialized forever, at war, jealous of one another, stagnant, or dead, to prepare for their return to power. The truth is that the children of families who suffered enormous losses during the genocide are helping feed the children of the killers. And vice versa. We have not yet achieved an economic miracle, but we have certainly reached a stage of overwhelming moral and political success.
The President’s words—coming from someone who once lived in extreme poverty as an exile—always resonate deeply with us: “Work is painful, but poverty is even more painful”. So, Rwandans put their hearts into their work, whether in administration or construction, so that the exit from poverty is collective and swift. I don’t want to paint a misleading picture. Like everywhere in the world, there are criminals, slackers, and people who exploit the system. But these cases are the minority, and just being in the heart of Kigali is enough to feel the pulse of the city: the collective urgency to move forward in development.
In the meantime, poverty still hurts. I am always astonished when I hear political commentators in France or Belgium claim that Rwanda “hides” this issue “under the rug.” That is completely false. The President, ministers, and leaders of public and private institutions constantly address the issue of low incomes and unemployment rates. No one is complacent, and no one accepts this reality with fatalism. I think there is a kind of Western disdain for our efforts, as if they were perceived as arrogance. Westerners talk about the “Rwandan miracle” far more than Rwandan citizens themselves—who are too busy building their own lives.
- There is a lot of anger among Congolese citizens toward Rwanda and Rwandans, which is particularly evident on social media. How do you analyze this?
A few days ago, the newspaper “La Libre Belgique” published a meticulous field investigation revealing the amount of revenue from Congolese minerals in Katanga that has been embezzled by the family of President Tshisekedi—an estimated $320 billion since 2019.
This number may be incomprehensible to the average person, certainly to an audience that often craves simplistic explanations for the sheer cruelty of the ultra-liberal capitalist system. A system that thrives on the lifeless bodies of children exhausted from working in mines or wielding weapons for a few coins. On the shattered psyches of women who endure rape and the cruel instrumentalization of their suffering. On the precarious survival of populations accused of being agents of the so-called Tutsi-Hamitic international conspiracy—Hema, Banyamulenge, and Congolese Tutsi—the only groups currently at genuine risk of genocide in the literal sense of the term.
The Congolese government seems to be in a competition of indecency with itself, and the white world struggles to judge it, as if such behavior is expected—allow me to repeat—for mere Africans.
At the beginning of January 2025, Congolese Justice Minister Constant Mutamba threatened journalists with the death penalty if they provided “media support” to the M23. Politician Justin Bitakwira continues to make genocidal provocations against the Tutsi, Hema, and Banyamulenge, organizing meetings aimed at eliminating so-called “infiltrators.” Media Minister Patrick Muyaya communicates through racist war cries like “All for the fatherland!!!” and “The Rwandan poison!!!”.
The Democratic Republic of Congo, built as the personal colonial property of a megalomaniacal Belgian king, has never been able to provide a coherent, positive, and flexible national identity for its citizens. They remain trapped as prisoners and zealous actors in a toxic public debate, marked by “hunts for people with questionable nationalities”.
In the diaspora, Congolese nationals organize protests chanting slogans like “Congolese till death!” They oscillate between recognizing the corruption of their leaders and diving into hatred—an easier path than confronting a mafia-like system of this magnitude.
In this sense, Congolese nationalism closely resembles that of pre-Nazi Germany: a state compensating for its lack of political and social coherence through racial and racist insecurity, blaming the Tutsi—just as Jews were blamed—for its own failures, economic mismanagement, and moral decay.
From popular media outlets to major international NGOs, from national to regional parliaments, everyone turns a blind eye to the increasingly fascist tendencies of the Congolese regime. American, Belgian, British, and German political and diplomatic leaders rush to support the DRC unconditionally—in exchange for the very same minerals they claim are being looted.
In the West, as in the African Great Lakes region, anti-Tutsi ideology is constantly at play—and increasingly powerful over time—while classic anti-Black racism further reinforces it.
From “The New York Times” to “La Libre Belgique’s” March 2 investigation—or rather, its disimulation— The compromises made by the international community in siding with the real sources of regional insecurity are perfectly observable facts. It is as if the world learns nothing. It finds comfort only in posturing as regretful after the fact. There is still time to see Rwanda for what it truly is and to condemn neo-colonialism and its African enablers.
