Reading Rwanda to Rethink Leadership: An invitation to young Rwandans to reflect with me on our history, leadership, and the lessons of Musinga’s Rwanda (1896–1931) as we rethink our future.

On 16 May 2025, Dr. David Himbara, delivered a public lecture in an X Space discussion under the title “African States as Architects of Poverty: Lesson 2.” The lecture offered a critique of how African states — and Rwanda in particular — have reproduced poverty and division through the deliberate choices of their leaders.

Tracing a continuum from the authoritarianism of the precolonial monarchy, through the exclusionary and oppressive regimes of the First and Second Republics under Kayibanda and Habyarimana, and into the present-day rule of Kagame, Dr. Himbara argued that Rwanda’s trajectory has been shaped less by historical inevitability than by patterns of poor leadership that continue to impoverish and polarize society.

Defeat Is The Only Bad News: Rwanda Under Musinga, 1896 - 1931

One of the most arresting moments in the lecture came when Dr. Himbara posed a pointed question to the audience of over 500 listeners, many of whom are prominent members of the Rwandan exile opposition. He challenged us to consider whether we truly knew Rwanda’s history well enough to account for how tragedy and poverty came to be — not through fate, but through the deliberate choices of leaders — from the monarchy under colonial rule, through the First and Second Republics of Kayibanda and Habyarimana, and into the present era of Kagame. While not phrased in precisely those words, the thrust of his question was unmistakable: had we as aspiring leaders engaged deeply enough with our country’s history to understand how authoritarian governance and poor leadership choices have repeatedly undermined Rwanda’s potential?

Dr. Himbara seized upon this silence to issue a challenge. He reminded us that without a deep and critical understanding of the country’s history, no one is truly equipped to propose meaningful change. This insight informed his widely circulated article “Ten-Point Advice to the New Generation of Rwandan Leaders,” in which he distilled key principles for preparing to lead a democratic, united, and prosperous Rwanda. Among these principles, his first and foundational recommendation was to educate oneself and one’s peers by engaging seriously with Rwanda’s historical scholarship.

Specifically, Dr. Himbara recommended three seminal works:

1. Jan Vansina, Antecedents to Modern Rwanda: The Nyiginya Kingdom

2. Alison Des Forges, Defeat Is the Only Bad News: Rwanda under Musinga, 1896–1931

3. David Whitehouse, Missionaries and the Colonial State: Radicalism and Governance in Rwanda and Burundi, 1900–1972

As he poignantly reminded us, one cannot repair what one does not understand — echoing Christy Leigh Stewart’s admonition: “You can’t fix what you don’t know is broken.”

In response to this challenge, I have embarked on a systematic program of study and scholarly reflection on these three works. My aim is twofold: first, to cultivate in myself a historically informed understanding of how Rwanda’s institutions and political culture evolved through successive regimes of authoritarianism; second, to contribute to a broader dialogue among aspiring leaders about what must be unlearned, reimagined, and built anew if Rwanda is to break with its tragic past.

These works, taken together, offer a critical genealogy of Rwandan authoritarianism: Vansina situates the monarchy’s power in its socio-political and cultural antecedents; Des Forges illuminates the constraints and adaptations of kingship under colonial rule; and Whitehouse interrogates the moral and institutional compromises that missionary radicalism and colonial governance engendered. My reflections will explore how these historical episodes shaped patterns of exclusion, exploitation, and centralized authority that continue to haunt Rwanda today.

Bisangwa supposedly dispatched a messenger to Court, asking: "When one is deafted abroad, one returns to his own country; when one is beaten at home, where does one go then?"

In addition to Dr. Himbara’s excellent recommendations, I will go on to add several other critical works to my reading list. These include:

1. Mahmood Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda (2001)

   - A powerful analysis linking colonial racial policies and postcolonial politics to the 1994 genocide, showing how identities were politicized into deadly categories.

   
   

2. Filip Reyntjens, Political Governance in Post-Genocide Rwanda (2013)

   - A critical examination of Rwanda under the RPF and Paul Kagame, detailing the authoritarian and exclusionary nature of the post-genocide regime.

   
   

3. Filip Reyntjens, Modern Rwanda: A Political History (2024)

   The book highlights recurring patterns—ethnic politics, authoritarian governance, elite manipulation—and pivotal shifts at major historical junctures

   
   

4. Michela Wrong, Do Not Disturb: The Story of a Political Murder and an African Regime Gone Bad (2021).

   An investigative narrative uncovering the RPF’s repressive practices, assassinations of dissidents, and the betrayal of post-genocide hopes.

   
   

5. Judi Rever, In Praise of Blood: The Crimes of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (2018)

   A controversial but important work documenting alleged war crimes and human rights violations committed by the RPF during and after the genocide.

To conduct this inquiry meaningfully, I will not only summarize the arguments of each work but also critically assess the implications of their findings for contemporary leadership challenges. I will consider, for example, how the myths of centralized, omnipotent kingship and the narratives of “captivity to custom,” as identified by Des Forges, persist in justifying authoritarian governance today. I will also examine how colonial governance and missionary activism laid the groundwork for state-led social engineering — often under the guise of modernization — that has contributed to cycles of violence and repression.

The urgency of this scholarly project cannot be overstated.As Dr. Himbara underscored, Rwanda has endured approximately 130 years of authoritarian rule without a peaceful transfer of power, beginning with the 1896 coup at Rucunshu. In that episode, Queen Mother Kanjogera orchestrated the overthrow and death of King Rutarindwa, installing her son Yuhi Musinga on the throne. This violent and exclusionary seizure of power inaugurated a pattern of governance in Rwanda marked by coercion, repression, and the marginalization of political rivals. That pattern continued under colonial tutelage, persisted through the post-independence republics of Kayibanda and Habyarimana, and remains evident in the current Kagame regime. The absence of peaceful, consensual transitions of power remains one of the defining challenges of Rwandan political history — and any aspiration to democratic leadership and inclusive future must begin with a clear-eyed understanding of how this trajectory was established and reproduced over more than a century. 

I invite fellow students of Rwandan history, young leaders, and all who care about the future of our country to join me in this intellectual endeavor. Over the coming months, I will publish a series of written reflections engaging each of these books in turn, beginning with Alison Des Forges’ Defeat Is the Only Bad News, which interrogates the dynamics of kingship under colonial rule and dispels enduring myths of absolute and unrestrained monarchical power.

In a country where, as Dr. Himbara observed, oral rumor often substitutes for knowledge and books remain under-read, we must resist the temptation to lead blindly. Scholarship is not a luxury but a responsibility. Only through knowing our history can we begin to envision — and embody — a different kind of leadership for Rwanda.

The Disappearance of Patrick Murara and the Courage to Reject Kagamistan

The news broke this weekend that Patrick Murara — a young Rwandan who has openly challenged the lies of “Kagamistan” and exposed how the RPF has worked tirelessly to Kagamenize Rwanda — reportedly went missing. Yet anyone familiar with Rwanda’s political culture, shaped by the ideological sermons of figures like General James Kabarebe, would recognize Murara’s fate as a chilling but predictable consequence of the state’s zero-tolerance approach to dissent.

Patrick Murara is missing. A bright young Rwandan, reportedly outspoken and unafraid to question Paul Kagame's authority has vanished — and in Rwanda’s current climate, that is rarely a coincidence.

A review of Kabarebe’s speeches, compiled and translated by W. J. Rugamba and publicly available on the Online Archive for Historical Documentation (James Kabarebe’s Selected Public Speeches, 2019), shows the ideological foundation of Rwanda’s authoritarian regime. In his 2019 address to the Association of Student Survivors of the Genocide (AERG), Kabarebe laid out a worldview that not only criminalizes dissent but frames it as an existential threat to the state.

Kabarebe’s rhetoric paints even the smallest ideological deviation as intolerable, equating independent thought with subversion. He describes ideology itself as an inherently destructive force, turning it into a catch-all term for any form of opposition, critical thinking, or alternative vision.

James Kabarebe’s Translated Public Speeches — free copies available on the Online Archive for Historical Documentation.

This framing has grave implications. It creates a climate where young people like Murara, who question or challenge the state’s narrative, are viewed as internal enemies. Kabarebe even characterizes dissenters as dangerous remnants who must be eliminated with overwhelming force, leaving no room for dialogue or rehabilitation.

These words are not just rhetoric — they shape policy. The government has cultivated a culture of fear and suspicion, where those who dare to think differently often face harassment, imprisonment, or forced disappearance. Murara’s case fits this pattern, reflecting the ideological paranoia that has come to define Rwanda’s governance.

The responsibility, however, does not stop with Kabarebe. His worldview mirrors the broader political culture of President Paul Kagame’s regime, which has ruled Rwanda since 1994. While Kagame’s government is praised for rebuilding Rwanda’s economy and maintaining stability, it does so at a profound cost — crushing dissent, muzzling the press, banning opposition parties, and using national security as a justification for human rights abuses.

Kabarebe dismisses internationally recognized principles like democracy and human rights as foreign imports designed to undermine the nation. This ideological framework leaves no space for civic engagement, pluralism, or healthy debate. In practice, it turns young, critical minds like Murara into targets instead of valued citizens.

Murara’s disappearance is especially tragic because he represents the very generation that Rwanda claims as the torchbearers of its future. The state exhorts its youth to be vigilant and committed to the nation’s survival, but its definition of vigilance leaves no room for independent thought, moral courage, or alternative visions. Those who deviate are branded enemies of the state.

Rwanda faces a profound contradiction at the heart of its post-genocide reconstruction. A nation cannot build a just and united future by silencing and disappearing its own citizens. The ideology promoted by Kabarebe and embodied in Kagame’s regime has turned fear into policy and paranoia into principle.

For Rwanda to truly heal from its past, it must move beyond the politics of fear and control, stop equating opposition with treason, and recognize dissent as an essential ingredient of democracy. In a country where the price of ideology is so high, the real danger may not lie with those who dare to reject it, but with those who cling to it so tightly that they forget what unity was meant to protect.

The Infantilization of Opposition Politics in Rwanda

In a recent space conversation, I heard a die-hard supporter of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) say something that was both revealing and troubling: “The RPF is the engine; the other parties are just friends of the family.” It was almost amusing — and yet deeply sad — to hear this kind of reasoning: RPF ni moteri, andi mashyaka ni inshuti zumuryango.

“The RPF as the engine, the others just ‘friends of the family’: A satirical take on Rwanda’s stunted political pluralism. — LivenBooks Graphic Creative Team”

It sounded more like a scripted talking point than a genuine belief — and it perfectly illustrates the problem with how political pluralism is understood (or misunderstood) in Rwanda today.

This metaphor reveals precisely what is wrong with Rwanda’s political imagination today. It suggests that the RPF alone drives the country forward, while other political actors are relegated to a symbolic, secondary role — as if their participation is not essential, but merely ornamental.

Yet in a healthy democracy, no single party should claim to be the “engine” of the nation. Power and legitimacy must come from the people and be shared, contested, and renewed through inclusive, pluralistic processes. By casting the RPF as indispensable and others as peripheral, this view entrenches a culture of dominance and dependency that is incompatible with genuine democratic practice.

Even more troubling is the idea that opposition parties are simply “friends of the family.” This language infantilizes politics, reducing it to personal loyalty instead of institutional accountability. It ignores the fact that dissent, alternative visions, and even criticism are not threats to national unity — they are its lifeblood.

If Rwanda is ever to move beyond authoritarianism, it must abandon metaphors that glorify one party’s monopoly and diminish others to passive bystanders. What the country needs is not an engine and its passengers, but a shared journey in which every citizen and party has a say in how the nation moves forward.