Renaud Girard : « On s'est trompé, on a soutenu une garde présidentielle à un régime qui, ensuite, a commis des massacres. Pourquoi revenir, pourquoi nous enferrer ? »

Ockrent, Christine

21 juin 1994

19940621

23:00:00

CEST

Journal de 23 heures

Renaud Girard : « On s'est trompé, on a soutenu une garde présidentielle à un régime qui, ensuite, a commis des massacres. Pourquoi revenir, pourquoi nous enferrer ? »

ScriptFrance3JournalDe23Heures21061994.pdf

40395 bytes

7

France 3

INA

Transcription d'une émission de télévision

FR

- Renaud Girard: "I consider that the French intervention in Rwanda is not in the interest of our country. First of all, I consider that it is late because I was in Kigali on April 10 when the French paratroopers were there to save the French and the other Europeans. A job which they did very well. But the massacres were taking place before their eyes and they did not intervene. So why did they not intervene when the massacres began and the French paratroopers were there? Secondly, I find this intervention very unwelcome because it is refused not only by the surrounding countries, by the OAU, and by the political party which already controls two thirds of the territory. But this political party, the RPF, we do not know if they are angels or demons. But in any case they did not commit massacres in a proven way. Whereas the others have massacred. I also think that there is a double misunderstands and that we must not fall into this trap. Double mistake because the Hutu believe that the French paratroopers will intervene to save them while the RPF believe that the French will come to counter them. […] So we are going to go there, nobody is going to understand our mission. Everyone will expect something different. You know: 'Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum', it is diabolical to persevere in error. We were there in 90. No one can explain to us today why we went to this mess. Why we went to intervene in a former Belgian colony! The French have never been to Rwanda! It was first a Tutsi monarchy, then a German colony, then a Belgian colony. What did we do there? We sent up to 700 men. We made a mistake, we supported a presidential guard to a regime which, then, committed massacres. We left in August 93 to be replaced by the UN. The UN has certainly done its job badly. But why come back, why go to hell? We made a mistake, we have to admit it. But you don't have to renew it. […] France is going to intervene in a country to prevent the RPF from taking power because the leader of the RPF says: 'You are preventing me from doing my job'. The RPF controls two thirds of the country. So far he has not proven himself to be anti-democratic. He is at home, he wants to solve these problems. It wasn't him who started it, it was the presidential guard, it was President Habyarimana's regime that first killed their own Hutu Prime Minister and the Belgian blue helmets. And we're going to play the cops. A second time we get stuck in error. […] The French who very easily could have restored the situation on April 10 when they were there, they did nothing. Why bring them back? Not them! Others, the Senegalese for example. The English why not. But not the French. […] Instead of carrying out a half-intervention, it would be better today to reflect once and for all, to say to ourselves that now we must create a real international army of the UN which can intervene as soon as the Secretary General asks for it. And not a weak blue helmet army. There were in Rwanda when the massacres started Bangladeshis who had nothing to do with the situation in the country, who were there to earn a good salary in dollars. And there were Belgians who were paralyzed because they were challenged as a former colonial power by the Hutu. So let's create a powerful, organized army of Blue Helmets, let the UN stop its clumsiness of sending Bangladeshis or Belgians to Rwanda. And that finally this army of the prevention of genocides and massacres is mounted at the UN. […] Not a single kilogram of French humanitarian aid has yet reached Kigali. Not a single kilogram when 4,000 tonnes have been released. Because the RPF is so hostile to France, because of its past policy, that it does not accept humanitarian aid from France! It accepts humanitarian aid from private French organisations, such as Pharmaciens sans frontières. Either the RPF welcomed Bernard Kouchner's initiative to open this humanitarian corridor for the exchange of Tutsi and Hutu from one area to another. It started to work since more than a thousand Tutsi were able to leave the Mille Collines hotel and the Sainte-Famille church. Similarly Bernard Kouchner obtained the agreement of the RPF and the Rwandan general staff for the evacuation of the orphans of Marc Vaiter, this Frenchman who had the courage to stay with these orphans on April 11th. So these private efforts like those of Bernard Kouchner or Pharmaciens sans frontières work! But the RPF is so hostile to France that it doesn't even want French humanitarian aid trucks! […] Our goals are not clear. But I think you should never send soldiers without a clear mission on the ground, without a political objective that everyone can understand. I believe that there we do not have a political objective, we do not have an end to this military mission and we do not have a mission to give to our soldiers on the ground. And I believe this is the very type of dangerous military intervention."
- Pierre Pradier: "The problem is of such importance that it deserves debate. And it is not very surprising that quite divergent opinions can emerge. At a time when we are in the process of distributing prizes, the distribution of bad points, trying to send everyone back to their responsibilities, I believe that all that is no longer appropriate! Today there are between 300, 400, a thousand, perhaps several thousand, of women, of children or of civilians who are assassinated on a daily basis. We no longer know whether how or why these things were born or developed. Today, we must stop! Only one emergency: stop these massacres! So is the intervention of the army of France the best way? Maybe not! In any case, someone will have to go to stop the arm of the murderers. The French and everyone else would like there to be a kind of international will to emerge and for countries other than ours to be able to do this work. Nevertheless: if today and if for several weeks no one wants to go there, then, despite the extreme danger that this entails, political danger, despite the interpretations or the possibility of risks, today, really no state of mind: we must stop the arm of the murderers. […] We are faced with a genocidal enterprise that continues! Because as the government troops retreat before the advance of the RPF the villages become "Tutsirein"! There is not a single Tutsi left alive! There is no question that France will put its grain of salt to know which of the two partners must win. It seems all the same, we have seen it for several weeks, that the RPF is in the process of winning over the whole country. It is particularly difficult to save civilian populations while not taking sides between the two adversaries. Yet that is the challenge left to us. Other European or at best African countries should agree to do this work alongside us. It is nevertheless the salvation of these civilian populations that remains our primary concern. Finally, it is a humanitarian concern. […] It is not a question of leaving flamberge in the wind under the ramparts of Orléans with a white standard! Simply, if others wanted to be by our side, I think the French and the whole world would be quite happy. But until now Italy had offered 800 men and then suddenly they disappeared, our British friends also remained remarkably discreet, the whole of the international community did not at all want to put a half-finger ! […] According to the latest news, all of the humanitarian aid, and in particular that which the Quai d'Orsay planned to deliver to Kigali, remains stuck on the other side of the border, on the Ugandan border, without no penetration could take place. And this despite the extremely commendable efforts of officials from the Quai d'Orsay who went to the field. I think it's probably some kind of political retaliation. […] I think that the European Parliament itself will probably have to exert all its weight so that Europe asks for the constitution and supports this constitution and feeds this constitution with an international army. […] I'm not sure that good feelings make good politics. Nevertheless, here, we are no longer in good feelings, we are truly in genocide. And it's true that private initiatives, I'm thinking of non-governmental organizations like Pharmacists Without Borders, like Doctors of the World who are there and who work with great ardor, will probably stay there. Even if for a few days they have to go back to the border to run less risk. In any case, I think that French public opinion knows the importance of these massacres. She also knows everything that can be done at any price to stop the genocide. Even if it involves political risks".