Original Title: Sometines in April; Director: Raoul Peck; Year: 2005; Country: USA; Duration: 140min

Sinopsis: Sometimes in April is an epic story of courage in the face of daunting odds, as well as an exposé of the West's inaction as nearly a million Rwandans were being killed. The plot focuses on two brothers embroiled in the 1994 conflict between the Hutu majority (who had ruled Rwanda since 1959) and the Tutsi minority who had received favored treatment when the country was ruled by Belgium. The drama is set in two periods, which unfold concurrently: In April 1994, after the Hutu Army begins a systematic slaughter of Tutsis and more moderate Hutus; and in 2004, when one of the main characters visits the United Nations Tribunal in Arusha to meethis brother and inquire the fate of his family. The film challenges the contours of moral responsibility through the story of a fractured family living through the war’s atrocities and the memories still alive ten years after the dramatic events.

A skilful portrayal of the Rwandan genocide

Alicia Gibson and Niamh Green

Master in International Political Journalism

Universitat Pompeu Fabra

The Rwandan genocide (1994) must be understood in the context of the strict regime of colonisation imposed before and after World War I. In 1916, Belgium took control of Rwanda from Germany and installed a rigid colonial system of racial classification and exploitation. Previously, the Hutu, Tutsi and Twa of Rwanda shared the same culture, language and religion. However, by elevating the Tutsi over the Hutu, the Belgian control created a deep resentment among the Hutu majority. In 1959, the colonisation of Rwanda ended, and Belgium handed over control of Rwanda to the Hutu majority. With independence, decades of anti-Tutsi segregation started, with many Tutsi’s and moderate or sympathizing Hutu’s being forced into exile. In 1988, some of these exiled refugees formed a rebel movement called Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). From here, a deadly cycle of extreme violence continued until 1993 when the UN negotiated a power-sharing agreement between the two sides. However, the attempt at ceasefire was resisted and on 6^thApril 1994, an airplane carrying Present Habyarimana of Rwanda was shot down killing the president. As civil war began to break out Hutus started rounding up and killing Tutsis on a massive scale. That was the launching of one of the most serious and meticulously organised genocides in history.

The United Nations has played an important role in international relations ever since its inception in 1945. Built on a foundation of liberalism with a staunch focus on human rights, one of the goals of the UN is to safeguard the unalienable rights of human beings. To ensure this within the UN charter there are two specific chapters aimed at the resolution of conflict: Chapter 6, which advocates for peaceful resolution of disputes; and Chapter 7, which considerscoercive measure facing threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression.The United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda was established by a Security Council resolution on 5th October 1993 with a mandate to monitor a cease-fire agreement between the Rwandan Hutu government and the rebel Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF). This was an observation mission established under Chapter 6 of the Charter. Thus, it was limited to observing cease-fire, articulating humanitarian efforts, and contributing to the security of the Rwandan capital. Moreover, it was asked to remain neutral and unable to use military force to achieve its aims.

The practice of genocide is something which can be analysed in the context of the transformation of armed conflicts in the last few decades and of the emergence of the so-called “new wars” -a term coined by Mary Kaldor in the late 1990s. Among several aspects, according to this concept people’s cultural and religious identities would be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War international sphere. Kaldor explains new wars as having many of the elements that we see reflected in the Rwandan genocide. For example, this conflict took place during a disintegration of states whereby Rwanda moved from being a colony of Germany to a colony of Belgium and finally to independence. Moreover, the genocide in Rwanda is the most poignant illustration of massive civil casualties in contemporary conflicts with just under a million victims in 100 days of killing. Also, this was a large-scale ethnic cleansing whereby the sectarian and racialized beliefs implemented during colonialism within Rwanda by Belgium were translated into violent acts. 

In the film, we see numerous scenes masterfully depicting the reality of the genocide, including the UN activities taking place in Rwanda at the time. One of the biggest criticisms of the UNAMIR action in Rwanda was its deployment under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, instead of under Chapter VII, which would have allowed them the use of force. Many commentators even question why the mandate remained unchanged after the UN saw the severity of the violence occurring in Rwanda at the time. One scene in the film which is particularly illustrative of this is the scene where the UN is carrying out humanitarian acts, saving expatriates and ignoring the direct violence occurring towards natives of Rwanda, which resulted in the brutal murder of one of Augustin’s (Idris Elba) family members. The film also depicts the frustration of some officials in the US that the United Nations mandate for Rwanda was of neutral force even after they reluctantly admitted that acts of genocide were taking place. Close to the end of the film, when the radio is announcing that the RPF had initiated a cease-fire and therefrom ended the genocide, we see the newscaster declaring that there was “little to no successful intervention from the West.” In terms of the UN, this failure to successfully intervene was based on their use of an observation mission instead of a peace enforcement mission under the UN Charter. This highlights that although the ability to carry out these missions under the UN Charter is in itself a positive action, even the UN is not well placed to deal with some of the technological developments of “new wars” which are occurring in the international sphere. 

The main theme in the film is the practice of genocide in Rwanda in 1994. The film depicts very well how the tension between the Hutus and Tutsis stemmed from the colonisation by Belgium as we are shown officials using an eye chart to compare the physical features of two Rwandan men to racially classify them as one or the other. This can lead us to consider how many of the new conflicts in the post-Cold War, which are not inter-state anymore, are affected by the conditions of a post-colonial era and by the feelings of independence that some of these countries felt. The most noticeable aspect of the “new war” hypothesis shown in the film is maybe the number of civil casualties. Every other scene has some imagery of large-scale massacre and ethnic cleansing, which further highlights the nature of these wars being based on ethnicity or tribe considerations. Another technological development shown in the film which also characterizes the new era of conflicts is the role played by communication and the media. One of the most poignant things about Sometimes in Aprilis that throughout, over the main film dialogue, we hear the use of the radio to instil the hatred and further cement the violence between the two sides. This is even further highlighted when we learn the war crime that Augustin’s brother Honoré (Oris Erhuero) is imprisoned for: inciting violence and hatred over the radio. This emphasizes the power of communication in facilitating these “new wars” as a pervasive feature of post-Cold War conflicts. 

Overall, the international dimension of the Rwandan genocide is portrayed skilfully in this film. We see clearly the implications of many concepts ranging from the problems with deep-rooted colonisation to the UN intervention, and the pressure in the international sphere to control these new technological developments so deeply affecting the lives of people in Rwanda. This ability to highlight this complex reality, as well as to underline the interconnectedness of these processes, is very significant for those trying to learn about these international events.

Raoul Peck’s honest portrayal of the tragedy occurred in the Rwandan genocide makes Sometimes in Aprilone of the best contemporary films depicting the reality of international relations in recent decades.