Hello again. This week I turn to an issue that has been recently examined in the United States: the place of torture in modern states, an issue that Ana will be contributing to as it pertains to the debate domestically. Here's the rundown: on July 31, 2006 Alain Mugabarabona was arrested, among others, for having confessed to being the leader behind an attempted coup d’état; the next day, the former Vice-President of Burundi Alphonse-Marie Kadege (pictured left) was also arrested. I mention these two among the others who were arrested for specific reasons: first, Mugabarabona because of his associations with the FNL-Incanzo Party, a former Hutu rebel group; second, Kadege as a Tutsi member of UPRONA (Union pour le Progrès national, or Union for National Progress). While detained it is believed that they were tortured, Kadege being bound at the hands and feet and whipped with a leather belt. What I find interesting about this is that in this instance, members of both sides of the "racial divide" in Burundi were arrested and subject to torture at the hands of their own government. What motivations did the government have? Mugabarabona had already confessed his involvement in the attempt and was himself a Hutu (the same ethnic background of the slim majority of members of the government of Burundi, including its president). Kadege, a Tutsi, had been high up in the government and of the same background of those in the relatively well represented minority of the heads of government in Burundi.
Here is an example of how the line between whom is targeting whom and which ethnic group is being victimized becomes ever blurrier. A further question: what drove members of both ethnic classifications to band together in an attempt to overthrow their government? Surely, something must have driven them to see beyond race, an issue which some would assume would divide them.
In the end it seems to me that in this particular case the issue is less about race and more about the government's wish to maintain its control by those means it chooses. Granted, modern states reserve the right to maintain their sovereignty but they do not reserve the right to target their own citizens for acts which would demoralize or bring them bodily harm or distress. The state is legitimate only so long as it is accorded the blessing of those it governs. By resorting to torture, assuming the allegations brought against it are true, the government of Burundi has added further tension to an already fragile situation within its borders. No matter how injurious the deeds committed against it are deemed no government has the right to torture its own citizens or any other, for that matter: there is no place for torture, neither in Burundi nor elsewhere.
I invite you to read the following for more information:
And this blog by Richard Wilson who has written about Burundi at commentisfree.
