Abstract
The Rwandan revolution could have been a social revolution. It became an ethnic one, because it was distorted by an alliance between “Hutu” clerks of Central Rwanda and important “Hutu” lineage heads, landowners of the North and the Northwest Rwanda. Kayibanda and the “group of Kabgayi”, belonging to the westernized elite of Rwanda, intended to remove their “Tutsi” rivals in the race for power and privilege promised by independence. Led by Bicamumpaka, the abakonde leaders wanted to get rid of the “Tutsi” hegemony that Nyanza and the colonizer had imposed on them. These lineages intended to recover the power and the land which they held before colonization. In ubukonde land, though both were listed in the “Hutu” category, the tension ran high between the large land owners and their dependants. The ethnicization of social claims avoided internal social clashes between “Hutu” in these regions and helped to maintain the minimum of cohesion inside Parmehutu, which was weakened by rivalries and divisions from the outset. It was also a way to delegitimize numerous “Hutu” who supported monarchy, described as being “not politically aware”. The archives show that many “poor Tutsi” believed in Parmehutu and voted for it (some even campaigning for it). These people were ultimately the collateral victims of ethnic (not to say racist) radicalization in the fight for freedom Kayibanda claimed to be leading. Colonel Logiest was an expert in revolutionary warfare. From mid-November 1959, he considered that Kayibanda would be his best agent and an objective ally to lead a revolution which would maintain Rwanda in the western and anti-communist orbit. He encouraged the ethnic polarization of the Rwandan society.