Erin Jessee - Notes from Rwanda

To date, I have spent four months in Rwanda conducting field research for my thesis project. My project aims to examine a phenomenon I have termed “inscribed intent,” whereby perpetrators use symbolic violence to physically inscribe the bodies of their victims in order to communicate the victims’ perceived status as members of an unwanted group. To this end, I have been conducting interviews with survivors and perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Once I have completed six months of research here, I will be moving on to Bosnia to begin the second phase of this comparative project. The data resulting from this fieldwork is intended to provide a valuable foundation for improving analysis of the testimonial and physical evidence typically used to establish the genocidal intent of the perpetrators involved in the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides. The work could also provide a theoretical framework for the study of genocidal prevention in relation to the escalating ethnic and religious tensions in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Kosovo, regions whose current conflicts are intricately associated with the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia respectively. Finally, it is hoped that this project will encourage further collaborative research among the disciplines of oral history, anthropology, international law, and forensic archaeology. My fieldwork thus far has certainly given me a better understanding of how to achieve these goals.

A second problem that has emerged is that of sharing authority with my participants when conducting analysis of the data that emerges from their interviews. While I always seek to confirm any preliminary conclusions reached as a result of a given set of interviews with the individual participant, this process can be very complicated when dealing with convicted genocidaires, who typically withhold a great deal of information about the crimes they’ve committed. While I always seek to interview convicted Category One (those who promoted genocide ideology or committed major atrocities such as mass murder or rape) genocidaires who have confessed, I often find that their confessions only relate to certain types of crimes, such as looting, beatings and mercy killings. It is very rare to find people who will admit to participating in massacres or committing other extreme crimes such as rape or torture, though they will often speak about observing others who committed such atrocities. As a result, I always seek to triangulate the information I receive during interviews with genocidaires with the data held by the prisons and gacaca offices in order to get a better sense of the evidence against them in relation to the wide range of charges they’ve faced. Thus, the act of sharing authority, while ideal when interviewing other types of informants, is often impossible with genocidaires due to their reluctance to confess fully and reflect about their motives in committing certain crimes. Ultimately, however, I have come to the conclusion that while it is necessary to share authority on some verifiable facts and conclusions pertaining to the genocidaires life histories, for example, there are times when I am being intentionally misinformed and therefore must rely on other forms of data to verify or negate certain aspects of their narratives without expressing my mistrust to my participants. As such, shared authority is not always possible. I intend to give a lecture at Concordia’s Center for Oral History and Digital Storytelling and publish a paper on this topic upon completing my fieldwork.

Finally, I have encountered several problems with my original methodology which I have since had to modify. Initially, I intended to interview a minimum of 20 individuals (10 survivors and 10 perpetrators) in each country who represent a diversity of backgrounds. Upon beginning my fieldwork in Rwanda it soon became evident that 20 sets of interviews would not provide enough data to support my conclusions. As a result, I’m now aiming to complete a minimum of 60 interviews (30 survivors and 30 perpetrators) in each country. Of these, half of the people in each category are intended to be women in order to get a better sense for the role that gender played during the genocide.

A second methodological problem that I have encountered relates to my desire to participate in ongoing forensic exhumations in Rwanda and Bosnia on a part-time basis in order to determine whether it is possible to identify evidence pertaining to the cultural meaning inherent in specific forms of violence by examining the mass graves and related crime scenes resulting from these genocides. While this aspect of my fieldwork will still be possible to complete in Bosnia, in Rwanda it has proved to be an unexpected challenge. The current Rwandan government does not allow international forensic investigations to take place, though they do allow locally organized exhumations for the purpose of repatriation and respectful burial to take place. As a result, it has been impossible for me to assist in any exhumations so far. Likewise, it has been extremely difficult for me to find archived reports from the exhumation conducted by Physicians for Human Rights in Kibuye in 1996. This was the only international forensic exhumation to occur following the genocide in 1994, and it was found to be so traumatic to the local community that further investigations have since been disallowed. Thus, I will have to rely on additional interviews with the forensic experts involved in this investigation, as well as archived reports from Physicians for Human Rights themselves, in order to better understand the kinds of evidence which were available as a result of this exhumation.

Based on my ongoing experiences, the primary lessons learned thus far in the course of my fieldwork is to maintain flexibility in my expectations and my methodology. I have constantly had to adapt to changing circumstances in the political climate in Rwanda, as well as the interests of my participants. And while the overall scope of my research remains the same, I have found myself led to pursue many different tangents, some of which have turned out to be extremely beneficial to my understanding of Rwandan culture, history and politics. Furthermore, my interdisciplinary training has allowed me to employ a wide range of methods for gathering and verifying information, including ethnographic observation and participation, oral historical life history and thematic interviews and archival analysis. As a result of these experiences, I would certainly recommend the use of interdisciplinary methods to future researchers, as it allows for the acquisition of rich data and a better understanding of the community and phenomenon being investigated, particularly where the study of conflict and human security is concerned. Likewise, speaking with the people involved in the perpetration of mass human rights abuses, as well as those who have survived such atrocities, is invaluable for highlighting the cultural context of such events.