Hotel Rwanda

A short film based on a choreopoem, Harriet, by Zhana, was screened as part of the London Black Film Festival this November.

In Hotel Rwanda, the central character is an African man, played by Don Cheadle. This is unusual for films made in the West, which almost always feature a white central character, even when depicting events which primarily involve African people. The choice of a Black lead in Hotel Rwanda ensures that the action of the film is shown from an African perspective.

See "Comparison with Shooting Dogs", below.

There are similarities with what happened in Nigeria, with the Biafran war, and in Liberia.

For more about Liberia, see: African Women's Creativity. Please note, this lens depicts scenes of violence, so you need to be signed in to Squidoo to read it.

For more about Nigeria, see: Naij: A Film History of Nigeria.

Of course, unlike Nigeria, Rwanda had no oil reserves. Thus, it was abandoned by the Europeans.

Rusesabagina, played by Don Cheadle, and his wife Tatiana (Sophie Okonedo), witness their neighbours being beaten in the middle of the night, but rationalises that they must have done something wrong.

The radio foretells the events to come. Rusesabagina is told that the words "tall trees" are a code - when these words are uttered, the killing will begin. But he dismisses this until, one day, he hears someone on the radio say "we must cut down those tall trees". Throughout the film, radio broadcasts threaten and warn of further violence to come, as the Hutu population are encouraged to attack and kill the Tutsi minority.

When the UN forces arrive at the hotel, more and more Tutsis gather there expecting to be protected from the Hutus. However, Nick Nolte's character, a UN officer, says to Rusesabagina, "You should spit in our faces". He explains that the troops will not remain there, and they have orders to evacuate the Europeans, but not the Africans. "You're not even N-words", he says. "You're Africans."

One shocking thing among so many is that when their soldiers retreat, the UN do not inforrm the rest of the world of the events taking place in Rwanda. After the Europeans are evacuated, Rusesabagina contacts his employers in France and gets the refugees in the hotel to contact everyone they know in Western countries. Thus, an evacuation of some of the African families is arranged.

For more about this, see "Ghosts of Rwanda", below.

Having managed to arrange an evacuation of the Tutsis (see above), Rusesabagina sends his wife and children off on the truck, to be taken to the airport and airlifted to safety. He remains at the hotel, unwilling to abandon the refugees. But then he hears news on the radio of another planned attack and realises the truck is heading straight into an ambush.

Here, the film departs somewhat from actual events. We see the truck being attacked and soldiers boarding it. They beat everyone on the bus apart from Tatiana Rusesabagina and her children, whom they do not touch. In reality, they beat her so badly that she lay in bed for two weeks, unable even to turn over.

More and more people continue to converge on the hotel. Rusesabagina bribes the general of the local militia with money and alcohol in order to keep them from killing the refugees. But when the booze runs out, the general says he will not protect Rusesabagina and the others any longer.

Rusesabagina manages to arrange safe transport for the people at the hotel by threatening the general, telling him he will be accused of war crimes and needs to keep Rusesabagina alive as the only one who can testify on his behalf.

This film has been criticised for its portrayal of the situation. Rusesabagina is said to have been in collusion with some of the perpetrators of the genocide. It is also said that "Hotel Rwanda" downplayed the role of the army.

Both films depict people sheltering in a safe haven under the protection of the UN forces, while mass killings continue just outside their walls, and with the constant threat of attack. In both films there is the sense of terror and helplessness in the face of imminent rape, bloodshed, mutilation and murder.

At one point, the UN commander tells Father Christopher that those inside the walls will hear shots being fired, as his men will be shooting the dogs that have been feeding on the dead bodies. Father Christopher asks him if the UN troops have a mandate to do this - they have not been allowed to fire on the murderers unless it's in an act of self-defence.

The UN has not declared the situation a genocide, and thus has no legal requirement to protect the Tutsis from these violent murders. Any remaining illusion of safety disappears once the UN withdraws, taking the Europeans with them.

Although, in Hotel Rwanda, the central character is able to continue to offer protection to the refugees, in Shooting Dogs, it is clear that once the UN troops leave, all the refugees will be slaughtered. Father Christopher is killed while trying to evacuate some of the children staying at the school. The children survive by sneaking out of the truck and running into the woods.

Another character, a young girl whom we have seen running around the track at the beginning of the film, and later running through the woods, is seen at the end, having survived, and visiting Joe Connor back in England. Her running is a thread which unites the narrative.

Many members of the film crew on Shooting Dogs were themselves survivors of the genocide, having seen their families murdered. The film was shot on location in the places where the events depicted occurred.

You may also be interested in "Johnny Mad Dog", which is reviewed in the lens African Women's Creativity. Please note, this film is very disturbing and the lens is R-rated, so you need to be signed in to Squidoo to read it.

Being part-Hutu, Paul Rusesabagina is safe from being attacked, although he risks guilt by association for harbouring European and Tutsi refugees in the hotel. His wife Tatiana is a Tutsi.

He stands apart as an individual, protecting the vulnerable and going against group conditioning. Although the two groups, Hutus and Tutsis, are in conflict, Rusesabagina shows extraordinary courage and compassion, protecting the vulnerable.

The Rwandan genocide is an example of extreme group mentality. Going along with the group can lead to violence and bloodshed, as has been demonstrated throughout human history.

Another story of individuality, which is not depicted in either film, concerns a teenage girl whose parents were killed in the genocide. She goes to the mayor of her town, whom she has known all her life as a friend of her family, and he rapes her.

Desperate and frightened, she then goes to the home of someone she does not know. She is not sure what will happen to her, but she asks them to take her in, and they do. The householder is a Hutu who lets it be known that she is staying with him, and no one must touch her as she is under his protection. Thus, she survives the genocide.

After the Nazis and the Holocaust, many people vowed such a thing would never happen again. It is chilling to witness the fact that such events continue to take place in different parts of the world.

To read more stories of courage, see Endgame - The Beginning of the End of Apartheid

I talk more about individuality and group mentality in my books What They Don't Want Us to Know and The Key to Everything .

Made 10 years after the Rwandan genocide, this film documents many of the events leading up to this shocking moment in history, with a particular focus on the role of the UN and world leaders.

This documentary was funded by PBS and the BBC, but has never been shown on the BBC.

Eyewitnesses from the UN, the Red Cross and other organizations speak about how they tried and failed to avert this humanitarian diasster.

UN General Dallial was the last remaining senior UN Army officer to remain in Rwanda.

He was about to seize an arms cache when he was ordered to desist from taking action. The UN mission was clased as Level VI, which meant that they were there as observers and were not allowed to intervene. He, however, considered it to be Level VII, which would have required action, including military intervention as necessary.

In the days leading up to the genocide, every day, a few more Tutsis were killed. On the radio, the Hutu extremists were threatening to kill Tutsis.

Imagine if every day, you turned on the radio and heard warnings that people were planning to kill you. But amidst the rising tension, the UN did nothing.

The frustration and terror of those trying to get the UN to take action is still palpable ten years later.

The Rwandan President's plane was shot down at the airport. To this day, no one is sure who was responsible.

Meanwhile, six UN troops had disappeared. Their bodies were later found piled up in a site held by the Hutu extremists.

An informer advised General Dallial that the Hutu etremists had killed them in order to pressure the UN to withdraw from Rwanda, and that they believed the UN would take no action and would leave them free to commit genocide. Both of these pieces of intelligence were later borne out.

Then the UN received the order to pull out, following the lead of the Belgian forces.

The testimony of those interviewed in this film demonstrates that the genocide could have been prevented; having started, it could have been ended much sooner with decisive action from the U.S. and other UN members.

President Clinton was filmed stating that the U.S. would not intervene unless it was in the U.S. interests to do so.

Having behaved shamefully by failing to protect the Tutsis from being slaughtered, U.S. officials and other members of the UN increased their shame by refusing to use the word "genocide". An admission that genocide was being committed would have required them to take action. Therefore, they did this two-step around the word, dancing faster and faster rather than taking effective action.

Amidst the stories of shame were stories of great individual personal courage. See "Acts of Personal Courage", below.

Even amidst the horror of the Rwandan genocide, there were some individuals whose actions stood out. These people demonstrated individual, personal courage, and the willingness to communcate saved lives.

Captain Mbaye Diagne, a Senegalese officer in the UN Army, ignored the orders to remain neutral. He personally rescued many people, taking them to safe havens and then getting them out of the country. He would go to places where the Hutu extremists were based and negotiate with them. In the end, he was shot while trafvelling in his car.

General Dallial had planned to set up more safe havens. He planned to take over football stadiums, which would have been easy to defend against would-be murderers. But his orders prevented him from doing so.

However, General Dallial also defied his orders, refusing to leave the country when ordered to withdraw. I know from another documentary that he and his troops remained in place and were given supplies by the BBC in return for daily information reports.

Ghosts of Rwanda was shown recently by London Black History Walks.

A country still trying to emerge from the shadow of the genocide, Rwanda is using film to transform society.

The Rwandan Film Festival showcases films made by local filmmakers in local languages.

Africa United is a feature film, shot in Rwanda for international distribution, about a group of children travelling to the World Cup in South Africa.

Films often depict children on a quest, being threatened by monsters, dragons, evil wizards, tornadoes and other natural and unnatural dangers.

Africa United depicts children under threat from rebels who want to force them to become child soldiers, adults who want to exploit them sexually, and immigration services, as well as HIV and AIDS. They travel through countries blighted by war, violence, genocide, conflict and disease. Yet it is a very heartwarming movie with a positive message about the future of Africa's young people.