By Gideon Rukundo Rugari
Strategic Studies is the science of predicting the action of statesman & the motive behind that act. Rwanda is as confused about the matter as everyone else. Just read Mugambage’s statement and Nduhungirehe’s social media post & you will understand they were surprised by the move & made sure to react in the most negative of forms.
Look at Réne Rutagungira’s face in that hospital image. It’s clear he didn’t expect to be in Kigali at that moment and was quick to comment thus on camera: “I TOLD THEM NOTHING”. This response was unsolicited.
Only the person who made a surprise move knows his motive.
It doesn’t prevent us from theorizing, speculating or simply not make any examination and imagine that it had simply had to be:
I will state that national interest is driving force behind a nation’s foreign policy. This interest is expressed only in terms of “power”, a very wide concept.
These interests are state centric in nature. It’s not possible to individualize them. This is true, whether the states in question are democratic or not. The weakness might lie in the identification of the most utilitarian interests (content) but never in their form. States by nature put the statesman or head of state in a situation where they are enslaved by the structural form of the state rather than individual interests.
This is why human centric interests don’t influence a statesman: Example, Ugandans who were killed at the border with Rwanda can’t influence what President Museveni M7 will do or not do during negotiations. This is the reason the ICC was put into place recently to deal with such crimes because states are not built to handle them at all. It’s therefore important to know which Rwandan commanders were deployed in the sectors where Ugandans were killed. The ICC would gladly take up such cases. This is also true with individuals who are known to have participated in kidnapping and killing Rwandan refugees in Uganda.
I have defined Uganda’s foreign policy before.
However, in a dispute between two or more countries and where negotiation is given a chance, then we use tools of international diplomacy to try to read President Museveni’s mind:
The first rule of thumb in international diplomacy to never negotiate from a point of weakness. One would rather run and hide than negotiate.
The second rule is: Keep your cards closely and firmly held onto your chest.
The third rule is that, you can’t cheat the game. In other words, never aspire for absolute gains. It’s only possible in diplomatic rancoring.
If we study these rules, it should be clear who has violated them and who has acted as a seasoned statesman.
Let’s ask another question: Which leader, between President Museveni and President Kagame, would one wish to hear more about regarding the diplomatic process? Clearly the one you have in mind is playing smart.
