See the latest opinion pieces on our page
In response, President Kagame objected, rightly, to these countries’ unfairness in their approach toward Rwanda in comparison to other countries in the region and around the world that do not abide by any international or Western standard of democracy or basic morality. I can well understand the exasperation of Mr. Kagame, under whose tenure Rwanda has become one of the most developed countries in Africa, and is undergoing a swell of development and economic growth.Despite the difficulties of the past, Rwanda is striding forward. This is true also in the realm of human rights, exemplified by the constitutional stipulations prioritizing gender equality and prohibiting discrimination of any kind, as well as banning ethnically-based political parties. As a result, the percentage of women in the parliament (64%) is the highest in the world. The comparable figures in Turkey are 14% and in Iran 3%, while the human rights situation in both of these countries is in continuous decline. Regime opponents are imprisoned, free speech – among the core values of democratic society – is brazenly trampled, while minorities and groups such as the LGBT community are persecuted on a daily basis.In a meeting which I held with the former president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, I heard only praise concerning the way in which Rwanda is proceeding as one of the most promising countries in Africa. The World Bank’s web page contains the following excerpt concerning Rwanda’s economy: “Rwanda has achieved impressive development progress since the 1994 genocide and civil war. It is now consolidating gains in social development and accelerating growth while ensuring that they are broadly shared to mitigate risks to eroding the country’s hard-won political and social stability.”The World Bank’s figures also indicate a significant decline in poverty and since 2005 a drop in socioeconomic disparities.Between 2001 and 2014, Rwanda’s GDP grew 9% a year on average, and it overcame its deficit, leading to a substantial improvement in the quality of life of the population.So I ask myself: are there countries in Europe that want to halt this economic growth and these tangible achievements? Is a third term for a popular president who has worked hard to heal national wounds and advance his country forward such a terrible thing? Many European countries don’t have term limits, such as Germany, where the chancellor is serving her third term.Legislative and constitutional changes are not impossible to implement. The United States is a case in point. Prior to the enactment of the 22nd Amendment in 1951, which limited US presidents to two terms, president Roosevelt served four terms in office.In stark contrast to the criticism of Rwanda, which maintains a democratic presidential system that has ushered in a period of prosperity, I haven’t heard even the slightest hint of censure from those who profess to uphold democratic principles, with regard to Mahmoud Abbas’ ongoing deferral of elections to the Palestinian presidency and parliament, which were last held in 2006.Nor have they been particularly vocal when countries such as Syria, Iran, Libya, Iraq and many countries in Africa infringe on human rights and persecute women and children. Needless to say, no one seems to be complaining about the lack of democracy in Qatar or other non-democratic countries in the Middle East.I believe the statements against Rwanda are misplaced and could well lead to disaster, by impinging on the continued recovery and development of the country. I call on democratic countries to support the current government and to become engaged only insofar as such engagement might assist and strengthen the country’s process of development, rather than hamper it.The author is a member of Knesset and former foreign minister of Israel.