Why Democracy may not work for Developing Countries: A Study of Rwanda
In 1990, the Rwandan civil war erupted between the country’s two dominant ethnic groups, the Hutus and the Tutsis. After four years of fighting, the war turned into a genocide, in which almost a million Tutsis were killed. This disaster left the small African nation in chaos, with an impoverished and divided population, and more than 400,000 Tutsi orphans.
In the 25 years since the genocide, Rwanda has been one of the world’s most surprising success cases of economic development, with the country having the world’s highest economic growth rate according to the World Bank. Not only has the country experienced rapid economic growth, but it has faced many social and political changes as well: in 2017 Rwanda ranked fourth in the world for gender equality, above highly developed countries such as Canada and Sweden, being a strong outlier for women’s rights in Africa.
These seemingly miraculous developments have occurred under the rule of president Paul Kagame, who has received criticism from Western voices in the international community for alleged human rights abuses and a lack of democracy in the country. Kagame has also received international praise, however, as the percentage of the Rwandan population living below the poverty line dropped from 58 to 38 percent over the past twenty years. Many leaders of the twentieth century’s rapidly developing countries, such as a China and Saudi Arabia, believe that democratization would actually be detrimental to their country’s well-being and stability.
This raises questions about whether being a dictatorship has helped Rwanda develop rapidly, and whether the government’s strategy really is sustainable in the long run.
President Kagame took control over Rwanda after he ended the civil war and genocide as the general of the Rwandan Patriotic Front in 1994. Since seizing power, Kagame has created a strong authoritarian government, focusing strongly on economic growth and development in the country. In 2000, the Vision2020 project was launched after internal peace had been restored and Kagame had taken control over all government institutions. The Vision2020 programme targets ambitious economic development goals by the year 2020, focusing on reducing poverty and division in Rwanda. To this end, state-owned firms have been used to drive economic growth in the country, benefiting the population through increasing national income, and helping Kagame gain further control over the economy at the same time.
Critics have said that Kagame’s policies are aimed at increasing his political power in the country. Whilst this may be true, the positive effects of the development process have massively improved the lives of the majority of Rwanda’s population as well. Also, Transparency international measured that Rwanda is the least corrupt country in Africa after Botswana. This newly found political stability has attracted a lot of investment to Rwanda, as the country has developed a track record for being one of the safest places in Africa to invest money. An example of foreign investment in Rwanda is a company called Zipline, which uses drones to deliver blood to hospitals around Rwanda from their base in the capital Kigali. This new system means that blood donations are processed more efficiently in Rwanda than they are for instance in the UK, and it is only one of many examples how increased investment in the country has increased welfare standards.
Kagame has also been a female rights champion in East Africa, promoting women’s participation in the labour force and government. In fact, Rwanda is the country with the highest female parliamentary representation in the world. As Rwanda is not a democracy, members of parliament do not directly hold political power, but they act more like the advisors of the president. So, although the female members of parliament do not directly create laws, they still influence the government’s policies, which have consistently been some of the most empowering of women in all of Africa.
On the surface these results seem almost like a fairy-tale, but human rights organizations say that under the surface, Kagame’s regime is persecuting journalists and political opponents to maintain political control over the country.
After the Rwandan civil war ended in 1994, president Kagame was able to consolidate power quickly and stabilize the country, but this has come at the expense of freedom of speech in the country. This creates a large dilemma, since civil liberties are suppressed in favour of economic growth, but at the same time, Rwanda’s political unity has been crucial in the country’s economic and social development.
In the Western world, democracy is often seen as the ultimate goal of modern governments, but many of these nations only democratized after they had achieved internal stability and relatively high levels of economic development. Many African countries, including Rwanda, are still far away from achieving these conditions, so there is the fear that if political opposition is allowed to run free, this will destabilize the country and cause it to descend back into chaos. Also, for the large proportion of Rwanda’s population that still lives in extreme poverty, freedom of speech and democratic elections are hardly the top priorities in their daily lives.
Nonetheless, this criticism is still valid for the long run, as we can only speculate what actions Rwanda’s government will take when the country does eventually attain higher welfare standards. This situation can be likened to that of China, which used state control of the economy and society to promote strong economic growth and increased welfare standards. Forty years ago, almost 90% of the Chinese population lived in poverty. In 2015, this figure was less than one percent.
The uniformity in economic and social policy across the country, coupled with repression of opposition, has been said to have contributed strongly to China’s development; a sentiment that is mirrored in Rwanda.
With political instability being one of the biggest inhibitors of economic development across Africa, the Rwandan government’s political approach seems to be one that attempts to be genuinely beneficial to the majority of the population. The relatively low corruption and lack of international scandals about large sums of money being embezzled by the government seem to be supporting this idea as well. This does not mean that the critics’ quest for democracy in Rwanda are unfounded, but for the time being, the country might actually be best off with its current form of government.
Once the country reaches a more long-term stable level of development, the questions about democracy will have to be raised again, but this is a question for another time. For the time being, the country’s trajectory surely seems to be a lot brighter than that of its regional neighbours facing widespread corruption, violence, and political instability.
Note: All sources used for this article can be found separately in the article entitled “compiled bibliographies for all my published articles” on my profile.
