As UN Rewrites Rwanda Genocide Exhibit, Role of France, the Church and Hutu Are In Play, Top Official Says

April 19, 2007
Inner City Press
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

In his nine-minute response, Mr. Akasaka several times referred to the "mass killing of Armenians." He emphasized that the postponement of the exhibition pained him, personally, since he visited Rwanda shortly after what he called "the massacre."

UNITED NATIONS, April 19 -- The exhibition to commemorate the 1994 Rwanda genocide, which the UN postponed on April 9, was deemed too controversial in its treatment of parties in Rwanda at the time, from France through the church to the UN system itself, according to Undersecretary for Public Information Kiyotaka Akasaka.

While reporting on April 9 and in subsequent editorials has focused on the postponed exhibition's reference to "one million Armenians murdered in Turkey" around 1915, UN associates spokesman Farhan Haq on April 9 said there were other concerns which he refused to disclose.

At the UN on Thursday, Inner City Press asked Mr. Akasaka to explain the postponement of the exhibition, and whether any UN member state -- whether Turkey, Armenia, Rwanda or France -- will be shown the amended text before the exhibition opens.

"I was involved from the beginning," said Mr. Akasaka, who assumed office on April 2, one week before the postponement. He described a process by which an exhibition committee, including the UN Department of Political Affairs, reviewed and approved text for the commemoration. "The text that appeared did not correspond to the one the exhibit committee looked at," Mr. Akasaka said, twice calling this "miscommunication."

"At the last moment, we needed more careful wording of the text," said Mr. Akasaka. "Not because of some demarche by the Turkish Ambassador to me, but because of inaccurate wording and other issues related to the Rwandan genocide.... You cannot blame one party against... I don't want to go into details."

Inner City Press asked for details, whether for example one issue was the role of France. Rwandan president Paul Kagame has recently sued France in the UN-affiliated International Court of Justice, alleging that a French judge has violated Rwanda's sovereignty by issuing warrants for nine Rwandan officials.

Mr. Akasaka to his credit answered this question, and later confirmed that his answer was on the record. He the contested issues included the "role of France, whether you can blame one hundred percent on the Hutu, the role of the Church and other issues we have to look into closely."

It remains unclear if France or the Rwandan government complained to the UN. A comment from the Rwandan mission requested; the mission's counselor Nicholas Shalita has indicated a willingness to discuss the issue, but not before deadline. (The Aegis Trust did not respond Thursday afternoon to a request for comment.) Inner City Press' previous, April 9 request to the Rwandan mission garnered the following quote from Rwandan Ambassador Nsengimana's letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:

"I write to you to express the Rwanda Government's profound regret that the exhibit entitled 'Lessons from the Rwanda Genocide,' organized on the occasion of the 13th commemoration of the Rwanda Genocide, has been postponed. It will be recalled that in its resolution 60/225, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General 'to establish a program of outreach entitled "The Rwanda Genocide and the United Nations" as well as measures to mobilize civil society for Rwanda genocide victim remembrance and education, in order to help to prevent future acts of genocide.' The exhibit would contribute significantly to the implementation of the resolution, and would send a strong message about the commitment of the United Nations to preventing genocide. The postponement of the event for reasons unrelated to resolution 60/225 is therefore deeply regrettable."

Inner City Press asked Japan's Deputy Permanent Representative Takahiro Shinyo on Thursday afternoon if Mr. Akasaka has been treated fairly, in being held responsible for the postponement. "Mr. Akasaka came after everything was planned," Mr. Shinyo said. "He is not in a timely situation. But he has to be responsible, he should be accountable" to the press.

Mr. Akasaka has been a spokesman to, and traveled with, the press corps which covers Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. On February 9, when Mr. Akasaka was announced as Ban Ki-moon's choice as Under Secretary General for Public Information, Japan's Minister for Foreign Affairs Taro Aso issued a three-point statement that

1. The Government of Japan welcomes the fact that on February 9 (Fri) (US Eastern time), UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed Mr. Kiyotaka Akasaka as UN Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information (Chief of the Department of Public Information).

2. In order for the UN to be reformed into an organization that responds to the modern international community, it is necessary to strengthen constructive coordination with the civilian society, and the task of the DPI is therefore becoming increasingly important. The Government of Japan hopes that Mr. Akasaka will make use of his experience and endeavor toward expanding activities of the DPI.

3. We would also like to pay tribute to the proactive contribution made in the field of disarmament by Mr. Nobuaki Tanaka, Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, whose resignation was announced simultaneously.

The simultaneity of the two Japan-related announcements was widely viewed as confirming that at the UN, the top spots are divided up among the most powerful countries, with Japan as the UN's second largest funder (but without a permanent seat on the UN Security Council) being assured of a post at the Under Secretary General level. While the outgoing USG for Public Information is Indian national Shashi Tharoor, historically at the UN, this post has more often than not gone to a Japanese citizen.

On Friday, April 13, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe (who for what it's worth is also Japanese) about the postponement of the exhibit and the process the UN would follow.

Inner City Press: About this Rwandan exhibit that got canceled... I’ve seen a story that it’s going very soon to be reopened. Can you provide an update as to when it is going to reopen? And also, there is some talk that... Will the language of the new exhibit be shown to the Turkish Mission prior to being put up? The Turkish Mission says that they are not the only country that complained, and I understand that they have complained, I guess, to the Office of the Spokesperson. Could you explain better, why it got cancelled and what steps will be taken before it's redone?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: First of all, it was not cancelled -- it was postponed. And at the time that we mentioned that had happened, we said that it was because the review process had not been properly followed. That review is ongoing, which I mentioned to you, and I was hoping that I would be able to announce to you today, when the exhibit would open. I don't have that date today, but I am hoping I will have something in the next couple of days, and our aim is to have the exhibit opened by the end of next week. So while the review process in ongoing, I don't think I can comment further right now.

Inner City Press: In terms of what triggered the postponement, did Turkey or other countries -- and if so, which -- complain?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: I work in the Spokesman’s Office and I was not in receipt of any complaints.

Inner City Press: Will DPI show the new exhibit to Turkey or any other…

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: The review process is under way, Matthew. I don't know right now.

Inner City Press: You will tell us afterwards, then?

Deputy Spokesperson: I will have to ask them.

Whether UN member states have implicit veto power over exhibitions in the UN's public spaces also arose earlier this month in connection with an exhibition in the UN's lower level sponsored by the mission of Georgia, concerning bloodshed in the Abkhazia region in the early 1990s. This exhibition used the words genocide and ethnic cleansing, attributing the latter to the current de facto government of Abkhazia, for whose officials Russia has recently advocated. On April 10, the day after the postponement of the Rwandan exhibition, Inner City Press asked Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin if he had seen Georgia's Abkhazia presentation."Yes," Amb. Churkin replied. "It's one-sided. It's unhelpful... One side is engaged in a massive campaign. But they chose to do it."

"But you don't think that countries should block each other's exhibition," Inner City Press asked.

"I don't want to generalize," Amb. Churkin said. He again called the Georgian exhibit "unhelpful" and "bad propaganda," but said Russia had "decided it was not the situation we should shake the tree."

But how and when can the UN tree be shaken? Inner City Press has been told that while displays in the General Assembly lobby are subject to review by, at least, the Exhibition Committee to which Mr. Akasaka referred, this committee does not review displays in the basement area by the Vienna Cafe, where Georgia's Abkhazia photographs and texts were shown. For that reason, journalists were told that at Georgia's opening of its display, no one from the UN Department of Public Information would be present.

To his credit, still-new DPI chief Akasaka on Thursday answered detailed questions from Inner City Press about the postponement of the Rwanda exhibition. In his nine-minute response, Mr. Akasaka several times referred to the "mass killing of Armenians." He emphasized that the postponement of the exhibition pained him, personally, since he visited Rwanda shortly after what he called "the massacre." At that time, he worked for the UN-affiliated World Health Organization. "We knew something was going on," Mr. Akasaka said. Later in 1994, he stayed at the Milles Collines Hotel. "It still smelled of blood, I feel strongly about this," Mr. Akasaka said, adding that he now expects the genocide exhibition to open not Friday, but "early next week," along with its re-written text.

[...]

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.