But we couldn’t intervene because it might have upset the French? This is repugnant. From the Sydney Morning Herald:
Papers prove US knew of genocide in Rwanda
By Rory Carroll
April 1, 2004
US president Bill Clinton’s administration knew Rwanda was being engulfed by genocide in April 1994 but buried the information to justify its inaction, classified documents made available for the first time reveal.
Senior officials privately used the word genocide within 16 days of the start of the killings, but chose not to do so publicly because the president had already decided not to intervene.
Intelligence reports obtained using the US Freedom of Information Act show the cabinet and almost certainly the president knew of a planned ‘final solution to eliminate all Tutsis’ before the slaughter reached its peak.
It took Hutu death squads three months from April 6 to murder about 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus and at each stage accurate, detailed reports were reaching Washington policymakers.
The documents undermine claims by Mr Clinton and his officials that they did not fully appreciate the scale and speed of the killings.
‘It’s powerful proof that they knew,’ said Alison des Forges, a Human Rights Watch researcher and authority on the genocide.
So why did Clinton feel compelled to intervene in Bosnia/Serbia/Kosovo but not Rwanda?