PAUL KAGAME: WHY AFRICAN ARE WRONG TO SEE HIM AS A MODEL TO FOLLOW

For many years, Rwanda's President Paul Kagame has been viewed as a role model by numerous African leaders, admired for transforming a nation devastated by genocide into one with economic growth, political stability, and social progress. However, recent discussions have shed light on why this perception may be misguided.

Kagame’s rise to power is undeniably impressive. By the age of 39, he had overthrown the governments of Uganda, Rwanda, and Congo (then Zaire), securing victory in several wars. He was seen as a hero for leading an army of exiled Tutsis to stop the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. However, beneath this narrative of success lies a darker reality that many may have overlooked.

While Rwanda is praised for its clean streets, low corruption, and female representation in parliament, these achievements mask deeper issues of authoritarianism and suppression. Kagame has built a police state where freedom of speech is almost non-existent. Opposition voices are silenced, critics are harassed, and political rivals are murdered, often even after fleeing the country. Rwanda’s parliament, celebrated for having the highest percentage of women in the world, is widely considered a rubber stamp for Kagame's decisions. read article ( Economist )

This authoritarian grip on power casts doubt on Rwanda's democratic processes, particularly with Kagame’s reelections marked by staggering majorities, often exceeding 90% of the vote.

Kagame’s style of governance, while effective in curbing instability and rebuilding the economy, has created an atmosphere of fear and control. His party, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), maintains eyes on every village, ensuring absolute obedience. Peasants are fined for minor offenses, and any criticism of the ruling party is quickly labeled as “divisionism” or “incitement to genocide,” a convenient pretext to stifle dissent.

The real danger in Kagame’s prolonged rule is the brittle nature of the system he has created. Authoritarian regimes like his suppress discontent but never eliminate it. Silencing dissent only bottles up dissatisfaction, which could explode in the future. Furthermore, Kagame’s entrenchment in power, with no clear succession plan, creates uncertainty about the country's stability after his eventual departure. He himself admitted in the past that failure to groom a successor would be a personal failure—and yet, as of 2017, he continues to hold onto power, raising questions about Rwanda’s long-term sustainability.

Kagame’s tight control over the economy through the RPF, and the dominance of cronyism within the political system, also stifles private investment. While Rwanda’s economic achievements are often lauded, cracks are beginning to show as growth slows and debts rise. This heavy-handed control is not the mark of a durable or healthy system.

For those who once saw Kagame as a model for other African leaders, it is important to recognize the flaws in such a system. While authoritarianism may provide short-term stability and growth, it often fails to create the kind of pluralistic, durable society necessary for long-term success. Kagame may have once been seen as a necessary solution to Rwanda's problems, but his continued rule has become the problem itself.

In sum, Kagame’s leadership, once hailed as exemplary, reveals the dangers of unchecked power. As Rwanda faces increasing challenges, it is clear that the international community—and particularly those who once saw Kagame as a role model—were wrong to overlook the darker aspects of his governance.