Please note that the posts on The Blogs are contributed by third parties. The opinions, facts and any media content in them are presented solely by the authors, and neither The Times of Israel nor its partners assume any responsibility for them. Please contact us in case of abuse. In case of abuse,
The Rwandan genocide. Rwanda’s genocide. The genocide in Rwanda. The Rwandan tragedy. Literally, the word “Rwandan,” used as a noun or as a modifier, denotes anything or anyone belonging to or of Rwanda, thus its ambiguity — an ambiguity that is a feature of every language. To understand the meaning of an ambiguous word or group of words, its context must be considered. For example, someone who knows little or nothing about the 1994 killings of Tutsis in Rwanda may infer from the phrase “the Rwandan genocide,” used without the truth of its historical context, that all Rwandans were victims of a genocide, which would also imply for the person that perpetrators were non-Rwandans. It is the ambiguity of the phrases “Rwandan genocide,” “Rwanda’s genocide,” “the genocide in Rwanda,” and “the Rwandan tragedy” that deniers of the genocide against the Tutsi have exploited to obscure the truth of what happened in Rwanda during the infamous 100 days in 1994, from June 7 to July 4, when members of the Tutsi group were being targeted for extermination.