Scheidt Undergraduate Research Fellow Francesco Micaletti-Hinojal presents on Rwandan perspectives on international actors during the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi

On April 7, 2026, Francesco Micaletti-Hinojal, an undergraduate student majoring in Philosophy, Politics, and Law and the 2025 Charles E. Scheidt Undergraduate Research Fellow at the USC Dornsife Center for Advanced Genocide Research, delivered a lecture that explored how Rwandans remember the role of international actors during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. He also examined how foreign governments, organizations, and media outlets responded to the violence at the time. Micaletti-Hinojal was motivated in his research by a personal connection: his father served with the United Nations in Rwanda in 1995 as part of a legal team investigating the genocide. While studying the subject, he noticed that most scholarship focused on the actions of foreign governments and institutions rather than the experiences and perspectives of ordinary Rwandans who lived through the violence.

To address this gap, Micaletti-Hinojal turned to the Visual History Archive (VHA), which contains approximately 164 testimonies related to the Rwandan genocide. Most of these interviews were conducted in Kinyarwanda and later subtitled, with some interviews also recorded in English. Using the archive’s map feature, he identified important locations and testimonies that discussed international actors, and supplemented this research with fieldwork in Rwanda, funded through the Charles E. Scheidt Undergraduate Fellowship.

Micaletti-Hinojal began the lecture by emphasizing that the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi must be understood within the broader context of Rwanda’s colonial history. Although the genocide was triggered by the assassination of President Juvénal Habyarimana in April 1994, Micaletti-Hinojal emphasized that the conditions that enabled such violence were rooted in earlier colonial policies. Under German and later Belgian rule, ethnic distinctions between Hutus and Tutsis were institutionalized through measures such as identity cards, segregated education systems, and differential access to social and political opportunities. These policies deepened social divisions and laid the groundwork for the tensions that would ultimately culminate in the 1994 genocide where Hutu extremists killed 800,000 Tutsis.

During his fieldwork in Kigali, Micaletti-Hinojal visited key sites connected to the genocide, including the Kigali Genocide Memorial, which preserves victims’ names, artwork-dedications, personal belongings, and human remains. He also visited the former headquarters of the radio station that broadcast anti-Tutsi propaganda during the genocide. One experience that particularly surprised him was visiting the Hôtel des Mille Collines, made famous by the film Hotel Rwanda. At the hotel, which has been renovated since, he found little public acknowledgment of its connection to the genocide as a key site of violence. His interactions with Rwandans proved equally significant. Through local academic contacts, he met survivors, educators, and community members who shared their perspectives on Rwanda’s past and present. While he encountered bureaucratic obstacles when conducting research under the Kagame government, he found the people he met to be welcoming and open.

A central finding of Micaletti-Hinojal’s research was that many Rwandans view international actors as having failed them during the genocide. Testimonies and interviews, he noted, frequently expressed disappointment with foreign governments, particularly the United States, whose officials were reluctant to characterize the violence as genocide in its immediate aftermath. Participants also criticized the role of France, with some interviewees alleging that French actors on the ground facilitated the violence and profited from it by supplying weapons to perpetrators. International media organizations likewise came under scrutiny for their limited coverage of the crisis during the genocide itself. Although some non-governmental organizations were remembered positively for providing humanitarian assistance, many survivors felt that the overall international response at the time was inadequate. Micaletti-Hinojal argued that this sense of abandonment has left a lasting legacy, contributing to a persistent skepticism toward foreign involvement among many Rwandans today.

At the same time, Micaletti-Hinojal observed remarkable changes within Rwanda since 1994. The country has experienced significant economic growth, technological development, and urban modernization. According to many of the people he interviewed, ethnic distinctions between Hutu and Tutsi are far less prominent in everyday life than they once were. Rather than emphasizing ethnic identities, many Rwandans focus on national unity and shared goals.

Another major theme of the lecture was post-genocide justice. Micalett-Hinojal discussed the Gacaca courts, a community-based justice system established to process the enormous number of genocide-related cases. These courts tried nearly a million individuals over several years and relied heavily on local participation, testimony, and reconciliation efforts. Micaletti-Hinojal argued that scholars and policymakers outside Rwanda have much to learn from this innovative model of transitional justice. He is presently working on a project that further explores the model of Gacaca courts and transitional justice in Rwanda.

During the discussion that followed, questions focused on research methodology, the changing significance of Hutu and Tutsi identities, representations of the genocide in popular media, and the effectiveness of Gacaca courts. The speaker noted that discussions of international actors appeared only briefly in most VHA testimonies, making his fieldwork especially valuable for uncovering local perspectives. He also reflected on the resilience of contemporary Rwandans, observing that while memories of the genocide remain painful, many people he met appeared more focused on rebuilding and reconciliation than on expressing anger toward perpetrators and foreign actors. Significantly, Micaletti-Hinojal’s lecture prompted a meaningful exchange with a Tutsi survivor in the audience, who emphasized the importance of precise language and expressed a preference for “the 1994 Genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda” over the broader term “Rwandan Genocide.”

The lecture highlighted the importance of centering Rwandan voices in discussions of the genocide and its aftermath. By combining survivor testimonies with field research, Micaletti-Hinojal’s project sheds light on how ordinary Rwandans remember international involvement, assess failures of intervention, and navigate the ongoing process of justice, reconciliation, and national recovery.