On Friday, Kagame was reelected in a landslide. The turnout and vote share for Kagame were equally incredible. The Rwanda Electoral Commission reported that well over 90 percent of Rwanda’s 6.9 million registered voters turned out to vote and that Kagame won 98.63 percent of the vote. Neither of his challengers managed to win 1 percent.
Having completed two terms in office, Kagame’s ability to run this year was possible only with an amendment to the constitution. In late 2015, more than 6 million Rwandans voted “yes” — 98 percent in favor with 98 percent turnout — in a referendum that allowed the president to run for a third term. The referendum also changed the length of presidential terms from seven years to five years, to be effective in 2024.
How should we understand Kagame’s overwhelming win?
Let’s first address some of common explanations. Are some Rwandans intimidated by the state? Certainly. Does the ruling party have roots down to the lowest level? Definitely. Do opposition candidates have far fewer resources? Undeniably. Are some of those who wish to run for president unable to? Yes.
But to stop the analysis there misses the larger story. This story begins not with the 1994 genocide, but with decades of conflict, armed or otherwise, among a people whose only real difference is an ethnic identity that was a product of colonial rule. These decades of conflict, culminating in a bloodbath that killed nearly a million people, left a piece of territory called Rwanda that would be unrecognizable to a visitor to the country today.
The fabric of society, ripping for decades until it finally shredded completely, must be hewed together anew. Killers and victims must live together. The government must find a way to exercise a monopoly of violence over its territory. The economy must return to its feet. Somehow, Rwandans, under the leadership of Kagame, managed to do that.
Some argue that the government cooks the books, especially for figures on economic development. However, a novel approach to the measurement of income, using data from mobile phones, shows that government population surveys show a high correlation with a measure of income that could not have been tampered with.
Is everyone happy? No. Life remains very hard for many Rwandans. Rwanda is still one of the poorest countries in the world, with few natural resources and underdeveloped human capital. Rural Rwanda is a far cry from the sparkling new hotels and endless rows of streetlights in Kigali. But whatever the challenges, whatever his faults, many people credit Kagame with ushering Rwanda back from total destruction.
This history is the backdrop on which we must analyze contemporary political support for the regime. For many Rwandans, voting for Kagame may be a reaffirmation — public and private — of a commitment to maintain the political settlement that has brought peace.
A vote in this context is not just a vote; it is also part of a public ritual, creating common knowledge about the legitimacy of the state. The act of voting, especially in rural environments with small communities, is highly social and easily observed. Your friends and neighbors might not see which box you tick, but they will know whether you went to the polling booth or stayed home in your garden. They will know whether you trekked to the campaign rally. For these reasons, some people may fear disapproval for not voting even in the absence of explicit coercion.
And many sincerely adore Kagame. They are at once flabbergasted and exasperated by those who vilify their leader and suggest their voice does not matter. On Election Day, they proudly took selfies sporting ink-stained thumbs, echoing the sentiment that rung through the campaign: Kagame is my choice.
Is it sincere support for Kagame or social pressure that drives such high turnout in Rwanda today? Almost certainly both. Recent research has argued that turning out to vote is a social act, and this behavior cannot be well explained without taking into account an individual’s social ties. Combine the social context of voting in Rwanda with the country’s unique history, and the high turnout and overwhelming support for Kagame begins to look less farcical.
Finally, a post-genocide generation of Rwandans constitutes an ever-larger share of the voting age population, including in this most recent election. The young boy scrambling to get a glimpse of the president may be voting in 2024, unfettered by the weights his parents bore, more certain his future will be free of violence. Whether a generational shift can shake Rwanda free of the chains of history remains to be seen, and is ultimately the business of Rwandans.
Melina Platas is assistant professor of political science at New York University at Abu Dhabi. She researches governance and political accountability in Africa. Follow her on Twitter at @melinaplatas.