Hutu's vs. Tutsi's
What constitutes a civilian vs. a soldier?
I'm researching / reading about the Rawandan conflict in 1995, where around 1 million Tutsi's were killed in 100 days by the Hutu majority. To kill so many so quickly, the entire population of Hutu's rose up against the Tutsi's, to the point that modertate Hutu's who refused to kill or condone the killing of Tutsi's were also killed. It was literally neighbors killing their neighbors.
Then the Tutsi army comes in and, with the help of France and the UN, stop the slaughter. They then try to track down all the Hutu's who killed the Tutsi's, causing them to invade the Congo. The tutsi army ended up killing thousands of unarmed Hutus. (This invasion then sparks what is known as the African world war.)
So at what point does a civilian who turned soldier to murder their neighbors at the government's request turn back into a civilian?
The question is important, because the answer changes the definition of what the Tutsi army did. Did the Tutsi army commit war crimes when they killed the fleeing Hutus, or Genocide? When you have so many who commit atrocities, how do you punish them? Do you punish them at all?
The next time this happens (and there will be a next time) - how do we stop the cycle of hatred and revenge killings? Divide the country? Forced education? Symbolic trials? Leave them to stew and hope they don't form a breeding ground for those who would hurt us?