Ten years ago today, the words "never again" were deprived of all meaning. Hours after a plane carrying Rwanda's Hutu president was shot down, a carefully orchestrated plan to eliminate the Tutsi minority swung into action. When the slaughter ceased 100 days later, hundreds of thousands of people were dead. Half a century after the Jewish holocaust, the outside world had done nothing to save them.
Today President Paul Kagame is leading a sombre day of commemoration in the capital, Kigali. It is also a fitting moment for Western reflection. The international reaction to the Rwandan genocide ranks among the greatest scandals of the 20th century. As the tempo of slaughter accelerated in April 1994, the United Nations cut its puny mission from 2,500 to 270 troops. Newly declassified documents show President Bill Clinton knew a genocide was underway but dodged using the term to avoid sending US troops. Eventually a French force was sent but it was accused of siding with the "genocidaires".
The western responsibility was historical as well as humanitarian. Belgian colonists nurtured the pernicious social divisions so ruthlessly manipulated by the architects of 1994. France blindly supported the extremist Hutu government in the early 1990s. The Catholic Church was also a culprit. Although some priests and nuns died defending Tutsis, others helped organise the massacres. Today the Vatican disclaims any institutional responsibility, pleading it cannot be held accountable for individual actions.
The West has assuaged its conscience since 1994 by pouring millions of euro into Rwanda. Yet that guilt-swathed development aid, bereft of critical engagement with President Kagame's increasingly authoritarian government, may be storing up more trouble. Mr Kagame took 95 per cent of votes in a widely-discredited presidential poll last August. His main opponent, moderate Hutu Faustin Twagiramungu, has fled into exile in Belgium. The independent press is intimidated. In neighbouring DR Congo, Rwandan troops and their rebel allies have committed a multitude of abuses.
Elsewhere in Africa - Zimbabwe springs to mind - such abuses would attract stinging condemnation. But in Rwanda western donors look the other way, arguing it is too early for a return to full-blown democracy. They may be right; few Tutsis would feel comfortable with majority rule by the community that tried to wipe them out just 10 years ago. Nevertheless, Mr Kagame's iron-fisted policies are hindering genuine reconciliation. And he shamelessly exploits the genocide for political ends. He must loosen his grip to prick a quietly swelling bubble of Hutu resentment and Tutsi disillusionment. And the West must set aside its remorse and distinguish between genocide survivors and their government.
A constructive yet critical engagement with Mr Kagame is crucial to helping steer Rwanda towards a stable and harmonious future.