*spoilers in here* "Shake Hands With The Devil" reviews the experiences of Canadian Gen. Romeo Dallaire, who was head of the UN troops in Rwanda in 1994, while filming his return to Rwanda for the 10th anniversary of the genocide in 2004. Dallaire's small UN peacekeeping force was sent in to help protect the fragile truce in Rwanda's civil war, and as such was unable to interfere in any way. In April of 1994, all hell broke loose as extremists assassinated Rwanda's president and staged a coup, pretending a "third force" was at fault. High-level military commanders joined forces with the "Hutu power" extremists and quickly killed all the moderate leaders in the first few hours after the assassination, so there was no one left to oppose them as they set in motion a carefully planned genocide. Foreign nationals fled the country and the UN pulled out everyone except a minimal force. Only 270 soldiers were allowed to remain, paralyzed by the restraints of their mission's parameters. They could shelter as many Tutsis as possible in a handful of UN-protected sites, but apart from that, they were made to be bystanders.<br /><br />The UN's ambivalence hamstrung every operational aspect of the mission. Dallaire had to beg for even the most basic supplies -- I'm talking about paper and pencils here, not guns or jeeps. He spent most of his time during the genocide jumping through the most insane administrative hoops, filing reports, writing assessments, trying everything to convince his bosses at the UN. It was plain that the higher-up hoped if they stalled long enough, it would all just go away.<br /><br />Finally after 3 months of unrestrained killing, the rebel troops were able to move in and halt the genocide. By then 800,000 people were dead.<br /><br />As you can imagine, Dallaire was devastated by this experience. In the years afterwards, he had an emotional breakdown and attempted suicide twice. He was haunted with guilt and remorse, certain the a minimal force of 5,000 could have stopped or even prevented the genocide. He sees this as his own personal failure, as it was his inability to convince his higher-ups to intervene which cost so many lives.<br /><br />But instead of succumbing to despair, with the help of his family and loved ones, he eventually pulled himself together. He laid some of the worst demons to rest by writing a book about his experience. The movie takes its title from the name of his book.<br /><br />Dallaire has returned to Africa to testify in the war crimes trials, but until the 10th anniversary, he had not gone back to Rwanda. As he revisited the scenes of his experiences in 1994, the filmmakers came with him, sometimes jumping back to archive footage of the genocide, so that we could see what Dallaire saw in his mind's eye as he contrasted past to present.<br /><br />There in the midst of those tormented memories, Dallaire's compassion for the survivors he meets overpowers his sadness and remorse. Each individual matters to him. And some places bring a wistful smile to his face. He is reunited with several people he worked with in 1994, and they greet one another with great affection. The film intersperses interviews with of some of those people, who fill in other details in the story.<br /><br />Dallaire reminds me of the heroes of classic mythology, like one of Joseph Campbell's stories, built from deep archetypes. He shook hands with evil incarnate, he was transformed by his horrific experience, he endured, he survived, and has passed back into the land of the living, wearing the scars of his ordeal like a scarlet letter or a mark of Cain. He is a modern day Cassandra, condemned to tell the truth no one wants to hear. Not surprisingly, Dallaire has been pressured to quit pointing fingers and keep his mouth shut. He refuses. Like the ancient mariner, he tells his tale because he must. He bears witness to that Hell on Earth. We need to listen to him, and this movie helps bring us his message.<br /><br />I would also like to respond to the review of May 16, 2005. This viewer was unhappy that the film was critical of the US, but I think he misunderstood. Although Dallaire has plenty of gripes with the US, the movie's main target for criticism is the UN. Yes, the US naturally comes under heavier scrutiny than other member nations because we have so much more to offer and have so much more influence. But the UN is the one who blew it in a big way here. The UN's scope reaches far beyond that of individual member nations. The Rwandan cease fire in early 1994 was exactly the type of situation the UN was meant to help with. In this case, the only thing the UN and the US succeeded in was in looking like racist hypocrites.<br /><br />This reviewer contends that none of us would be willing to sacrifice an American life to save a Rwandan, but I don't agree. I think American soldiers have a sense of honor, and would not want to stand by and watch a child hacked to death in front of the parents. Being a world leader is more than just getting to be first in line at the feed trough. Our great wealth, our powerful military, and our extraordinarily rich resources enable us to lend a hand to others who need help. International law was broken. We (the US AND the UN) promised to uphold that law and we (the US AND the UN) had a duty to stand by our word.