Many government and donor policies in post-genocide Rwanda have been justified in the name of reconciliation yet the term is rarely defined. This book analyses different discourses in order to unpack the nebulous concept. Among distinct constituencies -the Rwandan government, elites, international donors, rural communities- there is some consensus on what reconciliation requires. Most saw the necessity of establishing degrees of responsibility and punishment for the genocide for example. Yet a government early prisoner release programme ostensibly established to implement this policy, was controversial. The term coexistence, not associated with government rhetoric, better matched interviewees' modest expectations for social relations after the genocide. Based on in-depth interviews, explanatory factors for patterns of coexistence are posited, including that individual life stories since 1994 mattered more in explaining behaviours and attitudes than experiences during the genocide. Moreover the imposition of "mandatory" reconciliation behaviours by Kigali was counterproductive. The book thus helps debunk important misconceptions about reconciliation and Rwandan politics and society.