The following is a 1999 book review from the Guardian of the landmark book, "King Leopold's Ghost", by Adam Hochschild, in which Hochschild makes the claim that Leopold's mass murder in the Congo was on par or worse than what Adolph Hitler did to the Jews of Western and Eastern Europe during World War II:
As the sun sank slowly over Brussels, its fading rays glinted off 
the glass domes and towers of the magnificent Victorian greenhouses in 
the grounds of the royal palace at Laeken. Built to celebrate King 
Leopold II's acquisition of the Congo a century ago, the greenhouses 
stretch for more than half a mile and are among the most visible and 
grandiose remaining symbols of a once enormous African empire, 60 times 
the size of Belgium. The colony was the largest private estate ever 
acquired by a single man - and one he never saw. 
It is said that when
 he showed his nephew the greenhouses, the youth gasped that they were 
like a little Versailles. 'Little?' snorted the king.
 Leopold 
always did think big. But the row over the king's notorious stewardship 
of his African territories still has the ability to evoke raw emotions 
in a country trying to come to terms with a brutal colonial past.
 
The
 question is: was the spade-bearded old reprobate a mass-murderer, the 
first genocidalist of modern times, responsible for the death of more 
Africans than the Nazis killed Jews? Was his equatorial empire, the 
setting for Conrad's Heart of Darkness and the terrible Kurtz with the 
human heads dangling round his garden, the scene of a largely forgotten 
holocaust? The old wounds have been re-opened by the publication of a 
book called King Leopold's Ghost, by the American author Adam 
Hochschild, which has brought howls of rage from Belgium's ageing 
colonials and some professional historians even as it has climbed the 
country's best-seller lists.

 
The debate over Belgium's colonial 
legacy could not be more timely. In the realm beyond the palace walls 
where Leopold's great grandson Albert II is now king, the openly racist 
extreme rightwing Vlaams Blok, which blames much of the country's ills 
on coloured immigrants from Africa, is bidding to become one of the 
biggest parties in next month's elections.
 
And the planes which 
soar over the greenhouses as they depart Brussels sometimes carry human 
cargo - black asylum seekers being unceremoniously deported, 
occasionally naked and still bleeding, back to Africa. Last September, 
the Belgian immigration service succeeded in suffocating one of them, a 
Nigerian woman called Semira Adamu, 20, on board the plane that was to 
take her home, by shoving her head under a pillow. The police videoed 
themselves chatting and laughing while they pushed her head down. It 
took them 20 minutes to kill her.
 
The history of Leopold's rule 
over the Congo has long been known. It was first exposed by American and
 British writers and campaigners at the turn of the century - publicity 
which eventually forced the king to hand the country which had been his 
private fiefdom over to Belgium.
 
But Hochschild's book has hit a 
raw nerve for a new generation with its vividly drawn picture of a 
voracious king anxious to maximise his earnings from the proceeds of 
rubber and ivory. It is clear that many of Leopold's officials in
 the depots up the Congo river terrorised the local inhabitants, forcing
 them to work under the threat of having their hands and feet - or those
 of their children - cut off. Women were raped, men were executed and 
villages were burned in pursuit of profit for the king. 
But what 
has stuck in the gut of Belgian historians is Hochschild's claim that 10
 million people may have died in a forgotten holocaust. In outrage, the 
now ageing Belgian officials who worked in the Congo in later years have
 taken to the internet with a 10-page message claiming that maybe only 
half a dozen people had their hands chopped off, and that even that was 
done by native troops. They argue that American and British 
writers have highlighted the Congo to distract attention from the 
contemporary massacre of the North American indians and the Boer War. 

 
Under
 the headline 'a scandalous book', members of the Royal Belgian Union 
for Overseas Territories claim: 'There is nothing that could compare 
with the horrors of Hitler and Stalin, or the deliberate massacres of 
the Indian, Tasmanian and Aboriginal populations. A black legend has 
been created by polemicists and British and American journalists feeding
 off the imaginations of novelists and the re-writers of history.' 
Professor Jean Stengers, a leading historian of the period, says: 
'Terrible things happened, but Hochschild is exaggerating. It is absurd 
to say so many millions died. I don't attach so much significance to his
 book. In two or three years' time, it will be forgotten.' Leopold's 
British biographer, Barbara Emerson, agrees: 'I think it is a very 
shoddy piece of work. Leopold did not start genocide. He was greedy for 
money and chose not to interest himself when things got out of control. 
Part of Belgian society is still very defensive. People with Congo 
connections say we were not so awful as that, we reformed the Congo and 
had a decent administration there.' Stengers acknowledges that the 
population of the Congo shrank dramatically in the 30 years after 
Leopold took over, though exact figures are hard to establish since no 
one knows how many inhabited the vast jungles in the 1880s.
 
It is
 true too that some of those reporting scandals had their own knives to 
grind. Some were Protestant missionaries who were rivals to Belgian 
Catholics in the region. Yet Leopold certainly emerges as an 
unattractive figure, described as a young man by his cousin Queen 
Victoria as an 'unfit, idle and unpromising an heir apparent as ever was
 known' and by Disraeli as having 'such a nose as a young prince has in a
 fairy tale, who has been banned by a malignant fairy.' As king, he did 
not bother to deny charges in a London court that he had sex with child 
prostitutes. When the bishop of Ostend told him that people were saying 
he had a mistress, he is reputed to have replied benignly: 'People tell 
me the same about you, your Grace. But of course I choose not to believe
 them.' His wiliness in convincing the world that he had only 
humanitarian motives in annexing the Congo, in persuading the Belgian 
government essentially to pay for his purchase and in buying up 
journalists, including the great explorer Henry Morton Stanley, to 
promote his cause show both cunning and skill. 
Emerson claims 
Leopold was appalled to hear about the atrocities in his domain, but dug
 his heels in when he was attacked in the foreign press. He did indeed 
apparently write to his secretary of state: 'These horrors must end or I
 will retire from the Congo. I will not be splattered with blood and 
mud: it is essential that any abuses cease.' But the man who (as Queen 
Victoria said) had the habit of saying 'disagreeable things to people' 
was also reputed to have snorted: 'Cut off hands - that's idiotic. I'd 
cut off all the rest of them, but not hands. That's the one thing I need
 in the Congo.' Although few now defend him, strange things happen even 
today when the Congo record is challenged. Currently circulating on the 
internet is an anguished claim by a student in Brussels called Joseph 
Mbeka alleging he his thesis marked a failure when he cited Hochschild's
 book: 'My director turned his back on me.' Daniel Vangroenweghe, a 
Belgian anthropologist who also published a critical book about the 
period 15 years ago, says: 'Senior people tried to get me sacked at the 
time. Questions were asked in parliament and my work was subjected to an
 official inspection.' At a large chateau outside Brussels in Tervuren 
is the Musee Royal de l'Afrique, which Leopold was eventually shamed 
into setting up to prove his philanthropic credentials. It contains the 
largest African ethnographic collection in the world, rooms full of 
stuffed animals and artefacts including shields, spears, deities, drums 
and masks, a 60ft-long war canoe, even Stanley's leather suitcase.

 
There
 is one small watercolour of a native being flogged, but a visitor would
 be hard-pressed to spot any other reference to the dark side of 
Leopold's regime. Dust hangs over the place. A curator has said changes 
are under consideration 'but absolutely not because of the recent 
disreputable book by an American'.
 
The real legacy of Leopold and
 of the Belgians who ran the country until they were bloodily booted out
 in 1960 has been the chaos in the region ever since and a rapacity 
among rulers such as Mobutu Sese Seko which outstripped even the king's.
 Leopold made £3m in 10 years between 1896 and 1906, Mobutu filched at 
least £3bn. When the Belgians left there were only three Africans in 
managerial positions in the Congo's administration and fewer than 30 
graduates in the entire country.
 Vangroenweghe says: 'Talk of 
whether Leopold killed 10 million people or five million is beside the 
point, it was still too many.' I asked Belgium's prime minister, 
Jean-Luc Dehaene, about the Congo legacy this week. 'The colonial past 
is completely past,' he said. 'There is really no strong emotional link 
any more. It does not move the people. It's part of the past. It's 
history.'