Gazing in the Congo (DRC): the dark heart of Africa (2006-2017)

[M-A Lagrange]

DR Congo: Rwanda Should Stop Aiding War Crimes Suspect

Field research conducted by Human Rights Watch in the region in May 2012 revealed that Rwandan army officials have provided weapons, ammunition, and an estimated 200 to 300 recruits to support Ntaganda’s mutiny in Rutshuru territory, eastern Congo. The recruits include civilians forcibly recruited in Musanze and Rubavu districts in Rwanda, some of whom were children under 18. Witnesses said that some recruits were summarily executed on the orders of Ntaganda’s forces when they tried to escape.

Providing weapons and ammunition to Ntaganda’s mutiny contravenes the United Nations Security Council arms embargo on Congo, which stipulates that all states shall “take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer, from their territories or by their nationals […] of arms and any related materiel, and the provision of any assistance, advice or training related to military activities […] to all non-governmental entities and individuals operating in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”

“Permitting Ntaganda to move in and out of Rwanda without fear of arrest sends a message that Rwanda is not serious about helping deliver justice to victims of the war crimes he and his troops have committed,” Van Woudenberg said. “Rwanda’s allies should insist that Rwanda help end impunity in the region, not encourage it.”

A number of officers who joined Ntaganda’s mutiny, including Colonel Makenga, Colonel Ngaruye, Col. Innocent Zimurinda and Col. Innocent Kayna, have past records of serious human rights abuses in eastern Congo. Human Rights Watch, UN human rights monitors, and local human rights organizations have documented ethnic massacres, torture, abductions, widespread sexual violence, and forced recruitment of children committed by these individuals while they were rebel group commanders or officers in the Congolese army.

http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/03/d...imes-suspect-0

The message is simple and clear: there are no progress in DRC since 2009 and CNDP redition.

[M-A Lagrange]

The United States is concerned by the continued mutiny of officers and soldiers formerly integrated into the armed forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and now operating in North Kivu province as an armed group under the name M23, and by recent reports of outside support to M23.

We support the Congolese government’s efforts to discourage further defections and to bring to justice alleged human rights abusers among the mutinous forces, including Bosco Ntaganda. These efforts are an essential step toward developing a disciplined and unified Congolese army and bringing a sustainable peace to the DRC.

The United States also reiterates its support for the international community’s comprehensive approach to disarming and demobilizing the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a violent armed group responsible for atrocities against civilians in the DRC’s eastern provinces and whose leaders participated in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. We support ongoing efforts to hold FDLR leaders accountable for their atrocities, and we urge FDLR soldiers and dependents to present themselves to Congolese or UN authorities for disarmament and repatriation.

We encourage the DRC, its neighbors, and its partners to work together to prevent M23, the FDLR, and all other armed groups from receiving outside support in contravention of the UN Security Council’s arms embargo on non-governmental entities and individuals operating in the DRC.

The United States also strongly supports the United Nations peacekeeping mission in the DRC, MONUSCO, in particular its active efforts to assist the Congolese government in protecting civilians displaced or threatened by clashes between government forces and armed groups.

Link: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/06/191902.htm

MONUSCO mandate should be soon discussed in NY...

[M-A Lagrange]

So ICG published an open letter addressed to the UNSC and MONUSCO SRSG.

Open Letter to the United Nations Security Council on the Situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo

History is again repeating itself in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). There is a risk of serious escalation of violence and the United Nations Stabilization Mission in the Congo (MONUSCO) is failing in its core mandate of stabilisation and protection of civilians. This month renewal of MONUSCO presents a vital opportunity for the Security Council to review its strategy in the DRC.

Eastern Congo is again rapidly destabilising with the defection of Bosco Ntaganda from the Congolese army and the formation of the M23 Movement, another Tutsi-led rebellion allegedly supported by Rwanda. The government, weakened by presidential and legislative elections last November that were widely recognised as deeply flawed, is seizing the opportunity to please the international community by at last pursuing the capture of Ntaganda. President Joseph Kabila seems to be gambling that this is an opportunity to break the parallel structures maintained by the Congrs national pour la dfense du peuple (CNDP) within the army, and to remobilise domestic support around anti-Rwanda sentiment by pursuing a military defeat of the M23. In addition to the fragmentation of the army and new fighting between the Forces armes de la Rpublique dmocratique du Congo (FARDC) and ex-CNDP elements, various Mai-Mai groups have expanded their reach and the Forces Democratiques de Liberation du Rwanda (FDLR) remains a persistent, if diminished threat, as the FARDC fails to control territory.

The stabilisation strategy underpinned by MONUSCO was centred too heavily on an expectation that the 2008-2009 rapprochement between DRC and Rwanda was enough to contain the conflict in the Kivus. The bilateral agreement was based on President Kabila's willingness to integrate Rwanda proxy CNDP forces into the army, but the strategy was short-sighted as it made no provisions for addressing the underlying causes of conflict beyond Rwanda security objectives. The current mutiny underway in the Kivus is perhaps the clearest evidence to date of how little progress has been made in stabilisation. The 2008 and 2012 crises appear remarkably similar, including their ethnic dimension, reported support from Rwanda and the negative impact on civilians, including displacement and potential for increasing ethnic tensions at the community level. These crises are symptoms of unresolved regional and local conflicts over access to land and resources, as well as a failure to achieve structural reform within the security sector, poor governance and non-existent rule of law, and the inability to address the sources of financing for armed groups, end impunity and extend state authority, including through decentralisation.

In this context, it would be a mistake if the Security Council seeks to make only minor adjustments to the current course in renewing MONUSCO mandate. Without a new approach and re-engagement by the Security Council, MONUSCO risks becoming a $1.5 billion empty shell.

http://crisisgroup.be/mail/open-lett...r-to-unsc.html

Let see what will be UN decision. But this shows that since Tom and Stan times in DRC nothing has really changed.
There is a need for a new deal with Rwanda in which Rwanda development is not based on a colonel (or a general) on a hill in neigbouring country.

[M-A Lagrange]

DRC: “If you resist, we’ll shoot you”: The Democratic Republic of the Congo and the case for an effective Arms Trade Treaty

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/in...62/007/2012/en
An excellent report, extremely detailed, highlighting the complex commercial relations between DRC and its weapons and ammunitions suppliers. Among those suppliers you will find USA, South Africa, Switzerland, Egypt, France, Ukraine, China… All the usual suspects.

Also from ENOUGH, additional advocacy for a better mandate to MONUSCO:

MONUSCO—Protection of Civilians: Three recommended improvementsAlthough civilian protection is stated to be the highest priority of the United Nations peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo, MONUSCO, the mission continually struggles to fulfill this mandate. Overall, the failure of the U.N. to deal with the FDLR, as a major factor in regional instability, allows for the eastern Congo crisis to fester. The optimal longer term alteration in MONUSCO’s mandate would be to empower and support it, in coordination with other actors in the region, to end the FDLR threat along the lines of the Ituri “Artemis” model. Given MONUSCO’s current mandate on civilian protection, however, this policy brief is focused only on making the existing operation a more successful one.

http://www.enoughproject.org/publica...d-improvements

And finally the dual between DRC and Rwanda is officially on as Lambert Mende, DRC government speaker and information minister, has openly accused Rwanda of supporting the M23 rebel movement.

DRC Government Rules Out Talks With Rebels
DRC Information Minister Lambert Mende says several hundred M23 combatants have been recruited recently in Rwanda.

Mende says the DRC government condemns the inactivity - or worse - of the Rwandan authorities in the face of these serious infringements of the DRC’s peace and security.
He also says the M23 had formed alliances with other armed groups, including the Rwandan FDLR rebels who are operating on Congolese territory.

http://www.voanews.com/content/drc_g...s/1205957.html

And the Rwanda answer:

Rwanda: DRC Should Address Its Own ProblemsThe Rwandan government has demonstrated commitment to a peaceful DRC - first, by helping end the previous conflict when it successfully mediated between Kinshasa and the CNDP rebels in 2009, and then actively and openly engaging the DRC to try and find a peaceful settlement of the renewed hostilities.
Ever since the war broke out more than a month ago, Kigali was not only disappointed but responded immediately, as a responsible and concerned neighbour, by organising a series of high-level political and military meetings between the two countries to help contain the situation. Agreements were reached and a joint plan of action drawn.
Unfortunately, Kinshasa has turned around and sought to stab its partner in the back by embracing false rumours and baseless speculation, even as both sides were just about to release results from a joint verification team.
Nonetheless, DRC can still save the situation. It is never too late to make peace. First, Kinshasa needs to acknowledge that the issues in North Kivu are their own and not anyone else's. They should openly engage with anyone who is genuinely willing to help address the issue. Looking around for scapegoats won't provide the answers.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201206120055.html

My conclusion remain the same as in the previous post... And the ones before.

[J Wolfsberger]

M-A,

The telling observation (from a few posts back) was "... remobilise domestic support around anti-Rwanda sentiment ..."

To what extent is anti-Rwanda/Tutsi propoganda/agitation/sentiment/whatever-we-call-it nothing more than an effort at distraction from internal DRC problems? And if that's all it is, doesn't that distraction make problems worse by further inflaming the situation in the Kivus?

[M-A Lagrange]

John,

The anti Rwanda sentiment exist, it would be stupid and foolish to ignore it.
I believe, as I said previously, that internal problems are at least 50% of the issue. But that said, it is also clear that Tutsi/Rwandophone community in DRC and Rwanda did prepare something.

Among M23 revendications there are:
- better ranks in FARDC for exCNDP,
- better pay,
- priviledged treatment,
- not being deployed out of the Kivu,

All this was partly done by Kinshasa. Therefore you cannot avoid the feeling that there is something else behind. And since DRC/Rwanda 2009 agreement are secret, this opens the door to any crazy theory.

In addition, the proof of recruitment in Rwanda by M23 or Bosco are quite strong and difficult to put asside. (It is not only HRW and UN who have such testimonies and other proof).

Personaly, I do not see the benefit for Rwanda in starting another rebellion in DRC.
Facking a rebellion to put Bosco Ntaganda aside would have make sens. Now it just looks like Rwanda is trying to solve its internal problems (overpopulation, food production, energy...) by inflaming the Kivu. Especially since refugees returns from Rwanda started to create problems in DRC.

I think that UN should have a stronger mandate and especially a stronger obligation to implement their mandate in terms o PoC and political dialog. If FARDC infiltration by Rwanda through CNDP has been/is an issue; MONUSCO infiltration by Kabila is also an issue. Both do not help in solving the crisis.

Hope this answered you question.

Sincerely

M-A

[M-A Lagrange]

Maximum Sentence Mooted for DR Congo's Lubanga
Former rebel leader Thomas Lubanga, who was convicted of conscripting child soldiers to fight in a five-year war that killed some 60,000 people, should get the Hague court's maximum sentence of 30 years, prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo says.

http://allafrica.com/view/group/main.../00017380.html