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

[davidbfpo]

Marc,

In answer to your question:

Does that mean that US are not the only one trying to save Kagame?

Can I suggest the likely suspect is the UK. Rwanda is a member of the Commonwealth, receives considerable UK aid and is of course closely linked to Uganda - who the UK also supports.

Amongst the other non-permanent UNSC members today I cannot see one that would do such a thing? Although South Africa can follow a strange policy at times. The members are on:http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp

[M-A Lagrange]

A difficult question to answer to. First of all, please find below a communication from HRW calling to not defend Rwanda.

HRW criticises Rwanda's UN council seat
Human Rights Watch criticised Rwanda's virtual guarantee of a seat on the UN Security Council next year, saying on Monday it shouldn't be on the UN's most powerful body when it is protecting a Congolese ex-warlord indicted by the International Criminal Court.
Implicated in crimes against children

HRW's UN director, Philippe Bolopion, said on Monday if Rwanda wants to be a responsible Security Council member it should cut off all support for Ntaganda, actively seek to arrest him, and surrender him to the ICC.

"By allowing its territory to be used to protect and arm an ICC-indicted war criminal, Rwanda is making a mockery of the decisions of the same Security Council it is slated to join next year," Bolopion told AP.

"Bosco Ntaganda is not only implicated in horrendous crimes against civilians including children, he is also undermining everything the Security Council has tried to achieve at great expense in the region for the last decade."

http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/HR...-seat-20120619

I think that HRW resumes very well the situation: Rwanda will be a UNSC non permanent member next year. For many permanent members (at least 2), this means more leverage in the extended UNSC.
This tends to go in the direction given by David on why are there some difficulties in publishing the proof of Rwanda support to M23.

On the other end, DRC gov has been conducting a strong diplomatic offensive in Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and Angola.
An offensive to which Angola responded positively, ensuring DRC of its support and SADC sympathy. This means that South Africa, Zimbabwe and Angola are, until they do something different, on DRC side. (Many articles in French can be found. I just add a link to one: http://www.mediacongo.net/show.asp?doc=20667)

The situation is quite tense in the sub region because we could end in a regional war in Africa, Central Africa against Southern Africa, on Congo soil.
Therefore lights need to be brought on allegations of Rwanda support to M23 (Rwandese have been made prisonners or surrendered).
Hopefully, discussions started as Rwanda foreign affairs minister is in Kinshasa.

And to finish and to illustrate why war criminal in DRC have to be turned to ICC, please find a link to Prosecutor address at Lubanga trial.
Just to remind who people like Bosco Ntaganda are (Bosco Ntaganda was under Lubanga orders in Ituri and he is wanted for similar crimes).

Prosecutor’s Address At Lubanga Sentencing
2. Thomas Lubanga’s recruitment included particularly cruel treatment. Children were abducted, their families forced to accept the situation, instead of obeying their mothers, children had to obey commanders. Children were trained by terror. They were trained to kill and to rape. The children were launched into battle zones where they were instructed to kill everyone regardless of whether they were men, women, or children, all were the enemy. The harm produced by this cruel treatment continue even after demobilization. Those who didn’t die as soldiers, they have permanent physical effects or they have on-going psychological trauma, all them still suffer.
In addition to these two aggravating factors, the Prosecution will like to highlight two aspects that should not be invisible. The crime of recruiting children as soldiers included as a fundamental aspect a gender discrimination, and fourth, the crime of recruiting children as soldiers denied these children and their generation of their right to education. I will briefly elaborate on both aspects:
3. Embedded in the recruitment of girl soldiers was their special use as sex slaves. In the training camps, girl soldiers were the daily victims of rape by the commanders and soldiers. The Prosecution chose not to charge this gender aspect as a separate crime because gender abuse is an essential part of the crime of recruiting girls as soldiers. All the girls recruited would be raped and abused because they are girls.
As emphasized by Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy [the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict] in her amicus brief to this court, girl soldiers are too often invisible. “Wife” is the word used to make this crime invisible. A severe sentence would ensure that the gender suffering of these girls and other girls will no longer continue to be invisible.

http://www.lubangatrial.org/2012/06/...ga-sentencing/

[M-A Lagrange]

From Enough:

Rwanda’s Long Shadow: U.S.-Rwandan Relations and a Path Forward in Eastern Congo

Given the implications of Rwandan involvement in the conflict, the international community should immediately take steps to respond to these allegations. If necessary, they must also reassess the nature of their policies and relationships with Rwanda to ensure that, by extension, they are not willingly complicit in supporting these violations of international law. As documented below there is substantial available evidence linking destabilizing elements in eastern Congo to the government of Rwanda. Those donor governments that continue to provide support to the government of Rwanda must hold Kigali to account for its involvement in destabilizing activities in Congo. At this point, a strategy of diplomatic see-no-evil, hear-no-evil is irresponsible, hypocritical, and ultimately destructive.

To that end, the government of the United States should immediately take the following steps:

1.Ensure that the recent investigation conducted by the U.N. Group of Experts on Congo is published and leveraged as a step toward ending external intervention in eastern Congo. Further, push the Security Council to provide additional resources for the Group to continue the investigation in the lead-up to the release of the 2012 annual report.
2.Based on the accumulated evidence, begin a formal policy review with a specific focus on the overall U.S. military and developmental aid policy. Send a clear signal that intervention in eastern Congo is not acceptable. Base such action on Section 105 of the Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006, which includes provisions for eliminating aid to countries if the Secretary of State “determines that the government of a foreign country is taking actions to destabilize the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
3.Partner with the government of Congo and the United Nations to develop a more aggressive strategy to dismantle the Rwandan Hutu militia, the FDLR, thus removing Rwanda’s main stated reason for its continued interest in eastern Congo.

http://www.enoughproject.org/publica...-eastern-congo

DRC government just addressed a letter to UNSC to ask the UN to come and play an active role in preventing the situation to go amok.
Not really the best news in such context.

[M-A Lagrange]

Top Rwandan officials backing Congo rebels: leaked U.N. findings

(Reuters) - U.N. experts have evidence Rwanda's defense minister and two top military officials have been backing an army mutiny in the east of neighboring Congo, according to notes of their briefing to a closed-door U.N. committee seen by Reuters on Thursday.

An M23 officer contacted by Reuters denied receiving Rwandan support, adding that any such backing would have allowed them to gain ground in the battle with regular Congolese forces.

"If a single time the Rwandans had supported us we wouldn't be on this hill - we would be far away from this. This action is purely Congolese," Colonel Vianney Kazarama said by phone.

The UN briefing was verbal. A written report of the Group of Experts findings is due in coming days to be submitted to the U.N. sanctions committee ahead of its final publication. There is no indication at this stage of any push to impose UN sanctions on either Rwanda or Congo.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...85L00420120622

In addition, additional exCNDP has left FARDC to join M23. Was not smelling good but starts to smell really bad at this stage.
Especially when Lambert Mende, the DRC gov speaker, says that they are not in a logic of war but in a logic of broken peace.

[J Wolfsberger]

Perhaps I'm unfair, but 1. and 2. (from post #627) appear to be feel-good happy talk. However, point 3. would go a long way toward reducing the violence - after the violence involved in "dismantling" subsides. But they have overlooked DRC promotion of violence against Tutsi in the Kivus, which leads to the formation of Tutsi militias, which prompts Rwandan support, which provokes formation of Hutu militias, et cetera ad nauseum.

A change in policy by the DRC is required, along with recognition that it will take the DRC a long time to build trust among the Tutsi that they can disband their militias without fear of slaughterer. It's a very tough sell.

[M-A Lagrange]

John,

I agree with you on the inferno spiral of the Kivu. I am just not that sure who started the militia (Hutu, Hunde, Tutsi, Nande, Bashi ???).

My points are:
1) there is a need of change of policy on both sides of the border,
2) there is a need of change of policy in US (backing Rwanda just does not work anymore),
3) there is a need for Kagame to clean his house if Rwanda is really not involved,
4) If Rwanda is involved and there are proofs then USA should help to solve rather than hide the issue.

Situation is getting hot in North Kivu. There are many ways to solve this.

[M-A Lagrange]

even if it hurts.

Here is a link to the DRC Group of Experts report.
Unfortunately, the crucial annexes with proofs of Rwanda involvement have been removed. And it's USA who is guilty of it.
I can understand why and how a delayed publication might help. But anyways, I also past a link to the join NGO call for publication.

The report is difficult to access in its pdf format. Therefore, I encourrage to download it in WORD format.
Here is the link: http://documents.un.org/mother.asp
Symbol: S/2012/348

NGO Coalition Urges Full Disclosure of Evidence Linking Rwanda to Congo's Rebellion
22 June, 2012 - 19:55
The Enough Project joined a coalition of human rights organizations, which includes Open Society Foundation and Humanity United, urging the U.S. government to pressure the U.N. Security Council to release all of the U.N. Group of Expert’s most recent findings related to Congo. In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the groups expressed concern that the publication of a crucial annex linking the government of Rwanda to the M23 mutiny in Congo was being postponed for political reasons.

http://www.humanitariannews.org/2012...ngos-rebellion

In addition, DRC MPs have called for an increase of defense 2012 budget...

To quote DRC speaker: "we are not at war with Rwanda but in a broken peace relationship."
I do not know what that means but for me DRC is on the path of war and so is Rwanda. Nothing good will come out of this.

[M-A Lagrange]

U.S. Tells Rwanda to Halt Support for Rebels in Eastern Congo

An addendum to a report by the United Nations Group of Experts on Congo accused top Rwandan officials including its Minister of Defense of coordinating military operations with several Congolese rebel groups. Rwanda has denied the allegations.

“We are deeply concerned about the report’s findings that Rwanda is implicated in the provision of support to Congolese rebel groups,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in the statement. The U.S. has “asked Rwanda to halt and prevent the provision of such support from its territory.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ern-congo.html

The addendum can be found at the following link:
http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1533...2012/348/Add.1

All the ingredients of an invasion of DRC through proxies and exCNDP (Pro Rwanda) forces integrated in FARDC are here.
The evidence are disturbing.

200 000 IDPs + 20 000 refugees for the momment. May be it is time to call for stronger sanctions than just saying: "you're naughty boy!".