[QUOTE]
Quote Originally Posted by KingJaja View Post
I've read the article.

1. Clearly Joseph Kabila doesn't depend on these guys for his personal security. He seems to be applying a popular model in the developing World - i.e. lavishly fund an elite unit largely composed of members of your tribe / mercenaries and treat the rest of the army like crap. (I might be wrong here). I find it hard to be believe that while Rwanda can field a modestly competent army, Congo DRC cannot.
Simply because of what you just said: he treat the rest of the army like crap...

2. The problem with Congo DRC is political, not military and Joseph Kabila clearly isn't the man you should be dealing with.
So who should be DRC president part from Stan and me? or Tom?
If you tell me the opposition, then I will advise you to just take the time to read DRC news from the last week and you will understand.

3. No amount of exposure to the US army is going to change the nature of military-civilian relations in the Congo DRC (to put it mildly), unless the underlying, socio-economic and political problems are dealt with. All armies reflect the values and the education levels of their lowest recruits and the leadership qualities of their commanders. The Nigerian army for example, has a well earned reputation for brutality, but it is less likely to sink to the level of the Congolese army because its leadership and rank and file are better educated and better orientated.
Yep, and how do you solve the issue when a whole country has a culture of stealing, corruption and fraud? As Mobutu said: I cannot pay you anymore, so you will have to steal. Don't steal too much but steal anyway cause that your only way to get paid.


4. A nation the size of Western Europe cannot be effectively administered from Kinshasa. It's time to break up the Congo and deal with the constituent parts. The US military intervention merely continues the false notion that Congo DRC is a united, contiguous entity and should be treated as such.
That war costed at least 2 million lives. Wanna try again?

5. On the balance, what the US army is doing is better than doing nothing, but it is not sustainable.
I agree with you.

Now the real question how do you "force" a government to implement a security sector reform that he is not willing to conduct as it would endanger its grip on populace and make people in power less rich?
And that's not a rethorical question.