Nov 27 2012
US Interests in Rwanda Spur Congo War
After having suffered from the ravages of war for two decades, the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo or DRC are now facing yet another brutal battle. The rebel group M23, made up of deserters from the Congolese Army have taken over the city of Goma and are refusing to leave until the democratically elected government of President Joseph Kabila is completely dismantled.
Ignoring a deadline issued by the African Union to leave the city, the 1,500 M23 rebels, who are mainly Tutsi in origin, fought back the Congolese Army as well as the 18,000 UN peacekeepers sent into the region to quell the violence. ‘Colonel Olivier Hamuli, a Congolese military spokesman has called the rebel takeover a “declaration of war.”
A UN finding that DRC’s neighbors Uganda and Rwanda had been arming and financing the rebels since they formed 8 months ago was originally disputed by the United States which had allied in the past with Rwanda and its President Paul Kagame. Rwanda’s political interests in DRC, the 2nd largest country in Africa, may be to carve out a new Tutsi led country from the Eastern half of the country. While the West backs the corrupt Kagame government, they also stayed mum as Kabila regained power in a rigged election.
The United Nations is estimating that 285,000 people have been displaced as a result of the conflict, and a Human Rights Watch report issued in September found M23 guilty of “summary executions, rapes, and forced recruitment.”
DRC is replete with precious metals and minerals, many of which are used in computers, cell phones and weapons and the conflict has gained more international scrutiny as mineral production has decreased. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission finally banned companies like Apple and Intel from using metals which come from rebel controlled areas of the country this year.
GUEST: Claude Gatebuke, executive director of the African Great Lakes Action Network.
Visit www.aglan.org and www.friendsofthecongo.org for more information. Claude Gatebuke may be reached via email at claude_at_aglan_dot_org.
4 Responses to “US Interests in Rwanda Spur Congo War”
There is one fundamental mistake in this report: Kabila was not democratically elected. The elected Congolese leader is under house arrest in Kinshasa. Kabila, Kagame and Museveni work in tandem to destabilise the region. The current situation is yet another elegantly played diversion from the real issue in the region: Until this war started, no international government had recognised Kabila’s reelection as credible. Kabila was pressured, mostly by the European Union, to seize the rebel leader Bosco Ntaganda, who is under an international criminal arrest warrant for war crimes committed as part of the rebel movement CNDP (one of the proxy rebel movements propped by Rwanda to destabilise Congo). Now arresting Bosco Ntaganda is directly attacking President Paul Kagame of Rwanda.
Rwanda was obliged to start a war to prevent the arrest of Bosco Ntaganda. Kabila could have arrested him before but continuously refused to do so, citing other priorities. The pressure to arrest Bosco Ntaganda is the cause of the quick formation of the rebel movement M23. When one listens to the M23 claims, there is nothing serious they complain about. Unfortunately for this group, the international community decided not to keep quiet any longer. The group of experts published a report showing what Rwanda was doing. It later included Uganda, rightly so.
As the pressure shifted from Kabila to Kagame, Rwanda tried to use the old tricks to blame everyone else. This time Kagame failed bitterly. Most of the foreign aid to the country was suspended. Something had to be done quickly to remedy to this situation. The M23 was asked to advance toward Goma and cause an international outcry. Even if the troops are ordered to retreat, they still will have to live on the Congolese territory, and control the Congolese borders with Uganda and Rwanda. This way business will continue as usual. Goma will still be within reach but the neighboring localities which have immense mineral deposits will still be under its (M23 and Rwanda indirectly) control.
A deal to this effect was brokered by Uganda’s Museveni, with full cooperation from Paul Kagame. This means further talks to end the crisis will have three key central figures: Paul Kagame, Joseph Kabila and Yoweri Museveni. This is where everyone is duped: Kabila whose government was illegitimate since November 2011 will be recognised and begged by the Congolese people and the international community to act presidential and patriotic and defend the country’s sovereignty. Museveni will be acknowledged as a peace broker and will get the opportunity to ask the international community to remove his half-brother (who acts on his behalf) from the list of Ugandan military leaders who back M23. Now last, and most importantly, Kagame gets to manage his domestic problems.
What then are Kagame’s domestic problems? Kagame is actually the main culprit in the ills that the people of the region are suffering. But he faces a difficult challenge in his own army: Back in the rebel days, Kagame was imposed on his army as the commander in chief, in replacement of Gen Fred Rwigema who was killed shortly after the rebellion movement attacked Rwanda in 1990. To be able to control his new army Kagame used different tactics to keep all military chiefs always busy and away from the high command HQ from where he operated. It worked. Most of his officers went to the HQ to report and would be immediately redeployed somewhere else on different assignments. Kagame made sure the officers never met.
As the war was ending and Rwanda was being captured, the officers never got a chance to sit together and discuss the future model of government they would adopt. Genocide had just been committed by the former regime. The officers were emotional about finding themselves in their homeland for the first time. They had a huge task to rebuild the country and some of the questionable policies, decisions and practices had to be overlooked for the sake of peace. Kagame consolidated his power, ended up becoming president and started to kill and jail those among his senior officers whom he viewed as a threat to his power.
He had to demote others, ridicule them and replace them with his bodyguards. The world would be shocked to know that his current minister of defense, Gen James Kabarebe (accused in the UN report of directly heading the command of M23) and his defense chief of staff, Gen Charles Kayonga are all Kagame’s former bodyguards who did no other serious military service prior to employment by Kagame. These and one Gen Jack Nziza (permanent secretary in the ministry of defense, also accused in the UN report of organising meetings to form the M23 movement) all under Paul Kagame are the instigators of the violence on the people of the region.
Kagame undermined all other senior military officers. He beats and jails them and humiliate them as he wants. To survive they have to kneel down to him and plead for mercy. He still uses old tricks to keep them apart and away from Rwanda so he can easily divide and control them. This is way he did all he could (with the help of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton) to keep 4000 troops in darfur for a long period of time. He has other “peacekeeping” troops and police in five other countries worldwide. A large chunk of the dollars they earn is contributed to Rwanda’s military fund. Basically they are sent to go and earn money and return it home to him. Those who resist face the full might of his humiliating punishments.
But Kagame being Kagame, Darfur’s money is not enough for him and more senior officers need to be controlled. Hence the need for a continued situation of war in the east of Congo. In Congo he sends younger officers, who are likely to listen to him and respect his authority. They get ranking promotions and as long as they remember who the boss is (gets the lion’s share), they are allowed to also loot and enrich themselves. The list of such officers is endless: Colonel Jules Mutebutsi, Gen Laurent Nkunda (demoted when he became a liability), Gen Bosco Ntaganda and now Gen Sultan Makenga. Before these were Gen James Kabarebe and Col Dan Munyuza.
While promoting these young sharks, the senior military officers he found at the battle field are isolated, under surveillance in Kigali. This is how he keeps himself in power. He knows he does not enjoy popularity within his own army and the moment Rwanda’s troops are repatriated from the different peacekeeping missions all over the world and sanctions are applied against supporters of the rebel movements in the DRC as a UN resolution declares, Kagame’s days will be numbered. He will face mutiny within his own army and may not survive it.
The correct action to take is to end Rwanda’s role in peacekeeping missions all over the world. This is because Rwanda cannot maintain peace in other countries and at the same time cause war and insecurity in Congo. This will be the beginning of peace in the region and will signal the end of Kagame’s reign.
EXIT STRATEGIES OUT OF GOMA: A FIVE-POINT AGENDA
(By Theogene Rudasingwa, International Coordinator of the Rwanda National Congress, an exile opposition political movement.
http://www.facebook.com/ijwi.ryihurironyarwanda/posts/350056771756775 )
The international community (read: western powers) have put pressure on Kagame to have his creation and proxy, M23, withdraw from Goma. President Kabila is being pressurized to talk to M23, to listen to their grievances. As we have argued, the problems of eastern DRC are partly a Congolese problem of internal weaknesses and, in this latest war, largely due to Rwanda’s internal political and human rights crisis. If the international community is asking Kabila to talk to a Rwanda-created and Rwanda-backed organization (mainly of Tutsi), wouldn’t it be logical that Kagame would be pressurized to listen to the legitimate grievances of Rwandans (Hutu and Tutsi) in both the peaceful and armed opposition? Kagame has totally closed the political space in Rwanda, imprisoned, killed or forced into exile opposition political leaders, journalists and human rights activists.
In Rwanda, an exclusively Tutsi clique of military officers run the show on behalf of President Kagame and his family. These are the same officers (James Kabarebe, Charles Kayonga, and the notorious Jack Nziza) that the UN Group of experts report has cited as being at the heart of the M23 rebellion. They are the same officers whom Kagame used to shoot down the plane in which the President of Rwanda and Burundi were killed on April 6, 1994. They are the same officers that Kagame used to assassinate President Laurent Kabila of DRC in 2001. They are the same officers that are at the heart of the horrendous crimes committed against Hutu in Rwanda and DRC, which were described in the UN Mapping Report of 2010 and other previous reports.
We have entered a period of high risk and escalation in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region. Within Rwanda we are probably 2 to 3 years to a major event, which could escalate into a full civil war. The political space has become completely closed, with moderate voices dead, in jail or in exile. The regime has become ever more illegitimate, intransigent, and aggressive. Power is vested in the hands of President Kagame and his wife, and a few Tutsi military officers who run both the formal and informal government. President Kagame and his top three military officers (James Kabarebe, Charles Kayonga and Jack Nziza) have ceaselessly turned to DRC, the latest venture being the M23, itself with high potential to escalate into a full civil war that could easily turn regional and ugly. Many people in Rwanda, DRC, Great Lakes region, Africa and the International Community are asking about the endgame in the current crisis in DRC.
Although the current problem in the eastern DRC has a Congolese component, the M23 saga is Rwanda’s (and secondarily, Uganda’s) creation. You cannot solve, once and for all, the M23 problem without dealing with Rwanda’s own political crisis, and re-evaluating the west’s unquestioning support to President Kagame and President Museveni. Short of new and innovative ways in the thinking process, policy, and action to underpin diplomatic, political and aid-related initiatives, withdrawal from Goma will be a temporary and futile measure, as we shall then wait for the resurgence of another round of violent conflict.
The international community, notably the US and the UK, may consider the following five measures to facilitate a sustainable movement out of the current DRC crisis:
1. Immediately initiate a contact group to spearhead a two-track peace process (DRC and Rwanda). The contact group should include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, South Africa, Uganda and Tanzania. The US and UK are key because, until now, that is what President Kagame cares for. The two western powers have also protected Kagame from calls for accountability with regard to his endless and costly DRC ventures, human rights, and lack of political freedoms in Rwanda etc. Belgium and France were engaged with previous regimes in Rwanda, and may have a few lessons they have learnt with regard to Rwanda. Tanzania has the institutional memory since it facilitated the Arusha peace process. South Africa is an important regional player. Uganda should be included simply because it could be a spoiler if left out.
2. The contact group should be brutally candid towards Kabila, Museveni and especially Kagame. Yesterday, as I listened to African Union Chairman Zuma and US Secretary of State Clinton, I was saddened and disheartened by the fact that neither could summon the courage to call a spade a spade, name Rwanda as a culprit and put Kagame to shame. As a young doctor, I was taught that the pathway to healing necessitates telling the patient what the diagnosis is , and empowering him/her to take the lead in a healing process. Ms. Zuma and Ms.Clinton highlight an ailment that afflicts the international system: when convenient, be silent or conceal the the truth. And Kagame loves that! The contact group collectively has substantive leverage to bring to the table. The members of the contact group understand the current power dynamics in Rwanda. They appreciate the consequences of maintaining the status quo and inaction in Rwanda, DRC, the Great Lakes region, and to international peace and security. Yes, the United States and UK may be focused on their security interests in Somalia and Sudan, and prone to blackmail from Kagame and Museveni. But failure to act fairly in the Great Lakes region risks creating more enemies in Africa. This would be counter-productive and dangerous.
3. The contact group should directly engage Rwandans, Congolese and Ugandans struggling for freedom and justice. A timid international community that won’t care for African people, and will only look at a country’s interests through the eyes of Kagame, Kabila and Museveni is a recipe for cyclical conflict and disaster. The thousands of civil and political groups that are calling for change in these countries are imperfect, but still they are indispensable stakeholders. In the case of Rwanda, President Kagame must unconditionally talk to the opposition whether armed or not. You make peace with enemies and opponents. The international community must support efforts that promote genuine dialogue, unity, reconciliation and healing within Rwanda and DRC, and in the various Diasporas. It is no good value for money when billions are spent in development projects when many in Rwanda and DRC feel they are marginalized.
4. Africans and the rest of the international community must make sure that those who have committed horrendous human rights abuses, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide are held accountable. Specifically, the United States and United Kingdom governments should stop protecting President Kagame and his officers who have committed serious crimes in Rwanda and the DRC. Those in the World Bank, IMF, DFID , USAID, and the aid industry who tell Rwandans that Kagame is fine because he is efficient in using aid are playing a bad influence since development without rights is both sham and unsustainable.
5. The African Union and the United Nations, since they have condemned themselves to be ineffectual observers in the DRC and Rwanda tragedies, should at least jointly and urgently convene a conference to consider a “Marshal Plan” for the Great Lakes Region to motivate the tens of millions of unemployed youth and women who are both victims and tools of state and non-state actors. The United Nations and the African Union should avail resources for participants from civil society and the political opposition to attend. Since the international community is asking President Kabila to listen to the grievance of M23, when will the African Union and the United Nations listen to the grievance of the African people?
Sooner than later the costly, redundant and scandal-prone UN peacekeepers in DRC will be asked to abandon what has become an embarrassing operation. The Congolese people will, as usual, and like the Rwandans and Somalis now and in the past, continue to struggle to survive. The challenge to resist Rwanda’s (and Uganda’s) attempts to promote secession and plunder of DRC is primarily a Congolese one. All Rwandans, DRC’s neighbors, Africans and the international community should, however, have an interest in preventive measures before it is too late. A window of opportunity does exist, but it is closing fast. We must act innovatively, and together, now.
Theogene Rudasingwa
Just to add, in response to a question about US interest in the Congo: At some point the US State Department wanted to stop Kagame from causing wars in the DRC. Wikileaks reported that the State Department was overruled by the Pentagon.
This means that the primary US interest in the Congo is military/security-based. The Pentagon is not interested in the gold or tantalite, but rather in uranium deposits that are in Congo. The deposits are not necessarily in the east of Congo but as long as the country is unstable, there is less likelihood that unfriendly nations can venture themselves to the country to set up operations to extract the uranium.
It is up to the Congolese people to acknowledge these US “legitimate” security concerns and build a democratic, US-friendly nation… for the sake of the peace of all the people of the region, including Rwandans.
Many thanks for this. As a recent visitor to Rwanda I was confused by the overwhelming American presence there. Considering Rwanda’s well documented involvement in destabilising the region, I wondered what the Americans stood to gain by continuing to associate themselves with Kagame’s regime. The argument that I heard there (from Americans) that that the US is there to alleviate the guilt they feel because the genocide happened on their watch did not ring true. It might ring true for the Clinton Foundation, but doesn’t explain the far-reaching involvement and quite unsettling influx of Americans. Call me cynical but Americans acting for purely altruistic reasons simply doesn’t hold water. I’ve read these comments with interest and the final comment makes complete sense to me. I am South African and the continued conflict in the DRC breaks my heart. There are so many Congolese here. They should be at home benefitting from the resources that are there. My own president should be helping, not hindering the process. And the West should step in and do the right thing for a change, not prop up governments that do their bidding while destroying lives.