This
article is run courtesy of Daily Maverick. To
visit their site, please click here.
DRC and Rwanda: The heart of
darkness keeps getting darker
On Tuesday the United Nations Security
Council held consultations on sanctions in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, after the
interim report of the Group of Experts on the DRC
was finally released last Friday. The most
contentious chapter of the report - said to
incriminate Rwanda in sponsoring violence in the
eastern shoulder of the DRC - is, however, yet to
be released; a silence that only adds to the
Western world's ignorance. By KHADIJA
PATEL.
To many of us, notions of
the Congo conjure up images from Joseph Conrad's
Heart of Darkness. It is so tempting to appeal to
Conrad's Congo to explain the Congo of today. But
this is to
ignore the country's
agency - the multifarious, contemporary DRC, which
is so much more complex than just the riches lying
in wait in its soil.
The DRC has always
been suspended awkwardly in Western consciousness
between romanticised literary descriptions and a
somewhat more banal obsession with the safety of
its mineral wealth. As political scientist Laura
Seay succinctly tweeted, "One day I will get an RA
to compile a list of every article that's relied
on lazy Conrad trope to frame a DRC story. There
are thousands." Even Tintin shines as an example -
the famed fictitious wunderkind's first-edition
adventures in Congo appeared with the caveat,
"Bourgeois, paternalistic stereotypes of the
period". How sad, then, that contemporary
reportage hasn't progressed much, often failing to
consider Congo as a nation of human beings living
in the present day.
There are few sources
of information that deal with the Congo in all its
complexity, although the United Nations Group of
Experts (GoE) Reports on the DRC are reputed to be
the best source of credible information on the
reality of the DRC's seemingly constant flux
between war and peace.
These reports have
been presented to the United Nations Security
Council twice a year for the last eight years.
Writing on her blog, Texas in Africa, Seay admits
that these reports are not ideal, but adds, a
little resignedly, that they are the best of a bad
bunch of sources. "The reports are not perfect,
but they are generally about as good as data gets
when it comes to the DRC," she says, adding,
"[They are] fastidiously researched and
documented, usually having annexes containing
incredibly valuable (and damning) data (eg,
receipts for illicit mineral transactions, photos
of destroyed villages, load lists for cargo planes
carrying weapons). The members of the GoE really
know their stuff, most live in the region while
conducting research, and they have connections and
usually manage to talk to members of most of the
armed groups operating in the (Kivu regions) and
beyond."
Usually, the first GoE reports
for the year are released to the United Nations
Security Council between May and early June. This
year, however, the public release of the report
has been held up over what is said to be the fate
of a controversial annex that delves into reports
of Rwandan support for mutineers in eastern Congo.
Senior members of the DRC government have been in
a huff over the delayed release of the GoE report,
accusing the United States of shielding its ally,
Rwanda, from damning allegations. The United
States, of course, refutes these allegations, and
the eventual release of the report last Friday was
made without the incriminating chapter. Said annex
is due to be released in two weeks, allowing the
Rwandan government to formulate an adequate
response to the allegations detailed within it.
Discussions of the report have, however,
already begun in the Security Council. Crucially,
Seay reminds us that the exact contents of the
withheld annex remain unknown. Its actual contents
and its potential effects will only be known in
the next two weeks. For now, the discussion will
centre around the version of the report that is
already in the open. And that, Seay points out, is
not without consequence. The GoE report shows that
the mutiny in eastern DRC has actually been months
in the making. The announcement by Congolese
president Joseph Kabila of his intent to arrest
Bosco Ntaganda proved just a catalyst in the
timing of the revolt. Ntaganda's forces were
readying themselves to revolt from as far back as
the presidential elections in December last year.
South Africa's ambassador the United
Nations, Baso Sangqu, was reluctant to comment on
the report before the meeting on Tuesday, but
reports indicate that Rwanda's possible
involvement in the recent mutiny in eastern DRC,
led by forces loyal to Ntaganda and the
newly-formed group called the 23 March Movement
(M23), may well have been raised in the meeting.
Rwanda is, of course, no stranger to the fortunes
of its neighbour, but this kind of scrutiny into
its role in the conflict is unprecedented in
recent years. Rwandan officials and journalists
who pledge their loyalty to the state-line have
been quick to blame New-York based Human Rights
Watch for their troubles.
Field research
conducted by Human Rights Watch in the region in
May 2012 found that Rwandan army officials had
provided weapons, ammunition, and an estimated 200
to 300 recruits to support Ntaganda's mutiny in
the Rutshuru territory in eastern Congo. The
recruits, they say, include civilians forcibly
recruited in the Musanze and Rubavu districts in
Rwanda, some of whom were children under 18. One
state sponsoring violence in another is generally
a crime anyway, but in the DRC it is especially
damning.
If indeed Rwanda provided weapons
and ammunition to Ntaganda's mutiny, they are in
contravention of the United Nations Security
Council arms embargo on Congo, which stipulates
that all states are to "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
material, 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."
The
Foreign Minister of Rwanda, Louise Mushikiwabo,
has been at the United Nations' headquarters this
week, ready to defend her country from these
allegations. On Wednesday she is set to address
the Security Council on Rwanda's defence. Speaking
to the media in the last few days, she has also
emphasised that news reports alleging Rwandan
involvement in recent clashes are impacting the
lives of the people in eastern DRC, particularly
Rwandans.
Not that this has calmed the
brewing storm. Last week, the Foreign Minister of
the DRC, Raymond Tshibanda, wrote to the Security
Council informing it that there was evidence of
Rwandan involvement in the recent crisis in the
east, and that this could affect relations between
the two countries. The letter also asked for the
Council to remind Rwanda of its international
obligations.
The response remains to be
seen, and the missing chapter of the report -
whatever form it takes - is likely to be pivotal.
There could still be a constructive dialogue, yes.
But sadly, it is more likely that the outcome of
these discussions will be felt in further
conflict. DM
This
article is run courtesy of Daily Maverick. To
visit their site, please click here.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
