Jesca Mutamba
Africa-Press – Rwanda. The peace agreement signed between Rwanda and DR Congo on Friday, June 27 in Washington DC, under US mediation, is seen by analysts as a diplomatic milestone.
However, its sustainability hinges on meaningful outcomes from the ongoing Qatar-facilitated negotiations between the Congolese government and the AFC/M23 rebels, along with political will from Kinshasa, an element they argue has long been lacking.
Signed by Rwanda’s Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe and his Congolese counterpart Therese Wagner Kayikwamba in the presence of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the agreement emphasizes mutual respect for territorial integrity, cessation of support to armed groups, and the peaceful resolution of disputes.
The agreement particularly demands that the FDLR be neutralize. The US- and UN-sanctioned militia was founded by remnants of the perpetrators of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, and had continued to pose a threat to Rwanda’s security for about 30 years.
The accord establishes a joint security coordination mechanism and oversight committee for implementation and accountability. Additionally, it includes commitments to foster regional economic integration and facilitate the return of refugees and internally displaced persons, laying the groundwork for sustainable peace and shared development.
‘No conflict resolution without addressing domestic realities’
Speaking to The New Times, on June 28, Alex Mvuka, a Congolese researcher and regional political analyst, lauded the outcome of the US mediation, adding that some actors had previously skewed peace processes in favor of DR Congo while ignoring historical responsibilities tied to colonial powers like Belgium.
“It is a positive development that this process has distanced itself from European interference,” Mvuka said. They bear historical accountability, from redrawing borders that displaced Rwandans into DR Congo to institutionalizing tribal divisions targeting Kinyarwanda-speaking and Tutsi communities,” he said.
Mvuka emphasized that the root causes of conflict in eastern DR Congo remain largely domestic, especially poor governance and ethnic-based exclusion.
“I see this more as a diplomatic gesture than a genuine resolution. Most of the challenges are internal, hence the proliferation of over 200 armed groups and the emergence of the M23 rebellion,” he stated. “If the Doha mechanism is not integrated into the Washington process, the agreement lacks a solid foundation.”
“DR Congo has a well-documented history of failing to honour peace agreements,” Mvuka noted. “We have witnessed it walk away from several regional frameworks that had a far greater chance of succeeding. On the other hand, Rwanda is likely to implement its part of the deal, not only because it has the capacity to do so, but also because it arguably desires peace more than the government in Kinshasa.”
He further argued that Rwanda’s defensive measures were a response to explicit
‘The ideology of FDLR is like smoke’
Mvuka raised concerns about the capacity of international mediators to understand the regional context.
“Rwanda’s withdrawal of defensive measures is verifiable. But how will DR Congo disarm over 250 armed groups and the FDLR, whose genocidal ideology spreads like smoke?” he asked. “The responsibility starts with Kinshasa owning its internal failures, rather than scapegoating neighbors.”
Frederick Golooba-Mutebi, a Ugandan independent researcher and regional political analyst, stressed that two critical pillars must be addressed to establish a lasting foundation for peace.
“The neutralization of the FDLR is paramount,” Mutebi said. “This armed group lies at the heart of the crisis, posing a grave threat to the security and wellbeing of Congolese Tutsi, many of whom it has killed, forcibly displaced, or driven into exile, particularly to Uganda and Rwanda.”
He noted that the militia also represents a danger to Rwanda’s peace and stability, having made repeated infiltration attempts, “often with the tacit support or direct complicity of past Congolese governments.”
“These threats have compelled Rwanda to take defensive measures that, in turn, have escalated tensions between the two nations.”
He further emphasized the importance of confronting DR Congo’s internal governance and security challenges.
“Resolving these issues requires a genuine negotiation process with the AFC/M23. If these talks address the legitimate concerns of the AFC/M23, and subsequently those of other marginalized groups, DR Congo could begin to overcome its internal fractures. This would pave the way for sustainable peace, stability, and the pursuit of prosperity,” he said.
While there are no guarantees, he said, the pathway to peace has at least been partially opened.
‘Time for UN to review its mandate in Congo’
While the peace agreement outlines the involvement of UN agencies in supporting cooperation between the two countries, particularly in facilitating the return of refugees, questions remain regarding the credibility and impartiality of some these agencies.
Analysts have raised concerns about the UN’s previous one-sided reports that appeared to align with the Congolese government while unfairly targeting other parties to the conflict.
They argue that the UN’s peacekeeping mission in DR Congo (MONUSCO) must be thoroughly reviewed to ensure it aligns with the objectives and spirit of the newly signed peace accord.
Ambassador Fatuma Ndangiza, a member of the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA), called for a comprehensive review of MONUSCO’s effectiveness.
“UN missions have made contributions, but MONUSCO, as it stands, is not meeting expectations,” said Ndangiza. “If it continues in its current form, it risks becoming irrelevant or even a part of the problem.”
She stressed the importance of creating safe conditions for the return of refugees and displaced persons, which would also catalyze regional economic integration.
‘DR Congo must dismantle the FDLR to ensure lasting peace’
Ndangiza described the signing of the peace agreement between Rwanda and DR Congo as a historic milestone that potentially opens a new chapter in advancing peace and security in the Great Lakes region.
She noted it is important to recognize the US-brokered deal aligns with other ongoing regional and continental peace efforts, including those led by the African Union, and Qatar.
“This can be regarded as a timely and strategic initiative,” she said. “But of course, what we are all now looking forward to is implementation. Rwanda may indeed be willing to lift its defensive measures, but without the neutralization or dismantling of the FDLR, doing so would be difficult.”
“The US must ensure that all parties, especially DR Congo with regard to the FDLR issue, take the necessary steps to dismantle the group. If that is achieved, it would significantly contribute to fostering peace and strengthening good relations with Rwanda.”
Ndangiza commended the US government’s active role in the negotiations since the start.
“One positive example was the decision to send a special advisor to President Trump, not simply to draft reports from Washington, but to visit the region in person,” she said, referring to Mass Boulos, the US president’s senior advisor for Africa, who visited the two countries in April before intense negotiations began.
Kinshasa’s political will
Jean Baptiste Gasominari, a former UN advocate and analyst of the DR Congo crisis, emphasized that with genuine political will from Kinshasa, what currently appears almost unattainable in the peace deal between Rwanda and DR Congo could indeed become a reality.
“Things deteriorated because DR Congo permitted them to,” Gasominari argued. “Its political environment enabled the crisis to deepen. Therefore, if the Congolese government renews its political will and genuinely commits to implementing the agreement, progress is entirely possible.”
The decision to integrate the FDLR into the national army and to rely on other armed militias in the war against the AFC/M23 rebels was a political choice, he said, adding that the same government has the power to reverse that course and reshape history.
“This peace deal appears to address the concerns of the two nations and reflects a mutual desire for stability,” he said. “However, if the underlying causes of the conflict, particularly those that DR Congo attributes to Rwanda, are not thoroughly addressed, peace will remain elusive.”
“The focus should be on resolving the grievances of Congolese citizens who have taken up arms to demand their rights.”
Source: The New Times
For More News And Analysis About Rwanda Follow Africa-Press
