A RESOLUTION THAT LACKS SUBSTANCE

The UN Security Council resolution adopted on February 22, 2025, highlights a biased approach in international diplomacy regarding the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Proposed by France, a country with a long history of involvement in the great lakes region, and supported by the United Kingdom and the United States, the resolution primarily focuses on the recent advances of the M23 rebel group in eastern DRC. This region has been marred by instability and violence for years, yet the resolution fails to recognize the underlying complexities that contribute to this situation. Notably, it disregards the sentiments of many local populations who view the M23 as a liberating force, indicating a significant disconnect between international perceptions and local realities.

The resolution does not tackle the fundamental issues driving the conflict.

Additionally, by focusing primarily on Rwanda's actions, the resolution risks oversimplifying the multifaceted nature of the conflict, which involves various local militias, political factions, and external influences. The power dynamics in the Great Lakes region are deeply interwoven, and any effective resolution to the DRC conflict must encompass a comprehensive understanding of these relationships. Therefore, while the UN Security Council's resolution may be seen as a step towards addressing the crisis, it ultimately falls short by not considering the historical grievances, socio-economic factors, and the necessity for inclusive dialogue among all stakeholders involved. This lack of depth in addressing the root causes of the conflict reveals a biased resolution that fails to engage with the realities on the ground. A resolution that is doomed to fail.

Let's look at key issues not addressed by this resolution:

Persecution of Congolese Tutsi: A Missed Root Cause

The resolution's failure to address the persecution of Congolese Tutsi is a significant oversight. Congolese Tutsi, including the Banyamulenge in South Kivu and Banyarwanda in North Kivu, have faced historical discrimination and violence, often linked to their ethnic ties to Rwanda. This community constitutes less than 5% of the population but has been targeted and persecuted in the open. In recent years, the brutality faced by the Tutsi community has escalated alarmingly. Reports indicate that individuals have been filmed while being brutally killed, with perpetrators showcasing their acts of violence on social media. Disturbing videos have emerged depicting individuals consuming human flesh, a grotesque manifestation of the dehumanization faced by the Tutsi. This open display of violence occurs with little to no international condemnation, leaving the community vulnerable and exposed. The lack of action against these atrocities has led to a sense of desperation among the Tutsi population. The M23, primarily composed of Congolese Tutsi, emerged in 2012 as a response to the systemic violence and persecution they face. Their formation was not merely a quest for power but a necessary step to protect their rights and ensure the safety of their families. Unless the international community acknowledges and addresses the injustices faced by the Tutsi community, there can be no lasting peace. The cycle of violence will continue as long as families live in constant fear for their safety. The world cannot expect this community to remain passive while their lives are threatened and their dignity stripped away. In conclusion, the plight of the Congolese Tutsi requires urgent attention and action. A resolution that fails to recognize their suffering only perpetuates the cycle of violence and unrest in the region.

DRC's State Weakness: A Fundamental Issue

The FDLR (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda) has administered Congolese territories for the past 30 years, infusing genocide ideology among the Congolese population and training militias within the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to foster an anti-Rwanda sentiment. This prolonged presence has not only destabilized the region but has also gone largely uncondemned by the international community. MONUSCO, the United Nations peacekeeping mission established to address these issues, has been in the DRC for decades yet has failed to bring about a resolution to the ongoing conflicts. The lack of accountability and the absence of sanctions against the FDLR raise serious questions about the effectiveness of international intervention. The letter below illustrates how the FDLR has imposed land taxes in areas such as Rugari and Tongo in the Rutshuru Territory (to mention a few), actions which occurred with the awareness of MONUSCO and without any significant international condemnation. This situation begs the question: why has the international community not recognized this as a violation of the DRC's territorial integrity?

Use of Western Mercenaries: An Overlooked Factor

The involvement of European mercenaries in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) raises significant legal and ethical questions, especially considering that the use of mercenaries is illegal in many European countries. Despite this, reports indicate that these mercenaries, particularly from Romania, have been active in supporting the DRC government near the Rwanda border since late 2022. Notably, the international community has largely remained silent on this violation of international law, with no country condemning the presence of these mercenaries. This situation prompts the question: is this an intervention force from Europe in the DRC? The purpose of their involvement appears to be to bolster the Congolese army against various armed groups, including the M23 rebels. However, the lack of official acknowledgment and condemnation complicates the narrative, suggesting a tacit acceptance of their role in the conflict.

Following their defeat and subsequent request to leave via Rwanda, a notable observation was made: many of the mercenaries were seen wearing MONUSCO (United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) hats.

This raises several interpretive questions: the wearing of MONUSCO hats could imply an attempt to associate themselves with a recognized international force, potentially to gain legitimacy or protection; it blurs the lines between official peacekeeping operations and the actions of mercenaries, leading to public confusion about who is responsible for security in the region; and the situation could reflect poorly on the MONUSCO mission, raising concerns about its effectiveness and the potential overlap with mercenary activities. The presence of European mercenaries in the DRC presents a complex scenario that challenges existing international norms and raises critical questions about accountability, legality, and the nature of foreign intervention in conflict zones. As the situation evolves, it will be essential for the international community to address these issues transparently and uphold the principles of international law.

M23 and Home Territories: Practical Challenges

M23 is a group primarily composed of individuals who are Congolese by nationality, despite their use of the Kinyarwanda language. This linguistic aspect does not define their national identity, as they are rooted in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The members of M23, predominantly Congolese Tutsi, have historical ties to the eastern regions of the DRC, where many were born and have established deep-rooted connections. Addressing the complexities of their situation requires acknowledging the historical context, including the importance of ancestral lands, as emphasized by Julius Nyerere, who argued that it is impractical to expect individuals to abandon their homeland without resolving these issues. Furthermore, the ethnic and territorial dimensions of the conflict are often overlooked, potentially exacerbating tensions rather than fostering resolution. In conclusion, the situation surrounding M23 is multifaceted, intertwining issues of identity, territory, and historical claims that must be carefully considered in any efforts aimed at resolution.

Congolese Tutsi Refugees: A Humanitarian Oversight

Rwanda and Uganda have been hosting hundreds of thousands of Congolese Tutsi refugees, fleeing ethnic violence and conflict in their homeland. The recent UN resolution, which fails to address this critical issue, is deeply problematic as it neglects the plight of these refugees and the urgent need for a comprehensive solution. To prevent the recurrence of conflict, it is essential to address the root causes of the violence that has led to the displacement of these individuals. Without tackling these underlying issues, the same war could erupt again, as people cannot be called refugees indefinitely. The international community must recognize that refugee status cannot be a permanent solution, long-term stability requires addressing ethnic tensions and fostering reconciliation, and humanitarian aid must be coupled with efforts to create sustainable conditions for safe return. It is imperative that the UN and the global community recognize the significance of the Congolese Tutsi refugee situation. By addressing these issues head-on, we can work towards a lasting peace and stability in the region.

FDLR's Presence in Congolese Army: A Security Threat

The UN report of experts has detailed how the FDLR (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda) and FARDC (Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo) are working together, posing a significant security threat to Rwanda. This situation can be likened to hypothetical scenarios involving other nations, such as if Mexico were collaborating with ISIS, how would the United States react? Or if the German army began recruiting Nazis, what would be the response from Europe or Israel? Additionally, every Western country recognizes that partnerships with Hezbollah or Hamas represent a clear threat to Israel. The FDLR is linked to the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, and its integration into the DRC army raises major concerns for Rwanda. According to Human Rights Watch, there are reports of Congolese army units providing ammunition to the FDLR. Furthermore, UN Press highlights Rwanda's calls for the disengagement of FDLR members from the DRC army. The resolution's silence on this issue, despite its implications for regional stability, is viewed as a critical oversight.

Burundi's Role: Unaddressed Implications

Burundi has troops in DRC, under a bilateral agreement with the DRC. However Burundi having the same ethnic composition as Rwanda and Burundi being led by a regime that views itself as a Hutu regime at the moment complicates the equation. In fact most of the Burundian top current leaders have either been involved in the genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda or in the first Congo war. They have a natural sympathy towards the FDLR which becomes a direct threat to the security of Rwanda.

Conclusion

How can a resolution that overlooks the deep-seated issues of Congolese Tutsi persecution, the inherent weaknesses of the DRC state, and the complexities surrounding the integration of the FDLR be expected to foster genuine peace in the region? Is it realistic to believe that merely addressing immediate crises without tackling the historical and ethnic tensions will yield sustainable results? Furthermore, could this resolution inadvertently serve to prolong the conflict rather than resolve it? What are the implications of a strategy that seems to simplify such a multifaceted conflict, and how might this oversimplification contribute to escalating tensions rather than alleviating them? Is there a possibility that the international community's interest in the DRC is somehow linked to the ongoing instability, suggesting that Congo is somehow more valued when it is embroiled in perpetual wars? As we observe the unfolding situation, what signs should we look for to determine whether this resolution is genuinely aimed at peace or merely a temporary fix that allows the cycle of conflict to continue?