[Dehai-WN] Foreignpolicy.com: That Other War

From: Berhane Habtemariam <Berhane.Habtemariam_at_gmx.de_at_dehai.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:17:09 +0100

 <http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/11/20/that_other_war> That
Other War


The bloody conflict you didn't read about this week is in Congo, and it
threatens to redraw the map of Africa.


BY ANJAN SUNDARAM | NOVEMBER 23, 2012


KIGALI, Rwanda - One of Congo's biggest eastern cities fell to a powerful
rebel force on Tuesday, Nov. 20, in a war that
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/21/world/africa/congolese-rebels-reach-goma-
reports-say.html?_r=0> may redefine the region but has produced
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/19/agony-congo-drc?CMP=twt
_gu> little political action by the United Nations, the United States, and
international powers that heavily support neighboring governments -- notably
Rwanda, a Western darling and aid recipient -- that are backing the
violence,
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/17/us-congo-democratic-rwanda-uganda
-idUSBRE89F1RQ20121017> according to U.N. experts. The fighting has
displaced nearly 1 million people since the summer, and the
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/19/congo-democratic-idUSL5E8MJGQU201
21119> battle for the city of Goma marks the latest episode of a long
struggle by Rwandan-backed rebels to take control of a piece of the
Democratic Republic of the Congo -- a struggle the rebels are now decisively
winning. The fighting has also highlighted the ineptitude of the United
Nations mission, one of the world's largest and most expensive, charged with
keeping Congo's peace.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
<http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iqXvJy2vCmO6vAgqnZRis9Bq6
RWg?docId=dacafeeedbdd42cfa78da5d4b9fa28c1> called Rwandan President Paul
Kagame on Saturday "to request that he use his influence on the M23 [rebels]
to help calm the situation and restrain M23 from continuing their attack,"
as the U.N.'s peacekeeping chief put it. And French Foreign Minister Laurent
Fabius
<http://www.france24.com/fr/20121118-lonu-appuie-larmee-combats-rebelles-m23
> affirmed that the rebellion in Congo was supported by Rwanda, expressing
"grave concern." But the violence has only escalated since. The U.N.
Security Council called an emergency session over the weekend, but its
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20382716> condemnation of the
violence, demanding that the rebels stop advancing on Goma and insisting
that outside powers stop funding the M23 rebels, have all simply been
ignored. The Security Council announced it would sanction M23 but did not
even mention Rwanda, the main power behind the rebellion. And even as the
fighting has intensified, the U.N. mission in Congo has been making public
<https://twitter.com/MONUSCO/status/270557972478959618> pronouncements about
new access to drinking water for people in eastern Congo -- producing a
surreal image of the war.

The well-equipped and professional M23 fighters, perhaps better armed and
organized than any rebel unit in Congo in the past decade, put on a
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/un-attack-helicopters-target-reb
els-in-eastern-congo-says-local-official/2012/11/17/f9d7744c-3117-11e2-af17-
67abba0676e2_story.html> remarkable show of force over the weekend to move
within a few kilometers of the provincial capital, Goma. The rebels not only
withstood heavy
<http://www.afp.com/en/news/topstories/un-peacekeepers-stay-threatened-goma>
shelling by U.N. helicopter gunships, but simultaneously gained ground and
forced back the Congolese national army on two other fronts, according to
reports. The Congolese army and U.N. peacekeeping forces subsequently stayed
out of the rebels' way, allowing M23 to capture large parts of Goma with
virtually no resistance. In the end, some 3,000 Congolese soldiers, backed
by hundreds of U.N. peacekeepers with air power, were unable to contain M23
forces numbering in the few hundreds.

This unprecedented military capability of the M23 rebels in a country of
ragtag militias has led to many credible claims -- backed by
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/17/us-congo-democratic-rwanda-uganda
-idUSBRE89F1RQ20121017> findings from U.N. experts -- that Rwanda is
providing weapons, soldiers, and military guidance to the rebels, with
orders coming directly from Rwanda's defense minister, Gen. James Kabarebe.
Human Rights Watch
<http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gPeQ03F3mUFPOsQAmVJp3v50
YucQ?docId=CNG.83b5aba4c61bffc07ff9697c9fafdf93.5d1> says it has extensively
<http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/03/dr-congo-rwanda-should-stop-aiding-war-c
rimes-suspect-0> documented Rwandan troops crossing into Congo to support
the M23 rebels. Uganda, too, is accused of providing M23 with a political
base, though on a request from the Congolese government it recently closed a
key border-crossing point that had been helping to finance the rebels. Both
Rwanda and Uganda are relatively ordered countries -- in stark contrast to
Congo -- with well-entrenched authoritarian governments that receive
significant military and financial aid from the United States and the West.

Such powerful backing means the rebels can deliver on their far-reaching
threats. As Goma fell, M23 spokesman Lt. Col. Vianney Kazarama told me that
rebels intended to "capture a good part of eastern Congo," including its
other major city in the east, Bukavu. The rebels have demanded that Congo's
government negotiate with them -- without specifying precisely what they
want. But Congo has <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20396768> said
it will only speak with Rwanda, "the real aggressor," and not to a
"fictitious" group that is serving as a cover. For now, the M23 rebels are
regrouping in Goma. And there may well be a calm interlude in the war, as
parties attempt to negotiate. But given the rebels' history, at the back of
their minds is likely an old dream -- of a place of their own in eastern
Congo -- that has become distinctly more real with Goma's capture.

The situation closely resembles another attack on Goma, four years ago, by
Laurent Nkunda, a rebel also backed by Rwanda who led M23's predecessor
group and who told me that he hoped to create a new country in eastern Congo
called the "Republic of Volcanoes." Some 200,000 people had been displaced
in that battle as fighting came right up to the city. In the end, Nkunda
chose not to take Goma, and during the negotiations that followed his forces
agreed to disband and join Congo's national army. This spring, however, some
of those same fighters declared that the Congolese government had reneged on
its promises and formed the M23 rebellion.

M23's and Nkunda's forces have been
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3786883.stm> accused of grave human
rights abuses, including mass rape (in one
<http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/kongo-berserker-von-bukavu-torpediert
-die-wahlen-a-415601.html> instance, of some 16,000 women in one weekend in
Bukavu), massacres, and the recruitment of child soldiers. Bosco Ntaganda,
an M23 leader, is wanted by the International Criminal Court for recruiting
child soldiers. Congo issued an international arrest warrant in 2005 for
Nkunda, citing war crimes, but he remains in secret detention in Rwanda,
which has refused to hand him over to Congo.

Rwanda's support for the M23 rebellion stems from a mix of historical
sympathies and financial interests. The M23 is composed mainly of Tutsi
fighters who represent a historically marginalized ethnic group in eastern
Congo. Several leaders of M23 and its predecessor rebel group had fought
alongside Rwanda's now-president, Kagame -- who, like many of his senior
aides, is also Tutsi.

Then there is also eastern Congo's immense mineral wealth, which Rwanda has
illegally profited from for years since its invasion of Congo in 1996.
Rwanda has
<http://www.enoughproject.org/blogs/new-evidence-links-rwanda-and-uganda-con
go-rebels-whats-impact> made hundreds of millions of dollars -- probably
much more -- by
<http://www.congoplanet.com/download/UN_Report_Congo_Rwanda_12122008.pdf>
supporting rebel groups who control lucrative mines in Congo and by
smuggling the minerals into Rwanda for export to world markets.

There is also history. Many Rwandans, including officials in government,
believe that eastern Congo is a rightful part of Rwanda, taken away when
European colonial powers carved up the continent in 1885 and made those
rich, fertile lands a part of Congo. They see the M23 as righting this
historical injustice, despite international laws to the contrary.

Rwanda's foreign minister, Louise Mushikiwabo, highlighted such sympathies
this summer when she began a private diplomatic meeting, on the topic of the
M23 rebellion, with a map of ancient Rwanda that encompassed much of eastern
Congo, according to several diplomats who attended the event. Her point was
that the region's history is complex, but it was only a logical step from
there to assert that Rwanda exercised some right over Congolese land.
Kagame, for his part, has remained oddly silent since the new surge of
violence on his country's border, though he has previously
<http://www.africanliberty.org/content/rwanda-president-kagame-lashes-out-we
st-after-aid-cut> refuted all allegations that his country supports the
rebels. And Kagame has so far, despite international appeals, refused to
condemn the M23 rebellion.

The rebels, however, insist that their movement is purely Congolese.
Kazarama, the M23 spokesman, told me that the M23 is combating "years of
poor governance, a lack of public services, and constant insecurity." When I
asked where the M23 had obtained its sophisticated military equipment -- the
U.N. has noted that it possesses 120 mm mortars and even night-vision
goggles -- Kazarama said he had purchased them on the "black market in
Dubai" and insisted that the weapons "had not come from Rwanda."

Rwanda, though it receives vast amounts of aid from Western countries, has
remained a decisive force in Congo's destabilization. The vast majority of
Congo's territory, despite being mineral-rich and open to pillage by other
neighbors, is relatively peaceful. But Congo's border with Rwanda, its tiny
neighbor, remains a flash point for new conflict.

In spite of the facts on the ground, Rwanda has a history of denial
regarding its involvement in Congo. Throughout its 1990s invasion of Congo,
Rwanda denied accusations of its presence on Congolese soil, even as
photographs emerged of Kabarebe, Rwanda's current defense minister and
operational commander of that Congo invasion, in Kinshasa, standing beside
Congo's then-president, Laurent Kabila, whom Rwanda had helped put in power.
For years, Rwanda also denied backing Nkunda's rebel forces, only to rein
him in and secretly detain him in Rwanda, where he remains today. And now,
President Kagame continues -- even
<http://www.africanliberty.org/content/rwanda-president-kagame-lashes-out-we
st-after-aid-cut> angrily -- to deny his government's assistance to M23.

On Tuesday, as M23 rebels took control of Congo's border with Rwanda -- an
event that should have caused concern -- news agencies
<http://www.romandie.com/news/n/_RDC_le_M23_a_Goma_controle_les_postes_front
ieres_avec_le_Rwanda86201120121347.asp> reported that Rwandan soldiers and
policemen "did not seem particularly nervous and no significant
reinforcements were visible."

The international community has historically chosen to take Rwanda's side in
its vehement denials of interference in Congo, continuing to
<http://www.oecd.org/dac/aidstatistics/1878421.gif> send almost $1 billion
each year to Rwanda's government, which depends for almost half its budget
on foreign aid.

In July, however, several Western governments
<http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/08/03/our_man_in_kigali>
suspended foreign aid payments to Rwanda after reports emerged that it was
arming the rebellion in Congo. The United States led the way, suspending a
symbolic $200,000 in military assistance (a tiny percentage of its real
support to Rwanda). But several of Rwanda's biggest financiers -- including
the European Union, the World Bank, and the African Development Bank, many
of which channel money directly to the Rwandan treasury -- have continued to
gift and loan the government money and have
<http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/133
597.pdf> refused to publicly condemn Rwanda's support to the rebels, despite
the mounting evidence.

In September, Britain, which had previously suspended its payments,
<http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/11/andrew-mitchell-rogue-mini
ster-claims-on-rwanda-aid-offensive/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;u
tm_campaign=andrew-mitchell-rogue-minister-claims-on-rwanda-aid-offensive>
reinstated 16 million pounds in aid to the Rwandan government. Britain's
former international development secretary, Andrew Mitchell, who
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/rwanda/95916
75/Britain-under-pressure-to-end-all-aid-to-Rwandan-government.html> enjoys
a close relationship with Kagame and whose charity work in Rwanda has been
praised by the president, was
<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andrew-mitchell-denies-rogue-
minister-accusation-after-controversially-approving-16-million-rwanda-aid-pa
ckage-on-last-day-as-international-development-secretary-8297634.html>
criticized as a "rogue minister" by British members of Parliament for
signing off on that aid on his very last afternoon in office. Other
countries, including the United States, have hinted that they will merely
not make any "new" aid commitments to Rwanda, but that existing promises --
which amount to several hundred million dollars -- will continue to be
delivered.

Simply put, the international community seems reluctant to apply pressure on
Rwanda to help end the enormous humanitarian crisis unfolding in Congo.
Western countries claim that putting pressure on Kigali could bring new
<http://vorige.nrc.nl/article2282136.ece> instability to the region --
despite the inherent absurdity in this argument, given Rwanda's
<http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/Africa-Monitor/2010/0827/Highlights-f
rom-leaked-UN-draft-report-on-Congo-atrocities-1993-1996> destabilizing
influence in Congo both now and historically.

Aid donors also fear losing what they consider a model country for
development in Africa -- though such notions of development success are
strictly economic. While Rwanda has
<http://www.minecofin.gov.rw/library/gce/MacroeconomicVariablesPublicDataset
062812.xlsx> reported striking economic growth since its 1994 genocide, its
government is severely repressive and shows scant respect for fundamental
human rights.

The latest attack on Goma also highlights the inadequacy of the
17,000-strong U.N. force, which is staffed mostly with soldiers from poor
countries -- in eastern Congo, mainly soldiers from India, Pakistan, and
Bangladesh -- who are sent to such missions as a reward for good service at
home. The U.N. per diems represent, for many soldiers, four times their
regular army salaries. Peacekeepers often told me they were using their
Congo stint to save up for a house or for their children's education -- they
were "not in Congo to die."

The U.N. has
<http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/20/uk-congo-democratic-idUKBRE8AJ0EZ2
0121120> said that once the Congolese army had fled Goma, it did not stop
the M23 rebels for fear of causing civilian casualties. French Foreign
Minister Fabius has meanwhile
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/20/congo-democratic-fabius-idUSP6E8K
O02H20121120> called for a review of the United Nations mission in Congo,
saying it was "absurd" that the rebels had been able to parade past the idle
peacekeepers. Meanwhile, the Congolese and Rwandan armies have
<http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-congo-democratic-rwandabre8ai0
ny-20121119,0,3983896.story> reportedly begun to bomb each other, in the
first open hostilities between the countries in years.

The resumption of fighting this spring ended a few years of gradual progress
in Congo's east, in which relative stability had been established in the
areas around Goma for the first time since 1996. The famous
<http://www.visitvirunga.org/> Virunga National Park had seen increasing
numbers of foreign tourists keen on visiting the endangered mountain gorilla
in its natural habitat. And Goma was enjoying a flurry of new construction,
largely of multistory hotels.

What seems clear now is that the M23 rebels have made a decisive push to
take over a part of eastern Congo. The Rwandan state also seems to be moving
with conviction -- not backing down from its support for the rebellion
despite repeated international appeals. And the government has been
emboldened by its recent
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/rwanda/96185
25/Rwanda-wins-UN-Security-Council-seat-amid-Congo-arms-claims.html>
successful bid for a seat on the U.N. Security Council, despite credible
evidence even then that it was supporting M23. And now there is talk in the
region of the emergence of a new quasi-country -- a South Sudan-style
annexation of mineral-rich territory in Congo.

A peaceful end to this conflict is now difficult to imagine, and it is
Congo's civilians who will suffer, as they always have, the most. It is
highly unlikely that the M23 rebels can be reintegrated into the Congolese
national army once again -- trust has been broken by this conflict. But if
the M23 are defeated, sentiments against the Rwandan-speaking minorities in
Congo will become even more vitriolic and may well lead to more violence.
The rebels, and Rwanda, are no doubt aware of their great gamble.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/images/congo.jpg






      ------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------

Received on Fri Nov 23 2012 - 10:09:46 EST