Showing posts with label Rwanda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rwanda. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Rwanda's way forward is through investment, not foreign assistance

TO BE NOTED: From UN Dispatch:

"
Rwanda's mHealth Boom

Philip Gourevitch is not the only one who's traveled to Rwanda recently and appreciated the extent to which it's "a country looking and moving forward, not back." This eyes-on-Singapore approach is particularly evident in the field of technology. The UN Foundation's Claire Thwaites reports on one of Rwanda's more encouraging public health-related tech developments:

Supported by the Rwandan Ministry of Health, Voxiva, and the Treatment Research and AIDS Centre (TRAC), TRACnet is an electronic records system that can be uploaded to mobile phones. In Masaka it is being used to track and record the distribution of anti-retroviral medications, ensure drug adherence, electronically create and submit patient reports, and access the most up-to-date information about HIV/AIDS care and treatment.

[snip]

In Masaka, I was guided through the health clinic by the local program manager, Hareuhana Diaedonne. During the tour, Hareuhana spoke at length about the simple but significant benefits that have been brought about by the introduction of mobile phones to the local healthcare system. Using TRACnet, he reported, data entry that used to take months to record and aggregate now can be collected in just 5 minutes.

President Paul Kagame has made a point to emphasize that he thinks Rwanda's way forward is through investment, not foreign assistance. Pushing mobile health technology seems like a perfect opportunity to both attract investment and improve the quality of the country's public health care system."

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

What we need to push for is not less aid but more aid to Africa and help untangle those aspects which reduce aid effectiveness

TO BE NOTED: From Africa Can...End Poverty

"
On Aid to Africa

Rwanda's president, Paul Kagame, makes a thoughtful commentary on aid. I concur with some of his views but defer on others. Volumes of aid to Africa per se are not the issue; instead the issue is the quality of political leadership and the effectiveness with which aid is put to in Africa to support the continent's development.

Aid, by itself, is not a bad thing and, if utilized properly, can help resource constrained economies make wise investments to move from a low to a higher base of performance. Post-war Western Europe and Japan reconstructed into a modern economy through massive aid provided through the Marshall Plan, and many developing economies in East Asia (China, Korea, etc) and South Asia (e.g., India) have taken off because of large injections of external aid and, of course, the determined will and good policies of those nations.

I find the debate championing the ending of aid to Africa as a dangerous one for it misses one key economic argument: resource fungibility. Having little less external resources does not imply meager internal resources will be better utilized. Africa has a financing gap--- and aid is a part filler. Depriving aid to Africa champions presume ending aid to Africa will make African economies face harder budget constraints and that African leaders will make wiser resource allocation decisions, as a result. This could not be further from the truth. Instead, I would argue that, if this were the case, we will see economies like that of Zimbabwe fare better. Instead, on account of resource fungibility, depriving aid to African economies, given prevailing patterns of governance and resource use in African economies, would likely hurt Africa's poor more.

What we need to push for is not less aid but more aid to Africa and help untangle those aspects which reduce aid effectiveness: weak and underutilized capacities, aid unpredictability, aid tying, and aid fragmentation. We should continue to push for and assist countries improve their governance and accountability capacities and systems to ensure that aid and resources of African countries are utilized more effectively for growth and lasting poverty reduction."

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Aid has not only often failed to meet its objectives; it has also rarely dealt with the underlying issues of poverty and weak societies

TO BE NOTED: From the FT:

"
Africa has to find its own road to prosperity

By Paul Kagame

Published: May 7 2009 19:35 | Last updated: May 7 2009 19:35

At recent meetings of the Group of 20 and the International Monetary Fund, world leaders have gathered to discuss the global economic crisis. Unfortunately, it seems that many still believe they can solve the problems of the poor with sentimentality and promises of massive infusions of aid, which often do not materialise. We who live in, and lead, the world’s poorest nations are convinced that the leaders of the rich world and multilateral institutions have a heart for the poor. But they also need to have a mind for the poor.

Dambisa Moyo’s controversial book, Dead Aid, has given us an accurate evaluation of the aid culture today. The cycle of aid and poverty is durable: as long as poor nations are focused on receiving aid they will not work to improve their economies. Some of Ms Moyo’s prescriptions, such as ending all aid within five years, are aggressive. But I always thought this was the discussion we should be having: when to end aid and how best to end it.

Aid has not only often failed to meet its objectives; it has also rarely dealt with the underlying issues of poverty and weak societies. We see this with our neighbour, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. There, 17,000 United Nations peacekeepers – the largest and most expensive presence of its kind in history – treat the symptoms rather than addressing the issues of capacity, self-determination and dignity.

Often, aid has left recipient populations unstable, distracted and more dependent; as Ashraf Ghani, the former finance minister of Afghanistan, has pointed out, it can even sever the relationship between democratically elected leadership and the populace.

Do not get me wrong. We appreciate support from the outside, but it should be support for what we intend to achieve ourselves. No one should pretend that they care about our nations more than we do; or assume that they know what is good for us better than we do ourselves. They should, in fact, respect us for wanting to decide our own fate.

At the same time, as I tell our people, nobody owes Rwandans anything. Why should anyone in Rwanda feel comfortable that taxpayers in other countries are contributing money for our well­being or development? Rwanda is a nation with high goals and a sense of purpose. We are attempting to increase our gross domestic product by seven times over a generation, which increases per capita incomes fourfold. This will create the basis for further innovation and foster trust, civic-mindedness and tolerance, strengthening our society.

Entrepreneurship is the surest way for a nation to meet these goals. Michael Fairbanks’ book, In The River They Swim, which uses Rwanda as one of its examples, highlights the need to respect local wisdom, build a culture of innovation and create investment opportunities in product development, new distribution systems and innovative branding.

Government activities should focus on supporting entrepreneurship not just to meet these new goals, but because it unlocks people’s minds, fosters innovation and enables people to exercise their talents. If people are shielded from the forces of competition, it is like saying they are disabled.

Entrepreneurship gives people the feeling that they are valued and have meaning, that they are as capable, as competent and as gifted as anyone else. Asking our citizens to compete is the same as asking them to go out into the world on behalf of Rwanda and play their part.

We know this is a tremendous challenge given our status as a land-locked nation emerging from conflict, with few natural resources, little specialised infrastructure and low historical investment in education. But, in fact, we have reasons to be optimistic: we have a clear strategy to export based on sustainable competitive advantages. We sell coffee now for high prices to the world’s most demanding purchasers; our tourism experience attracts the best customers in the world and market research reveals that perceptions of Rwandan tea are improving.

This has resulted in wages in key sectors rising at more than 20 per cent on an annual basis. We have cut our aid as a percentage of total GDP by half over the past decade, and last year we grew at more than 11 per cent even as the world entered a recession.

While this is encouraging, we know the road to prosperity is a long one. We will travel it with the help of a new school of development thinkers and entrepreneurs, with those who demonstrate they have not just a heart, but also a mind for the poor.


The writer is president of Rwanda"

Thursday, April 16, 2009

importance of science, technology and education investment as part of Rwanda’s ambitious development strategy

TO BE NOTED: From The Bottom Billion Blog:

"
Leapfrogging technology and Rwanda’s knowledgebase

An interesting lecture from Rwandan President Paul Kagame speaking at MIT. In the talk he addresses the importance of science, technology and education investment as part of Rwanda’s ambitious development strategy. Rwanda’s sees technology and the knowledgebase of the country as critical to unlocking growth across not just in the technology sector, or in the export of ICT services, but as integral to the countries overall development path. By focusing on the country’s human capital and its access to technology, the spillovers can benefit all aspects of the economy- from innovative energy technology to deliver electricity to rural areas, to technology-enhanced healthcare delivery models. Kagame also sees technology such as mobile phones as the key to more efficient business operation, such as distributed agricultural pricing systems.

The Rwandan President in the lecture emphasises the leapfrogging power of mobile phone technology, seen not just in Rwanda but across the developing world- however the question remains how widely can the success of mobiles be emulated for other technologies? I remain skeptical that the successes in mobile technology access in low-income countries can be translated into similar successful technological ‘leapfrogging’ in, for example explosive growth in rural computer access, simply by trusting the technology and the market. This is especially true for a replication of the private-sector-driven mobile phone sector, which is perhaps unique in its light-touch network potential. Instead, pushing the real technological boundaries will empahsise the need for more traditional forms of government infrastructure investment alongside innovative private sector action and partnerships.

It is still too early to judge, but I am enthusiastic about the present Rwandan government investment strategy to initiate the necessary infrastructure and taking this technological momentum to unlock the private sector possibilities- building of a national fibre network, roll out of national WiMAX access, a Kigali technology park and business incubator and external fibre landing stations to connect Rwanda to the coming east African undersea fibre. The strategies success or failure will hinge crucially on handover of the impetus to private sector actors. Indeed now it is up to private enterprise, foreign investment and the countries talent to sustain this momentum and fulfil Vision 2020’s ambition of Rwanda as a regional technology and telecommunications hub.

From the MIT Compton Lecture series website:

“Our continent is no longer all about violence and disease and human disasters that scarred many African countries in recent decades,” says Kagame. “We are now becoming a continent of opportunities.”

There are those who doubted Rwanda could “constitute a viable state,” says Kagame, but 14 years after bloody genocide and civil war, his country has managed an astonishing revival — enough “stability and resilience to allow the economy to grow at an average 7% annually in the past several years.” Other African nations have been expanding at the same pace; oil producers are zooming along at even faster clips. Kagame attributes this recovery to such factors as the “leapfrogging power of mobile technology,” where hundreds of millions of new cell phone users, even in remote areas without electricity, drive the growth of new business. And the number of internet subscribers in Africa is growing more than three times as fast as the rest of the world, says Kagame.

Cell phones and the internet allow Rwandan and other micro entrepreneurs to develop business networks. Kagame describes how technology helped a Kigali bakery expand beyond its neighborhood to reach more customers and suppliers, enabling workers to move into larger homes. In Kenya, Kagame recounts, a new agricultural commodity exchange “has reduced barriers between farmers, traders and consumers,” with the internet and cell phone text messages providing timely market information. This network has improved the incomes of farm families by 25%, leading to better healthcare and education. Rwanda’s power utility is also reaping the benefits of technology, keeping track of customers and accounts more efficiently, and no longer relying on government handouts.

But while technology has enabled Africans “to leapfrog some features of underdevelopment,” Kagame says it is not enough. “Our vision of becoming a middle income country by 2020 … requires thinking and acting inventively, boldly and creatively.” Kagame wants to build a foundation not just in technology but in science. Doing this requires a heavy investment in all levels of education. “Without a knowledge base,” he says, “Africa’s imperative for agricultural and industrial development to create wealth will remain unrealized.” He calls for members of the MIT community to join “in overcoming our challenges and turning them into rewarding opportunities.”

(Hat tip: Africa Unchained)"

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Worries about Rwanda’s record on human and political rights are now compounded by worries about its economic record.

TO BE NOTED: From the Economist:

"The genocide in Rwanda

The difficulty of trying to stop it happening ever again
Apr 8th 2009 | KIGALI
From The Economist print edition


Fifteen years on, the country is praised for salving the wounds of genocide. Yet that comes at the price of diminishing freedom. And now the economy is faltering

AP
AP


EVEN today, it is almost impossible to imagine how so many Rwandans could have turned into coldblooded butchers. The memorials to the slain that now grace many of the towns and villages in the country provide only small glimpses into the collective insanity that gripped a whole country in April 1994, when the Hutu killers turned on their Tutsi fellow citizens and Hutu sympathisers, leaving over 800,000 dead in three months.

Take the memorial at the National University of Rwanda in Butare, a couple of hours’ drive south-west of the capital, Kigali. Under a corrugated iron roof a long board displays the photographs of about 60 students who were killed. In fact, most of the staff and students at the university, over 500 in all, were slaughtered in just two weeks or so; only a few escaped across the nearby borders to Congo or Burundi. Many of the students were killed by their own teachers, specifically the dean of agriculture and vice-dean of political science. The former not only personally killed students but organised the campus massacre as well. What could have been running through their minds in the weeks leading up to the killings, as these highly educated people calculated how best they could hack or shoot their own students to death?

These awful questions haunt Rwanda to this day. It is only a mixed comfort to the genocide’s few survivors at the university that those two former academics responsible for many of their friends’ deaths are still in prison, just down the road. Some think they should have had a worse fate. But one of Rwanda’s main problems, in terms of justice and retribution, has been that so many Hutus, hundreds of thousands of them, became génocidaires; it was always going to be impossible to impose the harshest sentences on all of them. Only the ringleaders have been tried by an international court sitting in neighbouring Tanzania. Thousands of others in Rwanda have been sentenced to prison by local traditional courts known as gacaga. Gangs of them can be seen in their distinctive overalls, doing hard labour, digging irrigation ditches and so on, all over Rwanda.

They are a constant visual reminder of the crimes of 15 years ago. Indeed, in some ways Rwanda is facing as difficult a struggle today with the legacy of the genocide as at any time since 1994. For it is only now that thousands of former génocidaires who have been fighting for many years from bases in the jungles of eastern Congo against the current Tutsi-dominated government are at last returning to Rwanda.

That they are returning at all is a victory for the long-term strategy of President Paul Kagame’s government to bring back the country’s previously hostile Hutus from the near abroad. Most of them were put to flight by Mr Kagame’s own then-rebel army, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), that forced an end to the genocide in 1994. They are being re-educated in special camps in the hope that they can be peacefully reintegrated into Rwandan society.

But even if the policy works, it will come at a high price for the Tutsi survivors of the genocide. Freddy Mutanguha, who manages the Kigali Genocide Memorial Centre, is used to dealing with the genocide’s consequences. Yet even he found it “too difficult” when two of the returning génocidaires moved into his home village of Kibuye a couple of months ago after they came back from Congo. So now his neighbours are two known killers “being fed and protected by the Rwandan government”. Mr Mutanguha, understandably, did not want to return to his own home to see them.



Courage and even generosity of spirit in dealing with an awful situation has earned Mr Kagame’s government high marks in the West and in Africa as a whole. After all, Rwanda is the only genocide case where the victims, the Tutsi, have chosen to reintegrate their killers into the country and to live as neighbours again—a uniquely hard task, especially in Africa’s most densely populated country. In other genocide cases, the victims have left altogether, sometimes to help found a new state of their own, such as Israel, or have been marginalised in their own country, as were the Herero in South-West Africa, now Namibia. To encourage reconciliation, Rwanda has embarked on an experiment to change completely the way a new generation thinks about itself. Now, officially, no one is a Hutu or Tutsi; there are only Rwandans. Ethnicity, the genocide’s alleged cause, is being outlawed.


For sure, the government’s policy has contributed to a new era of peace; Rwanda, it is generally agreed, is now one of Africa’s most law-abiding countries. Yet the reach and ferocity of new laws encouraging reconciliation are making Western donors and many Rwandans queasy. Is the country paying too high a price for its policy?

Critics fear that any challenge to an already authoritarian government is gradually being outlawed under a pretext of criminalising the promotion of so-called “genocide ideology”. There were already stiff penalties for “divisionism”, an acknowledgment of differences between Hutu and Tutsi. But last year a new and even fiercer law was passed, carrying heavy penalties. Its criminalisation of genocide ideology is so broadly drawn that it could be used to prosecute people for any number of utterances.

Clause three, for instance, states that the crime of promoting genocide ideology is characterised by “dehumanising a person or group with the same characteristics”, and that this can be done by “marginalising, laughing at one’s misfortune, defaming, mocking, boasting, despising, degrading, creating confusion aimed at negating the genocide which occurred, stirring up ill feelings”.

About 1,300 cases involving genocide ideology were initiated in Rwanda’s courts in the 2007-08 judicial year, even before the latest law was passed. Human-rights critics say these ill-defined laws are being abused by the government, enabling it to prosecute anyone, including young children, who say anything the government dislikes or who draw attention to the role of Mr Kagame’s own RPF in the massacres of 1994. For many, justice has been too partial in post-genocide Rwanda; many of Mr Kagame’s men, estimated by the UN to have killed up to 45,000 people between April and August 1994, have got off lightly.

These draconian laws chime with the government’s general dislike of dissent. Some foreign critics are now banned from entering the country, however sympathetic they may have been to Rwanda in the past. Alison des Forges was probably the greatest foreign expert on Rwanda until her death in a plane crash in February. She had been the most sensitive and thorough chronicler of the genocide but, as an increasingly vocal critic of Mr Kagame’s human-rights record, she was banned last year, her death barely marked in Kigali. Open political opposition is declining. At elections the formal opposition parties largely mimic the government line and then join the government afterwards. There is little real choice.

Worries about Rwanda’s record on human and political rights are now compounded by worries about its economic record. Indeed, they are related. The economic recovery after the genocide, when Hutu militias looted the country before fleeing into Congo, had been remarkable, if largely funded by the diaspora and by foreign aid. But in the past few years it has stalled. The number of Rwandans living in extreme poverty is reckoned to have declined from over 75% in 1994 to 57% in 2006. But the figure has barely moved since then. Because of a rapid increase in population, the absolute number of people in poverty has probably risen.

Rwanda now needs a vigorous private sector to keep the economy moving in the right direction, especially if the country is to meet its lofty goal of becoming east Africa’s service hub. The government talks up its eagerness for free enterprise, endearing it to the West, but entrepreneurs, especially from abroad, often feel hamstrung in what they are allowed to do—and so leave. A controlling government will hurt Rwanda’s economic prospects as well as its wider freedoms; the two are indivisible."

Friday, March 20, 2009

We are getting increasing reports of FDLR targeting civilians they accuse of collaborating.

TO BE NOTED: From Stop The War In North Kivu:

"
Negative hornets
2009 March 20

We are getting increasing reports of FDLR targeting civilians they accuse of collaborating. We’re seeing increased instances of rape and killings of civilians“(…) “A hornets’ nest has been stirred up, and I’m not sure that anyone is prepared to deal with the angry hornets.”

Anneke Van Woudenberg (HRW) recently said this regarding the “counter attack” of FDLR forces in the Kivus after the departure of the Rwandan Armed Forces at the end of February.

I agree with this opinion. The metaphor, though, is a dangerous one. I find picturing the FDLR as a “hornest´nest” pretty close to a term well-known in the region: that of “negative forces”.

As in any other war, language in the Great Lakes Region is a tool of propaganda. For years, one of the biggest propaganda successes of the Rwandan regime was coining the term “negative forces” referring to FDLR. Almost everyone used it for a while. By using it, everything regarding this group became instantly bad. However, many historians and analysts have shown that the degree of revengeful violence inflicted in the Kivus by the Rwandan Armed Forces was comparable to the unbearable suffering Rwanda went through in 1994. This to say: there is not one single “negative force” in this affair, but many. One side, though, has been able to present itself as a pure and simple victim for a long time. That is part of the truth (a painful truth that has to be remembered and never forgotten), but not the whole of it.

There are no memorials for the people that were slaughtered at the other side of the border, in Congolese soil. And they were many."

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

This does not mean, though, that Braeckmann´s story is wrong.

TO BE NOTED: From Stop The War In North Kivu:

"
US playing the stick and the carrot with Rwanda
2009 March 17

On March 2nd, the US based company Contour Global announced the investment of 325 million U$ to develop a gas extraction and electricity generation facility which “will provide 100 MW of natural gas fired electricity to Rwanda and the East African Region”. According to Contour Global, this is the biggest investment in the history of Rwanda (you can download the press release here).

The Rwandan army finished the joint military operation and left Congolese soil on February 27th.

Of course, both news have no link to each other."

And:

"Just too good to be true?

2009 March 16

I read a beautiful story a few days ago. It is like a new chapter of The West Wing, the wonderful TVseries where a decent and capable man, who studied in LSE and won the Nobel Price for Economics, rules the most powerful country on Earth and tries to be a force for good.

In this beautiful chapter, the President of the United States and his new administration do care about human rights, have a great operating knowledge of the problems of the people in North Kivu, and use their power to change the situation for better. The plot shows how Congolese authorities visiting Washington are happily impressed by the new administration´s knowledge of the conflict. They are listened, and the new men in Washington are remarkably able to open a dialogue process. They put an end to CNDP, ensure the normalization of the relationship between the DRC and Rwanda… and the first stone for a durable end to violence is in place.

Sounds like Alice in Wonderland, but this is mainly what Colette Braeckmann says in her last post. The text has been widely visited and traduced.

I guess that in the following chapters of this unexpected new season of the West Wing, the IDPs start to return home.

Colette Braeckmann is not no matter who. When she talks, people quiet and listen. However, here in the ground things do not seem so nice. IDPs continue to flee violence in Masisi and the FDLR claims to be hitting hard the FARDC.

This does not mean, though, that Braeckmann´s story is wrong. The problem is that governance is so poor in the DRC that the gap between the macro level and the reality on the ground is enormous. The weakest the state is, the longest it takes for decissions to be put into practice.

Joseph Kabila was recently here, and so did Ban Ki Moon. These visits, together with recent events and articles like Braeckmann´s, let us dream that the discussions taking place behind doors can really change the scenario, for good and forever. Sounds like Alice in wonderland, but having a black president in the white house sounded like that only two years ago, so… Let´s see.

This being said, no matter how much silence good diplomacy needs, no one knows what is being/has been discussed. Not very democratic as a process for a country considering itself as the champion of freedom."

Saturday, February 21, 2009

The problem is: if Rwandan armed forces really leave, how are the FARDC suppose to hold their current position in the front line?

From Stop The War In North Kivu:

"
US: “Real success in the Kivus”. Sure?
2009 February 21

Through words of its ambassador in the DRC, the US have publicly shown their full support for the joint military operation taking place in the Kivus. This kind of open declaration, and the way things are happening, can let us even think that plan the itself has been conceived by US diplomacy and proposed to Kigali and Kabila with a “you take it, or you take it” approach, soften with the idea of a “win-win” situation for everyone.

It seems that once the US speaks, the EU feels that it has to express itself on the matter.

Eurac, an influential European advocacy network, has expressed interesting recommendations on the current scenario, mainly advocating for less military muscle and more negotiation. This is not an easy thing to say now, though, because we are knowing that the FDLR keeps on killing civilians. However, let´s make this clear: the FDLR are not the only negative forces in this war, no matter how many times Rwanda has tried to label them with this term. All armed groups involved in this war are more than negative (Filip Reytnjens expressed the spiral of violence in the Great Lakes region after the genocide with a very lucid sentence: “this is not a story of good guys fighting bad guys. This a story of bad guys”).

Following the on-going diplomatic plan, Rwanda affirmed yesterday what most Congolese citizens wanted to hear: that Rwandan troops will leave the country this same week. “Tomorrow [for today] they are going to issue (the orders). They will begin pulling back slowly,” a Rwandan spokesman said yesterday. He said that the withdrawal will be completed for next Wednesday.

The problem is: if Rwandan armed forces really leave, how are the FARDC suppose to hold their current position in the front line?

Many people in this part of the world remember the last time Rwandan forces left the Kivus. An expression was coined that time. People said that Rwandan soldiers “left through the main entrance and came back through the back window“. This is to say, they continued their presence in Congolese soil in a more disguised, but real, way. Many Congolese fear this could be the case again.

Me:

To tell you how strange reporting in the US is, I'm going to post you a post I submitted to the NY Times today which was rejected. It was on the Bob Herbert column:

The war in the DRC and the recent rampage of the Lord's Resistance Army are not invisible if you care to look. Here are a few resources:

http://af.reuters.com...

http://stopthewarinnorthkivu.wordpress.com...

http://blogs.lesoir.be/colette-braeckman/

http://petereichstaedt.blogspot.com/

Recently, the US was involved in pressuring Rwanda to intervene with the cooperation of the DRC in the DRC, and in helping Uganda search for the LRA, which turned into a nightmare for many because the search was poorly organized.So the US is involved, although more needs to be done. The UN's role is not what it should be. Here is a very good essay on the UN in the DRC:

http://www.grip.org...

Don the libertarian Democrat

— Don, Tacoma, WA

So I'm trying to publicize places where one can keep up on the crisis, but it's not easy. I've no idea if the problem was mentioning other blogs or using French sources. Je ne comprend pas. I didn't look that up. It might not be correct. I'm much better at reading French.

Friday, February 20, 2009

Rwandan troops will start withdrawing from eastern Congo on Saturday and the entire force will have left by the middle of next week

TO BE NOTED: From Reuters:

GOMA, Congo (Reuters) - Rwandan troops will start withdrawing from eastern Congo on Saturday and the entire force will have left by the middle of next week, a Rwandan military spokesman said on Friday.

Rwandan soldiers have "achieved their objectives" in a joint operation with Congo's army to hunt Rwandan Hutu rebels in eastern Congo, even though the rebels have not been completely destroyed, Major Jill Rutaremara told Reuters.

Congo invited the Rwandan army to help it attack the rebels last month, in a sign of improved relations between the two countries after a 15-year period in which they fought two wars.

The rebels, known as the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), have been central to these conflicts, which still simmer despite the world's largest United Nations peacekeeping mission and 2006 elections in Congo.

"Tomorrow they are going to issue (the orders). They will begin pulling back slowly," Rutaremara said on Friday.

"There will be a parade and then the troops will go back to Rwanda. All Rwandan troops will pull out," he added, saying the withdrawal would be completed by Wednesday.

Some FDLR rebels took part in Rwanda's 1994 genocide and then fled to Congo, sparking years of violence as Rwanda's powerful Tutsi-led army then invaded its mineral-rich neighbor.

Rwanda said it invaded Congo during the 1990s to hunt the Hutu force but it did not defeat them and, in the process, Rwanda was accused of plundering Congo's resources and backing other Congolese rebels.

Congolese President Joseph Kabila has also invited Uganda's army to hunt Ugandan rebels in northeast Congo.

Kabila said last month that the Rwandan and Ugandan soldiers had until the end of this month to complete their operations in Congo. Uganda is seeking an extension to its operation.

(Reporting by Hereward Holland; writing by David Lewis; editing by Tim Pearce)

Friday, February 13, 2009

in Congo after the 1994 Rwandan genocide and has been a principal cause of the deadliest documented conflict since World War II

From the Washington Post:

"Rwanda's Move Into Congo Fuels Suspicion
Some in Mineral-Rich Region See Broader Motives Than Disarming Hutu Militiamen

By Stephanie McCrummen
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 13, 2009; A01

KIGALI, Rwanda -- With thousands of Rwandan troops fanned out across eastern Congo's green hills, many residents and international observers are questioning what is really behind the operation in the mineral-rich region and how long it is likely to last.

The official explanation, offered by both Rwandan and Congolese diplomats, is straightforward. After two wars and a decade of mistrust, the two nations finally agreed to deal militarily with a common menace -- the Rwandan Hutu militia known as the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda, or FDLR, which reorganized in Congo after the 1994 Rwandan genocide and has been a principal cause of the deadliest documented conflict since World War II.

By some estimates, at least 5 million people died in multi-sided wars over more than a decade, mostly from disease, hunger and the collapse of human services associated with the fighting. The humanitarian catastrophe was largely ignored by the United States and other Western nations, while United Nations peacekeepers failed to halt the violence.

In acting now, Congo and Rwanda have in theory ended a proxy war that had played out for years in eastern Congo. Rwanda pulled the plug on rebel leader Laurent Nkunda, whom it arrested last month. And Congo abruptly turned on its longtime ally the FDLR, joining the Rwandans in an operation to hunt down the militia.

"Rwanda and Congo have decided to come together as neighbors," said Joseph Mutaboba, who was Rwanda's envoy during several rounds of talks. "And we have been able to tackle the problems that are ours."

But some observers see much broader economic and political motives behind Rwanda's military foray -- its third in Congo in the past decade -- that have more to do with Rwanda's regional ambitions than with the 6,000 or so FDLR militiamen. As recently as October, Rwandan officials had cast the militia as "a Congolese problem," saying it did not pose an immediate military threat to Rwanda.

"Is the FDLR now suddenly on the verge of becoming more militarily powerful? I don't think we've seen that," said Alison Des Forges, a Human Rights Watch researcher and leading expert on Rwanda. "And if they haven't, then what you have is Rwanda trotting out an old warhorse of an excuse to go in again. The question is, what is the intent?"

The stakes are high for the joint Rwandan-Congolese military offensive against the FDLR, given its potential to trigger more regional instability than it resolves. Rwanda's two earlier invasions succeeded in disrupting the militia's operations but also helped spawn more than a decade of conflict that at one point drew in as many as eight African nations in a scramble for regional supremacy and a piece of Congo's vast mineral wealth.

Although the two Rwandan invasions were devastating for the Congolese, they were hugely beneficial for Rwanda, which is still struggling to rebuild after the 100 days of well-planned violence in 1994 when Hutu extremists killed an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Many Rwandans became involved in the lucrative mineral trade out of eastern Congo after the genocide, and some observers speculate that the current military operation aims to solidify Rwanda's economic stake in the region.

"It was a period of great economic boom for Rwanda -- a lot of people got rich, including military officers," Des Forges said, adding that the current military operation could help Rwandan President Paul Kagame relieve internal pressures on his government, which allows little room for dissent. "Presumably, if the troops were back in Congo for a substantial period of time, they could expect to reap certain benefits. It could also be beneficial for Rwanda to have greater control over economic resources than they've had before."

On that score, unverifiable rumors abound about secret deals and gentlemen's agreements struck between Congo and Rwanda over mineral rights and mineral processing. At a local level, Congolese villagers who have long suspected Rwanda of wanting to annex a swath of eastern Congo say they are certain that their tiny but militarily powerful neighbor is interested in more than disarming the FDLR.

"Congo is rich," said Eric Sorumweh, who said he watched hundreds of Rwandan troops pass by his village last month. "So they just come to loot the wealth of Congo."

Those suspicions, along with Rwanda's messy history in Congo, have fueled criticism of Congolese President Joseph Kabila, who has been lambasted by political opponents for inviting an old enemy back into the country. Late last month, Kabila pledged that the estimated 7,000 Rwandan troops in Congo would leave by the end of February. This time, his supporters say, the situation with Rwanda is different.

While conspiracy theories swirl, Kabila's backers -- as well as a number of Western diplomats who support the joint operation against the FDLR -- say Congo's deal with Rwanda represents a mature realization by Kabila and Kagame that their interests are better served by working together officially, rather than through rebel proxies.

"I think the two presidents have understood that official contact can be to their advantage," said Julien Paluku Kahongya, governor of North Kivu province in eastern Congo. "Now we can start thinking together of how we can lift the economy. For agriculture and trading and other economic reasons, Rwanda will be coming here, and we will be going to Rwanda."

According to Kahongya and others, the downsides of the proxy war between Rwanda and Congo were becoming increasingly clear. Kabila was politically threatened by the stunning advance of Nkunda's rebels across eastern Congo last year. And Rwanda was embarrassed by a U.N. report in December that found it to be directly or tacitly supporting Nkunda. As a result, Rwanda's prized reputation as a darling of the aid world suffered, the Netherlands and Sweden cut off aid, and international pressure mounted for the government to solve its differences with Congo. The report also found that Congo was collaborating with the FDLR.

At the same time, hundreds of millions of dollars from the European Union, the World Bank and other donors -- for major road, railroad and power projects that would benefit both countries -- were largely predicated upon a detente between the two sides. That is supposed to become official when Rwanda and Congo restore full diplomatic relations, probably next month.

"Rwanda's interest is in a stable region, and you can't have that with multiple armed groups running around in eastern Congo," said a Western diplomat in the region who was not authorized to speak publicly. "Plus there's a whole system of militia taxes and corruption there, and none of that benefits Rwanda. They see their economic welfare as tied to greater integration in East Africa."

And so Congo and Rwanda devised a way to cut out the middlemen -- launching the joint military operation to disarm the FDLR, neutralize Nkunda's rebels and, in theory, fold an array of other, smaller militias into the Congolese army.

The entry of Rwandan troops into Congo also represents the failure of U.N. peacekeepers to tame the militias and rebels of eastern Congo. A deal signed in Nairobi in December 2007 called upon the peacekeepers to assist the Congolese army in disarming the FDLR, but that effort never got off the ground. A recent U.N. request for an additional 3,000 peacekeepers also fell flat, with only Bangladesh offering troops so far.

"Now things have turned in such a way that it's possible for the Rwandans to do it," said Philip Lancaster, a professor at the University of Victoria in Canada who has been involved in U.N. efforts to demobilize Congo's militias. "I think this is a clear case of two African states agreeing to solve their own problems, seeing that the international community can't."

According to a U.S. official who is in close contact with the Rwandan military, the goal is not to completely dismantle the FDLR, but merely to scatter it. Several of its key leaders are not even in eastern Congo, but are living in the Congolese capital, Kinshasa, or in Europe.

So far, very little information is trickling out about the operation. According to U.N. officials, Rwandan forces were able in recent days to capture two villages that had served as FDLR bases. More than 40 FDLR fighters have been killed and 11 taken prisoner, and more than 500 fighters and their families have simply surrendered.

Several large groups of militiamen were fleeing west last week, deeper into Congo, the U.N. officials said, and Rwandan soldiers were pursuing them."

Me:

"The entry of Rwandan troops into Congo also represents the failure of U.N. peacekeepers to tame the militias and rebels of eastern Congo. A deal signed in Nairobi in December 2007 called upon the peacekeepers to assist the Congolese army in disarming the FDLR, but that effort never got off the ground. A recent U.N. request for an additional 3,000 peacekeepers also fell flat, with only Bangladesh offering troops so far. "

This is the sad fact. The UN troops were unable to stop the violence. Outside pressure forced Rwanda and the DRC to cooperate, as is happening with Uganda in respect to the Lord's Resistance Army.

I'm sorry, but it was indifference, not meddling, that allowed 5 million people to needlessly die.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Being a head of state is not like being in a restaurant. I have to have time to think about it.

From Tyler Cowen:

"
Africa's World War

The subtitle is Congo, The Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe and yes the book truly explains all of these things or at least gives it a noble try. The author is Gérard Prunier. I've been stunned by how much I've learned from this book, which is clear without denying the underlying complexities. I rate it as one of the two excellent books of the year so far, the other being Ted Gioia's book on the history of the blues.

You'll find a very critical review of the book here but I was more impressed by the book than by the review. I liked this excerpt:

Interviewer: What model of democracy do you see as suitable?

Kabila: I cannot say now, you are asking too much. Being a head of state is not like being in a restaurant. I have to have time to think about it.

Me:

I'd like to recommend a few blogs:

http://stopthewarinnorthkivu.wordpress.com/

http://blogs.lesoir.be/colette-braeckman/

http://blogs.reuters.com/africa/

Posted by: Don the libertarian Democrat at Jan 31, 2009 5:01:03 PM

Monday, January 26, 2009

Nkunda, once Rwanda's tool in keeping Hutu militias at bay, had become an embarrassment.

From Stop The War In North Kivu, some context:

"
Diplomatic pressure and unknown deals In Analysis, News on January 25, 2009 at 3:43 pm

Last Friday, Chris McGreal provided a very comprehensive analysis of the recent events in The Guardian. Together with Foreign Policy, the Guardian points to diplomatic pressure pushing the deal, specially after Kiwanja and the Stearns report:

Kagame’s closest allies overseas, the US and Britain( ABOUT TIME ), which provide the bulk of Rwanda’s foreign aid and a lot of diplomatic cover, quietly made clear that the conflict in eastern Congo had to be brought to an end.

However, as Jason Stearns said last Friday on the NYT, Nkunda’s arrest is part of a broader realignment. As he underlines, the unknowns and risks over the horizon are many."

Here's the Guardian:

Rwanda: why former military hero was disowned after rampages in Congo
The arrest of Laurent Nkunda reflects a dramatic diplomatic shift after tiny but ambitious state found itself on receiving end of international criticism
Laurent Nkunda

Laurent Nkunda: had become an embarrassment to Kigali Photograph: AP

Tony Blair happened to be in Rwanda at the time the Tutsi rebel general, Laurent Nkunda, was slaughtering his way through eastern Congo late last year.

Blair – who has taken on saving Rwanda as another of his post-premiership missions, inserting people into the offices of the president, prime minister and cabinet in Kigali to help run the government – was keen to talk up the prospects for the tiny central African nation that has made remarkable strides since the 1994 genocide that left about 800,000( 800,000 ) Tutsis dead.

But the world's attention was on a different aspect of Rwanda entirely. This time Rwanda was on the receiving end of international criticism for backing Nkunda amid the continuing horror of massacres, mass rape and perpetual refugees in Congo, where about 5 million( 5 Million ) have died as the result of more than a decade of war and its effects.

Nkunda, once Rwanda's tool in keeping Hutu militias at bay, had become an embarrassment. The rebel general had already spilled a lot of blood before the crisis flared again last October when his forces marched to the edge of Goma in eastern Congo. But on that occasion the world, for once, took notice when Nkunda's men went through the town of Kiwanja systematically killing hundreds of the remaining men, and some families.

In Rwanda President Paul Kagame's government was alarmed. His minority Tutsi-led administration, which drew much of its foreign support from the moral authority of having ended the genocide, was now seen more as perpetrator than victim.

Kagame's grand scheme to project his country as a rapidly modernising state embracing Anglo-Saxon liberal capitalism – even to the extent of switching the education system from French to English( WOW. OF COURSE, HE'S PROBABLY NOT FOND OF THE FRENCH. ) – was threatened by its support of Nkunda. Its involvement in Congo sent out the message that Rwanda was really run by another bunch of bloodthirsty warlords.

At that point Nkunda became more of a liability than an asset. His arrest yesterday, as he fled into Rwanda with large amounts of cash, gold and diamonds( HOW NICE ), is one part of a dramatic diplomatic shift as Kigali tries to detach itself from direct involvement in Congo that used to pay dividends in securing its frontier and vast profits from the plunder of minerals but which has become a political burden.

Nkunda's close ties to Rwanda go back to his days fighting in the rebel army, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), that overthrew the genocidal regime and took power in 1994. He returned to Congo – or Zaire as it then was – and was again drawn in to collaboration with the RPF after it invaded Congo twice in the second half of the 1990s to fight the Hutu militias that had fled there after leading the genocide.

After Rwanda pulled out of Congo in 2003, it saw Nkunda's National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP) as a buffer force against the Hutu force, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), which had gained control of swaths of territory on Rwanda's border and kept up the mantra of genocide, threatening to exterminate Tutsis.

But Nkunda, in the name of defending Tutsis, was increasingly bloodthirsty. His forces rampaged through cities such as Bukavu, murdering and raping. They also got into the mining business, getting rich out of plundering gold, diamonds and coltan, a crucial but rare component of mobile phones.

Much of the world turned a blind eye to Rwanda's backing for Nkunda. Officially it had stopped because Kigali was embarrassed by his excesses but there was no doubt that links remained. Nkunda's soldiers included English-speaking Tutsis most likely drawn from Rwandan exiles who grew up in Uganda. The UN observed weapons being shipped through a triangle of land that linked Rwanda, Uganda and Congo. Above all, for a long time Nkunda served Rwanda's interests and Kigali declined to condemn him.

No more. Rwanda is trying to reshape itself as a modern, forward-looking country, far from the semi-fascist state that took hold during the three decades from independence to the genocide. The government's successes can be seen in how the capital has boomed since the genocide. Millions of dollars flowed in to build new hotels now filled with tourists and conferences. Kagame is talking up his country's prospects as a regional information technology hub.

But Congo increasingly threatened to wreck the new image, and Nkunda – who, as he grew more powerful, took to greeting visitors to his hilltop headquarters dressed in flowing white robes, like some messianic figure, with his white pet goat in tow – went from being an asset to a problem.

The political capital that the minority Tutsi-led government of Rwanda could draw on because of western guilt and sympathy after the genocide was increasingly overshadowed by the crimes being committed in Congo.

In December a UN report accused the Rwandan government of fuelling the conflict through covert support to Nkunda. The report also accused the Congolese government of ties to the Hutu militias threatening Rwanda, but that attracted less attention.

Rwanda vigorously denied the accusations but they were well documented and a further embarrassment after the crimes of Nkunda's forces a few weeks earlier. In response, some European governments cut off aid to Rwanda, emphasising to Kigali that it was now no longer viewed as the victim.

Kagame's closest allies overseas, the US and Britain, which provide the bulk of Rwanda's foreign aid and a lot of diplomatic cover, quietly made clear that the conflict in eastern Congo had to be brought to an end.( AT LAST )

Last week saw two dramatic and complementary developments. Nkunda faced a revolt within the CNDP, with some of his officers saying they had removed him from command and would no longer fight the Congolese government. At the same time, thousands of Rwandan troops moved across the border in agreement with the Congolese government to purse the Hutu militias controlling swaths of territory.

The deal was in place. Rwanda would neutralise Nkunda and the CNDP so long as the Hutu militias were also confronted. Tellingly, the rebel general fled across the border after he was confronted by a joint Rwanda-Congolese force. Nkunda's benefactor was allied with his enemy in pursuit of him.

Eastern Congo has been here before, and there is unlikely to be a complete halt to the violence for some time. There are still too many armed groups and mining groups with a vested interest in continued instability.

But dealing with the Hutu militia and Nkunda does confront the root causes of the conflict in eastern Congo for the first time, and gives its long suffering people the prospect of hope they have not had for many years."( GOOD )

From the NY Times:

A Congolese Rebel Leader Who Once Seemed Untouchable Is Caught

Uriel Sinai/Getty Images

Gen. Laurent Nkunda, shown in November 2008, was apprehended late Thursday by Rwandan troops. Rwandan authorities on Friday were tight-lipped about what they would do with him.

Published: January 23, 2009

KIGALI, Rwanda — Overnight, the battle in Congo has suddenly shifted.

Skip to next paragraph
Benedicte Kurzen/VII Mentor

Gen. Laurent Nkunda, the leader of a group of rebels, with his pet goat Betty in the mountains of Congo in November.

Benedicte Kurzen/VII Mentor

Mr. Nkunda at a training camp in North Kivu Province for the group of rebels that he leads.

General Nkunda was cornered near Bunagana.

Gen. Laurent Nkunda, the Congolese rebel leader whose brutal tactics and Congo-size ambitions have threatened to bring about another catastrophic war in central Africa, was arrested late Thursday, removing an explosive factor from the regional equation.

According to United Nations officials and Rwandan authorities, General Nkunda was captured by Rwandan troops as he tried to escape a Congolese-Rwandan offensive that has taken aim at several rebel groups terrorizing eastern Congo.

General Nkunda had seemed untouchable, commanding a hardened rebel force that routinely humiliated Congolese troops and then calmly gliding through muddy villages in impossibly white robes. But he may never have anticipated that his old ally, the Rwandan Army, would take him away.

The surprise arrest could be a major turning point for Congo, which has been mired in rebellion and bloodshed for much of the past decade. It instantly strengthens the hand of the Congolese government, militarily and politically, right when the government seemed about to implode. But it could also empower other, even more brutal rebel figures like Jean Bosco Ntaganda, General Nkunda’s former chief of staff, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes.

Still, analysts and politicians say they hope that General Nkunda’s capture at the hands of Rwanda means that the proxy war between Rwanda and Congo is finally drawing to a close.

A United Nations report in December accused high-ranking Rwandan officials of sending money and troops to General Nkunda, a fellow Tutsi who claimed to be protecting Congolese Tutsi from marauding Hutu militias. This cross-border enmity has been widely blamed for much of the turmoil, destruction, killing and raping that has vexed Congo for years.

John Prendergast, a founder of the Washington-based Enough Project, which campaigns against genocide, called it a “massive turn of events.”

“Finally the two countries are cooperating,” he said.

Kikaya bin Karubi, a member of Congo’s Parliament, said General Nkunda’s arrest “could be the beginning of the end of all the misery.”

“Look what happened at Kiwanja,” he said, referring to a small Congolese town where United Nations officials said General Nkunda’s forces went door to door, summarily executing dozens of civilians in November.

Now, if Congo gets its way, General Nkunda will have to face the consequences. The government is urging Rwanda to extradite General Nkunda so he can stand trial in Kinshasa, Congo’s capital, where he could face a war crimes tribunal and treason charges, punishable by death.

But Rwandan authorities were tight-lipped on Friday about what they would do with General Nkunda. “I can’t speculate,” said Maj. Jill Rutaremara, a spokesman for Rwanda’s Defense Forces. All he would say was that General Nkunda was “in the hands of Rwandan authorities.”

Though General Nkunda never controlled more than a handful of small towns in eastern Congo, he was Congo’s No. 1 troublemaker. His troops have been accused of committing massacres dating back to 2002. General Nkunda recently began cultivating national ambitions to overthrow Congo’s weak but democratically elected government, which threatened to draw in Congo’s neighbors and plunge central Africa into a regional war, something that has happened twice before.

General Nkunda’s confidence may have been his undoing. On Thursday night, hundreds of Rwandan troops cornered him near Bunagana. Congolese officials said he refused to be arrested and crossed into Rwanda, where he was surrounded and taken into custody. It is not clear how many men he had with him at the time, but it appears he was taken without a shot.

Just a few days ago, Rwanda sent several thousand soldiers into Congo as part of a joint operation to flush out Hutu militants who had killed countless people in the 1994 Rwanda genocide and were still haunting the hills on Congo’s side of the border.

Few expected the Rwandan troops to go after General Nkunda. Not only is he a Tutsi, like Rwanda’s leaders, but he had risen to power by fighting these same Hutu militants. Several demobilized Rwandan soldiers recently revealed a secret operation to slip Rwandan soldiers into Congo to fight alongside General Nkunda. He had been trained by the Rwandan Army in the mid-1990s and was widely believed to be an agent for Rwanda’s extensive business and security interests in eastern Congo.

But it seems that the Rwandan government abruptly changed its tack, possibly because of the international criticism it has endured for its ties to General Nkunda. Several European countries recently cut aid to Rwanda, sending a strong signal to a poor country that needs outside help. Rwanda may have figured the time was ripe to remove General Nkunda, analysts said.

Earlier this month, some of General Nkunda’s top commanders split from him, saying they were fed up with his king-of-the-world brand of leadership. One of those commanders was Mr. Ntaganda. Prosecutors at the International Criminal Court have accused him of building an army of child soldiers, a war crime.

But Mr. Ntaganda suddenly switched sides, denouncing General Nkunda and saying that he and his men were now eager to join the Congolese Army, which they had been battling for years. Many analysts believe that the Congolese government promised to try to protect Mr. Ntaganda from being sent to The Hague.

According to Jason Stearns, an analyst who recently served on a United Nations panel examining the conflict: “It’s fairly clear that Kigali and Kinshasa have struck a deal. Kinshasa will allow Rwanda onto Congolese soil to hunt down” the Hutu militants, “and in return Rwanda will dethrone Nkunda.”

Congolese officials are now talking about restoring full diplomatic relations with Rwanda, which had been suspended for years, and reinvigorating economic ties. But many uncertainties remain, including a possible power scramble by other militant groups hoping to fill the vacuum.

“Nkunda’s arrest is part of a larger, radical realignment,” Mr. Stearns said. “There are, however, many unknowns and risks.”

From Enough Said:

Printer-friendly version
Congo tank

In a dramatic reversal of fortune for one of Central Africa’s most powerful warlords, Congolese rebel leader Laurent Nkunda was arrested by Rwandan authorities last night along the Congo-Rwanda border. When my colleague Rebecca and I met with Nkunda in the town of Rwanguba on Thanksgiving Day, he seemed on top of the world. His rebel movement, the National Congress for the Defense of People, or CNDP, had routed the Congolese army, embarrassed UN peacekeepers, consolidated control of a large swath of North Kivu province, and threatened the regional capital of Goma. Nkunda shrugged off allegations that his lieutenant, Bosco “The Terminator” Ntaganda, had directed a massacre of civilians in Kiwanja, and confidently demanded direct negotiations with Congolese President Laurent Kabila. Journalists flocked to his compound, diplomats had him on speed dial, and the UN appointed a former president of Nigeria to mediate a solution. This morning, Nkunda was in Rwandan custody, and it sounds like he is already back in Congo and headed for detention in the capital, Kinshasa. What happened?

The power play orchestrated by the Congolese and Rwandan governments has been brewing for weeks. As Nkunda’s power and ambition grew, the governments of both Rwanda and Congo came to see him as a serious problem, albeit for different reasons. Unable to defeat Nkunda militarily and unwilling to treat him as a legitimate political actor, President Kabila needed Rwanda’s help to neutralize him. Rwandan President Paul Kagame was stung by Nkunda’s increasingly bold pronouncements (particularly his ambition to take his fight all the way to Kinshsa) and a U.N. panel of experts report documenting Rwandan support for CNDP and involvement with conflict minerals in eastern Congo. European donors began to threaten aid money and Rwanda no longer had plausible deniability that it was not involved with Nkunda.

Congolese officials sought Rwandan help to get rid of Nkunda. The quid pro quo: the Rwandan military would be allowed to re-enter eastern Congo to hunt down the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, or FDLR, a Rwandan Hutu rebel group led by commanders responsible for the 1994 Rwanda Genocide. In a fantastically cynical move, the two sides also agreed that indicted war criminal Bosco Ntaganda would replace Nkunda as head of CNDP, and that his forces would join in the offensive against the FDLR.

A week ago in Goma, Ntaganda announced that he had taken control of CNDP and would collaborate with the Congolese and Rwandan armies against the FDLR. As reported on this blog earlier this week, more than 3,000 Rwandan troops crossed into eastern Congo this past weekend, isolating Nkunda and ultimately arresting him. My colleague John Prendergast noted in the New York Times today, “Now the hard part begins.”

While the move to take more aggressive action to remove the FDLR from eastern Congo and arrest of Nkunda are welcome developments and could contribute mightily to a lasting peace in eastern Congo, there are lots of reasons to be profoundly apprehensive.

  • The planned operations against the FDLR have the potential to be catastrophic for Congolese civilians. The Congolese army and Rwandan armies have abysmal track records in protecting civilians, and the FDLR will almost certainly not stand their ground and fight. As they have done in the past (and as the Lord’s Resistance Army has done in northeastern Congo), the FDLR may well melt into the bush, leave civilians to bear the brunt of the offensive, and return with a vengeance when the operation is over. Moreover, Congo and Rwanda have clear economic motive to assert control over valuable mines in FDLR controlled areas. This could be why the UN peacekeeping force charged with protecting civilians in eastern Congo has been kept deliberately in the dark and is now restricted from traveling to certain areas.
  • The role of Bosco “The Terminator” Ntaganda sends a chilling message about the lack of accountability for crimes against humanity. Ntaganda is wanted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court, and the Congolese government, a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC, is in full violation of international law by failing to arrest him. Human Rights Watch has documented his role in recent massacres.
  • Even though Nkunda has been arrested, allowing Rwandan troops back onto Congolese soil is a dangerous gamble for Congolese President Kabila. Many people in eastern Congo loathe Rwanda for its behavior during the wars that ripped the country apart from 1996 to 2002, when they failed to dislodge the FDLR while looting substantial mineral wealth. The Rwandan military has been able to inflict substantial casualties on the FDLR on the past, but never to the point where they were able to break them as a force. The longer Rwandan forces remain in eastern Congo, the more vulnerable Kabila will be to internal challenges.
  • Lastly, and as Enough has consistently argued, even a successful operation against the FDLR must be accompanied by a process to deal with the other major root causes of conflict in eastern Congo: the fight for control over lucrative natural resources, access to land, economic and physical security of ethnic minorities (particularly Tutsis), and contentious debates over citizenship and identity.

Events are unfolding rapidly on the ground, and Enough is preparing on a statement with recommendations for policymakers on how to help avoid the situation from spiraling downward. We will release the statement next week, but as a first step the Obama administration should immediately appoint a special envoy to the Great Lakes region. The administration has not yet named its Africa policy team, but the people of eastern Congo cannot wait another day for the United States to get engaged at a high level."( THIS POST IS MORE WORRYING )

In a related post from Reuters:

Photo
1 of 1Full Size

By Aaron Gray-Block

THE HAGUE (Reuters) - Congolese militia leader Thomas Lubanga trained child soldiers to kill, pillage and rape, a prosecutor told the International Criminal Court at the start of its first war crimes trial on Monday.

Lubanga, 48, pleaded not guilty on the first day of the historic trial, which opened more than six years after the ICC was set up as the world's first permanent war crimes court.

Lubanga, an ethnic Hema, is accused of enlisting and conscripting children under 15 to his Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) in Congo's eastern Ituri district to kill rival Lendus in a 1998-2003 war in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

ICC prosecutors say child soldiers recruited by the UPC were involved in hostilities between October 2002 and June 2003, and that some of them were forced to kill, while others lost their lives in combat.

In an opening address to the Hague-based court, chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said Lubanga committed the most serious crimes of concern to the international community -- crimes against children.

"Lubanga's armed group, recruited and trained hundreds of children to kill, pillage and rape. Hundreds of children still suffer the consequences of Lubanga's crimes. They cannot forget what they suffered, what they did, what they saw," he said.

"They cannot forget the beatings they suffered, they cannot forget the terror they felt and the terror they inflicted. They cannot forget the sounds of the machine guns, they cannot forget that they killed. They cannot forget that they raped, that they were raped."

Some of the children were now using drugs, some had become prostitutes, and others were jobless, Moreno-Ocampo said.

He said he intended to demand close to the maximum sentence, which court officials say is life imprisonment.

Moreno-Ocampo showed the court a map indicating where hostilities took place and videos he said showed Lubanga with child soldiers.

"At this stage, our client would like to plead not guilty," Catherine Mabille, lead defence lawyer, told the court.

Dressed in a dark suit and red tie, Lubanga looked impassively ahead as his charges were read aloud to him.

BUNIA LINK-UP

Some 400 people in Congo's eastern town of Bunia -- at the heart of the Hema-Lendu violence -- were watching the trial via video-link, including many UPC supporters, a Human Rights Watch official said.

She said the start of the trial is a signal to the world that there will be accountability for war crimes, but also urged the court to look into officials in Uganda and in Rwanda who armed and supported groups operating on the ground.

More than 30,000 children were recruited during the conflict in Congo, many given marijuana and told they were protected by witchcraft, according to Bukeni Waruzi, the Africa and Middle East coordinator for human rights group Witness.

Lubanga's trial had been due to start in June 2008, but judges postponed because the defence was unable to view some evidence against him.

The matter was resolved in November when prosecutors began releasing documents to the defence that had been provided on condition of confidentiality to protect sources in war zones.

But some procedural measures are still pending.

The three-judge court has allowed 93 victims to take part in the case and give evidence. They can also seek compensation.

Four of the victims are among the 34 witnesses that prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo will call during the trial, which is expected to be completed before the end of the year.

Ethnic violence in the Ituri region between the Hema and Lendu, and clashes between militia groups vying for control of mines and taxation, have killed 60,000( 60,000 ) people since 1999.

Lubanga was handed over to the court in 2006 after Congo referred the case to the ICC prosecutor in March 2004.

The defence will make its opening statement on Tuesday."

In case you want to hear him speak. From the Hub:

DR Congo rebel chief justifies his fight - 21 Nov 08
As the UN agrees to deploys more forces to halt the DR Congo conflict, Laurent Nkunda, the rebel chief, acknowledges partial responsibility for the upheaval in an interview to Al Jazeera's Yvonne Ndege at a secret location in eastern Congo. But insisting that there is "no life, no economy, no administration, no justice", he says "you cannot destroy what is not there".

Saturday, January 24, 2009

Kinshasa has probably taken this step under big international pressure. But it is also a bet. If it works out, the war will be over.

From Jeffrey Gettleman in the NY Times:

"KIBUMBA, Congo — On Saturday afternoon, seemingly the entire village of Kibumba lined up alongside the main road and watched a once fearsome rebel army dissolve in front of their eyes.
Skip to next paragraph
Vanessa Vick for The New York Times

Residents of the village of Kibumba in Congo, where on Saturday rebel forces gave up to be absorbed into the army.

It was raining, and many villagers were wearing swamp boots and thin slickers. They stood with their feet planted in the mud, some chewing chunks of sugarcane, others nibbling on roasted corn. In front of them, dozens of rebel soldiers climbed aboard a cargo truck, tossing their machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades and backpacks in first and then playfully fighting one another for a seat.

“We’re done,” said one rebel, who identified himself as Captain Amiable.

If Kibumba is any indicator, the fierce rebellion in eastern Congo headed by Gen. Laurent Nkunda may be ending with his arrest( GOOD ). Rwandan troops captured General Nkunda along the Congo-Rwanda border on Thursday night.

It was a stunning turn of events, especially because Rwanda used to be one of General Nkunda’s top backers. Two days later, hundreds of his troops agreed to be trucked to collection points to be integrated into the army.

Few ever doubted the charismatic pull General Nkunda had over his men. He was a true believer, with a messianic conviction that he had been put on this earth to protect fellow Tutsis in Congo from being slaughtered as they were in Rwanda in 1994. He was tall and thin, with a commanding presence and hints of elegance.

He had built one of the best-organized, best-trained bush armies in Africa. His soldiers always carried their rifles pointing down and kept their uniforms incongruously spotless, even though they marched through a world of mud.

But all that acclaimed discipline, which had helped the rebels to rout the Congolese government troops just about every time they faced off, seems to have vanished as fast as its leader.

On Saturday, Captain Amiable smelled like a beer bottle. His battle buddy, a young man named Sergeant Kompast, was not much better, with bloodshot eyes and a loaded assault rifle that kept slipping off his shoulder. The two teetered along the road, arm in arm, shouting at passing cars.

They were soon drowned out by a bunch of glassy-eyed rebels singing at the top of their lungs, “We are commandos, we are commandos!” as they were trucked out of town.

Few people in Kibumba seemed sad to see them go.

“Criminals,” one woman muttered.

Several rebels said it was good that General Nkunda had been arrested.

“We always wanted to negotiate,” Captain Amiable said. “But Nkunda was blocking us.”

Peace, however, is far from assured. There are still many other rebel groups haunting the hills of eastern Congo. General Nkunda’s force was thought to number around 5,000 fighters, and many have simply melted back into the bush, possibly to fight on. His former chief of staff, Jean Bosco Ntaganda, a ruthless commander known as the Terminator, is the new rebel figurehead after having defected from General Nkunda.

So far Mr. Ntaganda is playing nice with the Congolese government. Though he has been charged with war crimes by the International Criminal Court, he was the one holding court on Saturday. He met with various Congolese officials at a hotel near here, apparently to discuss the details of his newfound sense of cooperation.

As for General Nkunda, the Rwandans holding him remain tight-lipped.

“Nothing has changed,” Maj. Jill Rutaremara, a spokesman for Rwanda’s Defense Forces, said Saturday. “If Congo wants him extradited, there’s a process to go through.”

The Congolese government is urging Rwanda to hand him over to face war crimes and treason charges. But Rwanda may have a hard time doing that.

General Nkunda used to be a Rwandan Army officer, and until recently, top Rwandan officials were suspected of supplying him with weapons and soldiers. The Rwandan government seems to have struck a deal with Congo in which the Rwandans agreed to neutralize General Nkunda and in return Congo would let thousands of Rwandan troops hunt down Hutu militants on Congolese soil.

A joint Congolese-Rwandan force has killed nine Hutu militants in eastern Congo since Friday, Reuters reported."

From Stop The War In North Kivu:

"
Wait and see: opinions In Analysis, From the field on January 24, 2009 at 4:59 pm

According to Father Luigi,

Dire que la guerre est finie ou dire que le long calvaire des populations du Kivu est terminé, c’est peut etre trés prematuré. Personne fait rien pour rien. Si les Rwandais ont accepté d’attaquer Nkunda conjointement avec les FARDC, ne l’on pas fait gratuitement. Les propos de Sarkozy c’est le dur prix que la RDC doit payer.

And according to Colette Braeckman (who is more pessimistic),

Les jours à venir verront sans doute un nouveau triomphe de la realpolitik, la morale n’y trouvera pas son compte, ni la lutte contre l’impunité. Mais si la paix enfin se dessine, fragile et minée par les compromis et les compromissions, ces scrupules seront sans doute vite effacés…

There are four thousand Rwandan soldiers in North Kivu according to OCHA , six thousand according to MISNA. FARDC forces are starting their advance .

Kinshasa has probably taken this step under big international pressure. But it is also a bet. If it works out, the war will be over. However, many Congolese consider that the price is too high, even if it works out. If this is the only solution to pacify North Kivu, I wonder if other provinces with a history of secessionist aspirations (i.e Katanga) could see this scenario as a window of opportunity."

I don't know what to think.