Congo and Rwanda sign a U.S.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict

On Friday, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda signed a peace agreement animated by the United States to help end the fatal fights for a decade in eastern Congo while helping the United States government and American companies to access critical minerals in the region.

“Today, violence and destruction are ending, and the whole region begins a new chapter of hope and opportunity, harmony, prosperity and peace,” President Donald Trump told foreign ministers in the two countries during a White House meeting.

The agreement was signed earlier in the statement room of the State Department under a portrait of Colin Powell, the first African-American to occupy the post of High Diplomat. There, Secretary of State Marco Rubio called him “an important moment after 30 years of war”.

The Central African Nation of Congo was embraced by a conflict with more than 100 armed groups, the most powerful supported by Rwanda, which have killed millions since the 1990s.

Although the agreement is considered a turning point, analysts do not believe that it will end the fighting quickly because the most important armed group says it does not wonder. Many Congolese mainly consider it as an opportunity for the United States to acquire critical minerals necessary for a large part of world technology after their government has contacted Trump to have support in the fight against rebels.

Trump pushed to access such minerals at a time when the United States and China are actively competition for influence in Africa.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Congo, Therese Kayikwamba, Wagner invoked the millions of victims of the conflict in the signing of the agreement with the Rwandan Minister of Foreign Affairs Olivier Nduhungirehe. The two expressed optimism but highlighted significant work to do to end the fighting.

“Some injuries will heal, but they will never disappear completely,” said Wagner. “Those who have suffered the most especially. They expect this agreement to be respected, and we cannot fail them. ”

Nduhungirehe noted “great uncertainty” because the previous agreements have not been implemented.

“There is no doubt that the road to come will not be easy,” he said. “But with the continuous support of the United States and other partners, we believe that a turning point has been reached.”

With Rubio, they welcomed the support of the Arab Nation of the Gulf of Qatar to facilitate the agreement, on which Doha has been working for months at the request of the United States and others.

The agreement has provisions on territorial integrity, the prohibition of hostilities and disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration of non -state armed groups.

Questioned in the oval office of violations of the agreement, Trump said that he did not think it would happen but also warned of “very serious, financial and other sanctions”, if it was.

The peace agreement should not end the conflict quickly

The rebel M23 group supported by Rwanda is the most important armed group in the conflict, and its major advance at the start of this year left bodies in the street. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations described it as “one of the most complex and serious humanitarian crises on earth”.

The Congo hopes that the United States will provide him with security support necessary to combat rebels and perhaps make them withdraw from the key cities of Goma and Bukavu, and from the whole region where Rwanda should have up to 4,000 soldiers. Rwanda said it defended its territorial interests and does not support M23.

The M23 rebels suggested that the agreement is not binding for them. The rebel group was not directly involved in the planned peace agreement, although it is part of other current talks.

Corneille Nangaa, chief of the Congo River Alliance – known by his French acronym AFC – who includes M23, told the Associated Press in March that direct peace talks with the Congo can only be held if the country recognizes their grievances and that “all that concerns us that is done to us is against us”.

A spokesperson for M23, Oscar Balinda, echoes the AP this week.

Nduhungirehe underlined separate talks in Qatar which are intended to ensure that the Congo and the M23 rebels accept between them how they will end the fighting. He also said that Rwanda had agreed to raise its “defensive measures”. It was not clear if he meant to withdraw the troops which, according to Rwanda, defend its territorial interests.

Rwanda has also been accused of exploiting minerals in eastern Congo, used in smartphones, advanced and much more fighter planes. Rwanda has denied any involvement, while analysts say that it could make Rwanda difficult not to be involved in the region.

The agreement is at the heart of the US government’s push to counter China in Africa. For many years, Chinese companies have been a key player in the Congo mineral sector. The Chinese Cobalt refineries, which explain the majority of the world supply, depends strongly on the Congo.

What the American role looks like to end the conflict

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Congo said that the United States has proven to be a “reliable partner” during the peace process and on other questions of relations between the two countries.

“There is therefore no doubt at the moment, if you wish, with regard to the credibility of the United States as a partner, whether for a peace process, where we have signed a very important agreement today, or for the investment of the United States,” said Wagner on the AP during an interview on Friday evening.

Analysts say that the US government’s commitment could depend on the access it has to minerals discussed in the context of separate negotiations between American and Congolese governments.

It is estimated that mainly unexploited minerals are worth up to 24 dollars by the US trade ministry.

Christian Moleka, political scientist of the Congolese reflection group Dypol, described the agreement as “major turning point”, but said that he could not “eliminate the problems of the conflict”.

“The current Agreement project ignores war crimes and justice for the victims by imposing a partnership between the victim and the attacker,” he said. “This seems to be a proposal for triggering and cannot establish sustainable peace without justice or reparation.”

In the province of Congo in the north of Kivu, the hardest by fighting, some believe that the peace agreement will help resolve violence, but will warn justice must always be signified for lasting peace.

“I do not think that Americans should trust 100%,” said Hope Muhinuka, militant from the province. “It is up to us to capitalize on everything we now have as an opportunity.”

The conflict can be attributed to the consequences of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, where the Hutu militias killed between 500,000 and 1 million tutzhnics, as well as moderate Hutu and TWA, indigenous peoples. When the forces led by Tuts retaliated, nearly 2 million Hutus crossed the Congo, fearing reprisals.

The Rwandan authorities accused the Hutus who fled to participate in the genocide and allegedly alleged that elements of the Congolese army protected them. They argued that the militias formed by a small fraction of the Hutus are a threat to the Tutsi population of Rwanda.

Since then, the current conflict in eastern Congo has killed 6 million people, in attacks, famines and epidemics of uncontrolled diseases resulting from fighting.