Washington, DC — A United Nations investigator has accused Rwandan-backed rebels of the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD-Goma) of massacring more than 150 people last month, and warned that violence could spread across the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The huge central African nation is Africa's third biggest country and has been ravaged by civil war for the last four years.
Despite what has appeared to be a breakthrough in efforts to reach a settlement to the DRC's conflict, the continued presence of Rwandan troops and its backing of the RCD-Goma, keeps a large question mark hanging over peace prospects. Rwanda's government says it is forced to keep troops in Congo because heavily armed battalions of the Rwandan Armed Forces (ex-FAR) and Hutu militias known as the Interahamwe who were responsible for the 1994 genocide fled into the DRC after their defeat, and have been making repeated incursions back into Rwanda. The Rwandan government also charges that the DRC protects these anti-government forces. In a recent interview, Rwandan President Paul Kagame's special advisor, Patrick Mazimhaka, told allAfrica that the Kinshasa government has "direct" access or control over most of these forces, with some integrated into the DRC armed forces.
For its part, the DRC government denies the allegations. And, in a countercharge, claims that the real reason Rwanda has entered the DRC is to exploit it's natural resources. A report last year by a United Nations panel of experts backed up these charges which in turn have been denied by the Rwanda government.
Rwanda has become the target of new criticism because of its rejection of an apparent deal made in April during negotiations in Sun City, South Africa, that would make Congolese Liberation Movement leader Jean Pierre Bemba Prime Minister leaving Joseph Kabila as head of state. According to Rwanda, this agreement does not conform to the 1999 Lusaka Peace Accord. That accord, says the Kigali government, mandates that first there should be a cease-fire, followed by the inter-Congolese dialogue, disarmament of warring groups like the Interahamwe and lastly withdrawal of foreign forces. And so, conflict continues in the huge central African nation. . AllAfrica's Charles Cobb Jr. spoke with Gervais Chirhalwira Nkunzimwami, President, Office of Coordination, Civil Society of South Kivu, still a site of intense conflict, about peace prospects and the role of Rwanda. Excerpts:
Looking at Congo from Washington, DC, although there has been some claim of success with the InterCongolese Dialogue, it doesn't seem to be much of a success. Rwanda objects to the deal apparently reached between Bemba and Joseph Kabila. Bemba hasn't resolved all of his differences with Kabila, and fighting continues in both Kivus. Peace seems nowhere near at hand. Would you comment on this view and give us some analysis of the situation in the aftermath of the Sun City InterCongolese Dialogue as you see it, particularly in your own region?
If it is your view from Washington that the dialogue was a failure, you are perhaps misinformed and I'd like to shed light on why I think it was not a failure. The discussion itself represents a step forward because there was essentially three rebellions and now you have just one, which means you have eliminated two of the problems. That's a success. The difficulty you see between Kabila and Bemba is normal in a sense. They have been on opposite sides so when they get together it obviously takes a while for them to adjust their perspectives.
We don't think the difference between Kabila and Bemba is substantial, however. Both are young men who follow our advice and counsel -- Congolese advice and counsel; who listen carefully to what civil society is saying, both of them. They'll eventually work out their dispute. We know that dispute started with the influence of the old Mobutists. Within Kabila's group there are individuals who would like to maintain their positions or posts. So you have people who don't want to change from a presidential to a semi-presidential regime for personal reasons. On the other side you have a group of people who believe that when Bemba becomes Prime Minister that he will rule in the manner that Mobutu did in the past -- uncontrollably. We of civil society and political parties are the ones who in fact gave that agreement that was signed in Sun City its value. It is us who must reestablish the harmony between the two belligerents. And so we will focus our efforts on making sure that the war ends and that the harmony between those two is reestablished. And this, as we see it, is going well. Our challenge is to convince Bemba is that this is not an agreement between two people; it's a patriotic pact to save the country.
Does Bemba see it as an agreement between two people? His personal deal?
Bemba was manipulated. The old generation -- the ancient Mobutists -- felt they could use Bemba to regain power. They thought they could use him to gain things that were beneficial to their personal interests. But we as a population have said no, and he has begun following our lead.
But can a peace settlement be real if a Bemba can be manipulated, even if it is only a temporary manipulation, especially when there is strong opposition from Rwanda and the RCD-Goma to the peace settlement?
For four years Bemba was manipulated by Uganda. It was difficult for him to detach himself from the Ugandans. But right now he is not being manipulated by Ugandans. He is being manipulated by older Mobutists. Of course the population doesn't want the country to fall into the hands of the old Mobutists so we believe he will not fall into that temptation knowing that we won't accept it. It has been our responsibility to convince him to change his perspective. We've done that once [moving him away from Uganda] and we are confident that we can do it again. For example, we were able to arrange a giant peace symposium in Butembo and during that peace symposium he spoke. When he spoke, he asked for forgiveness for what he had done. During that symposium we asked him to demilitarize some key villages in the area and he did it the same day. So we see him as someone who listens to the demands of the people. And we believe he will continue to listen to us and not do otherwise.
There is still the fact that Rwanda objects to the Sun City deal reached between Bemba and Kabila; or at least Paul Kagame objects to this new relationship between Kabila and Bemba. That is why I asked whether or not we are really looking at a meaningful settlement for Congo in terms of the InterCongolese Dialogue. Can I assume you think we are?
Yes, Rwanda refused to sign the agreement. The RCD-Goma which is its protege in the Congo wasn't included. That's why they didn't sign. The RCD had failed in its political efforts to gain the position of President at the discussions at Sun City. Their strategy was to start at zero so you could name a new president, a new prime minister, a new head of the parliament for Congo at Sun City. Given that they [Rwanda] failed in that particular initiative the thing that is most important to them is to stay in the part of the country that they control so they can continue to exploit the resources that are there. The RCD is nothing but the hand of Rwanda exploiting and occupying the Congo. No one in the RCD has ever objected or complained about massacres perpetrated by the Rwandans in Congo. Of course it is only the Congolese who would find it unacceptable that their people be killed and their resources be stolen.
But what about Rwanda's stated security concerns with the ex-FAR and the Interahamwe? Do you consider them legitimate?
The strange thing is that if the Interahamwe are a problem, they don't seem to be focusing on them, gathering them up and taking them back to Rwanda. They seem to be focusing on gathering up mineral wealth and other items and taking that back to Rwanda.
The Interahamwe are the button that started the war. But it is not the enemy they [the Rwandans] are going into Congo to fight. Often times in the Kivus we point out where they are but they don't seem to be interested. Instead they are killing Congolese people. The never search our the Interahamwe to confront them directly. Even a battle of five minutes, we are not aware of that ever happening. They are there to search for minerals, to pillage the banks, to take away animals.
Well, I spoke not long ago to President Kagame's special envoy, Patrick Mazimhaka, who made the point to me that the Interahamwe and ex-FAR are kind of hidden or integrated within the military of Congo.
He must prove that Congolese don't have enough men to train and staff their own army. Why would we do that? Use Interahamwe, why would we do that? Don't we have enough people? If we really needed soldiers we would integrate Congolese who form the Mayi-Mayi militias rather than the Rwandans. That would be the natural strategy.
Mazimhaka and others have noted certainly from the funeral of Joseph Kabila's father -- from the funeral of Laurent Kabila until now, a fairly visible presence of foreign soldiers around the young Kabila -- Zimbabweans, etcetera. In short, the young Kabila doesn't trust Congolese troops is one possible assumption based on this observation; that this is part of the continuing turbulence of Congolese politics.
The zone that the Interahamwe occupies is actually inaccessible to the Congolese army. And everywhere they are, the Congolese population suffers. We would not support the Interahamwe being the people who are protecting our President. We don't trust them either. If there are people who say that, or believe that there are Interahamwe in the circle around the president, they say that because they often just lie. I have heard them lie with my own ears. All three [Interahamwe, ex-FAR, Rwandan army] have caused problems and should go back to their country.
The Kinshasa government has actually proposed a commission to actually identify the Interahamwe, where they are and how many they are and Rwanda has refused to participate in that commission. How could they, if they were serious, refuse to participate in such a commission?
If the Rwandans are there to exploit there is no reason to think that they will withdraw. Do you have any reason to think that they will [withdraw] any time soon?
There are three possibilities: There is the possibility that they could just die like flies. Or secondly, the Congolese people will one day get tired of this pattern and rise up and chase them back. The third possibility which is what we're actually working on now, is to show the Rwandans that we're there neighbors and that we've always shared our riches with them. If you prefer however to continue being thieves and terrorists, the international community will have to say "leave". If they don't, them it will be up to the international community to make them leave. We are at that stage now, in fact. We see what happened for the second time in Kissangani, for example. That example suggests they are now normal people.
Do you see this problem with Rwanda as specifically a problem created by Kagame, or is there some other dynamic at play in Rwanda that has caused this problem?
We, people who are my age, 58, say it is a problem caused by Kagame. It's him and his generation of politicians. It was generation and his people that were the first ones to launch a war against the Congolese people. Before him that had never happened. In fact, the Rwandans and Congolese had lived in harmony. So it's Kagame who has brought this about.
And what is your assessment of the young Kabila? Is he merely a pawn put up by his father's supporters or is he his own person and a genuine leader of Congo?
We can say that the Congo has no leaders. The best leaders are the leaders who listen to the people, someone who believes that all their power actually comes from the people. But I believe that Kabila is listening and is doing what the people are demanding. And if he continues along this line he will succeed. We ask him to deliver peace for us, reconciliation so we can reconstruct our country. And to collaborate with the international community and our neighbors and in general he is doing that. But is he a leader? Well, we don't know yet? He is the conductor of the train. You see him and what he is saying is basically what we have told him. The rebellions are doing exactly the opposite of what the pop[population is asking. We ask them to help unify the country and they do just the opposite. Everything they control depends on Kigali. And if we had let them they would have just annexed that part of the country. In other parts of the country there are no real leaders.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
So aren't we back to my sort-of pessimistic original question? You're describing three Congos: Bemba's Congo, Kabila's Congo and Rwanda's Congo. Maybe there are more than that -- Wamba Dia Wamba's Congo. Do we have a country at all? Do we even have the prospects of being a country?
Yes.
Beyond geography?
Yes, yes, because we its inhabitants believe it exists. That's why it exists. From our forefathers it has existed and we continue to demand that it exist. The only thing that doesn't exist is the imaginary divisions that people would like to bring about. We don't agree with that. They will die in their enterprise to cut the Congo up. Congo exists. It exists! You can't say that just because it's a sick country, it doesn't exist.
What do predict for the immediate future? For the rest of this year?
I think the country will be reunified. I think the dictators in the region won't last long because they are following the same path that Mobutu took. For example, in Rwanda, you've got to dance for the President. Newspapers are not free. I feel for the Rwandans.
Do you think there will be another round of talks like the Sun City talks?
In the first Sun City it was envisioned that we would have a big regional conference to look at some of these issues, incorporating all the countries in the Great Lakes region. This conference would be the vehicle to make sure that all these issues were taken care of and that people would be returned to their proper country. this is agreed on in theory.
On either side of you, in Burundi and Brazzaville, there is conflict; perhaps more serious in Brazzaville right now than in Burundi. Does that have a destabilizing effect on the political efforts for peace in the DRC?
These conflicts are very negative. When all the countries in the region were in conflict, we resisted. Finally we caught the same "cold." Their problems overtook us. We definitely feel the consequences of their wars and their problems. For example the war in Congo could be said to be a consequence of the war that started from refugees who came from Rwanda. That's really the principal cause of the war, in fact and we would like them to take their problem back. That's why we would never, under any circumstances, put the Interahamwe into our army.
