Home 
Briefing Papers DRC
Briefing Papers DRC | DRC |
|
|
|
|
A history of the DRC and details of the current political situation.
Background An estimated eight to nine million people died during Congo’s colonisation by King Leopold of Belgium. Full independence was gained in 1960. After Congo’s first democratic leader, Patrice Lumamba, was assassinated by the West in 1961 Mobutu Sese Seko came to power and changed the countries name to Zaire. His 30-year rule bought corruption on an unprecedented scale. The economy collapsed, with average incomes in the 1980’s a third of what they were at the beginning of the 1960’s, and falling further still during the 1990s. Zaire became increasingly weak. During 1996 the Rwandan and Ugandan governments backed Zairian Tutsis and rebel leader Laurent Kabila’s anti-Mobutu party the AFDL , which deposed Mobutu and bought Kabila to power in May 1997. Civil war returned in 1988 as a series of rebellions, backed by Rwanda and Uganda, were waged against the government. Forces from Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia came to Kabila’s assistance. As the war progressed anti-Kabila forces gained the upper hand and Kinshasa suffered major setbacks. Rebel forces now control the northern and eastern regions. Complexities of Africa’s First World War i) Countries Involved. There can be no doubt the rebellions of 1998 have lead to Africa’s most complicated and intractable civil war. It has sucked in the armies of six neighbouring countries and left the population prey to a host of competing armed groups. Some of these groups are Congolese, others are foreign. Their civil wars have spilled into neighbouring territory. Each player is there for different reasons. Rwanda and Uganda are fighting against the Kinshasa Government: Rwandan troops are supporting the rebel movement RCD Goma . Rwanda became involved to get rid of the threat from the Interhamwee, the malitia men and former Rwandan soldiers who carried out the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and then fled into Eastern Congo. It is thought some of the Interhamwee are fighting with the Congolese army. Uganda also says insurgents from their rebel movement, the ADF, were using Congolese bases to terrorise inhabitants of Southwest Uganda. Uganda’s president Museveni supports the Congolese rebel movements of the MLC and the RCD-ML . Operational armed militias are still wreaking havoc in the North Eastern region controlled by Rwanda and Uganda. Laurent Kabila’s government encouraged this violence by encouraging military coordination between the Interhamwee and long standing Congolese rural militias, known as the Mai Mai. On the side of Kinshasa are Angola, Namibia and Zimbabwe. Angola entered the war to save Kabila’s regime and assure the Congolese government did not support the UNITA movement, fighting a civil war against Angola from bases in Southern Congo. Zimbabwe has no obvious security interests in the Congo. The decision to intervene was probably related to President Mugabe’s ambitions to assert himself as an African statesman. Namibia has been the junior partner in this alliance. Burundian armed rebels have found employment fighting for the Congolese forces, but Burundi’s army itself is not a major player in Congo. The FDD have 16,000 troops in Congo and have been using it as a base to invade Burundi. ii) Lusaka Accords: History. Until the death of Laurent Kabila on January 16th attempts to establish a lasting cease-fire failed continuously. At the moment of the Lusaka cease-fire Rwandan forces were poised to take the strategically critical city of Mbuji Mayi. Unlike the impenetrable swamps and jungles that lie to Kinshasa’s Northeast, the route from Mbuji Mayi is relatively free of natural obstacles. Moreover, if Mbuji Mayi fell, the government would lose their land links to mineral-rich Katanga. This was interpreted as imminent military defeat for Kabila. Rebel capture of Mbuji Mayi would have brought the RPA and the RCD to the geographical heart of Congo. In actuality, this juncture marked the beginning of a stalemate. The Lusaka cease-fire provided an opportunity for the Congolese to re-arm and organise defence of Mbuji Mayi with assistance from their Zimbabwean, Angolan, and Namibian allies. Rwanda also welcomed the chance to re-group, to try to overcome the logistic and command obstacles required maintaining an army in the field stretching from southern Equateur to the Zambian frontier. Since signing Lusaka Rwanda has also had to respond to worsening insurgencies in the Kivus and the outbreak of hostilities with Uganda. In July 1999 the main parties involved signed the accord. Although main rebel groups operating in the Northeast did not sign, they agreed to the contents. The main provisions of Lusaka are: · Parties of the conflict to set up a joint military commission (JMC) until the UN and the OAU deploy a peacekeeping force. · Withdrawal of all foreign forces to be carried out within nine months. · Development of a mechanism to identify and disarm militias. · Government of Congo, RCD, MLC and unarmed opposition groups to enter political dialogue. · Negotiations for dialogue to be held under the aegis of a neutral facilitator. The cease-fire was never implemented. Fighting continued sporadically until February 2000, when a new implementation calender and expansion of the UN mission (MONUC) to 5537 military personnel and civilian staff. Bombing, ethnic attacks, and front-line fighting continued. The war became increasingly fractionalised. In August 1999 Ugandan and Rwandan armies had started fighting each other for control of diamond rich Kisangani, in Northeast Congo. Fighting broke out again during May 2000, when tens of thousands of people were trapped in their homes for days without food or water, and at least 60,000 fled into the surrounding jungle. Serious damage was inflicted on the PowerStation, the Tshopo hydroelectric dam, the Cathedral, and one of the city’s hospitals. Interviewed afterwards, one resident said: “.. its complete carnage...dogs are eating bodies in the streets. I went to look for my brother but the house is empty, they’re all gone. Houses are burned, houses have dead inside buried under the rubble.” Kisangani seriously tarnished both countries in the eyes of the international community. The UN Secretary General accused them of breaking promises and recommended a harsh Security Council response. This came with Resolution 1304 on 16 June 2000, which called for the withdrawal of the two armies from Congo without delay and for reparations to be paid to victims of the feud. There have been other horrific events in the Northeastern areas controlled by Ugandan and Rwandan sponsored forces. Reports tell of RCD soldiers killing and raping civilians in the rebel-held Kivus. In the Ituri province, controlled by Uganda, rebel forces have been accused of stoking up land disputes between the Hendu and Lema tribes by arming and training malitia groups in return for financial payment to Hema businessmen . Inter-ethnic fighting has caused tens of thousands of deaths since 1998. During January the Lendus, accompanied by anti-Ugandan government rebels participated in violent clashes in Bunia. They vowed to eradicate the Hema ethnic group from Northeast Congo and placed Hema heads on sticks. When fighting ended in early February approximately 400 people had been killed and 5,000 displaced. Ultimately, the Lusaka Agreement was undermined by the belligerent’s own non-compliance with its terms and squabbling over the role of the Facilitator and the UN. There were always a number of problems with implementing the agreement. For the period prior to UN deployment the belligerents were tasked with policing the disengagement of forces, the issue of armed groups was not realistically addressed, and the planned operation had considerable logistical obstacles. iii) A “Scramble for Wealth?” Some analysts have argued the war is motivated by economic concerns. Congo is a potentially rich country, with 8% of the world’s diamond reserves and plentiful supplies of copper, cobalt and zinc. In the past mining has accounted for as much as 3/4 of export revenue and 1/4 of GDP . There is clearly more to this war than ethnicity and territory. Last year the UN set up a panel to investiage the illegal exploitation of Congo’s resources and identify those involve. To date, the panel has encountered problems in gaining access to information from all sides . Angola now controls Congo’s petrol distribution and has positioned itself to control future exploration in Kinshasa’s offshore territorial Congo basin. For their 11,000 troop commitment Zimbabwe briefly managed the Congo state mining company, attempting to merge it with Zimbabwean army firm Osleg on the London Stock Market. In return for 2,000 troops Namibia got a stake in the Congolese Miba Diamond company. Rwanda and Uganda control territory well beyond the Kivus in north-eastern Congo, an area traditionally rich in diamonds and now described as the Wild West of Africa. Uranium, mercury, diamonds, children, leopard skins and even human skins can reportedly be bought there. Last year Uganda made nearly as much money from gold exports as from coffee, despite having hardly any reserves at home. This has helped create significant improvements in Uganda’s balance of payments, despite increased defence expenditures. There can be no doubt Rwanda also makes huge profits from the war - approximate estimations for the value of trade in minerals leaving the Kivus are around US $100m annually . The commercialisation of military deployment by all sides raises serious concerns, as traditional exit strategies, such as the return of stability or achievement of a strategic foreign policy objective, become less relevant if the occupying army participates in commercial enterprise. If forces are essentially self-funding the financial constraints of deployment become marginalised. While semi-commercial criteria can create an incentive for entering a conflict, establishment of entrepreneurial schemes by military commanders and political elite can provide a strong disincentive for troop withdrawal. iv) A Humanitarian Catastrophe? Relief agencies describe a sense of “absolute abandonment” amongst the Congolese people. Last November the UN reported 16 million people have their lives in tatters because of the civil war . This amounts to more than 1/3 of the population. Over a million people have died as a result of the conflict . Over two million are internally displaced - many of them utterly destitute. An unestimated number of people are living in the forests. The UN Food and Agriculture Association estimates food security is the most precarious in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Kivus, in Northeast Congo, are particularly bad. 80% of the population have been forced to leave their homes since 1998 . In Kinshasa urban famine has become a reality. Huge inflation and 50% depreciation in the value of the Congolese Franc has meant that 70% of the population cannot afford US$1 a day for food . Most schools in Congo are no longer operational. There is also a severe lack of access to healthcare. Since the war started there has been an increase in epidemic diseases such as Cholera, Measles and Polio. Currently around 80% of Government funding is spent on food assistance . Humanitarian agencies have argued donors should work through local structures to fund education, health, shelter and peace-building projects throughout the country. Political situation i) Congolese Government The assassination of President Laurent Kabila on has profoundly altered the dynamics of power in Congo. Kabila constantly restricted the movements and deployment of MONUC, which until recently was made up of just a few hundred military observers to cover a landmass which, if superimposed onto Europe, would stretch from London to Moscow. Kabila also rejected Ketimire Masire, claiming the former Botswanan president and agreed facilitator of the peace process was bias. Kabila’s son, Joseph was sworn into presidential office on January 26th. He then embarked on a whirlwind tour, meeting the presidents of South Africa, France and Belgium, plus the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State. He has impressed world leaders by stating his commitment to the Lusaka Accords, talking of liberalising trade and ending state monopolies, and requesting humanitarian agencies assess the situation in Congo, including previously impenetrable areas. There has been no fighting along the front lines since Laurent Kabila’s death on January 16th. During February the UN announced the parties involved in the conflict had reached an agreement on disarming the Hutu militias in North-eastern Congo and at a peace summit in Zambia Joseph Kabila said he would accept Masire as facilitator to the inter-Congolese dialogue. Positive developments continued with UN Security Council meetings in New York on February 23rd, when Rwanda confirmed their earlier pledge to withdraw troops 200 kms from Pweto in Katanga, and Uganda confirmed they would withdraw two battalions from Congo. Resolution 1341 was adopted; calling on parties to the conflict to begin disengaging on 15th March. The Lusaka signatories will work with MONUC through the Joint Militarry Committee in Kinshasa, and draw up their plans for disarming, demobilisation and reintegration of irregular armed forces by 15th May. The Secretary General’s revised concept of operations, which reduced UN MONUC personnel to 3000, was also agreed. Rwanda has now pulled back from Pweto, leaving the RCD Goma in control. This is due to be followed by a 15 km pullout of all forces from front lines, starting on 15th March. Uganda has also started to pull back two battalions from the Orientale and Equateur provinces in Eastern Congo. So far, this self-imposed cease-fire and withdrawal has held. Monitors and military observers will begin deploying in three weeks. Masire is due in Kinshasa between 16th – 19th March to hold further consultations for the dialogue, which is expected to begin in mid-April. He has said the dialogue will involve four commissions, one on military and security issues, a constitutional commission, an electoral commission, and a commission on humanitarian and development issues. In a recent interview , Joseph Kabila said the deaths of 2 million Congolese amounted to genocide of the population. He criticised other African heads of state for failing to “clearly recognise the aggression by Rwanda and Uganda against the Congo,” saying the withdrawal of Ugandan and Rwandan troops from Congolese territory should not be linked to dialogue between the rebels and the government. “Elections must take place in the entire country. This is precisely why the aggressors must get out of the Congo,” he said. There may yet be problems at home and with the peace process. The unauthorised killing of “some” eleven Lebanese nationals, detained after the assassination of Laurent, has been a source of embarrassment for the new government. The rebel movement RCD -Goma has accused Kinshasa of trying to hide the facts amid an increase in arbitrary arrests, illegal detentions and extra judicial killings. Rebel factions have also accused government forces of preparing for renewed battle. Joseph Kabila is currently considering a reshuffle of his father’s cabinet, at the moment largely made up of family members. It remains to be seen whether hard-liners, such as Kongolo, Minister for Justice, or Kakudji, Minister for Home Affairs, will allow him to do so. The editor of a Kinshasa based satirical newspaper was recently arrested, probably for publishing a picture of Kabila with someone before him displaying his backside and publishing a list of ministers who the president “must get rid of.” Despite his achievements so far, Congo’s new leader faces the near impossible task of presiding over an enormous country riven with regional and ethnic rivalries. Kinshasa is in the Far West of a country largely covered in jungle and so neglected that few roads have been built since the 1960s. ii) British Government. After Laurent Kabila’s assassination the government called on all parties to respect the Lusaka Accord and comply fully with the UN Security Council Resolutions. They were already providing much needed financial support and an expert to work in the Facilitator’s office, and have said additional requests will be considered . The Great Lakes Special Representative and the UK Permanent Security Council Representative met Joseph Kabila in New York on February 2nd. They assured him of Britain’s willingness to help through contacts with other parties in the conflict and encouraged him to implement the Lusaka Agreement. Clare Short, Minister for International Development, also met with the President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame, during February and urged him to take the peace process forward. The British Government is currently the main aid donor to Rwanda. In 1998 - 99 UK gross expenditure on aid for Rwanda was £13.776m, for DRC it was £1,546m . Although these figures should be seen in the context of a shared aid responsibility among European partners, British NGOs and Congolese government representatives argue Congo needs more humanitarian assistance from the international community. 80 representatives from NGOs and UN agencies represented on the ground are currently participating in humanitarian assessment missions in Congo. A more stable situation, coupled with increased access and an informed humanitarian evaluation, may result in increased aid. ii) EU. The EU has maintained a position of supporting the Lusaka Accords as a negotiated peace settlement fair to all parties. They have emphasised the importance of national dialogue, and respect for territorial integrity, national sovereignty, democratic principles and human rights. 15 EU nations have pledged support for an international conference under OAU/UN auspices on achieving regional peace, security, democracy and development after the Lusaka Accord has been implemented. The EU has also said it would support any activities contributing to political stability. On March 5th the EU adopted a E35 million-intervention plan to address the humanitarian crises. Funds will be allocated by the European Humanitarian Aid Office to partner organisations working in emergency medical treatment, pubic health care, care of refugees and nutrition and food security. Conclusion The change of leadership in Congo has had a positive effect on the Lusaka peace process. President Laurent Kabila often shunned peace summits and was described as someone who “prefers sharing the country to sharing power” , but his son has been effective at breathing life into the Lusaka Accords. Joseph Kabila has pleased the international community by stating his commitment to Lusaka, and showing willingness to compromise. He also appears pro-dialogue and elections. But his biggest challenge yet may be keeping his own government in order and building a base of domestic support. He must also persuade the various entrenched military-corporate interests to leave Congo and reach an agreement on demobilisation, disarmament and reintegration of armed forces and militias with the other Lusaka signatories. Questions The Lusaka Accords: i) What role will the Congolese government play in discussions to establish a mechanism for disarming irregular armed forces? Although the parties to the war are said to have reached an agreement on disarming the Interhamwee and other militias in Eastern Congo, this might prove difficult, as it is very easy to hide in the dense forests. It will be very difficult to locate, disarm and relocate these people to countries when they are not willing and remain outside of the peace process. In order for this to be successful there will need to be dialogue between the Rwandan and Ugandan governments and the militias they are fighting against. iii) Will the Facilitator be able to operate according to his mandate in the Accords? Former Botswanan President, Ketimile Masire, has been tasked with facilitating political dialogue between the government, RCD , the MLC and unarmed opposition groups. Laurent Kabila rejected Masire as facilitator, claiming he was bias. Joseph Kabila said he would accept Masire on February 15th. Masire plans to start the Inter-Congolese dialogue in mid-April. He has been invited to Kinshasa on 13-16 March, but is yet to meet the new President. Congolese Politics: i) How do you envisage building a representative political system in Congo? President Joseph Kabila has stated his commitment to the Congolese national dialogue under Masire and to holding democratic elections. There is now a real opportunity for genuine national dialogue with involvement of a wide range of groups. However, Congo is a huge and ethnically diverse country with little infrastructure. Transport and communication are generally difficult, and with the Northeastern half occupied by rebel forces, the country is barely functioning as one separate entity. To achieve a stable representative political system politics may benefit from becoming more consensual, possibly with a power-sharing or devolved structure. International Community Burundi i) What role can the Congolese government play in further cease-fire talks between the FDD and the Buyoya government? The FDD Burundian rebel movement have 16,000 troops in Congo. They have fought on the side of the Congolese government and are using the DRC as a base to invade Burundi. Laurent Kabila orchestrated the first talks between the FDD and Burundian President Buyoya shortly before his death, and since then Joseph Kabila has also been engaged in the peace process. The FDD did not sign the peace agreement at Arusha, brokered for Burundi by Nelson Mandela in August 2000. Fighting has continued since then, and the issue of transitional leadership is still to be resolved. Mineral Exploitation i) How is the Congolese government assisting the work of the UN panel on Exploitation of Mineral Resources in Congo? The UN Panel on Exploitation of Mineral Resources has encountered difficulties with accessing and publishing information. In their interim report the panel stated they have encountered difficulties in obtaining information from all government’s involved in the war. UN Mission i) How can the International Community help restore peace in Congo? The MONUC mission is not a peace-keeping force and will not be implementing the Lusaka Agreement. With only 3300 personnel it may be difficult to monitor the ceasefire and withdrawl of troops along a front line of 2,400 kilometres. The mission may also experience problems with logistics and commuication. Humanitarian i) Can the government guarantee that the UN and other NGOs will have access to displaced and vulnerable populations in the long and short term? NGOs and UN agencies are currently carrying out humanitarian assessment missions in Congo. Information from the assessment should result in an increased knowledge and capacity of NGOs to work in previously inaccessible areas, but agencies will need co-operation and assurances from the Congolese government in order for this to happen. ii) How is the Congolese government fighting against the spread of HIV/AIDs? The use of rape as a weapon of war, and increased prostitution as a result of poverty have contributed to rising rates of HIV and AIDs in Congo. Although statistics suggest the rate of AIDs is 5–10% the reality is probably higher. In conflict-ridden areas in the Northeast AIDs rates can be as high as 25%. British Government i) Can the British government do more to help Congo? ii) What assurances can the Congolese government give the British government? The APPG has argued there should be an international conference on the Great Lakes Region, after the Lusaka Agreement is implemented. The British government is in a strong position to continue playing a positive role in the peace process, we have a wealth of experience from our work in Uganda and Rwanda, and good relations with both governments. |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|