The rdc-Rwanda peace process: a Washington strategy in question

The ongoing peace process between the Democratic Republic of Congo (RDC) and Rwanda has reached a critical “stalemate,” according to Jason K. Stearns, an associate professor at Simon Fraser University. Speaking on Monday during a discussion hosted by journalist Stanis Bujakera Tshiamala, Stearns emphasized that neither the Doha-Montreux negotiations nor the Washington-led initiatives have yielded any significant progress over the past year.

Montreux Negotiations: Persistent Deadlock

Regarding the Montreux talks, Stearns noted a distinct lack of evolution, stating that “not much has truly changed.” He highlighted the enduring “major disagreements” between the Congolese government and the AFC/M23 rebel group, which continue to hinder any breakthrough.

Concerning the agreement brokered between Kinshasa and Kigali under Washington’s guidance, the expert conceded that numerous accords have indeed been penned. However, he stressed that “implementation remains a significant challenge.” Drawing a comparison to American diplomacy in other complex situations, such as with Iran, Stearns suggested that the Trump administration’s deep engagement in diplomatic efforts risks producing merely “fine declarations and MOUs” (Memoranda of Understanding), without substantial advancement in their practical application. He asserted that the core objective must be to “transcend these framework agreements to achieve a genuine compromise,” a critical element that, in his view, “is not yet clearly defined.”

The Elusive Compromise Between Kinshasa and Kigali

Stearns highlighted that the fundamental compromise sought between Kinshasa and Kigali mirrors what has been discussed in all prior agreements, including the comprehensive and inclusive accord during the 2003 transition period. This involves the withdrawal of Rwandan troops in exchange for a firm Congolese commitment to combat the FDLR. He lamented that this “same deal” has seen minimal progress in its execution over the years.

Regarding the M23 rebel group, Stearns observed a complete lack of any viable compromise. He noted that “the Congolese side continues to favor a military solution,” while the M23 movement has declared its intention to maintain its presence for “another ten years.” The researcher’s stark conclusion was that “we are very, very far from success” in resolving this particular aspect of the conflict.

Analyzing the Stalled Progress: Why No Tangible Results?

When questioned about the root causes of this impasse, Jason Stearns initially acknowledged a unique contribution from the Trump administration compared to previous mediation efforts by the East African Community and the African Union, facilitated by Angola. He pointed to the exertion of genuine pressure, which he felt was notably absent in earlier attempts. Stearns assessed that “sanctions against Rwanda are more aggressive than ever before,” even surpassing measures seen since the major Congolese wars began in 1996.

However, he pinpointed two critical shortcomings. Firstly, a glaring lack of coherence within the international community. Washington has imposed sanctions on Rwanda without securing the full cooperation of European partners, who are among Kigali’s primary financial backers. Stearns highlighted this disconnect by observing that Rwandan President Paul Kagame continues to ink deals, including with American basketball teams, suggesting to him that Kagame is not truly feeling the weight of intense international pressure.

Secondly, Stearns identified the absence of a clear, overarching global strategy. Citing American diplomats, he noted that Washington does not foresee a military solution, a stance he personally agrees with. Yet, the precise compromise strategy intended to underpin the pressure exerted on Kigali remains, in his analysis, ill-defined.

Montreux: A Vague Compromise Rejected

Furthermore, the researcher disclosed that American diplomats reportedly put forward a “vague” compromise proposal between the M23 and the RDC during the Montreux discussions. This proposal, which was never publicly revealed, would have offered the rebel movement a form of “partial integration,” based on Stearns’ interpretation of the situation – though he clarified he had not seen the actual text of the agreement. Both sides ultimately rejected this proposition.

Finally, Jason Stearns concluded that the most significant missing element today is comparable diplomatic pressure on Kinshasa. He believes that, unlike Rwanda, the RDC “has not truly faced diplomatic pressure from the United States” up to this point, contributing to the prolonged deadlock.