Skip to main content

Negotiations Between Congo and M23 Rebels Suspended




Summary


The deployment of U.N. forces in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo to allow for negotiations has actually removed Kinshasa's incentive to negotiate with rebels there. Talks between the Congolese government and M23 rebels were suspended Oct. 21 over disagreements related to amnesty, disarmament and the reintegration of the rebels into the country's military. Kinshasa has no desire to allow M23, which started as a mutiny of Congolese forces, to return to its ranks, and since U.N. troops are present to limit the actions of M23, the Congolese government sees no reason to compromise.

Analysis


While mediators claimed over the weekend that an agreement was only hours away, disputes over the most important articles of a draft agreement led negotiators to suspend talks. In the meantime, both sides have reportedly reinforced their positions in North Kivu, the eastern Congolese state where the fighting has taken place.

Negotiations have been ongoing since M23 briefly took control of Goma, the capital of North Kivu, nearly a year ago. At the time, M23 had demonstrated that it could capture population centers, and the government was unwilling to dedicate enough forces to overturn the rebels' gains, giving Kinshasa an incentive to enter negotiations.







However, the Congolese government was never really committed to negotiations. Instead, it wished to use them to stall M23 while it attempted to weaken the group by other means. Initially, Kinshasa tried to disrupt the support M23 received from Congo's neighbors, Uganda and Rwanda. Uganda has occasionally supported rebels in Congo because of its own economic interests across the border. For its part, Rwanda has traditionally backed Tutsi rebels in eastern Congo, including M23, because they contain the threat of Hutu rebels and help Kigali access eastern Congo's mineral commodities. Eventually, regional organizations, such as the Southern African Development Community, and the West became involved, threatening sanctions and diplomatic backlash in an effort to cut off this foreign support for M23.

These efforts had an impact on M23, which saw the rise of two distinct factions -- one loyal to M23 leader Jean-Marie Runiga and the other to Sultani Makenga. Runiga was eventually removed from his command. With Makenga now serving as de facto commander, M23 remained a military threat but sought to proceed with negotiations.

However, a major breakthrough in Kinshasa's dealings with the rebels came in late March, when the U.N. granted a mandate for a U.N. intervention force to be deployed in Goma. Made up of troops from South Africa, Tanzania and Malawi, the brigade was the result of an earlier intervention force that had been proposed by the Southern African Development Community. The presence of the intervention force reduced M23's ability to threaten to capture Goma, and after offensives by the Congolese military and U.N. forces, the rebels were also pushed out of a safety zone surrounding Goma. This ensured that the rebels would be distant enough from the city to prevent them from attacking it with longer-range weapons.

With the threat contained, Kinshasa was able to harden its stance in negotiations, leading to their eventual suspension. The Congolese government has allowed Tutsi rebel groups to reintegrate into the military in the past (M23 is drawn from the ethnic Tutsi and Rwandan-supported Congress National for the Defense of the People militia), but those groups' demands for preferential treatment on political issues have been a constant source of friction between the government and the rest of the military. Kinshasa wants to avoid repeating history with M23, but M23 is insistent because integration into the military would enable it to continue to protect Tutsis in the area while also defending their many economic interests such as illegal mining. As long as the Congolese military, with the help of U.N. troops, is able to hold back M23, the government will have no reason to moderate its position.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images) Summary Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations. However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states. Analysis Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria . Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was re

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east. Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies . This has

LONDON POLICE INDIRECTLY ENCOURAGE CRIMINALS TO ATTACK RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE A few days ago an unknown perpetrator trespassed on the territory of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, causing damage to the property and the vehicles belonging to the trade delegation , Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during the September 12 press briefing. The diplomat revealed the response by the London police was discouraging. Police told that the case does not have any prospects and is likely to be closed. This was made despite the fact that the British law enforcement was provided with video surveillance tapes and detailed information shedding light on the incident. By this byehavior, British law inforcements indirectly encourage criminals to continue attacks on Russian diplomatic property in the UK. Zakharova’s statement on “Trespassing on the Russian Trade Mission premises in London” ( source ): During our briefings, we have repeatedly discussed compliance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, specif