The world is being sold an entirely implausible narrative, which blames Rwanda for Congo’s conflict, and its decades of resource hemorrhage and misdistribution. In a lazy, flawed equation, this rhetoric points to Rwanda’s rapid development - which persists despite chaos in the neighbouring country - as supposed evidence of Rwanda’s greed-led involvement in the chaos in question.
It is said that through the presence of M23 (a Congolese rebel group of which we shall speak later), President Kagame’s forces are "robbing Congolese natural resources”, specifically, precious Congo minerals, which are growing in value, as the tech industry expansion across the world increasingly relies on their sourcing.
Excuse me while I laugh.
Supposedly, it is not the effective taxation system, or the transparent leadership and renowned crackdown on corruption, or the grueling transformation of the country into a touristic and conference and exhibition hub, or the sizeable investments resulting from Rwanda’s safety, cleanliness and rapid economic growth that have allowed us to build some good roads and decent institutions.
This progress couldn’t possibly be a result of the fact that while being indisputably efficient growth agents (as proven by Rwanda’s impressive ongoing economic transformation), Rwandan leaders are some of the most modestly paid globally, forfeiting their salaries in times of economic crises and having them redistributed among the people; a testament to good governance.
Perhaps that would make too much sense. So what cynics choose to claim instead, is that Rwanda’s progress is the result of its digging into Congolese mines that are neither observable by drone, nor locatable by witnesses, or traceable any other way known to man.
Having an ounce of faith that it is the efforts of the past 28 years that have penned the Rwanda success story would imply that good governance works, and I suppose many, including our critics in Congo, fare better emotionally when convinced that no such thing exists. Whatever coping mechanism allows them to endure repetitive cycles of poor governance, such dangerous vitriol should call for alarm.
The current war-mongering coming from across the lake is adding unnecessary fuel to an internal fire that has already ravaged their home.
The myth of Rwanda pillaging Congo bears no standing, for a variety of reasons that I deplore having to state.
Much of the current "ethnic tension” (very ugly term; a favourite of France 24) that has been occurring in the eastern region of Congo began before the second Congo War, which spread like wildfire across a dozen military groups and at least 6 countries, in 1998.
Prior to that, in 1994, when the Rwandan genocidaires were defeated, many fled like the cowards that they always were. The killer mobs that had been shrunken by the FPR’s victorious liberation efforts had seen exile to Congo as an opportunity to erect new human shields against justice. The resulting death toll was in the high thousands, and the murderers claimed to have become victims, describing themselves as refugees in need of global (western) assistance.
In the middle of the chaos of identity laundering, of the FPR’s efforts to establish a legitimate foundation to "Never Again” by neutralizing the "kill all Tutsis” rhetoric, and the simultaneous attempts by the genocidaires and their sympathisers to regain Rwandan ground and finish the job they had started....More mess emerged.
Those tasked with helping stirred the pot.
The (again, western) NGOs that had pulled ridiculous amounts of money to ascertain the "safety” of Rwandan refugees that had, for months, been crossing the border into Congo, did something very strange. I’m quite the conspiracist as it pertains to western interests in Africa, perhaps because history has always proven reality to be infinitely worse than we surmised, but here is a theory I believe in.
Aware that the blurring of the line between right and wrong, between innocent and guilty, between butcher and survivor could harbor further conflict, and justify their lengthened, astronomically overpaid stay in the Kivu region, the NGOs present at the time purposely allowed genocidaires to rebrand themselves as "conflict victims”; people therefore worthy of protection on Congolese soil.
I understand that many may find this rationalization, and the similar one surrounding the MONUSCO mission’s failure to effect an end to the conflict they were tasked with terminating, as two far-fetched theories. But I've yet to come across another one that justifies the ineptitude with MONUSCO, and foreign NGOs on local grounds, have taken to delivering peace and improved welfare to the region.
It is reminiscent of President Tshisekidi’s own failures, in that they have all been so consistent and featured so much blame-transferring over the years, that they must be intentional.
Unfortunately, there is chaotic history that the Congolese President can use to feed his diversions.
When the Second Congo War broke out, "ethnic tensions” were exacerbated for obvious reasons.
Across the Central and East African region are dozens of ethnicities, most of which might have felt frustrated by, among other things, decades of poverty, having experienced almost 20 years of the IMF’s rather evil Structural Adjustment Programmes, which ulcerate the colonisation wound.
Those that had facilitated the pillage had accrued immense wealth, and the wealth gap had widened as more conflict emerged, fueling the cycle of anger and finger (and gun) pointing. Things were looking grim, and they have not stopped since.
The first and second segments of these series can be found here and here.
(To be continued..)