The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has become an irksome presence beyond the expected neighbourly friction. It is intruding on everyone with its government’s dysfunction and incompetence that is as huge as its vast territory.

Then there is the war with the M23 rebels in the east of the country that goes on despite regional initiatives to end it. And ethnic cleansing that, if not stopped, will surely turn into genocide.

Those who could end all this – the DRC authorities and some in the international community - do not want to. They choose, instead, to blame this failure on Rwanda.

That is what is so frustrating – this refusal to solve the security problem in the east of the DRC and deflecting responsibility on others - as President Paul Kagame said on January 9 at the swearing in of the new president of the Senate.

You can understand why. Immediately after his speech, his words were distorted and a lie created that he had said Rwanda would not accept refugees from DRC and those already in the country would be expelled. The usual suspects - Congolese government officials, NGOs and their media allies - invented and spread the lie.

Everyone knows he said no such thing. His only sin was perhaps to bring some clarity to the situation, remind the world about who should sort it out, and how that could be done. And for his pains he and his country become the villains.

And yet the solution is simple.

One, recognise the nationality of Congolese citizens the government is trying to make stateless. Those include the refugees in neighbouring countries.

Two, deal with the presence of foreign armed groups, like the genocidal FDLR from Rwanda and the Islamist ADF from Uganda, and others from Burundi, who have set up base in the area from where they continue to threaten the security of their countries. Some of them, like the FDLR, have become fighting allies of the government.

Three, establish effective government authority in the entire territory of the DRC, especially in its eastern provinces.

Four, give full support to regional efforts to resolve all these issues.

But those he called out for their failure to solve the eastern Congo security problems were clearly not ready to accept this clarity. So they threw up more mud into an already murky situation and, as has become the practice, accuse Rwanda for all of this.

This has been the pattern: distort, deflect, disown.

This is bad enough, but there is a more sinister motive for the blame game. It is actually a kind of weapon against Rwanda, in their view, the little upstart that will not take orders but instead wants to create order; that died but refused to remain dead and instead resurrected healthier and stronger and determined never to be killed again.

And so the calculation is that the conflict in the neighbourhood in which it is alleged to have a hand will keep Rwanda bogged down by security concerns, its attention and resources diverted.

But, of course, this will not end the conflict in the DRC. And unless there is a change of attitude on the part of the DRC government and the international community, nor will diplomatic efforts as the pattern over last twenty years or so has shown.

It has been cyclical: conflict flares up into open war, diplomatic efforts follow, an agreement is reached and for a while there is quiet. Then the agreements are breached and a new cycle begins.

Today, there is war going on in eastern DRC following a ten-year lull but without peace. This has led to Luanda and Nairobi to find an end to the war. As part of arrangements to restore peace, an East African Community Regional Force has been deployed in the area.

Ten years ago there were similar processes and military deployments following the outbreak of fighting between FARDC and M23 resulting from the government’s refusal to honour the terms of a previous agreement reached in 2009.

Some might remember the meetings in 2012 in Khartoum, Addis Ababa and the ICGLR summit in Kampala, all aimed at finding answers to the political and security problems in eastern DRC.

Eventually a peace agreement was reached. M23 agreed to put down their arms. The government was to address the reasons for their taking up arms in the first place.

What followed is common knowledge. The government did not honour its part of the agreement. War broke out again last year and a new cycle for search for peace started.

Then as now, the DRC government was not particularly interested in a lasting, peaceful resolution of the conflict. They were intent, as they keep saying, on crushing the M23 rebels. That remains the intention even today.

Earlier, on March 23, 2009, the date from which the rebels take their name, another agreement had been signed between the government and another rebel group, CNDP, from which the M23 rose. That, too, was not honoured, leading to a resumption in fighting barely two years later.

So today, we are back to the beginning, or at some point in the pattern that goes round and round.

The same cycle can be seen in the verbal war. The chorus in DRC today is: crucify Rwanda, slap sanctions on this meddling country and all will be well.

Ten years ago, it was a certain Lambert Mende who led the calls for crucifixion. He was joined by religious and civil society leaders, and the media amplified their already loud clamour.

Today, the choir of the hanging brigade is conducted by a one Patrick Muyaya. He is equally strident but still his cries have been made louder by the traditional and social media and a host of foreign lobbyists and PR firms.

With this sort of dismal historical record of peace initiatives in DRC, it is easy to feel frustrated or even fall into despair. But still we hope (it’s a glimmer) that this cycle of war-lull-war again-broken promises and blame games will be broken and a lasting settlement reached.

There is always the chance that some of those with the means to end it will recognise the situation for what it is and act accordingly.

It is just possible that President Kagame’s patient explanations, even his frustration, may change some minds.