August 29, 2012Your Excellencies,First, if you would allow me to express Rwanda’s unwavering commitment to the United Nations system, to the work of this body, and to the cause of peace in the region and the world.The issue that brings me here today -- the unfolding crisis in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo and allegations of Rwanda’s involvement in it -- is just the latest iteration of what has become a well-worn narrative.  In fact, it is the familiarity we recognise in many of the elements at work today -- Kinyarwanda-speaking former rebels in mutiny against old foes -- that has made the case against Rwanda so superficially plausible and, to some, utterly compelling.  For many in the diplomatic community and some in the media, the narrow and outdated ethnic prism through which they view developments in our region make it next to impossible for them to contemplate any alternative scenario.  In addition, it demonstrably serves the political interests of the DRC to propagate this narrative since it entirely shifts focus away from the deeper systemic and governance issues they face.  But let me emphasise at the outset this overriding reality.  If for no other reason, Rwanda is not involved in the eastern DRC because instability in that region represents a direct threat to our own national interest.  As sure as night follows day, conflict in the DRC will invariably lead to accusations against Rwanda as it has done to spectacular and potentially devastating effect in this instance.  At a bare minimum, it represents a threat to our hard-won reputation among member-states.  But, far beyond merely that, the result of this instability is that it undermines the social and economic progress of Rwanda.  In fact, the only country who is more damaged by persistent instability in the eastern DRC than Rwanda is the DRC itself.  This is why, despite the immense consternation caused by this latest round of claims, we remain committed to being part of a long-term and sustainable solution in the eastern DRC.  What we have experienced over the past several months in the daily back and forth of claim and counter-claim, rumours and media speculation, is not helping anyone.  The DRC, Rwanda, the Security Council and the international community need to pivot decisively and orient ourselves towards a peaceful solution with our eyes firmly fixed on the future and not the past. It is why we initiated and continue to honour the joint verification mechanism with the government of the DRC. It is why we have cooperated with the Group of Experts, even after their failure to consult along with their evident bias and methodological shoddiness has given us more than enough reason to withdraw cooperation.  It is also why we have been active participants from day one in the regional efforts spearheaded by the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region which is in the process of establishing a neutral force made up of regional states. It has already proven to be an effective mechanism.  This is demonstrated by the current cease-fire which has been in place for approximately a month. We also believe it promises to deliver a sustainable solution since it involves all of DRC’s neighbours who each have a direct stake in regional peace and security. There have been a series of meetings -- in Addis Ababa, and subsequently Kampala -- up to heads of state level, to flesh out this solution. As a result of the resolution reached in Kampala, a series of technical meetings took place in Goma to plan the implementation of the resolution which includes the following: 1. Expansion of the Joint Verification Mechanism to all ICGLR members to begin its work on September 5th 2012.2. The planning for the deployment of a neutral force made up of regional states3. Deployment of special envoys to cement the current cease-fire into an enduring and sustainable solution. Rwanda is committed to this approach and offers its unwavering commitment to play whatever role is necessary to facilitate its objectives. I repeat: Rwanda’s national interest is served by peace and sustainable security in the eastern DRC.  It’s national interest is harmed by anything less. Yesterday, officials from my government introduced Rwanda’s rebuttal to the addendum to the interim report of the UN Group of Experts on the DRC in great detail. They went line by line, allegation by allegation, to refute the claims made to support the central accusation that Rwanda has been, and continues to be, an active participant in the conflict in the eastern DRC. I will not take up the valuable time of the Security Council to repeat elements of our very detailed rebuttal but I urge all members to take the time to read it alongside the addendum itself and review the many appendices that, in my opinion, comprehensively debunk both the overall conclusion of the Group as well as each specific evidentiary element they use to support it. What I will do, however, is raise issues relating to basic procedural fairness.  Rwanda does not, in any way, shape or form, expect special treatment from this or any other international organisation. We do, however, expect -- indeed, demand -- a minimum standard of impartiality and fairness when the UN or its agencies involve themselves in our affairs, or -- as is the case here -- make specific or general accusations of wrongdoing against us.  Please allow me to go through several ways these minimal standards have not been reached in this case. FAILURE TO CONSULT Two hours before Steven Hege presented the addendum to the Sanctions Committee, he raised in general terms the accusations contained therein for the first time with an official of the Rwandan government.  Even then, the official -- in an informal 30 minute conversation -- was given only the broad outlines of what was to come which was, by then, well known via numerous media outlets who had privileged access over and above Rwanda, whose national reputation was at stake. The claim that Rwanda had prior opportunity to respond in May is an outright falsehood that I must address directly.  We received a letter date 29 April 2012 from Mr Steven Hege advising of his intention to visit Kigali between May 14-16 this year.  In that letter, Mr. Hege laid out specifically the topics the Group of Experts wanted to raise with Rwandan officials.  There was no mention -- none -- of Rwandan involvement in the emerging crisis in the eastern DRC.  Furthermore, during the visit in May, Mr Hege and his colleagues did not raise the matter to any of the officials they met.  Not one.  Let me put it this way: if the Group of Experts on the DRC had compelling evidence of Rwandan complicity in what amounts to an invasion of another sovereign state, but failed to raise it while they met with the government responsible for the alleged invasion, it is surely a case of the most reckless kind of professional neglect.  Thus, Rwanda had no genuine opportunity to present its rebuttal to the litany of allegations contained in the addendum to the interim report until it had been leaked to the media and presented to the Sanctions Committee with the exception of a 30 minutes conversation with a single official two hours before its submission. (This is clear breach of Sections 9 (a) and 28 of the "Report of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on General Issues of Sanctions” (S/2006/997) HEGE’S BIAS We are aware that this is not the first time the issue of impartiality has arisen with respect to the Group of Experts mechanism (e.g. Somalia/Eritrea and Sudan).  We would argue, however, that the case of the DRC Group is by far the most egregious and straight-forward case to date. We acknowledge that experts will bring an array of preconceptions and biases to the table, some favourable to Rwanda’s position and some not. We also acknowledge Mr Hege, as a private citizen, advocate, academic or activist, is fully entitled to his point of view. But Mr Hege is not acting in his capacity as citizen or activist.  Instead, he occupies a position of great importance and sensitivity; as well as a position that enables him to inflict significant damage on member-states without even giving them the right of reply.  It is in this context that Steven Hege’s writings have emerged -- and we are confident that you will agree they place his views of Rwanda, post-genocide politics and the FDLR on the extreme fringe.  They do not fall within acceptable boundaries Mr Hege himself acknowledged the serious implications of his uncovered writings by attempting to take down evidence from a website where his fact-sheet on the FDLR had been hosted.  Unfortunately, he underestimated the power of the Internet.  Several Rwandan bloggers and concerned citizens took the initiative to keep a record. Let me briefly outline the worldview contained in this extensive paper trail: Hege regards the Rwandan government as illegitimate foreigners -- Ugandan Tutsi elite is his phrase -- in language eerily familiar to survivors and students of the genocide;He believes the FDLR are (a) predominantly victims, and not perpetrators, of violence, (b) represent no serious threat (despite the latest massacre occurring on August 10, 2012) and (c.) legitimate actors (far from terrorists, in direct contravention of multiple UNSC resolutions) whose place at the table will only come about once (direct quote) "international opinion sours on the Rwandan regime.” It is both ironic and remarkable that, through his appointment to this most sensitive and elevated position, Mr Hege has, a mere three years after he wrote these words, found himself in a position to bring his prophecy to life. All this begs the question:  how is it possible the vetting process at the UN did not capture these incendiary writings? And, if they did indeed capture them, how did they not immediately disqualify Steven Hege from consideration for membership in, let alone leadership of, the Group of Experts? Your excellencies, before I take your questions, I would like to once again emphasise this central point. The people of Rwanda seek peace and stability not for its own sake, but because they are indispensable prerequisites for expanding social and economic opportunity for our citizens. The Rwandan people are too focused on advancing down that path to dare risk taking a backward leap, which is the accusation leveled against us.  This is why we have no interest in this conflict, but we are deeply interested in an enduring solution that brings about enduring peace.  Thank you for your time, and please feel free to ask anything at all. ENDS