Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Fighting for 3rd day between army and M23 rebels in eastern Congo
GOMA, Congo - Congo's army says its helicopter gunships have bombarded rebel positions during a third straight day of fighting between government forces and M23 rebels.
Congo's army said Tuesday rebels could be seen fleeing the bombardment.
Congolese Col. Mustapha Mamadou said the army was reacting to attacks while still complying with a February peace agreement. However a statement Tuesday by the South African army, which has a battalion with the U.N. mission in Congo, said Congolese army attacks on rebel positions Sunday and Monday were "predetermined."
Government forces say they have advanced some three kilometres.
Peace talks between the Congolese government and the M23 stalled again last week as the head of the M23 delegation complained that the head of the government delegation left the talks.
- E-mail this Article
- Print this Article
- Share this Article
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Why President Obama Called Out Congo's Neighbors Without Mentioning Names?
Last week, President Kikwete called on both Rwanda and Uganda to enter into dialogue with their respective rebel militia who are present in the Congo instead of continuously utilizing rebel presence as a rationale for repeated interventions in the Congo.
On Monday, July 1, 2013 during his state visit to Tanzania, responding to a question from a Congolese journalist, President Obama said "The countries surrounding the Congo, they've got to make a commitment to stop funding armed groups that are encroaching on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Congo."
President Obama's response is fascinating in two respects. First, in spite, of sixteen years of intervention in the DRC by U.S. allies Rwanda and Uganda, which has triggered the deaths of millions of Congolese, President Obama still did not mention either country by name; he merely uttered the phrase "Congo's neighbors." Secondly, while the U.S. has repeatedly acknowledged that its allies, Rwanda and Uganda are funding armed groups in the Congo, it continues to arm, train, finance and provide diplomatic and political cover for both countries.
Philippe Bolopion of Human Rights Watch says it best when he observed in a New York Times commentary: "So how do you get away with arming a rebel force that attacks U.N. peacekeepers, rapes women and recruits children? You need powerful friends, and Rwanda has had one. Born from the guilt of the Clinton administration's inaction in the face of the Rwandan genocide, and a recognition of Rwanda's relatively efficient use of development aid, the United States has proven to be one of Kigali's staunchest allies."
It would stand to reason that as the U.S. calls on its allies to cease funding of armed groups in the Congo, the U.S. itself would cease funding of Rwanda and Uganda as long as they continue fueling the conflict in the DRC. In fact, U.S. law calls on the Obama Administration to do as much. Section 105 of Public Law 109-456, the law that President Obama sponsored as senator and co-sponsored by Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, authorizes the Secretary of State to withhold aid from Congo's neighbors, should they destabilize the country. The Obama Administration has yet to fully implement this law.
Pressure has been mounting around Rwanda and Uganda's support of militia gangs in the Congo. In light of the two UN Group of experts reports published in 2012, the United States government has said that "there is a credible body of evidence that corroborates key findings of the Group of Experts' reports - including evidence of significant military and logistical support, as well as operational and political guidance, from the Rwandan government to the M23." The administration response to the report has been a suspension of $200,000 of Foreign Military Financing provided to a Rwandan military academy and a phone call from President Barack Obama to Paul Kagame to discuss Rwanda's role in the destabilization of the Congo. Unfortunately, these small steps have not been enough to stop Congo's neighbors from intervening in the Congo, nor are they commensurate with the level of suffering the people of the Congo face daily due to the brutal killings perpetrated by militia gangs.
One of the key changes needed in U.S. policy in the Great Lakes Region of Africa is to cease its support of U.S. allies who are fueling conflict in the DRC. As he did in his 2009 trip to Ghana, President Obama repeated again during his Cape Town speech that "we are interested in investing not in strongmen but in strong institutions." However, the US government's continued support of strongmen in Rwanda, Uganda and DRC, stands in stark contrast to President Obama's declaration in Cape Town.
A second key change required in US policy is for the U.S. to in fact support strong institutions and democracy both in the Congo and the region. The lack of democracy and democratic institutions and the militarization of the political spacein the region have been a major driver of the instability in the DRC, Uganda and Rwanda. These structural changes in U.S. Foreign Policy are vital steps needed to advancing peace and stability in the Congo and the Great Lakes region of Africa.
Despite the millions of Congolese who have perished in the past 16 years in what the United Nations says is the deadliest conflict in the world since World War II, the response from the United States in particular and other global leaders has been lackluster at best in the face of what is arguably the greatest human tragedy at the dawn of the 21st century. The recently initiated "Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework for the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Region," is one such example; as it fails to hold Rwanda and Uganda accountable, lacks a serious justice component, did not include the Congolese people in its development and mistakenly argues that legitimizing Rwanda and Uganda's looting of the Congo under the guise of trade and economic integration will bring stability.
The degree to which action has been taken, to hold aggressor countries like Rwanda and Uganda accountable has been a result of global pressure on world leaders by ordinary people. We have repeatedly seen the constructive role that global pressure can play in advancing peace in the Congo. Recently, the UN Group of Experts on the DRC leaked a report documenting reduced support for Rwandan and Ugandan militias in the Congo. This is a clear sign that the pressure on the U.S. and its allies Rwanda and Uganda needs to be sustained and
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
MINOVA: A place of beauty and treasures
My brother Dejoie and I were in the humanitarian car of an organization AFEDEM, "Appui aux Femmes Démunies et Enfants Marginalisés", together with four of its staff - a lawyer, a magistrate, the coordinator of the workshop and the head of the office at AFEDEM in Minova.
Getting to know the place
Unexpected surprise
Broken Sony Z1 camera |
Educating and creating awareness
working on solution to fight sexual violence |
Refugee camp
kids at the refugee camp outside Minova |
Precious treasure
Side road market |
Much Love from Congo
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Congo losing a generation to war, says bishops’ conference president - June 19th, 2013 By Catholic News Service
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
The Trouble With Congo Is Deep and Widespread by Obadiah ndiaba ( huffingtonpost)
Conventional wisdom about the Democratic Republic of Congo make us believe that the trouble with Congo lie in the east of the country alone. That is wrong and dangerous. Like a wrong diagnosis of a disease, it leads to wrong prescription and medicine. In many ways, the newly touted United Nations (UN) intervention brigade is based on this kind of wrong diagnosis and bad prescription. The UN, with its unmatched clout in Congo, should focus in curbing the predatory Congolese state, rather than promote it, and provide help in developing better institutions for the country to stand on its own feet - instead of going to war with Congolese people, most of whom have legitimate demands and rights to be enraged with the current situation.
In Eastern Congo, the media narrative has focused on the M23, merely the tip of an iceberg, considering the number of rebel groups that continue to cause untold human suffering to the people of Congo. A recent Oxfam report depicts a map of major rebel groups in Eastern Congo that the BBC dubbed "D.R Congo's Kaleidoscope." Tragically, media watchers seldom hear news coverage of these armed groups causing havoc to civilians. The lone exception is the rape narrative, and makes no mistake; rape is a common weapon of war in Congo.
Conservative estimates say there are over thirty active armed groups in the East, such as The Patriotic Front for Change (FPC), Raïa Mutomboki (Which literally means: People Get Angry!), Ecumenical Force for the Liberation of Congo (FOLC), Allied Democratic Forces, more than a dozen of Maï-Maï armed militias, another half a dozen of regional armed groups such as the Rwandan FDLR, the Burundian FNL and the Ugandan LRA of Joseph Kony, and countless others. Maï-Maï groups might soon face a shortage of names (Maï-Maï Asani, Maï-Maï Mayele, Maï-Maï Zabuloni, Maï-Maï Kifuafua, etc.).
Armed groups and militias in Congo are like a cluster of businesses in a special tax-free economic zone. That should not surprise anyone since the government is nonexistent, except its untidy army constantly accused of rape, harassment and rampant corruption within its ranks. The other exception of government presence seems to be in the shoddy mining deals by government officials, costing the country billions of dollars according to the latest Kofi Anan's Africa Progress Panel.
A white paper produced by the Enough Project explains how the Congo wars of 1996 and 2003 opened the door for armed groups to take advantage of the absence of a functioning security system in the east. There is no army or police, so armed renegade commanders are mushrooming in the country in the name of providing protection to people and turf control.
The Oxfam report puts Congo's ragtag army and rebel groups in the same scandalous category, since both are "mercilessly exploiting local communities to help fund their war."
Security and humanitarian issues are not exclusive to the East of the country; they are now widespread in a number of other provinces as a result of complete lawlessness in the country and lack of government presence.
In the resource-rich province of Katanga, the mining hub of copper, cobalt and home to the biggest mining operations in the country, a separatist movement called Kata Katanga (Meaning 'Cut Katanga' in Swahili) battled government soldiers near the city of Lubumbashi over the past weekend and left scores of people dead. Last March, the same group had mounted an attack in the city before surrendering to the UN peace-keeping mission in an apparent suicide of a group of people with no hope for a future. At least 35 people were reported to have died and the government declared a curfew in the city and its surrounding areas for a number of days. Local officials and some provincial parliamentarians are blaming the attacks on 'misery' and the 'absence of state authority.'
An inquiry of the National Assembly produced a report in which it warned the government that Katanga is a 'sleeping volcano' whose eruption will cause damage. Well, it is already causing untold damage to civilians, 23,000 of whom fled their homes and 16 burnt alive over the past weekend alone .
The United Nations (UN) has declared a humanitarian crisis in Katanga province, noting, "Katanga is turning into a province that requires the same amount of attention as the Kivus." The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimates that there have been over 316,000 displaced people since January 2012 in the southeastern part of Katanga province alone. The insecurity in Katanga seems to be worsening, fueled by disenfranchised youths who accuse the government of cronyism and rampant corruption in managing resources. They want to take matters in their own hand. Maï-Maï 'Tigers,' another armed group in Katanga province, has been attacking army posts and causing havoc to local populations.
In the Province Orientale, recurrence of clashes between the army and militias continues, albeit, off the radar of media coverage. The territory of Ituri is now literally under the control of armed bandits, not even structured armed groups.
Pole Institute, an intercultural center for peace in the Great Region of Africa, recentlyconcluded that the problems of insecurity in Congo are a consequence of "bad governance" and the "absence of the state." Unless Congo acts as a functioning country with institutions, such as a serious army, to provide security to its own people, Congo is proving that, in fact, it does not exist as a coherent state. The United Nations presence in Congo shouldn't shield such a government, rather it should work to address the deep governance issues facing the country -- it is only the way to end the conflict if Congo is to survive as a functioning and coherent state.
Friday, June 14, 2013
Thursday, June 13, 2013
For Abuse in DRC, South Africa Charges 93 Troops, UN Says Nothing, ZeroTruthfulness By Matthew Russell Lee
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Finally another update
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Peacekeeping Becomes War
Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire)
May 22, 2013: In early May UN Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region (central Africa) Mary Robinson acknowledged that the UN’s Intervention Brigade could cause problems for future UN humanitarian aid operations in Africa. The brigade has a mandate to conduct “targeted offensive operations” which is diplo-speak for offensive combat operations. The brigade is the first UN peacekeeping operation to be given an explicit offensive mandate. Critics of the Intervention Brigade concept have warned that it is a mistake for the UN to field an offensive force. The critics argue that it sets a terrible precedent. In a future humanitarian crisis, armed groups may forcibly oppose basic it humanitarian aid operations like refugee relief in a combat zone because they believe the humanitarian operation will inevitably lead to the deployment of a combat brigade which will attack them. Some Intervention Brigade supporters are concerned that the nations supplying the troops for the brigade could suffer attacks on their citizens who are living or working in the Congo or nearby countries.
Terror attacks on nations manning the brigade may seem far-fetched but they cannot be completely discounted. The model here is Uganda, which has troops serving in the UN and African Union’s AMISOM Somali peacekeeping operation. Uganda has suffered several terror attacks which have been tied to Somali Islamist extremists who oppose AMISOM. Intervention Brigade advocates portray the brigade as the military field force component of the UN’s new Framework security and development agreement. The Framework is UN shorthand for the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework for Eastern Democratic Republic Of the Congo and the Region (i.e., central African and Great Lakes region). Brigade advocates point out that there are at least 25 active, armed rebel militias in the eastern Congo. The militias seed violent chaos, making it all but impossible to conduct humanitarian relief operations much less establish and run the long-term economic, training and political stability operations the region needs. Brigade advocates contend the offensive mandate is an attempt to set conditions for sustainable economic and political development. (Austin Bay)
May 20, 2013: M23 rebels attacked a Congolese Army (FARDC) position ten kilometers north of Goma (capital of North Kivu province). This was the first armed battle between M23 fighters and the Congolese Army since late 2012. M23 acknowledged that a firefight occurred in the area but said that its fighters were attacked by Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) militiamen. After the M23 fighters drove off the FDLR attack, Congolese Army artillery began shelling their position and M23 accused the government of over-reacting.
May 16, 2013: South Africa reaffirmed its commitment to support the UN’s intervention brigade in Congo. However, South African defense officials said that many senior South African military officers believe the South African military is currently over-committed. South Africa is involved in several peacekeeping efforts in Africa. The new intervention brigade mission will require shifting scarce resources from other missions. South Africa’s participation in the intervention brigade is regarded as critical by the UN.
May 15, 2013: Armed Mai-Mai militiamen attacked a Congolese Army camp and recruitment center outside the town of Beni (North Kivu province). The attack kicked off a two-hour long firefight between the gunmen and Congolese Army soldiers. 23 gunmen were killed, three soldiers and five army recruits.
May 14, 2013: The government acknowledged that former M23 rebel fighters have been allowed to join the Congolese Army through the army’s reintegration program. North Kivu provincial officials claim that over 500 former rebels (from various militias) have joined Congolese Army units since late 2012. The officials have complained to the national government that the reintegration program creates security risks for Congolese civilians. The North Kivu officials are particularly worried about M23 rebel fighters who have rejoined the Congolese Army. The most prominent former M23 fighter to be reintegrated is Colonel Nzala Ngomo who at the time was commanding a Congolese Army battalion and defected to M23 in November 2012. As of May 1, he is now fully reinstated as an officer in the Congolese Army. The North Kivu officials see the unrestricted reintegration of M23 fighters as rebel infiltration
May 11, 2013: A hundred Tanzanian troops committed to the UN’s new intervention brigade have deployed in the eastern Congo. The troops are the lead element in a 1,280 soldier Tanzanian contingent that will serve with the brigade. The core of the Tanzanian contingent will be an 850 man infantry battalion. The brigade will eventually deploy 3,069 international troops. Malawi and South Africa are also providing contingents.
May 8, 2013: The UN condemned the rogue militia attack on a UN Organization and Stabilization Mission (MONU.S.CO) convoy in South Kivu province which killed a Pakistani peacekeeper. The UN called the attack a war crime. A preliminary report claimed that the militia was trying to take hostages.
May 7, 2013: A rogue militia ambushed a UN convoy on the road between the towns of Walungu and Bukavu (South Kivu province). One Pakistani soldier serving with the MONU.S.CO peacekeeping force was killed in the attack.
May 2, 2013: M23 rebel fighters declared that they will not begin a new round of peace negotiations unless the government agrees to a ceasefire. M23 recently claimed that the Congolese Army is working with Rwandan Hutu rebels in the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) militia. Now M23 reports that an FDLR unit is advancing toward an important M23 position and it appears that the FDLR move is coordinated with Congolese Army movements.
May 1, 2013: A senior UN diplomat acknowledged that deploying the new Intervention Brigade to conduct UN-ordered offensive operations against rebel militias could hinder future UN humanitarian operations in Congo and central Africa. The official said that she hoped the brigade’s deployment would serve as a deterrent and that military operations would be limited.
April 30. 2013: M23 rebels declared that they are ready to fight the new UN Intervention Brigade when it deploys in the eastern Congo. M23 officers had previously threatened Tanzanian and South African leaders that they and their men will fight the brigade. Tanzania and South Africa are both providing troops
April 24, 2013: Civilians living north of Goma have refused to comply with demands by M23 rebels that they participate in a protest demonstration against the UN decision to deploy an intervention brigade for offensive operations in the eastern Congo. A demonstration had been planned for April 15 in the town of Kibumba (north of Goma). According to local residents, M23 leaders had to call off the protest since they refused to participate.