Concerned by the continued deterioration of the security situation in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the United Nations Security Council met on Thursday, December 12, in a climate marked by humanitarian urgency, resumption of fighting and interferences attributed to Rwanda.
During the discussions, several State members painted an alarming picture of the conflict’s evolution in North-Kivu and South-Kivu provinces. Recent clashes have led to massive population displacements and have worsened an already critical humanitarian crisis. The international community expressed near-unanimous concern over the risk of a regional conflagration in Africa’s Great Lakes region following the resumption of hostilities by Rwandan forces under the personal command of Paul Kagame.
Kinshasa raises Its voice
The Congolese delegation, led by the Foreign affairs minister, used the platform to express deep frustration over what it considers the Security Council’s inertia. Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner recalled that «several UN reports have documented the external support enjoyed by the M23», adding that «the absence of binding measures weakens the very authority of the Council». She called for a strict enforcement of existing resolutions and concrete actions to uphold the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the DRC.
For their part, the United States, through their representative, Ambassador Mike Waltz, forcefully expressed concern over the proven involvement of Rwanda and its president, Paul Kagame – explicitly named – in the thirty-year-old conflict that has claimed more than 10 million lives in the Democratic Republic of Congo. He called for the withdrawal of all non-Congolese and non-invited forces and for respect for international law.
Despite the absence of immediate binding decisions by the Security Council, the Congolese public opinion views the December 12 security council meeting as an opportunity for the international community to safeguard its credibility by enforcing its own norms and principles. As the crisis drags on, the widening gap between highly publicized diplomatic commitments and realities on the ground continues to fuel doubt and frustration, both in the DRC and internationally.
The Responsibility of the United States
As evidence of Rwanda’s direct involvement in destabilizing eastern DRC continues to mount, US inaction has become increasingly difficult to justify. UN reports, field testimonies, and official denunciations by Kinshasa converge to the same reality : the military aggression devastating eastern DRC was initiated by the Rwandan regime under president Kagame, which openly deploys itself on all fronts of an invasion reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s obsessions with Poland, Czechoslovakia, and the Soviet Union in quest for “living space.”
Following the strong statements made by the United States representative at the United Nations, and the subsequent clarification issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the key question remains whether Washington will finally abandon its long-standing posture of rhetorical declarations that have consistently accompanied concrete inaction and fueled outrage among Congolese populations.
Successive reports by the UN Group of Experts have dispelled all doubts regarding the identity of both the instigator and executors of the military aggressions launched against the DRC by Rwanda since 1996. These aggressions are attributed to president Paul Kagame individually, his government, and the armed forces of the Republic of Rwanda, which attempt, in vain, to hide behind a handful of Congolese renegades from the AFC–M23 armed group. These findings are not mere allegations. For the first time, they have been acknowledged by several members of the international community, including the United States.
However, without serious coercive measures, such as targeted sanctions, suspension of military cooperation, and an embargo on all mineral exports from Rwanda until effective traceability mechanisms are implemented, these condemnations will remain empty words. Managing a crisis of such profound human cost through incantatory rhetoric alone is no longer acceptable, even if Rwanda is, as some point out, a strategic ally of the United States in the region.
A privileged relationship between the world’s leading power and a rogue state like Kagame’s Rwanda, caught red-handed destabilizing the entire Great Lakes region, cannot justify such guilty complacency. «By failing to react despite being fully aware of the crimes committed by the Kagame regime against the DRC and Burundi, as they themselves have demonstrated, the United States would be choosing to sacrifice international law on the altar of mafioso interests, an insult to the virtuous logic that has historically guided this great country », says an analyst specializing in African interregional relations.
A Posture with dramatic human consequences
In Kinshasa, there is hope that the Trump administration – which had the courage to bring the thirty-year-old Congolese tragedy back to the forefront – will follow through on its stabilizing initiative. Violence continues in eastern Congo; territorial entities in North and South Kivu are constantly changing hands and civilian populations pay the heavy price. Millions of people have been massacred and displaced to allow Rwanda to forcibly expand its territory and seize Congolese minerals amid a chronic instability that purely declarative approaches will never resolve.
In Kinshasa, the government, civil society, and public opinion deplore the absence of sanctions against the Rwandan aggressor, viewing it as tacit tolerance. «When a major power refuses to act in the face of established facts, it becomes part of the problem, even by omission», says a civil society activist who spoke to our editorial staff.
America’s credibility at stake
Public opinion increasingly believes that this posture can undermine the image of the United States all over Africa. Nobody would abide by a rules-based international order when those rules are applied selectively. The Congolese crisis highlights the limits of human rights rhetoric when confronted, in practice, with alliances calculations.
In a strategic region where competition for influence is intensifying, this inconsistency risks eroding trust in Washington over the long term, to the benefit of other actors ready to fill the diplomatic vacuum such a stance may create.
The Urgency of a Change in Course
In light of the worsening security situation in eastern DRC, the apparent neutrality of the United States is no longer tenable. Calls for de-escalation without concrete actions now appear insufficient. To restore its credibility and genuinely contribute to peace and stability, Washington is expected to take clear, coherent, and courageous decisions about Rwanda.
Failing this, history will record that in the face of documented aggression and a major humanitarian crisis, the world’s leading power chose to look elsewhere.-
Le Maximum