The path to peace for the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Great Lakes region is a path of bold moves and collective accountability. The current political and security situations in the region, and more specifically in the DRC, call for an unorthodox analysis at the four most dominant levels of international politics: international systems, the regional, state, and individual levels. The past failed attempts by the international community and Congolese actors to restore peace in the DRC show that best wishes and superficial resolutions alone are not enough. Agreements must include reinforcement mechanisms, measurable outcomes, and clear accountability measures. Whether supported by the United Nations (UN) Security Council (UNSC), as in the case of UNSC Resolution 2773, or through regional arrangements, such as the recent merger of the Congo peace processes between the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and East African Community (EAC); peace and security in the DRC and the broader region of the Great Lakes depend on holding political actors accountable to the region, rule of law, state institutions, and the citizens for their actions and decisions. These accountability mechanisms should be made possible by the willingness of citizens and authorities to settle their differences and work for peace.
Beyond simplistic approaches
Since taking office in January 2019, President Felix Tshisekedi has vowed to promote peace and stability. His strategy of regionalising efforts through the EAC and SADC has been ineffective. Peace is consistently threatened and undermined by actions and decisions of armed groups such as M23 and the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), which have engaged in violence in the eastern provinces. Political groups, including the Common Front for Congo (FCC), former president Kabila’s political platform, have sabotaged the 2023 electoral process and are sceptical of Kinshasa’s goodwill. These political and security challenges reveal the complexity of the Congo’s situation. To address these crises, we must go beyond the simplistic approach to peace. Working towards a difficult peace and a credible peace process is the only way forward. Such a peace process may not yield immediate political gains, but it can deliver tangible results for communities by ending violence and conflict.
More pieces to the puzzle
Political calculations, competing priorities, and interests among actors within the DRC and the Great Lakes regions contribute to the slowness of the processes.
The current focus on the Washington Agreement (DRC-Rwanda) and the Doha processes (DRC-M23) is only one piece of the puzzle. While these processes are essential in providing platforms and frameworks for negotiations, a comprehensive regional process that integrates Uganda and Burundi, countries with equal security stakes in the region, is needed. Concurrently, an internal political and social peace process is also necessary, which would include the many armed groups and civil society movements in the DRC. The call for an inter-Congolese dialogue, as expressed by President Tshisekedi, religious leaders, and the opposition, should be encouraged. More importantly, the goal is to establish an inclusive framework for organisation and participation without compromising the country’s sovereignty or alienating any segment of the population, whether implicitly or explicitly. Nonetheless, the call for dialogue represents a positive step towards a collective commitment to resolving conflict through an inclusive peace process. The challenge lies in how best to achieve this.
The current focus on the Washington Agreement (DRC-Rwanda) and the Doha processes (DRC-M23) is only one piece of the puzzle. While these processes are essential in providing platforms and frameworks for negotiations, a comprehensive regional process that integrates Uganda and Burundi, countries with equal security stakes in the region, is needed
Tweet
Aligning strategies and mobilising support
The political processes and resolutions decided at the international level, particularly in Washington and Qatar, must align with local expectations and resonate with the narratives expressed at community level. For instance, many Congolese initially assumed that the Washington process would involve direct military action against M23, but the United States (US) focus has mainly remained diplomatic and economic. To make the process work for sustainable peace and beyond economic interests, they should align with UNSC Resolution 2773. In case the latter becomes a passive resolution with no enforceable mechanisms, the African Union (AU) should take the lead. As such, the AU must rise above the institutional limitations and politicisations of its decisions to deliver on peace. With its continental vocation, the new leadership at the helm of the organisation should elevate it to its rightful place as a respected and responsive institution.
The political processes and resolutions decided at the international level, particularly in Washington and Qatar, must align with local expectations and resonate with the narratives expressed at community level
Tweet
Regional organisations have also demonstrated their limits in this crisis. For instance, the deployment of EAC troops in November 2022 faced credibility issues due to perceptions of Kenyan alignment with M23, while South Africa’s domestic politics have shaped its SADC troop deployment. These limits underscore the need for more capable and politically neutral regional bodies that can both enforce peace and hold actors accountable for their actions. Regional bodies should encourage, support efforts, and help develop mechanisms of intra- and inter-state peace dialogues in the Great Lakes region. The security postures of Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi are justified by claims of national security threats (posed by their citizens) harboured in neighbouring countries. Regional actors must eradicate these perceived threats for the region to recover its stability. Intra- and inter-state dialogues are a necessity.
National-level priorities for the DRC?
First priority is the urgent need for institutional reforms, including the security sector. The weak performance of the Armed Forces of the DRC (FARDC) in the field and the ongoing judicial prosecutions due to cases of corruption demonstrate the fragility of public institutions and the need for a countrywide institutional reform plan. The independence and capacitation of oversight institutions, such as the national and provincial assemblies, must accompany this reform.
Second priority is the de-politicisation of peace efforts and the creation of a permanent framework of political consultations. This framework should coordinate the organisation of national political and social dialogue, and also serve as a platform to monitor the strict implementation of the resolutions, similar to truth and reconciliation commissions.
Third priority is a deliberate and sustained attention to community grievances, either due to identity or their socio-economic conditions, which must be translated into actions. In case of identity conflicts, leaders must encourage both national and intercommunity dialogues. Moreover, in the case of socio-economic situations, the state, in partnership with its strategic partners, must invest in job creation and infrastructure development. This holistic and multilevel approach to the crisis is essential for sustaining peace.
Political or individual will?
Beyond the institutional and regional efforts, peace in the region is also dependent on the individual (translated as political) will of the leaders. The de-escalation of violence in the eastern region of the DRC and the reduction of divisive political narratives between Kigali and Kinshasa following the presidents Tshisekedi and Kagame’s meeting in Qatar demonstrates the value of high-level engagements. Bringing together Presidents Tshisekedi (DRC), Kagame (Rwanda), Museveni (Uganda), and Ndayishimiye (Burundi) would be a significant step toward regional stabilisation, harmonisation of political approaches, and ultimately pave the way for community reconciliation.
In conclusion, the biggest successes in this peace effort would be to make the process meaningful to citizens through tangible actions and programmes. At the international level, while the UN has been supporting the DRC through MONUSCO (UN Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the DRC) and the office of the Special Envoy for the Great Lakes, integrating the concurrent peace processes into one that is championed by the UN or the AU, with the active support of Qatar and the US, is essential. These countries have shown vested interests lately. This coordination is necessary for the mobilisation of resources, accountability of actors, and measurable outcomes that advance peace, security, and societal stability.
Dr. Yvan Yenda Ilunga is an Assistant Professor of Political Science & International Relations and Associate Director of the MA International Relations programme at Salve Regina University.
