24 March 2003
Official Cites Lack of African Leadership as Block to Congo Peace
(U.S. Great Lakes policy touched on at SAIS Forum) (960)
By Jim Fisher-Thompson
Washington File Staff Writer
Washington -- During a March 20 meeting on conflict in the Great Lakes
region, a senior U.S. Government official voiced frustration at the
inability of African leaders to end the turmoil in the eastern part of
the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) that is slowly but inexorably
draining the region of resources and human capital.
The U.S. official, who asked to have his name withheld, told a policy
forum "it's a very negative picture I'm painting on the political
side." The U.S. Government continues to work for peace in the DRC but
"we lack African leadership on this" and the result is "chaos" in the
region.
He spoke at the 95th meeting of the Great Lakes Policy Forum,
sponsored by the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies (SAIS) Conflict Management Program and Search for Common
Ground, an international non-governmental organization (NGO) dedicated
to helping resolve conflicts worldwide. In the audience was former
Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Herman Cohen who had
worked to help resolve conflicts in Namibia/Angola, Mozambique and
Ethiopia/Eritrea.
In 1998, Uganda and Rwanda intervened in a rebellion in the eastern
Congo that eventually involved a total of nine African nations in what
has been called the continent's first world war. In 1999, the warring
parties signed a ceasefire agreement in Lusaka that included a
framework for peace, but Rwandan and Ugandan troops remained in DRC.
In July 2002, Rwanda and the DRC signed an accord intended to end the
four-year conflict, but hostilities continue to smolder.
Since the Lusaka ceasefire agreement, the official explained, "Our
strategy in the DRC has been to:
-- urge the withdrawal of foreign forces;
-- support the formation of an inclusive transitional government and
reunification of the country; and
-- encourage the DDR [Disarmament, Demobilization and Repatriation] of
armed rebel groups in the DRC."
He added, "We also strongly support access to humanitarian assistance
throughout the county, cessation of human rights abuses, and cessation
of illegal exploitation of the DRC's resources."
For the rest of the Great Lakes region, the official said, "Our policy
in Burundi is clearly to support the [peace] process backed by South
Africa and others in the region to bring about a successful transition
and more open state. Our policy in Rwanda is to encourage moving
towards democracy and to continue the rebuilding of the country...and
in the particular case of the Congo [DRC] to try to get the Rwandan
troops out."
But, despite these goals and intentions, the strategy is not working,
the official said. "The truth of the matter is we lack African
leadership on this. And we lack it in many ways."
Some faction leaders in the DRC conflict, for example, have been
distracted away from the peace process into intervening in other
countries, like the neighboring Central African Republic (CAR). They
have "not lived up their political role" in the process and the result
has been chaos in some of the movements.
"I would argue that the Rwandan government has not clearly decided who
speaks for them" among the faction leaders inside eastern Congo. "No
one seems to be moving forward in this [peace] process," he added.
A much-heralded "Congolese dialogue" among grassroots political
leaders in the DRC has still "not come to a successful closure"
despite a long, hard effort by the Government of South Africa. It's
not for lack of trying that this has failed; it's for lack of will by
the internal [DRC political] parties.
"Where is the man who speaks for the Congo?" the official asked
rhetorically. "[DRC President Joseph] Kabila says it's him. Why hasn't
he made the necessary compromises? Why hasn't he reached out to the
others [faction leaders] in a meaningful way?"
As for the argument by some that providing security in the DRC capital
for such meetings is basically impossible, the official said, "It's a
red herring [misdirection].
"We can come up with $40 million to do security in Kinshasa," he said
averred. "We can have the Angolans, who are more than willing to step
in for the international community, do security in Kinshasa. We can
have the U.N. put blue helmets on South Africans and others who are
willing to do this.
"The parties refuse to move forward on this score because they have
not in their own minds reconciled themselves to what they've agreed
to. And that's where we are on the Congo now," he concluded.
The official strongly objected to NGO community concerns that the U.S.
Government has not been active on this front.
On the contrary, he said, "We're extremely active. We've been quite
blunt to some of the parties privately. But the truth is we don't have
that much leverage. We can use some influence in the World Bank and
other places -- but the downside is that it punishes the Congolese
people."
He said, the recent firing of the DRC finance minister, "whom we
believed was making serious progress, was frankly very disturbing to
us for the future of the Congo and for the near term." It certainly
makes it more difficult to justify further assistance to DRC to
Congress, he added. "We really cannot say to our masters on the Hill
and elsewhere that we're sure and confident that the money will not be
wasted."
Looking at overall peace efforts in the region, the official repeated,
"There are some good pieces of paper. The point is to get them
[Africans] to execute the pieces of paper." Inaction "is not for want
of a plan. It's for want of the will to execute the plan."
(The Washington File is a product of the Office of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
