Category: Politics

In a recent interview with the BBC, DRC Prime Minister Judith Suminwa Tuluka dismissed calls for an “inclusive dialogue” that includes M23. Instead, she stated that the country’s focus is on diplomatic engagement with Rwanda, which Congolese authorities accuse of fueling the conflict.

Regional leaders from the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have urged direct talks between Kinshasa and M23, but the DRC has maintained its stance.

The Angolan-brokered peace talks collapsed in December after Rwanda demanded that the Congolese government negotiate with the rebels.

Despite the DRC government’s claims, Rwanda has repeatedly denied allegations of supporting M23, arguing that insecurity in eastern DRC stems from poor governance.

Kigali asserts that the Congolese government is attempting to divert international attention from the root causes of the conflict, including decades of marginalisation and persecution of Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese.

In the wake of the capture of Goma and Bukavu, Corneille Nangaa, leader of the AFC rebel alliance, which includes M23, recently reiterated that the fighters are Congolese and do not rely on Rwandan support.

“Kinshasa continues to push a misleading narrative, claiming that any Congolese who speaks Kinyarwanda is Rwandan. Yes, some of our soldiers were born in Rutshuru, Masisi, and Nyiragongo and speak Kinyarwanda. Does that mean they are part of the Rwandan army?” Nangaa posed.

During her interview with the BBC, the prime minister denied any ties between the Congolese army and the FDLR, a group composed of remnants of the perpetrators of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda.

However, multiple reports, including those from United Nations (UN) experts, have documented cooperation between the Congolese army and FDLR fighters in their battle against M23 in North Kivu and South Kivu provinces.

In London on Saturday, Zelensky and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer signed a loan agreement worth £2.26 billion (approximately $2.84 billion USD) to bolster Ukraine’s defense capabilities amid the ongoing war with Russia.

During their meeting at Downing Street, Starmer reiterated Britain’s “unwavering determination” to support Ukraine, emphasizing that the country has the “full backing” of the United Kingdom.

The loan, which will be repaid through profits from frozen Russian assets, is intended to enhance Ukraine’s weapons production capacity, helping the country defend itself against continued Russian aggression.

Zelensky expressed his gratitude for the support, calling the meeting with Starmer “meaningful and warm.”

He also praised the UK’s consistent backing since the start of the conflict, confirming that the funds would be directed towards the production of weapons in Ukraine.

“This is true justice – the one who started the war must be the one to pay,” Zelensky stated.

The loan agreement follows months of discussions and was first announced in October, with the funds set to bolster Ukraine’s frontline military equipment.

Zelensky’s visit also comes ahead of a major defense summit in London, where European leaders will discuss a peace plan for Ukraine, with Starmer suggesting that such a deal would require U.S. involvement.

Zelensky’s successful negotiation with the UK contrasts sharply with his tense meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump just a day earlier.

On Friday, Zelensky’s visit to the White House quickly descended into discord when U.S. Vice President JD Vance demanded that Zelensky be more thankful for America’s support and pressured him to consider a ceasefire with Russia.

The exchange escalated into a shouting match, with Zelensky being asked to leave the White House early.

Trump, who had hoped to secure a minerals deal with Ukraine during the meeting, accused Zelensky of “gambling with World War Three” by not agreeing to Washington’s terms for peace talks.

Tensions reached a boiling point when Zelensky warned Trump that appeasing Russia would only lead to more conflict, not peace, in Europe. The meeting ended without a signed agreement, leaving the planned minerals deal unfinished, with Trump turning to social media to write, “Come back when you’re ready for peace.”

Brown, who arrived in South Africa in August 2024, formally assumed her role as the senior US diplomat in the country in January 2025. Her departure comes amid escalating tensions between Pretoria and Washington over key policy differences.

Brown’s resignation follows the earlier departure of former US Ambassador to South Africa, Reuben Brigety, who stepped down in January as part of the standard transition process under the newly inaugurated US President Donald Trump.

The Trump administration is yet to appoint a new ambassador to replace Brigety.

Brown’s resignation has fueled speculation about diplomatic strains between the two nations. The US and South Africa have clashed on several policy issues, including Pretoria’s stance on Russia’s war in Ukraine, its growing ties with China, and most recently, its controversial land reform policies.

The South African government has been pursuing land redistribution efforts to address historical injustices related to apartheid-era land dispossession. The proposed reforms include the expropriation of land without compensation in certain cases, a policy that has raised concerns in Washington.

The US government has previously expressed reservations about the potential economic repercussions, particularly regarding foreign investment and property rights. Pretoria, however, maintains that the policy is necessary to correct imbalances in land ownership and promote economic inclusivity.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on February 7, 2025, suspending all US aid to South Africa in response to the land expropriation law, which the Trump administration claims discriminates against white farmers.

The suspension has had immediate and severe consequences, particularly for health programs. The US had been funding nearly 20% of South Africa’s $2.3 billion annual HIV/AIDS program through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).

The abrupt withdrawal of this support has led to the closure of health clinics and nutrition programs, with experts warning of a potential increase in mortality rates and instability.

This was the key message delivered by Gen. (Rtd) James Kabarebe, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs in Charge of Regional Cooperation, during a meeting with EU Special Envoy for the Great Lakes region, Ambassador Johan Borgstam, in Kigali on Thursday, February 27, 2025.

The discussions, described as frank and productive, focused on Rwanda’s security concerns and the escalating tensions in eastern DRC, which recently saw the AFC/M23 rebel group capture Bukavu and Goma cities.

Kabarebe dismissed comparisons between the conflict in DRC and the war in Ukraine, calling them politically motivated and misleading. He stressed that such narratives only serve to distract from the real causes of instability in the region.

“The situation in Eastern the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is not comparable to the conflict in Ukraine. Any attempt to draw such comparisons is politically motivated and serves only to divert from the real issues at hand,” a statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs reads in part.

Rwanda pointed to the presence of over 200 armed groups in eastern DRC, including the FDLR, a militia composed of individuals responsible for the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi. Kigali insists that the group, sanctioned by the UN and the US, remains a major threat to regional security and must be neutralised.

The Rwandan government also raised alarm over what it called an “existential threat” at its borders, citing an international military coalition composed of the FDLR, Burundian forces, Wazalendo ethnic militias, and European mercenaries.

The minister made it clear that Rwanda expects firm security guarantees, including the withdrawal of all foreign forces near its borders and a lasting resolution to the M23 issue, which stems from decades of marginalisation and persecution of Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese.

In addition, Rwanda criticised the DRC’s approach to the crisis, accusing its government of using international sanctions as a smokescreen to cover up its own governance failures, human rights violations, and corruption.

Kigali argued that punitive measures imposed on Rwanda do not contribute to peace but rather undermine African-led diplomatic efforts.

Kabarebe also took issue with what he described as the EU’s selective application of sovereignty and territorial integrity principles. He noted that Rwanda has faced multiple border violations since 2018, prompting defensive measures that will remain in place until its security concerns are fully addressed.

The meeting ended with Rwanda urging the EU to take a more constructive role in resolving the crisis, focusing on facts rather than political interests. Kigali reiterated its commitment to regional peace and called on international partners to support efforts aimed at achieving long-term stability in the Great Lakes region.

“Rwanda encourages EU member states to participate positively in regional peace efforts and avoid mixing politics in matters of peace and security,” the statement added.

The two political nemeses-turned-allies are reportedly working on a legal framework to define the structure and operational mechanisms of their proposed political union. This arrangement would see Odinga secure a plum government position while also bringing more of his allies into the Cabinet.

The drafting of the agreement comes just days after Odinga returned home following his unsuccessful bid to become chairperson of the African Union Commission (AUC).

In their first meeting since returning from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, the two leaders met at State House Mombasa on Monday, February 24, where they reaffirmed their commitment to a broad-based government. Several of Odinga’s lawyers, who have drafted past agreements with previous regimes, were present in Mombasa, further fueling speculation.

Odinga and Ruto faced off in the disputed 2022 presidential election, which the former prime minister accused Ruto of rigging. However, in an unprecedented move, they joined forces after deadly youth-led protests erupted in the country in June last year over punitive taxes. This was widely seen as Ruto’s attempt to have Odinga help him quell the unrest.

In return, Ruto absorbed some of Odinga’s political lieutenants into the Cabinet in what he termed the formation of a broad-based government. The President also led efforts to lobby for Odinga’s AUC bid. However, this move was not without criticism, with some accusing Odinga of riding on the blood of young Kenyans who died in the protests for political gain.

With their renewed political dalliance, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the leaders are keen to elevate their political collaboration to a new level.

Should Odinga yield to Ruto’s overtures, he is reportedly set to be rewarded with the appointment of several of his allies to senior government positions, including Cabinet Secretaries and Principal Secretaries. Some of Odinga’s supporters are pushing for a 50-50 power-sharing arrangement by 2027.

Odinga could also benefit from a proposed constitutional amendment that would see the creation of the position of Leader of the Official Opposition, the reintroduction of the Prime Minister role, and other governance adjustments aimed at enhancing inclusivity and national cohesion.

Amid growing speculation, Odinga has promised to make a major political announcement next week, further heightening rumours of a potentially game-changing realignment in Kenyan politics.

“The African Union Commission (AUC) election is now behind us. I’m back home, ready for the next move, which I will share with Kenyans in the coming week,” he said during a press briefing.

Meanwhile, Ruto’s former deputy, Gachagua, who was ousted last year over insubordination, is expected to unveil a new party and form a coalition with other like-minded opposition leaders in a bid to challenge Ruto in 2027.

He has repeatedly accused President Ruto of betrayal and has vowed to lobby against him, seeking to deny the Head of State votes from the vote-rich Mount Kenya region, which played a huge role in Ruto’s election.

According to a report by The New York Times, Tshisekedi, whose government has struggled to retain control over territories recently overtaken by the M23, is negotiating trade agreements for the DRC’s prized minerals.

The Congolese head of state’s goal is to leverage the natural resources—among the most abundant in the world—to garner assistance from Western powers, hoping they will apply more pressure on Rwanda, which he accuses of backing the M23 rebels. Rwanda has repeatedly denied the claims.

The DRC is rich in minerals, including cobalt, copper, diamonds, and gold, and has vast untapped resources valued at an estimated $24 trillion. Cobalt, in particular, plays a crucial role in global supply chains, as the DRC provides about 60% of the world’s cobalt reserves.

Tshisekedi’s offer aims to entice the U.S. and European countries into becoming more involved in the region, with the hope of tipping the scale in the DRC’s favour in its battle against M23 in the wake of the capture of Bukavu and Goma, key cities in eastern Congo.

Tshisekedi’s negotiations come at a time when China has made significant inroads into the DRC’s mining sector, with many of the country’s mineral resources controlled by foreign entities.

This has fueled ongoing tensions, as the local population continues to live in poverty despite the wealth generated from mining activities. Congo’s mineral wealth has often been siphoned off by foreign companies, with only a fraction of the proceeds benefiting the Congolese people.

The DRC’s mineral wealth has long been a point of contention, especially regarding Rwanda’s alleged role in supporting the M23 rebels, a claim Tshisekedi has repeatedly made.

Rwanda, for its part, denies involvement, and M23 spokesperson Lawrence Kanyuka has refuted Tshisekedi’s assertion that the group is motivated by the DRC’s mineral resources.

In past media statements, Kanyuka stated that M23’s struggle is not for control of valuable land but for survival, accusing Kinshasa of oppressing ethnic groups, particularly the Kinyarwanda-speaking communities in the east, and denying them recognition as true Congolese citizens.

Meanwhile, reports of Tshisekedi’s latest overtures come just days after the U.S. government imposed sanctions on General (rtd) James Kabarebe, Rwanda’s Minister of State for Regional Integration in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, accusing him of facilitating connections between Rwanda and M23.

The Rwandan government strongly condemned the sanctions, terming them “unjustified” and counterproductive to regional peace efforts.

“The sanctions are unjustified. The international community should support, not undermine, ongoing regional efforts toward a political solution. If sanctions could resolve the conflict in eastern DRC, we would have had peace in the region decades ago,” Government Spokesperson Yolande Makolo said.

Rwanda has consistently argued that the crisis in eastern Congo is rooted in deeper historical and governance issues that require political solutions rather than external pressure.

In a post shared on X, Nduhungirehe questioned the motives of the American non-governmental organisation, indicating that refugees were returning home following the M23 rebels’ capture of Goma and assurances of security.

“What a ‘scandal’! How can IDPs dare return home in a secured environment? Why don’t they stay in those camps forever to justify the relevance of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) and Human Rights Watch (HRW)?” Nduhungirehe wrote on Friday, criticizing the UN mission’s nearly three-decade presence in the country without resolving the conflict.

HRW’s latest geospatial analysis revealed that nearly all displacement camps west of Goma had been dismantled since M23 rebels took control of the provincial capital in January.

According to satellite imagery from 16 February shared by the NGO, only debris remained where thousands of tents once stood.

HRW claimed that the closure of the refugee camps violated international humanitarian law, “which prohibits the forced displacement of civilians except when required for their safety or due to imperative military reasons.”

M23 has repeatedly denied allegations of human rights violations, asserting that their fight is against decades of persecution and marginalisation of Congolese Rwandophones in eastern Congo.

Rwanda has also been vocal about the plight of Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese, many of whom have been displaced due to ethnic discrimination. Over the years, more than 100,000 have sought refuge in Rwanda.

In a recent interview, Nduhungirehe contextualised the long-standing issues facing Congolese of Rwandan descent, tracing them back to colonial-era border divisions.

“Rwanda was a German colony, and in 1910, 1912, and 1911, there was a meeting in Brussels where Belgium, Germany, and the United Kingdom artificially drew the borders between the three countries. Part of the Kingdom of Rwanda was given to Congo along with its people, while another part was given to Uganda. As a result, there are people of Rwandan culture and heritage in both countries—DRC, which was then Congo, and Uganda,” he explained.

“But those in Uganda never faced issues; they were integrated into society and considered Ugandan. However, those in Congo, who have lived there since 1910, were never fully recognised as Congolese; they were always suspected of being Rwandans. This marginalisation persisted even after Congo’s independence. In the 1970s, then-President of Zaire, Mobutu Sese Seko, granted them citizenship, but ten years later, in the 1980s, he revoked it, leaving them in a precarious situation,” Nduhungirehe added.