For over 30 years, people in eastern DRC have lived in an endless cycle of violence. Armed violence has caused massive displacement. Millions have lost their lives, a mass tragedy the international community continues to underestimate. Civilians live in constant fear and are deprived of livelihoods and prospects for the future.

Beyond this immediate suffering, the conflict has exacerbated ethnic and social tensions. Divisions have deepened, particularly between communities perceived as belonging to Bantu and Tutsi ethnic groups, fuelling stigmatisation and reprisals. This situation creates a climate of widespread mistrust and dangerously undermines social cohesion.

In addition, cross-border trade, once essential to economic and social life, has declined sharply. Congolese and Rwandan populations living on either side of the border are exposed to threats, suspicion and restrictions, further exacerbating the precariousness and isolation of communities.

The agreements have not produced tangible results because they are not being respected. The commitments made, notably the M23’s withdrawal and the end of Rwanda’s support, have never materialised. There’s no binding mechanism and no real will to implement the agreements.

From the point of view of many people in the DRC, the Washington agreement appears to be more of an economic arrangement than a genuine peace process. The war in eastern DRC is also a war over the exploitation of natural resources, and this agreement gives the impression of seeking to manage resources rather than protect populations and restore Congolese sovereignty.

As for the Doha agreement, another negotiation process directly involving the M23 and the Congolese government, it suffers from the same weaknesses: continued hostilities and a lack of transparency and effective implementation.

The conflict extends far beyond the DRC’s borders. Rwanda’s direct involvement, the risks of spillover into Burundi and instability throughout the Great Lakes region clearly show this is a regional crisis. Rebel movements, population flows and geopolitical interests are dangerously intertwined.

But it’s also an international crisis because many external parties are involved, either directly or indirectly. The European Union, for example, has concluded mining agreements with Rwanda, even though Rwanda doesn’t have mineral resources comparable to those of the DRC. These resources  come from the DRC’s occupied areas.

This situation reveals a profound international hypocrisy. Behind the rhetoric of peace and stability, economic and strategic interests are contributing to prolonging the war.

Civil society plays a crucial role in documenting and denouncing human rights violations, the plundering of resources and the suffering endured by Congolese people. We also analyse peace agreements to expose their limitations and propose credible alternatives.

However, civil society cannot bear the burden of peace alone. To achieve lasting peace, all parties must respect their commitments, including the effective withdrawal of armed groups and foreign forces. Otherwise, no dialogue can succeed.

Lasting peace also requires inclusive processes, rooted in local realities and led by the DRC’s people. They must respect the sovereignty and dignity of Congolese people.