CIVICUS discusses recent developments in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with Reagan Miviri, researcher and analyst at Ebuteli (‘staircase’), a Congolese research institute focused on issues of politics, governance and conflict.

Conflict has intensified in eastern DRC, with M23 rebels capturing Bukavu after their earlier takeover of Goma, displacing thousands and worsening an already dire humanitarian crisis. In response, a historic joint summit between the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) called for an immediate ceasefire, direct negotiations among all conflict parties and the withdrawal of foreign forces. As violence continues to escalate, diplomatic efforts are increasingly vital to securing lasting peace.

How has the security situation recently changed in the DRC?

Since mid-February, when M23 captured Bukavu in eastern DRC, the security situation has worsened significantly. But the deterioration didn’t start with this event. Insecurity had already been escalating beforehand. The capture of Goma in late January sparked one of the deadliest urban battles in the country as the military had limited withdrawal routes.

In Bukavu, the takeover was smoother because multiple exit routes were available for the military and civilians. However, as M23 advances further south toward Uvira, the risk of intense urban combat increases, particularly given the presence of other armed groups in the region.

The United Nations (UN) has raised serious concerns about human rights abuses in M23-controlled areas, with reports of over 3,000 people killed, many of them non-combatants. The UN continues to monitor the situation and is working with humanitarian organisations to provide aid to displaced people. However, logistical challenges and insecurity hinder effective intervention. The protection of children remains a pressing issue, with reports of forced recruitment and other abuses. The UN is urging the international community to step up resources to address the growing humanitarian crisis.

What are the risks of regional spillover?

There’s a considerable risk the conflict will spill over into neighbouring countries, particularly given longstanding tensions between the DRC, Rwanda and Uganda. Rwanda’s backing of M23 has intensified these regional tensions. Movements by armed groups and large flows of refugees could destabilise border regions. To prevent further escalation, regional and international bodies must intensify diplomatic engagement, promote conflict resolution mechanisms and impose targeted sanctions on Rwanda for violating international law. Strengthening the mandate of the UN stabilisation mission (MONUSCO) to focus on civilian protection and preventing cross-border incursions could also help mitigate the risk.

MONUSCO’s presence has been widely criticised for its limited effectiveness, and some regional leaders have demanded its withdrawal. The involvement of regional contingents from Malawi, South Africa and Tanzania has been met with scepticism; however, their presence can at least provide some level of deterrence against further escalation. An abrupt departure without a solid security alternative could leave a power vacuum that armed groups may exploit. If withdrawal is to happen, it would have to be carefully planned, coordinated and paired with strengthening the Congolese military and advancing political dialogue.

What can the EAC and SADC do to de-escalate the conflict?

Both regional bodies have engaged in mediation efforts to resolve the ongoing conflict in eastern DRC, but have been hampered by competing national interests and deep-rooted regional rivalries. Many key players are not neutral. They have longstanding economic, political and security stakes in the conflict, which complicates their role as impartial mediators.

A major obstacle to successful mediation is the deep mistrust among those involved in the region. For instance, the perceived alignment between Kenya’s President William Ruto and Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has led to concerns that Kenya’s involvement in the process may not be entirely objective. This has weakened confidence in EAC-led initiatives, particularly from the DRC government and others who view Rwanda as a key M23 backer. Similarly, Uganda’s historical involvement in eastern DRC’s affairs, including its complex relationships with armed groups, further complicates diplomatic efforts.

Despite these challenges, regional efforts remain crucial. Angola’s diplomatic initiatives once showed promise in reducing tensions, though progress stalled when Rwanda did not fully participate. Without Rwanda’s active participation, any agreements reached risk being ineffective, as its role – whether direct or indirect – remains pivotal to conflict dynamics.

To move forward, all parties should accept that a military solution is unsustainable and will worsen the humanitarian crisis. To break the deadlock, neutral mediators – potentially from African states external to the conflict or international bodies – could help facilitate unbiased dialogue. A more structured and enforceable diplomatic framework, potentially under the African Union’s oversight, could also enhance credibility and ensure that any agreements reached lead to real change on the ground.

What’s needed for lasting peace?

M23’s grievances, which are largely centred on protection of the Tutsi community and security concerns, must be addressed as part of a broader national framework that includes all armed groups and communities in need of protection from the state. Dialogue with M23 is essential, but a lasting peace process must also tackle deeper issues that fuel instability, including poor governance, economic inequality, systemic corruption and repeated external violations of DRC sovereign territory.

But an inclusive approach should go beyond merely accommodating M23’s demands, aiming instead for comprehensive peacebuilding and national reconciliation. A national dialogue bringing together political leaders, civil society and representatives of the Congolese clergy could provide a platform to address these longstanding issues.

It will require a multifaceted approach to resolve the crisis, including military de-escalation, regional diplomatic engagement and internal political reforms. If the root causes of the conflict are not addressed, the cycle of violence is likely to persist.