CIVICUS discusses the peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda with Gentil Akilimali, Executive Secretary of the Centre of Hope for Human Rights, a Congolese civil society organisation that supports victims of human rights violations in the DRC through legal, psychological and social assistance.

On 27 June, the DRC and Rwanda signed a peace agreement in Washington, DC, with the aim of resolving persistent regional tensions through diplomacy. Following the agreement, the DRC issued an ultimatum demanding the immediate withdrawal of Rwandan forces from its territory and an end to all support for armed groups such as the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda and M23. The DRC has threatened to launch a military offensive if these conditions aren’t met. The potential for further conflict comes at a time when eastern DRC is still experiencing a serious humanitarian crisis.

How likely is the latest agreement to succeed?

The DRC and Rwanda have previously signed numerous agreements, including those of Nairobi, Addis Ababa and, most notably, Lusaka. Unfortunately, these agreements have generally failed due to deep mistrust. As this mistrust has never been addressed through mechanisms of truth, justice, regional reconciliation and security guarantees, any agreement signed between the DRC and Rwanda is highly precarious.

The Washington Agreement, signed in late June under US mediation, could promote peace, as both Rwanda and the USA benefit from DRC mineral resources such as coltan. However, structural mistrust persists, and the prospects for peace remain fragile.

This agreement essentially provides a diplomatic framework with limited and insufficient operational monitoring mechanisms. To be effective, a monitoring mechanism should include technological surveillance by satellites and drones, as well as early warning and incident resolution systems. It should also require quarterly public reports and include an independent verification mechanism and automatic sanctions in the event of violations, such as the freezing of military aid, visa restrictions and the suspension of financial aid.

Beyond sanctions, a judicial mechanism is needed to prosecute all those responsible for serious crimes in the DRC. Those responsible for crimes committed against the population – including the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo in 1996, DRC forces in 1998, the National Congress for the Defence of the People in 2006 and M23 in 2009 and again from 2022 onwards – must be arrested and prosecuted in order to break the cycle of violence in eastern DRC.

How do US interests and mineral resources influence this process?

The USA facilitated the agreement not out of humanitarian or moral concern, but mainly to secure its economic, mining and geopolitical interests in relation to China and Russia, while presenting itself as a mediating power. The extent of its commitment will depend on balancing these objectives with its willingness to maintain credible diplomatic pressure on Rwanda, despite its historic partnership with the country.

Economic issues play a decisive role in stakeholders’ engagement or disengagement in the peace process. Eastern DRC is rich in strategic minerals such as cassiterite, cobalt, coltan and gold, attracting neighbouring countries, armed groups, mafia networks and state interests. Control of and access to mining areas are priority military and economic objectives, fuelling violence and complicating the search for peaceful solutions.

In this context, the DRC may be pressured to grant mining concessions or economic incentives during peace negotiations in order to obtain a real commitment from Rwanda. These concessions are sometimes discreetly included in agreements, creating economic peace rather than political or social peace. The key challenge remains to remove natural resources from the cycle of violence and exploitation, and to integrate them into a fair and transparent development framework that enables the DRC to grow.

What could the agreement mean for the humanitarian crisis?

The humanitarian crisis is both a symptom of and an aggravating factor in the conflict. If it persists, it could undermine the peace agreements by fuelling frustration, strengthening armed groups and discrediting the DRC state as a protector. Conversely, only peace can end this humanitarian crisis. This requires the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms to redress past injustices, promote reconciliation between the Congolese and Rwandan populations, prevent future violence between the two countries and restore trust between the DRC and Rwanda.

If the humanitarian crisis is not stabilised through effective responses, including the safe return of displaced people, humanitarian access and the rehabilitation of conflict zones, the peace process risks being perceived as illusory by local communities, remaining a diplomatic exercise with no real impact on the ground.