A Discernment and Apostasy watch site for African Saints.
Prove all things..(1 Thesa.5:21)
Test Spirits..(I John 4:1)
Like the Bereans, check whether things are so(Acts 17:11)
Tuesday, 12 November 2013
No 'Peace Deal' With Defeated M23 Rebels, DR Congo Says: Rwanda silent over M23 rebel defeat: How The US Masterminded Downfall of their friend M23
Congolese soldiers guard suspected M23 rebel fighters who
surrendered in Chanzo village in the Rutshuru territory near the eastern
town of Goma, November 5, 2013. REUTERS/Kenny Katombe
First read:
End of the M23 Era but no end yet to USA and her clients’ looting of Congo resources : Kabila Congratulates Congo
Army for Defeating M23 Rebels: FARDC captured Ugandan and Rwandan Nationals
fighting alongside M23 Rebels
When territorial sovereignty violators cry foul
when their own sovereignty is violated: Uganda protests D.R Congo’s recent
bombing of its territory in pursuit of M23 rebels: Rwanda has also accused the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) of firing bombs and rockets into its
territory: Remember when Uganda was fined 18 trillion shillings ($10 billion)
for violating the sovereignty of Dr.Congo
The
signing of a document that was supposed to mark the end of peace talks
between DR Congo’s government and the defeated M23 rebels was postponed
indefinitely on Monday in Entebbe, Uganda, over a disagreement on its
wording and title.
Uganda’s State Minister for Foreign Affairs
Henry Oryem Okello suggested that Congolese officials had balked at
signing a “peace deal” that had been agreed upon and had instead “asked
for more time” to consider the document.
DR Congo’s Foreign
Minister Raymond Tshibanda said that the wording and the title of the
document was important because the situation on the ground had changed.
The “Kampala peace talks” between DR Congo and the M23 rebels have gone
on for nearly a year. But last week the Congolese army recaptured all
territories once occupied by the rebels after the peace talks broke down
again two weeks earlier.
The Congolese government then said it
would no longer sign a “peace deal” with the M23 rebels, but would sign a
document marking the end of the rebellion.
Uganda’s Defense
Minister and chief mediator Cyprus Kyonga said on Monday he was still
optimistic that an agreement could be reached.
“We need time to consult with each party,... there are issues of fine-tuning language and some words,” Mr. Kyonga said.
Congolese authorities have always faced strong opposition at home against signing a “peace deal” with the M23 rebels.
Signing a “peace deal” would even make less sense now that the
Congolese army, backed by UN peacekeepers, has dislodged the rebels from
all the territory they occupied for more than a year in North Kivu
province.
Congolese authorities have also not forgotten that the
M23 rebels claimed that the government had failed to abide by an earlier
peace deal signed on March 23, 2009, as a pretext to launch their
rebellion last year.
After defeating the rebels militarily, why
give them the opportunity to later use yet another “peace deal” as a
pretext to launch a new rebellion?
But Ugandan officials have
been pushing for a deal as if the situation on the ground had remained
the same as it was three weeks ago, when the M23 rebels still controlled
large swathes of land, and refused then to sign a peace deal if rebels
who had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity were not
granted a complete amnesty.
Some Congolese analysts have always
called into question the impartiality of the Ugandan government. Uganda
and Rwanda have been accused by the United Nations and rights groups of
supporting the M23 rebels.
Ugandan officials claimed last week
that close to 1,700 rebels had fled into their territory, a number
disputed by officials in North Kivu province, who put the number at a
couple of hundreds at most.
Ugandan officials have also said that
the fugitive rebels will be disarmed but will not be handed over to
Congolese authorities, including M23 military commander Sultani Makenga,
who is wanted by DR Congo’s government and is under U.N. and U.S.
sanctions.
The U.N. and African Union-brokered Addis Ababa
Framework Agreement, signed in February by 11 countries to tackle the
conflict in eastern Congo, calls on neighboring countries to “neither
harbor nor provide protection of any kind to persons accused of war
crimes, crimes against humanity, acts of genocide or crimes of
aggression, or persons falling under the UN sanctions regime.”
Rwanda, under intense international pressure over its alleged covert
aid to M23 rebels in the eastern DemocraticRepublic of Congo, has
maintained total silence since the group’s defeat.
The March 23 Movement (M23) announced this week it was ending its
18-month insurgency after suffering a resounding rout at the hands of
the Congolese army with key backing from a special UN intervention
brigade.
The rebels are now under pressure to sign a formal peace deal on
Monday in Uganda, to where most of its fighters have fled. Scores of
wounded fighters have also fled to Rwanda.
UN experts have accused Uganda and in particular Rwanda of backing
the rebels, and despite angry denials, officials in Kigali have been
clearly anxious over the turn of events.
On the eve of M23′s formal surrender, Rwandan Foreign Minister Louise
Mushikiwabo warned in a radio interview that Kigali’s arch-foe, the
DRC-based Rwandan Hutu rebels of the Democratic Forces for the
Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), were moving into positions abandoned by the
M23.
“Our intelligence reports indicate that FDLR is coming close to the
Rwandan border as M23 is chased out of the territory,” she said on local
radio KFM on Monday.
The FDLR, one of a myriad of rebel outfits operating in the Kivu
region, is a descendant of Rwandan Hutu extremist groups that carried
out the 1994 genocide, during which some 800 000 people, mostly ethnic
Tutsis, were murdered while the world stood by.
Kigali’s minority Tutsi-led government sees them as a continuing
threat to Rwanda’s security, which goes some way to explaining their
alleged support for the M23—a Tutsi-dominated outfit.
Rwanda’s recent silence contrasts conspicuously with its threats of
retaliation made just a couple of weeks earlier when shells allegedly
fired by the DRC army hit its territory, raising fears that the conflict
could widen.
Rwanda’s first venture into the former Zaire came in 1996, aimed at
preventing the perpetrators of the 1994 genocide from re-arming. That
drew little or no criticism at the time—partly because of Western guilt
over failing the stop the genocide.
Its subsequent ventures into its mineral-rich neighbour, starting
with the second Congo war in 1998, have been gradually less popular, but
it was its backing for the M23 rebels, who are accused of rights abuses
including rape and recruiting child soldiers, that sparked a fierce
diplomatic backlash.
Criticism
In the 18 months of M23′s existence, Rwanda has come in for criticism
from even its most loyal supporters: foreign capitals including
Washington, London, The Hague, Berlin and Stockholm suspended or cut
some of their bilateral support to Kigali, which they have otherwise
championed for its remarkable post-genocide economic recovery.
“Rwanda overplayed its hand in the M23 gamble,” said Kris Berwouts,
an independent analyst on conflict and security in the Great Lakes
region.
“The reaction of Rwanda’s traditional partners went way beyond its
[Rwanda's] worst fears … it was absolutely clear that its future moves
and actions would be looked upon with great suspicion,” he said.
Analysts have largely attributed the M23′s humiliating defeat to
intense pressure applied by the UN Security Council and particularly the
United States on Rwanda, ensuring that Kigali could not afford to bail
out the rebels, whose military leader Sultani Makenga is under UN and US
sanctions.
Rwanda “had no choice” but to stand down amid the latest fighting, another regional expert told Agence France-Presse.
Analysts also cited differences of opinion within Kigali’s power
structure—centred around strongman and President Paul Kagame, who has
dominated the country since his then-rebel Rwandan Patriotic Front ended
the genocide in 1994.
Some figures in Kigali, analysts say, want to maintain a strategic
presence in North Kivu—for both security and economic reasons—while
others think it is no longer worth it.
It now remains to be seen how much enthusiasm the UN intervention
brigade will put into going after the FDLR and other armed groups that
terrorise civilians—seen as the key next step in efforts to put an end
to two decades of war and regional meddling in the region. – AFP
Rwanda, under intense international pressure over its alleged covert
aid to M23 rebels in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, has
maintained total silence since the group’s defeat.
The March 23 Movement (M23) announced this week it was ending its
18-month insurgency after suffering a resounding rout at the hands of
the Congolese army with key backing from a special UN intervention
brigade.
The rebels are now under pressure to sign a formal peace deal on
Monday in Uganda, to where most of its fighters have fled. Scores of
wounded fighters have also fled to Rwanda.
UN experts have accused Uganda and in particular Rwanda of backing
the rebels, and despite angry denials, officials in Kigali have been
clearly anxious over the turn of events.
On the eve of M23′s formal surrender, Rwandan Foreign Minister Louise
Mushikiwabo warned in a radio interview that Kigali’s arch-foe, the
DRC-based Rwandan Hutu rebels of the Democratic Forces for the
Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), were moving into positions abandoned by the
M23.
“Our intelligence reports indicate that FDLR is coming close to the
Rwandan border as M23 is chased out of the territory,” she said on local
radio KFM on Monday.
The FDLR, one of a myriad of rebel outfits operating in the Kivu
region, is a descendant of Rwandan Hutu extremist groups that carried
out the 1994 genocide, during which some 800,000 people, mostly ethnic
Tutsis, were murdered while the world stood by.
Kigali’s minority Tutsi-led government sees them as a continuing
threat to Rwanda’s security, which goes some way to explaining their
alleged support for the M23 — a Tutsi-dominated outfit.
Internal differences
Rwanda’s recent silence contrasts conspicuously with its threats of
retaliation made just a couple of weeks earlier when shells allegedly
fired by the DR Congo army hit its territory, raising fears that the
conflict could widen.
Rwanda’s first venture into the former Zaire came in 1996, aimed at
preventing the perpetrators of the 1994 genocide from re-arming. That
drew little or no criticism at the time — partly because of Western
guilt over failing the stop the genocide.
Its subsequent ventures into its mineral-rich neighbour, starting
with the second Congo war in 1998, have been gradually less popular, but
it was its backing for the M23 rebels, who are accused of rights abuses
including rape and recruiting child soldiers, that sparked a fierce
diplomatic backlash.
In the 18 months of M23′s existence, Rwanda has come in for criticism
from even its most loyal supporters: foreign capitals including
Washington, London, The Hague, Berlin and Stockholm suspended or cut
some of their bilateral support to Kigali, which they have otherwise
championed for its remarkable post-genocide economic recovery.
“Rwanda overplayed its hand in the M23 gamble,” said Kris Berwouts,
an independent analyst on conflict and security in the Great Lakes
region.
“The reaction of Rwanda’s traditional partners went way beyond its
(Rwanda’s) worst fears… it was absolutely clear that its future moves
and actions would be looked upon with great suspicion,” he said.
Analysts have largely attributed the M23′s humiliating defeat to
intense pressure applied by the UN Security Council and particularly the
United States on Rwanda, ensuring that Kigali could not afford to bail
out the rebels, whose military leader Sultani Makenga is under UN and US
sanctions.
Rwanda “had no choice” but to stand down amid the latest fighting, another regional expert told AFP.
Analysts also cited differences of opinion within Kigali’s power
structure — centred around strongman and President Paul Kagame, who has
dominated the country since his then-rebel Rwandan Patriotic Front ended
the genocide in 1994.
Some figures in Kigali, analysts say, want to maintain a strategic
presence in North Kivu — for both security and economic reasons — while
others think it is no longer worth it.
It now remains to be seen how much enthusiasm the UN intervention
brigade will put into going after the FDLR and other armed groups that
terrorise civilians — seen as the key next step in efforts to put an end
to two decades of war and regional meddling in the region.
AFP
M23 rebels walk inside an enclosure after surrendering to Uganda’s
government at Rugwerero village in Kisoro district on Friday. Reuters.
Sultani Makenga, the commander of the M23 rebel group in the
eastern Democratic Republic of Congo on Thursday surrendered in Uganda
alongside hundreds of M23 fighters in the Mgahinga National Park.
This came after an offensive last week by the Democratic Republic of
Congo soldiers backed by UN troops defeated the M23 rebels, who launched
an uprising in the mineral-rich east of the country in early 2012.
Details have now emerged about the key role the United States played
that finally brought down the curtains on the activities of the M23.
US ROLE
The United States exerted key pressure on Rwanda to halt its support
for M23 rebels in the Democratic Republic of Congo, seeking to end the
latest conflict in the Great Lakes region of Africa.
Washington had already put its ally Rwanda on notice in July 2012, freezing annual military assistance of $200,000.
Then, a month ago, Washington announced sanctions concerning the training of Rwandan officers.
The goal was to get the government of President Paul Kagame to break completely with the Tutsi mutineers of the M23.
“It is clear that the US has been behind the scene putting more
pressure on Rwanda,” said Richard Downie of Washington’s Center for
Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
He cited as evidence “the assistance over the border from Rwanda
which was pretty significant until farly recently has trickled down to
virtually nothing in the past few weeks.”
Kagame took power after the 1994 genocide committed by Hutu
extremists, and the United States has supported his Tutsi-led government
for nearly 20 years.
But now, Downie said, Washington has “very slowly, but increasingly
come around to the view that Rwanda is the critical piece of trying to
resolve this chronic conflict and that Rwanda’s role has been frankly
very unhelpful.”
After long keeping quiet, in recent months Washington embraced
reports from the United Nations and claims from DR Congo accusing Rwanda
and Uganda of providing military support to the M23 in the North Kivu
region. Both countries deny this.
The US special envoy for the Great Lakes region, Russ Feingold, a
former senator and expert in the region, recalled Wednesday that the
sanctions imposed last month were motivated by “the recruitment or
assistance in terms of children soldiers for the M23 and involvement of
Rwanda in that.”
But the punishment could be lifted if it is shown that Kigali has in fact broken ties with the rebels, Feingold said.
A foreign policy priority for Obama
US President Barack Obama.
Feingold did not hide the fact that the withdraw of Rwandan support
for the M23 was due in part to behind the scenes work by American
diplomats, in particular to phone calls from Secretary of State John
Kerry to Kagame and other leaders in the region.
Without confirming the date of the last conversation between Kerry
and Kagame, a State Department official told international media:
“Secretary Kerry and other officials have regularly raised our concerns
about support for armed groups such as M23 with various leaders in the
region, including President Kagame.”
Feingold said the level of US engagement in the region is “probably
unprecedented,” adding it is one of the first priorities of President
Barack Obama’s foreign policy.
Feingold noted his own full time appointment to his post in July —
which came at the request of UN counterpart Mary Robinson and EU
counterpart Koen Vervaeke — and the strong involvement of the United
States in efforts to conclude regional peace talks underway in Kampala,
Uganda for the past 11 months.
After 20 years of war in the region that have left five to six
million dead, according to US estimates, Downie agreed with Feingold
that “the US is driven really by an humanitarian agenda in the Congo and
the genuine desire to try to tackle this conflict.”
But, he cautioned, “this a chronic long-running conflict, although we
have a moment of optimism right now with M23 disbanding, this is by no
means the end of the road in terms of solving these problems.”
M23 fighters who retreated into Uganda after being hammered
by U.N.-backed Congolese government forces “can still regroup,” Ugandan
government spokesman said Tuesday.
M23 fighters who retreated into Uganda after being hammered by
U.N.-backed Congolese government forces “can still regroup,” Ugandan
government spokesman said Tuesday.
Ofwono Opondo’s warning came after Congolese government
officials delayed signing a peace accord with the insurgents. The
ceremony planned for Monday evening was postponed after Congolese
officials asked for more time to review the final document.
Ugandan officials with knowledge of the negotiations reported a
breakdown of trust between Ugandan mediators and Congolese officials.
Some members of Uganda’s military have supported the Congolese M23
rebels and the Rwandan government has provided even greater backing,
according to a United Nations group of experts.
In negotiations convened after the rebels appeared to be losing the
fight, the Congolese delegation said they could no longer hold
face-to-face meetings with M23′s civilian leaders, said the Ugandan
government spokesman, Ofwono Opondo.
“They don’t want to be seen to be equal to M23,” Opondo said.
Uganda’s deputy foreign minister, Okello Oryem, told reporters late
Monday that Congo’s government was not comfortable with the idea of a
“peace agreement” with M23, saying it instead wanted a “declaration”
that M23 is a vanquished “negative force.”
Another apparent sticking point is the fate of the M23 military
commander who recently fled with at least 1,665 of his fighters to
Uganda amid a heightened offensive by Congolese government troops in
neighboring eastern Congo. The U.N. has imposed a travel ban and assets
freeze on Sultani Makenga, a former Congolese army colonel, for “serious
violations of international law involving the targeting of women and
children” as leader of M23. Congolese government officials want to see
Makenga tried for his alleged crimes.
Opondo said Makenga “is not a prisoner” in Uganda and may only be
handed over to Congolese authorities after a final peace accord has been
signed.
U.S. special envoy Russ Feingold urged the parties to ensure that
those who have committed war crimes, crimes of genocide and crimes
against humanity will be held accountable. Feingold told The Associated
Press on Monday that the peace deal offers no amnesty for rebels accused
of committing serious crimes and no automatic reintegration of the
rebels into the national army. Ugandan officials confirmed that the
rebel delegation had accepted these conditions.
The Congolese government delegation to the Uganda talks is led by
Foreign Minister Raymond Tshibanda. It was not possible to get his
comment.
Makenga, 39, emerged as M23′s top commander earlier this year
following a violent split within the rebel ranks that saw the ouster of
Congolese warlord Bosco Ntaganda, who then fled to Rwanda before handing
himself over to the International Criminal Court. Hundreds of M23
rebels allied with Ntaganda also fled to Rwanda at the time.
M23 launched its rebellion in April 2012, becoming the latest
reincarnation of a Tutsi rebel group dissatisfied with the Congolese
government. The rebels accused Congo’s government of failing to honor
all the terms of a peace deal signed in March 2009 with M23′s precursor
group, the CNDP.
At their peak the M23 rebels overtook Goma, a provincial capital in
Congo. But in the past year they had been weakened by internal divisions
and waning Rwandan support. The Congolese military capitalized on these
rebel setbacks by pushing ahead with new offensives beginning in August
that were supported by a brigade of U.N. military forces with a mandate
to attack the rebels. Agencies
