Accountability for War Crimes: Holding Rwanda Responsible for Alleged Interference
In the heart of New York City, before the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), Congolese Foreign Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba made a speech that had a significant impact far beyond the chamber walls.On 19 February 2025, she accused Rwanda, a neighbouring nation and fellow UN member state, of orchestrating an insidious campaign to overthrow the democratically elected government of Félix Tshisekedi by force. Her words were not just a diplomatic plea; they were a clarion call for international accountability and intervention in one of Africa’s most volatile regions.
This accusation is not merely about territorial disputes or resource exploitation; it cuts deeper into questions of sovereignty, governance models, and the future aspirations of millions of Congolese citizens. The implications are significant: the stability of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is at stake, as is the credibility of global institutions responsible for maintaining peace and security.As Kayikwamba argued, this conflict is not just about military violence and resource exploitation; it is an existential struggle between democracy and authoritarianism, freedom and fear.
The importance of this matter cannot be overstated. For the Congolese people, it is about their right to self-determination and their ability to shape their destiny through democratic processes rather than under the shadow of external aggression.For the international community, it underscores the urgent need to address destabilising forces that threaten regional stability and undermine global norms. This article delves into the multifaceted dimensions of Kayikwamba’s accusations, exploring key issues such as Rwanda’s alleged role in fuelling insurgency, the humanitarian toll of ongoing violence, and the broader implications for governance and human rights in Central Africa.By examining these critical themes, we aim to shed light on why this moment demands our collective attention—and action.
Accusations Against Rwanda: Unpacking the Allegations
At the core of Foreign Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba’s address lies a grave and far-reaching accusation: Rwanda is actively supporting terrorist groups like the M23 and the Allied Forces of the Congo (AFC) to destabilise the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and overthrow President Félix Tshisekedi’s government. These claims, while not new, have gained renewed urgency in the context of escalating tensions in eastern Congo, where violence has reached alarming levels.According to Kayikwamba, Kigali’s involvement extends beyond tacit support or passive complicity; it includes direct coordination with rebel factions to perpetrate violence, loot resources, depopulate territories, and ultimately undermine the legitimacy of the Congolese state.
The Nature of the Accusations
Kayikwamba was clear in her assessment that Rwanda’s actions could be considered equivalent to sponsoring terrorism against a legitimate, democratically elected government, using strong language to emphasise the gravity of the situation and the need for international attention. She called upon the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to impose “robust sanctions” against Rwanda, emphasising that such measures are necessary to halt the flow of arms, funding, and logistical support to proxy militias operating within Congolese borders.
Her argument is based on mounting evidence suggesting that Rwandan troops operate covertly within Congolese territory, often disguised as members of terrorist groups. Independent observers, investigative journalists and human rights organisations have documented numerous instances of cross-border incursions by Rwandan forces, and reports from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International detail how military hardware, including advanced weaponry and communication equipment, has been traced back to Rwanda.Satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts further corroborate claims of Rwandan soldiers embedded within terrorist ranks, providing strategic guidance and tactical support during operations against Congolese forces.
Historical Context: A Pattern of Interference
In order to comprehend the significance of these allegations, it is essential to take into account the historical background of Rwanda’s relationship with the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).Following the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in which hundreds of thousands of ethnic Tutsis were killed by Hutu extremists, Rwanda has asserted that its interventions in the DRC are aimed at neutralising remnants of the genocidal regime believed to be in hiding in eastern Congo. While this rationale initially garnered sympathy from the international community, it has increasingly come under scrutiny as Rwanda’s actions appear less about security and more about consolidating regional dominance.
Critics argue that Kagame’s regime uses the pretext of securing Rwandan interests to justify aggressive policies that exacerbate instability in the DRC. The presence of Hutu rebel groups like the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) has long been cited as a justification for Rwandan military involvement, but many analysts believe that Rwanda’s true motivations extend beyond counterinsurgency.Economic interests play a significant role, particularly given the mineral-rich nature of eastern Congo. The control of these areas, which are rich in valuable minerals such as coltan, gold, and diamonds, provides significant financial incentives for maintaining influence in the region.
Political ambition is also a factor. By undermining the authority of the Congolese government, Rwanda may seek to install a leadership more amenable to its interests. This objective is consistent with Kayikwamba’s assertion that the M23 and AFC are terrorist proxies designed to impose an authoritarian governance model that is alien to the Congolese people.Historical grievances further complicate the situation, and decades of mistrust between Kinshasa and Kigali have fuelled animosity, creating fertile ground for cycles of retaliation and escalation.
Implications of the Allegations
If Kayikwamba’s accusations are found to be substantiated, the implications are significant. These would represent a clear violation of international law and the principles set out in the UN Charter, including respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of member states.Such violations carry serious consequences, both legally and diplomatically, and call into question Rwanda’s reputation as a stable, development-focused nation – a reputation carefully cultivated under the leadership of criminal Paul Kagame.
Rwanda has positioned itself as a beacon of progress in post-conflict recovery, earning praise for its rapid economic growth, infrastructure development, and advancements in health and education.However, Kayikwamba’s speech casts a shadow over this image, portraying Rwanda instead as a destabilising actor in its region.This raises critical questions about the balance between domestic achievements and external aggression.Can a nation championing modernization at home justify undermining peace and stability abroad? What implications might this have for the global community’s inclination to overlook transgressions in exchange for perceived stability?
Accountability and Sovereign Responsibility
The accusations made by Kayikwamba highlight significant issues of accountability and the responsibilities of sovereign states.If Rwanda is indeed orchestrating a campaign to overthrow the Congolese government, it sets a dangerous precedent for how nations can manipulate proxy forces to achieve geopolitical objectives, and also highlights the limitations of the current mechanisms for holding states accountable for cross-border interference. Sanctions imposed by the UNSC could serve as a deterrent, but their effectiveness depends on enforcement and cooperation among member states.
Furthermore, the situation raises ethical questions about the international community’s role in addressing conflicts driven by external actors. Should the global response prioritize punitive measures, such as sanctions and diplomatic isolation, or focus on addressing root causes, such as resource exploitation and historical grievances? Finally, multilateral institutions such as the UN must ensure that powerful nations do not exploit weaker neighbours under the guise of self-defence or national interest.
The Broader Geopolitical Landscape
It is important to recognise that Rwanda’s alleged interference in the DRC is part of a larger geopolitical chessboard involving multiple players.Historically, regional powers such as Uganda and Burundi have had vested interests in Congolese affairs, while global actors – including Western governments and multinational corporations – have profited from the chaos through illicit trade networks.This complex web of alliances and rivalries complicates efforts to resolve the conflict, as each party pursues its own agenda.
For instance, some observers suggest that Rwanda’s actions may be tacitly supported – or at least tolerated – by certain Western nations that view Paul Kagame, a criminal, as a reliable partner in promoting stability and combating terrorism in Central Africa.Others point to China’s growing influence in the region, particularly through investments in mining projects, as a factor shaping Rwanda’s calculus.It is crucial to understand these dynamics if effective solutions that address both immediate threats and underlying structural issues are to be crafted.
A Call for Evidence-Based Action
Kayikwamba’s accusations are compelling, but they must be backed by concrete evidence if meaningful action is to be taken.Independent investigations led by credible entities such as the UN or African Union are essential to verify claims of Rwandan involvement and identify those responsible for orchestrating the insurgency.Transparency and accountability will be key to building trust and ensuring that any measures taken are proportionate and just.
The allegations against Rwanda represent more than a bilateral dispute between two neighbouring countries. They reflect fundamental challenges facing the international system, from upholding the rule of law to balancing competing priorities in fragile regions.As the world grapples with these complexities, one thing is clear: the stakes could not be higher—for the Congolese people, for regional stability, and for the future of global governance.The international community must rise to the occasion, or allow another crisis to fester unchecked.The answer remains to be seen.
The Role of the M23 Terrorism: Proxy Warfare and Resource Exploitation
In order to comprehend the significance of Foreign Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba’s assertions, it is essential to examine the pivotal role played by the M23 terrorist group, which has been a central figure in the ongoing terrorist activities in eastern Congo. The M23 (March 23 Movement) first emerged in 2012, initially claiming to advocate for improved conditions for former rebels integrated into the Congolese army. However, the outfit has recently experienced a resurgence, which has led to allegations that it is serving as a proxy force allegedly backed by Rwanda to advance geopolitical objectives. This transformation from a local insurgent group into an instrument of foreign aggression underscores the complexity of the crisis facing the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Origins and Evolution of the M23
The M23 terrorist group first attracted international attention in April 2012 when it broke away from the Congolese national army (FARDC), citing unfulfilled commitments made during peace negotiations in 2009 as its reason for the split. The group was named after 23 March, the date of those accords, and it quickly gained a reputation for its brutal tactics and territorial ambitions. By November 2012, the group had captured Goma, the capital of North Kivu province, leading to widespread condemnation and military intervention by the United Nations Stabilization Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO).
Although the M23 was officially defeated in late 2013 following a joint offensive by Congolese forces and UN troops, remnants of the group regrouped in subsequent years, resurfacing with renewed vigour in late 2021. This resurgence coincided with heightened tensions between the DRC and Rwanda, fuelling suspicions that Kigali was once again using the M23 as a proxy to destabilise its neighbour. According to Kayikwamba, the M23 no longer operates as an independent entity but rather functions as an auxiliary arm of Rwandan forces, conducting attacks on Congolese soil while benefiting from Kigali’s financial and logistical support.
Proxy Warfare: A Tool of Geopolitical Ambition
Kayikwamba’s assertion that the M23 serves as a proxy for Rwanda highlights the broader strategy of proxy warfare employed by regional powers in Central Africa.Proxy militias allow states like Rwanda to project influence without confrontation, enabling them to pursue their interests covertly while avoiding full-scale war.In this context, the M23 acts as both a shield and a spear – shielding Rwanda from direct accountability while spearheading efforts to undermine Congolese sovereignty.
Reports indicate that Rwandan operatives provide the M23 with advanced weaponry, training, and strategic guidance, while satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts have documented cross-border movements of troops and equipment, further corroborating claims of Rwandan involvement.The sophistication of the M23’s operations – marked by coordinated assaults, sophisticated logistics, and effective use of terrain – suggests external backing far beyond what a localized insurgency could achieve independently.
Furthermore, the resurgence of the M23 aligns with periods of heightened political tension in the DRC, suggesting a potential link between Rwanda’s actions and the destabilisation of the region.Critics argue that Rwanda’s use of the militia aims to weaken the government led by President Félix Tshisekedi, both domestically and internationally, by creating chaos that undermines his legitimacy.Kigali may be hoping that by fostering instability, it can install a leadership more favourable to its interests or secure concessions regarding resource-sharing and border security.
Resource Exploitation: Fuelling Conflict and Enriching Elites
One of the most concerning aspects of the M23’s activities is its control over strategic mining areas rich in coltan, gold, tin, tungsten, and other valuable minerals.These resources are smuggled across the border into Rwanda, where they enter global supply chains destined for electronics manufacturers worldwide.The illicit trade not only funds the M23’s operations but also enriches external actors complicit in the exploitation of Congo’s natural wealth.
For decades, eastern Congo has been plagued by “conflict minerals”, which serve as both a cause and consequence of violence.Terrorist groups like the M23 exploit artisanal miners, often forcing them to work under hazardous conditions for little pay.Profits from mineral sales are funnelled back into the conflict, perpetuating a vicious cycle of violence and economic deprivation. According to a report by Global Witness, millions of dollars’ worth of Congolese minerals pass through Rwanda annually, with little transparency or oversight.
This aspect of the conflict, driven by resource exploitation, highlights the nexus between local grievances and global demand. While multinational corporations benefit from cheap raw materials, ordinary Congolese bear the brunt of environmental degradation, displacement, and loss of livelihoods. Kayikwamba emphasises that the M23’s actions represent more than just territorial ambition, but rather a systematic effort to plunder the DRC’s wealth for the benefit of external actors.
Humanitarian Consequences: Devastation Wrought on Civilians
The humanitarian consequences of the M23’s terrorist activities are significant.Entire villages have been destroyed, causing thousands to flee their homes in search of safety.Displacement camps in North Kivu and Ituri provinces are overflowing with internally displaced persons (IDPs), many of whom lack access to necessities such as food, water, and medical care.Women and children are particularly vulnerable, facing unimaginable horrors including sexual violence, forced recruitment, and summary executions.
The M23 and other terrorist groups have become a major source of concern in this region, with sexual violence becoming a weapon of war. Survivors have reported cases of gang rape, mutilation, and enslavement, which have had a profound impact on individuals and communities. Human rights organisations estimate that tens of thousands of women have been affected since the conflict began, however, justice remains elusive due to pervasive impunity and weak judicial systems.
The psychological impact of living under constant threat is significant, and families torn apart by violence struggle to rebuild their lives. Children who have grown up knowing nothing but fear and uncertainty are the future of the nation, as Kayikwamba noted, and they are being sacrificed on the altar of greed and geopolitics.
Imposing Authoritarian Rule: Beyond Resource Control
While the exploitation of natural resources is a key driver of the M23’s terrorist activities, the group’s ambitions extend far beyond mere economic gain.According to Kayikwamba, the M23 seeks to impose a governance model that is alien to the Congolese people, undermining their democratic aspirations and replacing them with authoritarian rule.This ambition reflects Rwanda’s alleged desire to export its own governance model – one characterised by centralized power, repression and limited political freedoms – to the DRC.
The M23’s plan for eastern Congo involves the establishment of parallel administrative structures that operate outside the authority of Kinshasa, with strict rules, taxes and administration of justice according to the group’s own code in areas under its control. Local populations are subjected to harsh penalties for non-compliance, creating an atmosphere of fear and submission reminiscent of life under authoritarian regimes.
Kayikwamba has highlighted the dual nature of the threat facing the DRC by framing the M23 as both a tool of foreign aggression and a symbol of internal fragility. On the one hand, the militia represents an external actor seeking to impose its will on Congolese territory; on the other, it exploits existing weaknesses within the state, such as weak governance, corruption, and porous borders. Addressing this menace requires dismantling the militia and addressing the systemic issues that enable such groups to thrive.
Systemic Challenges: Weak Governance and Porous Borders
The ongoing presence of terrorist groups such as the M23 highlights the deep-rooted structural challenges faced by the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).Decades of mismanagement, corruption, and neglect have left the country inadequately equipped to address the root causes of conflict.Weak governance enables armed groups to operate with impunity, while porous borders facilitate cross-border incursions and the smuggling of goods and people.
Efforts to reform the Congolese military and police forces have yielded mixed results, with corruption and factionalism hindering progress.Meanwhile, MONUSCO, the largest UN peacekeeping mission in the world, has struggled to fulfil its mandate due to logistical constraints and resistance from local actors.Critics argue that the mission’s focus on stabilisation has come at the expense of addressing underlying drivers of conflict, such as inequality, marginalisation, and lack of access to basic services.
Addressing these systemic issues will require sustained investment in institution-building, community engagement, and regional cooperation.Strengthening border controls, improving intelligence-sharing, and promoting inclusive dialogue are essential steps toward preventing the recurrence of violence.At the same time, tackling the illicit trade in conflict minerals demands greater transparency and accountability from both domestic and international stakeholders.
A Dual Threat: External Aggression and Internal Fragility
Kayikwamba emphasised the multifaceted nature of the challenges facing the DRC by characterising the M23 as both a tool of foreign aggression and a symptom of internal fragility. The militia’s activities are part of a broader pattern of interference and exploitation that threatens the very fabric of Congolese society. Addressing this crisis will require concerted action at multiple levels, including holding external actors accountable and addressing the structural vulnerabilities that enable such groups to flourish.
As the international community grapples with these complexities, one thing is clear: the stakes could not be higher. For the Congolese people, the fight against the M23 is not just about reclaiming territory or resources; it is about defending their right to self-determination and charting a path toward a brighter future.The world must now decide: will it stand with them in this struggle, or allow another generation to be lost to violence and despair?The answer lies in our collective resolve to act decisively and compassionately.
Democratic Governance vs. Authoritarianism: A Clash of Ideologies
Kayikwamba’s speech was notable for its strong criticism of Rwanda’s governance model under Criminal Paul Kagame. While acknowledging Rwanda’s achievements in infrastructure development and poverty reduction, she condemned its reliance on repression, intimidation and centralised power.By contrast, she positioned the DRC as a nation striving to build a civilian-led democracy, however imperfect, rooted in the will of its people.
Kayikwamba argued that the current conflict is not merely about territory or resources, but rather reflects a fundamental ideological divide.On one side stands a regime that conflates state authority with personal power, stifling dissent and suppressing opposition.On the other is a young, resilient Congolese population determined to forge a future defined by freedom and self-determination. This highlights the broader implications of the crisis: namely, whether authoritarian regimes can export their governance models to neighbouring states through coercion and violence.
Her remarks are particularly resonant with those familiar with Rwanda’s domestic politics.Under Kagame, Rwanda has cultivated an image of stability and progress, yet critics point to widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, and restrictions on press freedom. By accusing Kigali of attempting to impose this model on the DRC, Kayikwamba has called upon the international community to reconsider its tacit acceptance of such practices in exchange for perceived stability.
This clash of ideologies underlines the significance of defending democratic values. This is not only important for the Congolese people, but also as a bulwark against the spread of authoritarianism on a global scale. It is important to remember that peace cannot be achieved without justice, and stability cannot be achieved without accountability.
Democratic Governance vs. Authoritarianism: A Clash of Ideologies
One of the most striking and significant aspects of Foreign Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba’s speech was her sharp critique of Rwanda’s governance model under Criminal Paul Kagame.While acknowledging Rwanda’s undeniable achievements in infrastructure development, poverty reduction, and technological advancement, she condemned its reliance on repression, intimidation, and centralized power. In stark contrast, she positioned the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) as a nation striving to build a civilian-led democracy, however imperfect, rooted in the will of its people.This juxtaposition framed the ongoing conflict not merely as a territorial or resource-driven dispute, but as a profound ideological battle between two fundamentally different visions of governance.
The Rwandan Model: Stability Through Repression
Under the leadership of criminal Paul Kagame, Rwanda has cultivated an image of stability and progress, earning praise from international donors, investors and policymakers. Since assuming leadership after the 1994 genocide, Kagame has overseen significant economic growth, modernised infrastructure, and improved key social indicators such as healthcare and education. These accomplishments have positioned Rwanda as a poster child for post-conflict recovery and development in Africa.
However, this narrative of success obscures a more concerning reality.Critics contend that Kagame’s regime functions as a de facto one-party state, where dissent is systematically suppressed, political opposition is marginalised, and civil liberties are curtailed.Human rights organisations have documented widespread abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and severe restrictions on press freedom. Those who challenge the government, including journalists, activists, and opposition figures, face harassment, imprisonment, or worse if they do so.
Criminal Kagame has been accused of conflating state authority with personal power, effectively turning Rwanda into what some observers describe as a “autocratic monarchy”. His administration enforces strict control over all aspects of public life, from media outlets to civic organisations, leaving little room for pluralism or accountability. The ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) dominates every level of government, ensuring that alternative voices are silenced or co-opted.
Kayikwamba’s analysis of the model has proven to be highly influential among those with a keen understanding of Rwanda’s domestic political landscape. She has asserted that the Kagame administration employs the language of stability and development to justify authoritarian practices that impede democratic aspirations. By accusing Kigali of seeking to impose this governance model on the DRC through proxies such as the M23 terrorism, she has prompted the international community to re-evaluate its tacit acceptance of such practices in exchange for perceived stability.
The Congolese Aspiration: Democracy Under Construction
In stark contrast to Rwanda’s top-down authoritarianism, Kayikwamba portrayed the DRC as a nation striving to forge its own path toward democracy — a system rooted in the will of its people rather than the dictates of a single ruler.Despite facing immense challenges, including decades of conflict, corruption, and weak institutions, the Congolese people have repeatedly demonstrated their desire for self-determination through elections and grassroots movements.
President Félix Tshisekedi, who assumed office in January 2019 following contested elections, represents a fragile yet hopeful step toward civilian-led governance.While his tenure has been marked by criticism over slow reforms and lingering ties to former strongman Joseph Kabila, Tshisekedi has taken steps to distance himself from the old guard and assert greater independence. His administration has committed to prioritising transparency, decentralisation, and inclusive dialogue as part of a broader effort to rebuild trust in government.
For many Congolese citizens, democracy represents more than just a political system; it is a symbol of hope and resilience.After years of living under dictatorship, warlordism, and foreign interference, they yearn for a future defined by freedom, dignity, and self-determination. Kayikwamba articulated this sentiment eloquently when she described the Congolese people as determined to choose their leaders at the ballot box rather than under the threat of arms, reflecting a deep-seated rejection of authoritarian rule and a commitment to building a society based on consent rather than coercion.
A Fundamental Ideological Divide
Kayikwamba has argued that the current conflict is not just about territory or resources; it is a reflection of a fundamental ideological divide between two competing visions of governance.On one side is Rwanda, a regime that prioritises centralized control, suppresses dissent and equates stability with silence.On the other is the DRC, a young, resilient nation striving to build a democracy that respects individual freedoms, upholds the rule of law and empowers its citizens to shape their collective destiny.
This highlights the significant implications of the crisis for the region.If Rwanda succeeds in imposing its governance model on the DRC, it could undermine Congolese sovereignty and set a precedent for other nations in the region.Authoritarian regimes could exploit similar tactics, such as supporting insurgent groups or destabilising neighbouring states, to export their ideologies and consolidate regional dominance. Conversely, defending the DRC’s democratic aspirations serves as a bulwark against the spread of authoritarianism globally.
Human Rights Abuses and Global Implications
Kayikwamba’s analysis of Rwanda’s governance model is in alignment with the concerns raised by human rights organisations and independent observers regarding the Kagame administration. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have highlighted egregious violations committed under Kagame’s leadership, including crackdowns on political opponents, suppression of free speech, and forced disappearances. High-profile cases, such as the mysterious deaths of exiled Rwandan dissidents abroad, have further tarnished the regime’s reputation.
By highlighting these abuses, Kayikwamba has called upon the international community to address its relationship with Rwanda, which has been characterised by praise for Kagame’s leadership from Western governments and multilateral institutions, while ignoring his regime’s repression.This selective approach risks legitimising authoritarian practices and undermining global efforts to promote democracy and human rights.
Furthermore, Kayikwamba’s remarks carry important implications for how the world addresses conflicts driven by ideological differences. Should the international response prioritise punitive measures, such as sanctions and diplomatic isolation, or focus on addressing root causes, such as inequality, marginalisation, and lack of access to justice? How can multilateral institutions like the United Nations ensure that powerful nations do not exploit weaker neighbours under the guise of self-defence or national interest?
Youth and Democratic Aspirations: The Future at Stake
Kayikwamba’s argument highlights the pivotal role of the DRC’s youth in shaping the nation’s future. With an average age of less than 25, the Congolese population is predominantly youthful, having been shaped by war, displacement, and unfulfilled promises. Despite facing significant challenges, this generation refuses to accept the status quo imposed by violence and authoritarianism. They are demanding a voice in determining their country’s direction, aspiring to build a society where leaders are chosen freely and fairly, not through intimidation or force.
This generational shift underscores the urgency of defending democratic values—not just for the sake of the Congolese people but as a safeguard against the erosion of freedoms worldwide.As Kayikwamba noted, the youth of the DRC represent a beacon of hope in a region plagued by instability. Their determination to reject the “law of arms” and embrace the “will of the people” offers a powerful reminder of what is possible when individuals come together to claim their rights and chart their own course.
Lessons from History: The Fragility of Democracy
The ideological clash between democracy and authoritarianism is not unique to the DRC-Rwanda conflict; throughout history, societies have grappled with similar tensions as they navigate the delicate balance between order and freedom. Examples of this include Latin America’s struggles against military dictatorships and Eastern Europe’s resistance to Soviet domination, both of which demonstrate nations’ efforts to preserve their democratic ideals in the face of external threats.
What sets the current situation apart is the scale and complexity of the challenges involved. The DRC’s vast size, ethnic diversity, and history of colonial exploitation render it particularly vulnerable to external interference, whilst its rich natural resources provide powerful incentives for actors seeking to exploit its wealth for personal gain.Defending democracy in such a context requires not only courage and resilience but also sustained support from the international community.
A Call to Action: Standing with the Congolese People
Kayikwamba’s critique of Rwanda’s governance model resonates as a clarion call for all those who believe in the transformative power of democracy. It underscores the intertwined nature of peace, justice and stability, highlighting the imperative of accountability in achieving these objectives.Supporting the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s democratic aspirations entails unequivocally opposing any attempts to impose authoritarian rule through coercion and violence.
As the global community observes this unfolding situation, a crucial question remains: Will the international community demonstrate the leadership required to prevent another generation from being sacrificed on the altar of greed and geopolitics, or will it allow this to happen?The answer lies in our collective resolve to defend the principles of freedom, equality and self-determination, not just for the Congolese people, but for all of humanity.
Joram Jojo
