Rwanda, M23, and the Fight for Sovereignty: Key Issues in the DRC Crisis

1. The Urgency of Implementing Resolution 2773

At the heart of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) ongoing crisis lies United Nations Security Council Resolution 2773, a landmark decision adopted unanimously in February 2025. This resolution is explicit in its demands: it condemns Rwanda’s military involvement in Congolese territory and calls for the immediate withdrawal of both Rwandan forces and the M23 terrorist group—a coalition widely accused of destabilising the eastern DRC. By framing these actions as violations of international law and threats to regional stability, Resolution 2773 underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for compliance.

However, despite its unanimous adoption, delays in implementing the resolution have left it largely symbolic, raising critical questions about the effectiveness of multilateral institutions like the United Nations. When resolutions are passed but not enforced, they risk eroding global trust in the UN’s ability to uphold peace and security. Such delays send a dangerous message: that powerful nations or non-state actors can flout international norms with impunity, further emboldening those who seek to exploit fragile states. For the people of the DRC, this inaction translates into prolonged suffering, continued displacement, and escalating violence—a grim reminder that words alone cannot stop bullets or feed hungry families.

Historical Precedents: Lessons from Delayed Enforcement

History offers sobering examples of how delayed enforcement of UN resolutions has exacerbated conflicts, leaving scars on nations and undermining faith in international diplomacy. Take, for instance, the Bosnian War during the 1990s. Despite numerous resolutions condemning ethnic cleansing and demanding humanitarian access, the UN’s inability to enforce these measures allowed atrocities such as the Srebrenica massacre to occur. The failure to act decisively not only deepened the conflict but also tarnished the reputation of the UN as a credible arbiter of peace.

Similarly, in South Sudan, repeated calls for an end to violence and accountability for war crimes went largely unheeded in the early years of the civil war. Delays in enforcing arms embargoes and sanctions enabled warring factions to continue their campaigns of terror, plunging the country into one of the worst humanitarian crises of the 21st century. These examples serve as stark reminders that when multilateral institutions fail to act swiftly, the consequences can be catastrophic—not just for the affected populations but for the global order itself.

Why Immediate Action Matters

In the case of the DRC, the stakes are equally high. The eastern provinces of North Kivu and South Kivu have long been hotbeds of conflict, with armed groups vying for control over mineral-rich territories. The presence of foreign forces, including Rwandan troops and the M23 terrorists, has further complicated an already volatile situation. Without immediate implementation of Resolution 2773, there is a real risk that the conflict will spiral out of control, drawing in neighbouring countries and potentially triggering a wider regional war.

Moreover, the credibility of the UN hinges on its ability to deliver tangible results. If Resolution 2773 remains unenforced, it risks being perceived as yet another empty gesture—a betrayal of the very principles the organisation was founded to uphold. For the Congolese people, who have endured decades of exploitation and neglect, such indifference would be devastating. It would reinforce the perception that their plight is secondary to geopolitical interests, further alienating them from the international community.

A Call to Restore Trust

The urgency of implementing Resolution 2773 cannot be overstated. Not only does it represent a test of the UN’s commitment to protecting vulnerable populations, but it also serves as a litmus test for global cooperation in an increasingly fractured world. By acting decisively now, the international community has an opportunity to restore trust in multilateral institutions and demonstrate that collective action can still make a difference.

Failure to do so, however, carries profound implications—not just for the DRC but for the future of international peace and security. As history has shown time and again, delays in enforcing resolutions often lead to greater instability, deeper suffering, and lost opportunities for reconciliation. For the sake of the Congolese people—and indeed, for the integrity of the global order—the time to act is now.

2. Aligning the Luanda and Nairobi Processes: Complementarity Over Merger

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) finds itself at the nexus of two pivotal peace initiatives—the Luanda and Nairobi processes—each designed to address different facets of the country’s protracted crisis. While these frameworks share the overarching goal of fostering stability in the eastern DRC, their distinct objectives highlight the complexity of the conflict and the need for a nuanced approach. As Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner emphasized during her March 2025 diplomatic briefing, alignment under the African Union (AU) offers a pragmatic path forward, ensuring coherence without compromising the unique contributions of each process. However, this approach is not without its critics, who argue that merging the two could streamline efforts. To understand the merits of alignment versus merger, it is essential to examine the specific roles of each process, the benefits of coordination, and the risks of consolidation.

Distinct Objectives: Regional Diplomacy vs. Disarmament

The Luanda process , spearheaded by Angola and supported by regional actors, focuses on high-level diplomacy aimed at de-escalating tensions between the DRC and its neighbours, particularly Rwanda. This initiative seeks to address the root causes of cross-border instability, including disputes over resource exploitation, historical grievances, and accusations of state-sponsored proxy warfare. By fostering dialogue among regional stakeholders, the Luanda process aims to create a framework for sustainable cooperation and mutual accountability.

In contrast, the Nairobi process zeroes in on disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) efforts, as well as direct engagement with armed groups operating within Congolese territory. Endorsed by Kenya and other East African nations, this initiative prioritizes reducing violence on the ground by negotiating ceasefires, facilitating the surrender of combatants, and reintegrating former fighters into civilian life. The Nairobi process also serves as the sole platform through which the DRC engages with non-state armed actors, underscoring its critical role in addressing localized conflicts.

While the Luanda process operates at the macro level, tackling interstate dynamics, the Nairobi process functions at the micro level, targeting the human cost of the conflict. Together, they form a complementary framework capable of addressing both the geopolitical and humanitarian dimensions of the crisis.

Alignment Under the African Union: A Pragmatic Path Forward

Minister Kayikwamba’s advocacy for aligning—rather than merging—the Luanda and Nairobi processes reflects a strategic understanding of the challenges at hand. By bringing these initiatives under the umbrella of the African Union, the DRC can ensure greater coherence in regional efforts while preserving the distinct objectives of each framework. The AU’s involvement provides several advantages:

1. Unified Leadership : The AU’s pan-African mandate allows it to bridge divides between Central and East African states, fostering collaboration across sub-regional blocs such as the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the East African Community (EAC).
2. Contextual Expertise : As an institution deeply embedded in African geopolitics, the AU is uniquely positioned to navigate the cultural, historical, and political nuances of the conflict.
3. Avoidance of Duplication : Alignment prevents overlap or competition between the two processes, ensuring that resources and efforts are directed toward shared goals rather than redundant initiatives.

This approach strikes a delicate balance, enabling the Luanda and Nairobi processes to retain their individual focus areas while benefiting from coordinated oversight. For instance, regional diplomacy advanced through the Luanda process can pave the way for successful DDR programs under the Nairobi framework, creating a virtuous cycle of progress.

Addressing Counterarguments: The Risks of Merging the Two Processes

Critics of alignment often propose merging the Luanda and Nairobi processes, arguing that a single unified initiative would streamline decision-making and eliminate bureaucratic inefficiencies. While this argument has merit in theory, it overlooks the potential pitfalls of consolidation. Merging the two processes risks diluting their respective strengths and losing sight of critical nuances.

For example, the Luanda process thrives on high-level negotiations involving heads of state and government officials, where long-term strategic agreements are forged. In contrast, the Nairobi process requires grassroots engagement with local communities and armed groups, necessitating a more flexible and adaptive approach. Combining these divergent methodologies could result in a “one-size-fits-all” solution ill-suited to the multifaceted nature of the conflict.

Furthermore, merging the processes might inadvertently sideline key stakeholders. The Nairobi process, for instance, relies heavily on input from civil society organizations and humanitarian actors working directly with affected populations. A top-down merger dominated by regional leaders could marginalize these voices, undermining the legitimacy and effectiveness of the initiative.

A Balanced Approach for Lasting Peace

Ultimately, the alignment of the Luanda and Nairobi processes under AU leadership represents a balanced and pragmatic strategy for advancing peace in the DRC. It acknowledges the complementary nature of the two frameworks while safeguarding their unique contributions. Rather than forcing them into a single mold, alignment allows each process to operate within its area of expertise, leveraging their combined strengths to tackle the crisis holistically.

As history has shown, overly centralized or rigid approaches to conflict resolution often fail to account for the complexities of local contexts. The DRC’s experience underscores the importance of flexibility, inclusivity, and adaptability in crafting solutions that endure. By championing alignment over merger, the DRC and its partners have an opportunity to set a precedent for effective multilateralism—one rooted in respect for diversity and a commitment to lasting peace.

3. Sovereignty vs. Foreign Interference: A Delicate Balance

In her March 2025 address to the diplomatic corps in Kinshasa, Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner placed a strong emphasis on national sovereignty—a principle she described as fundamental to the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) pursuit of peace and stability. Her remarks came against a backdrop of accusations that external actors, particularly Rwanda, have meddled in Congolese affairs by supporting terrorist groups such as the M23. While the DRC seeks international cooperation to resolve its crises, it remains steadfast in rejecting any form of foreign interference that undermines its autonomy. This tension between sovereignty and external involvement raises critical questions about how nations can navigate the delicate balance between asserting their independence and engaging with an increasingly interconnected world.

Sovereignty Under Siege: The Case of the DRC

For decades, the DRC has grappled with the consequences of foreign intervention, whether through colonial exploitation, Cold War proxy battles, or more recent incursions by neighbouring states. These interventions have often been justified under the guise of humanitarianism, regional security, or economic interests, yet they have frequently exacerbated instability rather than alleviated it. In the current context, accusations against Rwanda highlight the dangers of external meddling. By allegedly backing terrorist groups like the M23, Rwanda not only violates Congolese sovereignty but also perpetuates cycles of violence that disproportionately affect civilian populations.

Minister Kayikwamba’s insistence on sovereignty reflects a broader aspiration among African nations to assert greater control over their destinies. For the DRC, this means rejecting narratives imposed by outsiders and reclaiming agency over its internal affairs. However, the challenge lies in achieving this without isolating itself from the global community, which plays a crucial role in addressing transnational issues such as conflict resolution, climate change, and resource management.

Historical Precedents: Lessons from Libya and Afghanistan

History offers sobering examples of how foreign interference can destabilise nations, often with devastating and long-lasting consequences. One notable case is Libya post-Gaddafi , where NATO-led military intervention in 2011—initially framed as a humanitarian mission to protect civilians—ultimately led to state collapse. Without a coherent plan for post-conflict governance, Libya descended into chaos, becoming a battleground for rival factions and a hub for human trafficking and terrorism. What began as an effort to safeguard lives ended up undermining the very foundations of Libyan sovereignty.

Similarly, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan during the late 1970s illustrates the perils of imposing external agendas on sovereign nations. The Soviet Union’s attempt to prop up a communist regime sparked widespread resistance, culminating in a protracted war that devastated the country and laid the groundwork for future instability. Even after the Soviets withdrew, Afghanistan remained trapped in cycles of violence, underscoring the difficulty of rebuilding a nation fractured by foreign intervention.

These historical precedents serve as cautionary tales, reminding us that while external actors may intervene with good intentions—or self-serving motives—their actions often fail to account for local complexities. Instead of fostering stability, such interventions can erode trust in national institutions, fuel resentment, and entrench divisions.

Is Complete Non-Interference Realistic?

Given the interconnected nature of modern geopolitics, complete non-interference is arguably unrealistic—and perhaps undesirable. In an era defined by global challenges such as pandemics, climate change, and cross-border terrorism, no nation exists in isolation. The DRC itself relies heavily on international partnerships to address issues like humanitarian aid delivery, natural resource governance, and regional security. To reject all forms of external engagement would be to deny the country access to vital resources and expertise.

However, there is a significant difference between constructive collaboration and coercive interference. Constructive collaboration respects the host nation’s sovereignty, prioritises locally-driven solutions, and aligns with the expressed needs of its people. Coercive interference, on the other hand, imposes external priorities, disregards local contexts, and undermines national autonomy. Striking the right balance requires clear guidelines and mutual accountability.

Toward a New Paradigm of Engagement

The DRC’s stance on sovereignty does not preclude international cooperation; rather, it calls for a reimagining of how such cooperation is structured. Instead of top-down interventions dictated by foreign powers, partnerships should be built on principles of equality, transparency, and shared responsibility. For example, initiatives like the African Union’s leadership in aligning the Luanda and Nairobi processes demonstrate how regional bodies can play a pivotal role in facilitating dialogue without overriding national interests.

Moreover, the global community must recognise that true sovereignty extends beyond political independence—it encompasses the ability of nations to manage their resources sustainably, protect their citizens from harm, and chart their own paths to development. For the DRC, this means addressing systemic issues such as corruption, weak governance, and illicit exploitation of natural resources, which often leave the country vulnerable to external manipulation.

A Fragile Yet Essential Equilibrium

The debate over sovereignty versus foreign interference is not merely academic—it is a matter of survival for nations like the DRC. Minister Kayikwamba’s emphasis on sovereignty underscores the importance of respecting national boundaries while acknowledging the need for collaborative solutions to complex challenges. History teaches us that unchecked foreign interference can destabilise nations, but complete isolation is equally untenable in today’s interconnected world.

As the DRC navigates this delicate balance, it serves as a microcosm of a broader global struggle: how can nations uphold their sovereignty while engaging constructively with the international community? The answer lies in forging partnerships rooted in respect, reciprocity, and a commitment to empowering local voices. Only then can the DRC—and other nations facing similar dilemmas—hope to achieve lasting peace and prosperity.

4. Humanitarian Challenges in North Kivu and South Kivu

The provinces of North Kivu and South Kivu in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have long been epicentres of conflict, displacement, and humanitarian suffering. These regions, rich in natural resources yet plagued by decades of violence, present a harrowing paradox: immense wealth juxtaposed with extreme deprivation. For humanitarian organisations operating in these areas, the challenges are manifold, ranging from blocked access routes and pervasive insecurity to the sheer scale of need. Despite these obstacles, there have been instances where innovative approaches have improved aid delivery, offering valuable lessons for future operations. Yet, as political stalemates persist, the ethical imperative to prioritise civilian welfare becomes ever more urgent.

Logistical Hurdles: Blocked Access Routes and Insecurity

One of the most significant barriers to effective humanitarian response in North Kivu and South Kivu is the near-constant insecurity caused by armed groups. The presence of terrorist militias such as the M23, Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), and countless other factions has rendered large swathes of these provinces inaccessible to aid workers. Roads are frequently blocked or controlled by hostile actors, making it perilous—if not impossible—for convoys to deliver food, medical supplies, and other essentials.

Even when routes are technically open, they often pass through conflict zones, exposing aid workers to ambushes, kidnappings, and attacks. In 2024 alone, several humanitarian workers were killed or abducted in the region, underscoring the risks faced by those attempting to alleviate suffering. Additionally, bureaucratic hurdles imposed by local authorities sometimes delay or restrict access further, leaving vulnerable populations stranded without assistance.

Compounding these challenges is the lack of infrastructure. Many communities in North Kivu and South Kivu are located in remote, mountainous areas that are difficult to reach even under peaceful conditions. During the rainy season, roads become impassable, cutting off entire villages from vital aid. This logistical quagmire forces humanitarian organisations to rely on costly alternatives like air drops or helicopter deliveries, which are neither sustainable nor scalable.

Success Stories: Innovative Approaches to Aid Delivery

Despite these daunting challenges, there have been notable successes where creative solutions have made a tangible difference. One example is the use of community-based networks to distribute aid. In some areas, humanitarian organisations have partnered with trusted local leaders and community volunteers to ensure that assistance reaches those in need. By leveraging existing social structures, these initiatives bypass many of the logistical barriers posed by traditional delivery methods while fostering trust among beneficiaries.

Another promising approach has been the deployment of mobile clinics staffed by trained medical personnel. These clinics travel to hard-to-reach areas, providing essential healthcare services such as vaccinations, maternal care, and treatment for malnutrition and infectious diseases. Mobile clinics not only address immediate health needs but also serve as platforms for educating communities about hygiene, nutrition, and disease prevention—empowering them to better withstand future crises.

Technology has also played a transformative role. For instance, the use of geospatial mapping tools has enabled humanitarian agencies to identify safe corridors and plan routes more effectively. Similarly, cash transfer programs facilitated through mobile banking have allowed displaced families to purchase goods directly from local markets, stimulating the economy while ensuring timely support. These innovations highlight the importance of adaptability and collaboration in overcoming logistical hurdles.

The Ethical Imperative: Prioritising Civilian Welfare Amidst Political Stalemates

At the heart of the humanitarian crisis in North Kivu and South Kivu lies an uncomfortable truth: the suffering of civilians is often exacerbated by political inertia. While regional and international actors debate resolutions, sanctions, and diplomatic frameworks, millions of Congolese men, women, and children endure unimaginable hardships. Hunger, disease, and displacement do not wait for political agreements—they demand immediate action.

This raises profound ethical questions about the responsibilities of both state and non-state actors in conflict zones. Is it acceptable to allow geopolitical considerations to overshadow human lives? Can we justify delays in aid delivery when every day brings new casualties? The answer must be a resounding no.

Humanitarian principles dictate that civilian welfare should always take precedence over political agendas. This requires not only increased funding and resources but also greater coordination among stakeholders to ensure that aid reaches those who need it most. It also necessitates holding accountable those who deliberately obstruct humanitarian efforts—whether through blocking access routes, attacking aid workers, or exploiting vulnerabilities for personal gain.

Actionable Insights for Future Operations

To improve humanitarian outcomes in North Kivu and South Kivu, several actionable insights emerge from past successes:

1. Strengthen Local Partnerships : Empower community leaders and grassroots organisations to play a central role in aid distribution, ensuring culturally appropriate and context-sensitive interventions.
2. Invest in Technology : Expand the use of geospatial tools, drones, and digital payment systems to enhance efficiency and safety in aid delivery.
3. Adopt Flexible Strategies : Develop contingency plans that account for seasonal changes, security threats, and shifting dynamics on the ground.
4. Advocate for Safe Corridors : Work with regional and international bodies to establish and maintain secure humanitarian corridors, enabling uninterrupted access to affected populations.

A Moral Obligation to Act

The humanitarian challenges in North Kivu and South Kivu are a stark reminder of the human cost of protracted conflict. While logistical hurdles and insecurity pose formidable obstacles, innovative approaches have shown that progress is possible—even in the most challenging environments. However, addressing these issues requires more than technical solutions; it demands a collective commitment to placing human dignity at the forefront of all efforts.

As Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner rightly noted during her diplomatic briefing, maintaining open humanitarian corridors is non-negotiable. In a world increasingly defined by complexity and interconnectedness, the plight of the Congolese people serves as a moral litmus test for the global community. Will we rise to meet this challenge, or will we allow political stalemates to perpetuate suffering? The choice is ours—and history will judge us accordingly.

5. Transparent Management of Natural Resources

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is endowed with some of the world’s most valuable natural resources, including cobalt, coltan, gold, and diamonds—minerals that are critical to global industries such as electronics, renewable energy, and jewellery. Yet, this immense wealth has often been a curse rather than a blessing, fuelling corruption, conflict, and environmental degradation. In her March 2025 address, Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner reaffirmed the DRC’s commitment to combating illegal exploitation of these resources through measures like classifying certain mining areas as “red zones.” These efforts underscore the urgent need for transparency in resource management, not only to safeguard national interests but also to ensure equitable development. However, the stakes could not be higher: history offers sobering examples of resource-rich nations that have faltered under the weight of corruption and mismanagement. By learning from these case studies and adopting innovative solutions, the DRC can chart a path toward sustainable governance.

Classifying Mining Areas as “Red Zones”: A Step Toward Accountability

One of the DRC’s key strategies to curb illegal mining activities involves designating certain regions as “red zones”—areas where unauthorised extraction and trade of minerals are strictly prohibited. This classification aims to stem the flow of illicitly mined resources into global supply chains, which often fund armed groups and perpetuate violence in eastern provinces like North Kivu and South Kivu.

By enforcing stricter controls over these zones, the government seeks to formalise the mining sector, ensuring that revenues generated from mineral exports benefit the state and its citizens rather than criminal networks or foreign exploiters. For example, artisanal miners operating in authorised areas would receive support to transition into regulated frameworks, reducing their vulnerability to exploitation by middlemen or militias. While this initiative represents a significant step forward, its success hinges on robust enforcement mechanisms and international cooperation to monitor compliance.

Case Studies: Lessons from Nigeria and Angola

To understand the risks facing the DRC, one need look no further than other resource-rich African nations that have struggled with corruption and mismanagement. Nigeria , Africa’s largest oil producer, provides a cautionary tale. Despite earning billions of dollars in oil revenues since independence, decades of graft and inefficiency have left much of the population impoverished. The infamous misappropriation of funds earmarked for infrastructure projects, coupled with environmental damage caused by oil spills in the Niger Delta, highlights how poor governance can squander vast opportunities for development.

Similarly, Angola —another nation rich in natural resources—has grappled with systemic corruption during and after its prolonged civil war. Much of the country’s oil wealth was siphoned off by elites, leaving ordinary Angolans without access to basic services like clean water, healthcare, and education. Although recent anti-corruption campaigns have sought to address these issues, the legacy of inequality and mistrust remains deeply entrenched.

These examples illustrate the perils of failing to manage natural resources transparently. For the DRC, which faces similar challenges exacerbated by decades of conflict, the consequences of inaction could be catastrophic. Without meaningful reforms, the country risks perpetuating cycles of poverty, instability, and exploitation—a fate shared by too many resource-dependent economies.

Recommendations for Strengthening Transparency

To avoid repeating the mistakes of others, the DRC must adopt bold and innovative measures to enhance transparency in its natural resource sector. Below are several actionable recommendations:

1. Leverage Blockchain Technology for Supply Chain Tracking : Blockchain technology offers a transformative solution for ensuring traceability and accountability in mineral supply chains. By recording every transaction—from extraction to export—on an immutable digital ledger, blockchain can help prevent smuggling and verify that minerals are sourced ethically. Pilot projects using blockchain have already shown promise in countries like Sierra Leone, where diamond exports were tracked to ensure compliance with international standards.
2. Strengthen Regulatory Frameworks : The DRC should enact and enforce stringent laws governing mining operations, including penalties for non-compliance. Collaborating with international bodies like the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) can provide guidance on best practices while enhancing credibility among global partners.
3. Empower Local Communities : Ensuring that local populations benefit directly from resource extraction is crucial for fostering trust and reducing grievances. Revenue-sharing models, where a portion of mining profits is reinvested in community development projects, can create tangible improvements in education, healthcare, and infrastructure.
4. Enhance International Cooperation : Combating illegal exploitation requires collaboration beyond national borders. Partnering with consumer nations and multinational corporations to implement due diligence measures can close loopholes that enable illicit trade. Additionally, working with regional organisations like the African Union can amplify efforts to combat cross-border smuggling.
5. Promote Environmental Sustainability : Transparent resource management must also prioritise environmental protection. Establishing clear guidelines for sustainable mining practices and holding companies accountable for ecological damage will help preserve the DRC’s natural heritage for future generations.

The Stakes for the DRC—and the World

The DRC’s struggle to manage its natural resources transparently is not just a domestic issue; it has global implications. As the world transitions to green technologies reliant on minerals like cobalt and lithium, the demand for Congolese resources will only increase. If the DRC fails to address corruption and mismanagement, it risks becoming yet another example of a nation whose wealth fuels conflict rather than prosperity.

Moreover, the ethical responsibility to ensure fair and sustainable extraction extends beyond the DRC’s borders. Consumers in Europe, North America, and Asia must recognise their role in driving demand for these resources and advocate for supply chains free from exploitation and abuse.

A Path Forward

Transparent management of natural resources is both a moral imperative and a practical necessity for the DRC. By classifying mining areas as “red zones,” strengthening regulatory frameworks, and embracing technological innovations like blockchain, the country can take decisive steps toward breaking the cycle of corruption and conflict. At the same time, lessons from Nigeria, Angola, and other resource-rich nations serve as stark reminders of what is at stake if these efforts falter.

For the people of the DRC, transparent resource governance represents more than economic opportunity—it embodies hope for a brighter, more equitable future. As Minister Kayikwamba aptly noted, the DRC takes this issue “very seriously.” Now is the time to translate words into action, proving that the country’s vast wealth can indeed become a force for good.

6. Attacks on Diplomatic Missions: Upholding International Law

In recent months, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has witnessed a disturbing uptick in attacks targeting diplomatic missions—a development that poses significant risks not only to bilateral relations but also to the broader framework of international diplomacy. During her March 2025 briefing, Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner condemned these acts as “unacceptable and contrary to the fundamental principles of international law.” Her remarks underscored the gravity of such incidents and their potential to undermine trust between nations. To fully grasp the implications of these attacks, it is essential to examine recent incidents, revisit the universal principles enshrined in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and debate whether stricter enforcement mechanisms are needed to deter similar violations globally.

Recent Incidents: A Pattern of Hostility

The DRC has experienced several high-profile attacks on diplomatic missions in recent years, with embassies and consulates becoming targets of vandalism, arson, or intimidation. For instance, in late 2024, unidentified assailants vandalised the premises of a European embassy in Kinshasa, smashing windows and defacing official signage. Similarly, protests outside foreign missions have occasionally escalated into violence, with demonstrators breaching security perimeters and threatening diplomatic staff.

These incidents have far-reaching consequences for diplomatic relations. They create an atmosphere of insecurity, prompting some countries to scale back their operations or withdraw personnel altogether. Such actions can disrupt vital channels of communication, impeding cooperation on critical issues like conflict resolution, humanitarian aid, and economic development. Moreover, they tarnish the DRC’s reputation as a host nation, raising concerns about its ability—or willingness—to uphold international norms.

The Vienna Convention: A Pillar of Diplomatic Immunity

At the heart of modern diplomacy lies the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), a cornerstone of international law that establishes the inviolability of diplomatic missions and their personnel. Article 22 of the convention explicitly states that “the premises of the mission shall be inviolable” and that “the receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage.” Similarly, Article 29 affirms the personal inviolability of diplomats, prohibiting host nations from subjecting them to arrest, detention, or harm.

These principles reflect a collective recognition that diplomacy thrives only when ambassadors and their missions operate free from fear of coercion or retaliation. By ensuring safe spaces for dialogue and negotiation, the Vienna Convention fosters mutual respect and cooperation among sovereign states. However, when attacks occur—whether perpetrated by state actors, non-state groups, or unruly mobs—they erode this foundational trust, jeopardising the very fabric of international relations.

Are Stricter Enforcement Mechanisms Needed?

While the Vienna Convention provides clear guidelines for protecting diplomatic missions, its effectiveness ultimately depends on compliance and enforcement. Critics argue that existing mechanisms are insufficient to deter attacks, particularly in volatile regions where governments may lack the capacity—or will—to safeguard foreign missions. This raises the question: should stricter enforcement mechanisms be introduced to hold violators accountable?

One proposal is to establish an international oversight body tasked with monitoring compliance with the Vienna Convention. Such an entity could investigate breaches, issue binding recommendations, and impose sanctions on states that fail to meet their obligations. For example, if a government repeatedly neglects to protect diplomatic missions within its borders, it could face penalties ranging from travel bans on senior officials to suspension of membership in multilateral organisations.

Another approach involves leveraging technology to enhance security at embassies and consulates. Surveillance systems, biometric access controls, and rapid-response units equipped with real-time data could help prevent intrusions and mitigate risks. Additionally, regional blocs like the African Union or European Union could play a proactive role by facilitating information-sharing and coordinating responses to emerging threats.

However, critics caution against overreach, warning that overly punitive measures could exacerbate tensions rather than resolve them. They argue that addressing root causes—such as political instability, socioeconomic grievances, or misinformation campaigns—is equally important. For instance, many attacks on diplomatic missions stem from public anger over perceived injustices or foreign interference. Engaging communities through education and outreach programs might therefore complement stricter enforcement mechanisms, fostering greater understanding of the importance of diplomatic immunity.

Implications for Global Diplomacy

The attacks on diplomatic missions in the DRC highlight a broader challenge facing the international community: how to uphold the sanctity of diplomacy in an era marked by rising nationalism, populism, and geopolitical tensions. When embassies are attacked, the repercussions extend beyond individual nations—they weaken the global architecture designed to promote peace, stability, and cooperation.

For the DRC, addressing these incidents is not merely a matter of legal obligation; it is an opportunity to demonstrate leadership and commitment to international norms. By taking decisive action to protect foreign missions and prosecuting those responsible for attacks, the government can rebuild confidence among its international partners. At the same time, global powers must recognise their shared responsibility to support fragile states in fulfilling their duties under the Vienna Convention.

Safeguarding the Foundations of Diplomacy

Attacks on diplomatic missions are more than isolated acts of violence—they are assaults on the principles that underpin international order. As Minister Kayikwamba rightly emphasised, such acts are unacceptable and demand immediate redress. Yet, preventing future incidents requires a multifaceted approach that combines robust enforcement mechanisms with efforts to address underlying grievances.

The stakes could not be higher. In a world increasingly defined by complexity and uncertainty, diplomacy remains one of humanity’s most powerful tools for resolving disputes and forging partnerships. If we allow attacks on embassies to go unchecked, we risk unraveling the delicate web of trust that sustains global cooperation. For the sake of both the DRC and the wider international community, upholding the inviolability of diplomatic missions must remain a top priority.

7. Constructive Diplomacy: Building Respectful Partnerships

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) stands at a pivotal moment in its diplomatic trajectory, as Minister Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner reiterated the nation’s desire for respectful and constructive engagement with international partners. Her emphasis on balancing assertiveness with collaboration reflects a nuanced understanding of the delicate dance required to navigate global geopolitics while safeguarding national sovereignty. In an era marked by shifting power dynamics, the DRC’s approach offers valuable lessons—and raises thought-provoking questions—about how nations can foster partnerships that are both equitable and effective. By examining successful examples from other African nations, such as Ethiopia’s handling of Nile disputes and Kenya’s role in mediating Somalia’s peace talks, we can glean insights into the evolving nature of diplomacy. Furthermore, the rise of South-South cooperation challenges traditional North-South alliances, prompting us to reconsider what truly constitutes meaningful partnership in the 21st century.

Balancing Assertiveness with Collaboration

For the DRC, the pursuit of respectful engagement does not imply passivity; rather, it involves asserting its interests firmly while remaining open to collaboration. This dual approach is critical in addressing complex issues like resource management, regional security, and humanitarian crises. For instance, when advocating for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2773, Minister Kayikwamba demonstrated assertiveness by calling out delays and reaffirming the DRC’s stance against foreign interference. At the same time, she expressed gratitude for the strong positions adopted by certain countries, acknowledging their support in advancing Congolese priorities.

This balance is essential in maintaining credibility on the global stage. Nations that fail to assert themselves risk being marginalised or exploited, while those that adopt overly confrontational postures may alienate potential allies. The DRC’s strategy highlights the importance of cultivating relationships based on mutual respect, transparency, and shared goals—a model that could serve as a blueprint for other developing nations navigating similar challenges.

Lessons from Ethiopia and Kenya: Successful Diplomatic Strategies

Other African nations have successfully navigated complex diplomatic landscapes, offering valuable case studies for the DRC. One notable example is Ethiopia’s handling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) dispute . As tensions flared between Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan over water rights along the Nile River, Ethiopia adopted a firm yet pragmatic approach. While steadfastly defending its right to develop the dam—a project seen as vital to its economic future—Ethiopia engaged in multilateral negotiations facilitated by the African Union (AU). By positioning itself as a responsible actor committed to dialogue, Ethiopia avoided escalating the conflict into outright confrontation, even as it maintained its core objectives.

Similarly, Kenya’s role in mediating Somalia’s peace talks demonstrates the power of constructive diplomacy in fostering regional stability. Kenya has consistently positioned itself as a neutral broker, leveraging its influence to bring warring factions to the negotiating table. Its efforts have been guided by a commitment to African-led solutions, underscoring the importance of local ownership in resolving conflicts. By prioritising collaboration over coercion, Kenya has earned trust among stakeholders, enabling it to play a pivotal role in shaping outcomes that benefit all parties involved.

These examples illustrate how assertiveness and collaboration can coexist within a broader diplomatic framework. Both Ethiopia and Kenya demonstrate that success often hinges on striking the right balance—advocating for one’s interests while remaining open to compromise and cooperation.

Thought-Provoking Questions: South-South Cooperation vs. North-South Alliances

As the DRC seeks to build respectful partnerships, it must also grapple with the evolving nature of global diplomacy. In recent years, there has been a noticeable shift toward South-South cooperation , where developing nations collaborate to address shared challenges without relying heavily on traditional Western powers. This trend raises important questions about the relative merits of South-South versus North-South alliances:

• Is South-South cooperation inherently more equitable than North-South partnerships? Proponents argue that South-South initiatives empower developing nations to set their own agendas, free from the paternalistic tendencies sometimes associated with North-South relationships. However, critics caution that these partnerships can still perpetuate imbalances, particularly if larger economies dominate smaller ones.
• What role should multilateral institutions play in facilitating South-South cooperation? Bodies like the African Union and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) have emerged as key platforms for fostering collaboration among Global South nations. Yet, their effectiveness depends on member states’ willingness to prioritise collective interests over individual gains.
• Can North-South alliances adapt to changing dynamics? Traditional donors and partners must reevaluate their approaches to ensure they remain relevant in a multipolar world. This may involve relinquishing outdated paradigms of aid dependency in favour of genuine partnerships built on equality and reciprocity.

For the DRC, these questions are particularly pertinent. As a resource-rich nation seeking to break free from historical patterns of exploitation, it must carefully weigh the benefits of engaging with both Southern and Northern partners. Could closer ties with emerging economies like China or India provide alternative pathways to development? Or do longstanding relationships with European and North American nations still hold value, provided they evolve to reflect contemporary realities?

Toward a New Era of Diplomacy

Constructive diplomacy lies at the heart of the DRC’s vision for its future—a future defined by respectful partnerships that honour its sovereignty while addressing pressing global challenges. By learning from the successes of Ethiopia and Kenya, the DRC can refine its approach to balancing assertiveness with collaboration, ensuring that its voice is heard without alienating allies.

At the same time, the rise of South-South cooperation invites us to rethink the foundations of international relations. As power shifts away from traditional centres, nations like the DRC have an opportunity to shape new paradigms of partnership—one rooted in solidarity, innovation, and shared prosperity. But this requires courage, creativity, and a willingness to challenge entrenched norms.

Ultimately, the question before the DRC—and indeed, the wider world—is simple yet profound: What kind of partnerships will define our shared future? Will we cling to outdated models of dominance and dependency, or will we embrace a new era of diplomacy grounded in mutual respect and collective progress? The answer will shape not only the destiny of the DRC but also the trajectory of global cooperation in the decades to come.

Conclusion: Towards a Shared Vision of Peace

Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner’s impassioned remarks in Kinshasa on March 5, 2025, serve as both a sobering reminder and an inspiring call to action. Her words echo a universal truth: peace is not merely the absence of war but the presence of justice, dignity, and opportunity for all. For the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), this vision remains elusive yet attainable—a beacon of hope amid decades of conflict, exploitation, and suffering. The journey towards stability hinges not only on the swift implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2773 but also on the collective will of regional and international stakeholders to act decisively, collaboratively, and respectfully.

The DRC’s path forward requires addressing multiple interconnected challenges with equal urgency and precision. Aligning complementary frameworks such as the Luanda and Nairobi processes under African Union leadership offers a pragmatic blueprint for fostering coherence without sacrificing nuance. Upholding national sovereignty while engaging constructively with global partners ensures that the DRC retains agency over its destiny, even as it seeks support to overcome systemic issues. Addressing humanitarian crises in provinces like North Kivu and South Kivu demands unwavering commitment to protecting civilian lives and ensuring access to aid, even amidst political stalemates. Promoting transparent governance of natural resources underscores the importance of accountability and equity, transforming the country’s vast wealth into a force for sustainable development rather than conflict.

Yet, these efforts cannot succeed in isolation. They require a concerted response from the international community—one that transcends narrow self-interests and embraces a shared vision of peace. This means moving beyond rhetoric to take tangible actions: enforcing sanctions against those who violate international law, supporting initiatives that empower local communities, and investing in long-term solutions that prioritise human welfare over geopolitical gain. It also means recognising the unique historical and cultural contexts of nations like the DRC, avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches that often exacerbate existing tensions.

As we reflect on this pivotal moment, let us ask ourselves difficult but necessary questions: Are we willing to rise above entrenched divisions and work together toward lasting peace? Can we hold ourselves accountable for upholding the principles of justice, equality, and solidarity that underpin the very foundation of international order? And most importantly, are we prepared to listen to—and amplify—the voices of those who have borne the brunt of conflict, ensuring that their needs and aspirations guide our collective efforts?

For the people of the DRC, the stakes could not be higher. Their resilience in the face of unimaginable adversity is a testament to the indomitable human spirit. Yet resilience alone is not enough; they deserve—and demand—a future defined by hope rather than hardship, by opportunity rather than oppression. Delivering on this promise requires more than goodwill; it demands bold leadership, innovative thinking, and sustained collaboration at every level—from grassroots movements to global institutions.

But the implications extend far beyond the borders of the DRC. In an increasingly interconnected world, the fate of one nation is inextricably linked to the fate of all. The challenges facing the DRC—conflict resolution, resource management, humanitarian protection, and equitable development—are emblematic of broader struggles confronting humanity today. How we respond to these challenges will shape not only the trajectory of the DRC but also the legacy we leave for future generations.

For the sake of the Congolese people—and indeed, for humanity itself—the answer must be a resounding yes. Yes, we are willing to confront uncomfortable truths and make difficult choices. Yes, we are committed to building partnerships rooted in respect, reciprocity, and shared responsibility. And yes, we believe in the possibility of a world where peace is not just an aspiration but a reality.

In the end, the quest for peace is not merely a policy imperative; it is a moral obligation. As Minister Kayikwamba so eloquently reminded us, the time to act is now. Let us seize this moment—not out of obligation, but out of conviction. For when history looks back on this chapter, may it see not a failure to act, but a triumph of unity, compassion, and resolve.

Joram Jojo