Why in News
- June 27, 2025: Rwanda & DRC signed a U.S.-brokered peace agreement in Washington.
- July 19, 2025: DRC government & M23 rebels signed a ceasefire deal in Doha, mediated by Qatar.
- Despite these agreements, M23 resumed offensives, undermining peace efforts.
Relevance:
- GS II – International Relations: DRC-Rwanda relations, role of U.S. and Qatar in conflict mediation, geopolitical stakes.
- GS II – Security: Regional security, insurgency (M23), ethnic conflicts, peace processes.
- GS III – Economy: Resource curse, minerals (cobalt, coltan) and global supply chains.
Basics
- Conflict background: Rooted in Rwanda’s 1994 genocide, subsequent Congo wars, and ethnic rivalries (100+ armed groups).
- M23 rebel group: Tutsi-led militia, accused of atrocities; reportedly backed by Rwanda.
- Significance: DRC has $24 trillion in mineral reserves (70% global cobalt, plus coltan, copper, diamonds, tin, gold).
- Actors:
- U.S. → brokered peace for minerals access, countering China’s dominance.
- Qatar → direct mediation with M23 rebels.
- Rwanda → pressured to sign, accused of backing rebels.
Overview
- U.S. Involvement
- Economic: Access to cobalt & critical minerals; reduce Chinese monopoly.
- Political: Project image as global peace mediator; influence African geopolitics.
- Security: Promote stability to secure mineral trade.
- Qatar’s Mediation
- Neutral bridge with non-state actors (M23).
- Enhanced diplomatic profile as conflict mediator (pattern seen in Afghanistan, Gaza, now DRC).
- Peace Agreement Provisions
- Joint Security Coordination Mechanism (JSCM).
- Economic Integration Framework (licit mineral trade).
- Ceasefire, disengagement, disarmament, conditional integration of rebels.
- Challenges & Limitations
- Repeated Ceasefire Failures: M23 resumed violence, 140+ killed in July 2025.
- Distrust among parties: DRC accuses Rwanda of continued M23 support.
- Unaddressed root causes: ethnic rivalries, governance gaps, historical grievances.
- Resource curse: illicit mining funds militias; competition over minerals perpetuates conflict.
- Implications for Conflict
- Agreement created illusion of peace; fragile trust easily broken.
- Shows need for comprehensive peace process addressing governance, justice, and inclusion.
- Without sustained commitment, external mediation risks becoming symbolic.
- U.S.–China rivalry over minerals may internationalize the conflict further.
