Reining in Kagame
President Paul Kagame has been thumbing his nose at the world by denying Rwanda’s role in the insurgency ravaging the Democratic Republic of Congo’s volatile east. Evidence of Kigali’s involvement collated by the UN is nevertheless overwhelming. By allegedly supplying the rebels, Rwanda’s army command has defied a UN arms embargo and flouted international law. There is a case for Rwandan complicity in war crimes too.
Rwanda is by no means solely responsible for the crisis in Congo, where rebels last week seized the city of Goma, driving thousands from their homes. The conflict has been years in the making, and the corrupt Kinshasa government is at least as much to blame.
Yet Rwanda has been a persistent spoiler, destabilising the UN-backed peace process that in 2003 ended five years of regional war. Mr Kagame justifies his army’s interest in events next door by citing security concerns in the absence of a functioning Congolese state. Yet by arming militias he undermined Kinshasa’s chances of establishing state authority.
On previous occasions when Rwanda meddled in Congo, world powers shrugged it off. This time, international patience is wearing thin. Donors have delayed nearly $200m of budget support, pending proof that Kigali has ceased support for the rebellion.
Isolating Mr Kagame in this way is a risky strategy. He may be part of the problem but he is part of the solution too. A sustained aid freeze risks reversing his country’s recovery since the 1994 genocide. It could also be counterproductive by encouraging the army to annex Congo’s mineral rich east, in the search for new resources.
Yet a clear signal that Rwanda cannot continue interfering in Congo without sanction is long overdue. International censure, in tandem with regional diplomacy, is already showing signs of working. On Wednesday the rebels began withdrawing from around Goma.
Greater international resolve is needed if this breakthrough is to be consolidated. UN Security Council members should wield the threat of targeted sanctions and asset freezes on Rwanda’s leadership if they place new obstacles in the path of peace. It is unacceptable for Mr Kagame’s supporters, notably in Britain and the US, to keep condoning his transgressions by arguing that his government spends their aid money well. Rwanda’s development record, impressive as it is, is no trade-off for chaos in Congo.
Rwanda is by no means solely responsible for the crisis in Congo, where rebels last week seized the city of Goma, driving thousands from their homes. The conflict has been years in the making, and the corrupt Kinshasa government is at least as much to blame.
Yet Rwanda has been a persistent spoiler, destabilising the UN-backed peace process that in 2003 ended five years of regional war. Mr Kagame justifies his army’s interest in events next door by citing security concerns in the absence of a functioning Congolese state. Yet by arming militias he undermined Kinshasa’s chances of establishing state authority.
On previous occasions when Rwanda meddled in Congo, world powers shrugged it off. This time, international patience is wearing thin. Donors have delayed nearly $200m of budget support, pending proof that Kigali has ceased support for the rebellion.
Isolating Mr Kagame in this way is a risky strategy. He may be part of the problem but he is part of the solution too. A sustained aid freeze risks reversing his country’s recovery since the 1994 genocide. It could also be counterproductive by encouraging the army to annex Congo’s mineral rich east, in the search for new resources.
Yet a clear signal that Rwanda cannot continue interfering in Congo without sanction is long overdue. International censure, in tandem with regional diplomacy, is already showing signs of working. On Wednesday the rebels began withdrawing from around Goma.
Greater international resolve is needed if this breakthrough is to be consolidated. UN Security Council members should wield the threat of targeted sanctions and asset freezes on Rwanda’s leadership if they place new obstacles in the path of peace. It is unacceptable for Mr Kagame’s supporters, notably in Britain and the US, to keep condoning his transgressions by arguing that his government spends their aid money well. Rwanda’s development record, impressive as it is, is no trade-off for chaos in Congo.
No comments:
Post a Comment