Wednesday, July 30, 2014

UN Chief: 'In the name of humanity, violence in Gaza must stop' | United Nations Radio

UN Chief: 'In the name of humanity, violence in Gaza must stop' | United Nations Radio

Source: UN Radio (unmultimedia.org)

The Secretary-General has called for an "immediate and unconditional humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza, urging for an end to the violence "in the name of humanity".
Mr Ban Ki-moon was speaking at a press briefing in New York on Monday, shortly after his return from the region.
The world is celebrating Eid al-Fitr which marks the feast of breaking the fast following the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Since Sunday, a relative and very fragile calm has been established on the ground, the Secretary-General noted.
"The temporary weekend pause in fighting brought a brief respite to war-weary civilians. It also revealed how much the massive Israeli assault has devastated the lives of the people of Gaza. We saw scenes of indiscriminate destruction. Some described it as a “man-made hurricane” – whole neighbourhoods reduced to rubble; blocks of flattened apartment buildings; scores of bodies still buried under mountains of twisted wreckage."
No country would accept the threat of rockets from above and tunnels from below, Mr Ban said.
At the same time, he added, all occupying powers have an international legal obligation to protect civilians.
Hamas rocket fire has claimed the lives of three Israeli civilians.
Over a thousand Palestinians have been killed since the start of the conflict, the majority of them civilians and hundreds of them children.
The Secretary-General said there must be accountability and justice for crimes committed by all sides.
Jocelyne Sambira, United Nations.
Duration: 1'39''

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Great Lakes Watch: Rwanda’s Election as a Non-Permanent Member of the...

Great Lakes Watch: Rwanda’s Election as a Non-Permanent Member of the...: By Stean A.N. Tshiband, JD, MCR. Abstract The Security Council renews five non-permanent member States every year. Although this exerc...

Rwanda’s Election as a Non-Permanent Member of the Security Council: What Prospects for Peace in Eastern DRC?

By Stean A.N. Tshiband, JD, MCR.

Abstract
The Security Council renews five non-permanent member States every year. Although this exercise has become part of the customs within the General Assembly, the organ that elects non-permanent member States, this year’s elections sparked protests from the DRC and some international non-governmental organizations. Beyond these protest, this paper examines the impact of Rwanda’s entry in the Security Council on peace and security in the Great Lakes region, particularly Eastern DRC. Drawing lessons from the past, this paper tends to analyze benefits and Rwanda’s non-permanent seat in the Security Council.
In October 2012, the International Community elected five new non-permanent members of the UN Security Council for a period of two years as it is always the case every year. The election of Luxembourg, Argentina, South Korea, Australia and Rwanda would have gone unnoticed if the latter was not involved in a controversy that involves the very essence of the very mandate of the Security Council – maintenance of international peace and security. The election of Rwanda sparked vigorous protests from the Government of the Congo (DRC) and some International Non-Governmental Organizations (Huffington Post, 19 October 2012).
While recognizing the right of the DRC to protest about Rwanda’s seat in the UNSC, it is also important to mention Rwanda’s right, to have a non-permanent seat in the Council as every other member State of the United Nations. However, important questions need to be asked. Why should Rwanda sit or not sit in the Security Council as a non-permanent member? What does this election represent in terms of values advocated by and representing the United Nations? And most of all, what will be the impact of this election on peace, security and stability within the Great Lakes Region of Africa, particularly Eastern DRC?
Seating in the Security Council
Before attempting to provide answers to these questions, it is important to remember that the UNSC is one of the most important organs of the United Nations and has the primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security (UN Charter Art 24[1]). It is composed of fifteen members, five of which are permanent (USA, UK, France, China and the Russian Federation) and ten non-permanent elected for a two-year term (UN Charter Art. 23[2]).
To be elected, Member States’ candidacy for a non-permanent seat in the UNSC are presented by their regional organizations and approved by the UN General Assembly with, at least, two-third (129 out of 193) of votes to obtain the seat (UNSC 2012). Rwanda’s bid for a seat was endorsed and presented by the African Union two years ago in replacing South Africa, whose membership is expiring on December 31, 2012 (UNSC 2012). South Africa currently holds one of the three seats allocated to the African bloc region. Every year, five Member States make their entry in the Security Council.
Although not mentioned in the Charter, aspiring member state are expected to demonstrate higher standards and values imbedded in the Charter and contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security.
The Significance of Rwanda on International Peace and Security
Rwanda is not only the country known by the 1994 genocide. It is the sixth major made significant contribution as Troop and Police Contributing Country (TCC) to Peacekeeping operations (UNSC2012). It has a strong interest in the thematic issue of women, peace and security, including a focus on combating sexual violence against women and empowering women in conflict resolution and peacebuilding (UNSC2012). Rwanda can also be praised for its impressive recovery from the Civil War that resulted in the genocide. Around eight hundred thousand Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed between April and July 1994. Rwanda is also seen as a very good example for its development and anti-poverty policies.
While the above achievements advocate for Rwanda as a model at all fronts of the UN programs, a very big shadow is cast upon it from its human rights record and involvement in the destabilization of Eastern DRC. The actual Rwandan regime is often pointed at for its political repression of members of the opposition. One will remember the involvement of Rwanda alongside Uganda in the so-called war of national liberation waged under the banner of the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of the Congo (ADFL) that overthrew the Mobutu regime and later in the “seven-nation war”, also called the African world war between 1998 and 2003 (Longman 2002: 129-144). From 1996, Rwanda is mentioned every time the territorial integrity and peace are threatened in Eastern DRC. The 2007 – 2009 Laurent Nkunda’s National Congress for the Defense of Peoples (CNDP) armed conflict, the continuing plunder of natural resources and violence in the Kivu provinces and the current Congolese Revolutionary Army (ARC), the former M-23 movement attacks have all pointed at Rwanda as the main instigator.
The White elephant: Rwanda’s Denial
Rwanda has always been pointed as the mastermind behind the ADFL, the Goma-based Rally for Democracy (RCD) rebellion, the CNDP and the M23 movement. In spite of massive damning facts clearly indicating its involvement in the Eastern DRC, Rwanda continued to deny the facts. Let us recall a few facts:
-          At the beginning of the ADFL rebellion, Rwanda denied its involvement in the “liberation movement”. The first war also called the ‘war of liberation’ was planned and carried out Rwanda and Uganda (Meredith 2011: 555 - 585). Congolese and the ADFL were a façade to put up to make it appear as an anti-Mobutu rebellion. Despite the presence of Rwandan troops and the ostensible power grip by Rwandan subjects, Rwanda never officially acknowledged having invaded its giant neighbor. The current Defense Minister, James Kabarebe, even assumed functions of the chief of Staff of armed forces in the newly “liberated” Zaire, then re-baptized The democratic Republic of the Congo under Laurent Desire Kabila(Meredith 2011: 555-585). Rwanda’s national security was the major drive that justified the so-called war of liberation (Tshiband 2009; Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004).
-          History may recall that Rwandan forces played an important role in the onset of the second war that resulted in the partition of the country. James Kabarebe was the commander of an operation that would seize power by force. He commandeered a private jetliner to ferry Rwandan troops from Goma to the military base of Kitona (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004). Despite the ostensible presence of Rwandan troops in the Congo, Rwanda rejected any claim it had invaded its neighbor. The attitude of the international community played an important role in Rwanda’s attitude. With the exception of France, almost all major powers chose to ignore the fact. Even after the signature of the final peace agreement, Rwanda never disengaged in the Congo, probably due to economic benefits it drew from the crisis.
-          The National Congress for the Defense or People (CNDP) is another of what is believed another of Rwandan creations in Eastern DRC. Facts on the ground indicated that the insurgency was orchestrated and carried out by Rwanda. The CNDP was supposedly a Congolese movement and staged an armed conflict to “protect Banyamulenge populations from exactions and attacks they suffered from FDLR, according to the movement, since Congolese authorities failed to disarm them (New York Times, 21 January 2011). It was also believed that his rebellion was staged to protect Rwandan interests in the Kivu provinces, namely natural resources exploitation (New York Times, 21 January2011). He also helped secure the Rwandan border and residents from FDLR raids (Huffigton Post, 3 January 2009). It also said that his movement controlled a 21000 sq. Km territory (Huffington Post, 3 January 2009). Despite being a renegade, Laurent Nkunda gained popularity among local residents. However, the DRC and Rwanda came together to track down the Hutu-FDLR rebels, sidelining Nkunda, who was later apprehended in Rwanda and kept under house arrest since then. There are few in his arrest that remain unclear:
o   Why has Nkunda been held under house arrest without any apparent charge against him?
o   Why did Rwanda quickly arrest its protégé? Was he the ‘sacrificial lamb’ on the altar of Congo-Rwanda reconciliation? Unless it is a façade arrest and tactical move by Rwanda to secure its interests. It is believed that Nkunda has been lately allowed to use his phone and contact former CNDP troop’s men integrated in the Congolese army to defect and apparently join the M23 (UNSC 2012).
o   His deputy, General Bosco Ntanganda, who is also wanted by the ICC on crimes against humanity charges, was left free and was even promoted. Latest information about the CNDP indicated that there were disagreements between Bosco and Nkunda. It is even believed that the former was planning a coup to oust Nkunda from the CNDP. The current leader of the Congolese Revolutionary Army, formerly known as the M23, Sultani Makenga has close ties with Nkunda. Does it mean Nkunda is leading behind the stage?
One thing is sure, there is much to the arrest of Nkunda that remains known only to the Rwandan regime. Nkunda’s background alone tells a lot on Rwandan involvement. In fact Laurent Nkunda He began his military career as an intelligence officer for the RPF and remained within its ranks throughout the campaign that led the Tutsi-led RPF to power in Rwanda (New York Times, 21 January 2011). He also joined troops that entered Zaire under the ADFL to topple Mobutu from power. He later joined the Goma-based RCD before being integrated in the Armed Forces of the DRC (FARDC), from which he broke and created the CNDP. Nkunda was arrested since January 2009 in Rwanda. Rwanda refused to execute the request for extradition issued by the Congolese Government. A UN report (UNSC 2008) provided indications of possible links between the Rwandan President’s Office and the CNDP.
-          The M23 movement, which was started by Col. Sultani Makenga, an ex-CNDP combatant loyal to Laurent Nkunda. The UN interim report (UNSC 2012) alleged that the latter, despite being under house arrest, was allowed to call his former companions and sympathizers in a move to convince them to join the M23.   The same report also alleged that key members of the Rwandan government provided support to the M23 movement. This support supposedly consists of logistics (armament), recruitment and training of troops. Rwandan troops are even suspected to have taken part in fighting against Congolese troops in North Kivu. Instead of providing counter-evidence to the report, Rwanda is trying attacking the credibility of the panel of experts and their methodology. A report on Aljazeera states (Ajazeera 2012):
“Rwanda has furiously denied the claims made in the report's annex and turned to their usual means of doing so: attacking the report’s methodology as well as its release before Rwandan officials had the chance to respond. Unfortunately for Kigali, the Group of Experts relied on a heightened standard for evidence, requiring five independent, eyewitness accounts for any information included in the report. This testimony, plus photographs of ammunition that could not have come from DRC, is damning for Rwanda, as is the sudden strengthening of M23 and reports from defectors that many M23 fighters speak English. If the report is true - and there is no credible reason for independent observers to believe it is not - it means that Rwanda is in violation of United Nations sanctions against supplying weapons to Congolese armed groups”
Rwanda has also rejected calls to condemn the M23 movement as requested by the major part of the international community.
Rwanda’s presence in Eastern DRC has persisted since late 1996. Genuine concerns for the security of a newly established authority in Rwanda might have been the main reason of launching a campaign in the DRC. This raison d’Etat progressively gave in to a campaign for natural resources. Rwanda is not expected to easily acknowledge its involvement in the destabilization of the DRC since main reasons of national security have long eroded and gave way to economic ones. Acknowledging its ostensible presence will amount to a mea culpa for violations of International Law treaties which Rwanda is party to.
National Security: A Key to Profiteering and Parasitism
Although Rwandan national security remained a priority, Rwanda’s motivation for the second war was driven by the resources (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004). The FDLR issue became secondary in Rwanda’s campaigns in Eastern DRC (APPG 2002). What was true for the second Rwandan crusade in the DRC remains evident to this day. The presence of Hutu-FDLR rebels in eastern Congo may still represents a threat to the Rwandan national security, but this is no longer a major security threat for Rwandan authorities. The Hutu-FDLR rebels destabilize an important part of Eastern DRC. They have on their account the vilest cases of systematic and organized sexual violence in the provinces of North and South Kivu, many other crimes against humanity, war crimes, wanton destruction of property and environment, plunder of natural resources and much more and so forth. Their presence affects much more the DRC than it represents a threat to Rwanda. Local populations even talk about them more as an organized criminal group rather than an armed group per se.
The FDLR renounced to any offensive action against Rwanda in 2008 and decided remain on defensive action, if attacked. It seems they are more satisfied with plundering natural resources in the Congo than re-conquering their native Rwanda. In addition, many among the FDLR rebels represent a new generation that did not take part to the 1994 genocide, they were either born in exile or were young children at the time of the genocide. Analysts suggest that national security is just an umbrella or a pretext used by Rwanda to destabilize the Congo. Some even mentioned that the stabilization and pacification of eastern Congo will prevent Rwanda from economic profits it draws from an unstable DRC richly endowed with natural resources. It would be easy to ask the question: A qui profite le crime?[1]
Just as other neighboring countries, Rwanda profits from the instability that the DRC suffers in many ways. Taxes paid for the transit of smuggled and illegally exploited resources, direct investment by groups and individuals involved in the plunder, side business investment related to shadow and illicit trade of resources from eastern DRC. The de facto partition of the country led to an unprecedented illegal exploitation of natural resources (Meredith 2011:555-585). Paul Kagame even called the war in the DRC self-sustaining; i.e. resources needed by troops in the DRC were financed by the presence of the very troops on the ground. One will wonder how. That is through the illegal exploitation of natural resources, of course. Not only Rwandan forces were present in the DRC, they also set criminal networks that are still exploiting natural resources in the Kivu provinces. To elicit the importance of natural resources in multiple Rwandan campaigns in Eastern DRC, one will notice that there were no documented instances when Rwandan troops attacked the FDLR rebels. On the contrary, the APPG report (2002) indicates that RPA and RCD ignored information about FDLR rebels. On occasion, it was even alleged that RPA and RCD even colluded with them over the extraction and trading of natural resources (APPG 2002).
Another fact of capital importance to determine the importance of natural resources over in choices made by Kigali is that there were little engagements between belligerents, but heavy fighting erupted in many occasions between Rwandan and Ugandan forces within the DRC over the control of natural resources (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004). It is also said that the question of natural resources in the eastern DRC represents a national security issue. Natural resources are of utmost importance and are an issue of state policy, unlike Uganda who favored personal gain of officers assigned in the DRC (Longman 2002:129-44; Turner 2007; UNSC 2003). In fact, Rwanda even established the “Congo Desk”, an official structure that was in charge of proceeds from natural resources from the Congo. The Congo Desk of the Department of External Relations monitored operations concerning the exploitation of natural resources in the Congo from Kigali (Tshiband 2009; UNSC 2003; Longman 2002: 129-144). It was in particularly charge of delivering licenses and had the upper hand over operations. It was reported that to a five per cent return of the proceeds was to be paid to the Desk be granted a monopoly in diamond trading and other activities. The Congo desk represented a kind of tender board through which all proceeds from the DRC were processed (Tshiband 2009).
The heavy toll that is paid by civilians revolves around the natural resources. The acquisition and control of resources is always one of the most tragic parts of the plunder. Most reports on Congo’s natural resources highlighted the massive violations of human rights, killings, expropriation, corruption, and much more during every phase, from extraction to export (Tshiband 2009). Zones controlled by troops close to Rwanda are not exempt of this harsh reality faced by civilian populations.
Some politicians in the Kinshasa fear that Rwanda is trying to create a partition of the Congo in a move to append it as part of its territory. This eventuality would resolve two issues: land scarcity and natural resources. Rwanda is one of the countries in Africa that has the highest density of population per square kilometer. It is also said that Kigali does not want to see a stable Eastern DRC. An unstable Eastern DRC is more profitable to Rwanda’s economy. However, Rwanda does not need an unstable Eastern DRC to draw profits from natural resources.
The Banyamulenge issue
The Banyamulenge and other Rwandophone communities are part of the ethno-linguistic landscape of the DRC for decades. Some of them are believed to have settled in the DRC since 1881 (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004b). Others emigrated from Rwanda during the Hutu revolution of 1959. Although they settled in the DRC for decades, their citizenship has always been at the center of a debate, mostly from politicians trying to use a nationalist sentiment to seek election or acquire a popular base. The citizenship of the Banyamulenge remains a sensitive question and had known different fortunes. In the 1990s, the national TV organized a series of debates on the subject. The subject sparked boisterous and emotional debate among participants. This series of debate has remained active among some members of ethnic groups believed to be rightful natives of the Congo.
In 1972, President Mobutu signed a decree to granting Zairian citizenship as of 30 June 1960 to all people from Rwanda and Burundi who had established residence in Kivu before 1 January 1950 and lived in the Congo since then (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004b). Many of these subjects were moved to mining zones and occupied key posts in Gécamines in the Katanga, for instance. In 1981, the parliament repealed the 1972 decree and replaced it with a law on citizenship, which defines a citizen as someone who is a descendant of an ethnic group found in the country within its borders as of 1 August 1885 (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004b). The citizenship of many Rwandophones became uncertain. The law did not sanction a general exclusion of Rwandophones from the Zairian citizenship. Those with recognizable structures of customary authority and relatively uncontested land such as the Tutsi Banyamulenge of South Kivu should qualify under this law as Congolese citizens (Nzongola-Ntalaja 2004b). This is not the understanding of many Congolese to this day. In fact, many of them, with the help of opportunistic and less scrupulous politicians, believe Tutsis are not Congolese citizens.
Rwanda or any other State sharing these ethno-linguistic groups does not have prerogatives of violating International Law or destabilizing the DRC on the ground of protecting the ethnic Congolese Tutsis. Rwanda’s involvement with Tutsi-led rebel movements did not help much in the integration of the Banymulenge. Rwanda’s engagement in Eastern DRC is even harmful to them. Their acceptance as rightful Congolese citizens becomes seriously damaged exposing them to more threats from other communities on the ground that they are Rwandan subjects. They speak the same language, have the same physical appearance and hold same cultural beliefs. It would be difficult for anyone to easily distinguish who is and who is not Congolese.
Birth in the Congo does not automatically confer Congolese citizenship. Congolese citizenship is regulated according to the jus sanguinis doctrine, which requires one of the parents to be Congolese citizens for a child to claim citizenship. Children of Banyamulenge can rightfully claim the Congolese citizenship regardless of where they were born as guaranteed by the constitution.
Citizenship is one of those sovereignty issues. No State can compel another to grant citizenship to all or part of a community. In the event the DRC would fail to deliver its obligations to protect individuals or groups within its territory, international provisions on the protection of civilians are in place and should be upheld. Rwanda or Uganda cannot justify any of their moves by the protection of the Banyamulenge.
The potential impact of Rwanda’s non-permanent UN Security Council seat the Congolese Diplomacy
Beyond what is perceived as an award for multiple violations of International Law, the main issue with Rwanda seating in the Security Council lies on how it will affect regional dynamics and efforts to stabilize large chunk of the Congolese territory in North and South Kivu provinces. The presence of Rwanda in the Security Council will definitely affect how the situation in the great Lakes Region of Africa is handled, but how will it affect security council transactions? How is Rwanda expected to play a key role the maintenance of international peace and security while it is suspected of torpedoing the same right next door? This is the key question that is tormenting many of those who are skeptical about the positivity of Rwanda’s two-year non-permanent seat. Let us explore few possibilities.
The presence of Rwanda in the Security Council confers it some responsibilities, such as exemplarity on its dealing with issues that come on the table of each of the 15 member States. Rwanda may choose to adopt an approach that reduces its interactions with destabilizing forces in Eastern DRC. This approach will not resolve the Kivu quagmire, but will give some space for peaceful initiatives to take roots. The disengagement of Rwanda, albeit partial, will have positive impact on the ground. Being a member of the Security Council, Rwanda may also choose a positive approach that is to positively seek ways to resolve the situation in Eastern DRC, drawing more attention on a region it comes from and inviting other member States, particularly the five permanent members to get more involved. This approach will affirm Rwanda’s position in seeking peace though its contribution to peacekeeping and, this time peacemaking. La charité bien ordonnée commence par soi-même[2]. Rwanda’s responsibility for peace starts from within the Great Lakes region.
Rwanda may still choose to continue its current activities in Eastern DRC. Not only it will dispose of privileges of vote, but may also rally other Member States to defend its position. Despite being non-permanent member, Rwanda’s entry in the Security Council will have a very big impact on its diplomacy and the weight it is acquiring internationally. In fact, Rwanda has a very strong and aggressive diplomacy and does not hesitate to utilize the international community’s guilt and sympathy because of the genocide to bring forward its case. Rwanda also knows how to positively shape the international public opinion in its favor. The combination of these factors will provide Rwanda a quasi-veto power.
On the contrary, the Congolese diplomacy seems to have failed. In spite of having tangible elements pointing Rwanda’s responsibility in the current instable situation in the Kivu provinces, it has not been able to advocate its case the right way. Since the fall of Mobutu, one of the main weaknesses of the DRC lies in its weak public opinion shaping. The voice of the DRC has become inaudible, even inside the DRC. In many instances, the government failed to protest and take active measures to curb violence in Eastern DRC. Many believe it is due to the institutional corruption that has gangrened politics and governance in the country. In fact, many military and civilian authorities entertain shadow and criminal networks in Eastern DRC (Tshiband 2009). The war itself is a lucrative business. Fabricated, overinflated bills, under-the-table business are the daily routine in the DRC. In some cases, the government pays for goods or services that are never supplied. In other cases, government official sell weapons to the very rebels they are fighting. While millions suffer from conflicts, a few people within the power circle in Kinshasa draw huge profits from it. In the current state of affairs, why would they end the conflict?
Another failure of the Congolese diplomacy is that it was not able to convince the African Union and the international community of the inopportunity of Rwanda’s membership in the UNSC, at this stage. It is not even sure they even attempted to do so. Protesting after votes have been cast is not only unproductive, but represents the old-fashioned and inefficient foreign policy. From the way the reception the Congolese position was voiced, no positive result can be expected.
Conclusion
Rwanda’s growing regional and international influence coupled with its membership in the Security Council may represent a positive or crippling factor in prospects for the settlement of the conflict and the stabilization of eastern DRC depending on choices authorities take and the level of international pressure.  It may become the golden opportunity to resolve the conflict or a means for Rwanda to get away with multiple violations of International Law in the DRC.
Rwanda may choose to capitalize on its presence in the Security Council to shape an even better image of a country that has emerged from one of the most unimaginable forms of violence and a country that would use its experience to eradicate violence and hate, both recipes for instability. The situation in the Kivu provinces will represent a threat to neighboring countries if not contained and resolved. It is a time bomb that only waiting to explode. Creating a no-man’s-land in Eastern DRC will not only invite groups that are controllable by Rwanda or any other GLR country, but may favor the establishment of uninvited and unwanted groups that may prove dangerous for the stability for the entire region. In addition, some groups may see their influence grow and decide to enfranchise from their backers and even threaten them.
Eastern DRC has been affected by a series of interminable armed conflicts since 1996. The death toll from these conflicts is estimated at more than six million people since the onset of the conflicts. In larger part, Rwanda holds the key to the stability of eastern Congolese provinces of the Kivus. Once external interferences are removed, Congolese can, then the internal process of healing wounds and transformation.
References:
1.    ‘Transnational Actors and the Conflict in the Great Lakes Region of Africa’, in PSN Conflict Studies eJournal, Vol.3[32], June 9, 2009
2.       Aljazeera, Rwanda at 50: Overcoming tragedy, but playing a risky game, online article accessed on 4 November 2012, available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/07/20127121254429443.html.
3.       All Parliamentary Group on the Great Lakes and Genocide Prevention (APPG), Cursed by Riches: Who Benefits from Resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Report, November 2002.
4.       Annex to the United Nations Group of Experts interim Report on the DRC, S/2012/348/Add.1 pursuant Res. 1533 (2004).
5.       Huffington Post (The), What happened to Congolese General Laurent Nkunda? Online Edition of 3 January 2009,  accessed on 20 October 2012. Article available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/georgianne-nienaber/what-happened-to-congoles_b_1214372.html.
6.       Huffington Post (The), Nations Compete for UN Security Council Seats; Rwanda Provides Drama, Online article accessed on 4 November 2012, available at : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evelyn-leopold/un-security-council_b_1985350.html
7.       Juma, L. (2007), ‘Shadow Networks and Conflict Resolution in the Great Lakes Region of Africa’, African Security Review, Vol.16 [1], March 2007.
8.    Longman, T.(2002), ‘The Complex Reasons For Rwanda’s Engagement in Congo’, in Clark, J.F.(Ed) The African Stakes of the Congo War, Fountain Publishers, Kampala, pp.53-74.
9.       Meredith, M. (2011) The Fate of Africa, Public Affairs, New York, 2011. Pp. 555-585.
10.   New York Times (The), Laurent Nkunda, Online Edition of 21 January 2011, accessed on 20 October 2012. Article available at: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/n/laurent_nkunda/index.html.
11.   Nzongola-Ntalaja, G. (2004), ‘he International Dimension of the Congo Crisis’ Global Dialogue, Vol 6 (3/4), 2004, pp.116-126.
12.   Nzongola-Ntalaja, G. (2004b) ‘The Politics of citizenship in the DRC’ Paper presented at the Annual International Conference on States, Borders and Nations: Negotiating Citizenshipin Africa, Center of African Studies, University of Edinburgh, 19-20 May 2004.
13.   Turner, T. (2007), The Congo Wars: Myth and Reality, Zed Books, London New York.
14.   UN Charter Art 23 -24.
15.   United Nations Security Council (UNSC) (2003) Report of the Panel Experts on the Exploitation of Natural Resources and other Forms of Wealth of the Democratic Republic of Congo, S/2003/1027. New York: United Nations.
16.   UNSC (2008) United Nations Group of Experts interim Report on the DRC, S/2012/348 pursuant Res. 1533 (2004)
17.   UNSC (2012) ‘Security Council Elections 2012’, Special Research Report, Security Council Report/2012 No.1, 25 September 2012.







[1] Who does the crime profit?
[2] Charity starts at home.

Saturday, October 27, 2012

KIVUTIEN : PEUPLE MARTYR PEUPLE ABANDONNE !!!

Il nous est triste de rappeler au monde que la situation que nous sommes entrain de vivre dans le Kivu et surtout au Nord-Kivu est non loin de l’Apocalypse !

Ca fait déjà plusieurs décennies que nous n’avons plus le plaisir de bénéficier à la paix dans notre pays, tous ces politiciens qui sont au pouvoir en RDC presque, ont eu la bénédiction d’occuper des postes de grande responsabilité en commençant leur combat dans notre zone montagneuse, et au lieu d’être reconnaissants, ils préfèrent nous abandonner dans la misère et l’insécurité noire.

Qu’avons-nous fait pour mériter tout ce qui nous arrive ?, pendant la guerre de l’ AFDL, ce sont nos frères, que autrefois vous avez appelé les « KADOGO » qui vous ont aidé à combattre l’armée du Feu MOBUTU et par la suite vous avez accédé au pouvoir, ces jeunes gens courageux et déterminés ont été abandonnés et payés en monnaie de singe car ils étaient à majorité constitués des jeunes gens autochtones du Kivu, et les plus malheureux ont été exterminés et tués.

Par la suite les vaillants véritables MAI-MAI qui ont farouchement résisté contre l’agresseur Rwandais depuis longtemps dans le Kivu ont accepté de soutenir les forces gouvernementales pour empêcher la rébellion du RCD de prendre le pouvoir à Kinshasa, eux aussi (Les Mai-Mai) une fois dans les FARDC ont été abandonnés, emprisonnés et dispersés et ce, jusqu’à nos jours et la plupart de leurs chefs guerriers ayant intégrés les FARDC, soit croupissent à Makala et les autres restent des militaires sans fonction et curieusement tous rappelés à Kinshasa, un cachot qui ne dit pas son nom, vivant dans la misère et avec seul objectif de les appauvrir et les affaiblir pour qu’un jour qu’ils ne résistent plus contre l’envahisseur Rwandais au Kivu.

Nous voici aujourd’hui avec une armée où la plupart d’officiers qui commandent les troupes au Kivu sont constitués des Rwandais et voulez-vous que ces gens là remportent une victoire au front contre leurs frères Rwandais du M23 ? Seul le naïf peut se laisser tromper.

Tout est clair que le Rwandais est le mieux servi au Kivu et en RDC, et vous trouverez la plupart des condamnés qui remplissent la prison de Makala et autres ce sont des autochtones Kivutiens qui se sont opposés vis-à-vis des Rwandais, le autres autochtones du Kivu ont toujours été tués par des assassinats prémédités, point n’est besoin de les citer, il suffit de voir la liste de toutes les personnes assassinées dans ce pays la RDC.

Seuls les autochtones Kivutiens qui sont au service des Rwandais continuent à vivre aisément et construisent nuit et jour au Kivu et occupent des postes de responsabilités dans l’armée, la police et dans les institutions et entreprises de l’état congolais.
C’est qui blesse encore, c’est de voir les hommes qui nous dirigent d’éviter de nommer clairement le Rwanda et l’Ouganda comme pays agresseurs au Kivu sur la tribune des Nations unies et même sur le podium du 14ème sommet de la Francophonie !
Matière qui pousse la réflexion.

Savez vous que pour le moment à Goma et dans tout le Nord-Kivu, on n’a de droit à circuler qu’à partir de 7h00 du matin jusqu’à 17h00 le soir et tout le monde doit être chez lui de 18h00 à 6h00 s’il veut continuer à faire partie du monde des vivants.
La nuit déjà vers 20h00, ce sont des tirs nourris et assassinats qui battent leur plein jusqu’au petit matin et ça c’est la vie actuelle à Goma et tout le Nord-Kivu, et curieusement les gens qui nous dirigent trouvent cela normal.

Nous devenons un peuple abandonné, le Rwanda et l’Ouganda profitant de la complicité des Congolais nous mènent une vie instable avec leur agression encouragée.
Le paysan Kivutien ne peut plus pratiquer l’agriculture, ne peut plus exercer ses activités librement, à chaque moment tout peut arriver dans la catastrophe.

Nous voulons que la justice triomphe véritablement dans ce pays et que tout le monde aspire à la paix, la vie d’une personne est sacrée et précieuse.

Mettez-vous à la place de cette population qui souffre injustement à cause des arrangements égoïstes entre certains congolais et les régimes Rwandais et Ougandais.
Nous gardons l’espoir que tout cela prendra fin un jour.

Article de GAZETI LA WALIKALE,
Goma, Samedi 27 octobre 2012.
gazeti.la.walikale@gmail.com
gazetiwalikale2012@yahoo.fr