The United Nations has decided to ease the embargo on the sale of arms to the Democratic Republic of Congo. Behind this decision, the change of position of several Western countries, including France, vis-à-vis the Rwanda of Paul Kagame, suspected of supporting the rebels of the M23 in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo, analyzes “Le Pays ”.
On December 20, the UN Security Council passed a resolution that removes language requiring countries to notify its 15 members of any arms sales or military aid to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). As a reminder, the country of Félix Tshisekedi has been subject to an arms embargo since 2000, in order to deal with the extent of violence in this immense mining eldorado of Central Africa.
While all of Kinshasa’s requests to lift the restrictions resulting from this embargo had been met with the refusal of the United States and Germany, things seem to be moving very quickly under the aegis of France which, in the meantime, took up the case and benefited, a rare thing, from the support of Russia, China and the African States which will sit on the Security Council.
The threshold of horror has been crossed
Why did the UN Security Council then decide to finally let go and why now? Without a doubt, the security context in North Kivu weighed heavily in the decision of the major world powers that dominate the Security Council.
Indeed, it is no secret that for some time now the M23 rebellion has been giving the Congolese army a hard time in the east of the country. The latest outburst of violence orchestrated by the rebellion and which has moved the entire international community is the massacre, with guns and bladed weapons, of 131 civilians (102 men, 17 women and 12 children) in the two localities of Kishishe and Bamboo. The threshold of horror was undoubtedly crossed by these events and it was difficult for the international community to remain silent without being accused of complicity with the armed gangs.
The other explanation for the reversal of the UN Security Council on the arms embargo in the DRC is the pressure of public opinion in the DRC. We remember, in fact, that the Catholic Church had mobilized its flock in processions which set off in the direction of Western chancelleries and UN representations in the country, precisely to denounce the silence of the great powers and international institutions. in the tragedy unfolding in the east of the country. The internal pressure was all the stronger as the populations, tired of the inefficiency of Monusco [UN mission having succeeded in 2010 to MONUC, itself deployed in 1999 in the DRC], ended up developing a powerful anti -unwhich forced the Blue Helmets to decamp from eastern DRC with arms and baggage.
The position of Paris evolves
Finally, the last explanation is the handling of the file by Paris, whose position has changed considerably on Kigali’s involvement in the insecurity in North Kivu [Monday, December 19, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the support from Rwanda to M23]. We must also congratulate ourselves that France has finally understood that Rwanda is using the genocide as a goodwill to keep Westerners on a leash, who undoubtedly also have things to reproach themselves for in the advent of this holocaust.
But make no mistake, Paris did not give the Congolese authorities a Christmas present. The French authorities have only defended the interests of their country by choosing to take part of the arms markets against the United States, which is benefiting from the war in Ukraine.
That said, what can be the consequences of this easing of restrictions on arms imports into the DRC? Logically, we are in a position to wait for the Congolese armed forces, better equipped, to return to the offensive and regain the upper hand over the rebels of the M23. The hope of a victory is therefore allowed, but are weapons alone enough to win the war? One can doubt it, and the best of victories is that which is acquired without combat.
This is why the Congolese authorities would benefit from opening a dialogue with the M23 in order to prevent the new equipment acquired after the lifting of the embargo from being used to massacre Congolese brothers. This would further weaken social cohesion and peace in a country where communitarianism is used as a pretext for the numerous acts of violence that are shaking the entire Great Lakes region. The other fear that one may have is that, in view of the endemic corruption in the country, the new weapons acquired will end up in the hands of armed groups who could use them to quench their thirst for blood on the poor populations. .
It is therefore truly a double-edged sword that this relief on arms imports into the DRC represents. But in the meantime, we can all the same congratulate ourselves that this injustice which was done to the DRC is repaired. The lifting of the embargo makes it possible to correct this stereotype which makes Africans like big children. But it must be said that the correction of this injustice benefits the very people who caused the harm, that is to say the Westerners, who are the main arms dealers in the world.