- Security
The peace process between the Democratic Republic of Congo (RDC) and Rwanda has reached a critical “deadlock,” according to Jason K. Stearns, an associate professor at Simon Fraser University. Speaking during a recent Space event hosted by journalist Stanis Bujakera Tshiamala, Stearns asserted that neither the Doha-Montreux nor the Washington initiatives have yielded any meaningful progress over the past year.
On the Montreux negotiations
Stearns noted that he observed “not really many changes” since the Montreux talks. He highlighted that “major disagreements” continue to persist between the Congolese government and the AFC/M23 rebel movement.
Regarding the agreement signed between Kinshasa and Kigali under Washington’s facilitation, he acknowledged that “many agreements” have been inked, but their “implementation poses a real problem.” Drawing a parallel with American diplomacy in other areas, such as Iran, Stearns suggested that the Trump administration, while “investing heavily in diplomacy,” risks “settling for grand declarations and MOUs” (framework agreements) “without much progress on implementation.” For him, the true challenge remains to “move beyond these framework agreements towards a genuine compromise,” a compromise that, in his view, “is not yet clear.”
On the nature of the sought-after compromise
Stearns reiterated that the fundamental compromise between Kinshasa and Kigali remains consistent with what was negotiated in all previous agreements, including the comprehensive and inclusive accord during the 2003 transition. This involves the withdrawal of Rwandan troops in exchange for a Congolese commitment to combat the FDLR. He emphasized that this “same deal” has seen very little progress in its execution.
Concerning the M23, he observed a complete absence of compromise: “on the Congolese side, the focus remains on a military solution,” while the rebel movement insists on maintaining its presence “for another ten years.” The researcher’s conclusion is stark: “we are very, very far from success.”
On the reasons for the lack of results
When questioned about the causes of this stalemate, Jason Stearns first praised a specific contribution from the Trump administration compared to previous mediations (East African Community, then African Union via Angolan mediation): the application of genuine pressure, which he felt was absent from prior attempts. He noted that “sanctions on Rwanda are more aggressive than ever before,” even since the major Congolese wars began in 1996.
However, he identified two significant shortcomings: A lack of coherence within the international community, as Washington sanctions Rwanda without involving European partners, who are among Kigali’s primary financial backers. He illustrated this discrepancy by pointing out that Rwandan President Paul Kagame continues to sign agreements, notably with American basketball teams, which, in Stearns’s view, does not indicate a person truly subjected to intense international pressure.
The absence of a clear global strategy: according to American diplomats cited by Jason Stearns, Washington does not envision a military solution—a position he shares. However, the compromise strategy meant to underpin the pressure exerted on Kigali remains, in his opinion, undefined.
On the compromise proposal rejected at Montreux
The researcher further disclosed that American diplomats reportedly presented a “vague” compromise between the M23 and the RDC at Montreux, which was never made public. This proposal would have offered the rebel movement a form of “partial integration,” based on Stearns’s understanding of the situation – though he clarified he had not seen the actual text of the agreement. This proposition was ultimately rejected by both parties.
Finally, Jason Stearns concluded that what is most lacking today is equivalent diplomatic pressure on Kinshasa. The RDC has, in his assessment, “not really suffered diplomatic pressure from the United States so far,” unlike Rwanda.
Related Posts
