Turning Point or Pointless Turn? Doubts Linger Over US-Brokered DRC-Rwanda Peace Deal

 

The United States has brokered a peace deal between the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, aiming to end decades of conflict in eastern DRC. The agreement, signed in Washington, requires both countries to establish joint economic and security mechanisms. Rwanda has pledged to withdraw its troops after DRC neutralizes the FDLR, a Hutu rebel group accused of involvement in the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

Despite official optimism, skepticism remains. Analysts warn that the deal may prioritize US access to critical minerals over genuine peace. President Trump, who recently cut vital USAID funding to DRC, has touted the agreement as a diplomatic triumph. Yet critics argue it could fuel further unrest if driven by resource interests, especially since Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi has signaled openness to a minerals-for-security arrangement.

Crucially, the M23 rebel group, currently in control of key cities in eastern DRC, is not party to the agreement. Though separate Qatar-led talks are planned, experts doubt that the deal will impact M23, especially given its suspected ties to Rwanda and strategic control of lucrative regions.

Local and international observers question the absence of grassroots involvement and justice measures. Nobel laureate Denis Mukwege condemned the deal as a surrender of sovereignty, while activist Vava Tampa labeled it a repeat of failed past efforts that ignore victims and enable impunity.

While some see US engagement as a diplomatic gain, others view it as a potential replay of colonial-era exploitation under the guise of peace. As implementation looms, concerns remain that fragile governance, exclusion of local voices and geopolitical competition, particularly with China, may render the deal ineffective or counterproductive.

See also: Mali Army Says 80 Fighters Killed Following al-Qaeda Linked Attacks