Last month’s fatal clashes between Congolese civilians and UN peacekeepers may have caught many by surprise but for those who have closely followed United Nations’ history in the Congo this was history repeating itself.
In early 1960s, UN peacekeepers, who had been deployed to the Congo in the wake of a bloody secessionist conflict in Katanga, found themselves at war with separatists, who enjoyed backing from Western interests.
Later, then UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold died in a mysterious plane crash in the then Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) where he was due to broker a ceasefire deal between Congo’s warring parties.
Fast-forward to 1999, the United Nations again deployed peacekeepers to the vast country, which eventually grew to a 20,000-strong force, the largest and most expensive UN peacekeeping operation.
Two dozen years later, there is little evidence to suggest the peacekeeping mission has achieved its stated objectives, including protecting civilians from violence, as well as facilitating humanitarian access and national demobilisation and reintegration programme.
This, despite the mission costing a whopping US$1.2 billion a year.
To the contrary, the United Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) has found itself battling allegations of illegal exploitation of mineral resources, and sexual exploitation and abuse.
All the while abusive militia groups continue to mushroom in mostly mineral-rich eastern regions of the Congo, driving as many as 4.5 million civilians into internally displaced persons camps, with another 800,000 seeking refuge in other countries – under MONOSCO’s nose.
As if that’s not bad enough, the UN force recently found itself cooperating – at least indirectly – with some of the most abusive armed groups in DR Congo, including the notorious FLDR militia, which was formed and is controlled by elements linked to the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, as it fought alongside Congolese forces against the M23 rebels.
Therefore, as much as violence against peacekeepers is unwarranted and must be condemned, it is not hard to see why the Congolese are frustrated with the Mission and want them out.
Yet, MONUSCO’s ineffectiveness is only a symptom of a broader problem: the failed international community’s approach to Congo’s political and security problems.
More than six decades after the UN first deployed troops to the Congo, it’s about time the United Nations and other key players such as the United States revisited their strategy if peace and security in DR Congo and the Great Lakes region is indeed a priority for them. As they say, you cannot keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result.
As such, the renewed attention to eastern Congo, one of the reasons behind this week’s visit by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to the region, should serve as an opportunity for the international community to take a hard look at its role in sustaining instability in eastern Congo – inadvertently or otherwise – and genuinely seek a new path toward sustainable peace and
security. Notably, the durable solution to the Congo problem lies within; it’s rooted in understanding the decades-long grievances of people and supporting an inclusive inter-Congolese political dialogue. Indeed, this is the approach advanced under regional mechanisms, under the East African Community (EAC) and the International Conference on Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) frameworks.
Instead of potentially adding fuel to the flames by making unsubstantiated allegations, the UN and other key stakeholders in the Congo situation should throw their full weight behind these regional peace initiatives.