Should the DR Congo-Rwanda declaration stop AFC/M23’s cause?

Goma lives again. Markets hum with traders. Children play in schoolyards. The Alliance Fleuve Congo/March 23 Movement (AFC/M23) has brought peace to eastern DR Congo’s liberated towns—Goma, Bukavu, Rutshuru. Since January 2025, over 7 million Congolese have fled violence from 120 armed groups (UN OCHA, April 2025). But in M23’s zones, hope rises. Families rebuild. Shops reopen. Yet, Kinshasa’s aggression threatens this fragile peace. The DR Congo-Rwanda Declaration of Principles, signed on April 23 in Washington, is legit but it serves Rwanda’s security, not AFC/M23’s cause. People must not be misled by the Washington-facilitated DR Congo-Rwanda Declaration of Principles. The DR Congo faces sovereign tensions with Rwanda over the FDLR’s presence in its army, a legitimate concern both nations agree to address. But AFC/M23’s cause is distinct. It should not be conflated with Rwanda’s security agenda, as M23’s struggle stands apart, demanding its own resolution. AFC/M23 must push for its own declaration with Kinshasa, rallying eastern DR Congo for justice and stability. I’ve witnessed the change. A few weeks ago, I walked Goma’s bustling streets. Vendors sold their merchandise free from militia threats. In Bukavu, my friend reopened her bakery, shuttered since 2023’s chaos. “M23 patrols keep looters away,” she said. In Rutshuru, farmers sow cassava, protected by M23. This is order, not rebellion. AFC/M23, formed in 2012 to shield Tutsis from ethnic hate, now protects all—Hutu, Nande, Shi. Yes, they have started building roads and clinics (Africa Intelligence, April 2025). Kinshasa calls them rebels. I call them saviors. This story echoes thousands. For Jean de la Croix Kabango, in 2022, militias burned his South Kivu village. He is a Munyamulenge, Tutsi, labeled “foreigner” despite centuries in Minembe plains. His sister lost her home; officials denied her citizenship. Hate speech spurred attacks—Wazalendo militias called them “snakes”. AFC/M23 intervened. They saved his nephew, 12, from a blazing fire outbreak. Now, in Goma’s liberated communes, he goes to school. M23’s governance has restored their dignity. Kinshasa sends only violence. The Washington Declaration doesn’t speak for them. It addresses Rwanda’s concerns of the FDLR, a militia linked to the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, which was openly reintegrated within DR Congo’s army. Rwanda’s push to neutralize this existential threat is legitimate, Kigali deserves security. But the declaration isn’t between Kinshasa and AFC/M23. It ignores their demands: persecution of Tutsis and safety for all. We should differentiate issues. Rwanda signing a declaration of principles, has nothing to do with AFC/M23. It’s between a state (DRC) whose president publicly declared the intention to attack another country (Rwanda) and cause regime change. So, the declaration is about Rwanda’s existential threat. Washington declaration doesn’t concern AFC/M23 and I hope those in corridors of power in Kinshasa understand this. They should be concerned with the recent truce between M23 and FARDC secured by Qatar only to be broken by FARDC shelling Goma’s outskirts on April 11. Such actions prove Kinshasa doesn’t want peace. AFC/M23’s peace in liberated areas threatens Tshisekedi’s power. The Qatar truce’s all out collapse demands urgent action. The Washington Declaration offers no solution for AFC/M23, Kinshasa must know this. In 2013, M23 trusted the Nairobi Accords, seeking reintegration. Kinshasa jailed their fighters. Trust was broken. AFC/M23 must negotiate its own Declaration of Principles with Kinshasa, demanding for their own rights. AFC/M23 must act on. They’ve proven peace is possible—Goma’s markets, Lake Kivu’s calm waters, Rutshuru’s fields show it. Kinshasa’s shells won’t stop their cause. The Washington Declaration content, rightful for Rwanda’s security, has no clauses on AFC/M23’s struggle. It’s not AFC/M23’s fight. It’s movement of Congolese people tired of persecution, a people without any service from the central government, a people hungry for a new DR Congo. The DR Congo-Rwanda Washington Declaration is a necessary step for Rwanda’s security, not a solution for eastern DR Congo’s pain. It binds Kinshasa and Kigali to tackle the FDLR, a militia responsible for 1994 genocide against the Tutsi now part of DR Congo’s army. That’s why they signed it—to protect Kigali’s sovereignty. The declaration pulls Kinshasa to admit FDLR’s danger, urging them to drop hate speech against Kigali and abandon reckless threats of regime change in Rwanda, which only fuel tension. AFC/M23’s cause remains untouched, and they must press on alone The path is tough. Kinshasa’s aggression looms. But AFC/M23’s liberated zones shine. For Jean de la Croix Claude, M23 must lead. Their cause, is his cause and his justice. Washington’s deal is right, DR Congo has questions to answer Rwanda’s grievances, not AFC/M23.

Opinions

Should the DR Congo-Rwanda declaration stop AFC/M23’s cause?