There can be no meaningful peace process in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo when one party continues to treat a ceasefire as a public relations tool rather than a binding commitment. The latest bombing of populated areas in North Kivu by the Kinshasa regime and its allies is a stark reminder that, without accountability, every diplomatic effort risks becoming little more than theatre. The reported drone attacks in the Rumangabo area, including the destruction of a camp for Virunga National Park rangers and damage to civilian-populated areas, should outrage every actor that claims to be invested in peace in the Great Lakes region. These attacks are not isolated mistakes but form part of a worrying pattern in which Kinshasa and its coalition speak the language of peace while acting in ways that deepen the conflict. For communities in eastern DR Congo, this is not an abstract diplomatic matter. It is the difference between life and death. It is the destruction of homes, the displacement of families, the terror of drones overhead, and the constant fear that any lull in fighting may be broken without warning. That such attacks are taking place while a ceasefire is supposed to be in force is a slap in the face of every effort to end a conflict that has devastated the region for decades. This is why the international community must abandon the comfort of vague statements. Those involved in brokering peace must be honest enough to name the violator when the ceasefire is violated. Neutrality should not mean blindness. Diplomacy should not mean silence in the face of deliberate provocation, and peace efforts cannot succeed if those undermining them are shielded from scrutiny. Kinshasa cannot continue to enjoy diplomatic indulgence while its actions contradict the very principles of dialogue and de-escalation. A government that claims to seek peace cannot at the same time sanction attacks on populated areas. It cannot expect the world to take its commitments seriously while its coalition continues to act with impunity. The mediators, regional bodies, and international partners involved in the peace process have a responsibility to protect the credibility of that process. That responsibility begins with calling out violations clearly and consistently, regardless of who commits them. Anything less sends the dangerous message that ceasefires are optional, that civilian suffering can be ignored, and that those with state power can escape accountability. If the current ceasefire is to mean anything, then those who break it must be firmly confronted. Kinshasa and its coalition must be told, plainly and publicly, that bombing populated areas is unacceptable, unlawful, and incompatible with any genuine search for peace.
