Congolese Rwandophones and their land are two sides of same coin – says scholar

Rwandan scholar, Prof. Jean-Pierre Karegeye, was recently interviewed by French media outlet TV5Monde about the borders between the DR Congo and Rwanda in the context of President Kagame's press conference in Benin. Karegeye reverted to the Berlin Conference, the persecution of Rwandophones in DR Congo, and the issue of citizenship. In the same interaction, a Congolese scholar, Prof. Bob Kabamba, responded to the same questions. TV5Monde's website published selected cross-reading excerpts from both scholars' interviews conducted by Christian Eboulé. The New Times brings you the full transcript of the interview with Dr. Karegeye. During a press conference held at the presidential palace in Benin on his visit to that country, Rwandan President Paul Kagame declared, among other things, that “a part of Rwanda was given to Congo and Uganda.” What is your view of the Congolese authorities' very strong reaction to President Kagame's statement? First, let us note that in the Congolese collective imagination, President Kagame is the symbol of absolute evil. This is cultivated primarily by Congolese politicians, who abdicate their responsibility by passing it on to Rwanda and Kagame. To borrow the words of Professor Josias Semujanga [professor of Francophone Literature at the University of Montreal, editor’s note], there is a threshold of acceptability on the Tutsi’s noxiousness. It is in this sense that I interpret the knee-jerk reactions whenever Rwanda is mentioned, or when Kagame speaks. The Rwandan President drew on historical facts to show the roots of the situation, which excluded Congolese Rwandophones in different periods. They are Congolese simply because they found themselves on the other side of the border [after the partition of Africa by the colonial powers at the Berlin Conference (November 1884-February 1885), editor's note]. What’s so scandalous about that? The partition of Africa during the colonial period is a self-evident truth. Kagame reminded us that M23 is not the cause of the Congolese crisis; it is an offshoot of it. M23 stems from a crisis, an identity conflict and systemic exclusion of ‘socially disqualified’ citizens, to quote the German philosopher and sociologist Georg Simmel. These citizens are treated like second-class citizens in their country. Without any way condoning the means they use to protect themselves; it would be important to highlight that they are compelled to defend themselves because the Congolese state refuses to protect them. In sum, President Kagame draws on history to warn of the exclusion of Rwandophones on the one hand, and to affirm cross-border cultural affinities on the other. At the end of the Berlin Conference (1884-1885), Africa was partitioned, and borders were drawn. On what legal or historical grounds does President Paul Kagame base his claim that Rwandan territories were given to Congo and Uganda? What is he referring to? Is he referring to the conventions signed in 1910 between the Congo Free State on one side, and England and Germany on the other? Again, President Kagame's response to the Beninese journalist was not about the revision of borders. His remarks consistently denounce the persecution of Congolese Rwandophones and at the same time they recall the phenomenon of shared culture between Rwandan citizens and Congolese Rwandophones. He is not thinking about past conventions; he is thinking about people, the persecution of a people. There is a growing desire to eliminate once and for all Rwandophone populations and primarily the Tutsi, ignoring the lessons of history. Some Congolese imagine that exterminating the Kinyarwanda-speaking community would improve the living conditions of Congolese citizens. Let's back up a little on the historical foundations of the border issue. The Berlin Conference partitioned Africa based primarily on the redistribution of resources. The fourteen countries present, especially France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal, were interested in King Leopold II's Congo. This conference is therefore important to understand the dynamics of certain conflicts and the birth of modern states in Africa. For example, King Yuhi V Musinga, who reigned in Rwanda between 1896 and 1931, was born in Sake, a region currently located in North Kivu. The toponymy of many territories in North Kivu are in Kinyarwanda. Congolese nationalists like Martin Fayulu and Noël Tshiani would need a Congolese Rwandophone or a Rwandan citizen to explain to them the meaning of places such as Nyiragongo, Karisimbi, Bunagana, Kishishe, Sake, Bwisha, Rucyuru, Nyamitaba, etc. In addition to the linguistic evidence, genealogy shows family links between the Rwandophone inhabitants of North Kivu and those of Rwanda. On the administrative level, the king of Rwanda used to appoint chiefs to administer North Kivu’s Rwandophone region. The Kingdom of Rwanda existed since the 13th century and expanded over time. The Congo Free State is an invention of King Leopold II, who ceded his personal estate to Belgium in 1908. This “property” of Leopold II is an agglomeration of several dismembered kingdoms such as the Lunda Empire, located between the DRC, Zambia, and Angola. The Kingdom of Congo spans Angola, the Republic of Congo, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Gabon. Rwanda was not exempt from this partition. The Brussels Convention of 1910 had defined the borders between the Belgian Congo, Uganda, and Rwanda-Urundi. It was during this period that Bufumbira became Ugandan territory; Bwishya, Gishari and many other regions were ceded to the Democratic Republic of Congo. The administrative documents still exist. Can you give us an overview of how the Burundian people also found themselves in the Congo? Also, within the framework of the Berlin Conference, the Burundian populations living in the Rusizi Plain in South Kivu found themselves on the Congolese side. They even have a traditional chief, Mwami Richard Nijimbere Kinyoni III. The Kirundi-speaking Congolese have maintained ties with their brothers and sisters who remained in Burundi, especially in the Cibitoke Province. However, migratory movements had intensified along all sides of Congo's nine borders The inhabitants also continued to circulate on both the Burundian and Rwandan sides for several reasons. The reality of a Tchokwe, an Alur, a Lunda, or a Bemba is the same as that of a Rwandophone or a Kirundiphone. Let's revisit President Kagame's statements. Are they in line with President Bizimungu's? What objectives is the Rwandan head of state pursuing by making such a declaration in the current context of growing tensions with the DRC? The former Tanzanian president, Julius Nyerere, also used the same Berlin argument to denounce the persecution of Congolese Rwandophones. He wanted the Congo to learn from the approach of managing the Maasai living between Tanzania and Kenya. Another example that comes to mind is that of two brothers, Arthur Moody Awori and Aggrey Siryoyi Awori. The former was Vice President of Kenya for five years, and the latter had served as Minister of Information and Technology in Uganda. But to be considered Congolese, Rwandophones must deny or hate their origins, their language, their culture, and their historical ties to (the Kingdom of) Rwanda. The principle of the intangibility of inherited colonial frontiers must be linked to the rights of the communities who own their land to live quietly and safely in their country as citizens. The debate over President Kagame's comments only makes sense to those who use hate as a political tool to hold on to power or get elected. As for President Bizimungu's remarks in September 1996, they need to be contextualized. At the time, there was a campaign against Rwandophones, involving mass arrests, torture, deportation, and the massacre of several Rwandophone Congolese in North and South Kivu. The then Vice-Governor of South Kivu, Lwabanji Lwaboshi Ngabo, gave the Banyamulenge population one week to leave Congo. It was while visiting a Banyamulenge refugee camp in Cyangugu that Bizimungu made his statement in relation to the Berlin conference. Not only in relation to the Banyamulenge, but generally in reference to the persecution of Rwandophones. He wanted to convey that if you drive out Rwandophone populations, drive them out with their lands. The Congolese authorities suspect Rwanda of seeking to increase the chaos and violence in the eastern DRC, with the aim of partitioning the country and annexing certain territories that are currently Congolese. What do you make of these suspicions? That is an absurd idea. What interest would Rwanda have in occupying Congolese land? Let's start with the premise that Rwanda is responsible for the chaos and violence in Congo. There are at least 260 armed groups. Are they supported by Rwanda? I am tempted to quote the Congolese professor, Bob Kabamba: “If there is a traffic accident in Kinshasa, one might say that it is Rwanda's fault.” To my knowledge, there is no declared border conflict between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. However, a border conflict between the DRC and Zambia resulted in armed incidents on multiple occasions in 1996, 2006, and 2016. Angola has occupied eleven Congolese villages in Kahemba territory. In both cases, there is never any mention of balkanisation or aggression. The Congolese say minerals are the main reason... If Rwanda is exploiting Congolese minerals, where is it selling them? Let us name these countries. The US, China, Canada? When we say that the DRC is a geological scandal, we are mainly thinking of the two Kasais and Katanga. There are minerals in Kivu, of course, as well as in Rwanda, but North Kivu and South Kivu are essentially agricultural regions. Regarding annexation, the Rwandan territory is sufficient for its population. Of course, Rwanda has a high population density. It is estimated that there are 483 people per km². The space is managed rationally. There is room for humans, green spaces, and animals. Tourists travel by the thousands to see the mountain gorillas. Density is not a barrier to development. Monaco has 2,855 inhabitants per km², Singapore has 12,226 inhabitants per km², the Vatican has 3,000 inhabitants per km², Bahrain has 2,641 inhabitants per km², Bangladesh has 1,709 inhabitants per km² and Barbados has 1,040 inhabitants per km². The Rwandan State is not captive to the fetishism of physical space. It has opened itself up to another reality, including connectivity. Despite its small territory, it positions itself well on several global issues. Rwanda is the second country in the world, after Bangladesh, to provide soldiers for UN peacekeeping missions. Rwanda is the first country in the world to use drones in healthcare delivery. Rwanda cooperates with several African countries such as Benin, the Central African Republic, and Mozambique by transcending the notion of proximity. Rwandan citizenship is not restricted to birthright and Jus sanguinis (citizenship determined or acquired by the nationality or ethnicity of parents.) To quote the Congolese philosopher Kä Mana, “Many tribal conflicts are rooted in the metaphysics of ties to the land.” In 2007, at the end of a visit to Kinshasa by a Rwandan delegation led by the Rwandan Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was received at the time by his Congolese counterpart, it was announced that a joint working commission would be established to work on the constitution of the boundary markers inherited from colonisation. Wasn't this an implicit way of acknowledging that there is a border problem with Rwanda? Does such a commission currently exist? Do you realise that the expression ‘inherited colonisation’ suggests a eulogy for the colonial period? I believe in Césaire’s equation: “colonisation = ‘thingification’. It even makes King Leopold II the founding father of an African country. But let's move on! To answer your question, as far as I know, there is no such commission, nor is there a border dispute. Rereading history or setting boundaries does not mean that there is a dispute. On the Rwandan side, however, a parliamentary commission was established in 2023 to reflect upon the root causes of the Rwandan-Congolese conflict. This commission wanted, among other things, to understand the animosity against Rwandans, and the stigmatisation of Rwandophones, especially Tutsi. This commission has also further identified the FDLR’s role in the dissemination of genocidal ideology in the Great Lakes region. As I said earlier, the backbone of the Republic of Rwanda is the age-old kingdom of Rwanda. The map of the DRC did not exist until April 30, 1885. To say that there are Congolese lands in Rwanda is an anachronism. Rwanda’s existence precedes Congo’s. Are there any lands of the former Kingdom of Rwanda in the DRC? Yes. But this is an unimportant question in the face of the principle of the intangibility of borders. However, the DRC’s Rwandophone populations and their lands must be considered as two sides of the same coin: you cannot have one without the other. To deny citizenship to a group because of its language and features is to deny its existence. It is chilling when (Congolese politician, Martin) Fayulu declares that the Banyamulenge do not exist. Citizenship is a fundamental right. For Hannah Arendt, being a citizen means the right to have rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is wishful thinking; but Citizens’ rights are Human Rights in action and are protected by states. Rwanda recently evacuated its citizens from Sudan in the wake of the war; it did the same thing in Libya. Following a traffic accident on the border between Tanzania and Rwanda, Rwanda dispatched helicopters to evacuate its citizens. You can imagine the plight of the Rwandophone Congolese who are denied even basic administrative status. Symbolically, it means reducing them to a state of nature. A Munyamulenge must walk for several days, far from his place of residence, to beg for an administrative document that he may or may not obtain because his nationality is said to be doubtful. The Congolese state is silent and complicit regarding the plight of its own people: this is one of the causes of the M23 war. Borders are intrinsic to the question of origins. However, the question of origins should not separate citizens into natives and non-natives. The republic is not a burrow. Borders are not walls between countries or peoples. The existence of borders in Europe does not prevent free movement. In Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, people on both sides have created their own spaces of communion. There is a shared cemetery between Goma and Gisenyi, as though to suggest that the destinies of the people are linked, even after death. The borders between Goma and Gisenyi, “petite et grande barrières”, are among the busiest in the world. To travel between the two Congolese cities of Uvira and Bukavu, the only fast and comfortable road used by the Congolese is the one in Rwanda. In addition to maritime transport across Lake Kivu, Congolese from Goma use paved roads from Gisenyi and Kibuye in Rwanda to get to Bukavu. There are, sadly, new deadly borders erected by some Congolese politicians: hate speech. We need to take them down before it's too late. For many years, some observers have held the view that lasting peace in the Great Lakes requires a revision of the current states' borders and a reconstitution based on the local populations' ethnic affinities. What are your thoughts on this? While it is an oxymoron and a humiliation for post-colonial Africa to derive the legitimacy of its borders from colonial practices that gutted societies, trampled upon cultures, confiscated lands, and murdered religions, to paraphrase Aimé Césaire in his Discourse on Colonialism, I do not believe that revising borders is a solution. Somalia doesn’t have ethnic groups. It is a group of clans with religious, linguistic, and cultural unity. But now the five hundred clans are smashing the Somali state to bits. Mauritius, with its mosaic of races, is not in danger. What is needed is responsible leadership, a societal project that places the citizen, not the tribal being, at its core. As long as there is corruption, exclusion, and misery, a scapegoat or an absolute evil will be invented. It is imperative that Belgium and Germany recall the historical context of Rwanda's partition and Congo's creation and assume their responsibility for the current uncertainties in the region. The Congolese state and MONUSCO must address the issue of the 260-armed groups more seriously and rigorously. The activities of the FDLR from within Congo are a serious concern for Rwanda. It should also be a serious concern for the DRC. It is imperative that the Congolese government get out of its epicurean politics, ‘politique de la jouissance’, and get involved in social and national security projects. Finally, regional integration must be encouraged.

News

Congolese Rwandophones and their land are two sides of same coin – says scholar