If the international community is serious about ending the decade-long conflict in eastern Congo, it must avoid mistaking momentum for substance. Rushing peace talks in a region beset by deep ethnic grievances, contested national identities, and regional proxy politics is more likely to paper over tensions than resolve them. A flawed peace process may buy a brief ceasefireâ€"but not peace.
The current negotiation timelineâ€"ten days between August 8 and 18â€"is wholly unrealistic. The M23 rebellion is not simply a military insurrection; it is the symptom of long-standing issues involving citizenship, marginalization of Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese, and exclusion from state institutions. Such structural problems cannot be resolved in a single round of talks, nor can they be negotiated away through technical deals and diplomatic photo-ops. The risk is that peace becomes an elite-level transaction rather than a people-centered transformation.
Furthermore, the M23's real leverage lies in its control of territoryâ€"including the symbolic strongholds of Goma and Bukavu. Ignoring this power dynamic in the name of expediency is a strategic error. Sustainable peace requires that the movement's political grievancesâ€"particularly around nationality rights, representation in public life, and protection of their communitiesâ€"be taken seriously. Dismissing these claims or insisting on immediate demobilization without reciprocal concessions will only incentivize the M23 to preserve its armed posture as a safeguard.
These risks are magnified by the broader regional context. In June 2025, the DRC and Rwanda signed peace agreement in Washington. Regional dynamics continue to play a significant role in the conflict, making it essential that neighboring states remain actively engaged in supporting a credible and lasting peace process. Yet the Doha process appears to be proceeding in a vacuum. Without strategic coordination between the Doha and Washington tracks, the peace process may produce incoherent agreements that are impossible to enforce.
The United States, as host and guarantor of the Washington Agreement, has a vital role to play in bridging these processes. A successful peace in eastern Congo hinges not just on silencing guns but also on aligning regional and domestic diplomacy. Washington should work closely with Doha to ensure that commitments made in one forum do not contradict or undermine the other.
Finally, the confidence-building measures outlined in the Declaration of Principles must go deeper than technical fixes. Prisoner exchanges and service restoration are importantâ€"but they are not sufficient. A genuine path to reconciliation must include the political integration of M23, protection of returnees, and affirmation of civil and political rights for all Congolese citizens, regardless of ethnicity or language. Peace without justice is simply a ceasefire with a countdown.
The stakes in eastern Congo are high, not only for the millions displaced and brutalized by war, but for the credibility of regional diplomacy. If the international community rushes a peace agreement that ignores the roots of the conflict, it will have paved the way for the next war.
Charles Kiiza
Source : https://en.igihe.com/opinion/article/rushed-peace-in-eastern-congo-risks-prolonging-the-war
