Rape and plunder of DRC: How EAC states betrayed a wounded neighbour

Soldiers from the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The war sucked in Congo's EAC neighbours. File photo.

By Jeff Otieno (email the author)

The Hotspots

North Kivu and South Kivu (Gross human rights violations on civilians, mainly killings and rape in all the four stages of war)
Forces involved: Zairean armed forces, rebels faithful to Laurent Kabila, anti Rwanda and Uganda rebels and Allied forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire comprising Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda soldiers.

Katanga also a hotspot in all the four stages (rape, killings, maiming and wanton destruction of property)
Forces involved: Zairean armed forces, anti Rwanda and Uganda rebels and Allied Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire

Kinshasa hotspot in first, third and fourth stages (killings and rape)
Forces involved: Congolese armed forces, Allied Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire,

Orientale Province, Equateur, Maniema and Bas-Congo Hotspot (Gross human rights violations mainly killing, rape and maiming)
Forces involved: Congolese armed forces, Allied Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire and Soldiers from Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia.

The Congo war that sucked three East African Community member states had four conflict stages, all playing a major role in the catalogue of gross human rights violations.
The stages are summarised below:

First Stage; March 1993–June 1996: Failure by the Mobutu regime to initiate the democratisation processes in Congo and the larger regional crisis.

The first period covers human rights violations committed in the final years of the regime of President Mobutu Sese Seko, as a result of its authoritarian rule and dismal performance in the democratisation process.

During this period, the unstable Central African state also experienced devastating consequences of the Rwandan genocide, particularly in the provinces of North Kivu and South Kivu.

Second Stage: July 1996–July 1998: First Congo War and the Allied Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (AFDL) regime.

The second period concerns gross human rights violations committed during the First Congo War and the first year of the regime established by President Laurent-Désiré Kabila.

This period had the greatest number of incidents in the whole of the decade under investigation, with 238 listed incidents.

The report says the information available confirmed the significant role of other countries in the First Congo War and their direct implication in the war, which led to the overthrow of the Mobutu regime.

At the start of the second stage period, serious violations were committed against Tutsi and Banyamulenge civilians, 19 principally in South Kivu.

This period was then characterised by the relentless pursuit and mass killing (104 reported incidents) of Hutu refugees, members of the former Armed Forces of Rwanda (later “ex-FAR”) and militias implicated in the genocide of 1994 (Interahamwe) by the Alliance des forces démocratiques pour la libération du Congo-Zaïre (AFDL) or Allied Forces for the liberation of Congo-Zaire.

The report adds that a proportion of the AFDL’s troops, arms and logistics were supplied by the Armée Patriotique Rwandaise or Rwanda Patriotic Army (APR), the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) and the Forces armées Burundaises or Burundian Armed Forces (FAB) throughout the Congolese territory.

This period was also marked by serious attacks on other civilian populations in all provinces without exception.

Third stage. August 1998–January 2000: Second Congo War
The third period involves a catalogue of violations committed between the start of the Second Congo War in August 1998, and the death of President Kabila.

This period included 200 incidents and was characterised by the intervention on the territory of the DRC of the government armed forces of several countries, fighting alongside the Forces armées Congolaises or Congolese Armed Forces (FAC) or against them.

There was also involvement of multiple militia groups and the creation of a coalition under the banner of a new political and military movement, The Gathering of Congolese for Democracy (RCD), which later split into smaller groups.

Fourth Stage: January 2001–June 2003: Towards transition

This final period lists 139 incidents committed, in spite of the gradual establishment of a ceasefire and the speeding up of peace negotiations in preparation for the start of the transition period on June 30, 2003.
During this period, fighting that had shaken the province of Ituri, in particular the ethnic conflicts between the Lendu and the Hema, reached an unprecedented peak.

The period was marked by clashes between the Congolese Armed Forces (FAC) and the Mayi-Mayi forces in Katanga province.

«La fin de seize ans d’impunité pour les vainqueurs au Rwanda»

Par SABINE CESSOU

Dix ans de meurtres, de viols et d’exactions en république démocratique du Congo (RDC) et une accusation d’éventuel génocide à l’encontre du Rwanda d’aujourd’hui : c’est ce que contient la version provisoire d’un rapport de 545 pages que n’a pas encore publié le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies aux droits de l’homme (HCDH), mais dont les fuites sont parvenues jeudi à la presse. Le document revient sur ce qui s’est tramé dans l’ex-Zaïre entre mars 1993 et juin 2003. Une période qui couvre les deux guerres du Congo, qualifiées de «guerre mondiale africaine» en raison du nombre de pays impliqués - 9 selon le rapport - mais aussi de victimes, qui se comptent par millions.

Rejeté jeudi comme «balivernes» par le gouvernement rwandais, le document met Kigali dans l’embarras. Il ouvre la voie à d’éventuelles poursuites pour «crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de guerre, voire de génocide». Si tous les regards se tournent de nouveau vers le Rwanda, il ne s’agit pas, cette fois, de se souvenir du génocide de 800 000 Tutsis par des milices hutues en 1994 mais du massacre systématique et prémédité par l’armée rwandaise, en territoire congolais, de dizaines de milliers de Hutus qui avaient fui le Rwanda par crainte de représailles tutsies. Le régime de Paul Kagame dément toute exaction en RDC, et affirme n’avoir fait que poursuivre dans l’ex-Zaïre les miliciens hutus génocidaires. Or, ce rapport du HCDH change un rapport de force et une écriture de l’Histoire, que décrypte pour Libération le sociologue français André Guichaoua, spécialiste de la région des Grands Lacs.

Pourquoi des fuites de ce rapport parviennent-elles maintenant à la presse ?

En fait, le rapport est congelé depuis plusieurs mois. Ces fuites sont habituelles, sur ce type de document, mais le plus surprenant aujourd’hui, c’est la réaction indignée des autorités rwandaises, alors qu’elles font pression depuis plusieurs semaines pour bloquer le rapport !

Que pensez-vous de l’accusation de génocide formulée à demi-mots par le rapport, à l’encontre d’une armée rwandaise accusée d’avoir massacré des Hutus en RDC ?

Des actes génocidaires ont été commis, c’est indéniable. Mais de tels actes ne font pas génocide. Si toutes les fois que des actes génocidaires étaient commis, on utilisait le terme de génocide, nous en aurions dix ou vingt par an. L’utilisation du terme est d’ailleurs laissée à l’appréciation des juristes par le rapport, qui n’a pas voulu franchir ce pas.

Quoi qu’il arrive, il me paraît très difficile de mettre sur le même plan la reconnaissance d’un éventuel génocide des Hutus au Congo avec celui des Tutsis au Rwanda. Il n’y avait pas les mêmes objectifs, la même finalité. Ce qui est plus ennuyeux encore, c’est le risque de globalisation de toutes les victimes des deux guerres du Congo. Entre 1998 et 2003, la grande guerre africaine a fait entre 3 et 4 millions de victimes, essentiellement civiles, dont on ne peut pas attribuer la responsabilité au seul Rwanda. Or, l’amalgame risque d’être fait dans les comptes rendus et l’utilisation politique du rapport.

Paul Kagame va-t-il de devenir un paria sur la scène internationale ?

Son affaiblissement est déjà réel. La dernière présidentielle au Rwanda, qu’il a remportée avec 93% des voix, n’a pas été une fête, en grande partie à cause de la manière dont la campagne a été menée. Les motifs d’énervement du candidat-président tenaient déjà à l’actualité qui se profilait, avec ce rapport. Il existe par ailleurs un désenchantement des bailleurs de fonds. Le département d’Etat américain a adressé des critiques au Rwanda. Or, ce pays ne tient que grâce à deux ressources : l’aide extérieure et les minerais du Kivu, région de la RDC située à la frontière du Rwanda. C’est le fait de le dire qui pose problème aujourd’hui.

Pourquoi les autorités rwandaises se montrent-elles aussi nerveuses concernant ce rapport ?

Parce qu’il met fin à seize ans d’impunité du camp des vainqueurs au Rwanda. Si le Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda (TPIR) avait joué son rôle et lancé des procédures sur les massacres de Hutus, des actes connus et documentés, le sentiment profond d’une incroyable injustice n’existerait pas aujourd’hui. Parce que le Rwanda a bénéficié du laxisme de la communauté internationale, il se retrouve dans une situation très complexe aujourd’hui. Des Rwandais, mais aussi des pays comme l’Espagne ou le Canada, dont des ressortissants ont été tués, et qui n’ont jamais osé porter plainte, vont pouvoir le faire.

Le rapport de forces idéologique a changé, et risque de se solder par une multiplication des procédures. Même des observateurs des Nations unies ont été assassinés par le Front patriotique rwandais [FPR, au pouvoir à Kigali, ndlr], et les dossiers ont ensuite été enterrés. Tout cela peut ressurgir. On a mis sous le boisseau un nombre incalculable de procédures, alors que tout le monde savait que des crimes importants avaient été commis. On a construit une success story rwandaise, un noyau de croyances qui s’est consolidé avec la caution tacite des Nations unies. Si le TPIR avait fait son travail, on n’en serait pas là.

Will United Nations Cover-Up Rwanda’s Congo Genocide?

By Milton Allimad

Let's see how Paul Kagame's chief apologists, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ban Ki-Moon, and Tony Blair help the co-architect of Rwanda’s genocide spin his way out of the accusations in a yet-to-be published United Nations report, that his troops committed genocide in Congo during the 1990s.

The report is scheduled to be released in October and according to media accounts it exhaustively documents the massacres of tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Hutu refugees who had fled to Congo after Rwanda’s President Juvenal Habyarimana
was assassinated --a dastardly deed which courts in France and Spain have pinned on Kagame-- Rwanda erupted in massacres and the country was overrun by an invading army from Uganda.

Hundreds of thousands of Rwandans –an estimated almost one million—were murdered and the majority is reported to have been Tutsis.

The commander of the army which invaded Rwanda on October 1, 1990—the army was actually units of Uganda's regular national army which was then renamed the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF)-- was Paul Kagame. He trained at Fort Leavenworth, in the U.S. shortly before the invasion, during the Bill Clinton Administration. The spiritual commander and financier of the operation was Uganda’s President, Gen. Yoweri K. Museveni.

There were also news accounts, including in The New York Times that Uganda provided the missile used to shoot down Habyarimana’s presidential plane, also killing the president of Burundi.

Rwanda's history has been sad and brutal. Kagame's family fled massacres directed at Tutsis in the early 1960s when the Hutu majority overthrew a Tutsi monarchy. He grew up in Uganda. In the 1980s, he was recruited along with thousands of other Tutsi refugees into Museveni's rebellion in Uganda. When Museveni came to power in 1986, the fighters were rewarded.

Kagame later became chief of Uganda's military intelligence.

Many analysts predicted that the 1990 Museveni-sponsored invasion of Rwanda could spark unspeakable massacres. In a short piece I published in The New York Times on April 20, 1994, I offered an analogy similar to the following: What if Pakistan were to sponsor an invasion of India, and have the Indian prime minister assassinated, while units of the Pakistan army --comprised of Muslims and renamed, for this comparison, the India Patriotic Front-- moved to seize Delhi? What would happen to India's Muslim minority?

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/20/opinion/l-don-t-write-off-rwandan-violence-as-ethnic-uganda-shares-blame-841447.html


In fact, in past columns I maintained that Kagame and Museveni planned the assassination of Habyarimana knowing full well that it would invite the mass murder of Tutsis by the Hutu majority; Museveni's army, on loan to Kagame under the name
Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF) would then march into the capital of Kigali and "restore" law and order as "liberators." The arsonists would put out the fire and take the credit for extinguishing a conflagration they had ignited.

France's first counter terrorism judge, responsible for looking into serious crimes, Jean-Louis Bruguière in 2006 came to the same conclusion and indicted Kagame: that Kagame planned the assassination hoping it would provoke the killings and chaotic conditions that would follow --begging for a "liberator" -- macabre as it may sound.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6168280.stm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=11133

Bill Clinton’s administration went with the program. Museveni and Kagame had sold the master plan as a great opportunity to dislodge the snobbish French influence from Central Africa. That's probably why Clinton even opposed a robust international intervention plan to halt the massacres--it would have ruined the Museveni/Kagame script and denied the RPF the opportunity to be hailed as heroes. What better explanation could there be to stand by and watch the killings which lasted several weeks?

One million or so dead? Under the Clinton-Museveni-Kagame reckoning, this was acceptable collateral damage.

U.S.-supported Gen. Museveni has been a genocidal killer in the East and Central Africa region for more than a quarter century now; that is without debate. He is also co-architect of the Rwanda calamity.

Museveni has been consistent. In Uganda, he confined a whole ethnic population, the Acholis in camps where several
hundreds of thousands died over more than two decades. In Congo, his army committed genocide in eastern Congo when it occupied part of the country—estimates of Congolese death as a result of the war unleashed by Uganda and related fighting and calamities reached seven million.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) found Uganda liable for what amounts to war crimes and awarded Congo $10 billion compensation in 2005. The International Criminal Court also started its own investigation, according to an article in The
Wall Street Journal on June 8, 2006.

http://www.friendsforpeaceinafrica.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=110

Apparently the ICC investigation of Museveni's role in the crimes for which the ICJ found Uganda liable has been blocked by Moreno Ocampo, the prosecutor whose ethics are highly questionable, given that he is alleged to have raped a female journalist in South Africa.

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/articles/2009-Spring/full-DeWaalFlint.html

Without Ocampo, it’s possible that Museveni may well be on his way to the Hague to answer for the Congo crimes. (We can
expect Uganda to also announce that it would also withdraw its forces from Somalia if the ICC were to ever indict Museveni).

Yet Kagame, from early on, also provided evidence that he was up to the task. He had learned well from his mentor, Museveni, even before he came to power in Rwanda in 1994.

In fact, Raymond Bonner, a New York Times correspondent once wrote an article during the tumultuous period in 1994 after the massacres, about the RPF arriving at a location in Rwanda and literally killing everyone in sight. Bonner must have found this incident confusing. Why would the celebrated "liberators" kill Tutsis as well as Hutus indiscriminately if Hutus were the "bad" guys?

Of course, it would only make sense if Kagame's primary goal was to escalate the body count. After all, later, when the skulls were stacked up in the memorial museums, who would know who was a Tutsi or Hutu victim? Who would know who were
killed by Habyarimana's defeated and discredited army, or the Museveni army on loan to Kagame? To the outside world, all the skulls would represent victims of the “evil” Hutus and had it not been for Kagame’s victory, so goes the narrative, many
more skulls might have joined the pile.

Now we come to the United Nations report which is due to be published in October. The world is a very funny place. The international community pretends that there is need for a United Nations report to show that Kagame's army and its Congolese
militia allies, committed genocide in Congo when it pursued the more than one million Hutus who fled to Congo when the RPF seized control. Forget that The New York Times' Howard French –who was an exception; the rest of the Times’ reporters,
including Donatella Lorch, sold the narrative of Kagame as liberator-- wrote a number of articles about the massacres at the time. There were even accounts of bodies being meticulously incinerated.

Why was there a cover-up of the massacre of Hutus? Because Kagame was sold to the international community as the "good guy" who had liberated Rwanda from the "evil" Hutus. Admitting that Kagame was a mass killer would undermine the Hollywood script and make supporting him unpalatable.

So, the fiction blossomed, with people like Bill Clinton, now a former president, and Blair, a former prime minister, extolling Kagame's virtues, in articles, or having Kagame as an invited speaker at Clinton's annual Global Initiative meetings. Seated next to other world leaders in a fine suit, who could believe that Kagame’s hands were so bloodstained?

Indeed, many Hutus committed the terrible massacres that followed Habyarimana’s assassination in 1994, four years after Uganda invaded Rwanda. Not all Hutus could have participated in these murders. Yet, a whole ethnic population, Hutus, who make up perhaps 85% of the population, have been demonized and unfairly tagged with the “genocide” label.

As witnessed in the run-up to the recent sham elections in Rwanda, the Kagame regime has elevated Hutu demonization to national policy--anybody who questions the established narrative of the 1994 tragedy is a "genocide denier" and disqualified
from national elections, or murdered, as in the case of some opposition leaders there.

So, it’s not surprising that Kagame would like to have the United Nations report implicating his army in genocide of Hutus in Congo blocked. It's also not surprising that some elements within the United Nations, including reportedly Secretary General
Ban Ki-Moon want to have reference to "genocide" removed from the report; the international community is obligated to act against those who commit genocide.

Ban Ki-Moon, probably encouraged by Washington and London, apparently sees genocide as an inconvenience that the United Nations does not need to deal with—not unless it involves Sudan’s Omar Hassan al-Bashir and Darfur of course.

This week Rwanda threatened to pull out its troops that are part of peace keeping operations in the Sudan's Darfur region. Ban Ki-Moon has urged Rwanda not to withdraw. What a repulsive response. The United Nations should be demanding that
Rwanda withdraw its army, given the alleged crimes in the impending UN report, instead of begging it to maintain its forces in UN peace keeping. Ban Ki-Moon’s appeal to Rwanda is shameful and contemptible—it confirms that when his term
expires at the end of the year, he should be eased out of the job as world’s top diplomat.

At the end of the day, Ban ki-Moon is probably doing the bidding of the powers in Washington and London. It’s also worth watching Kagame’s chief apologists, Clinton and Blair, who have both remained silent since Rwanda’s sham elections which Kagame “won” by 93% .

People who genuinely care for Africa and for the citizens of Congo and Rwanda should not remain silent when the West and a handful of individuals play with the lives of millions of Africans.

The Internationally-created special court prosecuted the killers of Tutsis. Now it’s time to bring to book the killers of Hutus, including the foreigners who aided and abetted the ugly deeds. A good start is to release the United Nations report without whitewashing by Ban Ki-Moon.

Editor’s Note: Please call the United Nations at (212) 963-1234 press “0” and ask for the Secretary General’s office. Let Ban Ki-Moon know that he shouldn’t obstruct potential prosecution of crimes against humanity. Call the U.S. Department of State
at (202) 647-2492 and ask for Secretary of State Clinton’s office and also let her know you don’t want your taxpayer money used to support a regime like Kagame’s, which just conducted sham elections and is now implicated in genocide. Please forward this article widely.

RWANDA'S reckoning has come and it is long overdue

Accusations of genocide now levelled in a leaked UN report at its Tutsi-led government are no surprise to the peacekeepers or aid workers who have lived and worked in the tragic crucible of eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and heard the terrible testimony of the massacres there.

The report, due for release next month, details the systematic killings of tens of thousands of ethnic Hutus inside the DRC in the wake of the 1994 genocide. Most of the incidents that the report documents are at least 15 years old. For most of that time, they have been considered simply too explosive to be scrutinised publicly, adding to a conspiracy of silence about the Tutsi crimes of the Rwandan genocide.

Rwanda proclaims itself furious that investigators did not go there to ask questions. Would they have got any answers? Rwanda is a virtual police state where the human rights community is among the most cowed in the world. To challenge the accepted narrative of the Tutsis as Rwanda's liberators is to "perpetrate genocidal ideology" and is forbidden.

Rwanda is outraged to be judged by the UN, an organisation that so dramatically failed it in its hour of need. Here it may have a point. But Rwanda has too long relied on the world's guilt over failing to stop the genocide to avoid scrutiny of its more unpalatable behaviour.

Paul Kagame, the Rwandan President and leader of the troops accused of genocide, has been adept at milking this, becoming the darling of Western governments and the recipient of billions in aid. Britain, in particular, has long been enamoured by him, despite evidence that millions of pounds of British aid helped to fund his plunder of natural resources in Congo, contributing to millions of deaths in the war there.

Will this report change anything? As the authors note, it is up to an independent court to decide whether what happened was genocide.

That court could be the International Criminal Court, to which Congo is a signatory. Rwanda, intriguingly, is not.

Justice for Rwanda has been victor's justice until now, but that narrative has a potent challenge.

The Times

UK complicit in bankrolling Congo conflict

As the Guardian reported last week, a 600-page report by the UN high commissioner for human rights was leaked, documenting the role of Rwanda in possible genocide in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo in the late 1990s (Leaked UN report accuses Rwanda of possible genocide in Congo, 27 August). This has seismic implications for British foreign and development policy towards Rwanda, which the present government needs to take extremely seriously.

Since the 1990s the Paul Kagame regime has represented itself as the progressive and modernising "Singapore of Africa", courting international support and legitimacy in the aftermath of the 1994 Rwanda genocide. Yet, alongside the suppression of human rights domestically, it has continued to play a direct and indirect military role in North Kivu, both in pursuit of Hutus who fled Rwanda in 1994 and natural resources that have bankrolled Rwanda's "economic miracle". All the while, the British government has continued to unquestioningly back Kagame, being Rwanda's largest source of overseas development aid. It has failed to recognise the complicity of Britain in effectively bankrolling a conflict in the Congo that has lead to millions of deaths.

The argument is simple: 1) More people have died in the conflict in the eastern Congo than in any war since the second world war; 2) The UN report provides evidence that Rwanda and Paul Kagame are directly and inextricably implicated, not only in fuelling that conflict, but in possibly carrying out the most serious crime in international human rights and humanitarian law – genocide; 3) The UK – its taxpayers and voters – are Kagame and Rwanda's biggest international supporters, largely unconditionally, and David Cameron and his colleagues continue to take annual Conservative party summer holidays to promote Rwanda's international reputation.

Dr Alexander Betts,

University of Oxford

Why No One Wants to Upset Paul Kagame

Mark Leon Goldberg

The big news out the UN today is that top UN Human rights official Navi Pillay announced she will delay the release of a controversial report about Rwanda's actions in the Congo (then Zaire) from 1993 to 2003. The so-called Mapping Report is an attempt to document alleged atrocities that occurred during the DRC's long civil war, of which DRC's neighbors played a lead role. A draft of the report, leaked last week to Le Monde, alleges that the Rwandan military committed genocide against Rwandan hutus who fled to the DRC. At the time, a Tutsi militia, led by Paul Kagame, defeated Hutu forces that committed genocide against Rwandan Tutsis. Kagame, of course, was recently elected to his third term as president of Rwanda.

To put it lightly, this did not go over well in Kigali. The Rwandan government has threatened to pull its troops out of all peacekeeping missions should the final draft of the report include the genocide allegation. As the Rwandan foreign minister cynically informs Phillip Gourevitch, “If you’re going to accuse our army of being a genocidaire army, don’t use us for peacekeeping.”

This is a threat that the United Nations has to take seriously. Rwanda has over 3,000 troops deployed to UN peacekeeping missions, making it the eighth largest troop contributing country to UN peacekeeping. Rwandans make up the single largest contingent of the peacekeeping force in Darfur--a mission that is already struggling. It is no wonder that Pillay decided to delay its release.

This episode goes to show how relatively small countries can punch above above their diplomatic weight class if they participate in UN peacekeeping. There is simply not a global surplus of peacekeepers. (And African forces are in particularly high demand.) Unless global powers raise the political cost of Rwanda making these kinds of threats, the UN will have little interest in crossing Kagame.

To wit, here is the Secretary General responding to a question about the Rwanda issue at a press stakeout earlier today.

Q: Sylvia Westall from Reuters, I wanted to ask you about Rwanda. Could you comment on Rwanda’s threat they may pull out their troops of UN peacekeeping missions starting in Darfur if they are accused of genocide in this upcoming report and if this does happen what will the UN do?

SG: First of all, the United Nations is very grateful to such a strong support and contribution of the Rwandan government to send their men and women as peacekeepers in UNAMID in Darfur and in UNMIS in Sudan and many other places, at least five missions they they are now taking part. It is very important, and I sincerely hope that such support and contribution will continue for peace and security in the region. The peace and security in Darfur and Sudan and elsewhere has implications, very important implications, for peace in the wider region. We are going to closely coordinate and work with President Kagame. He has been leading this leadership and he has been participating as one of the very important African leaders, not only in peace and security, but also as one of the co-chairs of MDG advocacy group and I am very much appreciative of his leadership.

S Africans stake claims to Congolese oil

By William Wallis and Simon Mundy in Johannesburg

Published: August 1 2010 18:05 | Last updated: August 1 2010 19:43

Women wash clothes at Tchomia on the Congolese shore of Lake Albert, the disputed site of vast oil reserves

The Democratic Republic of Congo’s volatile Ituri province is already home to a gold rush. Now, prospectors are staking claims to oil proved to exist in vast quantities under Lake Albert on the other side of the disputed border with Uganda.

In their latest incarnation, the prospectors are South African. Big names from Johannesburg have emerged as triumphant in the latest round of a long battle for control of exploration rights and knocked Ireland’s Tullow Oil off its perch.

According to a production-sharing agreement seen by the Financial Times, Khulubuse Zuma, nephew of Jacob Zuma, South Africa’s president, signed for Caprikat, one of two British Virgin Islands-registered companies which paid $6m (€4.6m, £3.8m) for control of rights awarded by Joseph Kabila, Congo’s president in June. Michael Hulley, lawyer to the South African president and business associate of his nephew, signed for Foxwhelp, the other company.

Advising Khulubuse Zuma on the deal was Mike Willcox, chief executive of Mvelaphanda Holdings Ltd, the company of Tokyo Sexwale, billionaire businessman and South Africa’s housing minister. Foxwhelp lists its address at an office in Johannesburg registered to Mr Sexwale, although Mr Zuma told the FT Mr Sexwale was not personally involved.

The deal offers a potential bonanza. Tullow is already developing a block on the other side of Lake Albert with an estimated 2bn barrels of oil. The terms of the agreement are highly favourable to the new entrants, which can expect significant profits.

The South African and Congolese governments’ interests dovetail neatly. South Africa has long sought commercial gain from its involvement in peacemaking efforts in Congo, and has been seeking a foothold in Africa’s new oil provinces.

For Mr Kabila, bringing in well connected business people from the continent’s economic powerhouse potentially buttresses him against some of his more hostile neighbours.

But not everybody is happy. The deal has raised fresh concern among western donors about the way Congo is managing its vast mineral wealth. Local interests in Ituri province – host to some of the worst massacres of the 1998-2003 war – are also up in arms. FTSE-listed Tullow, which has been battling for four years to activate exploration rights in the same area has responded furiously.

Mr Kabila never approved Tullow’s licence, for which the company paid $500,000 in 2006, and was reportedly holding out for more cash.

Representatives of the Irish company say they have sought to persuade Kinshasa of the benefits for stability as well as logistics of developing the shared oilfield jointly with Congo’s former enemies in Uganda.

“There aren’t going to be two pipelines for the oil export: one Ugandan and one Congolese,” Tim O’Hanlon, Tullow’s vice- president for Africa, told the FT. “This is one geological resource, one commercial reserve, one community of Africans around one isolated lake with a border down the middle.”

Complicating matters further, one of the blocks was also claimed by Divine Inspiration, another South African group.

“Our original contract is still absolutely valid. We don’t accept the second contract on top of ours, let alone the third,” Mr O’Hanlon said, adding that, if necessary, the company would defend its claim using legal channels.

Andrea Brown of Divine Inspiration said her group paid a $2m signing bonus for one of the blocks only after the Congolese government had cancelled Tullow’s original contract. She, too, is seeking compensation.

Lambert Mende, Congo’s information minister, has dismissed criticism of the deal by both companies as sour grapes.

Businesspeople and diplomats in Kinshasa believe the new licence holders could attempt to sell on quickly to experienced operators such as Italy’s ENI.

But Khulubuse Zuma said he had no intention of selling.

He told the FT that he planned to merge Caprikat and Foxwhelp into a single entity called Congo Oil and bring “new players” into the new company’s shareholding structure.

“As an example, if we see PetroSA [South Africa’s state oil company] as being strategic and adding value, they will be invited,” he said.

“Also, Congolese entrepreneurs, if we feel they will add value, we will invite them too. Every expertise will be included.

Le commerce équitable expliqué aux Congolais

Par Hugo Kitenge, Ph.D (c.)

Introduction

Le fonctionnement actuel de l’économie mondiale souffre de déséquilibres de plus en plus flagrants qui affectent particulièrement les producteurs de produits agricoles tropicaux, victimes des politiques agro-industrielles basées essentiellement sur les rendements et le profit. Les prix et les conditions d’achat leur sont imposés sans négociation et le plus souvent, ces prix d’achats ne couvrent pas même les coûts de production. Face à ce constat l’application du commerce dont ses systèmes de garantie sont nombreux et l’enjeu d’une harmonisation est majeur. La collaboration des grands réseaux internationaux de commerce équitable, le développement de labels équitables régionaux et nationaux, notamment au Sud et l’implication régulatrice des pouvoirs publics peuvent ouvrir des pistes. A quoi sert le commerce équitable ? Quel est l’impact local du commerce équitable ? Est-il encore pertinent ?

Chapitre 1 : Définition du commerce équitable

Le Commerce équitable est un partenariat commercial qui se veut une alternative au commerce international traditionnel visant de parvenir à un développement harmonieux et durable des producteurs défavorisés et marginalisés. Pour cela, il offre de meilleures conditions commerciales, en attirant l’attention du public et en menant des campagnes.

En contrepartie, les producteurs s’engagent à respecter certaines règles sociales (interdiction du travail forcé et de l’exploitation des enfants, respect de la déclaration de l’Organisation Internationale du Travail sur les droits fondamentaux des travailleurs) et environnementales.

1- Les principes du commerce équitable ?

Les règles du commerce international font peser sur les petits producteurs marginalisés, une pression de plus en plus forte contre laquelle ils n'ont pas les moyens de lutter. Le commerce équitable propose un nouveau modèle basé sur une relation plus équilibrée entre les différents partenaires commerciaux. Soutenu par les consommateurs, ce commerce garantit aux producteurs des pays en voie de développement l'achat de leurs marchandises à un prix " juste" à l'abri des fluctuations du marché.

Le commerce équitable repose donc sur cinq principes fondamentaux : tout d’abord assurer une juste rémunération du travail des producteurs et artisans les plus défavorisés ensuite garantir le respect des droits fondamentaux des personnes (refus de l'exploitation des enfants, du travail forcé, de l'esclavage...), instaurer des relations directes, durables et transparentes entre partenaires économiques et aussi favoriser la préservation de l'environnement enfin proposer aux consommateurs des produits de qualité.

3- Quels sont les objectifs du commerce équitable ?

Le commerce équitable vise deux objectifs principaux : en premier temps créer et favoriser les conditions permettant aux agriculteurs des pays pauvres de développer eux-mêmes une activité économique rentable et pérenne en leur donnant un accès juste, direct et sans circuits intermédiaires spéculatifs aux marchés consommateurs des pays riches. Le commerce équitable se veut comme un levier de développement économique et une alternative aux actions d'aide et de charité humanitaires pour les personnes défavorisées mais capables de travailler. Tandis que dans un deuxième temps éveiller les consommateurs sur la puissance de leur pouvoir économique en tant qu'acheteurs afin qu'ils puissent dans leur consommation courante être acteurs d'une alternative économique mondiale favorisant le développement durable, l'éthique, le respect des travailleurs, le respect de l'environnement.

Chapitre 2 : Comment fonctionne le commerce équitable ?

1- Le respect des standards génériques

Tous les maillons de la filière équitable - importateurs, industriels - sont agréés et contrôlés par les organismes certificateurs FLO-Cert, FLO/Max Havelaar pour la France. Concrètement, cela signifie qu'ils se sont engagés contractuellement à respecter les standards internationaux génériques du commerce équitable. Ces standards sont décrits dans un cahier des charges minimum, auquel sont ensuite ajoutés des engagements propres à chaque groupe, selon ses besoins et ses possibilités. Il existe ainsi des standards génériques pour les producteurs de café, les exploitations de thé, les planteurs de bananes,...

2- Les maillons de la filière équitable

Pour les petits producteurs, la plupart du temps, le commerce équitable vient soutenir un processus de développement déjà initié par des producteurs qui ont fait le choix de s'organiser en coopératives pour faire face aux difficultés.

3- Les organismes de contrôle du commerce équitable

Dans l’organisme de contrôle du commerce équitable il y a le FLO International (Fairtrade Labelling Organisations) qui a été créée sous l'impulsion des initiatives nationales de certifications déjà existantes (Max Havelaar Hollande, Max Havelaar France, Fairtrade Etats-Unis, Transfair Allemagne). Pour chaque marché national, les deux organisations nationales/internationales sont complémentaires du point de vue du contrôle , ensuite le FLO-Cert :chargé de prise en compte, la certification et les contrôles, l'application des standards, qui a été créée par FLO International afin d'apporter les garanties de transparence et d'indépendance exigées par la norme internationale . L'entreprise contrôle et délivre la certification commerce équitable. Elle s'assure que les producteurs ont bien perçu une rémunération pour leurs produits comprenant le prix minimum garanti, qui permet de couvrir les coûts d'une production durable, ainsi que le versement de la prime de développement qui doit permettre aux producteurs d'améliorer leurs conditions de vie.

Chapitre 3 : Synthèse sur le commerce équitable

Les points forts du commerce équitable :

Le commerce équitable touche un public de plus en plus large et de nombreuses initiatives voient le jour : nouvelles filières, diversification des produits concernés et développement des réseaux de distribution. Ce dynamisme soutient un nombre croissant de producteurs engagés dans cette démarche : plus d’un million et demi en Afrique, Asie et Amérique Latine.
En outre les produits alimentaires et l'artisanat, le commerce équitable concerne également le secteur cosmétique (beurre de karité, huiles essentielles…), les compléments alimentaires, le textile et maintenant les services, avec l’organisation de voyages équitables et solidaires. On note alors le développement du commerce équitable qui se traduit par une augmentation du nombre de points de vente (boutiques spécialisées, grandes et moyennes surfaces, sites Internet de vente en ligne), des volumes de produits vendus et du nombre de références disponibles pour les consommateurs publics et privés comme exemple en France, on dénombre actuellement 250 points de vente spécialisés, des entreprises de vente par correspondance et de nombreux sites Internet consacrés partiellement ou totalement à la vente en ligne de produits issus du commerce équitable. Il ne faut pas non plus oublier la distribution via les réseaux des boutiques « bio » (près de 500), et bien sûr, plus de 10 000 grandes et moyennes surfaces qui distribuent des produits alimentaires.

En addition une notoriété qui s’affirme. Hier encore confidentiel, le commerce équitable voit sa notoriété s’accroître fortement depuis 2000. Cette progression spectaculaire s’explique par le travail permanent des acteurs du commerce équitable et le relais soutenu des médias

Ainsi que l’appui au développement du Sud dans l’amélioration du niveau de vie de 500.0000 personnes dont 1 500 000 producteurs, le développement social, environnemental et communautaire et la structuration et renforcement des organisations de producteurs ainsi qu’une ouverture pour le Nord du levier économique du commerce équitable , du premiers pas vers une sensibilisation à la solidarité international dans la prise de conscience politique des consommateurs

2-Les critiques sur le commerce équitable :

Le critique sur le commerce équitable se traduit sur l’implication croissante de la GMS (Grande et Moyenne Surface) dans la commercialisation des produits issus du commerce équitable qui pose de nombreuses questions, présente des opportunités, mais aussi des risques. Afin que les grands distributeurs ne dévoient pas la démarche, les opérateurs du commerce équitable doivent maintenir une capacité de négociation commerciale. Ils doivent également veiller à ce que les systèmes de garantie qu’ils peuvent mettre en place satisfont aux exigences de la démarche.

Comme l’institution d’Adam Smith nota qu'en augmentant les prix des produits « équitables », le commerce équitable incite de nouveaux producteurs à entrer sur le marché. Dès lors, cela augmente la production et fera baisser le cours des produits non équitables, au détriment des petits paysans qui ne produisent pas « équitable » et de l'environnement .De ce fait le même cas qu'une subvention sur des produits au cours bas, le commerce équitable ne fait qu'exacerber le problème en augmentant la production et en encourageant la poursuite d'activités non viables au détriment de productions réellement utiles.

Conclusion:

En guise l’impact du commerce équitable représente la nouvelle situation issue de l’ensemble des résultats et effets induisant des changements significatifs et durables, dans la vie et l’environnement des personnes ou des groupes pour lesquels un lien de causalité direct ou indirect peut être établi avec l’action de développement.

En 30 ans, le contexte du commerce équitable a fortement évolué sous l’effet d’une opinion publique favorable et d’un développement des parts de marché. De nouveaux acteurs et tout autant de stratégies, alliances et enjeux sont apparus. Aujourd’hui, bien que déjà considéré comme une démarche de développement permettant de réelles transformations sociales au Sud comme au Nord, le commerce équitable reste soumis à plusieurs défis.

Par HUGO KITENGE, Ph.D (c.)

___________________________________

Bibliographie

L'économie Sociale au Nord et au Sud.
de Jacques DEFOURNY, Patrick DEVELTERE et Bénédicte FONTENEAU.
Editions Ouvertures économiques, De BOECK Université, 1999.

L'Ethique dans les Relations Economiques Internationales
En hommage à Philippe Fouchard.
Centre René-Jean DUPUY pour le Droit et le Développement.
Centre De Recherche sur le Droit des Marchés et des Investissements Internationaux (CREDIM)
Editions PEDONE Paris 2006

Rwanda: Kagame has referred himself as Hitler

by Chief Editor|www.rwandarwabanyarwanda.over-blog.com

Kigali – President Paul Kagame on Wednesday accused foreign critics of trying to impose values on Rwanda as well as preferring ‘hooligans’ to govern the country – categorically singling-out opposition politician Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, RNA reports.

In a firry 45-minute address to mark the 16th anniversary of the 1994 Tutsi Genocide, Mr. Kagame accused the opposition – specifically naming Ms. Ingabire in person, of “political hooliganism”. The President also accused the critics of “abusing me” in the name of freedom of expression, but said he is “not bothered at all”.

“Some people here want to encouraging political hooliganism,” he said in English, before going into a tirade of attacks on Ingabire, as the crowd behind him was in constant applause.

“Some people just come from nowhere…useless people…I see every time in pictures some lady who had her deputy – a Genocide criminal, talking about ‘there is Genocide but there is another’…that is politics…and the world is also saying ‘the opposition leader’…”

The President was referring to Mr. Joseph Ntawangundi, the aide to Ms. Ingabire who was recently sentenced to 17 years for Genocide.

“They call me Hitler”

In a culmination with loud applause and clapping from the audience, President added: “To that we say a big no. And if anybody wants a fight, then we will give them a fight”.

The President dismissed the notion of free expression as promoted by his foreign critics such as campaign groups, saying Rwandans know what freedom means more than anybody else can teach them. He also attacked those he described as “constantly meddling in our politics” by propagating and making up “lies” about his government.

The President warned his critics of hiding behind freedom of express to “abuse me” but also added that he does not “give a damn”.

“They break tool, they call me Hitler…am not bothered at all…I just hold them in contempt,” he said amid more applause. He wondered how his critics attack him and “at the same time complain about press freedom?”

“You are even free to abuse people, you have no respect for anything…and you turn around to complain that you have no freedom to express yourself? …What more do you want to express about yourself or about others?”

“Ni watu gani awo?”

Mr. Kagame said “bad national politics converged with bad international politics” to cause what was being commemorated at today April 07 for the next three months.

“Who are these giving anyone here lessons honestly? …Ni watu gani awo? …who are these? …are these Rwandans complaining? …or have they sent you to complain on their behalf? …” he wondered in a mixture of English, Kinyarwanda and Swahili, amid applause.

He added: “These Rwandans you see here and elsewhere are as free, as happy [and] as proud of themselves, like they have never been in their lives.”

The President accused the west of preferring to criticize his government but do not want to be held responsible for their role in the Genocide. He also said the west was undermining “our dignity”, “our values” and “our pride”, arguing that democracy took time to get to the current level in their countries.

“They wake up in the morning, distort [the] situation, tell lies about everything…plus they are responsible for many of the things that put here today to commemorate this Genocide…,” he said.

“…yet when they talk about freedom of expression, they don’t want you to express yourself about their responsibility in this Genocide…What freedoms are you teaching me if you cant take responsibility for the politics that killed one million people in Rwanda.”

The Generals

He added: “I know those who say it and support that, know it is wrong. But [it] is an expression of contempt these people have for Rwandans and for Africans…that they think Africans deserve to be led by these hooligans.”

Turning his guns on the government officials who are fleeing the country apparently complaining about “no political space”, the President accused them of “running away from accountability”.

“These Generals fleeing the country should not be taken seriously,” he said, in apparent reference to ex-army chief Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa, who has political asylum in South Africa.

Earlier, Sports and Culture Minister Joseph Habineza also attacked the man behind the Hollywood movie ‘Hotel Rwanda’. Mr. Habineza did not name Mr. Paul Rusesabagina but was clearly referring to him.

Using poetic speech, the Minister also fired at the vocal opposition causing laughter in the otherwise somber occasion, saying they are blocking the reconciliation among Rwandans.

Paul Kagame lights the flame at the Kigali Genocide Memorial Center

Earlier, in the same stadium amid silence as thousands waited for the arrival of the President, loud cries could be heard from difference sections as survivors erupted in emotional bursts. They continued all through the hours-long function – indicative of survivors remembering their traumatic experiences.

At exactly 12:00, a minute silence was observed in the stadium, as with other areas where commemoration activities were ongoing.

A women survivor narrated how she has rebuilt her life very successfully over the last sixteen years. Her ordeal started on April 07 in Kigali, that by April 12, she could barely move herself as she had been machetted on several parts of her body. The advancing RPF rebels saved her and others on this date – providing all sorts of aid.

As part of the national vigil, local musicians including those from within and outside of Rwanda sung emotional songs composed for the commemoration. White was the top colour they were dressed in – with some combinations of black trousers.

A group of about 200 children – wearing white dresses and purple coverings on their heads delivered a moving presentation in a mixture of English and Kinyarwanda. All through the act coupled with singing, poems and messages of hope for the survivors, traumatic outbursts could be heard as people were driven up by emotion.

Earlier, President Kagame led a brief vigil at the Kigali Genocide Memorial Center where some 250,000 victims are laid to rest. In the courtyard of the Centre, the President lit a flame, which will burn for 100 days in symbolic recognition of the 100 days of the Tutsi slaughter.

Commemorative activities were taking place at village level across the country. In Kigali, city authorities organised a procession from Kacyiru to the national stadium in the afternoon.

Can Congo’s incompetent government make the most of new oil finds?

Apr 8th 2010 | KINSHASA | From The Economist print edition

IN THE wake of exciting oil discoveries on the eastern side of Lake Albert, which separates north-eastern Congo from Uganda, the Congolese government is trying to emulate its smaller neighbour by wooing foreign investors to help rejuvenate its country’s ramshackle but potentially rich economy. But Congo is not Uganda. Though the Ugandans have their share of headaches—for instance, the murderously messianic Lord’s Resistance Army that has ravaged parts of northern Uganda and neighbouring regions—they have at least a core of functioning institutions and infrastructure that the Congolese woefully lack. But Congo’s leaders are hoping a similar oil bonanza will give their country the boost it so badly needs.

At present Congo gets only 28,000 barrels a day, courtesy of a French company, Perenco, from onshore and offshore blocks along its sliver of Atlantic coastline between Angola to the south and the Angolan exclave of Cabinda to the north (see map). But the Congolese are looking to their bit of Lake Albert in the far north-east, where reserves of 2 billion barrels are said to await exploitation. Some of the biggest American, French and Italian oil companies are sniffing around, with Total apparently nosing ahead.

But developing Congo’s newly discovered oilfields will be tricky. For a start, the area is not safe. Two years ago seven people were killed in a couple of skirmishes between Congolese and Ugandans, in one case involving a British contractor, on Lake Albert. A South African-led oil consortium keen to explore the Congolese blocks has given the government $1.5 million to help it police its side of the lake.

Worse, Congo’s president, Joseph Kabila, who managed to be abroad when a recent glitzy oil conference took place in Kinshasa, his capital, has failed to woo or reassure investors. Several independent oil companies, including Tullow, the Irish one that has led the way in Uganda, have been waiting years for presidential decrees giving them the final go-ahead to start exploring blocks for which they have already paid “signature bonuses” (upfront initial payments), in some cases for around $2m a go. To make matters worse, some licences to exploit blocks are being disputed.

In any event, Mr Kabila’s government must tackle several other oil-related issues. It has to settle its differences—over demarcation of its coastal boundaries, for one thing—with Angola, the region’s new oil giant, whose co-operation it requires in oil and political matters. Congo’s parliament must pass a new hydrocarbons code to attract outside investors. With elections due in 2011, it could usefully offer a fresh bunch of signature bonuses to get some cash into the national coffers. And finally it needs to meet the conditions that would entitle it to full membership of the club whose members sign up to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. This requires governments and foreign energy and mining companies to publish full details of their dealings to ensure that corrupt secret payments are kept to a minimum. But Mr Kabila has yet to convince foreign companies that Congo is willing to play straight.

Des combats à Mbandaka

Par Le Potentiel

Week-end agité à Mbandaka, chef-lieu de la province de l’Equateur. Des combats opposent dans la ville même les FARDC aux éléments armés. A en croire des coups de fil en provenance de Mbandaka, le gouvernorat serait attaqué et des éléments armés se dirigeraient vers l’aéroport. Ainsi, après Dongo, Makanza, c’est maintenant le tour de Mbandaka de connaître des moments d’insécurité avec toutes les conséquences que cela entraîne tant sur le plan social, économique qu’humain. Il y a lieu d’arrêter cette spirale de combats meurtriers qui ne livre pas encore ses secrets.

Confusion à Mbandaka, chef-lieu de la Province de l’Equateur. Si au niveau de l’assemblée provinciale, on s’empoigne pour le bureau de cette instance provinciale, les habitants de la ville de Mbandaka se sont réveillés ce dimanche pascal sous les tirs de balles. Des coups de feu ont été entendus du côté de la résidence du gouverneur ; « le gouvernorat ». Il semble, selon les premiers éléments d’information parvenus à Kinshasa, les assaillants auraient occupé le « gouvernorat pendant quelques heures » avant de poursuivre en direction de l’aéroport. Selon Radio Okapi, les insurgés ont occupé l’aéroport après des combats à l’armes lourde.

Mais en début d’après-midi d’hier dimanche, des personnes jointes par téléphone, ont confirmé le déroulement des combats qui augmentaient d’intensité. On ignorait encore si dans leur progression, les assaillants ne se sont pas emparés de la « poudrière » pour expliquer justement cette intensité de combats.

Ces assaillants, selon un habitant de Mbandaka, sont arrivés à Mbandaka à bord d’un bateau «Malaïka», a-t-on appris à Kinshasa accosté au port de Bakinta en tirant des coups de feu nourris avant d’attaquer le gouvernorat, situé au bord du fleuve. Ils seraient une centaine.

Avant les combats de ce week-end, l’on se rappellera que les autorités provinciales avaient fait état de l’arrestation de certaines personnes de la bande à Ondjanli, ce mystérieux chef des Enyele, dont notamment son chauffeur. Le 24 mars 2010, dans une déclaration faite à la presse et reprise par le journal L’Observateur, le Commandant de la IIIè région militaire, le général Michel Ekutshu, avait reconnu que les accrochages avaient eu bel et bien lieu le jeudi 25 mars dans la localité de Bomongo, province de l’Equateur entre les FARDC et les insurgés Enyele.

Selon lui, les insurgés avaient tendu une embuscade aux éléments des FARDC dans la localité de Bomongo et les accrochages avaient fait 21 morts du côté des insurgés, tandis que du côté des FARDC, un soldat a été tué.

Que des combats se déroulent en plein centre de Mbandaka, c’est dire que la situation est sérieuse. Elle appelle de la part des autorités des FARDC, de Mbandaka et de Kinshasa, des réactions urgentes et efficaces.

DE DONGO A MBANDAKA

Cette situation inquiétante appelle également à une réaction efficace doublée d’une réflexion profonde. En fait, tout est parti de Dongo avant d’atteindre Mbandaka en passant par Makanza, sans oublier toutes les localités situées sur ce parcours. Si l’on peut reconnaître les efforts entrepris par les autorités tant nationales que provinciales pour rétablir l’ordre et l’autorité de l’Etat, il y a lieu de reconnaître qu’il y a là un goût d’inachevé. Que les véritables meneurs, les instigateurs ne sont pas encore arrêtés, ni neutralisés et procéderaient certainement par distraction pour progresser, selon leurs objectifs prévisionnels.

Sinon Mbandaka ne serait pas touché comme c’est le cas maintenant. De un.

La deuxième réflexion soulève une autre série d’interrogations. Qui sont ces assaillants qui savent se servir d’armes et donnent l’impression de bien faire « la guerre » pour narguer les FARDC ? Comment sont-ils approvisionnés en armes quand on sait qu’ avec la situation géographique, la RDC partage ses frontières avec le Congo Brazzaville et la RCA du côté de la Probince de l’ Equateur? Quel est leur effectif ? Comment expliquer que des « paysans » qui se sont battus pour des étangs de poisson deviennent subitement des « éléments armés » ? Il revient au gouvernement d’apporter désormais des réponses précises à ces interrogations.

Il est un fait indéniable que cette situation d’insécurité pose de nombreux problèmes aux populations de cette province de l’Equateur. Pour preuve, la navigation est rendue difficile à cause justement de ces combats. Des armateurs refusent de se hasarder à prendre le fleuve. Selon une mini-enquête réalisée par Le Potentiel, près d’une soixantaine de bateaux et autres embarcations sont bloqués à Kinshasa. Ils attendent de voir clair, d’être rassurés avant de voyager. Entre-temps, des produits sont bloqués à l’intérieur de cette province pendant que les habitants ne peuvent se ravitailler en produits manufacturés. Situation dramatique.

D’autre part, les combats de Mbandaka démentent en quelque sorte les déclarations du gouverneur de la province de l’Equateur. Au sortir de l’audience que lui avait accordée dernièrement le vice-Premier ministre, Professeur Adolphe Lumanu Mulenda Bwana Sefu, il avait déclaré ce qui suit : « La rébellion a pris fin dans ma province. On ne parle plus d’insurgés Enyele comme une bande organisée, mais bien plus comme un résidus de bandits ou des gens qui errent à la quête des moyens de survie. La province vit actuellement dans la tranquillité. Les insurgés qui, il y a trois mois, attaquaient des embarcations sur le fleuve Congo ». Autre fait curieux, les Enyele entrent à Mbandaka au lendemain de la confusion au sein de l’assemblée provinciale, avec la casse intervenue au siège de cette institution provinciale.

RECHERCHE DE LA PAIX

Devant cette situation, il y a lieu d’éviter qu’il y ait d’autres Mbandaka, Dongo et autres Makanza. Si la tendance consiste à affaiblir l’autorité de « Kinshasa », il revient au gouvernement central de bien lire ces signaux et de bien les interpréter.

Car on ne peut comprendre que des paysans qui se disputent des étangs de poissons, visent des objectifs civils et militaires. Il faut creuser la question.

Cette réflexion profonde ne doit nullement exclure la genèse de tous les conflits armés qui se sont déroulés dans notre pays. Ces forces obscures qui refusent que la RDC décolle ont plusieurs tours dans leurs manches. La vigilance doit être de rigueur pour qu’il n’y ait pas d’effets d’entraînement dans les autres provinces.

Comme il sied de le rappeler, en pareilles circonstances, toutes les institutions nationales sont interpellées et ont l’obligation politique de se saisir de cette question. Dans cet élan de recherche d’une paix durable sur toute l’étendue de la République démocratique du Congo.

En dernière minute, on apprend que les insurgés Inyele ont été délocalisés de l’aéroport.

L’Etat congolais prêt à céder ses parts dans 7 entreprises mixtes

Siège du Portefeuille à Kinshasa

Cette action rentre dans le processus de son désengagement des entreprises, selon le Copirep, structure technique chargée de la reforme des entreprises publiques. L’Etat se désengagera en particulier dans la Cimenterie de Lukala et dans la Société de développement forestier.

A côté de Cilu et de la Sodefor, il est prévu, selon les sources du Copirep, que l’Etat cède ses parts dans le pétrolier Cobil, dans Congo Chine Telecom, et Tourhotels, une société de tourisme et d’hôtellerie.

Les plantations et huileries du Congo ainsi que les chemins de fer des Uele sont aussi concernés.

L’Etat cédera-t-il la totalité de ces actions ? Peut-être la moitié d’abord dans certaines sociétés, comme il l’a fait avec la cimenterie nationale, affirme une source du ministère du portefeuille.

Pour la plupart de ces entreprises, l’expression canard boiteux leur colle à la peau depuis plusieurs années.

La cession d’actions ne déchargerait pas seulement l’Etat mais lui fournirait quelques millions de dollars. Une structure est déjà créée pour s’occuper de ces fonds.

Beaucoup de syndicalistes contactés estiment qu’un montant important de ces fonds devrait servir à payer les droits des travailleurs : arriérés et décomptes finals des employés dont la plupart attendent la retraite.

Outre les cessions, le gouvernement entend faire une concession. C’est celle de céder, pour quelques années, la Société Sidérurgique située à Maluku à un partenaire privé pour sa relance.

Copyright Radio Okapi

Congo Could Have Most of Debt Forgiven by June

$11-billion debt relief comes in wake of President Kabila moving to reform economy, better control spending

Scott Stearns |

Photo: AP

Second Vice-Chair of the G-24 Rogerio Studart, right, accompanied by G-24 Chairman Jean-Claude Masangu Mulongo, Governor of the Central Bank of the Democratic Republic of Congo, gestures during a news conference at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington (file)

The Democratic Republic of Congo could have the bulk of its external debt forgiven by June in a deal with foreign donors and the International Monetary Fund.

Repaying nearly $11-billion of debt is a heavy burden for an economy still recovering from fighting between 1998 and 2003 that killed more than 3 million people.

Economic growth last year was less than three percent, depressed by a larger-than-expected slowdown in mining and construction. Inflation last month was estimated to be nearly 50 percent in a country with an average per capita income of just more than $170 a year.

But President Joseph Kabila's moves to reform the economy and better control spending have the Democratic Republic of Congo on the verge of an historic deal that could see that nearly $11-billion debt slashed to just more than $2 billion.

International Monetary Fund mission chief Brian Ames says "steadfast actions" are still needed, but the country appears on target to secure debt forgiveness by its 50th independence anniversary on June 30th.

Ames says if the Kabila government continues to take necessary steps, the IMF and World Bank can prepare all the necessary documents for that plan to be in place by the end of June.

Seven years after a peace deal ended most of the fighting, Central Bank Governor Jean-Claude Masangu Mulongo says continuing violence in the eastern Kivu regions means Congo is still not fully benefiting from its mineral wealth.

Masangu Mulongo says Congo needs to find a way to manage its security problems, while at the same time keeping its macroeconomic framework on track.

The International Monetary Fund says President Kabila is improving revenue collection, better managing state spending, and making it easier for businesses to operate. Ames says central-bank reforms should help reduce inflation and increase foreign currency reserves.

If approved, Masangu Mulongo says the debt forgiveness plan would cut Congo's annual debt servicing from $920-million to just more than $200-million.

Masangu Mulongo says that is important because it would allow Congolese to spend the next 50 years without the burden of more than $10-billion of debt.

The United Nations plans to begin withdrawing some of its peacekeepers from western Congo by June, which could put more of a strain on the national army to provide more of its own security. But the bulk of the 20,000-member U.N. force will remain in the east at least until next year.

President Kabila is also finalizing a $9-billion mineral deal with China that is Beijing's largest investment in Africa, giving state-owned firms the right to develop copper and cobalt mines in exchange for building roads, railways, universities, airports, and hospitals.

The IMF decision on debt relief was delayed because of concerns about the conditions of loans in that Chinese mineral deal. The plan was modified to address those concerns, and Congo is again moving forward toward $70-million of a three-year, $550-million package of IMF loans due to be repaid at concessionary rates after 2016.

Angola eyes extension to maritime border with Congo

* Angola eyes extension to maritime border with Congo

* Area rich in oil reserves

* Congo accused Angola in 2009 of stealing its oil

(Adds quote from Congo oil ministry official, paragraphs 5 and 6)

By Henrique Almeida

LUANDA, March 24 (Reuters) - Angola is trying to reach an agreement with neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo before it submits a request to the United Nations for its maritime border to be extended to cover an area with huge oil reserves.

The Angolan parliament approved a resolution on Wednesday that allows the government to enter into talks with the Congo, which last year accused Angola of stealing its oil [ID:P491096], about the border extension.

Angolan Justice Minister Guilhermina Prata said the goal was to extend Angola's maritime border to up to 350 nautical miles from 200 miles.

"An agreement with the Democratic Republic of Congo on our northern maritime border will create the conditions for Angola to submit a request (to the United Nations)," Prata told members of parliament.

The head of energy projects at Congo's oil ministry, Joseph Pili Pili, told Reuters in Kinshasa that representatives from both countries met informally this week to discuss the issue and would schedule a formal meeting in Luanda in April.

"Angola is our partner. We want to negotiate a new zone of common interest. We have not negotiated on money yet," he said.

Angola rivals Nigeria as Africa's biggest oil producer.

But Congo, struggling to recover from a 1998-2003 war, has almost no offshore oil operations. Its narrow Atlantic coastline lies between the main part of Angola and its northern exclave of Cabinda.

Under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, coastal states may explore and exploit the natural resources of their continental shelf for up to 200 nautical miles from shore.

They can apply to extend their border's outer limit to up to 350 nautical miles in certain circumstances.

TENSION

Although strong regional allies, tension between the two nations erupted last year after Kinshasa accused Luanda of stealing its oil and later expelled thousands of Angolan immigrants from its land in a wave of deportations.

Angola Foreign Minister Assuncao dos Anjos said ties between the two nations are good and denied accusations that Angola was illegally pumping Congo's oil.

"Relations between Angola and the Congo are good," dos Anjos told Reuters on the sidelines of a parliamentary session in Luanda.

Asked why Angola planned to request an extension to its maritime boundary, dos Anjos replied: "This extension request comes from a decision by the international community to allow nations to stretch their maritime border."

Brazil said earlier this week it was trying to forge an alliance with African and South American countries to defend seabed mining rights and strategic lanes in the South Atlantic [ID:19436031] by extending maritime borders.

Such a move could render huge profits for nations like Angola, which boasts a similar underwater rock formation to Brazil, which in 2007 made a pre-salt discovery of some 8 billion barrels of crude in its Tupi field. (Reporting by Henrique Almeida; additional reporting by Katrina Manson in Kinshasa; Editing by Richard Valdmanis and Amanda Cooper)

Congo's Kabila heads to South Korea for deals

CONGO-DEMOCRATIC/KOREA

* Presidential delegation to sign health, education deals

* Deepwater port, roads and mining deals on table

* Congo looking to Asia as ties to West falter

By Katrina Manson

KINSHASA, March 26 (Reuters) - Congo's President Joseph Kabila will lead a delegation to South Korea this weekend to discuss deals in infrastructure, health and mining, Korean and Congolese officials said on Friday.

The talks come as the Central African nation, shaken by years of corruption and violence, increasingly seeks to strengthen ties with Asian partners viewed as less critical than the West on human rights and governance issues.

The president, who will spend three days in the country, will be accompanied by seven ministers, including those from infrastructure, minerals, energy, health and education, as well as the head of the country's business federation.

Among the deals at stake is the development of Democratic Republic of Congo's first deepwater port on the tiny coast, according to an official at South Korea's embassy in Kinshasa.

"We are deeply engaged in discussions over the port at Banana," said the embassy official. Congo only has a river port at Matadi, some 150 km from the western strip of coastline.

Estimates suggest building a deepwater port at Banana, which has been slated since the 1980s and would give access to container ships carrying imports and mineral exports, would cost $300-400 million.

"We've built things that people never thought possible before," said the embassy official, rejecting concerns that Banana offers too technically complex a prospect.

Kabila will visit South Korea's largest port city Busan, the official said.

No deal on the port is likely to be finalised during the visit, but bilateral accords will be signed on health and higher education in the central African nation.

"They want to invest in infrastructure and energy, and we can sell their cars here," said an official in Congo's ministry of foreign affairs, whose minister forms part of the delegation. "But we've not yet negotiated over mines."

LOOKING TO ASIA

The Congolese official said the government would not agree minerals-for-infrastructure along the lines of a controversial deal signed last year with China, however.

"It's not going to be like with the Chinese. We have to respect the agreement with the World Bank and IMF in order to reach completion point for debt relief. Even the Koreans know that," said the official.

China last year signed a deal worth an initial $9 billion to build infrastructure in exchange for some of Congo's vast copper reserves in the south of the country.

The deal was reduced to $6 billion and the debt component reduced after the IMF, which is trying to relieve the bulk of Congo's $11 billion debt by the end of June, intervened.

Congo has asked the world's largest peacekeeping force, comprising close to 22,000 U.N. troops, to leave the country in 2011, during which presidential elections are due to be held.

"It's clear that the president is getting fed up with the Western donors and looking to Asia," said a Western diplomat. "China is much less critical of government and on human rights, but South Korea is more attached to macroeconomic stability."

South Korea is keen to build a long-term relationship with Congo, promoting cultural exchange as well as private business deals to be discussed next week, the embassy official said.

"We really feel like we have something to offer to a country like Congo from our own experience, having been a much poorer country than Congo 50 years ago. And now we are chairman of this year's G20," the official added. (Editing by David Lewis)

DR Congo wants $3 bln pipeline to central oil basin

* Congo aims to start work on 1,500 km pipeline in 2015

* Ministry of oil will bring central basin blocks to 80

KINSHASA, March 26 (Reuters) - Democratic Republic of Congo has set 2015 as a target date for starting construction of a pipeline to export potential oil finds from its central basin to the coast, a senior official said on Friday.

Congo will look to companies and banks to fund the $3 billion, 1,500-km (900 mile) project taking hoped-for oil from blocks under forests in the heart of the country to the coast.

Several oil companies have expressed interest in the Cuvette Centrale's 21 blocks, but no exploration has started. Blocks 1, 2 and 3 have been allotted to Brazilian company COMICO, pending a presidential decree to start exploring.

"We think we can start buliding the pipeline in 2015," Joseph Pili Pili, director of projects at the ministry of hydrocarbons, told Reuters on the sidelines of a conference.

"To finance it we will go to the companies, and the banks," he added, giving the $3 billion price tag.

The pipeline, dubbed "The Reptilian" after its lizard-like across the country, would link the Cuvette Centrale to Matadi river port on the western coast.

Pili Pili also said the ministry of hydrocarbons plans to add more blocks to the area, bringing the total to about 80.

Congo hopes a spate of proposed exploration that has oil majors Total (TOTF.PA) and Eni (ENI.MI) interested will bring its stagnant oil sector to life.

Its tiny oil industry, which produces about 25,000 barrels a day from its onshore and offshore blocks in the southwest, is also waiting presidential go-ahead for exploration of blocks -- some of which are disputed -- in the east. (Reporting by Katrina Manson; Editing by David Lewis)

The anatomy of Congo's bloodbath

The roots and evolution of the persistent violence plaguing the Democratic Republic of Congo:

1994
More than 2 million ethnic Hutus arrive from Rwanda, fearing retaliation for the infamous genocide campaign against their Tutsi neighbours. Among them are many of the militants responsible for the slaughter who continue to attack Tutsis on both sides of the border..

1996
The First Congo War breaks out when the Alliance of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (AFDL) emerges in the eastern provinces. Backed by Uganda and Rwanda, it is led by Laurent-Désiré Kabila, an admirer of Congo's first elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba. He declares war on dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, the man who brought about Lumumba's downfall and death three decades earlier, and is now refusing to move against the Hutu militants.

1997
The uprising ends when Mobutu flees the country. Mr. Kabila comes to power but turns against his foreign patrons when they refuse to withdraw their troops.

1998
The Second Congo War begins when Congolese Tutsis (known as the Banyamulenge) and Rwandan forces move against Mr. Kabila, who is now supported by leftist regimes in Angola, Namibia and Zimbabwe.

1999
The rebels sign a ceasefire and foreign powers agree in principle to withdraw their troops with the creation of the United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC), a multinational peacekeeping force. But the peace pact is widely disregarded, and fighting goes on.

2001
President Kabila is assassinated and succeeded by son Joseph, then in charge of the armed forces MONUC starts to send forces into Congo's eastern hot spots.

2002
Congo finally signs a lasting agreement with Rwanda, which again agrees to pull out its 30,000 troops if the Hutu extremists are disarmed and sent home. Uganda also agrees again to withdraw its forces from northeastern Congo.

2003
A power-sharing pact among the various Congolese factions leads to a transitional government and plans for a return to democratic elections.

2004
Kinshasa appoints new governors in Congo's 11 provinces, re-establishing its national authority. The army clashes in South Kivu with Banyamulenge (Congolese Tutsi) rebels who seize the provincial capital of Bukavu but pull out a week later under international pressure. They are led by Laurent Nkunda, shown at left, a renegade Congolese general who as a young man taught school in Kitchanga, now a refugee centre, before fighting with Rwanda's rebel Tutsis after the genocide and then coming home to join the fight against Mobutu.

2005
After more than a decade in Congo, the Hutu-dominated Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) announces that it plans to end its armed struggle against the Tutsi-led government in Kigali.

2006
A new constitution is adopted, having received 84-per-cent support in a national referendum.

The first free elections in four decades are held, followed by a runoff vote that sees Joseph Kabila returned as president.

The FDLR's great rival, the National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP), the leading Tutsi militia backed by Rwanda, clashes with the UN and army in North Kivu, prompting 50,000 residents to flee the province.

2007
Aid agencies report another jump in refugee traffic, again because of unrest caused by the forces of Laurent Nkunda, which control much of North Kivu.

2008
Uganda, Sudan and Congo jointly attack bases set up in northeastern Congo by Uganda's notoriously brutal Lord's Resistance Army. Many civilians die when the rebels strike back.

2009
Congo army launches campaign against Tutsi leader Laurent Nkunda, who is ousted by his deputy Bosco (The Terminator) Ntaganda and arrested after escaping to Rwanda. The CNDP then settles with the government, forms a political party and integrates its fighters with the army. Together they begin to attack the rebel Hutus of the FDLR, prompting yet another round of death and dislocation.

UN extends MONUC's mandate to mid-2010.

Sources: United Nations, World Fact Book, BBC

Congo to Open Oil Blocks on Lakes Tanganyika, Kivu

Source: Reuters 3/24/2010, Location: Africa
Democratic Republic of Congo will open 10 blocks on Lake Tanganyika and six blocks on Lake Kivu for oil exploration as it attracts interest from foreign energy firms, an energy ministry official said.

The central African country, whose oil sector has been virtually paralysed since the 1970s by decades of corruption and conflict, will open the new offshore properties to bidding in April, Joseph Pili Pili, director of projects in Congo's oil ministry, told Reuters on the sidelines of a conference.

"We know Lake Tanganyika has lots of petrol because it is the only one we've got lots of data for -- seismic, magnetic -- the geology has a lot of potential," he said. Foreign firms Chevron, Total, and CNOOC had already expressed interest in the blocks, he said.

"We have to give these (blocks) to a big company because Lake Tanganyika is so deep, at 1,500 metres. It will need a lot of work," he said.

The Lake Kivu blocks, meanwhile, could provide rich reserves of natural gas, he said.

"There are 60 billion cubic metres of gas and each year it produces 350 million cubic metres," he said. "It is like you are sleeping in your bed and God just produces gas for you."

Interest in Congo's oil potential has risen in recent months after big finds on the Ugandan side of Lake Albert. Oil majors Total and Eni have recently expressed interest in blocks on Congo's side of the lake, and several companies including Tullow are jostling for belated presidential decrees to ratify competing licenses.

Despite its potential reserves, Congo barely registers among Africa's oil producers with just 25,000 barrels per day in output, all from French independent Perenco's operations in the southwest of the country.

La RDC ouvre 16 blocs à l'exploration pétrolière

KINSHASA, 24 mars (Reuters) - La République démocratique du Congo va ouvrir 10 blocs à l'exploration pétrolière dans le lac Tanganyika et six blocs dans le lac Kivu, a annoncé mercredi un responsable du ministère de l'Energie.

La RDC, qui a déjà offert des blocs à l'exploration au lac Albert, ouvrira en avril des appels d'offre pour les nouveaux blocs, a déclaré Joseph Pili Pili, directeur deprojets au ministère congolais du Pétrole.

(Katrina Manson Nicole Dupont pour le service français)

Nkunda: la Cour rwandaise incompétente

AFP
26/03/2010

La Cour suprême du Rwanda, saisie d’une requête de remise en liberté de l'ex-chef rebelle tutsi congolais Laurent Nkunda, s'est déclarée incompétente et a renvoyé l'affaire devant la justice militaire, a-t-on appris vendredi de source judiciaire.

"La Cour suprême s'est déclarée incompétente et a renvoyé l'affaire devant un tribunal militaire", a indiqué à l'AFP l'un des avocats de M. Nkunda, Aime Bokanga. La Cour suprême a justifié sa décision par le statut de militaire du chef d'état-major de l'armée rwandaise, le général James Karabe, considéré comme étant à l'origine de la détention de l'ex-chef rebelle congolais, a expliqué Me Bokanga.

Ni le prévenu, ni le général Kabarebe n'étaient présent à l'audience ce vendredi. "Pour nous, c'est une déception", a commenté Me Bokanga, pour qui la justice rwandaise "n'a pas pris en compte la dimension humaine de l'affaire", alors que M. Nkunda "est détenu sans procès depuis plus d'un an".

Laurent Nkunda avait été arrêté en janvier 2009 à Gisenyi, ville rwandaise frontalière avec Goma, dans l'est de la République démocratique du Congo (RDC), alors qu'il était à la tête de la rébellion du Congrès national pour la défense du peuple (CNDP).
Il est depuis lors en résidence surveillée en périphérie de Kigali.

Nkunda avait mis en déroute dans le Nord-Kivu (est de la RDC) l'armée congolaise en octobre 2008 et menacé de faire tomber Goma. A la suite d'un retournement d'alliance, les armées congolaise et rwandaise avaient lancé le 20 janvier une opération conjointe sans précédent contre les rebelles hutus rwandais dans l'est de la RDC, qui avait par ailleurs abouti à l'arrestation de Nkunda.