Monday, February 8, 2010 9:26pm EST
Make this your Home Page | RSS 
Congo in Crisis: What President Obama Can Do To Right Past Wrongs In US Policy
Kambale Musavuli | Posted November 20, 2008 9:10 AMThe Democratic Republic of Congo, formerly Zaire, has been entangled in a humanitarian catastrophe for the past 12 years. Some of us remember the first elected Prime Minister of the Congo, Patrice Lumumba, as he brought to the world the vision of a prosperous Congo where this beautiful land will benefit the Congolese people and not world corporations.
But for many of us, our memory of the Congo is the "Rumble in the Jungle" when Muhammad Ali pulled off the improbable victory against George Foreman in 1974. Today, there is plenty of rumbling in the Congo and it does not bode well for the people.
A modern day holocaust is occurring in this picturesque land of abundance. This central African country, which sits in the heart of Africa, straddles the equator and is bordered by nine other African countries. It is the size of Western Europe and pivotal for the entire African continent; as Congo goes so does Africa.
Since 1996, it is estimated that nearly 6 million people have died in the Congo, hundreds of thousands of women have been raped as a tool of war, and Congo's enormous wealth has been plundered by the international community. The United Nations says that the conflict is the deadliest since World War II. Unfortunately, the conflict has been presented to our community through the pathological lens of the mainstream media, much the same way stories are presented about issues of violence in urban America.
We have been led to believe that this is a case of depraved Black people wantonly killing each other. As a result, we shy away from the issue in shame. The truth is 6,000 armed rebels backed by U.S. ally Rwanda are holding a nation of approximately 60 million peace-loving people hostage.
The central cause of the conflict is the scramble for Congo's spectacular wealth of gold, diamonds, copper, cobalt, tin, zinc, coltan (a mineral that is central to the functioning of cell phones, lap top computers, video games and many electronic devices). The issue at hand is who is going to control Congo's wealth and for whose benefit. This has been the main issue in the Congo since the late 1880s and what lead to the assassination of Congo's first freely elected Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba, by the U.S. and Belgium.
President-elect Barack Obama is intimately aware of the current situation in the Congo. He sponsored a bill on the Congo as a Senator, which passed in 2006. He is clear about the importance of the Congo to the entire African continent. He says "if Africa is to achieve its promise, resolving the problem in the Congo will be critical."
In light of the current upheaval in the Congo that has resulted in unbearable suffering for a beleaguered people, President-elect Barack Obama should put the Congo at the top of his list of foreign affairs issues to tackle. In addressing the Congo, there are concrete policy prescriptions that he can pursue which would put the Congo and the Central African region on a path to peace and stability.
1. Stop giving President Paul Kagame of Rwanda carte blanche to intervene in the Congo. Kagame invaded Congo twice (1996 and 1998) and occupied Congo for six years (1996 - 2002), and the biggest fight he had in the Congo was with his ally Uganda over minerals and not the so-called Hutu rebels who participated in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, which he uses as a pretext for invading the Congo.
2. Call for a political process that leads to the democratization of the Rwandan political landscape, which would allow disaffected "Hutus" to leave Congo and go back to Rwanda to participate in political life. Lack of democracy in Rwanda feeds instability in the Congo
3. A radical change is needed in US policy, which currently favors corporate exploitative interests (see Dan Rather's "All Mine" report below) and has contributed to the exacerbation of the problem in the country.
The International Crisis Group study of July 2007, "Consolidating the Peace," clearly documents how the U.S. skewed the electoral system to favor former rebel leaders, one of whom is Joseph Kabila, who is now the President of Congo (shown here with President Bush). Kabila had no political history whatsoever in the Congo, yet the West provided him nearly unconditional support to ascend to the head of government. Many brilliant Congolese leaders who truly care about their people have been systematically sidelined because the U.S. is not confident that these Congolese men and women will serve its corporate interests. Hence, the U.S. assured the victory of a weak "leader" who would guarantee unfettered access by U.S. corporations to Congo's wealth.
4. The solution to the current crisis is political and not military as is being proffered by many European states. Should the U.S. tell Kagame to stop its support of proxy rebel forces in the Congo, the killing and mass displacement of the people would stop. The U.S. has enormous leverage over Kagame and it has not exercised it.
5. Finally, the U.S. should support national reconciliation in the Congo and support the rightful ownership of Congo's wealth for the people of the Congo. The Carter Center and the United Nations have made clear policy recommendations that would further this policy but the US government has refused to act on those recommendations, which would ultimately give the Congolese more control over their own wealth and set them on a path to self-sustainability.
For President-elect Obama and the newly strengthened Democratic majority in Congress to act on the above prescriptions, they must be made aware that there are people throughout the country who care about what happens to Black people in Africa. Join the global "Break the Silence" movement around the Congo and let our leaders know that change must come to Congo if Africa is to move forward as a continent.
Kambale Musavuli is a Congolese activist and a spokesperson and student coordinator of Friends of the Congo.
- Obama to Democrats: 'Turn off the cable news and lead' (16 comments)
- Baptist missionaries or child traffickers? (15 comments)
- Sarah Palin's crocodile tears over the N word (13 comments)
- Gen. Colin Powell now favors repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (9 comments)
- Serena wins Australian Open (6 comments)
-
Joe commented on Sarah Palin's cheat sheet:
Why does she need to write these things onto her hand? She should already know her major talking po...
-
Ostend Street commented on Sarah Palin's cheat sheet:
She will go down in history as a very wealthy pawn in the the Republican Parties strategies no matt...
-
whynot commented on Sarah Palin's cheat sheet:
You have to ask yourself - is Sarah Palin retarded?...
-
tjr commented on Sarah Palin's cheat sheet:
What a fool, please run Palin!...
-
Ostend Street commented on Gen. Colin Powell now favors repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell":
Here's another perspective. Your comments are also an abomination. ...
Mark Allen
John Amaechi
Maya Angelou
Crystal McCrary Anthony
Patricia Arnold
Algernon Austin
Randall Bailey
Rick Blalock
Kola Boof
Keith Boykin
Mario Brossard
Michael Brown
Theresa Caldwell
Clay Cane
Jasmyne Cannick
Charisse Carney-Nunes
Audrey Chapman
Gordon Chambers
Staceyann Chin
Mark Corece
Gilda Daniels
Yvonne R. Davis
Terrance Dean
Marcia Dyson
Damon Evans
M. Franklin
Lenora Fulani
Ron Glover
Keli Goff
Peter Gomes
Deondray Gossett
Kia Gregory
Zulema Griffin
Malcolm Harris
Marc Lamont Hill
Alicia Hines
Dennis R. Holmes, M.D
Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Jessica Ingram-Bellamy
Jacqueline Jackson
Avis Jones-DeWeever
Quincy Lenear
Carl Lewis
Rae Lewis-Thornton
Shannon J. Love
Rod McCullom
Terry McMillan
M.W. Moore
Alphonso Morgan
Nicholas Nelson
Clarence Nero
Charles Ogletree
Spencer Overton
Shirley Parker
Deval Patrick
Charles Pugh
Anwar Robinson
Eugene S. Robinson
Rashad Robinson
Mark Sawyer
Tara Setmayer
Rev. William Sinkford
Alexander Smalls
Basil Smikle
Nadine Smith
Doug Spearman
John Stanley
Jamal Story
Ronald Sullivan
David Dante Troutt
Omar Tyree
Linda Villarosa
Dorian Warren
Isaiah Washington
Robin Washington
Diane Weathers
Reg Weaver
Marcia J. Williams
Nathan Hale Williams
Jeff Winbush
Kai Wright



MySpace
flickr
YouTube

2008-11-20 14:26:25
2008-11-20 15:17:25
2008-11-20 16:09:30
2008-11-20 22:54:11
2008-11-21 08:22:29
2008-11-21 08:48:45
2008-11-21 09:48:52
2008-11-21 13:03:39
2008-11-21 14:04:22
2008-11-21 15:15:22
2008-11-22 06:31:25
I had never thought about that before. I had always imagined that diversity was virtuous just in itself, much like they say free trade should be. But looking at the majority of conflicts on our continent, I see some pattern. Many of the countries with sharply different cultures (and also languages) are at war internally. The eastern Swahili DRC is quite different to the western (Kinshasa-Lingala) DRC. Of course, while it is not the different cultures or languages themselves that 'cause' the conflicts, but the cultural and linguistic differences are easier to exploit by the warlords. Suddenly, I feel like I believe in this small and efficient self-determination. Problem, for most post colonial African regions in conflict still: is that 'curse' of natural resources, also not simply confined to cultural or linguistic borders. So: how does one propose to SADC an equitable political break up of the massive but 'pseudo' nations (put together in ad hoc fashion sometime after that 1881's scramble). In a long term vision for the AU: I think Bukavu would make a great capital town of a country called the Eastern Congo Republic (ECR), with Swahili its lingua-franca. Not French.
Right now though, the eastern DRC needs international peace ‘makers’.2008-11-22 09:25:10
2008-11-22 09:28:13
2008-11-22 09:32:16
2008-11-22 11:47:13
2008-11-22 13:37:20
2008-11-22 13:42:29
2008-11-22 20:57:19
2008-11-23 07:17:14
Do you think it is currently useful (or even possible) to separate the politics of Rwanda from those of the DRC as a whole? Say: do you think if Rwanda did not exist the DRC would have been a better place? Can we speak about the problems in Rwanda without getting confused by those in the DRC? I imagine that would be hard.
But it also seems to me that the problems in Rwanda (itself) do come from a bifurcated identity of two big cultures (Hutu & Tutsi), which according to some history could be easily manipulated in colonial times? If say, we were to go back to pre-colonial history, do you imagine in Rwanda itself, that if Hutus and Tutsis had been allowed to develop as separate States, there would have been limited conflicts in that geographical area called Rwanda today? I am sure with the conflict in Rwanda having naturally migrated to the DRC and neighbours, it is hard to imagine what could have been. But I also imagine that what made it easy for Rwanda's conflict to migrate to the DRC and the region was because Rwanda's borders have always been ad hoc. In a sense that, exactly the same people (in cultural and linguistic terms) are found in Rwanda and the DRC. That is, one's closest relatives, in blood terms, actually reside across the border: while one's enemies live inside those borders as ‘your compatriots’. That is a difficult proposition in dealing with one's potentially divided loyalties. And that is what I meant about artificial boundaries that would and could not ever promote social cohesion. Two nations (cultural groups) living in the same State. This is the case both in the DRC and in Rwanda and probably all African countries. So, I guess the challenges would be how to untangle that state of conflictual affairs, with so many vested political interests having cropped up and grown deep, and cemented by the discoveries of natural resources. Just like in the Niger delta, I imagine it would be the greatest challenge to divide up the great lakes region in such a manner that the nationalities (cultural groups or nation States) in the region would feel is equitable. Implicitly, at this point it appears that regional people feel that the current division of borders is not equitable with respect to allowing access to those resources, notwithstanding the cultural differences, which are themselves the facade useful in conflict promotion, coming in handy in times of competition. The truth is that it is the access to those minerals which is at the heart of the great lakes conflicts, especially in the eastern DRC. So: if the majority of my observations are close to the truth, then I don’t imagine how McCloskey is that far off the mark. Her proposition is by no means a 'political' solution for the current conflicts as they have manifested themselves. Rather, it is an explanation of how things could not have gone right (in this case very wrong, with the imposition of these senselessly big national borders, forming countries like the DRC, for instance).
The immediate political solutions would rely on more that such a theoretical idea, especially with so many vested interests (and many external too) now ripe in the whole region. I'd be interested to know what role China is playing in the lakes right now?
So John you are right. The mess is much more complicated than dividing up the region geographically. I mean Kinshasa would not want to be cut off the minerals deposit in the East of DRC, that's for sure) - the same way that northern Nigerian would not want to be a cut off of the Niger Delta. But the fact remains that conflicts over access to the minerals will continue for as long as an equitable ways of sharing them are not found or are impossible to implement (with greedy warlords demanding the biggest shares). And ALSO with weak institutions in the region to implement any kind of law and order. But the conflicts cannot be allowed to continue until the deposits have run empty. So: my sense is that there has to be an external 'referee' (one without vested interests in outcomes, so not the US), 'who' must devise an acceptable plan to all cultural players (i.e. NOT the governments or just cultural groups inside the DRC or Rwanda or Uganda) in the region. But a plan acceptable to people who view themselves as cultural groups like the Hutus or Tutsis for instance. A plan on how these groups could collectively manage the minerals, and equally share in the profits. This devised plan could be state-based (cannot reside in the DRC’s government), but conceptualised and proposed to affect the whole region. To me that would still mean that McCloskey's proposition (not in its selfish interpretations of the Hutus or Tutsis) is not that far fetched. But at the moment, the DRC needs international troops.2008-11-25 00:06:41
2008-11-25 00:14:10
2008-11-25 07:36:50
2008-11-26 00:33:38
2008-12-08 04:30:58
2008-12-16 11:35:32
2008-12-17 03:33:50
2008-12-20 20:09:02
2008-12-22 01:42:18
2008-12-30 16:54:57
To see your comment, wait approximately two minutes, then simply refresh the page.
Report issues/abuses to suggestions@thedailyvoice.com