June 2, 2001
The past suggests that when the warring parties talk peace in Congo, the world should fortify itself with heavy doses of scepticism. This week, however, peace in Congo did seem a few steps closer after a ten-day visit to the region by 12 ambassadors to the United Nations.
When a UN Security Council delegation visited the country a year ago, it came back empty-handed. Fighting continued. This time a similar mission has returned with commitments all round that look at least half-sincere. Congo's government lifted its ban on political parties. Uganda said it would pull its troops out of Congo except for those in a few areas near its border. The rebel group Uganda supports said it would disengage its frontline forces by June 1st. Zimbabwe has shifted from saying that its troops will begin to leave only after the Rwandans and Ugandans have gone, to saying that its last troops will leave only after the others have departed.
Evidence of faith in these moves was confirmed by the opening of the Congo river to traffic coming from the sea to Kisangani, a city deep in rebel territory. And all agreed that a "national dialogue" between the government and the armed and unarmed opposition would begin under the chairmanship of Botswana's ex-president, Ketumile Masire, on July 16th.
Last year's delegation, led by Richard Holbrooke, Bill Clinton's ambassador to the UN, mainly blamed Congo's president, Laurent Kabila, for the failure to implement the Lusaka agreement signed by all parties in 1999. Mr Holbrooke has now departed the UN, and the new American administration is uncertain of its African policy. Mr Kabila has departed this world, murdered in January. His son, Joseph, has taken over, and seems far more flexible and open-minded.
The Clinton administration tended to be sympathetic to Rwanda and Uganda, which had invaded Congo in 1996 to bring Kabila to power, and then again in 1998 to overthrow him. But, this time, the Americans left the leadership of the UN delegation to the French, who regard Congo as their lost fief, and are no friends of either Rwanda or Uganda.
Under the Lusaka agreement all foreign forces in Congo were treated the same, whether they had invaded (Rwanda and Uganda) or been invited by the government (Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia). Now the "invaders" are being forced to get out first. The Lusaka agreement also said that the government and the rebels were to sit at a round table as equals. No longer: Mr Kabila will be president at the "national dialogue" and given special status. The dangers ahead
Many pitfalls remain. One of the most dangerous is the Rwandan militiamen responsible for the 1994 genocide. They fled into Congo, and some now fight in Mr Kabila's army. Their presence was the stated reason why Rwanda and Uganda invaded Congo in 1998. They are unlikely to surrender their weapons: some are wanted by the UN's tribunal on Rwanda, others by the Rwandan government. Many of them may be quietly given Congolese citizenship--or go on to fight for the Burundian Hutu militias or even the Angolan rebel movement, UNITA.
The "national dialogue" will not be easy. The rebels will demand a political price for conceding the territory they now control. The unarmed, but probably more popular, opposition to Mr Kabila will have a hard time getting its voice heard. And the biggest unanswered question of all: who is going to rebuild a state that has been neglected for more than 30 years?
