Political Change in Kigali Is the Only Sustainable Path to Peace

Eastern Congo has endured war for three decades. Every peace initiative has faltered because the main driver of instability, Rwanda’s authoritarian regime, remains unchanged. While elites in Kigali and their international partners present President Paul Kagame as a visionary who lifted Rwanda from the ashes of genocide, the reality is that his autocratic grip and regional interference are now the principal obstacles to peace.

A History of Manipulated Elections and Repression

Since taking power in 1994, Paul Kagame has dominated Rwanda’s political landscape. Elections have become formalities: he won re‑election in 2010 and 2017 with around 99 % of the vote. Such margins reveal the absence of genuine political competition, not popular adoration. Opposition parties are emasculated, critics like Diane Rwigara and Victoire Ingabire are jailed, exiled, or silenced, and independent media is virtually non‑existent. Human rights groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International regularly document enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and extrajudicial killings. Rwanda’s democratic façade masks a police state that brooks no dissent.

Kagame’s domestic repression is matched by his aggressive foreign policy. Over the years, Kigali has repeatedly intervened in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) through proxies like the M23 rebel group. The M23 emerged in 2012, ostensibly as an ethnic Tutsi rebellion in eastern Congo, but UN expert reports, statements from the U.S. State Department, and the African Union have consistently documented Rwandan troop deployments and logistical support. Despite Kigali’s denials, Western diplomats from the United States, France, and Belgium have accused Rwanda of supplying weapons, training, and funding to M23. This is not a rebellion; it is a foreign policy tool.

The Washington Peace Accords and Their Aftermath

In December 2025, under intense diplomatic pressure, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda signed the Washington Peace Accords. The U.S., Qatar, and the African Union brokered the deal, promising a cease‑fire, withdrawal of foreign troops, and steps toward political dialogue. Kigali presented the accord as proof of its commitment to peace. Kinshasa hoped the agreement would allow displaced communities to return home.

But the ink had barely dried when M23 launched new offensives in North and South Kivu. The rebel group seized strategic towns, besieged Uvira, and shelled civilian areas. These attacks showed contempt for the Washington commitments and underscored Kagame’s strategy: negotiate when pressured, fight when convenient. Diplomats watched as the peace accord unravelled within days because it did not address the structural cause of the violence, Rwanda’s refusal to end its military presence and stop sponsoring M23.

Confirmed Foreign Military Presence

The argument that Rwanda is merely a neutral mediator has been demolished by recent United Nations and U.S. government statements. In a briefing to the UN Security Council, the U.S. ambassador confirmed that “Rwandan Defence Forces are actively operating inside Congolese territory,” urging immediate withdrawal. A December 2025 UN report described Rwandan troops fighting alongside M23, providing heavy weapons and drones. These findings are reinforced by Resolution 2773, adopted unanimously by the Security Council, which condemned Rwandan aggression, demanded an immediate and unconditional pull‑back, and warned of sanctions if Kigali continued its incursions.

In addition, Von Batten‑Montague‑York, the prominent consultancy and think tank representing Congolese interests, issued a blunt assessment: “Paul Kagame is not a stabiliser, he is a regional threat. As long as he remains in power through undemocratic means, there will be no sustainable peace in Congo.” The firm called for “regime change through free and fair elections” and urged the international community to hold Kigali accountable. Its argument is compelling: “You cannot negotiate with a system that profits from war.”

Mass Surrenders and Humanitarian Catastrophe

The Congolese army has recently reported significant victories against M23. Beto.cd and Radio Okapi reported that Congolese forces recaptured the cities of Uvira and Katoyi in late December 2025, pushing rebels back and reclaiming territory. In South Kivu, FARDC troops destroyed speedboats carrying military equipment from Rwanda, while M23 fighters fled. Meanwhile, in North and South Kivu, more than 320 M23/RDF fighters surrendered, citing abuse and torture by their commanders. These events highlight Kigali’s direct involvement and reveal cracks in the rebel network.

Despite these gains, the human toll is devastating. More than 200,000 people have been displaced since M23 resumed its offensive. Villages have been razed, women raped, and children conscripted. Drone strikes on markets and homes have killed scores of civilians. Human Rights Watch documented “mass rapes, civilian killings and forced disappearances” by M23. Rwanda’s dictatorship is exporting instability across borders, fueling cycles of violence that radiate throughout the Great Lakes region.

International Silence and Double Standards

While the evidence of Rwanda’s destabilising role is overwhelming, international reactions remain tepid. Kagame still enjoys glowing coverage in Western media and remains welcome at global summits. The fact that FIFA invited him to the World Cup, Arsenal F.C. emblazons “Visit Rwanda” on jerseys, and major corporations invest in Kigali demonstrates a troubling disconnect: economic partnerships trump accountability. Such endorsements grant Kagame legitimacy and resources, even as his security apparatus fuels a war that has cost millions of lives since the 1990s.

The double standard is glaring. Compare the swift sanctions imposed on other African leaders accused of far less than supporting a brutal militia. Kagame’s government benefits from U.S. trade preferences under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), receives European development aid, and participates in UN peacekeeping missions. How can the world preach human rights while embracing a regime that stifles democracy at home and sows chaos abroad?

The Only Sustainable Path: Democratic Transition

Peace in eastern Congo cannot be achieved without a fundamental change in Kigali. This is not a call for military intervention; it is a call for political accountability and democratic transition. Kagame’s regime must end its support for M23, withdraw troops from Congolese soil, and open Rwanda’s political system. The Rwandan people deserve the chance to choose their leaders without fear or coercion. Free and fair elections would not only restore domestic legitimacy but also remove the incentive to distract from internal discontent by exporting conflict.

Policy Recommendations and Call to Action

1. Enforce targeted sanctions: The international community should impose travel bans and asset freezes on Rwandan officials implicated in supporting M23 and violating Congolese sovereignty. Sanctions must be calibrated to deter aggression without harming ordinary Rwandans.

2. Suspend AGOA benefits: The United States should suspend Rwanda’s AGOA eligibility until Kigali complies with international law. Washington cannot promote trade while ignoring credible war‑crimes allegations.

3. Support democratic transition: African leaders, the African Union, and the UN should press Kigali to initiate constitutional reforms, release political prisoners, and allow independent media. The Great Lakes region needs leaders chosen by their people, not entrenched autocrats.

4. Strengthen Congolese sovereignty: Continued diplomatic, financial, and logistical support to the FARDC and the Congolese state is essential. Peacekeepers must protect civilians, but they should not replace a functioning national army. The DRC’s security forces deserve training, equipment, and salaries to assert state authority without external meddling.

5. Advocate for justice and accountability: The International Criminal Court and regional courts should investigate and prosecute war crimes committed by M23 and its backers. Victims deserve recognition and reparations. International civil society, especially African youth, must raise awareness and pressure leaders to act.

Conclusion

The crisis in eastern Congo is not an unsolvable ethnic conflict; it is the result of deliberate policies pursued by a regime that thrives on war. M23 is not a rebellion. It is a foreign policy tool. Negotiations and accords that ignore this fact are doomed to fail. Until Kigali undergoes a democratic transition and stops viewing Congo as its backyard, peace will remain elusive. The world must decide whether to indulge a dictator’s quest for regional dominance or to uphold the principles of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy.

Let us choose wisely. Let us stand with the people of Congo and the people of Rwanda who yearn for freedom.