DRC, Rwanda agree on economic framework

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) will commit to working with third parties, including the US, to revamp their mineral supply chains and develop reforms, reports BusinessLIVE. This according to a draft of an economic framework seen by Reuters as the two countries seek to spur investment following a peace deal reached in Washington. The countries agreed on the draft framework, which is part of the peace deal, a source said, adding the draft was now being discussed by stakeholders, including the private sector, multilateral banks and some donor agencies of other countries. Congo and Rwanda will likely meet in early October to finalise the framework, the source added. It would be signed by heads of state at a later date. The 17-page framework comes after the countries signed a peace deal in Washington in June at talks held by US President Donald Trump’s administration. The deal aims to end fighting that has killed thousands and attract billions of dollars of Western investment to a region rich in tantalum, gold, cobalt, copper and lithium. The draft builds on an outline for the framework reached in August and sets out implementation measures and co-ordination mechanisms. Congo, Rwanda and the US state department did not respond to requests for comment.

According to the draft, the parties would pledge to work with the US and other international partners to develop additional regulatory initiatives and reforms ‘necessary to de-risk private sector investment in a cost-effective manner’, to reduce illicit trade and increase transparency. They would also adopt outside transparency mechanisms, including committing to implement guidance from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, among others, according to BusinessLIVE. The draft framework calls for third-party inspections of mine sites and working with private sector partners to develop cross-border special economic zones, according to the draft. But there are concerns the timeline for implementation may be facing headwinds. ‘One of the main obstacles to finalising and signing this regional agreement is the fact that the other peace processes have stalled’, a Western diplomat said. The diplomat said a separate effort to mediate between the Congolese government and the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels, the Doha process, is struggling to move forward. Kinshasa views the plundering of its mineral wealth as a key driver of the conflict between its forces and M23 rebels in eastern Congo.

Meanwhile, the South African Government is facing scrutiny following the revelation that delegates from the sanctioned M23 rebel group recently attended a high-level peace dialogue in Magaliesburg, Gauteng, without being detected, reports salaamedia. The incident has drawn sharp criticism, particularly as it follows deadly clashes in the DRC where 14 South African soldiers were killed by the same group. Minister of International Relations & Co-operation Ronald Lamola stated that the government was unaware of the rebels’ presence at the second African Peace and Security Dialogue, which was hosted by the Thabo Mbeki Foundation. The presence of the M23 delegation, which included spokesperson Lawrence Kanyuka, prompted the DRC Government to boycott the conference. Meanwhile, Congolese nationals protested outside the venue. Kanyuka expressed disappointment at the DRC’s refusal to attend. This situation has intensified scrutiny on South Africa’s diplomatic processes, with the attendance of M23 rebels being seen by some as a major security lapse. The handling of the situation has led to strong condemnation from political figures, including former Deputy Minister of International Relations & Co-operation Candith Mashego-Dlamini Fransman. She has called for President Cyril Ramaphosa and Lamola to issue a public apology to DRC President Félix Tshisekedi, the SADC leadership and the African Union. ‘South Africa now finds itself at the centre of an avoidable diplomatic crisis’ Fransman stated, highlighting that the oversight raises ‘unsettling questions about the integrity of our diplomatic vetting processes’.