entree


Heritiers de la Justice, a.s.b.l.Service of protestant churches for peace and human rights, 211 Av. Patrice Lumumba/BUKAVU


\| Back HomePage............................ \|BATWA(pygmies) In central Africa...................... \|CHURCH in Kivus


DO YOU REMEMBER THIS?If not please click here Hearing on “Suffering and Despair: Humanitarian Crisis in the Congo” TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS SUBCOMMITTEE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES Committee on International Relations House of Representatives Washington D.C. Statement of Father Jean-Bosco Bahala Diocesan Media Director, Archdiocese of Bukavu (Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo) May 17, 2001, 2712 Rayburn House Office Building. (May 20,2001 6pm) INTRODUCTION Thank you, Madam Chair for the invitation to testify at this important hearing today. Many thanks also to all the members of the subcommittee. I especially want to extend my heartfelt thanks to Congresswoman McKinney, Ranking Minority member, for all the efforts and initiatives she has undertaken for the advent of peace in my country and in Africa. My name is Jean-Bosco Bahala. I am a diocesan priest of the Archdiocese of Bukavu in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and I head the Diocesan Social Communications Service (SEDICOS). This service has been central to the social work of the Church and has been responsible, together with other church-led initiatives like Justice and Peace Commissions, for reinforcing efforts by civil society organizations in South-Kivu province in Eastern DRC to instill human rights and democratic values, tolerance and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. In this regard, I am a member of the network of human rights groups in South-Kivu (Réseau des Associations de Défense des Droits de l’Homme), RADHOSKI, who have actively monitored and denounced human rights violations in the region. This morning, I bring to you a message of peace. Yes, peace from a war-torn land, but also the cry of distress of the Congolese people to the people of the USA. I come to testify on the prospects for peace in my country, and on efforts by the Catholic Church together with the Protestant Church and civil society to create harmony among a distraught people. I would also like to share with you our insights on the situation prevailing today in Eastern DRC. The Role of the Church The Catholic Church in Bukavu is an organized and well-established structure that has had to confront the different conflicts that have torn the Great Lakes region apart since 1990. These circumstances have led the Church to engage in the search for peace through dialogues with local authorities, bearing witness to different international institutions, and educating the population in non-violent conflict resolution methods. Our church is the backbone of several community development efforts - we run hospitals, dispensaries and health care centers, institutions of primary, secondary and higher education, and are very engaged in the protection for the population through social and development programs. In the last couple of years and because of our commitment to peace and human dignity, the Catholic Church of Bukavu has lost through violent or precipitated deaths, her pastors, Monsignor MUNZIHIRWA Christophe, assassinated on October 29, 1996 and Monsignor Emmanuel KATALIKO, who recently died in Rome on October 4, 2000, after seven months in exile imposed by the RCD rebels. This, because he dared to speak of peace, express outrage against attacks on a defenseless civilian population, and articulate the concerns of the population entrusted to his care. As you are surely aware, in this war waged on the Congolese civilian population, and against our will for four years now, which involves 7 regular armies and several other armed groups, it is estimated that 2.5 million Congolese have died. While this number in itself is shocking, it does not reveal the gravity of the suffering, hardship and torment that innocent Congolese civilians have endured: under the guise of waging war women have been buried alive; nuns have been raped, young girls and women sexually assaulted, and men killed. With such incidents of increasing insecurity, the local population has tended to seek refuge in Church Parishes. The attackers have therefore turned to systematically attacking and destroying property belonging to the Churches. Churches and rectories have been burnt and priests and other clergy killed. Even hospitals and medical centers belonging to the church have been burnt. These attacks, often carried out in city centers, are routinely and without investigation, blamed on militias whereas by all accounts they are carried out by the occupying armies. This was for instance the case with the deliberate looting of the studio of my institution, SEDICOS that was broken into in November 2000. Despite the attacks, destruction of property, and assassinations of religious personalities, the Church has embarked on the path towards peace. Recently the Church organized 0-- despite its having been banned by the RCD in Bukavu -- an International Symposium on Peace in Africa, in Butembo (North-Kivu), that brought together over 500 guests from across Europe, North America, and other African countries. The symposium was a concrete manifestation of our commitment to non-violence and peaceful cohabitation. The symposium’s main resolutions were: · “To disarm our minds and recognize that all Congolese and all men and women concerned about peace are our brothers and sisters; · To take human rights as our starting point in building peace; · To break away from apathy, the corruption of lies and the search for personal interest in political life; · To refuse to resort to violence, revenge and hatred in order to advance resolutely along the path of non-violence. Non-violence is the power of truth ” Our Key recommendations for the U.S. International actors and institutions, with a view to bringing an end to the crisis in Congo and the Great Lakes region, have proposed several solutions and formulae. U.S. government officials from the State Department (War Crimes Office, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor) and the National Security Council, and members of Congress have visited the region and have thus acquired first-hand a more accurate understanding of the nature of the conflict in Congo. With the advent of a new administration in both the United States and in Congo, we firmly believe the time is right for concrete action towards bringing the war in the Congo to an end. We strongly believe that, as the only superpower in the world, the U.S.’s decisions have a huge influence on political actors in Central Africa region. This country can play a significant role in putting an end to the carnage that is going on there if the right pressure is applied on those forces fueling the conflict. Our aim is to seek solutions to the conflict in Congo that respect the expectations of the population and internationally recognized rights and obligations of peoples. In order to better understand the present conflict in the Great Lakes region of Africa, it is necessary to recall the ethnic tensions and conflicts in the neighboring states of Rwanda and Burundi. 1. THE GENOCIDE IN RWANDA AND ITS EFFECTS. 1.1 A BRIEF HISTORICAL SURVEY. The intensification of Rwanda’s conflict began in 1990 when a portion of Rwandan citizens, of Tutsi ethnicity exiled since 1959, with the military support of Uganda where they had been based, decided to regain power in Rwanda by force. After the ensuing war, that occasioned a series of massacres, the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF) took power in Kigali. Amidst the RPF’s incursions into Rwanda, and a rapidly deteriorating internal situation, the 1994 genocide in Rwanda occurred. The victory of the ethnic Tutsi in 1994 threw a tide of about two million Hutu refugees on Congolese territory. Two years later, in 1996, a minor rebellion of the Banyamulenge, (Tutsi of Rwandan origin who for long had been living on Congolese soil), scorched the Eastern part of the Congo and expanded to the entire country. The reasons advanced for this rebellion was that they were fighting for their right to Congolese citizenship. However, this was only a pre-textual or limited explanation for the violence, since it became apparent shortly thereafter that the rebellion was also intended, or rather allied with forces determined to, destroy refugee camps housing Hutu from Rwanda (and Burundi) – these were for the most part innocent civilians who never had any conflict with the Banyamulenge. After watching with dismay as an army massacred tens of thousands of refugees and leaving even more unaccounted for, from refugee camps under UN protection, the local Congolese population was stunned at the silence and passiveness of the international community. Effective measures showing that the international community condemned these massacres were not taken. The Archbishop of Bukavu, Mgr. Christophe Munzihirwa, was murdered in this tragedy on October 29, 1996 because of his clairvoyance and his unequivocal stand on the turn of events in the region. Unfortunately, no one had listened to him and the RPF army thus eliminated a witness who had become too outspoken. In the Kivu provinces, we have realized that under the tutelage of Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, the Banyamulenge had been manipulated for other objectives. In 1996, Laurent Kabila was made the leader of this " rebellion." Thus, this largely externally engineered rebellion was made to appear as a (Congolese) civil war with a slogan of campaigning for "national liberation". In exchange, Kabila would get the military support from his allies to overthrow the ailing Mobutu dictatorship and seize power in Kinshasa. To settle once and for all his power in Congo, Kabila was made to clarify his stand vis-à-vis what several Congolese had begun considering as a political and military take over of Congo by Kabila’s own allies. Under pressure from national public opinion, he decided to break ranks with those he had identified as Rwandan, Burundian and Ugandan mercenaries. The second so-called war of "liberation" started right after that decision. The motivations behind this new war, which began on August 2, 1998, differ depending on which audience is involved. While addressing the Congolese population, those orchestrating the war say it is intended to put an end to the dictatorship of Kabila, who is also accused of being responsible for genocide. However, the explanation given outside Congo is that it is necessary to avoid another genocide[i] in the region by protecting the borders of Rwanda and Burundi against incursions from Congolese territory. However, the Congolese people remain shocked, injured and bruised by this conflict foremost because of the ambiguity of the explanations for the current war. They cannot especially comprehend what necessitated attacks committed as far away as Kitona, Inga, Matadi and Kinshasa (far western cities of Congo), almost 2000 kms away from the Rwandan and Ugandan borders. It is incomprehensible that the occupying forces are still justifying this new war as necessary to defend and secure the borders of Cyangugu and Gisenyi, in Western Rwanda, and this, at the expense of Congo as if Congo itself has no right to a certain amount of security within its own borders. Our people do not comprehend why in order to prevent another genocide, banks and financial institutions of Bukavu, Goma, Uvira, and throughout occupied Congolese territory must be robbed. They do not understand why in order to avoid a new genocide civilians need to be slaughtered; shot at close range as happened in Kasika, Uvira, and Kalehe. They do not understand why the Rwandan and Ugandan armies (‘allies’ claiming to be only interested in protecting their security) have even fought each other on Congolese soil, as in the mineral-rich Kisangani area in June 2000, causing hundreds of causualties and incalculable damage. We have complained profusely about the violations of our most basic rights as human beings but the world has remained deaf to our screams. A stronger ideology, one against which every type of suffering and atrocity seems to have been made relative, has been put in motion. The genocide – Rwanda’s genocide -- has become “ideological” and functions like a blank check that the last US administration has granted to Rwanda’s RPF government. In effect it works as a guarantee that they can escape scrutiny whatever their actions, and can therefore act in all impunity. 1.2 THE OFFICIAL U.S. POSITION. In December 1997, during the preparation of the visit of President Clinton to Africa, the Secretary of State, Dr. Madeleine Albright expressed that the US government was willing to enter into a new partnership with the people of the Great Lakes Region in Central Africa.[ii] At the very beginning of this visit, precisely in Accra, (23 March - 2 April 1998), President Bill Clinton presented the US’s initiative as the act of " the African renaissance” for all Africans " longing for new hopes of democracy, peace and prosperity." During her tour in Africa from 26 October to 5 November 1998, Dr. Susan Rice, former Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, reaffirmed the engagement of U.S. in the search for means to restore peace and development in the region. However, the chorus of the genocide seems to provide the framework on which the new U.S. policy for Central Africa is drawn.[iii] . In fact, one would have expected that a new U.S. policy in the region would prioritize promoting peace, democracy and prosperity, rather than support an expansive war. However, this has been done; all – it is claimed -- to avoid a new genocide. 1.3 THE PREVENTION OF GENOCIDE AS A DOMINANT IDEOLOGY. Saddled by this burden that has prevented our interlocutors from seeing through the limitations and consequences of their current policy, our claims and concerns have been silenced - we cannot even claim our right to be heard because there was a genocide. The entire international community with the U.S. spearheading, are expected to adopt the same attitude. There is manipulation of the international community’s feelings of guilt for failing to intervene to prevent the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The Kigali regime invests considerable energy into making this strategy work, especially by reminding Western countries that they were apathetic in not intervening to prevent the genocide. This regime however forgets the strong influence that the U.S., its strongest ally, had on the U.N. Security Council at the time of the genocide. Under the influence of the U.S., on April 27 1994, the Security Council decided the immediately withdraw the United Nations Mission in Rwanda (MINUAR), thus putting an end to its mission at a moment when to avoid the worst, a UN presence was most needed and should instead have been reinforced. The Rwandan Patriotic Front has made good use of that mistake by carving for itself their right to act without scrutiny as long as it reminds a repentant international community of its inaction to prevent the 1994 genocide. The report of the U.N. Secretary General Investigative Team (SGIT) to the Security Council on July 1, 1998 made strong condemnatory allegations on the responsibility of the Rwandan army and forces loyal to Kabila in the massacres of tens of thousands of Hutu refugees in the DRC.[iv] The Security Council responded on July 13 with a tepid, and half-hearted condemnation and recommended that further investigations be made and perpetrators brought to justice by Rwanda and the Congolese government. Instead of the word "genocide", "massacres" was the term used to chracterize the slaughter that was carried out in Eastern Congo. Indignant with the inexplicably weak response of the Security Council, some human rights advocacy organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reacted with outrage. How could one explain the Security Council’s resigned attitude towards investigating and punishing those responsible for these crimes? Perhaps some of its members did prefer to keep the truth on the massacre of the Hutu refugees under the carpet in order to maintain the flawed impression that the Kigali regime was a pure “victim” that deserved protection from recurrence of genocide – a contention that would have been negated by calculated slaughter of innocent civilians by the RPF. Additionally, we know from other sources that the U.S. army trained the perpetrators of these atrocities and that there were sightings of U.S. citizens (troops) when these massacres took place. The joint report by Human Rights Watch/Africa and the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), "What Kabila is Hiding: Civilian Killings and Impunity in Congo," issued in October 1997, accuses the U.S. of being informed of Rwanda’s intention to attack the refugee camps in Congo.[v] 1.4 OUR STAND ON THE QUESTION OF GENOCIDE. Any genocide, that of Rwanda included, is reprehensible and must be vigorously condemned. However, today, only five situations are somewhat universally recognized as having constituted genocides: that against the Jews in World War II, against the Armenians at the beginning of the century, the Pol Pot regime’s genocide in Cambodia, the Bosnian war genocide, and finally that of Rwanda in 1994. Moreover, there are many suspects of genocide in our region. Are only groups that emerge as victors in military conflict entitled to claim to be victims of the genocide? Do we have to wait for the end of the massacres and needless deaths occurring in Congo for us to speak of another genocide? However, with regard to our region, since the 1994 Rwanda genocide where the Tutsi were the principal victims is the only one considered important, an effort must be made to establish objectively the direct and indirect, internal and external levels of responsibility for that genocide. We must always also keep in mind that this was a Rwandan genocide; that is, Hutu and Tutsi perished in it.[vi] In general, the international community should avoid the manipulation of genocide, whether actual or in its prevention, because the concept -- permit the term – “sells” so well today. And specifically, the fate of the Congolese people in bearing solely the burden of this dark period of our common, collective history should come to an end. 2. THE PHILOSOPHY OF GENERALIZED WAR. 2.1 WHAT IS THE WAR IN CONGO ABOUT? The Congolese people see this war as a conquest aimed at fully controlling and managing the resources of Congo and their exploitation through Rwanda and Uganda as intermediaries. Due to this critical understanding, the people manifest a true attitude of resentment against the actual U.S. policy in Central Africa. The armies of Rwanda and Uganda, main allies of the U.S. in the region, are in fact occupying Congolese territory.[vii] Some eyewitnesses affirmed to have seen US military instructors training Rwandan troops in Deida, an island in Lake Kivu and in another military base in the Northeast part of Idjwi (South-Kivu). Although the U.S. administration speaks of a negotiated solution in favor of the integrity of the Congolese national territory and the respect of its existing borders, the genuineness of that commitment is put to question by realities on the ground. Why should they mainly favor troops and weapons while they claim that peace is their primary goal? [viii] The people consider the present war as an invasion initiated from outside and carried out under the disguise of a mutiny of the 10th and the 222nd brigades, based respectively in Goma and Bukavu. However, what are these two brigades to resist the Congolese National Army with the support of Angola, Zimbabwe, and Namibia? This "rebellion" is not an expression of the aspirations of the people, as some want public opinion to believe. It is instead the result of political intrigue built around the vengeance that Kabila’s own old Rwandan and Ugandan allies had prepared against him. That is why the people reject it, considering it as another unjust war against them. In spite of months of falsehood, the people have shown their disapproval by boycotting different activities imposed by the RCD (Congolese Rally for Democracy), which is the political branch of the “armed rebellion.” The Congolese people absolutely do not endorse this war that they find unjustified. For them, it is an act of aggression from Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. The people regard those Congolese who back it as dishonorable persons who are betraying their people and their country. This explains why the “rebellion” is unpopular. 2.2 CONQUEST FOR AN UNDISPUTED MARKET The real objective of this war can be traced to the " African Growth and Opportunity Act," a bill introduced in the American Congress in October 1997 by a group of American multinationals. This bill defines the new economic policy of the US in Africa. It recommends the elimination of taxes on most African products, the privatization of all the sectors of economy in Africa, the reduction of taxes imposed on multinationals, the elimination of all restrictions regarding investing in Africa, a revision of laws on the protection of the environment, as well as a project to create a free trade zone between the United States and Africa. One would expect the often-mentioned new partnership between the U.S. and Africa that should usher in an "African Renaissance," to be built on free and bilateral agreements between States, rather than being the result of military imposition. The war’s major stake The major stake in this war is the looting of the DRC’s resources, not discounting all corollary fiscal exploitation. We witness a systematic looting of resources for the benefit of the aggressors and foreign companies. They administer the territory they militarily occupy as absolute colonies, with the complicity of some Congolese, depriving the population of their rights, including the most basic, through a reign of terror and misery. Mgr. Kataliko was exiled from his diocese precisely for pointing out this exploitation that is on going and has recently been thoroughly attested to by the UN’s Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of the DRC’s Natural Resources. Despite the condemnation of the illegal exploitation of the DRC’s resources by the UN’s Security Council and its extension of the mandate of the Panel of Experts, its failure to proceed to impose sanctions on these foreign powers will continue to leave in tact the mechanisms and opportunity for exploitation. 3. THE PRESENT SITUATION AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE WAR ON THE POPULATION. Catastrophic Humanitarian Situation We live a daily humanitarian tragedy that is indescribable and unprecedented. The humanitarian structures of the Church such as hospitals, medical centers, nutritional and charity centers are unable to keep pace with the massive flow of the ever-growing numbers of the needy. Malnutrition, once a phenomenon afflicting mostly children, is now increasingly afflicting adults. Epidemics such as cholera, once confined to the some rural areas, are reappearing in the city, following the enormous exodus and concentration of populations fleeing the insecurity in rural areas. A few reports by international agencies have documented the extent of this humanitarian disaster. In a recently released report following a survey of death rates in Eastern Congo, the International Rescue Committee concludes that the death rate due to the conflict in Eastern Congo is “shockingly high”. It estimates the number of excess deaths since the beginning of the current war at 2.5 million, of which 350,000 were deaths directly resulting from the violent conflict. A UN official, Ms. Caroline McAskie, of the Office of Humanitarian Coordination stated during a meeting of the UN Security Council that about 16 million people, or about a third of the DRC’s total population, are directly affected and impacted by the fighting. Among some of the most atrocious consequences of this war on the civilian population are: · A series of massacres, among which the massacre at Kasika is most often talked about (1099 casualties, all civilians). Other massacres have been committed in Makobola, Lusenda, Kilungutwe, Kamituga and Katogota. · Internal displacement of the civilian population: for instance, entire villages are displaced and continually in motion between Bukavu and Kindu, fleeing from the terror of war. By our estimates, at least 1.5 million Congolese are internally displaced as a result of the war. · Far from their houses and fields, the civilian population dispersed in the dense, equatorial forest are left without food, medicines, drinking water, and exposed to all sorts of epidemic outbursts and inclement weather conditions. · The war has occasioned the crumbling of the educational system, with extremely high school dropout rates, and these youths being recruited into militias, and other armed groups. · As confirmed by Congressman Frank Wolf who visited the region in January 2001, the situation of women is particularly precarious: “ Women live in fear. Soldiers – regardless of whom they owe their allegiance to – often treat them as prey. I heard horrific stories of rape, abuse and torture. Women are being raped in front of their husbands and children. One woman had her hands cut off after being raped; she now has a child she cannot care for. We were told that just two days before I arrived in Bukavu, a woman was raped in the marketplace at 10 a.m. and no one intervened. ” As a result of this widespread use of sexual violence, the spread of AIDS is a real concern, especially since it is said that 70% of soldiers fighting in Congo are HIV positive and have been accused of raping women indiscriminately. Congolese human rights groups have documented hundreds of cases of rape perpetrated by soldiers. Human Rights Watch even reported on a case of a Congolese woman being raped and forced to stand in a pit full of water in which a dead infant (foetus) was already floating from another woman who had miscarried earlier during her torture. · Since the beginning of the war, 58 priests and other religious clergy have either been killed or wounded. The Church has thus been bearing the brunt of this war. · Grinding to a halt of the local economy because of the degradation of financial institutions and banks. The strangling effect on the local population is aggravated by their being cut off from all means of communications that are now controlled by the various militias spreading insecurity in all the occupied territory. · Uncontrolled inflation, approaching a rate of 300% in just the first four months following the beginning of the war. · Fear of large scale massacres and of the recurrence of crimes typically committed by the Rwandan Army (such as killings in Kasika, Kilungutwe, Bushaku, Bunyakiri, etc) · A deep feeling of abandonment and isolation: nobody seems to be moved or willing to alleviate the acute humanitarian problems that the Congolese population is facing. · An unjustifiable and excessive feeling of guilt is imposed on the conscience of the Congolese people: they are accused of participating in the genocide (or as sympathizing with the perpetrators of the Rwanda genocide) when they try to defend themselves after being attacked. They are treated as irresponsible or irrational whenever they try to speak out their mind; they were accused of subservience to the “dictatorial” Laurent Kabila regime whenever they insist upon the national unity of Congo. In fact, this last aspect misconstrues the reason for the similarity between the discourse from Kabila and the population: the latter’s point being not so much to express support for Kabila the individual, but about affirming the principle of national identity and sovereignty as well as the territorial integrity of Congo. These are absolutes that no country will consider negotiable. · Arbitrary detentions, abductions, tortures and murders ordered by the RCD against those who hold different opinions.[ix] RCD/Rwanda authorities in occupied Eastern Congo have repeatedly silenced protest by human rights monitors and observers, as well as church and other civil society institutions in the region. They have taken high-handed measures against senior church leaders – such as the 7 month relegation of late Archbishop Emmanuel Kataliko of Bukavu, and specifically targeted church social institutions and human rights groups in the occupied regions for intimidation, attacks and lootings. Recent incidents of such Rwanda/RCD heavy-handedness include the obstruction of encounters by the Co-Chair of the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), with civil society in occupied–Eastern Congo. This incident happened in January 2001. This pattern of repression suggests a strong inclination to suppress potential sources of information to the outside world so that abuses can continue in the dark, which makes public diplomacy even more effective. · With the complicity of the RCD, the invaders are terrorizing local traditional rulers and chiefs, forcing them to go underground in the countryside. In certain cases, Catholic priests and Protestant pastors have suffered from the same treatment. This behavior displays the political intention to decapitate a people by suppressing its traditional leadership. · The freedom of speech and expression has been suppressed. We would say that in order to satisfy certain American and international viewpoints the Congolese people have been compelled to become subservient -- without thought, without option, without action, in short, become non-existent. In the Western part of the country controlled by the Government of Kinshasa, the situation is hardly better: famine, misery, and disease are compounded by unpaid salaries due to the war -- in other words the generalized extreme poverty is the daily reality for Congo’s citizens. Human Rights organizations have also reported that in areas under government control, belligerent forces, including armies allied to the Kinshasa government have committed serious abuses. The war of occupation has also been used as an excuse for the suppression of fundamental freedoms and blocking the path towards democratization. Restrictions on freedom of independent media and freedom of political expression were particularly draconian under Laurent Kabila. Unjustified arrests, incommunicado detention, and harassment of human rights activists are also a recurrent problem. Everyone hopes that with the advent of President Joseph Kabila’s regime, which has promised political openness and particular attention to improving the human rights situation, participation, freedom of opinion and speech and the beginning of the inter-Congolese dialogue will be possible. 4. TODAY’S STRATEGY The False Interahamwe To perpetuate the ideology of the prevention of another genocide and protection of its borders, one core strategy has remained available to Rwanda’s government: perpetuate the argument that the Interahamwe are responsible for the war, and that they are present and operate from the DRC. It must be made clear that the Interahamwe began as a Rwandan phenomenon. They were the militias that, in 1994, carried out massacres to maintain a dubious Hutu regime in power amidst the onslaught of a progressing Tutsi military power. At its root, this is the result of an ethnic and political problem, internal to Rwanda. However, ever since the tragic events of 1994, a new pattern has arisen whereby any and all armed insurgents seeking to combat Rwanda’s current government are labeled -- rightly or wrongly – as Interahamwe. However, in many of the attacks upon the civilian population in the DRC -- which some want to portray as exclusively the handwork of the Interahamwe -- victims have attested to the fact that persons of Tutsi ethnicity were among the attackers. This has led to the conclusion that there are indications of a macabre strategy at work with the sole objective of creating and perpetuating some insecurity along Rwanda’s borders through armed groups that terrorize the local population. These groups principally attack villages to in order to dislodge the local population. They then loot social centers, especially churches, in order to weaken an institution that represents a force of moral resistance to the occupation. For the international community, this leads to confusion that confers upon the aggressors a pretext to stay in the occupied territories. On the ground, it gives enough time for the invading forces to settle and place the international community before a fait accompli: the presence of Rwandan settlers is in rapid expansion in Eastern DRC, through a war that has all the characteristics of an act of conquest. The exploitation that has ensued extends presently to up to a thousand kilometers (about 575 miles) beyond the borders of the aggressors, Rwanda and Uganda. Justifications advanced for the war: The occupying nations justify this war by claiming that they have to ensure the security of their borders, and prevent another genocide. The international community has believed this version with little objection, and even gone as far as tolerating and supporting it. It will be necessary to undertake a thorough review of Rwandan security concerns in Eastern Congo and to redefine the U.S. role in creating regional security guarantees that eliminate the security concerns advanced by Rwanda and Uganda as bases for their intervention in the DRC. While at times disapproving the consequences of Rwanda’s military action in Congo (i.e., the compromised territorial integrity of the DRC), U.S. policy has been caught between an understanding that Rwanda - at least during its initial forays into Congo - had real security concerns, but an equally clear understanding that there is no enthusiasm in Washington (or indeed anywhere else) for a massive and complex militia demobilization, and border security operation to stabilize the region. The U.S. should acquire a more thorough and focused understanding of the precise nature of threats to Rwanda’s security posed by remnants of genocidal militia groups in Congo. Good policy, or an eventual ‘security guarantees’ arrangement cannot be made on the basis of speculations about the nature of these threats to Rwanda’s security (i.e. Militia groups – their numbers, location, military strength, command structure, etc). This is the best check against the pre-textual use of unarticulated security concerns to justify a military presence and abuses which in their nature bear at best a tenuous relationship with guaranteeing security. While the previous administration’s policy was based upon addressing the risks posed to Rwanda (i.e. its reason for ‘understanding’ Rwanda’s military action in the Congo), it is unfortunate that U.S. policy largely failed to address the actual large –scale massacres (of both Rwandans and Congolese) that have taken place in the DRC, since 1996. Fueling Ethnic tensions According to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, Uganda is directly responsible for the ethnic war between the Hema and the Lendu communities in the Orientale province of Eastern DRC that has resulted in about 20,000 deaths since 1999. Recent accounts of events in the region indicate that the RCD-Goma is using the same strategy in a bid to create antagonism between the two main tribes of South Kivu, the Bashi and the Warega. Thus, a policy of “divide and rule” is gaining ground. The Lusaka Accords The Lusaka cease-fire accords are the fruit of inter-state negotiations to which the rebel factions backed by Rwanda and Uganda were parties. The International Community sanctioned the Accords and their implementation has often been delayed. Violations of the Accord that have occurred repeatedly are the consequences of its inherent shortcomings (especially the absence of any sanctions against those who violate the Accords). Although, the government of Joseph Kabila has lifted obstacles previously created by his predecessor, there is a clear impression that the belligerents want to keep the status quo that in effect maintains the partition of the country. Despite calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops and several resolutions of the UN Security Council, no real and concrete signs of willingness to match their declared intentions to withdraw is seen on the ground. On the contrary, troops withdrawn from the battle frontline are redeployed to the interior of Congolese territory where fighting with militias (such as the Mai-Mai) continues. 4.1 RAISING AWARENESS IN THE U.S. It is for the foregoing reasons that we are kindly asking for your cooperation to awaken American public opinion to the misery and misfortune of the Congolese people. As a superpower and the principal ally of Rwanda and Uganda, the U.S., if willing, cannot lack means to remedy to the situation. This help should reflect the interest that the United States has always assigned to human rights and social progress. We are witnessing the troublesome consequences of a policy that in practice still favors a militarized solution to the Great Lakes conflicts and this is perceptible even if we are still unable to unveil all its political, economic, and military intrigues, whose obscurity prevents public opinion from unmasking its authors. We also know however the high consideration that the American public has for truth, respect for human rights, liberty, democracy and social progress. 4.2 KNOWLEDGE. We would like to ensure that American society is knowledgeable about what is happening in the Central Africa region. In fact, once well informed, it is best placed to move its authorities to promote a different strategy – one marked by dialogue and collaboration rather than war. We are confused by the discrepancy between the official declarations of the U.S. and the practical, military consequences of its policy on the ground. The official discourse espouses democracy, peace, equality and prosperity, whereas in the field we live the reverse: the unbridled dictatorship of an ethnic minority in Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi and currently in the East of the DRC. In the same way, instead of peace, we are crushed by a generalized war raging through the heart of the continent; instead of prosperity, we are struggling with misery and systematic plundering of private and national resources. The assistance we are asking for will not exclusively benefit our country and people. We foresee in it a preventive measure that can spare the Great Lakes Region from the tragedy that entrenched politics of exclusion can lead to. 4.3 IMPLICATIONS OF THIS APPROACH U.S. government officials are on record as saying that a country as big, rich and powerful as the U.S. is morally obliged to take steps in reducing the poverty of the Third Word. That is what should be the case but for the moment, our people are hardly receiving any assistance from your country. The US should send strong signals that it is conscious of the war economy and economic interests that are suspected of fueling conflicts in the region, and that serious consideration will be given to measures similar to the proposed Sierra Leone (conflict diamonds) Carat Act, UN diamond export bans on Sierra Leone & Angola, or the embargo on Liberia’s diamonds, to create strong disincentives to economic adventures. The population does not lack interlocutors and spokespersons. The civil society of the South-Kivu can be proposed as a courageous example. In their "Plan for Peace" (which has brought on them persistent repressive measures from the RCD), they have designed some peaceful ways to get out of this absurd war. As interlocutors, they need to be recognized by the great powers of this world, as a way by which the latter can show their political will and determination to find peaceful solutions to a conflict that has already left too many victims. Paths to Solutions In order to end this war of occupation: 1. The reality of the conflict in all its complexity must be made public. We salute to that effect the idea of deploying UN observers (MONUC), to ensure that the belligerents live up to their commitments, and ensuring a neutral observer presence. 2. Real peace will never be achieved as long as the integrity of the DRC is threatened. The deployment of UN troops should be envisioned at its borders with the invading countries rather than along the combat front line, as stipulated in the flawed Lusaka Accords. 3. An inter-Congolese dialogue would not be effective without a more serene atmosphere and as long as occupation armies control the country. It is also a must to work simultaneously at resolving the internal problems of Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda through an internal dialogue in their countries, as required from the DRC. 4. Good governance is a must in the DRC, and in the entire Great Lakes Region of Africa – this must be assured through governments that result from popular participation and are democratically chosen. 5. The Banyamulenge question is a question that can only be resolved by an administration of a peaceful Congo, in conformity with the Constitution of the country. Moreover, the wiser among the Banyamulenge have long come to the realization that those in power in Kigali are simply manipulating the Banyamulenge’s legitimate concerns for their own objectives in DR Congo; these Banyamulenge groups have thus began searching for ways to peace. 6. An international structure to investigate, try, and punish all those guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity -- no matter their origin or perpetrators -- is necessary to halt the culture of impunity that has settled in the region. 7. Support should be given to those forces in the population actively working on ways to peacefully resolve the conflict. It is imperative to associate all those active at the grassroots level in the peace process. Since they share in the devastation of war, it would be beneficial that they participate in peace building. Conclusion 1. We ardently wish that the new U.S. administration play a strong role both in its bilateral relations in the region and within the international community in putting an end to the violation of basic human rights in DR Congo. It should also weigh heavily with its might to end this war and the occupation of DR Congo. Just as the international community moved and teamed up in favor of Kuwait against the Iraqi aggressor, the U.S. should – in light with the official position of the U.N. Security Council -- re-consider, acknowledge, and articulate its policy around a realization that the DR Congo is a country invaded and occupied by three neighboring states. Therefore, appropriate mobilization to oblige the invading forces to leave would re-establish the integrity of its territory and allow each country to put together internal democratic structures conducive to development. 2. We believe that once foreign troops leave, a new form of international cooperation is possible in order to erect and rebuild what this war has destroyed, and jump-start economic activities presently paralyzed by this war. This will ultimately lead to regional economic integration, freely subscribed to by the people and nations the Great Lakes and Central Africa. We think that this offers a better guarantee for sustainable development and peace, and this has worked successfully in other seriously agitated regions. The European Union has become, thanks to economic cooperation, a peaceful zone on our planet after the two disasters of 1914 and 1945. 3. We are convinced that all the assistance can reach us rapidly to achieve our goals without allowing some states to use them to consolidate their might of violence and prolong the sufferings of populations battered by both warring parties. 4. Finally, we are committed to work to achieve justice, respect of human dignity and human rights, truth, brotherhood, and understanding in the sub-region. We truly hope that the new administration takes our analysis into consideration, and that it will do whatever is necessary to restore peace in DR Congo and the Great Lakes region of Africa. The Congolese people want peace and nothing but peace. It is in order to contribute to building this peace that I testify today. We call upon you to re-echo the cries of the people of our country and to bring pressure on those who control the conflicts in the Great Lakes Region of Africa from behind the scenes. While thanking you infinitely for the attention that you granted me, I hope the United States Congress will help define timely and concrete political proposals that will prevent the region from becoming a zone of permanent instability, where a culture of annihilation prevails over respect for the dignity of the human person. GOD BLESS YOU. ANNEXES (submitted to the SubComittee’s offices): Selected photographs of some atrocities committed in Eastern DRC. Video footage of victims of a bomb attack carried out by the RPA in Bukavu, on 26 August 2000 after the visit of (fmr.) US Ambassador for War Crimes, David Scheffer. “Cry of Suffering – Cry of Hope: Message of the People of the Democratic Republc of Congo”, Final Document of the International Symposium on Peace in Africa, Butembo, DRC (February 2001) List of mining dealerships (comptoirs) belonging to Rwandan soldiers in Bukavu List of foreign companies enagaged in the purchase of coltan in the Kivus. A Study on the Exploitation of Coltan in North-Kivu, by Pole Institute/CREDAP (17 March 2001). 1 …stop the genocidal killings and other local violence in Rwanda, Eastern Congo, and Burundi.". During the Entebbe Summit, on March 25, 1998, the engagement that banishes the genocide in Africa was taken when President Clinton declared that: " Our efforts came too late for yesterday's victims; they must be in time to prevent tomorrow's victims ". Susan Rice reaffirmed the same saying that " concrete steps must be taken to prevent another genocide in this region ". 2 In the immediate term, our goals in the Great Lakes region are to help: 1) stabilize the Democratic Republic of Congo…; 2) stop the genocidal killings and other local violence in Rwanda, in Eastern Congo, and Burundi and; 3) advance increased respect for human rights and humanitarian principles and the development of justice system (…) 3During her exchange with the Civil Society in Kinshasa (October 30, 98) Susan Rice reiterated that peace; development and a guarantee of a space for the ethnic Tutsi are objectives of US. (IRIN-CEA, 31/10/1998). 4This report states that the circumstances in which attacks against the camps of refugees inside the country were carried out in 1997 “display the deliberate intention to exterminate Rwandan Hutu refugees” who had remained in Zaire. A possible interpretation of this phase of operations led by the AFDL (Alliance of the Democratic Forces for Liberation, Kabila’s party) with the military support of Rwanda is that it had been decided to eliminate those Hutus. The confirmation of the above interpretation would lead to the recognition of another act of genocide. 5" The US provided Rwandan authorities with firm political support throughout its military campaign in Congo. Some well-informed witnesses declare that the American army has been training and assisting the RPA on Congolese territory. Some specific recommendations have been addressed to the U.S. government asking them to unveil the nature of their engagement with Rwanda and demanding that they suspend all tactical support and delivery of weapons to the RPA in Congo. Researchers like Bill Hartung have highlighted this U.S. involvement in military support for belligerents in the Congo. Some credible witnesses affirm that they have sighted some US military officers in Cyangugu, on the eve of the fall of Bukavu (28/10/1996, from a local source). [vi] It must be noted that the responsibility for certain key events related to the genocide is yet to be established, especially via an investigation of the authors of the April 1994 shooting of the plane carrying then Rwandan President Habyarimana. This is a potentially explosive issue to follow: a French Judge is investigating the alleged involvement of the actual Rwandan President in the shooting of this plane which occurred a few hours before the genocide began. There has been talk of a confidential memo by U.N. investigators specifying elements of proof implicating the RPF in this incident that the U.N. has neither released nor acknowledged. 6In an interview with Lynn Duke, (a correspondent of The Washington Post, July 14, 1998), on the massive military assistance of the U.S. to Rwanda, a member of Clinton’s administration responded: “ [T]o impose some military solutions to the conflicts in the Great Lake Region, it is necessary to establish a very powerful military regime.” The military assistance granted to these two undemocratic regimes comes essentially from a special budget of the Pentagon. It the scrutiny of the Congress and the American public following a law enacted in 1981 that grants to the Pentagon millions of dollars every year to finance the operations of the U.S. Special Forces abroad. " … Some countries in the Great Lake Region, starting for instance with Rwanda, have favored and are still giving great importance to military strategies in which we Europeans have no part. Unfortunately, they look up to the one who provides them with weapons, military materials, as the more interesting partner. In our days, the U.S. in particular, is helping them in that sense." Julia Ficatier, Interview with Aldo Ajello, European Commissioner for the Great Lakes Region of Africa, La Croix, 8 May 1998. Furthermore, the consequences of this war are being felt in Uganda as well: schools and hospitals are receiving only half of their monthly subsidies. Some ministers have declared that the rest is spent to sustain the war in Congo. The Ugandan people are not in favor of this action. (Reseau Européen Congo, No.11, December 4, 1998). On November 12, 1998, Prof. Akiki Mudjandju, the dean of the Faculty of Political Sciences at Kampala University, denounced his country’s military intervention in the DRC. This intervention was notably characterized by the nomination of General James Kasini, Ugandan army’s Chief of Staff, to lead the troops of the forces of aggression, allied to the so-called “Congolese” rebellion. According to BBC, the weight of this war is becoming unbearable for the Ugandan economy. The State is dedicating half of its budget to military ends instead of allocating it for its socio-economic development. Prof. Akiki enjoined President Museveni to reanalyze the problem of security in Uganda, underlining that the solution is to be found in Uganda and not outside, in the DRC. (ACP, 14/11/1998). “The World Bank is saying the Ugandan economy is doing very well, but Uganda is third from the bottom in the ranking of the least developed. It is descending. Life expectancy is dropping continually but they say that people are dying because of neglect " (…) " There are some American businessmen who have key interests in dealing with Museveni. They see Museveni as the new broom that can be used to sweep across Africa.” Executive Intelligence Review, USA , August 8, 1997, vol. 24, n° 32. Recently, the Paris Club of donors in collaboration with other sponsors announced loans worth two billion US dollars to Uganda. If the proportions of expenses of the State remain the same, this means Uganda will have available about a billion dollars for use in the aggression against the DRC. The economic situation of Rwanda is even worse where signs of famine have compelled the regime of Kigali to ask for food help. 7cfr. ALERT, No.6/1998.	ARCHIVES La Reporting on Kivu Villages Mwenga centre \| Kamituga \| Kalambi \| Baraka \| Bideka \| Ibanda-Ngweshe \| Baraka \| Ville de Bukavu \| Uvira \| Luvungi \| Kalehe \| Sange \| Lemera\| Bunyakiri \| Nyabibwe \| Kitutu \| Kalonge \| Kaziba Funders - EZE-Germany - Christian-Aid/UK - - ICCO-Hollande - Dan Church Aid/Danemark - KIOS/Finlande What is Heritiers? Objectives and Aims,... Staffs Current Projects Human Rights Reports & International Media on Kivu Human Rights Watch 1.Latest Report de Mai 2000) 2.French version Previous Report International Rescue Committee a. 1.7 million deads in 22 months (June 2000):Summary b. 1.7 millions dead in 22 months (June 2000):Whole raport ACROBAT READER Amnesty International 1. Latest Report (Juin 2000, version Anglaise) 2. East of Congo: Horror HALT! International prosecution for human rights violations 1. Hussein Habre case in Senegal 2. Hussein Habre next 3. International Criminal Court . Others Reports Links on the Congo (MONUC: UN in Congo) Observatoire de l'Afrique New Congo Net *irin*

DO YOU REMEMBER THIS?If not please click here

Hearing on “Suffering and Despair: Humanitarian Crisis in the Congo”

TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS SUBCOMMITTEE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES Committee on International Relations House of Representatives Washington D.C. Statement of Father Jean-Bosco Bahala Diocesan Media Director, Archdiocese of Bukavu (Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo) May 17, 2001, 2712 Rayburn House Office Building. (May 20,2001 6pm)

INTRODUCTION Thank you, Madam Chair for the invitation to testify at this important hearing today. Many thanks also to all the members of the subcommittee. I especially want to extend my heartfelt thanks to Congresswoman McKinney, Ranking Minority member, for all the efforts and initiatives she has undertaken for the advent of peace in my country and in Africa.

My name is Jean-Bosco Bahala. I am a diocesan priest of the Archdiocese of Bukavu in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and I head the Diocesan Social Communications Service (SEDICOS). This service has been central to the social work of the Church and has been responsible, together with other church-led initiatives like Justice and Peace Commissions, for reinforcing efforts by civil society organizations in South-Kivu province in Eastern DRC to instill human rights and democratic values, tolerance and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. In this regard, I am a member of the network of human rights groups in South-Kivu (Réseau des Associations de Défense des Droits de l’Homme), RADHOSKI, who have actively monitored and denounced human rights violations in the region.

This morning, I bring to you a message of peace. Yes, peace from a war-torn land, but also the cry of distress of the Congolese people to the people of the USA. I come to testify on the prospects for peace in my country, and on efforts by the Catholic Church together with the Protestant Church and civil society to create harmony among a distraught people. I would also like to share with you our insights on the situation prevailing today in Eastern DRC.

The Role of the Church

The Catholic Church in Bukavu is an organized and well-established structure that has had to confront the different conflicts that have torn the Great Lakes region apart since 1990. These circumstances have led the Church to engage in the search for peace through dialogues with local authorities, bearing witness to different international institutions, and educating the population in non-violent conflict resolution methods. Our church is the backbone of several community development efforts - we run hospitals, dispensaries and health care centers, institutions of primary, secondary and higher education, and are very engaged in the protection for the population through social and development programs.

In the last couple of years and because of our commitment to peace and human dignity, the Catholic Church of Bukavu has lost through violent or precipitated deaths, her pastors, Monsignor MUNZIHIRWA Christophe, assassinated on October 29, 1996 and Monsignor Emmanuel KATALIKO, who recently died in Rome on October 4, 2000, after seven months in exile imposed by the RCD rebels. This, because he dared to speak of peace, express outrage against attacks on a defenseless civilian population, and articulate the concerns of the population entrusted to his care.

As you are surely aware, in this war waged on the Congolese civilian population, and against our will for four years now, which involves 7 regular armies and several other armed groups, it is estimated that 2.5 million Congolese have died. While this number in itself is shocking, it does not reveal the gravity of the suffering, hardship and torment that innocent Congolese civilians have endured: under the guise of waging war women have been buried alive; nuns have been raped, young girls and women sexually assaulted, and men killed.

With such incidents of increasing insecurity, the local population has tended to seek refuge in Church Parishes. The attackers have therefore turned to systematically attacking and destroying property belonging to the Churches. Churches and rectories have been burnt and priests and other clergy killed. Even hospitals and medical centers belonging to the church have been burnt. These attacks, often carried out in city centers, are routinely and without investigation, blamed on militias whereas by all accounts they are carried out by the occupying armies. This was for instance the case with the deliberate looting of the studio of my institution, SEDICOS that was broken into in November 2000.

Despite the attacks, destruction of property, and assassinations of religious personalities, the Church has embarked on the path towards peace. Recently the Church organized 0-- despite its having been banned by the RCD in Bukavu -- an International Symposium on Peace in Africa, in Butembo (North-Kivu), that brought together over 500 guests from across Europe, North America, and other African countries. The symposium was a concrete manifestation of our commitment to non-violence and peaceful cohabitation.
The symposium’s main resolutions were:

· “To disarm our minds and recognize that all Congolese and all men and women concerned about peace are our brothers and sisters;

· To take human rights as our starting point in building peace;

· To break away from apathy, the corruption of lies and the search for personal interest in political life;

· To refuse to resort to violence, revenge and hatred in order to advance resolutely along the path of non-violence. Non-violence is the power of truth ”

Our Key recommendations for the U.S.

International actors and institutions, with a view to bringing an end to the crisis in Congo and the Great Lakes region, have proposed several solutions and formulae. U.S. government officials from the State Department (War Crimes Office, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor) and the National Security Council, and members of Congress have visited the region and have thus acquired first-hand a more accurate understanding of the nature of the conflict in Congo. With the advent of a new administration in both the United States and in Congo, we firmly believe the time is right for concrete action towards bringing the war in the Congo to an end.

We strongly believe that, as the only superpower in the world, the U.S.’s decisions have a huge influence on political actors in Central Africa region. This country can play a significant role in putting an end to the carnage that is going on there if the right pressure is applied on those forces fueling the conflict. Our aim is to seek solutions to the conflict in Congo that respect the expectations of the population and internationally recognized rights and obligations of peoples.

In order to better understand the present conflict in the Great Lakes region of Africa, it is necessary to recall the ethnic tensions and conflicts in the neighboring states of Rwanda and Burundi.

1. THE GENOCIDE IN RWANDA AND ITS EFFECTS.

1.1 A BRIEF HISTORICAL SURVEY.

The intensification of Rwanda’s conflict began in 1990 when a portion of Rwandan citizens, of Tutsi ethnicity exiled since 1959, with the military support of Uganda where they had been based, decided to regain power in Rwanda by force. After the ensuing war, that occasioned a series of massacres, the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF) took power in Kigali. Amidst the RPF’s incursions into Rwanda, and a rapidly deteriorating internal situation, the 1994 genocide in Rwanda occurred. The victory of the ethnic Tutsi in 1994 threw a tide of about two million Hutu refugees on Congolese territory.

Two years later, in 1996, a minor rebellion of the Banyamulenge, (Tutsi of Rwandan origin who for long had been living on Congolese soil), scorched the Eastern part of the Congo and expanded to the entire country. The reasons advanced for this rebellion was that they were fighting for their right to Congolese citizenship. However, this was only a pre-textual or limited explanation for the violence, since it became apparent shortly thereafter that the rebellion was also intended, or rather allied with forces determined to, destroy refugee camps housing Hutu from Rwanda (and Burundi) – these were for the most part innocent civilians who never had any conflict with the Banyamulenge. After watching with dismay as an army massacred tens of thousands of refugees and leaving even more unaccounted for, from refugee camps under UN protection, the local Congolese population was stunned at the silence and passiveness of the international community. Effective measures showing that the international community condemned these massacres were not taken. The Archbishop of Bukavu, Mgr. Christophe Munzihirwa, was murdered in this tragedy on October 29, 1996 because of his clairvoyance and his unequivocal stand on the turn of events in the region. Unfortunately, no one had listened to him and the RPF army thus eliminated a witness who had become too outspoken.

In the Kivu provinces, we have realized that under the tutelage of Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, the Banyamulenge had been manipulated for other objectives. In 1996, Laurent Kabila was made the leader of this " rebellion." Thus, this largely externally engineered rebellion was made to appear as a (Congolese) civil war with a slogan of campaigning for "national liberation". In exchange, Kabila would get the military support from his allies to overthrow the ailing Mobutu dictatorship and seize power in Kinshasa. To settle once and for all his power in Congo, Kabila was made to clarify his stand vis-à-vis what several Congolese had begun considering as a political and military take over of Congo by Kabila’s own allies. Under pressure from national public opinion, he decided to break ranks with those he had identified as Rwandan, Burundian and Ugandan mercenaries. The second so-called war of "liberation" started right after that decision.

The motivations behind this new war, which began on August 2, 1998, differ depending on which audience is involved. While addressing the Congolese population, those orchestrating the war say it is intended to put an end to the dictatorship of Kabila, who is also accused of being responsible for genocide. However, the explanation given outside Congo is that it is necessary to avoid another genocide[i] in the region by protecting the borders of Rwanda and Burundi against incursions from Congolese territory. However, the Congolese people remain shocked, injured and bruised by this conflict foremost because of the ambiguity of the explanations for the current war. They cannot especially comprehend what necessitated attacks committed as far away as Kitona, Inga, Matadi and Kinshasa (far western cities of Congo), almost 2000 kms away from the Rwandan and Ugandan borders.

It is incomprehensible that the occupying forces are still justifying this new war as necessary to defend and secure the borders of Cyangugu and Gisenyi, in Western Rwanda, and this, at the expense of Congo as if Congo itself has no right to a certain amount of security within its own borders. Our people do not comprehend why in order to prevent another genocide, banks and financial institutions of Bukavu, Goma, Uvira, and throughout occupied Congolese territory must be robbed. They do not understand why in order to avoid a new genocide civilians need to be slaughtered; shot at close range as happened in Kasika, Uvira, and Kalehe. They do not understand why the Rwandan and Ugandan armies (‘allies’ claiming to be only interested in protecting their security) have even fought each other on Congolese soil, as in the mineral-rich Kisangani area in June 2000, causing hundreds of causualties and incalculable damage.

We have complained profusely about the violations of our most basic rights as human beings but the world has remained deaf to our screams. A stronger ideology, one against which every type of suffering and atrocity seems to have been made relative, has been put in motion. The genocide – Rwanda’s genocide -- has become “ideological” and functions like a blank check that the last US administration has granted to Rwanda’s RPF government. In effect it works as a guarantee that they can escape scrutiny whatever their actions, and can therefore act in all impunity.

1.2 THE OFFICIAL U.S. POSITION.

In December 1997, during the preparation of the visit of President Clinton to Africa, the Secretary of State, Dr. Madeleine Albright expressed that the US government was willing to enter into a new partnership with the people of the Great Lakes Region in Central Africa.[ii] At the very beginning of this visit, precisely in Accra, (23 March - 2 April 1998), President Bill Clinton presented the US’s initiative as the act of " the African renaissance” for all Africans " longing for new hopes of democracy, peace and prosperity." During her tour in Africa from 26 October to 5 November 1998, Dr. Susan Rice, former Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, reaffirmed the engagement of U.S. in the search for means to restore peace and development in the region. However, the chorus of the genocide seems to provide the framework on which the new U.S. policy for Central Africa is drawn.[iii] . In fact, one would have expected that a new U.S. policy in the region would prioritize promoting peace, democracy and prosperity, rather than support an expansive war. However, this has been done; all – it is claimed -- to avoid a new genocide.

1.3 THE PREVENTION OF GENOCIDE AS A DOMINANT IDEOLOGY.

Saddled by this burden that has prevented our interlocutors from seeing through the limitations and consequences of their current policy, our claims and concerns have been silenced - we cannot even claim our right to be heard because there was a genocide. The entire international community with the U.S. spearheading, are expected to adopt the same attitude. There is manipulation of the international community’s feelings of guilt for failing to intervene to prevent the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The Kigali regime invests considerable energy into making this strategy work, especially by reminding Western countries that they were apathetic in not intervening to prevent the genocide. This regime however forgets the strong influence that the U.S., its strongest ally, had on the U.N. Security Council at the time of the genocide. Under the influence of the U.S., on April 27 1994, the Security Council decided the immediately withdraw the United Nations Mission in Rwanda (MINUAR), thus putting an end to its mission at a moment when to avoid the worst, a UN presence was most needed and should instead have been reinforced. The Rwandan Patriotic Front has made good use of that mistake by carving for itself their right to act without scrutiny as long as it reminds a repentant international community of its inaction to prevent the 1994 genocide.

The report of the U.N. Secretary General Investigative Team (SGIT) to the Security Council on July 1, 1998 made strong condemnatory allegations on the responsibility of the Rwandan army and forces loyal to Kabila in the massacres of tens of thousands of Hutu refugees in the DRC.[iv] The Security Council responded on July 13 with a tepid, and half-hearted condemnation and recommended that further investigations be made and perpetrators brought to justice by Rwanda and the Congolese government. Instead of the word "genocide", "massacres" was the term used to chracterize the slaughter that was carried out in Eastern Congo. Indignant with the inexplicably weak response of the Security Council, some human rights advocacy organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reacted with outrage. How could one explain the Security Council’s resigned attitude towards investigating and punishing those responsible for these crimes?

Perhaps some of its members did prefer to keep the truth on the massacre of the Hutu refugees under the carpet in order to maintain the flawed impression that the Kigali regime was a pure “victim” that deserved protection from recurrence of genocide – a contention that would have been negated by calculated slaughter of innocent civilians by the RPF. Additionally, we know from other sources that the U.S. army trained the perpetrators of these atrocities and that there were sightings of U.S. citizens (troops) when these massacres took place.

The joint report by Human Rights Watch/Africa and the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), "What Kabila is Hiding: Civilian Killings and Impunity in Congo," issued in October 1997, accuses the U.S. of being informed of Rwanda’s intention to attack the refugee camps in Congo.[v]

1.4 OUR STAND ON THE QUESTION OF GENOCIDE.

Any genocide, that of Rwanda included, is reprehensible and must be vigorously condemned. However, today, only five situations are somewhat universally recognized as having constituted genocides: that against the Jews in World War II, against the Armenians at the beginning of the century, the Pol Pot regime’s genocide in Cambodia, the Bosnian war genocide, and finally that of Rwanda in 1994. Moreover, there are many suspects of genocide in our region. Are only groups that emerge as victors in military conflict entitled to claim to be victims of the genocide? Do we have to wait for the end of the massacres and needless deaths occurring in Congo for us to speak of another genocide? However, with regard to our region, since the 1994 Rwanda genocide where the Tutsi were the principal victims is the only one considered important, an effort must be made to establish objectively the direct and indirect, internal and external levels of responsibility for that genocide. We must always also keep in mind that this was a Rwandan genocide; that is, Hutu and Tutsi perished in it.[vi]

In general, the international community should avoid the manipulation of genocide, whether actual or in its prevention, because the concept -- permit the term – “sells” so well today. And specifically, the fate of the Congolese people in bearing solely the burden of this dark period of our common, collective history should come to an end. 2. THE PHILOSOPHY OF GENERALIZED WAR.

2.1 WHAT IS THE WAR IN CONGO ABOUT?

The Congolese people see this war as a conquest aimed at fully controlling and managing the resources of Congo and their exploitation through Rwanda and Uganda as intermediaries. Due to this critical understanding, the people manifest a true attitude of resentment against the actual U.S. policy in Central Africa. The armies of Rwanda and Uganda, main allies of the U.S. in the region, are in fact occupying Congolese territory.[vii]

Some eyewitnesses affirmed to have seen US military instructors training Rwandan troops in Deida, an island in Lake Kivu and in another military base in the Northeast part of Idjwi (South-Kivu). Although the U.S. administration speaks of a negotiated solution in favor of the integrity of the Congolese national territory and the respect of its existing borders, the genuineness of that commitment is put to question by realities on the ground. Why should they mainly favor troops and weapons while they claim that peace is their primary goal? [viii]

The people consider the present war as an invasion initiated from outside and carried out under the disguise of a mutiny of the 10th and the 222nd brigades, based respectively in Goma and Bukavu. However, what are these two brigades to resist the Congolese National Army with the support of Angola, Zimbabwe, and Namibia? This "rebellion" is not an expression of the aspirations of the people, as some want public opinion to believe. It is instead the result of political intrigue built around the vengeance that Kabila’s own old Rwandan and Ugandan allies had prepared against him. That is why the people reject it, considering it as another unjust war against them. In spite of months of falsehood, the people have shown their disapproval by boycotting different activities imposed by the RCD (Congolese Rally for Democracy), which is the political branch of the “armed rebellion.”

The Congolese people absolutely do not endorse this war that they find unjustified. For them, it is an act of aggression from Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. The people regard those Congolese who back it as dishonorable persons who are betraying their people and their country. This explains why the “rebellion” is unpopular.

2.2 CONQUEST FOR AN UNDISPUTED MARKET

The real objective of this war can be traced to the " African Growth and Opportunity Act," a bill introduced in the American Congress in October 1997 by a group of American multinationals. This bill defines the new economic policy of the US in Africa. It recommends the elimination of taxes on most African products, the privatization of all the sectors of economy in Africa, the reduction of taxes imposed on multinationals, the elimination of all restrictions regarding investing in Africa, a revision of laws on the protection of the environment, as well as a project to create a free trade zone between the United States and Africa.

One would expect the often-mentioned new partnership between the U.S. and Africa that should usher in an "African Renaissance," to be built on free and bilateral agreements between States, rather than being the result of military imposition.

The war’s major stake The major stake in this war is the looting of the DRC’s resources, not discounting all corollary fiscal exploitation. We witness a systematic looting of resources for the benefit of the aggressors and foreign companies. They administer the territory they militarily occupy as absolute colonies, with the complicity of some Congolese, depriving the population of their rights, including the most basic, through a reign of terror and misery. Mgr. Kataliko was exiled from his diocese precisely for pointing out this exploitation that is on going and has recently been thoroughly attested to by the UN’s Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of the DRC’s Natural Resources.

Despite the condemnation of the illegal exploitation of the DRC’s resources by the UN’s Security Council and its extension of the mandate of the Panel of Experts, its failure to proceed to impose sanctions on these foreign powers will continue to leave in tact the mechanisms and opportunity for exploitation.

3. THE PRESENT SITUATION AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE WAR ON THE POPULATION.

Catastrophic Humanitarian Situation We live a daily humanitarian tragedy that is indescribable and unprecedented. The humanitarian structures of the Church such as hospitals, medical centers, nutritional and charity centers are unable to keep pace with the massive flow of the ever-growing numbers of the needy. Malnutrition, once a phenomenon afflicting mostly children, is now increasingly afflicting adults. Epidemics such as cholera, once confined to the some rural areas, are reappearing in the city, following the enormous exodus and concentration of populations fleeing the insecurity in rural areas.

A few reports by international agencies have documented the extent of this humanitarian disaster. In a recently released report following a survey of death rates in Eastern Congo, the International Rescue Committee concludes that the death rate due to the conflict in Eastern Congo is “shockingly high”. It estimates the number of excess deaths since the beginning of the current war at 2.5 million, of which 350,000 were deaths directly resulting from the violent conflict. A UN official, Ms. Caroline McAskie, of the Office of Humanitarian Coordination stated during a meeting of the UN Security Council that about 16 million people, or about a third of the DRC’s total population, are directly affected and impacted by the fighting.

Among some of the most atrocious consequences of this war on the civilian population are:

· A series of massacres, among which the massacre at Kasika is most often talked about (1099 casualties, all civilians). Other massacres have been committed in Makobola, Lusenda, Kilungutwe, Kamituga and Katogota.

· Internal displacement of the civilian population: for instance, entire villages are displaced and continually in motion between Bukavu and Kindu, fleeing from the terror of war. By our estimates, at least 1.5 million Congolese are internally displaced as a result of the war.

· Far from their houses and fields, the civilian population dispersed in the dense, equatorial forest are left without food, medicines, drinking water, and exposed to all sorts of epidemic outbursts and inclement weather conditions.

· The war has occasioned the crumbling of the educational system, with extremely high school dropout rates, and these youths being recruited into militias, and other armed groups.

· As confirmed by Congressman Frank Wolf who visited the region in January 2001, the situation of women is particularly precarious:

“ Women live in fear. Soldiers – regardless of whom they owe their allegiance to – often treat them as prey. I heard horrific stories of rape, abuse and torture. Women are being raped in front of their husbands and children. One woman had her hands cut off after being raped; she now has a child she cannot care for. We were told that just two days before I arrived in Bukavu, a woman was raped in the marketplace at 10 a.m. and no one intervened. ”

As a result of this widespread use of sexual violence, the spread of AIDS is a real concern, especially since it is said that 70% of soldiers fighting in Congo are HIV positive and have been accused of raping women indiscriminately. Congolese human rights groups have documented hundreds of cases of rape perpetrated by soldiers.

Human Rights Watch even reported on a case of a Congolese woman being raped and forced to stand in a pit full of water in which a dead infant (foetus) was already floating from another woman who had miscarried earlier during her torture.

· Since the beginning of the war, 58 priests and other religious clergy have either been killed or wounded. The Church has thus been bearing the brunt of this war.

· Grinding to a halt of the local economy because of the degradation of financial institutions and banks. The strangling effect on the local population is aggravated by their being cut off from all means of communications that are now controlled by the various militias spreading insecurity in all the occupied territory.

· Uncontrolled inflation, approaching a rate of 300% in just the first four months following the beginning of the war.

· Fear of large scale massacres and of the recurrence of crimes typically committed by the Rwandan Army (such as killings in Kasika, Kilungutwe, Bushaku, Bunyakiri, etc)

· A deep feeling of abandonment and isolation: nobody seems to be moved or willing to alleviate the acute humanitarian problems that the Congolese population is facing.

· An unjustifiable and excessive feeling of guilt is imposed on the conscience of the Congolese people: they are accused of participating in the genocide (or as sympathizing with the perpetrators of the Rwanda genocide) when they try to defend themselves after being attacked. They are treated as irresponsible or irrational whenever they try to speak out their mind; they were accused of subservience to the “dictatorial” Laurent Kabila regime whenever they insist upon the national unity of Congo. In fact, this last aspect misconstrues the reason for the similarity between the discourse from Kabila and the population: the latter’s point being not so much to express support for Kabila the individual, but about affirming the principle of national identity and sovereignty as well as the territorial integrity of Congo. These are absolutes that no country will consider negotiable.

· Arbitrary detentions, abductions, tortures and murders ordered by the RCD against those who hold different opinions.[ix] RCD/Rwanda authorities in occupied Eastern Congo have repeatedly silenced protest by human rights monitors and observers, as well as church and other civil society institutions in the region. They have taken high-handed measures against senior church leaders – such as the 7 month relegation of late Archbishop Emmanuel Kataliko of Bukavu, and specifically targeted church social institutions and human rights groups in the occupied regions for intimidation, attacks and lootings. Recent incidents of such Rwanda/RCD heavy-handedness include the obstruction of encounters by the Co-Chair of the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), with civil society in occupied–Eastern Congo. This incident happened in January 2001.

This pattern of repression suggests a strong inclination to suppress potential sources of information to the outside world so that abuses can continue in the dark, which makes public diplomacy even more effective.

· With the complicity of the RCD, the invaders are terrorizing local traditional rulers and chiefs, forcing them to go underground in the countryside. In certain cases, Catholic priests and Protestant pastors have suffered from the same treatment. This behavior displays the political intention to decapitate a people by suppressing its traditional leadership.

· The freedom of speech and expression has been suppressed. We would say that in order to satisfy certain American and international viewpoints the Congolese people have been compelled to become subservient -- without thought, without option, without action, in short, become non-existent.

In the Western part of the country controlled by the Government of Kinshasa, the situation is hardly better: famine, misery, and disease are compounded by unpaid salaries due to the war -- in other words the generalized extreme poverty is the daily reality for Congo’s citizens.

Human Rights organizations have also reported that in areas under government control, belligerent forces, including armies allied to the Kinshasa government have committed serious abuses. The war of occupation has also been used as an excuse for the suppression of fundamental freedoms and blocking the path towards democratization. Restrictions on freedom of independent media and freedom of political expression were particularly draconian under Laurent Kabila. Unjustified arrests, incommunicado detention, and harassment of human rights activists are also a recurrent problem. Everyone hopes that with the advent of President Joseph Kabila’s regime, which has promised political openness and particular attention to improving the human rights situation, participation, freedom of opinion and speech and the beginning of the inter-Congolese dialogue will be possible.

4. TODAY’S STRATEGY

The False Interahamwe To perpetuate the ideology of the prevention of another genocide and protection of its borders, one core strategy has remained available to Rwanda’s government: perpetuate the argument that the Interahamwe are responsible for the war, and that they are present and operate from the DRC. It must be made clear that the Interahamwe began as a Rwandan phenomenon. They were the militias that, in 1994, carried out massacres to maintain a dubious Hutu regime in power amidst the onslaught of a progressing Tutsi military power. At its root, this is the result of an ethnic and political problem, internal to Rwanda. However, ever since the tragic events of 1994, a new pattern has arisen whereby any and all armed insurgents seeking to combat Rwanda’s current government are labeled -- rightly or wrongly – as Interahamwe.

However, in many of the attacks upon the civilian population in the DRC -- which some want to portray as exclusively the handwork of the Interahamwe -- victims have attested to the fact that persons of Tutsi ethnicity were among the attackers. This has led to the conclusion that there are indications of a macabre strategy at work with the sole objective of creating and perpetuating some insecurity along Rwanda’s borders through armed groups that terrorize the local population. These groups principally attack villages to in order to dislodge the local population. They then loot social centers, especially churches, in order to weaken an institution that represents a force of moral resistance to the occupation.

For the international community, this leads to confusion that confers upon the aggressors a pretext to stay in the occupied territories. On the ground, it gives enough time for the invading forces to settle and place the international community before a fait accompli: the presence of Rwandan settlers is in rapid expansion in Eastern DRC, through a war that has all the characteristics of an act of conquest. The exploitation that has ensued extends presently to up to a thousand kilometers (about 575 miles) beyond the borders of the aggressors, Rwanda and Uganda.

Justifications advanced for the war: The occupying nations justify this war by claiming that they have to ensure the security of their borders, and prevent another genocide. The international community has believed this version with little objection, and even gone as far as tolerating and supporting it.

It will be necessary to undertake a thorough review of Rwandan security concerns in Eastern Congo and to redefine the U.S. role in creating regional security guarantees that eliminate the security concerns advanced by Rwanda and Uganda as bases for their intervention in the DRC. While at times disapproving the consequences of Rwanda’s military action in Congo (i.e., the compromised territorial integrity of the DRC), U.S. policy has been caught between an understanding that Rwanda - at least during its initial forays into Congo - had real security concerns, but an equally clear understanding that there is no enthusiasm in Washington (or indeed anywhere else) for a massive and complex militia demobilization, and border security operation to stabilize the region.

The U.S. should acquire a more thorough and focused understanding of the precise nature of threats to Rwanda’s security posed by remnants of genocidal militia groups in Congo. Good policy, or an eventual ‘security guarantees’ arrangement cannot be made on the basis of speculations about the nature of these threats to Rwanda’s security (i.e. Militia groups – their numbers, location, military strength, command structure, etc). This is the best check against the pre-textual use of unarticulated security concerns to justify a military presence and abuses which in their nature bear at best a tenuous relationship with guaranteeing security. While the previous administration’s policy was based upon addressing the risks posed to Rwanda (i.e. its reason for ‘understanding’ Rwanda’s military action in the Congo), it is unfortunate that U.S. policy largely failed to address the actual large –scale massacres (of both Rwandans and Congolese) that have taken place in the DRC, since 1996. Fueling Ethnic tensions

According to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, Uganda is directly responsible for the ethnic war between the Hema and the Lendu communities in the Orientale province of Eastern DRC that has resulted in about 20,000 deaths since 1999. Recent accounts of events in the region indicate that the RCD-Goma is using the same strategy in a bid to create antagonism between the two main tribes of South Kivu, the Bashi and the Warega. Thus, a policy of “divide and rule” is gaining ground.

The Lusaka Accords The Lusaka cease-fire accords are the fruit of inter-state negotiations to which the rebel factions backed by Rwanda and Uganda were parties. The International Community sanctioned the Accords and their implementation has often been delayed. Violations of the Accord that have occurred repeatedly are the consequences of its inherent shortcomings (especially the absence of any sanctions against those who violate the Accords). Although, the government of Joseph Kabila has lifted obstacles previously created by his predecessor, there is a clear impression that the belligerents want to keep the status quo that in effect maintains the partition of the country. Despite calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops and several resolutions of the UN Security Council, no real and concrete signs of willingness to match their declared intentions to withdraw is seen on the ground. On the contrary, troops withdrawn from the battle frontline are redeployed to the interior of Congolese territory where fighting with militias (such as the Mai-Mai) continues.

4.1 RAISING AWARENESS IN THE U.S.

It is for the foregoing reasons that we are kindly asking for your cooperation to awaken American public opinion to the misery and misfortune of the Congolese people. As a superpower and the principal ally of Rwanda and Uganda, the U.S., if willing, cannot lack means to remedy to the situation. This help should reflect the interest that the United States has always assigned to human rights and social progress. We are witnessing the troublesome consequences of a policy that in practice still favors a militarized solution to the Great Lakes conflicts and this is perceptible even if we are still unable to unveil all its political, economic, and military intrigues, whose obscurity prevents public opinion from unmasking its authors. We also know however the high consideration that the American public has for truth, respect for human rights, liberty, democracy and social progress.

4.2 KNOWLEDGE.

We would like to ensure that American society is knowledgeable about what is happening in the Central Africa region. In fact, once well informed, it is best placed to move its authorities to promote a different strategy – one marked by dialogue and collaboration rather than war. We are confused by the discrepancy between the official declarations of the U.S. and the practical, military consequences of its policy on the ground. The official discourse espouses democracy, peace, equality and prosperity, whereas in the field we live the reverse: the unbridled dictatorship of an ethnic minority in Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi and currently in the East of the DRC. In the same way, instead of peace, we are crushed by a generalized war raging through the heart of the continent; instead of prosperity, we are struggling with misery and systematic plundering of private and national resources.

The assistance we are asking for will not exclusively benefit our country and people. We foresee in it a preventive measure that can spare the Great Lakes Region from the tragedy that entrenched politics of exclusion can lead to.

4.3 IMPLICATIONS OF THIS APPROACH

U.S. government officials are on record as saying that a country as big, rich and powerful as the U.S. is morally obliged to take steps in reducing the poverty of the Third Word. That is what should be the case but for the moment, our people are hardly receiving any assistance from your country. The US should send strong signals that it is conscious of the war economy and economic interests that are suspected of fueling conflicts in the region, and that serious consideration will be given to measures similar to the proposed Sierra Leone (conflict diamonds) Carat Act, UN diamond export bans on Sierra Leone & Angola, or the embargo on Liberia’s diamonds, to create strong disincentives to economic adventures.

The population does not lack interlocutors and spokespersons. The civil society of the South-Kivu can be proposed as a courageous example. In their "Plan for Peace" (which has brought on them persistent repressive measures from the RCD), they have designed some peaceful ways to get out of this absurd war. As interlocutors, they need to be recognized by the great powers of this world, as a way by which the latter can show their political will and determination to find peaceful solutions to a conflict that has already left too many victims. Paths to Solutions

In order to end this war of occupation:

1. The reality of the conflict in all its complexity must be made public. We salute to that effect the idea of deploying UN observers (MONUC), to ensure that the belligerents live up to their commitments, and ensuring a neutral observer presence.

2. Real peace will never be achieved as long as the integrity of the DRC is threatened. The deployment of UN troops should be envisioned at its borders with the invading countries rather than along the combat front line, as stipulated in the flawed Lusaka Accords.

3. An inter-Congolese dialogue would not be effective without a more serene atmosphere and as long as occupation armies control the country. It is also a must to work simultaneously at resolving the internal problems of Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda through an internal dialogue in their countries, as required from the DRC.

4. Good governance is a must in the DRC, and in the entire Great Lakes Region of Africa – this must be assured through governments that result from popular participation and are democratically chosen.

5. The Banyamulenge question is a question that can only be resolved by an administration of a peaceful Congo, in conformity with the Constitution of the country. Moreover, the wiser among the Banyamulenge have long come to the realization that those in power in Kigali are simply manipulating the Banyamulenge’s legitimate concerns for their own objectives in DR Congo; these Banyamulenge groups have thus began searching for ways to peace.

6. An international structure to investigate, try, and punish all those guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity -- no matter their origin or perpetrators -- is necessary to halt the culture of impunity that has settled in the region.

7. Support should be given to those forces in the population actively working on ways to peacefully resolve the conflict. It is imperative to associate all those active at the grassroots level in the peace process. Since they share in the devastation of war, it would be beneficial that they participate in peace building.

Conclusion

1. We ardently wish that the new U.S. administration play a strong role both in its bilateral relations in the region and within the international community in putting an end to the violation of basic human rights in DR Congo. It should also weigh heavily with its might to end this war and the occupation of DR Congo. Just as the international community moved and teamed up in favor of Kuwait against the Iraqi aggressor, the U.S. should – in light with the official position of the U.N. Security Council -- re-consider, acknowledge, and articulate its policy around a realization that the DR Congo is a country invaded and occupied by three neighboring states. Therefore, appropriate mobilization to oblige the invading forces to leave would re-establish the integrity of its territory and allow each country to put together internal democratic structures conducive to development.

2. We believe that once foreign troops leave, a new form of international cooperation is possible in order to erect and rebuild what this war has destroyed, and jump-start economic activities presently paralyzed by this war. This will ultimately lead to regional economic integration, freely subscribed to by the people and nations the Great Lakes and Central Africa. We think that this offers a better guarantee for sustainable development and peace, and this has worked successfully in other seriously agitated regions. The European Union has become, thanks to economic cooperation, a peaceful zone on our planet after the two disasters of 1914 and 1945.

3. We are convinced that all the assistance can reach us rapidly to achieve our goals without allowing some states to use them to consolidate their might of violence and prolong the sufferings of populations battered by both warring parties.

4. Finally, we are committed to work to achieve justice, respect of human dignity and human rights, truth, brotherhood, and understanding in the sub-region.

We truly hope that the new administration takes our analysis into consideration, and that it will do whatever is necessary to restore peace in DR Congo and the Great Lakes region of Africa. The Congolese people want peace and nothing but peace.

It is in order to contribute to building this peace that I testify today. We call upon you to re-echo the cries of the people of our country and to bring pressure on those who control the conflicts in the Great Lakes Region of Africa from behind the scenes.

While thanking you infinitely for the attention that you granted me, I hope the United States Congress will help define timely and concrete political proposals that will prevent the region from becoming a zone of permanent instability, where a culture of annihilation prevails over respect for the dignity of the human person. GOD BLESS YOU.

ANNEXES (submitted to the SubComittee’s offices):
Selected photographs of some atrocities committed in Eastern DRC.
Video footage of victims of a bomb attack carried out by the RPA in Bukavu, on 26 August 2000 after the visit of (fmr.) US Ambassador for War Crimes, David Scheffer.
“Cry of Suffering – Cry of Hope: Message of the People of the Democratic Republc of Congo”, Final Document of the International Symposium on Peace in Africa, Butembo, DRC (February 2001)
List of mining dealerships (comptoirs) belonging to Rwandan soldiers in Bukavu
List of foreign companies enagaged in the purchase of coltan in the Kivus.
A Study on the Exploitation of Coltan in North-Kivu, by Pole Institute/CREDAP (17 March 2001).

1 …stop the genocidal killings and other local violence in Rwanda, Eastern Congo, and Burundi.".

During the Entebbe Summit, on March 25, 1998, the engagement that banishes the genocide in Africa was taken when President Clinton declared that: " Our efforts came too late for yesterday's victims; they must be in time to prevent tomorrow's victims ".

Susan Rice reaffirmed the same saying that " concrete steps must be taken to prevent another genocide in this region ".

2 In the immediate term, our goals in the Great Lakes region are to help: 1) stabilize the Democratic Republic of Congo…; 2) stop the genocidal killings and other local violence in Rwanda, in Eastern Congo, and Burundi and; 3) advance increased respect for human rights and humanitarian principles and the development of justice system (…)

3During her exchange with the Civil Society in Kinshasa (October 30, 98) Susan Rice reiterated that peace; development and a guarantee of a space for the ethnic Tutsi are objectives of US. (IRIN-CEA, 31/10/1998).

4This report states that the circumstances in which attacks against the camps of refugees inside the country were carried out in 1997 “display the deliberate intention to exterminate Rwandan Hutu refugees” who had remained in Zaire. A possible interpretation of this phase of operations led by the AFDL (Alliance of the Democratic Forces for Liberation, Kabila’s party) with the military support of Rwanda is that it had been decided to eliminate those Hutus. The confirmation of the above interpretation would lead to the recognition of another act of genocide.

5" The US provided Rwandan authorities with firm political support throughout its military campaign in Congo. Some well-informed witnesses declare that the American army has been training and assisting the RPA on Congolese territory. Some specific recommendations have been addressed to the U.S. government asking them to unveil the nature of their engagement with Rwanda and demanding that they suspend all tactical support and delivery of weapons to the RPA in Congo. Researchers like Bill Hartung have highlighted this U.S. involvement in military support for belligerents in the Congo. Some credible witnesses affirm that they have sighted some US military officers in Cyangugu, on the eve of the fall of Bukavu (28/10/1996, from a local source). [vi] It must be noted that the responsibility for certain key events related to the genocide is yet to be established, especially via an investigation of the authors of the April 1994 shooting of the plane carrying then Rwandan President Habyarimana. This is a potentially explosive issue to follow: a French Judge is investigating the alleged involvement of the actual Rwandan President in the shooting of this plane which occurred a few hours before the genocide began. There has been talk of a confidential memo by U.N. investigators specifying elements of proof implicating the RPF in this incident that the U.N. has neither released nor acknowledged.

6In an interview with Lynn Duke, (a correspondent of The Washington Post, July 14, 1998), on the massive military assistance of the U.S. to Rwanda, a member of Clinton’s administration responded: “ [T]o impose some military solutions to the conflicts in the Great Lake Region, it is necessary to establish a very powerful military regime.” The military assistance granted to these two undemocratic regimes comes essentially from a special budget of the Pentagon. It the scrutiny of the Congress and the American public following a law enacted in 1981 that grants to the Pentagon millions of dollars every year to finance the operations of the U.S. Special Forces abroad.

" … Some countries in the Great Lake Region, starting for instance with Rwanda, have favored and are still giving great importance to military strategies in which we Europeans have no part. Unfortunately, they look up to the one who provides them with weapons, military materials, as the more interesting partner. In our days, the U.S. in particular, is helping them in that sense." Julia Ficatier, Interview with Aldo Ajello, European Commissioner for the Great Lakes Region of Africa, La Croix, 8 May 1998.

Furthermore, the consequences of this war are being felt in Uganda as well: schools and hospitals are receiving only half of their monthly subsidies. Some ministers have declared that the rest is spent to sustain the war in Congo. The Ugandan people are not in favor of this action. (Reseau Européen Congo, No.11, December 4, 1998).

On November 12, 1998, Prof. Akiki Mudjandju, the dean of the Faculty of Political Sciences at Kampala University, denounced his country’s military intervention in the DRC. This intervention was notably characterized by the nomination of General James Kasini, Ugandan army’s Chief of Staff, to lead the troops of the forces of aggression, allied to the so-called “Congolese” rebellion. According to BBC, the weight of this war is becoming unbearable for the Ugandan economy. The State is dedicating half of its budget to military ends instead of allocating it for its socio-economic development. Prof. Akiki enjoined President Museveni to reanalyze the problem of security in Uganda, underlining that the solution is to be found in Uganda and not outside, in the DRC. (ACP, 14/11/1998).

“The World Bank is saying the Ugandan economy is doing very well, but Uganda is third from the bottom in the ranking of the least developed. It is descending. Life expectancy is dropping continually but they say that people are dying because of neglect " (…) " There are some American businessmen who have key interests in dealing with Museveni. They see Museveni as the new broom that can be used to sweep across Africa.” Executive Intelligence Review, USA , August 8, 1997, vol. 24, n° 32.

Recently, the Paris Club of donors in collaboration with other sponsors announced loans worth two billion US dollars to Uganda. If the proportions of expenses of the State remain the same, this means Uganda will have available about a billion dollars for use in the aggression against the DRC.

The economic situation of Rwanda is even worse where signs of famine have compelled the regime of Kigali to ask for food help.

7cfr. ALERT, No.6/1998.

ARCHIVES

La Reporting on Kivu Villages

Funders

- EZE-Germany

-
Christian-Aid/UK

-
- ICCO-Hollande

- Dan Church
Aid/Danemark - KIOS/Finlande

What is Heritiers?

Objectives and Aims,...
Staffs
Current Projects

Human Rights
Reports & International
Media on Kivu

Human Rights
Watch
1.Latest Report
de Mai 2000)
2.French version
Previous Report

International Rescue
Committee
a. 1.7 million deads in 22
months (June 2000):Summary
b. 1.7 millions dead in 22 months
(June 2000):Whole raport
ACROBAT READER

Amnesty International
1. Latest Report
(Juin 2000, version Anglaise)
2. East of Congo: Horror

HALT! International prosecution
for human
rights violations
1. Hussein Habre case
in Senegal
2. Hussein Habre
next
3. International
Criminal Court

. Others Reports

Links on the Congo

(MONUC:
UN in Congo)
Observatoire de l'Afrique
New Congo Net

irin

"If you think you are too small to make a difference, you have never passed a night in a same room with a musquito"
(Dalai Lama)
Avez-vous un commentaire ou une suggestion? Ecrivez au webmaster: nmkra@hotmail.com
Avenue Patrice Lumumba, Ibanda-Bukavu, DR Congo.