Civic society organizations are voicing alarm over the potential consequences of a U.S.-led peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, set to be signed on June 27. The deal, which aims to end decades of conflict, is being criticized for its lack of emphasis on justice for crimes committed by armed groups. Many fear that this omission could lead to a cycle of violence and unresolved grievances, undermining the agreement’s long-term viability.
Critical voices from civil society argue that the agreement’s focus on security and political reconciliation may not be enough to address the deep-seated issues of accountability and justice. The Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda have both been plagued by armed conflict, with various groups committing atrocities that have left lasting scars on the population. The new agreement, while promising in its intent to bring peace, is now under intense scrutiny for its approach to addressing these past crimes.
Supporters of the agreement, including U.S. officials, emphasize the need for stability and economic development in the region. They argue that focusing on security and political dialogue is the most practical path forward, given the complexities of the conflict. However, advocates for justice stress that without addressing the root causes of the violence, the peace deal may not hold, and the region could face renewed instability and suffering.