Pages

31 Dec 2012

USA: Experts Forecast the Cost of Failure to Compromise

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/experts-forecast-cost-failure-compromise-022928110.html

Experts Forecast the Cost of Failure to Compromise

RELATED QUOTES

SymbolPriceChange
MS18.59-0.03
Even if President Obama and Republicans in Congress can reach a last-minute compromise that averts some tax increases before Monday's midnight deadline, experts still foresee a significant drag on the economy in the first half of 2013 from the fiscal impasse in Washington.
While negotiators in the capital focus on keeping Bush-era tax rates in place for all but the wealthiest Americans, other tax increases are expected to go into effect regardless of what happens in the coming days. For example, a two percentage point jump in payroll taxes for Social Security is all but certain after Jan. 1, a change that will equal an additional $2,000 from the paycheck of a worker earning $100,000 a year.
Many observers initially expected the lower payroll-tax deduction rate of 4.2 percent to be preserved. But in recent weeks, as it became clear that political leaders were prepared to let that rate rise to 6.2 percent, economists reduced their predictions for growth in the first quarter accordingly.
Largely because of this jump in payroll taxes, Nigel Gault, chief United States economist at IHS Global Insight, is halving his prediction for economic growth in the first quarter to 1 percent from an earlier estimate of just over 2 percent. That represents a significant slowdown in economic growth from the third quarter of 2012, when the economy expanded at an annual rate of 3.1 percent.
Mr. Obama has pushed to preserve Bush-era tax rates on income below $250,000 a year but Republicans have held out for a higher threshold, perhaps in the neighborhood of $400,000 a year. Republicans also favor deeper spending cuts to curb long-term budget deficits — a move many Democrats oppose.
While hopes dimmed Sunday afternoon that a deal could be reached before Jan. 1, most observers said they did not expect the full impact from more than $600 billion in potential tax increases and spending cuts to swamp the economy right away. Indeed, a compromise could be struck in the coming weeks that heads off the worst of the fallout.
In the event no compromise is found, however, the Congressional Budget Office and many private economists warn that the sudden pullback in spending and the rise in taxes would push the economy into recession in the first half of the year. Under this outcome, Mr. Gault said, the economy could shrink by 0.5 percent over all of 2013.
With the clock ticking, some observers bolstered their criticism of Washington. "If we have a recession, it's unforgivable," said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at the Economic Outlook Group. "For the first time in modern history, we will have a self-inflicted recession in the U.S."
Despite Washington's history of delaying fiscal compromises to the last possible minute — as in the fight over raising the debt ceiling in the summer of 2011 — investors had assumed until very recently that a deal would be completed before year-end.
But last week, stocks sold off as hopes for a quick compromise faded. More pressure on shares is expected beginning on Monday, especially if the fight does indeed slip into 2013. If anything forces politicians to act, Mr. Baumohl said, it could be a sell-off on Wall Street. "The politicians need to be pressed by markets to be forced to the table," he said.
Payroll managers at many companies are also watching the negotiations closely but have already prepared systems for the two percentage point change in payroll taxes, said Scott A. Schapiro, a principal at KPMG.
"We're primarily closed down from Christmas to New Year's," he said, "but our payroll folks are working. Payroll has to be around."
"This is one of the most obvious effects of the fiscal cliff," Mr. Schapiro added, "because it will affect all taxpayers." The Social Security payroll tax applies to the first $113,700 of annual income, he said. It was first cut by Congress in late 2010 to help give the economy a jolt, and was extended again last year to cover 2012.
Another big question mark is whether unemployment benefits for more than two million jobless Americans will be extended beyond Jan. 1. While there is still the possibility these payouts for the long-term unemployed will be preserved as the negotiations go down to the wire, failure to extend them would deliver another sizable blow to a still-fragile economy, experts said.
"This is not just an inside-the-Beltway-game," said Vincent Reinhart, chief United States economist at Morgan Stanley. "Both the payroll tax increase and the change in unemployment benefits would hit hand-to-mouth consumers hard. This has consequences for the whole economy."
Consumer spending is especially critical right now, because many businesses have pulled back already, citing the fiscal impasse in Washington as a prime concern. Until recently, consumers have been more optimistic about the economy, although sentiment has eroded in recent weeks as anxiety increased about just what policy makers would do in terms of taxes and spending.
If it were not for the uncertainty in Washington and the fallout from the fiscal impasse, Mr. Reinhart said, the economy would be growing at an annual rate of 2 percent to 2.5 percent. Instead, he estimated growth in the fourth quarter of 2012 at just under 1 percent, and said he expected it to edge up only slightly to around 1 percent in the first half of 2013. Unemployment, now at 7.7 percent, is about 0.3 percentage point higher than it otherwise would be, he added.
To be sure, the impact from some other scheduled changes will not be felt right away — and could still be reversed if a deal is completed in the coming weeks. For example, automatic spending cuts set to hit the Pentagon budget as well as nonmilitary programs are spread out between now and the end of the 2013 fiscal year in September, giving legislators time to change course and head off any major impact.
But the longer the standoff continues, the deeper the economic damage, experts said. "Because the politicians couldn't get out of the way," Mr. Reinhart said, "growth in the last quarter of 2012 and the first two quarters of 2013 will be below trend. There is a real cost of not coming to the table."
PHOTO: Shoppers in Atlanta. The confidence of consumers has eroded in the absence of a deal to avert a harsh budget package on Jan. 1. (PHOTOGRAPH BY DAVID GOLDMAN/ASSOCIATED PRESS) (B2)
Related Articles

30 Dec 2012

Region sucked into conflict as eastern Congo becomes theatre of war again - News - www.theeastafrican.co.ke


NEWS

Region sucked into conflict as eastern Congo becomes theatre of war again

SHARE BOOKMARKPRINT
RATING
M23 rebels withdraw through the hills having left their position in a village in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, on November 30, 2012. Hundreds of Congolese rebels left their frontline positions around Goma following a regionally brokered truce. Photo/AFP

M23 rebels withdraw through the hills having left their position in a village in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, on November 30, 2012. Hundreds of Congolese rebels left their frontline positions around Goma following a regionally brokered truce. Photo/AFP 

By Edmund Kagire, Rwanda Today

Posted  Friday, December 28  2012 at  19:03

IN SUMMARY

  • The timeline of arguably Rwanda's big story of 2012 as it unfolded.
SHARE THIS STORY
  
 
0

Share

It all started in April with a group of soldiers formerly under National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP) — who had been integrated in the national forces under a March 23, 2009 agreement — mutinying and launching a rebellion against the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

The fighting would spiral into a full-scale war. Soon, Rwanda was being accused of lending support to the rebels against the government of President Joseph Kabila gaining momentum from June.

However, till the end of the year, Rwanda remained defiant amid intense pressure from the international community — and despite the consequences that came with the accusations, mainly donors withholding vital aid.

The following is the timeline of arguably Rwanda's big story of 2012 as it unfolded:

April 29, 2012: Soldiers, mainly Kinyarwanda-speaking, formerly aligned to Gen Laurent Nkunda's CNDP which had been integrated into the national forces FARDC stage a mutiny in eastern Congo. According to the rebels, about 600 men are part of the mutiny.

Early reports suggest that the mutineers are linked to Gen Bosco Ntaganda, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes. The group's spokesperson, Lt-Col Jean Marie Vianney Kazarama, however distances the rebels from the fugitive general.

May 8: In a press release, the mutineers announce that they have set up a new rebel movement known as M23, named after the date, in the month of March, of a 2009 peace deal which they accuse President Kabila and his government of failing to honour. The new rebel group also names its leader, Col Sultani Makenga.

May 28: Reports surface that Human Rights Watch (HRW) has a report in which it implicates Rwanda in the fresh conflict. BBC is the first to report it. Rwanda responds by labelling the rumours about its involvement in the conflict as "categorically false and dangerous."

June 4: HRW releases a report which, for the first time, accuses Rwanda of supporting the rebels and implicates top government and military officials in the fighting. The rebels launch an offensive, triggering an exodus of refugees crossing into Rwanda and Uganda.

July 6: M23 fighters capture the DRC-Uganda border town of Bunagana after two days of fighting that see some 600 Congolese troops flee into Uganda, according to the Ugandan People's Defence Forces (UPDF). An Indian peacekeeper with the UN Mission in DR Congo (Monusco) is killed in the fighting.

June 19: In a presidential press briefing, President Paul Kagame for the first time speaks about the renewed conflict. The Rwandan leader says the problems of governance in DRC are to blame, as well as the hypocrisy of the international community, which called on Rwanda to intervene and resolve the crisis but later turned around and accused the same country of fomenting the conflict.

June 20: A leaked draft report of a UN Group of Experts on the DRC crisis implicates Rwanda in the conflict but Rwanda condemns what it refers to as the leakage of a "one-sided preliminary document based on partial findings and is still subject to verification."

July 11: International Conference for the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) member countries meet in Addis Ababa on the sidelines of the African Union summit to discuss the conflict. Rwanda welcomes the development, saying a "regional solution" is needed to resolve the crisis.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page»

Rwanda schemed M23 war - UN expert


Rwanda schemed M23 war - UN expert

SHARE BOOKMARKPRINTRATING
M23 rebels in Kivu recently.
M23 rebels in Kivu recently. PHOTO BY AFP 
By Steve Hege

Posted  Sunday, December 30  2012 at  02:00
IN SUMMARY
The investigation. Rwandan involvement and orchestration of the M23 rebellion becomes more comprehensible when understood as a determined and calculated drive to spawn the creation of an autonomous federal state for eastern Congo.
Since the outset of the M23 rebellion, the government of Rwanda has provided direct military support to the rebels, facilitated recruitment, encouraged desertions from the Congolese army and delivered ammunition, intelligence and political advice to them.
Rwanda, in fact, orchestrated the creation of M23 when a series of mutinies led by officers formerly belonging to the group's predecessor, the Congrèsnational pour la défense du people (CNDP), were suppressed by the Congolese armed forces in early May.
But Rwanda continues to deny any involvement and has repeatedly claimed it was not consulted or given a right of reply to our investigations. This is not true. Despite the government of Rwanda's refusal to receive us during our official visit to Kigali in May, we purposefully delayed the publication of the addendum to our interim report in order to give the country's Minister of Foreign Affairs an opportunity to clarify the information. But she declined to do so and claimed her government was not privy to our findings.
Response without substance
Following the publication of the addendum on June 27, we met again with the government of Rwanda in Kigali and took into consideration its written response to our interim report. However, we found no substantive element of our previous findings that we wished to alter.
In our final report, we also documented support for the rebels from the government of Uganda. Senior Ugandan officials provided the rebels with direct troop reinforcements in Congolese territory. 
They also supported the creation and expansion of the political branch of M23 permanently based in Kampala even before President Joseph Kabila had ever authorised any interaction between the rebels and the government of Uganda.
Kampala acknowledged this support was indeed taking place in a meeting with the Group of Experts in early October. An appointed senior police officer said they would investigate and arrest those involved. 
The DRC government is aware of this support but has chosen not to denounce it in the hope of convincing the Ugandans they have more to gain by working with Kinshasa than with Kigali in this crisis.
What is Rwanda's motive?
Throughout our work, the question most often posed to us was: Why would Rwanda undertake such a politically dangerous endeavour? Some of the motives behind this war are as follows: 
As per their name, the rebels have claimed that the government reneged on the March 23, 2009 peace agreements.
However, this accord was merely an afterthought to formalise a bilateral deal between Kinshasa and Kigali which was predicated on affording the latter with immense influence in the Kivu in exchange for arresting CNDP chairman Laurent Nkunda, and forcing the rest of the group to join the national army under the leadership of Bosco Ntaganda.
M23 has also made many claims about human rights, even though nine of its members and associates have been designated for sanctions by both the US government and the UN's Sanctions Committee, most for egregious violations of international law, including recruiting child soldiers and violent land grabs.
Nevertheless, M23 similarly demands good governance, though they have attacked and appropriated numerous state assets provided by donors, including recently, 33 vehicles previously donated to the Congolese police.
M23 also claims they are fighting for the 50,000 Tutsi refugees who remain in Rwanda. A rebellion which displaces over 500,000 can hardly defend the rights of 50,000 refugees.
In recent months, M23 has increasingly claimed that they want a review of the discredited 2011 presidential elections, in an attempt to attract the sympathies of a broader constituency and further weaken President Kabila.
Finally, Rwanda and M23 have said the Congolese army's military operations against the Rwandan Hutu rebels of the FDLR have failed and the group remains a threat. However, not only did the Rwandan Minister of Defence recently say the FDLR could never threaten Rwanda, but the rebels are currently at all-time low numbers after thousands were demobilised by the UN.
Objectively, the greater security threat to Rwanda is represented by Tutsi political opponents who have fallen out with President Kagame in recent years.
Rwanda's regional strategy
Rwandan involvement and orchestration of the M23 rebellion becomes more comprehensible when understood as a determined and calculated drive to spawn the creation of an autonomous federal state for eastern Congo. 
Prior to the November 2011 elections, a senior intelligence officer within the Rwandan government discussed with me several possible scenarios for the secession of eastern Congo.
He said because the country was too big to be governed by Kinshasa, Rwanda should support the emergence of a federal state for eastern Congo. He said: "Goma should relate to Kinshasa in the same way that Juba was linked to Khartoum," prior to the independence of South Sudan.
During several internal meetings of M23 for mobilisation, senior government officials, including the Minister of Defence's special assistant, openly affirmed that establishing this autonomous state was in fact the key goal of the rebellion.
Several M23 commanders and allies have also openly confirmed this in interviews I conducted as part of the Group of Experts. Even senior Ugandan security officials also acknowledged this was the aim of the Rwandans in this M23 war.
One officer, who helped support M23 in co-operation with the Rwandans, told us: "They're thinking big ... you need to look at South Sudan." The objective of federalism also helps to explain in part, the involvement of individuals within the Ugandan government. If Rwanda achieves its goal, then Ugandans would need to ensure that their own cultural, security, and economic interests in the eastern DRC were not jeopardised.
Steve Hege is the former co-ordinator of the UN Group of Experts on the DRC. This is Hege's testimony to the US House of Representatives House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights on 11 December 2012

Final report of the Group of Experts on the DRC submitted in accordance with paragraph 4 of Security Council resolution 2021 (2011) (S/2012/843)

Final report of the Group of Experts on the DRC submitted in accordance with paragraph 4 of Security Council resolution 2021 (2011) (S/2012/843)

Report
from UN Security Council
Published on 15 Nov 2012 View Original
Executive summary
The eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo remains plagued by dozens of foreign and national armed groups. Instability has increased since the mutiny by former members of the Congrès national pour la défense du peuple and the subsequent creation of the Mouvement du 23 mars (M23) earlier in 2012. The rebels expanded their control over Rutshuru territory with extensive foreign support in July 2012 and have recently taken advantage of an informal ceasefire to enhance alliances and command proxy operations elsewhere.
The Government of Rwanda continues to violate the arms embargo by providing direct military support to the M23 rebels, facilitating recruitment, encouraging and facilitating desertions from the armed forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and providing arms, ammunition, intelligence and political advice. The de facto chain of command of M23 includes Gen. Bosco Ntaganda and culminates with the Minister of Defence of Rwanda, Gen. James Kabarebe. Following the publication of the addendum to its interim report (S/2012/348/Add.1), the Group met the Government of Rwanda and took into consideration its written response. The Group has, however, found no substantive element of its previous findings that it wishes to alter.
Senior officials of the Government of Uganda have also provided support to M23 in the form of direct troop reinforcements in Congolese territory, weapons deliveries, technical assistance, joint planning, political advice and facilitation of external relations. Units of the Ugandan People’s Defence Forces and the Rwandan Defence Forces jointly supported M23 in a series of attacks in July 2012 to take over the major towns of Rutshuru territory and the Congolese armed forces base of Rumangabo. Both Governments have also cooperated to support the creation and expansion of the political branch of M23 and have consistently advocated on behalf of the rebels. M23 and its allies include six sanctioned individuals, some of whom reside in or regularly travel to Rwanda and Uganda.
Taking advantage of a lull in combat on the official front lines, M23 has sought to build coalitions with other armed groups throughout the Kivus and in Ituri and Kasai Occidental. Col. Sultani Makenga emerged as the coordinator of the armed groups allied with M23. In August and September, he ordered Raïa Mutomboki to carry out brutal ethnically motivated attacks, burning more than 800 homes and killing hundreds of civilians from Congolese Hutu communities in Masisi territory, whose militias refused to ally themselves with M23.
The use and recruitment of child soldiers by armed groups, notably by M23, has increased. In particular, several M23 commanders with histories of child recruitment have overseen the enrolment and training of hundreds of young boys and girls. Furthermore, some M23 commanders have ordered the extrajudicial executions of dozens of recruits and prisoners of war.
The many attempts by M23 to forge a common front with ethnic Hema and Lendu armed groups in Ituri and the Banyamulenge community in South Kivu have encountered significant resistance. The Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has sought to counter the efforts of M23 to expand its alliances by promoting integration processes with armed groups, notably in Ituri and in Masisi territory.
At historically low numbers, the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda (FDLR), although continuing to commit abuses against civilians, have become further isolated from external support and are focused on self-protection in the face of attacks by the Congolese armed forces and M23 allies. Junior FDLR officers have sought to ally themselves with the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo against M23, while some criminal networks within the Congolese armed forces continue to sell small amounts of ammunition to the rebels.
There is, however, no evidence of strategic cooperation between FDLR and the Government.
Among Burundian rebel groups, the Forces nationales de libération remain divided and reliant on local Congolese armed groups, while the Front national pour la révolution au Burundi has now transformed itself into the Front du peuple murundi and allied itself with M23 in South Kivu. The Ugandan-led Allied Democratic Forces have expanded their military capacity and cooperated with Al-Shabaab networks in East Africa.
The Congolese armed forces continue to be plagued by criminal networks generating revenue for senior officers through their control over natural resources and contraband, including the trafficking of ivory from armed groups. The land forces commander, Gen. Gabriel Amisi, oversees a network distributing hunting ammunition for poachers and armed groups, including Raïa Mutomboki. Disarmament and stockpile management efforts have also been undermined by the increased demand associated with the M23 rebellion as the market price for small arms has risen fourfold.
The requirement of the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo for mineral exporters to exercise due diligence in accordance with United Nations and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development guidelines has nearly halted all tin, tantalum and tungsten exports from the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, apart from north Katanga where mineral tagging was introduced in 2011. Smuggling into both Burundi and Rwanda is on the rise. The credibility of the mineral tagging system in place in Rwanda is jeopardized by the laundering of Congolese minerals because tags are routinely sold by mining cooperatives. Several traders have contributed to financing M23 rebels using profits resulting from the smuggling of Congolese minerals into Rwanda.
While tin ore production has decreased in the Kivus, tantalum and tungsten ore production has been resilient to international traceability demands, given that those minerals are more easily smuggled. Rwandan exports of tantalum and tungsten have experienced a corresponding increase during 2012, while tin ore exports have decreased.
Overall price and production decreases have had negative socioeconomic consequences in some mining zones. New commercial opportunities have, however, been created as mining communities have adapted to other economic sectors. Security has improved in most of the major tin and tantalum mining areas, which has led to less conflict financing and increased oversight and monitoring by civil authorities and non-governmental organizations.
Armed groups, criminal networks within the Congolese armed forces and miners easily shift to gold mines where due diligence requirements have not affected trade. Nearly all gold from the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo is smuggled out of the country and channelled through a few major traders in Kampala and Bujumbura who ship out several tons per year, worth hundreds of millions of United States dollars. In the United Arab Emirates, most Congolese gold is smelted and sold to jewellers. The assets freeze imposed by the Security Council has not limited the operations of the previous owner of the sanctioned entity Machanga Ltd., who exports through other front companies and transfers large sums of money to suppliers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Rapport final du Groupe d’experts sur la République démocratique du Congo conformément au paragraphe 4 de la résolution 2021 (2011) du Conseil de Sécurité (S/2012/843)

Rapport final du Groupe d’experts sur la République démocratique du Congo conformément au paragraphe 4 de la résolution 2021 (2011) du Conseil de Sécurité (S/2012/843)

Report
from UN Security Council
Published on 15 Nov 2012 View Original
Résumé
L’est de la République démocratique du Congo demeure la proie de dizaines de groupes armés congolais et étrangers. L’instabilité s’est accentuée depuis la mutinerie d’anciens membres du Congrès national pour la défense du peuple (CNDP) et la création subséquente, cette année, du mouvement du 23 mars (M23). Les rebelles ont, en juillet 2012 et avec une aide considérable de l’étranger, étendu leur emprise sur le territoire de Rutshuru et ils ont récemment profité d’un cessez-le-feu informel pour consolider leurs alliances et pour faire mener par des supplétifs des opérations dans d’autres zones.

29 Dec 2012

Rwanda: Victoire Ingabire’s Speech and Quotes

http://www.victoire-ingabire.com/Eng/victoires-quotes/

Victoire Ingabire's Speech and Quotes

I agree that there was a genocide by Hutu extremists against the Tutsis, that is the reality. The people who did this need to face justice. But there were also other crimes against humanity, including the killing of Hutus.
I don't believe in violence and war is not the solution to the problems that face this country.
People say there's stability in Rwanda but this stability is based on repression … We need stability based on freedom. I don't understand how democratic countries can remain friends with a government that doesn't allow democracy. The democratic UK is supporting a dictatorship.
Shall I die or live, be detained or released what we have achieved will not go back. This movement is stronger than me. Remanding me in captivity or silencing my voice can only postpone the revolution. It cannot stop the movement.

Unity and Reconciliation Speech at Gisozi Genocide Memorial Centre

On the 16th January 2010, Mrs Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, having stayed abroad for 16 years, returned to her country to register her political party and run for presidential elections. It was her first time back in Rwanda since the genocide committed against Tutsi people. On her very first day in Rwanda, she went to lay a wreath of flowers at the Gisozi Genocide Memorial Centre and made a speech on unity and reconciliation.
Her speech, translated in English below, has been submitted as evidence in the court of law on divisionism and revisionism charges leveled against her.
"I would like to say that today, I came back to my country after 16 years, and there was a tragedy that took place in this country. We know very well that there was a genocide, extermination. Therefore, I could not have returned after 16 years to the same country after such actions took place. They took place when I was not in the country. I could not have fallen asleep without first passing by the place where those actions took place. I had to see the place. I had to visit the place.
"The flowers I brought with me are a sign of remembrance from the members of my party FDU and its executive committee. They gave me a message to pass by here and tell Rwandans that what we wish for is for us to work together, to make sure that such a tragedy will never take place again. That is one of the reasons why the FDU Party made a decision to return to the country peacefully, without resorting to violence. Some think that the solution to Rwanda's problems is to resort to armed struggle. We do not believe that shedding blood resolves problems. When you shed blood, the blood comes back to haunt you.
"Therefore, we in FDU wish that all we Rwandans can work together, join our different ideas so that the tragedy that befell our nation will never happen again. It is clear that the path of reconciliation has a long way to go. It has a long way to go because if you look at the number of people who died in this country, it is not something that you can get over quickly. But then again, if you look around you realize that there is no real political policy to help Rwandans achieve reconciliation. For example, if we look at this memorial, it only stops at people who died during the Tutsi genocide. It does not look at the other side – at the Hutus who died during the genocide. Hutus who lost their people are also sad and they think about their lost ones and wonder, 'When will our dead ones be remembered?'
"For us to reach reconciliation, we need to empathize with everyone's sadness. It is necessary that for the Tutsis who were killed, those Hutus who killed them understand that they need to be punished for it. It is also necessary that for the Hutus who were killed, those people who killed them understand that they need to be punished for it too. Furthermore, it is important that all of us, Rwandans from different ethnic groups, understand that we need to unite, respect each other and build our country in peace.
"What brought us back to the country is for us to start that path of reconciliation together and find a way to stop injustices so that all of us Rwandans can live together with basic freedoms in our country."

Rwanda’s Rampaging Rebel Force - NYTimes.com


OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Rwanda's Rampaging Rebel Force

  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • GOOGLE+
  • SAVE
  • E-MAIL
  • SHARE
  • PRINT
  • REPRINTS

Despite supporting a brutal rebel group in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda is about to take a seat on the U.N. Security Council.

Related in Opinion

Opinion Twitter Logo.

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow@nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow@andyrNYT.

Few countries dare challenge the Security Council the way Rwanda does; even fewer get away with it. Yet on Tuesday, despite backing an abusive rebel group that has attacked U.N. peacekeepers in the neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda will take a two-year seat on the council. At the famous horseshoe table, Rwanda will get to make life-and-death decisions on the future of countries in crisis, including the very neighbor it is accused of destabilizing.

How could this be? The facts came out in June, when a U.N. group of experts monitoring sanctions in eastern Congo published a report accusing Rwanda of supporting, as it had done before since the late 1990s, a Congolese rebellion this time named March 23. Even by Congolese standards, M23 has a sinister record: One of its leaders is Bosco Ntaganda, a fugitive from the International Criminal Court accused of war crimes, including murder, rape, sexual slavery and recruitment of child soldiers.

As our own research at Human Rights Watch confirmed, Rwandan Army officials were providing M23 with weapons, ammunition and hundreds of young Rwandan recruits, and even sending their troops into Congo to assist them. Despite Rwanda's virulent denials, the diplomatic machinery kicked into gear, with the U.S. government making discreet efforts to encourage its Rwandan ally to use its "influence" to stop the violence.

But throughout the summer Rwandan support continued unabated, enabling M23 to do what its leaders know best: commit widespread crimes, including killing civilians and summarily executing boys who tried to escape recruitment. A 32-year-old woman from Chengerero told us that on July 7, M23 fighters broke down her door, beat her 15-year-old son to death and abducted her husband. Before leaving, they raped her, poured fuel between her legs and set her on fire. In Muchanga, a 15-year-old girl described being raped by an M23 fighter who stole the money for her school fees. The list goes on.

According to the U.N. experts' report, M23's de facto chain of command "culminates with the Rwandan Minister of Defense General James Kabarebe." The experts concluded that in July Rwandan Defense Force commanders operated alongside M23 during operations that targeted a U.N. base in Kiwanja and killed a U.N. peacekeeper.

And yet the Security Council failed to put Rwanda on notice. Instead, on Oct. 18, benefiting from a practice of rotation among African countries, Rwanda ran unopposed for a Security Council seat, winning 148 votes among the 193 nations in the U.N. General Assembly. Even after M23 seized control of Goma, on the eastern border of Congo, in November, causing tens of thousands residents to flee in fear of their lives, the Security Council failed to confront Rwanda.

So how do you get away with arming a rebel force that attacks U.N. peacekeepers, rapes women and recruits children? You need powerful friends, and Rwanda has had one. Born from the guilt of the Clinton administration's inaction in the face of the Rwandan genocide, and a recognition of Rwanda's relatively efficient use of development aid, the United States has proven to be one of Kigali's staunchest allies. When the interim report of the U.N. experts came out in June, it was widely alleged that the United States delayed its publication, arguing that Rwanda, which had been uncooperative, should be given time to respond. The Obama administration suspended $200,000 worth of military aid, but only under a legislative requirement, all the while undermining efforts at the United Nations to denounce Rwanda's role in the crisis.

While other countries, such as Britain, were raising public pressure on Kigali, the United States was using all the diplomatic contortions in the book to avoid public censure of Rwanda's support for M23. Finally, on Dec. 18, President Obama called on the Rwandan president, Paul Kagame, to end "any support" for M23. Although couched in diplomatic terms, the appeal, along with candid statements by U.S. diplomats, amounted to a recognition that "quiet" diplomacy had failed to curb M23's abuses.

But as a grim new year is about to set on eastern Congo, the United States should go much further. On Jan. 1, it should greet Rwanda, its new fellow Security Council member, with long overdue sanctions against Rwandan officials complicit in M23 abuses, making clear that a seat at the table is no license to make a mockery of the council's resolutions.

Only once Rwanda ceases supporting M23 will it be able to make a credible contribution to the lifesaving work of the Security Council, drawing on its own tragic history as a victim of genocide, and its experience as a troop contributor to peacekeeping operations.

Philippe Bolopion is United Nations director for Human Rights Watch.