Congo Peace

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley signed into law this month the Maryland State Procurement and Congo Conflict Minerals Bill, making Maryland the second state to pass such legislation. The measure, passed with the help of the Enough Project, has received little publicity.

The law, patterned after Section 1502 of the federal Dodd-Frank conflict minerals legislation, may not be garnering that much enthusiasm because Sec. 1502 itself is on the ropes.

A House of Representatives hearing scheduled for today, May 10, may be the beginning of the end for the law, as industry forces and their allies seem to be uniting against it. Note the title of the hearing today in The International Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of The House Financial Services Committee: “The Costs and Consequences of Dodd- Frank Section 1502: Impacts on America and the Congo”

This doesn’t bode well for Section 1502 or the new Maryland law.

Congo Peace supported the passage of the Maryland law and enforcement of Section 1502. Here’s why: Conflict mineral laws at least create a public dialogue on how the riches of the Congo are extracted and call for accountability up and down the supply chain. How else will American consumers see the connection between their electronics products and the violence surrounding their extraction in the Congo?

With the U.S. economy in the doldrums, jobs in short supply and government cutbacks all around, why should Americans care about the elections set for November 28 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo?

Well, as U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Johnnie Carson recently said, “What happens in Africa affects the United States and the entire international community.”

The Congo, still recovering from two catastrophic wars and ongoing conflict, is a very fragile state. Its current young president, Joseph Kabila, while inking some additional mineral contracts, by many accounts hasn’t done much for the Congolese nor has been able to quell the violence in the East.  Corruption and impunity for crimes remain commonplace. Those brave enough to defend human rights  have been “attacked, abducted, and subjected to death threats and other forms of intimidation by government security forces and armed groups”, according to Amnesty International.

Few observers are expecting a fair vote on November 28.  Here are five reasons why as Americans we should pay attention to who is running the Congo:

1. Our economy relies on raw materials from the Congo. American companies that employ a lot of workers such as technology companies, the aerospace industry, jewelers, and food suppliers have products that contain raw materials from the Congo. Though considered to be one of the richest countries in the world regarding natural resources, the Congolese are among the world’s poorest citizens and face all of the health issues associated with extreme poverty.

Prince Kihangi Kyamwami, a development official in the Walikale region of the DRC, points out: “As everyone knows, over the past decade, the great powers, dictators, private firms, criminal networks and rebel forces have ruthlessly exploited our wealth, plunging most of the population into extreme poverty. The profits from mining haven’t helped local development or local communities.”

As long as our economy relies on raw materials from the Congo, we should as consumers encourage business practices that benefit the Congolese people and not just corrupt leaders.

2. Enlightened leadership matters to women and girls. The present state of affairs in the Congo has left the country, particularly the eastern region, a very dangerous place for females. Militias and even government soldiers, many caught up in the illicit trade of minerals, continue to rape with impunity. It doesn’t have to be this way. Just look at the difference Liberia’s President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has made in her country after all of the destruction caused by her predecessor, Charles Taylor and the militia he’s accused of backing in Sierra Leone. In fact, Sirleaf’s efforts recently won her a share in this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. No one can argue that Liberia and the region is a much safer place for women and girls then it was during Taylor’s presidency.

3. For preserving forests, a vast river system, and wildlife.  The Democratic Republic of Congo possesses 50 percent of Africa’s forests and a river system that could provide hydro-electric power to the entire continent, according to reports on the country’s strategic significance and its potential role as an economic power in central Africa. Leaders that care more about enriching themselves and their cronies don’t have a long-term stake in the flora and fauna. Read record poaching threatens mountain gorillas. Americans who care about environmental and wildlife issues should care about who is garnering the resources of the Congo.

4. Our high ideals. Official U.S. foreign policy continues to trumpet the American ideals of democracy and freedom, according to the State Department Mission Statement. As the Arab Spring (and summer and Fall) are teaching us, it doesn’t make long-term sense to support dictators in the pursuit of our national interests. The pattern of U.S. political leaders and lobbyists  protecting kleptocratic dictators in Africa needs to be challenged. Are we not seeing that citizens of oppressive regimes will eventually — even if it takes decades — oust oppressive leaders and then resent the U.S. for supporting them? As a Congolese friend recently shared, Congolese people are waiting to see if the U.S. will take their side.

5. Finally, the U.S. has some troops in the Congo advising the undisciplined and underpaid Congolese army. Recently, the U.S. sent more troops to the region to assist Uganda in tracking down the LRA, the notorious rebel group led by the fanatical Joseph Kony, that has been terrorizing Congolese villagers who live near the border with Uganda.

What happens in the Congo does matter to Americans, and we should pay attention to the elections. And we should ask of our Congressional representatives, the State Department, and the White House for a bolder, more comprehensive approach to achieving peace in the DRC.

TF Austin

A New York Times op-ed (Aug. 7, 2011), How Congress Devastated Congo, offers a blistering critique of the conflict minerals plank of the Dodd-Frank Act. Though the act hasn’t been implemented, the author argues that a pre-emptive minerals ban is having the unintended consequence of putting artisan miners in Eastern Congo out of work.

The Enough Project, a leading driver in the conflict minerals campaign and this piece of legislation, has vigorously defended the provision. So have some other organizations close to the situation. Congo expert Jason Stearns also pointed out in a blog post last week, “Thoughts about Conflict Minerals,” that some Congolese NGOs had supported implementation of the act as recent as May 2011.

I would like to make the point that in this debate it’s time to listen more carefully to what the Congolese have had to say all along about the ongoing, destructive conflict in their country. From numerous conversations with Congolese friends, and the blogs of Congolese activists, their message seems to be consistent.

While supportive of cleaning up the minerals trade in the East, they continue to indicate that the effort to do so by the Dodd-Frank bill and the campaign to purchase “conflict free” cell phones doesn’t get to the heart of the matter.

Listen carefully here to what some insightful Congolese voices have to say about the broader context of the conflict in their country.

“The conflict mineral approach has an obsessive focus on the FDLR and other rebel groups while scant attention is paid to Uganda (which has an International Court of Justice ruling against it for looting and crimes against humanity in the Congo) and Rwanda (whose role in the perpetuation of the conflict and looting of Congo is well documented by UN reports and international arrest warrants for its top officials),” wrote Kambale Musavuli and Bodia Macharia, representatives of Friends of the Congo in a 2009 Huffington Post blog.  “Rwanda is the main transit point for illicit minerals coming from the Congo irrespective of the rebel group (FDLR, CNDP or others) transporting the minerals.”

My friend Agnes Loteta Dimandja, another voice from the Congolese diaspora, points out:

“The Congolese situation remains complex to understand because there are too many hidden interests. It is clear that some active organizations supposedly working for the Congolese interests, yet act contrary to these interests. This is understandable because of their hidden agenda. It is known that behind the so-called humanism hides large financial and economic interests they cover and for which actually they work.

“Despite many reports that have clearly denounced the responsibility of both countries Rwanda and Uganda, they have never been condemned. It is known that the two presidents are responsible of the tragic situation in Congo for over 10 years. They have built mineral processing plants in their countries and it is in full sight of everyone that each day, truckloads cross the Congo border carrying Congolese minerals to these countries.”

These Congolese voices are not uncritical of the DRC government’s role in the conflict.

Mvemba Dizolele, a Congolese scholar and writer, points out on his blog that the DRC government has failed to build a professional army, “perhaps the single most important element in ensuring Congo’s territorial integrity and the security of its citizens and coveted national resources. President Kabila continues to deal with militias in the east in the same way that he did during the transition period—co-opting warlords into the government and security institutions. Even as militia leaders get promoted into the Congolese army, they remain rooted geographically in their area of influence and continue to perpetrate horrific abuses on civilians with impunity. In short, the national army is little more than a patchwork of militias with parallel command structures and no incentive to change.”

At the same time, Dizolele underscores the destructive role of Rwanda, Uganda and other neighboring countries in the Congo.

“The predatory designs of neighboring Rwanda and Uganda also fuel the volatile situation,” he writes. “Both Rwanda and Uganda have invaded Congo twice, with continued incursions into eastern Congo where they still support militias. Several UN reports have linked both countries to Congolese militias and the looting of resources. Furthermore, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and Tanzania benefit from the illicit mineral trade in eastern Congo as they serve as primary export routes. And while Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi have no gold, diamond or tantalum deposits of significance, they have become important exporters of these minerals. In the past, high level government officials and senior army officers were implicated in this trade.  Whether this is still the case today is unclear. It seems, nevertheless, highly unlikely that these countries could export such large amounts of minerals without the collusion of government officials.  Whether these leaders are actively sourcing these goods or simply turning a blind eye to the trade matters little to the bottom line: the result is still the same.”

So given the debate over the efficacy of the conflict minerals campaign, my question for the campaign proponents is this: While leading Congolese voices continue to point to the regional nature of the minerals trade as the the main problem, why don’t you address it? In asking the U.S. public to focus on “conflict minerals” are you not providing cover for a not too hidden regional problem involving Rwanda, Uganda and other neighboring countries of the Congo? Why not put more emphasis in a regional diplomatic solution, for example calling on the Obama administration, or perhaps the UN, to appoint a special envoy to the region? Such a mission would seek a resolution of the conflict with the major players, not only President Kabila of the DRC, but also President Museveni of Uganda, and President Kagame of Rwanda.

Such a mission would also do well to involve the International Criminal Court in further indictments on militia leaders and to uncover and to bring to justice their supporters. Restorative justice for the Congolese, who have suffered untold violence, is also essential in any rebuilding process.

TF Austin

The National Endowment for Democracy honored Floribert Chebeya with its Democracy Service Medal in a ceremony, July 26, held at the United States Holocaust Museum. Chebeya was awarded the medal posthumously for his work as founder and president of Voix des Sans Voix (Voice of the Voiceless) a leading Congolese human rights organization that works to defend and empower citizens in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. His widow, Annie Chebeya Mangbenga, accepted the award on his behalf.

“To countless people in the DRC as well as in other African countries, Floribert was a savior,” NED President Carl Gershman said at the ceremony. “From his unmarked and humble office, he fought for Congolese citizens whose rights the country’s leaders had ignored and trampled upon.”

Chebeya was killed in June 2010 after criticizing the inspector general of the police for a violent suppression of a political and religious movement in Kinshasa, DRC. A military tribunal in June 2011 sentenced to death four of eight defendants in the case, though the police commissioner John Numbi — considered to be the prime suspect — was never charged.

Comments from Annie Chebeya were particularly moving. “Ladies and gentleman, the voice of the voiceless is no longer with us. I hope that you who are present will not forget to be the voices who will grow louder to defend this cause.”

Annie Chebeya remarked that her husband was a wonderful father to their six children. She and her children have moved to North America, where they have started a new life. She continues to fight to learn the entire truth of the death of her husband and his driver, Fidele Bazana.

The medal presentation came at the end of a half-day conference, “Voices from the Congo: the Road Ahead,” co-organized by NED, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Eastern Congo Initiative.

The conference webpage has some podcast interviews, which are worth the time to listen to.