“The genocidal massacre perpetrated in Kisheshe on 29 and 30 November is one too many crimes against humanity committed in the DRC by the Rwandan suppletifs of M23” – said Martin Fayulu (disgraced opposition leader and self-proclaimed victor of the 2018 Congolese Presidential elections) during his “Presidential end of year address” to a nation that maintains his civilian status.
“The insecurity problem today in the Great lakes Region is called Rwanda” – said “President elect” Felix Tshisekedi, on January 17th 2023 at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
It appears that Martin Fayulu, and indeed his political nemesis, President Felix Tshisekedi, both bank on one simple narrative to win the 2023 Presidency: “Rwanda is to blame, for everything”.
This lie is dangled in front of the xenophobic end of the Congolese electorate, like a shiny twinkling object before a neglected toddler in need of distraction from a soiled nappy unlikely to be changed any time soon.
If you were to believe the Congolese news, and indeed the reports of some of the countries historically guilty of fanning the fires of the Great Lakes’ region’s conflicts, Rwanda backs terrorism claiming the lives of innocent Congolese citizens. There is of course zero proof of this narrative, because it is a lie – The Lie™.
Congo’s turmoil has seen more days than many of us. Between humanitarian crises, conflicting reports from international institutions, coups and contested elections, foreign military presence and the residue of regional wars, it is hard to diagnose the root cause of the disease. Is it the conflicts resulting into the poverty, or is it the poverty resulting in the conflicts?
Whether conflict or poverty is the core issue, either, and both, only fester through incompetent leadership.
This is where Fayulu and Tshisekedi would interrupt, chests puffed with feigned outrage, as if The Lie™ might gain credibility, as claimed by the Nazi Big Lie theory, with repetition: “it is Rwanda ruining everything!”
It isn’t so silly a tactic.
The scapegoating of Rwanda is routinely picked up by international publications, which, as far as our continent is concerned, seem to bear and breed a taste for simplicity, for reductiveness, for Good Victim African vs Bad Killer African outlooks.
The truth about Congo’s current problems, is, however, more nuanced.
0.4% of deaths in the Democratic Republic of Congo can be directly attributed to violence. Insalubrity, preventable diseases and poor access to healthcare, as well as malnutrition, account for the vast majority of avertable deaths in the DRC. Seasonal tragedies as the result of infrastructure collapse, such as the recent deaths of at least 169 people in Kinshasa alone following heavy rainfall, inflate these numbers yearly.
There are currently over 130 armed groups fighting for their share of the Congo Eldorado, stirred and shielded by ethnic divide, the questionable agendas of international shareholders of its gas and mineral wealth, and global apathy to the “characteristic” violence marring the Great Lakes Region.
Congolese citizens have lived in abject poverty, conflict, unsafe infrastructure and poor sanitation for 6 decades beyond DRC’s independence. Congo is ranked 8th in the world in terms of poverty, 3rd in the world in terms of likelihood to incur internal mass murder, 11th in the world in terms of corruption, and 17th in the world in terms of wealth inequity.
Nevertheless, a global taste for a conflict-centric narrative to contextualize African misery routinely refutes the responsibility of Congolese leaders to provide good internal governance, or a tangible improvement in poverty rates since the end of the Second Congo war, almost twenty years ago.
Instead, officials have for long deviated attention and criticism, and garnered international military and financial support, using conflict-mongering.
Conflict-mongering becomes ever more useful during the election period, when rather than present a sound, transparent economic plan (and pledge accountability for its results), politicians can theatrically extrapolate, inflame and frighten, appealing to emotions rather than analytical approbation.
In the past, this has worked splendidly well for devious leaders across the world. Diversionary Foreign Policy, typically characterized by Diversionary War, surmises: “unpopular leaders generate foreign policy crises to both divert the public’s attention away from the discontent with their rule and bolster their political fortunes”. Academics justifiably argue that “political leaders’ popularity increases as the imminence of foreign threat and international conflict rises”.
The “dictatorship” of Rwandan President Paul Kagame “spilling onto Congolese soil” springs to mind, as one of those colourful diversionary fictions. Storytelling, or narrative creation, is linked to facilitated bonding, increased empathy and a resulting willingness to champion a perceived hero, or victim.
The story many are told about Congo’s current plight, in sometimes upsetting, graphic terms, tickles both the “African trigger-happy military tyrant” western kink, and every human’s emotional, hormonal vulnerability to a compelling narrative; our desire to empathise with a proclaimed “wronged party”.
The lie™ is perfectly compatible with the rapid update cycle format of social media, where reductive, shocking and emotionally engaging narratives perform eerily well.
While analysis on the impact of poor public policy – and the resulting breakdown of institutions and resource misallocation – on citizen welfare may be apt critique of Congo’s predicaments, it’s just not as appealing, is it? This analysis would not aggressively villainize one entity, while elevating the other to the endearing status of hero or victim. It is not twitter-sexy, snappy, or momentous. It is complex, and boring; unlike inspired fiction.
As aforementioned, the exhaustive truth surrounding Congo’s situation is more nuanced.
Nevertheless, while the presence of armed groups in Congo, including the infamous M23, can appear at times sensationalized and inflated for political gains, to ignore the devastating impact of terrorism and violent rebellion in Congo on the daily lives of its civilians would be highly negligent.
So why do Congolese leaders not want to address their internal terrorism issues; the murders committed by the Mai-Mai, or the protection of Interahamwe, or the presence of the Islamic State on Congolese soil, or the persistent local use of child soldiers (to state a few)?
Here is what I believe needs to be fixed by the 2023 Presidential Elections. If Congo hopes to dissolve some, and ideally all, of its terrorist groups, if resource-rich Congo hopes to eventually stop making the “poorest countries in the world” list, an ambitious, accountable and self-demanding leader must be elected. And this person, the past 4 years of soaring conflict and sinking living conditions in Congo have shown, does not seem to be Felix Antoine Tshisekedi, let alone is discount version, Martin Fayulu. I wish our Congolese brothers and sisters the best of luck, and change, at last.
