In a continent known for AIDS, poverty, and political upheaval, the Democratic Republic of the Congo stands out: it is currently the site of the first conflict to claim more than 6 million lives since the Holocaust. Yet the Congo, home to the largest peacekeeping force in the world, hardly ever makes headlines, and vast stretches of its land remain void of humanitarian aid, so that medicine, electricity, food and water remain in constant short supply. Meanwhile, attempts to negotiate a peace settlement have repeatedly failed to stop the fighting, leaving more than 45,000 civilians dead each month.
It is hard to trace the roots of this deadly war, since the Congo – a mineral-rich land in the heart of Africa – has been the victim of looting and repressive rule since Belgium colonized its territory in the late 19th Century. Since gaining independence in 1960, the Congo has suffered everything from the assassination of its first leader, Prince Lumumba, to 30 years of dictatorship under Mobutu Sese Seko, whose corrupt rule ended only with a civil war in 1997. The fighting, a consequence of attempts by Hutu militias to destabilize neighboring Rwanda, resulted in the short-lived presidency of Laurent D. Kabila, who was similarly expelled from the country in 1998, when a second civil war broke out. In the five years that followed, countries from Rwanda to Uganda joined in the bloodshed.
Now, even after a UN-brokered peace in 2003 and the country’s first democratic elections in 2006, the Congo remains in tatters. Rape and torture run rampant, villages are destroyed by rebel offensives, and millions of refugees are left to fend for themselves, since neither the international community nor the Congolese government have the authority or the resources to help them.
None of this is news after twelve years of conflict, which is why the Congo fails to command the media’s attention. Nevertheless, there are those who report regularly on the atrocities, including a columnist for the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof, who has been added to the speakers’ list for BGIA’s spring semester.
In his most recent column, "The World Capital of Killing," Mr. Kristof makes an interesting point: it is not humanitarian aid which is most sorely needed in the Congo, but a more vigorous international effort to end the war itself. Humanitarian aid is simply the pressure that slows the bleeding of certain wounds; in order to heal the Congo completely, real surgery is needed. It is time for the international community to engage in this issue: to put pressure on Rwanda to stop sponsoring rebels, and on President Joseph Kabila to arrest generals wanted for war crimes. Furthermore, the United States should lead an effort to monitor the minerals coming from Congo to stop warlords from profiting from this devastating war. Only then can the international community be said to have satisfied its promise after the Rwandan genocide: never again.
Good post and an interesting (though tragic) topic. I was reading this blog post earlier today, which is about the Kristof article, so I figured I'd share it here: http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2010/02/casualty-counts-in-congo.html
ReplyDeleteHm. I wish I had come across that blog before doing this post; I guess I figured I could trust the death toll estimates provided by the New York Times. But the "Lawyers, Guns and Money" blog makes a good point: ultimately it doesn't matter how many millions have died - something needs to be done either way, as long as the casualties keep adding up. And regardless of how many people die, the number of rapes and IDPs are still horrifying. Here's hoping something can be done to stop it.
ReplyDeleteThe state of the DRC is tragic to the core. I completely agree with Kristof and the need for a more direct effort by the international community - a commitment that goes further than paper (money). Humanitarian aid will be needed, but its too soon. Throwing money at a crisis, i.e. the DRC, doesn't help anyone; on the contrary, it prolongs conflict.
ReplyDelete