Dispute over military command holds up Congo peace deal

ADDIS ABABA Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:20am EST

President of the Democratic Republic of Congo Joseph Kabila (2nd R) arrives at the venue for the 20th Assembly of the African Union (AU) at its headquarters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa January 28, 2013. REUTERS/Tiksa Negeri

President of the Democratic Republic of Congo Joseph Kabila (2nd R) arrives at the venue for the 20th Assembly of the African Union (AU) at its headquarters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa January 28, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Tiksa Negeri

Related Topics

ADDIS ABABA (Reuters) - African leaders failed on Monday to sign a U.N.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending two decades of conflict in eastern Congo, said a senior Congolese diplomat, who pointed to concerns over who would command a new regional military force.

The agreement was to include the deployment of several thousand extra soldiers to tackle armed militias in the mineral-rich east. The brigade would fight under the banner of the U.N.'s MONUSCO peacekeeping force.

Diplomats at an African Union summit in Ethiopia said the troops would come from the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC), notably Tanzania.

Leaders from the Great Lakes region had originally been expected to sign the deal on Monday morning.

Seraphin Ngwej, a senior diplomatic adviser to Congolese President Joseph Kabila, said SADC members had raised questions over who would command the intervention force - SADC or MONUSCO.

"(SADC) wants assurances the brigade can do what they want it to do," said the diplomatic source who declined to be named.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said he had postponed the signing because of "procedural differences" and stressed there were no fundamental differences on the agreement's content between the eight regional states involved.

A fresh rebellion launched last year in Congo's east, a region where ethnic tensions and vast mineral deposits have fuelled a series of cross-border wars - raised fears of another conflict in the borderlands zone.

BOLSTERING PEACEKEEPER MANDATE

The M23 rebel movement swept across Congo's North Kivu province and in November seized the provincial capital of Goma, a city of 1 million people. The rebels later left the city to pave the way for peace talks.

The group is named after a March 23, 2009 peace deal that integrated Tutsi-dominated rebels into Congo's army, but which they say the government violated. The rebels are now also demanding wide-ranging political reforms. ž

MONUSCO was widely criticized for failing to halt the rebels' southern advance on Goma. The force said its helicopters had fired hundreds of rockets but were unable to beat back the swelling ranks of the rebels as government forces fled.

However, U.N. chief Ban said any perception that the peacekeepers had failed was misinformed. The peacekeepers had a strict mandate, and responsibility for security lay first and foremost with the Congolese government and its army.

Nevertheless, he said, "We are now looking at a different approach, how we can strengthen the capacity of MONUSCO."

U.N. officials say the new intervention brigade's mandate would be more robust than MONUSCO's.

Regional tensions escalated last year when a U.N. group of experts reported Rwanda and Uganda were both supporting the M23 rebellion. Both countries have denied involvement.

A second diplomat said the obstacles blocking the Congo peace deal were broader than just the intervention force. He gave no further details.

Separate peace talks between the Kinshasa government and M23 rebels hosted by Uganda have stalled.

Diplomats at the AU summit said it was unclear whether the delays to the deal would hold up a recommendation by Ban to the U.N. Security Council that the new force be deployed.

Ngwej said that under the proposed regional agreement the Kinshasa government would commit to security sector reforms, including the army.

(Writing by Richard Lough; Editing by Louise Ireland and Drazen Jorgic)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
oxen wrote:
In Mali, what happened? The ECOWAS kept dragging feet until the rebels were near the Capital Bamako, so France took the lead to help. Same thing here, if UN believes all these heads with all sorts of interests will easily agree that may be wrong. Mr Ban Ki-Moon needs to take a firm stand and bring on board international standards. If it is a UN led force let the UN decide the command or work with a country that takes the significant lead to command along side with any other significant force. E.g. let SADC be significant leader as part of the force and work on agreed rules under overall UN command, otherwise it will be just a mess. In Mali the Govt forces are working with French, I do not think Mali forces have any commander leading the French forces and may be vice-versa. Similary SADC can work along with UN and DRC govt and coordinate peace enforcement. There are too many players in the region to sign things,some have been watching or fanning the chaos so forget some and share out roles with those that are able to help DRC. The UN needs to be in charge of the overall forces it is accountable for this mission, and others will work under UN, they will be accountable under the UN. SADC can be in charge of its contingent but coordinated under UN. Otherwise the rebels will have no incentive to talk for peace, they will just continue unabated in the mines and controlling all the zones where people have fled. It is the population that suffers, the African leaders seem to have other priorities and Mr Kabila does no seem to know who means good for his country. He counted on Kampala talks that obviously could not work with the accused rebel sponsors giving ideas. SADC my be wishfully thinking that their member will be left alone with all the gold to mine for free available to those that are armed to the teeth and have a lot of support in the area to go for it and the free timber to make quick cash. Who cares about the population or peace in Congo or the plight of youth that are being misled to fight for the warlords to get rich quick? They should be going to school and doing other business.

Jan 31, 2013 12:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.