Skip to main content

[RwandaLibre] UN sanctions sparks row between DRC and Rwanda | eNCA

 


UN sanctions sparks row between DRC and Rwanda


Africa
Kigali's UN ambassador Eugene-Richard Gasana. The UN Security Council on Thursday renewed a sanctions regime against Democratic Republic of Congo in a vote that sparked a furious row between Congo and Rwanda. Picture: AFP

UNITED NATIONS, United States - The UN Security Council on Thursday renewed a sanctions regime against Democratic Republic of Congo in a vote that sparked a furious row between Congo and Rwanda.

The council backed a sanctions committee report which says the M23 rebel group is recruiting in Rwanda despite its military defeat and that its leaders are moving freely in Uganda.

Rwanda, as a temporary member of the 15-nation Security Council, voted for resolution 2136 but then lashed out at the sanctions report and DR Congo.

Kigali's UN ambassador Eugene-Richard Gasana called the sanctions committee report "baseless" and said his DR Congo counterpart was a "cry baby" always complaining to the council about Rwanda.

DR Congo's ambassador Ignace Gata Mativa said the sanctions experts had clearly shown "grave violations" by Rwanda and Uganda by aiding "destabilization" in eastern DR Congo.

"Such an attitude constitutes an act of aggression that the Security Council must record and condemn," Gata added.

"Dear friend, it is time to stop acting like a cry baby each time, each time to come here and hit out at Rwanda," Gasana responded.

M23 launched an uprising against the DR Congo government in 2012 and briefly occupied the key city of Goma before it was defeated by government forces late last year. It is one of a host of groups that have brought strife to eastern DR Congo over the past two decades.

UN experts have repeatedly said Rwanda and Uganda support the rebels. The two countries deny any role in the uprising.

Gasana repeated accusations that the experts are "unprofessional" and that their work threatens peace efforts.

The council resolution renewed the mandate of the experts and expressed "full support" for their work, however.

The council expressed "strong condemnation" of "internal or external support to armed groups active in the region, including through financial, logistical and military support." But it did not mention Rwanda or any alleged backing for M23.

The resolution did highlight "deep concern" over accusations in the sanctions report that DR Congo forces had been in "collaboration" with the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, which includes some fighters who took part in Rwanda's 1994 genocide.

The Security Council ordered that individuals and entities arming DR Congo groups "through illicit trade of natural resources, including gold or wildlife as well as wildlife products" should be included on the sanctions list.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said in a statement that the move was a "critical step" in the battle against elephant poaching and illicit ivory trading.

A resolution passed Tuesday starting a sanctions regime in neighbouring Central African Republic also said poachers linked to armed groups should be targeted.

WWF said that more than 20,000 elephants are killed each year for their tusks, many of them in Central Africa conflict zones.

-AFP

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
.To post a message: RwandaLibre@yahoogroups.com; .To join: RwandaLibre-subscribe@yahoogroups.com; .To unsubscribe from this group,send an email to:
RwandaLibre-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
_____________________________________________________

More news:  http://amakurunamateka.blogspot.co.uk/; http://ikangurambaga.blogspot.co.uk/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

__,_._,___

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines contre le Rwanda sont-elles si importantes ?

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines contre le Rwanda sont-elles si importantes ? Auteur : The African Rights Campaign. Londres, Royaume-Uni Publié en : mars 2026   Introduction Lorsqu'un gouvernement est accusé d'exécutions extrajudiciaires, de déplacements massifs, de violences sexuelles, de violations des droits de l'homme et du pillage systématique des ressources naturelles d'un pays voisin, la réponse diplomatique attendue est un démenti catégorique, étayé par des preuves. Le Rwanda ne l'a pas fait. Lorsque le département américain du Trésor a imposé des sanctions aux Forces de défense rwandaises (FDR) et à quatre de leurs commandants les plus haut placés, le 2 mars 2026, la porte-parole officielle de Kigali, Yolande Makolo, a délivré une déclaration que les analystes diplomatiques étudieront attentivement pour ce qu'elle omet conspicuement. Elle a dit que les sanctions étaient « injustes », qu'elles ciblaient « uniquement...

Why US Sanctions Against Rwanda Are So Important

Why US Sanctions Against Rwanda Are So Important Author: The African Rights Campaign. London, UK Published: March 2026   Introduction When a government is accused of extrajudicial killings, mass displacement, sexual violence, human rights abuses, and the systematic pillage of another country's mineral resources, the expected response in international diplomacy is an unequivocal denial backed by evidence. Rwanda did not do that. When the United States Department of the Treasury imposed sanctions on the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and four of its most senior commanders on 2 March 2026, Kigali's official spokesperson Yolande Makolo made a statement that diplomatic analysts will study carefully for what it conspicuously omitted. She said the sanctions were 'unjust,' that they targeted 'only one party to the peace process,' and that they 'misrepresent the reality and distort the facts.' Rwanda's government, described by Bloomb...

Rubaya Mine Under USA’s Control: Kagame Has No Grounds to Object.

Rubaya Mine: Strategic Interests, Regional Conflict and the DRC–USA Cooperation Framework Rubaya mine, located in Masisi territory in North Kivu, eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, is a Congolese resource. It was a Congolese resource before the M23 advanced on it, it remains a Congolese resource today, and it will remain a Congolese resource regardless of what any regional actor claims, implies or pursues. That is not a political position. It is a statement of international law and sovereign right. This foundational point must be stated plainly because it is frequently obscured in discussions about the conflict in eastern Congo. Debates about security narratives, mineral partnerships and geopolitical alignment risk creating a false impression that Rubaya's ownership or governance is somehow open to negotiation between external parties. It is not. The Democratic Republic of the Congo holds sovereign authority over its territory and its natural resources. N...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

Migration Policy Institute