Congolese Human Rights Activist Present To US Congress

Congolese activist Justine Masika Bihamba of Synergie Des Femmes pour les victimes des Violences Sexuelle Breaks The Silence and presented the case of Congolese Women to the U.S. Congress today. The recommendations she made are as follows:

1. Restore peace in the eastern DRC and in the whole region

2. Give attention to political developments in Kinshasa and in the other provinces as well as the eastern DRC. The DRC will remain fragile until the state is strengthened so that it has the power to reinforce constitutionalism and good governance.

3. Promote dialogue, based on mutual respect and partnership, between the international community and the government of the DRC toward genuine development and a resolution of the conflict.

4. Help the government of the DRC to create a truly unified, effective and disciplined army which is the backbone of lasting security in eastern Congo. The training of different battalions by different partners with different military cultures must be replaced by a better coordinated and complementary approach.

5. Put pressure on the government of Rwanda to open its democratic space and to allow for negotiations to find a solution to the problem of the FDLR: the solution is political.

6. Build a coherent coordinated multilateral response to the challenge of the DRC. In spite of the huge budget spent on the Congo peace process the results are still well below expectations. If the international community wants to make a difference, it must show that its members are ready to work together.

7. End impunity. Support the creation of an international tribunal based in the DRC with a system of mixed chambers where international and Congolese judges work side by side on cases of past violations of human rights. The presence of the international tribunal in DRC would ensure that it would be close to the victims and less danger of evidence corruption. Mutual control and support among international and Congolese judges would diminish the danger of corruption.

Click here to listen to more Congolese women voices>>

UN Report On War Crimes in The Congo: Will The Congolese People Finally Get Justice?

The below is a critique of Nick Kristof's blog on the issue: http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/the-u-n-report-on-war-crimes-in-congo/

Click here (PDF) to download UN Report.

The report raises several key questions:
1. Will the Congolese people finally get justice after living through 14 years of the greatest crimes committed against humanity at the dawn of the 21st century?

2. Will those corporations implicated in the illegal looting of Congo's minerals and supporting rebel groups also be called to account? President Clinton's friend Jean-Raymond Boule provided a private jet in exchange for mining concessions to one of the rebel groups that committed atrocities. (See UN Development Programme report - http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/docs05/The%20International%20Dimensions%20of%20the%20Congo%20Crisis.pdf)

3. Will the Clinton Administration be held to account for its propping up and support of regimes that perpetuated such heinous crimes? Will Madeleine Albright, Susan Rice, Bill Richardson and members of the Clinton National Security Council be called to account? NY Times reporter Howard French has written extensively on this question: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_lost_continent

4. Will the Obama administration FINALLY implement PL 109-456 Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security and Democracy Promotion Act hat he sponsored as Senator? http://friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/policy-a-issue-briefs.html
It explicitly calls for the US to hold accountable Congo's neighbors that destabilize the Congo.

5. Will the international dimensions of the crimes committed in the Congo be finally investigated? The United States Congress can take the lead on this by calling a hearing to fully address the roots of the greatest crime committed against humanity in the 21st century.

Finally a few points of correction and clarification:
Mr. Kristof, you mention that the report describes the role of “conflict minerals” in sustaining warfare but the organization you cite has said nothing about the role of US corporations, especially mining companies' direct involvement in fueling the conflict over the past 14 years, in spite of four UN reports documenting the corporate complicity in fueling the conflict in the Congo. In fact, you have never mentioned the names of these companies either. See list of mining and other companies implicated over the past 14 years: http://conflictminerals.org/us-canadian-companies-involved-in-congo/

Some of the core elements of this report are not new. Even your paper reported on this in 1997 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/magazine/29Tennis-t.html?_r=2) Also other institutions in the international community have been out front on these crimes committed by the Rwandan Patriotic Army. The 2008 Spanish indictment (http://jicj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/6/5/1003) of 40 top officials in the Rwandan government is a case in point. President Kagame himself would have been prosecuted if he were not a head of state. The 2005 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling (http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/116/10455.pdf ) against Uganda is another case in point -- Rwanda would have undoubtedly met the same fate as Uganda if they were party to the ICJ and not outside of its jurisdiction like its key sponsor and ally, the United States.

BLOOD MINERALS:The Criminalization of the Mining Industry in Eastern DRC

The Pole Institute convened representatives from diverse sectors of the Congolese society to share their analysis and prescriptions for addressing the de-criminalization of natural resources so that they can be a benefit to the Congolese people. Below are some excerpts geared towards the International community and the myriad efforts underway to address “conflict minerals.” Click here to download the full report.

Select Excerpts:
In order to rehabilitate and decriminalize the mining industry, which according to [Aloys] Tegera, generates more than two-thirds of the revenue of North Kivu, it is necessary to, in the first place, work towards the re-establishment of the Congolese state. Any efforts by the international community to re-organize and legislate for the Congolese mining industry without taking this fundamental step into account risk failure, “unless, of course, the various lobbies have in mind a Congo without the Congolese, which would clearly be absurd.” Introduction page 3

A glaring lacuna in all these efforts is the lack of involvement of the Congolese people in seeking solutions to problems that face them in their own country, and Johnson argues that unless the Congolese people are brought “back in” all these international efforts will remain, for their originators, an exercise in creating the DRC after their own image. Introduction page 4

[Dominic] Johnson argues that because of this failure to include the Congolese people in crucial debate on ‘their’ issues, the international community has made a serious error of judgment in not recognizing that the situation in the east of the DRC goes beyond just a presumed squabble over minerals and raises fundamental questions of the structuring of state power which have to be taken into account by anyone hoping to work with the Congolese state in order to reform the Congolese mining sector. Introduction page 4

It is imperative that the various people and organizations of good will who are determined to ensure that the minerals of Kivu are ‘clean’ or conflict-free first work towards a definition of the basics necessary for the re-establishment of the Congolese state. Only when this is in place will the control of the mining industry be possible. The various initiatives will not be effective unless this basic condition is met. Aloys Tegera page 11

It is argued that important aspects of the regulatory model now emerging are partly based on an erroneous and outdated analysis of the conflict dynamics in Eastern Congo and that this is likely to weaken its effectiveness on the ground. The error consists in regarding competition around minerals as the main reason for conflicts in Eastern Congo and the establishment of government authority as the main mechanism for ending such competition and thereby the conflicts themselves. Reforms centered around strengthening the rôle of the state in Eastern Congo rather than the people will, we contend, exacerbate conflict instead of ending it, even if they succeed in curbing the excesses deriving from mineral trade. Dominic Johnson page 22

It is therefore perfectly possible, under the certification and due diligence schemes now on the table, to claim to have solved a decades-old conflict about control of a mineral-rich region and the control of the trade of its produce without addressing any of the issues involved, without resolving conflict on the ground and without contributing to peace and
human security in a manner visible to the local population. Dominic Johnson page 43

However, beyond the possibility or even the impossibility of an international intervention to render the minerals of eastern DRC ‘clean’ for use, in other words conflict-free, it is important to emphasize that the criminalization of the mining industry underestimates the fact that more than two-thirds of the revenue of a province like North Kivu depends on mineral exports. Aloys Tegera page 8

Click here to find out more about the Pole Institute.

Also find here prescriptions for addressing Congo’s challenge from select Congolese groups:

Women scholars and activists
http://friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/womens-voices.html
Elected officials
http://congofriends.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html

Congolese youth
http://conflictminerals.org/conflict-mineral-critique/

Human Rights
http://congofriends.blogspot.com/2010/06/long-live-spirit-of-floribert-chebeya.html

Remember to join us for Congo Week from October 17 – 23 as ordinary people throughout the globe join in solidarity with the people of the Congo in their quest to fulfill their enormous human and natural potential.

Conflict Minerals: An Attempt to Weaken Congo’s Social Justice Movement

The narrative that is being pushed by the United States government and former government officials who head “grassroots” organizations is that the source of Congo’s conflict is solely rebels who control mines and rape women. This narrative is a gross distortion of the root causes of the conflict in the Congo and the loss of over six million lives since 1996. It obfuscates the heinous crimes and the massive looting in which the United States, Canada, Europe and other nations and corporations have been implicated over the past 14 years.

Congo is trapped in a geo-strategic battle for its enormous wealth, strategic minerals and key location in the heart of Africa. The United States government has played a destructive role in the Congo for a long time and continue to do so:

1885 – First country in the world to recognize the Congo under the ownership of Belgian King Leopld II
1908 – 1960 – Supported Belgian Colonial rule under which tenure it procured the uranium used to fuel the atomic weapons dropped on Japan during World War II

1961 – Complicit in the assassination of Congo’s first elected Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba

1965 – 1997 – Installed and maintained the brutal dictatorial rule of Joseph Mobutu for over three decades

1996 & 1998 – Backed and supported the invasions of Congo by its allies Rwanda and Uganda, which unleashed the mass killing of millions of Congolese

2006 – Facilitated access to power for a pliant leader, Joseph Kabila in return for his providing unfettered access to Congo’s riches by western mining interests

2006 – present – In spite of the abundance of evidence produced by the United Nations and research institutions throughout Africa, Europe and North America, the United States government has refused to hold its allies Rwanda and Uganda accountable for their destructive practices inside the Congo. In addition, the United States government has refused to investigate the U.S. mining companies identified by the United Nations as illegally exploiting the Congo.

Presenting the Congo through a conflict minerals lens will do little if anything at all to end the conflict and will certainly do absolutely nothing about the structural challenges imposed on the Congo by the global community, which keeps the country and its population dependent and impoverished. Read more about why Conflict Minerals is not a victory for the Congo.

STANFORD: New proxy voting policy on conflict minerals

Stanford will vote "yes" on shareholder resolutions asking companies to report their efforts to avoid using "conflict minerals" from Congo Stanford will vote "yes" on shareholder resolutions asking companies to report their efforts to avoid using "conflict minerals" from Congo. The new policy is narrowly drawn and broadly supportive of efforts by electronics companies to address the problem of conflict minerals in their supply chains.

The Stanford University Board of Trustees recently approved a new proxy voting guideline that says the university will vote "yes" on "well-written and reasonable shareholder resolutions that ask companies for reports on their policies and efforts regarding their avoidance of conflict minerals and conflict mineral derivatives."

The 32-member board approved the new guideline at its June 9-10 meeting. "The proxy voting guideline to support resolutions asking companies to address the issue of conflict minerals reflects Stanford's values as a socially responsible investor," said Leslie Hume, the board's chair. "It is narrowly drawn and broadly supportive of efforts by leading technology and electronics companies to address the problem of conflict minerals in their supply chain." The trade in Congo's conflict minerals – tin, tantalite, tungsten and gold, which are used in cell phones, laptops and MP3 players – is a major source of funding for armed groups in eastern Congo whose members commit atrocities against civilians.

Hume applauded students for bringing the issue to the university's attention. "Stanford students, through diligent research and constructive advocacy, played a key role in bringing this issue to the attention of both the university's Advisory Panel on Investment Responsibility and Licensing, and to the board's Special Committee on Investment Responsibility," she said.
The student group is Stanford STAND: A Student Anti-Genocide Coalition. The university's Advisory Panel on Investment Responsibility & Licensing unanimously approved the proxy voting guideline in April, and then forwarded it to the Board of Trustees. The advisory panel is composed of 12 people, including four members of the faculty, four students (two undergraduates and two graduate students), two members of the university's staff, and two alumni.
Related information:
Stanford Student Anti-Genocide Coalition
http://www.standnow.org/chapter/stanford
Advisory Panel on Investment Responsibility & Licensing
http://ucomm.stanford.edu/apir/
Investment Responsibility at Stanford: A Brief History
http://ucomm.stanford.edu/apir/history.html
COMMENT: Lisa Lapin, University Communications: (650) 725-8396, lapin@stanfod.edu
Media contact: Kathleen J. Sullivan, Stanford News Service: (650) 724-5708, kathleenjsullivan@stanford.edu

A Critique of Jon Rosen’s Essay About President Paul Kagame of Rwanda

Jon Rosen’s essay about President Paul Kagame is outrageous—for myriad reasons. Consider just four.
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/discussion/show/5629

First, Rosen mentions only Amnesty and HRW, implying that these two are the Kagame dictatorship’s only critics. Nothing could be further from the truth. It would be similar to claiming that only African-Americans hated apartheid.

The millions who have already sounded the alarm publicly that Kagame is getting away with (mass) murder include: The Economist; The New York Times; three different expert panels assembled by the UN Security Council; U.S. Senators Durbin and Feingold; Mrs. Clinton’s State Department (although their’s may be just crocodile tears); the world’s best experts on the Great Lakes region (renowned researchers and thinkers such as Nzongola-Ntalaja, Howard French, Rene Lemarchand, Gerard Prunier, Thomas Turner and Allan Stam); and ADNA, a network of Africa-focused advocacy nonprofits monitoring US foreign policy.

And the critics include millions of individual Rwandans and other Africans--like me.

Second, Rosen glosses over the damning case against Kagame--in the same way he ignores most Kagame critics. Rosen fails to mention that right now Kagame’s regime is shutting down newspapers, is kidnapping the homeless and is demonizing and pronouncing Ms. Ingabire guilty--before her sham trial even begins. And hours ago in Rwanda, Kagame arrested eminent American law professor, Peter Erlinder, who is defending Ms. Ingabire.

Nor does Rosen mention Mr. Kagame’s role in Yoweri Museveni’s blood-soaked climb to power in Uganda. And he is silent about their joint plundering of the Congo—the real driver of their invasion.

Speaking of the Congo, Rosen could not even be bothered to spell out in full Kagame’s greatest crime there. The thousand-word essay devotes all of one sentence to mass rapes, massive displacements and millions of deaths.

And even though it is published a global journal, the Rosen essay forgets to mention that General Kagame continues to enjoy more than two decades of American support, that he was trained at American military academies, that his son is now enrolled in West Point, and that he tours the US several times each year.

If I appear irritated, please understand why. In Washington’s current relations with Mr. Kagame we are seeing the replay of a tired old movie. Since 1960, Africa’s year of independence, each and every US administration has praised, financed and kept in power its own set of brutal African strongmen that, in its secret files, it has labeled “friendly tyrants.” Mobutu sese Seko of Zaire; Siyaad Barre of Somalia; Hissene Habre of Chad; Samuel Doe of Liberia; and Jonas Savimbi of Angola—these are just five of the dozens. This continuing scandal of official Washington supporting “friendly tyrants” in Africa is the third reason the Rosen essay is outrageous.

The fourth reason stinks even worse. American journalists, whose most sacred democratic duty is to expose government abuse of power, cover up the “friendly tyrants” scandal, keeping American citizens in the dark. Thus today, we have media giants like Steven Kinzer and Fareed Zakaria singing Kagame’s praises. Now, along comes Jon Rosen to join the chorus of praise singers.

But it is not just journalists. As Rosen writes, “ . . . Kagame has long attracted an international following. Figures from Tony Blair to Rick Warren have lauded him . . .”

All this reeks because it continues a tradition of Western elites telling Africans to be happy living under dictatorships that those elites would not tolerate in their own countries for a single day

It is entirely possible that Jon Rosen has a reason. Perhaps to avoid being arrested in Rwanda, (as just happened to Peter Erlinder) he was obliged to publish an outrageous, slanted analysis that dismisses the critics and pooh-poohs the damning case against Kagame as a mere “narrative.” If so, that price is too high and Rosen should have walked away from Rwanda.

Nii Akuetteh
FRIDAY, May 28, 2010

This blog has moved


This blog is now located at http://congofriends.blogspot.com/.
You will be automatically redirected in 30 seconds, or you may click here.

For feed subscribers, please update your feed subscriptions to
http://congofriends.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default.

Say No To Canadian Troops For Congo and Yes To Canadian Diplomacy

By Bodia Macharia, President, Friends of Congo University of Toronto

As Canada’s Governor-General Michaelle Jean visits the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), much speculation abounds regarding the new-found attention being paid to the DRC by the Canadian government. It appears that Canadian General Andrew Leslie is primed to head the 20,000 strong United Nations Mission in the Congo. There is speculation that the anticipated Canadian troops withdrawal from Afghanistan may result in Canadian troops presence in Congo.

Canadian troops should stay home. The DRC does not need more militarization, it needs justice. Canada can help to advance justice, peace and stability in the Congo without sending a single soldier. Should the Canadian government and people in general do the following, it would go further to advance peace and stability in the Congo more than any number of Canadian troops:

1. Call on the United States and England in particular as well as other nations throughout the globe to make Congo a top diplomatic priority.

2. Call on the United States and England to pressure their allies Rwanda and Uganda to cease the destabilization of the Congo, open political space in their own countries and engage in sincere and earnest dialogue with their countrymen who are wreaking havoc in the Congo.

3. Canada should also leverage its position with Rwanda to open political space inside Rwanda and engage in dialogue with Rwandan rebel groups inside Congo.

4. Canada should call on its corporations and those raising capital on the Toronto Stock Exchange (an estimated half the mining capital in the world is raised on the Toronto Stock Exchange) to cease their exploitation of Congo’s riches. Companies such as Banro, First Quantum, Anvil Mining, Barrick Gold via its partner Anglo-Gold Ashanti and others have or continue to benefit at the expense of the Congolese people. A good start would be for the Parliament to pass Bill C-300. In addition, assure that the Canadian Investment Fund for Africa is used for its original purpose - African companies, not Canadian companies that have ready access to capital markets.

5. Provide support to local institutions as opposed to authoritarian regimes that oppress their populations with the support of Canadian tax dollars.

The Condition of Women in the Congo

15th ANNUAL WOMENS AMBASSADORS CONFERENCE

"Recovery from Natural Catastrophes,Wars,and the Financial Crisis"

By: Saran Traore, Research Analyst, Friends Of The Congo

Howard University, the US Congress and the Womens Ambassadors Foundation collaborated on the 15th Annual Womens Ambassadors Conference in the Rayburn Building at the US Congress on April 7th, 2010. The conference had a morning and afternoon session of discussions on different issues facing the global community. Although all the events were informative, the “Recovery from the Financial Crisis” and “Recovery from Wars, the case of the Congo(DRC)” in the afternoon were most eyeopening.

Each session lasted for an hour with panelist giving some overview of the topic then a Q&A after. “Recovery from the Financial Crisis” covered the recent economic crisis that affected the entire international community. Members of the World Bank, experts from Howard university and financial groups were all present to talk about the beginning of the crash, where it started and who was affected the most in comparison to the US. One specific speaker, Mr. Shanta Devarajan from the World Bank, was the expert on the Africa and his take on the affects on the continent as a whole. According to Mr. Devarajan, African was showing great economic improvements not seen in years before the crisis. Overall growth was at 6% before the crash from 4%. Trade and need of commodities was in Africa's favor. Policies were being made across the board for smarter and better economic governance. These improvements then halted after the crash because of the big hit that Africa took. Growth reduced to 1%, Infant Mortality rates grew 30-50 thousand, and millions of people were thrown back into poverty. Although all this sounds severe, Mr. Devarajan says that it could have been worst if Africa had not been on the hot streak that it was on before the crisis. He also emphasis that we should be optimistic, for policy makers are seeing the benefits of prudent policies and many countries are staying the course on these policies.

As I and many other Africans were hopeful of these statements and numbers, I felt the need to ask a very realistic question. With the recorded growth mentioned, distribution of wealth (DOW) in Africa has been and remains a very serious issue. How was it factored into the growth and how was it further effected by the economic crisis? Mr. Devarjan very much agreed with my concerns. According to him, DOW was monitored because in comparison to India, Africa showed a 1.1% in poverty reduction which was better than in India. Once the crash hit, there off course was a drop in income and many people dropped jobs from the formal sector to head to the informal sectors. Also, as remittance is an important part of Africa's economy and wealth distribution, there was a significant drop since those in the Diaspora could no longer afford to send as much back as before the crash. The good news is, remittances are coming back, therefore giving some who have lost jobs some hope for income.

The second session, “Recovery from Wars, the case of Congo (DRC)” was a very powerful one. The panel consisted of Friends of Congo's very own Makeda Crane, a speaker and blogger for FOC, and Jeanne-Martin Cisse who was Guinea-Conakry's first woman Ambassador to the UN and in 1972 was president of the Security Council. Crane spoke of the political, social, and economic crisis that the Congo is experiencing and the millions of lives the have been and continue to be claimed from it. She gave a touching and gripping presentation about her involvement with the Congo and her plight to help the Congo get back on its own feet. She spoke of the fight for minerals in Congo, the tragedy of the amazing women being raped as a result of the war, and the need for social empowerment. In the same tone, she emphasized the political, economic and most importantly human potential of the Congo. Ambassador Cisse echoed in on the same note and spoke of healing Congo and the rest of Africa. She has witnessed the history of Congo and wishes to see a positive change in her lifetime for the country and the entire continent so that the dialogue can change for the better about Africa to the outside world.

“Countries at the Crossroads”

“Countries at the Crossroads”

Political Turmoil and Receding Reform: Democratic Governance in Uncertain Times

By Saran Traore, Research Analyst, the Friends of Congo

Thursday, April 6th, 2010 was a remarkable and exciting day at the Brookings Institute in Washington DC for Freedom House as it hosted the release of the fifth edition of “Countries at the Crossroads.” The Countries at the Crossroads series are an annual assessment of government performance in 70 strategically important countries worldwide that are at a critical crossroad in determining their political future. This edition covered 32 countries, including the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Methodology behind these findings was founded by prominent scholars and analysts who are considered experts in the regions covered in the study.

The four main areas of performance that Freedom House considers to be the basis of analyzing the state of democratic governance in a country are as follows; Accountability and Public Voice, Civil liberties, Rule of Law, and Anti-corruption and Transparency. Each country is graded on a scale of 0-7. Congo's scores in each of these dimensions are as follows; In Accountability and Public Voice, Congo has an average score of 1.53, with the higher score in the category of 5.34 belonging to Ghana. Civil liberties, Congo has an average of 1.98, Ghana with the highest of 5.33. In the category of Rule of Law, Congo has a 1.15, Ghana yet again having the highest of 4.64. Finally for Anti-Corruption and Transparency, Congo scores a 1.06, while South Africa has the highest of 3.90. These average scores are a compilation of all 32 countries in Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America and Haiti in the Western Hemisphere. The findings also determined Ghana and South Africa as established democracies and found Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Tanzania in fragile democratic processes. On the lower spectrum of progress, they found Kenya, Nigeria, and Uganda in faltering reforms and Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe as power concentrators. The last category that Congo falls in is simply explaining that undemocratic governance predominates and prospects for democratic gains are “dim.” Although “dim,” this does not imply impossibility of making progress to get Congo on a democratic path. As these numbers and findings may seem disheartening, it should be a motivator and emphasize the importance of the work that we all, stakeholders, are dedicated to in the Congo.

Although these indicators are mostly used by agencies such as the United States Agency for International Aid (USAID) and the Millennium Challenge Account to determine aid recipients, The goal of Freedom House and Jake Dizard, the managing editor of Countries at the Crossroads, is that these findings can be used by policy makers and leaders of these countries as a guide to remedy many of the issues hindering the growth democratic governance.

Thursday's event was a full house of different organizations and a very rich panel of experts to discuss the regional governance challenges in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The panelist included Joel Barkan of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Kevin Casas-Zamora with the Brookings Institute, and Joshua Kurlantzick of the Council on Foreign Relations, just to name a few. The presentations by each expert on each region was extremely fascinating, especially Joel Barkan's take on the state of democracy in Africa. Although the focus of the presentation was on Kenya and Uganda, many of his analysis was applicable to other African states such as the Congo. He spoke of checks and balances in government, Rule of Law and the election process being gradually disregarded in many developing countries. So in order to change political infrastructure, it must be done in the wake of elections. The full report and scoring of the countries analyzed is on the Freedom House website along with greater detail about the methodology of the entire project. You can also get the full transcript of Thursdays event at the Brookings institute web address.

Reference

Freedom House

http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=140&edition=9

Brookings Institute

http://www.brookings.edu/events/2010/0407_political_turmoil.aspx