DR Congo, Rwanda sign peace deal in ‘turning point’ after years of conflict
How did your country report this? Share your view in the comments.
Diverging Reports Breakdown
Congo and Rwanda sign a U.S.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict
The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda on Friday signed a peace deal facilitated by the U.S. The deal has been touted as an important step toward peace in the Central African nation of Congo. President Trump said at a news conference that he was able to broker a deal for “one of the worst wars anyone’s ever seen” Analysts see the deal as a major turning point but don’t believe it will quickly end the fighting. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations has called it “ one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth’” The deal is also at the heart of Trump”s push to gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world’�s technology at a time when the United States and China are actively competing for influence in Africa. The mostly untapped minerals in the region are estimated to be worth as much as $24 trillion by the United State Department of Commerce, a political scientist at the Dypolese think tank said.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda on Friday signed a peace deal facilitated by the U.S. to help end the decades-long deadly fighting in eastern Congo while helping the U.S. government and American companies gain access to critical minerals in the region.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it “an important moment after 30 years of war.” Earlier, President Trump said at a news conference that he was able to broker a deal for “one of the worst wars anyone’s ever seen.”
“I was able to get them together and sell it,” Trump said. “And not only that, we’re getting for the United States a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo.”
Advertisement
The deal has been touted as an important step toward peace in the Central African nation of Congo, where conflict with more than 100 armed groups, the most potent backed by Rwanda, has killed millions since the 1990s.
It’s also at the heart of Trump’s push to gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world’s technology at a time when the United States and China are actively competing for influence in Africa.
Analysts see the deal as a major turning point but don’t believe it will quickly end the fighting.
Advertisement
The agreement involves provisions on territorial integrity and a prohibition of hostilities as well as the disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration of non-state armed groups.
Peace deal not likely to quickly end the conflict
The Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group is the most prominent armed group in the conflict, and its major advance early this year left bodies on the streets. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations has called it “one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth.”
Congo hopes the U.S. will provide it with the security support needed to fight the rebels and possibly get them to withdraw from the key cities of Goma and Bukavu, and from the entire region where Rwanda is estimated to have up to 4,000 troops. Rwanda has said that it’s defending its territorial interests and not supporting M23.
Advertisement
M23 rebels have suggested that the agreement won’t be binding on them. The rebel group hasn’t been directly involved in the planned peace deal, although it has been part of other ongoing peace talks.
Corneille Nangaa, leader of the Congo River Alliance — known by its French acronym AFC — which includes M23, told the Associated Press in March that direct peace talks with Congo can only be held if the country acknowledges their grievances and that “anything regarding us which are done without us, it’s against us.”
An M23 spokesman, Oscar Balinda, also echoed those thoughts in an interview with the AP this week, saying the U.S.-facilitated deal doesn’t concern the rebels.
Rwanda has also been accused of exploiting eastern Congo’s minerals, a trend analysts say might make it difficult for Rwanda not to be involved in any way in the region. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, advanced fighter jets and much more.
A team of U.N. experts alleged in a December report that “fraudulent extraction, trade and export to Rwanda of (Congo) minerals benefited both AFC/M23 and the Rwandan economy.” Rwanda has denied any involvement in Congo’s minerals.
The deal is also at the heart of the U.S. government’s push to counter China in Africa. Chinese companies have been for many years one of the key players in Congo’s minerals sector. Chinese cobalt refineries, which account for a majority of the global supply, rely heavily on Congo.
Advertisement
U.S. role in ending the conflict
Analysts say the U.S. government’s commitment might depend on how much access it has to the minerals being discussed under separate negotiations between the American and Congolese governments.
The mostly untapped minerals are estimated to be worth as much as $24 trillion by the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Christian Moleka, a political scientist at the Congolese think tank Dypol, called the deal a “major turning point” in the decades-long conflict, but that the signing could “in no way eliminate all the issues of the conflict.”
“The current draft agreement ignores war crimes and justice for victims by imposing a partnership between the victim and the aggressor,” he said. “This seems like a trigger-happy proposition and cannot establish lasting peace without justice and reparation.”
In Congo’s North Kivu province, the hardest hit by the fighting, some believe that the peace deal will help resolve the violence, but warn justice must still be served for an enduring peace to take hold.
“I don’t think the Americans should be trusted 100%,” said Hope Muhinuka, an activist from the province. “It is up to us to capitalize on all we have now as an opportunity.”
Advertisement
The conflict can be traced to the aftermath of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, where Hutu militias killed between 500,000 and 1 million ethnic Tutsi, as well as moderate Hutus and Twa, Indigenous people. When Tutsi-led forces fought back, nearly 2 million Hutus crossed into Congo, fearing reprisals.
Rwandan authorities have accused the Hutus who fled of participating in the genocide and alleged that elements of the Congolese army protected them. They have argued that the militias formed by a small fraction of the Hutus are a threat to Rwanda’s Tutsi population.
Asadu and Lee write for the Associated Press. Asadu reported from Dakar, Senegal. AP writers Ellen Knickmeyer in Washington, Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations, Justin Kabumba in Goma, Congo, and Ignatius Ssuuna in Kigali, Rwanda, contributed to this report.
DR Congo and Rwanda sign long-awaited peace deal in Washington
Rwanda and DR Congo have signed a peace deal aimed at ending decades of conflict. The deal demands the “disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration” of armed groups fighting in eastern DR Congo. Details are scant and previous peace deals in the region have failed – yet that has not deterred the US and Congolese presidents from framing this as a generational victory. Eastern DR Congo is rich in coltan and other resources vital to the global electronics industries. The M23 rebels – the main actors in today’s conflict – were spawned by a previous peace deal that failed to ensure the demobilisation of the M23 16 years ago. The Rwandan government has at least 7,000 troops on DR Congo soil, and insists its military presence is a defensive measure against threats posed by armed groups like the FDLR – a rebel militia composed largely of ethnic Hutus linked to the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The calls for the total withdrawal of Rwandan troops from DR Congo are major point of contention.
Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo have signed a peace deal in Washington aimed at ending decades of devastating conflict between the two neighbours, and potentially granting the US lucrative mineral access.
The deal demands the “disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration” of armed groups fighting in eastern DR Congo.
Further details are scant and previous peace deals in the region have failed – yet that has not deterred the US and Congolese presidents from framing this as a generational victory.
“This is a great day for Africa and… a great day for the world!,” wrote President Donald Trump on his Truth Social platform last week when an initial agreement was reached.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Another diplomatic success for President Félix Tshisekedi – certainly the most important in over 30 years,” said the Congolese president’s office ahead of Friday’s signing.
The deal was signed by the Congolese and Rwandan foreign ministers at the US State Department.
There has been talk of Tshisekedi and Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame going to Washington to meet Trump together, though no date has been fixed.
Decades of conflict escalated earlier this year when M23 rebels seized control of large parts of eastern DR Congo including the regional capital, Goma, the city of Bukavu and two airports.
Thousands of people have been killed and hundreds of thousands of civilians forced from their homes following the recent rebel offensive.
ADVERTISEMENT
After the loss of territory, the government in Kinshasa turned to the US for help, reportedly offering access to critical minerals in exchange for security guarantees. Eastern DR Congo is rich in coltan and other resources vital to the global electronics industries.
Rwanda denies supporting the M23 despite overwhelming evidence, and insists its military presence in the region is a defensive measure against threats posed by armed groups like the FDLR – a rebel militia composed largely of ethnic Hutus linked to the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
Rwanda in turn accuses the Congolese government of backing the FDLR, which is denied by DR Congo. Their presence is of utmost concern to Kigali.
When some information about the deal was released last week, a statement spoke of “provisions on respect for territorial integrity and a prohibition of hostilities”, but there were no specifics.
It also talked about the “facilitation of the return of refugees and internally displaced persons”.
ADVERTISEMENT
According to a Reuters news agency report, Congolese negotiators had pushed for an immediate withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers, but Rwanda – which has at least 7,000 troops on Congolese soil – refused.
In an angry statement a day before the deal was signed, Rwanda’s Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe condemned “the leak of a draft peace agreement” saying Rwanda had “demanded the other parties to respect the confidentiality of the discussions”.
The calls for the total withdrawal of Rwandan troops from DR Congo is major point of contention.
But Nduhungirehe said “the words ‘Rwanda Defense Force’, ‘Rwandan troops’ or ‘withdrawal’ are nowhere to be seen in the document”.
Just hours before the signing ceremony, Tshisekedi’s office said the agreement “does indeed provide for the withdrawal of Rwandan troops… [but] preferred the term disengagement to withdrawal simply because ‘disengagement’ is more comprehensive”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Unless and until full details of the signed deal are made public, several crucial questions remain unanswered:
Will the M23 rebel group withdraw from areas they have occupied?
Does “respect for territorial integrity” mean Rwanda admits having troops in eastern DR Congo and will withdraw them?
Would the agreed “return of refugees” allow thousands of Congolese back from Rwanda?
Does “disarmament” mean that the M23 will now lay down their weapons?
Who will disarm the FDLR, after the failure of several previous attempts?
Would the agreed humanitarian access allow the reopening of the rebel-held airports for aid supply?
Prior to Friday’s signing, Rwandan government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo told Reuters news agency that the “lifting of defensive measures in our border area” would be contingent upon the FDLR’s “neutralisation”.
One of the main actors in today’s conflict – the M23 rebels – were spawned by a previous peace deal 16 years ago that failed to ensure demobilisation.
Last year, Rwandan and Congolese experts reached an agreement twice under Angolan mediation on the withdrawal of Rwandan troops and joint operations against the FDLR – but ministers from both countries failed to endorse the deal. Angola eventually stepped down as a mediator in March.
More about the DR Congo conflict from the BBC:
[Getty Images/BBC]
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
BBC Africa podcasts
Trump Ally Targets DR Congo Mine Amid US-Brokered Peace Deal… Major Geopolitical Shift!
Donald Trump seeks credit for a peace deal between DR Congo and Rwanda, amid concerns that lasting peace remains uncertain. The peace deal aims to address longstanding tensions between the two nations, which have been exacerbated by armed conflicts and territorial disputes. However, skepticism remains regarding the sustainability of this newfound peace, especially as Trump seeks recognition for his role in facilitating the agreement. The path forward requires collaboration and vigilance to ensure peace is not just a temporary respite.
www.ft.com
In a significant geopolitical shift, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have signed a peace deal, marking a potential turning point after years of conflict. This agreement comes amid efforts led by the united states, with Donald Trump’s allies seeking to invest in DRC’s mining sector. As of 2025-06-27 18:20:00, the international community watches closely, hoping for lasting stability in the region.
5 Key Takeaways Trump ally pursues DR Congo mine acquisition.
Peace deal signed between DR Congo and Rwanda.
Concerns about lasting peace despite agreement.
Congo retracts demand for Rwandan troop withdrawal.
Trump announces new peace initiative in Congo.
The peace deal aims to address longstanding tensions between the two nations, which have been exacerbated by armed conflicts and territorial disputes. However, skepticism remains regarding the sustainability of this newfound peace, especially as Trump seeks recognition for his role in facilitating the agreement.
Fast Answer: The DRC and Rwanda’s peace agreement, brokered with U.S. involvement, signifies a vital step toward regional stability, though doubts about its durability persist.
This development raises crucial questions about the future of peace in Central Africa. Can this agreement truly bring an end to decades of violence? Will external influences, like U.S. investment, help or hinder the peace process?
The peace deal is seen as a pivotal moment for both nations.
Trump’s involvement highlights the U.S.’s renewed focus on African diplomacy.
Concerns linger about the actual implementation of the agreement.
The peace agreement’s success is crucial for regional stability, impacting not only the DRC and Rwanda but also neighboring countries.
As the world watches, it is essential for both nations to commit to the terms of the agreement. The path forward requires collaboration and vigilance to ensure peace is not just a temporary respite.
DR Congo, Rwanda sign peace deal in ‘turning point’ after years of conflict
The US and Qatar-brokered peace agreement must be followed by disengagement and the return of displaced families, DRC says. The conflict has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands more since January. The deal will also help the US government and American companies gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world’s technology.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have signed a peace deal in Washington, DC, to end years of fighting between the neighbouring countries.
Meeting in the White House in the United States on Friday, foreign ministers from the two African countries signed an agreement brokered by the US and Qatar.
The deal raises hopes for an end to fighting that escalated with the advance of M23 rebels this year. The conflict has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands more since January.
“We believe that a turning point has been reached with the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe said at the signing.
The peace agreement must be followed by disengagement, justice and the return of displaced families, added Congolese Foreign Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner.
“This is an important moment after 30 years of war,” said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who hosted the two foreign ministers at the Department of State in Washington for the signing.
The deal will also help the US government and American companies gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world’s technology at a time when the US and China are actively competing for influence in Africa.
Analysts see the deal as a major turning point but don’t believe it will quickly end the fighting that has killed millions of people since the 1990s.
More to come …
Congo and Rwanda sign a US-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict
Congo and Rwanda sign a peace deal to help end the decadeslong deadly fighting in eastern Congo. The deal will help the U.S. government and American companies gain access to critical minerals in the region. President Donald Trump said at a news conference that he was able to broker a deal for “one of the worst wars anyone’s ever seen” The deal has been touted as an important step toward peace in the Central African nation of Congo, where conflict with more than 100 armed groups has killed millions since the 1990s. The Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group is the most prominent armed group in the conflict, and its major advance early this year left bodies on the streets. The rebel group hasn’t been directly involved in the planned peace deal, although it has been part of other ongoing peace talks in the country.. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations has called it “ one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth’
Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it “an important moment after 30 years of war.”
Congo’s Foreign Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner invoked the millions of victims of the conflict in signing the agreement with Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe. Both of them expressed optimism but also stressed there is still a significant amount of work to do to end the fighting.
“Some wounds will heal, but they will never fully disappear,” Wagner said. “Those who have suffered the most are watching. They are expecting this agreement to be respected, and we cannot fail them.”
“Shared growth and cross-border cooperation will unlock tangible dividends for both our countries,” Nduhungirehe said. “We must acknowledge that there is a great deal of uncertainty in our region and beyond, because many previous agreements have not been implemented, and there is no doubt that the road ahead will not be easy. But with the continued support of the United States and other partners, we believe that a turning point has been reached.”
All three ministers lauded the support of the Gulf Arab nation of Qatar in facilitating the agreement, which Doha has been working on for months at the request of the U.S. and others.
Earlier Friday, President Donald Trump said at a news conference that he was able to broker a deal for “one of the worst wars anyone’s ever seen.”
“I was able to get them together and sell it,” Trump said. “And not only that, we’re getting for the United States a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo.”
The deal has been touted as an important step toward peace in the Central African nation of Congo, where conflict with more than 100 armed groups, the most potent backed by Rwanda, has killed millions since the 1990s.
It’s also at the heart of Trump’s push to gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world’s technology at a time when the United States and China are actively competing for influence in Africa.
Analysts see the deal as a major turning point but don’t believe it will quickly end the fighting.
The agreement involves provisions on territorial integrity and a prohibition of hostilities as well as the disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration of non-state armed groups.
Peace deal not likely to quickly end the conflict
The Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group is the most prominent armed group in the conflict, and its major advance early this year left bodies on the streets. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations has called it “one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth.”
Congo hopes the U.S. will provide it with the security support needed to fight the rebels and possibly get them to withdraw from the key cities of Goma and Bukavu, and from the entire region where Rwanda is estimated to have up to 4,000 troops. Rwanda has said that it’s defending its territorial interests and not supporting M23.
M23 rebels have suggested that the agreement won’t be binding on them. The rebel group hasn’t been directly involved in the planned peace deal, although it has been part of other ongoing peace talks.
Corneille Nangaa, leader of the Congo River Alliance — known by its French acronym AFC — which includes M23, told The Associated Press in March that direct peace talks with Congo can only be held if the country acknowledges their grievances and that “anything regarding us which are done without us, it’s against us.”
An M23 spokesman, Oscar Balinda, also echoed those thoughts in an interview with the AP this week, saying the U.S.-facilitated deal doesn’t concern the rebels.
Rwanda has also been accused of exploiting eastern Congo’s minerals, a trend analysts say might make it difficult for Rwanda not to be involved in any way in the region. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, advanced fighter jets and much more.
A team of U.N. experts alleged in a December report that “fraudulent extraction, trade and export to Rwanda of (Congo) minerals benefited both AFC/M23 and the Rwandan economy.” Rwanda has denied any involvement in Congo’s minerals.
The deal is also at the heart of the U.S. government’s push to counter China in Africa. Chinese companies have been for many years one of the key players in Congo’s minerals sector. Chinese cobalt refineries, which account for a majority of the global supply, rely heavily on Congo.
US role in ending the conflict
Analysts say the U.S. government’s commitment might depend on how much access it has to the minerals being discussed under separate negotiations between the American and Congolese government.
The mostly untapped minerals are estimated to be worth as much as $24 trillion by the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Christian Moleka, a political scientist at the Congolese think tank Dypol, called the deal a “major turning point” in the decadeslong conflict, but that the signing could “in no way eliminate all the issues of the conflict.”
“The current draft agreement ignores war crimes and justice for victims by imposing a partnership between the victim and the aggressor,” he said. “This seems like a trigger-happy proposition and cannot establish lasting peace without justice and reparation.”
In Congo’s North Kivu province, the hardest hit by the fighting, some believe that the peace deal will help resolve the violence, but warn justice must still be served for an enduring peace to take hold.
“I don’t think the Americans should be trusted 100%,” said Hope Muhinuka, an activist from the province. “It is up to us to capitalize on all we have now as an opportunity.”
The conflict can be traced to the aftermath of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, where Hutu militias killed between 500,000 and 1 million ethnic Tutsi, as well as moderate Hutus and Twa, Indigenous people. When Tutsi-led forces fought back, nearly 2 million Hutus crossed into Congo, fearing reprisals.
Rwandan authorities have accused the Hutus who fled of participating in the genocide and alleged that elements of the Congolese army protected them. They have argued that the militias formed by a small fraction of the Hutus are a threat to Rwanda’s Tutsi population.
___
Asadu reported from Dakar, Senegal. AP writers Ellen Knickmeyer in Washington, Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations, Justin Kabumba in Goma, Congo, and Ignatius Ssuuna in Kigali, Rwanda, contributed to this report.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.