Marc Bossuyt, Emeritus Professor of International Law at the University of Antwerp, Emeritus President of the Constitutional Court.
Despite its heavy past, Belgium has decided not to assume its role as a mediator in this African regional conflict. It has unequivocally sided with Congo and even pressured the EU to adopt unilateral sanctions against Rwanda.
Diplomatic Breakdown
Rwanda has decided to sever diplomatic relations with Belgium. Since Belgium refused the Rwandan ambassador proposed by Kigali, there has been no Rwandan ambassador in Brussels for two years, nor a Belgian ambassador in Kigali. Rwanda has now taken another step. This is very regrettable, as it benefits no one.
Our Shared History
This situation is particularly painful given the unfortunate history we share with Rwanda. We have a somewhat similar history with Congo, which was a Belgian colony until 1960. Ruanda-Urundi was entrusted to Belgium until 1962, first as a mandate of the League of Nations and later as a United Nations Trust Territory.
One could have expected Belgium, as a former colonial power, to play a mediating role in conflicts between its former overseas territories. This is even more relevant considering that the root of the conflict dates back to the late 19th century when, under the influence of King Leopold II of Belgium, Rwandans were divided between these two countries.
Unilateral Sanctions Against Rwanda
Today, Belgium is not playing a mediation role in this conflict. It has excluded itself. It has unequivocally taken Congo’s side in this regional conflict and has even pressured the European Union to adopt unilateral sanctions against Rwanda.
However, there are no sanctions against Congo. Yet, there would be sufficient reasons for such measures: the misconduct of the Congolese army in Kivu, hate speech against the Tutsis, threats against Rwanda, cooperation with the genocidal Hutu rebels of the FDLR, the use of a thousand mercenaries from Eastern Europe, the failure to honor commitments made with Congolese Tutsis on March 23, 2009, and the refusal to negotiate with the M23, among others.
It is East African and Southern African countries (not the EU) that are now putting pressure on Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi. They demand that he start negotiations with the M23 under Angola’s mediation. These countries understand that this is the only way to resolve the conflict. That is why Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa (which has 2,000 troops in Kivu) have wisely decided to withdraw their forces from Congo. Meanwhile, Burundi has also withdrawn its 10,000 soldiers from Kivu. In addition to the diplomatic breakdown, one direct consequence of the EU sanctions is that the M23 now refuses to come to Luanda for negotiations.
More Restraint Needed
However, Belgium’s shared history with Rwanda should encourage greater restraint in its criticism of this country. Most Belgians are unaware of this history. For Belgium, it is merely a footnote. For Rwanda, it fills several chapters.
Beyond King Leopold II, there are other historical grievances: ethnic labels on Rwandan identity cards, Belgium’s passivity during the 1959 massacres, the intervention of Colonel Guy Logiest in Rwanda’s political structures in 1960, Belgium’s complacent attitude toward the discriminatory policies of Presidents Grégoire Kayibanda and Juvénal Habyarimana, and Belgium’s lobbying within the UN Security Council to withdraw all peacekeepers from Rwanda during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis.
Rwanda still remembers that, over 100 days, about one million Rwandans were killed with machetes. The 1997 Rwanda Commission and Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt’s apology in 2000 helped provide some balance. However, today, the lack of understanding regarding the situation of Rwandans in Congo has erased that progress.
Not a Simplistic Story
Belgium, which prides itself on its expertise and knowledge of Africa, should not adopt the simplistic narrative that Rwanda is only interested in Congo’s natural resources. This narrative ignores the chaotic situation in Congo, where the M23 is just one of more than 100 armed militias operating there.
It is true that the M23 holds a unique position because it has organized itself well to defend its community. Since Congo’s independence, this community has been marginalized and discriminated against. Their nationality has been contested and labeled as “questionable.” Of course, the M23 militia members are not saints, but the most organized military groups are not necessarily the worst human rights violators.
Unilaterally imposing sanctions on Rwanda will not solve a problem that must be addressed within Congo itself. The only solution lies in bringing both the M23 and the Congolese government to the negotiating table. That should be the focus of Belgian diplomacy. The Luxembourg government, which refused to support the EU’s sanctions against Rwanda, could provide useful guidance on this matter.
An opinion piece by Marc Bossuyt, Emeritus Professor of International Law at the University of Antwerp, Emeritus President of the Constitutional Court. The text was translated from original French version published by La Libre, Belgian newspaper
