Security Council meeting on April 18, 2024
The United Nations Security Council’s resolution passed last night unanimously condemning Rwanda might feel like a moment of global validation for the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). With world powers seemingly rallying against Rwanda and President Paul Kagame, it’s tempting to believe that Congo’s problems will soon disappear from last night.
But history warns us otherwise. Many nations have learned the hard way that UN resolutions, even those passed unanimously, rarely bring lasting peace.
Instead, they often cover up deeper issues—colonial legacies, local governance failures, and international interests—that must be addressed for real change to happen.
Look at history. The UN’s track record in Africa and beyond is filled with instances where its resolutions not only failed to solve conflicts but sometimes made them worse. During the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, as hundreds of thousands of Tutsi were slaughtered, the UN Security Council unanimously reduced its peacekeeping force, refusing to acknowledge the crisis as genocide until it was too late. Their inaction contributed to one of the 20th century’s greatest humanitarian failures.
Similarly, in South-West Africa (modern-day Namibia), the UN passed Resolution 246 in 1968, condemning South Africa’s illegal occupation of the territory. Despite the resolution’s unanimous support, South Africa maintained control for more than two decades until Namibia finally gained independence in 1990. The resolution changed little on the ground.
Closer to home, the DRC itself has seen the limits of UN intervention. The United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) has operated for years with broad mandates granted by the Security Council. Yet, violence in eastern Congo persists. Despite successive UN resolutions, MONUSCO’s presence has not brought lasting peace, despite billions of dollars spent.
In the Central African Republic (CAR) and Sudan’s Darfur region, Rwanda’s involvement has helped turn the tide. While UN peacekeeping missions like MINUSCA in CAR and UNAMID in Darfur have struggled to bring lasting peace, Rwanda has deployed troops that have significantly impacted stability. Rwandan peacekeepers have faced heavy casualties while singlehandedly fighting militia groups to protect civilians.
Moreover, Rwanda’s recent presence in these regions has introduced governance practices that empower local populations—such as community works, regular meetings, and building social infrastructure like schools and hospitals, which foster a sense of ownership and long-term peace.
Beyond Africa, consider Bosnia during the 1990s. Resolution 819 declared Srebrenica a “safe area” under UN protection, yet Bosnian Serb forces massacred over 8,000 people while UN peacekeepers stood by, powerless to intervene. In Lebanon, Resolution 1701 sought to end hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel, but Hezbollah retained its weapons, and violence erupted again.
What do these examples teach us? UN resolutions often fail because they do not address the root causes of conflict—historical injustices, corruption, weak governance, and foreign exploitation. Too often, they serve as diplomatic cover, allowing global powers to appear morally upright without taking the tough actions needed to solve complex crises.
In Africa, these resolutions frequently overlook the effects of colonial borders that forced diverse communities into artificial states, fostering tensions that still fuel violence today.
For the people of the DRC, this means one thing: do not be misled into thinking that external condemnation of Rwanda will solve your country’s deep-rooted challenges. President Félix Tshisekedi may present the UN’s stance as a victory, but real peace and prosperity cannot come from international resolutions alone.
Ending the cycle of violence requires confronting corruption, improving governance, and addressing the grievances of marginalized communities within Congo’s borders. It also demands acknowledging the complex regional dynamics that fuel conflict—including the role of foreign governments, not just Rwanda.
Blaming Rwanda for all of Congo’s problems is a dangerous oversimplification that lets local leaders off the hook. While Rwanda’s actions may warrant scrutiny, Congo’s leadership must focus on strengthening state institutions, improving the economy, and fostering national unity. No UN resolution can substitute for these essential reforms.
History is clear: external interventions, no matter how well-intentioned, rarely deliver lasting solutions. Congo’s future lies in the hands of its own people and leaders. Real change will come not from international condemnations, but from addressing the root causes of conflict and building a nation where all citizens can thrive.
Until then, UN resolutions will remain little more than words on paper—powerful in theory, but too often powerless in practice.
