Open Letter to Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner
By Léon ENGULU III
The signing of a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda in Washington on June 27, 2025, under American mediation, is undoubtedly an important diplomatic milestone.
However, this initiative raises serious questions about its true scope and solidity. It is a ministerial commitment, signed by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, and not a solemn treaty ratified by heads of state or approved by parliaments. This choice weakens both the legal force and the political legitimacy of the agreement.
Unlike previous multilateral frameworks such as the Luanda Process or the Addis Ababa Framework Agreement, which benefited from broader regional and international involvement, the Washington Agreement remains confined to a ministerial text, without a real implementation mechanism and without a clear prospect of solemn ratification. Yet, the complexity and depth of recurrent crises in the Great Lakes region demand strong multilateralism, involving not only the State parties but also regional organizations (African Union, SADC, East African Community) and international organizations (UN, AU).
This requirement for an inclusive and coordinated approach was moreover reaffirmed by the United Nations Security Council, notably through its Resolution 2773 (February 2025), which emphasizes the need for a negotiated political settlement, respectful of State sovereignty and based on inclusive dialogue. Although the Washington Agreement touches upon these principles, its provisional and limited nature, as it stands, does not allow it to provide solid and lasting answers to the security, political, and economic challenges of the region.
Strengthening the Washington Agreement: A Consolidation Conference
Madam Minister,
To preserve diplomatic gains and ensure the coherence of the DRC’s actions, it’s crucial to organize an international consolidation conference. This meeting would bring together the guarantors of the Addis Ababa Framework Agreement—namely the United Nations, the African Union, the ICGLR, and SADC—as well as international partners such as the European Union, France, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Technical and financial partners, including the World Bank and the African Development Bank, would also be invited to participate.
The primary objective of this conference would be to meticulously examine the Washington Agreement. It would aim to harmonize it with commitments already made, notably the Addis Ababa Framework Agreement and the Nairobi Process. The conference would also seek to align the Washington Agreement with relevant Security Council resolutions, starting with Resolution 2098 (2013), and to correct any potential shortcomings before any solemn signing by the heads of state.
This approach is all the more vital as the DRC might, in the long term, require the political, security, or logistical support of these multilateral and regional partners should challenges arise during the agreement’s implementation. By involving them from the outset of the signing, within a concerted framework, their availability and mobilization would be guaranteed when the time comes.
Additional Flaws and Recommendations
Furthermore, the Concept of Operations (CONOPS) annexed to the Washington Agreement itself reveals significant shortcomings. It organizes the gradual withdrawal of Rwandan forces and the temporary securing of liberated zones, depending on the neutralization of the FDLR by the FARDC, with these FDLR, if any remain, being established in M23-controlled areas. The CONOPS does not provide any detailed mechanism for the demobilization and neutralization of armed groups, particularly the M23. It merely mentions the Doha negotiations in Qatar, without specifying concrete guarantees or a credible timeline. This imprecision weakens the arrangement, leaving the door open to new stalemates or military manipulations in eastern DRC.
Moreover, it is to be feared that even with the gradual withdrawal of the Rwandan army, Rwanda will continue to exert decisive influence through its allied armed groups, notably the M23, to maintain access to strategic mining resources in eastern Congo. The Washington Agreement nowhere provides for the immediate and verifiable evacuation by the M23 of the mining sites it currently controls in Masisi, Rutshuru, or Walikale, strategic mining areas rich in coltan, gold, and tin. This legal void opens the door to a form of lasting economic proxy, where the M23 would remain the armed wing of external economic interests, against a backdrop of a hidden balkanization by centrifugal fragmentation, thus prolonging the economic war to the detriment of regional stability. It would therefore be essential for the international consolidation conference to include clear clauses on the restitution of these mining areas to the authority of the Congolese state, with a verification mechanism and targeted sanctions in case of non-compliance. Without this requirement, peace would remain illusory, as it would be deprived of effective control over the resources that fuel the conflict. American mediation does not exclude the possibility of an international consolidation conference.
In this dynamic, the active participation of Congolese civil society is essential. Its grassroots presence and independent analytical capacity would allow for a rigorous diagnosis of the Washington Agreement and the formulation of concrete recommendations. Moreover, calling upon experts who have contributed since Resolution 2098 (2013) and to the conclusion of previous agreements within the framework of the stabilization and lasting peace process in eastern DRC would allow current actors to benefit from the lessons of previous experiences. This collective work would ensure that the priorities of the populations, the aspirations of the victims, and the effective defense of human rights are fully integrated, beyond simple statements of principle; but also to highlight the principles of power diplomacy and complex interstate negotiations.
Several concerning flaws are already apparent in the agreement signed in Washington, notably: the absence of credible transitional justice mechanisms and human rights guarantees, which are essential for restoring trust and preventing new cycles of violence; the absence of clear reference to previous requirements for the neutralization and disarmament of the M23, seemingly linking the fate of this armed group to the gradual disengagement of the Rwandan army and the Doha negotiations in Qatar, which weakens the coherence and readability of the entire process; the absence of proposals to pursue structural reforms in the security and governance sectors, which were nevertheless at the origin of the mixed results of previous agreements; finally, will this agreement be ratified by the Heads of State and validated by civil society? Without this, its democratic legitimacy risks being called into question.
These shortcomings risk transforming this agreement into a mere diplomatic instrument, useful in the short term but inoperative in the long term. The stabilization of the Great Lakes region requires, on the contrary, a solid, multilateral, legally binding treaty, supported by the highest authorities and accompanied by credible monitoring and verification mechanisms, under the control of the international community, similar to the Addis Ababa Framework Agreement.
Madam Minister, your career, marked by a constant commitment to serving the most vulnerable and by your humanitarian action for women and children victims of conflict, places you on the front line to defend a truly lasting peace, based on justice, human dignity, and respect for fundamental rights. The DRC cannot afford a fragile agreement, without solid mechanisms for civilian protection and reparation for victims. You now have the historic responsibility to embody a vision that lives up to your values and the legacy of your humanitarian struggles.
The DRC, in light of the tragedy experienced by its populations in the East for 30 years, deserves more than a provisional and shaky peace. It deserves an authentic peace, built on consultation, justice, and shared responsibility. You have the opportunity, Madam Minister, to embody this ambition.
Léon Engulu III
Philosopher and engineer,
former political advisor to
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
former acting Coordinator of
the National Oversight Mechanism
for the Addis Ababa Framework Agreement,
specialist in institutional reforms
and international relations.