【Wen/Observer Net, Zhang Jingjuan】On December 4 local time, Washington witnessed a rather dramatic "peace show".

According to reports from the UK's Financial Times and Reuters, after mediation by the US, Qatar and other parties, the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Félix Tshisekedi, and the President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame, signed a peace agreement in Washington, the capital of the United States, on that day, aiming to end a 30-year conflict.

However, the two leaders were not united in spirit. Their contradictory statements before and after signing the agreement, ongoing armed conflicts, and the US's inclusion of mineral interests in the agreement made this peace plan, named "Washington Agreement" by US President Trump, "suspect".

The report pointed out that this surface achievement contrasts sharply with the bloody reality on the ground. Washington is urgently seeking the rich natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and is accelerating its global layout to counter China's dominant position in key minerals.

"Peace Partners" Who Don't Shake Hands

In the so-called "Trump Institute for Peace", the words "Achieving Peace" stood out prominently. Trump stood between the presidents of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda and announced the "historic" peace agreement between the two countries, claiming, "This is the eighth war we have ended in less than a year."

"These two leaders spent a lot of time fighting each other in the past, and now they will spend a lot of time hugging, shaking hands, and then using the US economically like other countries," said Trump in a joking manner, which caused laughter among part of the audience, but was out of place with the atmosphere on stage.

The report said that neither of the two leaders mentioned the other's name in their speeches, nor did they shake hands, and the tense atmosphere between them was evident.

Kagame (left) and Tshisekedi (right) The Financial Times

Tshisekedi said in Washington that he hoped Rwanda would "take the agreement commitments as seriously" and "fully respect the wording and spirit of the commitments made in Washington". However, the day before his departure for the US, he also strongly criticized Rwanda for "stabbing him in the back", saying, "Without trust in peace and reconstruction, regional trade cannot be carried out."

Kagame said that "these agreements provide all the necessary conditions to completely end the conflict" and praised Trump's "practical" approach.

But the long-standing tensions between the two countries could not be hidden: Kagame repeatedly accused the Democratic Republic of the Congo of violating previous agreement terms, while Tshisekedi insisted that Rwandan troops were still stationed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo with the rebel group "M23 Movement" and had not withdrawn as promised.

Public data shows that after the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, some Hutu militiamen who participated in the massacre fled into the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, intensifying the tension between the Hutus and the Tutsis in the area. In this context, Tutsi soldiers marginalized in the Congolese army formed the "National Congress for the Defense of the People" (CNDP) in 2004. Although the organization signed a peace agreement with the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2009 and was incorporated into the regular military system, internal dissatisfaction remained, and some members launched another rebellion in 2012, forming the later core issue of the regional situation, the "M23 Movement". The government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has always believed that Rwanda uses this as an excuse to interfere in its internal affairs and try to control the eastern part of the country.

M23 Movement armed personnel Reuters

"Without actual on-the-ground peacekeeping forces, the agreement has 'almost no credibility'."

At the same time as the signing ceremony, there were reports of clashes between the M23 Movement and the Congolese army in South Kivu province. The M23 Movement spokesperson accused the government army of bombing several civilian areas.

Analysts point out that although the US's diplomatic intervention temporarily prevented the escalation of the conflict, it failed to address the core issues.

Since January this year, the tension in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has escalated sharply, with the anti-government armed group "M23 Movement" continuously launching attacks in North Kivu, South Kivu and other areas, causing numerous civilian casualties and displacement. The Democratic Republic of the Congo accuses Rwanda of secretly supporting the M23 Movement, while Rwanda accuses the Democratic Republic of the Congo of supporting the Rwandan opposition force "Rwandan Patriotic Front".

In June, the foreign ministers of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda signed a peace agreement in Washington. The content of the agreement at that time included: respecting each other's territorial integrity, stopping hostilities, promoting combatants to disengage, demobilizing and conditionally integrating illegal armed groups; establishing a permanent joint security coordination mechanism; promoting the safe and orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons in both countries, and ensuring humanitarian access.

In September, Tshisekedi said during his attendance at the United Nations General Assembly that the peace agreement had not quelled the fighting in the eastern part of the country. On December 2, the military of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the M23 Movement exchanged accusations of launching offensives in the eastern part of the country, violating the ceasefire consensus brokered by the international community.

The Financial Times

UN data shows that the conflict in the region alone has resulted in thousands of deaths and 1.6 million people displaced this year. The World Food Programme warned last month that millions of hungry people are unable to receive aid.

A nameless official from the Democratic Republic of the Congo warned earlier this week that without actual on-the-ground peacekeeping forces, the agreement signed on Thursday had "almost no credibility".

In fact, in early October, due to continued provocations from Rwanda and the M23 Movement, the delegation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo suddenly withdrew from the Washington negotiations, leading to the suspension of the formalization plan for the regional economic partnership.

Behind the Agreement: More of the US's Struggle for Mineral Resources

Compared to the stalled ceasefire commitments, the distribution of mineral resources in the agreement advanced "rapidly".

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo both signed bilateral agreements with the US, granting Washington the right to develop key minerals. Trump openly declared at the signing ceremony, "We will send some of the largest and best American companies to these two countries to mine rare earths and other resources, and everyone can make big money."

The eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is rich in gold, tantalum ore, and other strategic minerals, and tantalum ore is a core raw material for smartphones, computers, and other electronic products, while rare earths are key resources for new energy and defense industries.

On December 4 local time, Trump delivered a speech at the signing ceremony. AFP

The US has long coveted African mineral resources, and this time, using the opportunity to mediate the conflict, it locked in the rights to extract resources under the guise of a "peace agreement", essentially using the peace process of African countries as a stepping stone for its geopolitical economic interests.

Denis Mukwege, the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize winner, who has been helping victims of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, stated that behind these agreements is more about the struggle for mineral resources, not about truly ending the bloodshed.

"In my opinion, this is clearly not a peace agreement," he said in Paris, "the evidence is that today morning, when the peace agreement was signed in Washington, my hometown was burying the victims."

Trump has always dreamed of being a "peacemaker", boasting about preventing many wars, including the India-Pakistan and Israel-Iran conflicts. However, Ivo Daalder, former U.S. ambassador to NATO and senior researcher at the Belfer Center of Harvard University, previously pointed out that since Trump returned to the White House, his desire for this image has become unrealistic, and this wish has become the guideline for his foreign policy. His desire to be a world "peacemaker" is based on a serious fallacy: peace simply means stopping the fighting.

In Daalder's view, Trump's goal is basically: to have people acknowledge him as the hero who ended the war. However, achieving peace is solving the conflict, not just ceasing hostilities, which is by no means easy, not something that can be resolved by making a phone call or holding a meeting.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7580297033702015534/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author.