As questions emerge about the effectiveness of the United States-brokered peace deal between the governments of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda to end the decades-old conflict in the central African state, hopes of stopping the widespread human rights abuses in war-ravaged eastern DRC and serving justice to the thousands of victims by holding the responsible parties to account continues to hang in the balance.
Stakeholders, eager to see peace in the region, have welcomed the deal signed on June 27, 2025, in Washington, DC. However, it is not lost on observers that this is not the first ceasefire pact between Kinshasa and Kigali, and that previous such agreements have rarely been honoured.
The peace efforts include the 1999 Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement, the 2002 Sun City Agreement, and the 2003 Pretoria Accords, all of which had limited success in achieving their objective of ending the conflict. The 2022 African Union-led Luanda Process stalled after the M23 rebels withdrew.
Critics have attributed the failure of past peace agreements to misplaced priorities, chief among them the exclusion of the citizens and the genuine need for accountability for their conflict-caused suffering. Some have pointed out that this latest pact seems to be making the same mistakes, a big blow to hopes of justice for the victims and survivors and accountability for the perpetrators of some of the worst human rights violations.
Vava Tampa, the founder of the Save the Congo charity, told Al Jazeera’s Inside Story that the US-brokered deal denies the Congolese victims and survivors justice and fuels impunity, and instead called for an international criminal tribunal to investigate and punish the perpetrators.
“Peace begins with justice. You cannot have peace or stability without justice,” he said.
His sentiments were echoed by Congolese political and economic analyst Dady Saleh, who said he was not convinced the agreement would make peace in eastern DRC a reality. Describing his idea of an effective peace deal, he told CNN it must include “genuine accountability, regional truth-telling, redistribution of national wealth, reform of governance, and a broad national dialogue that includes all Congolese voices, not just elites or foreign allies.”
Sam Zarifi, the executive director of Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), which operates in the DRC, expressed concern about the agreement’s silence on human rights and its failure to address the plight of survivors.
“There can be no durable peace without meaningful justice. But the agreement…sidelines human rights and fails survivors,” he told the BBC.
READ: Freedom and human rights under siege in Africa amid rising repression
The pact states the two parties’ commitment “…to promoting full respect for human rights and for international humanitarian law”. However, it makes no mention of accountability for the human rights violations visited on the civilians, who have suffered the brunt of the brutal war in eastern DRC.
Summing up the contents of the treaty, a statement posted on the US State Department’s website says: “The agreement includes provisions on respect for territorial integrity and a prohibition of hostilities; disengagement, disarmament, and conditional integration of non-state armed groups; establishment of a joint security coordination mechanism that incorporates the CONOPS of October 31, 2024; facilitation of the return of refugees and internally displaced persons, as well as humanitarian access; and a regional economic integration framework.”
Justice and accountability are vital elements of peacebuilding in eastern DRC, considering the ordeal of the local people during the years of fighting between the different factions. Reports paint a grim picture of the suffering endured by civilians, particularly women and children. On June 16, 2025, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said in Geneva that Rwandan-backed rebels, Congolese troops, and allied militias had all committed human rights abuses, some possibly amounting to war crimes.
He told the UN Human Rights Council that a fact-finding mission conducted by his office in eastern DRC had revealed “an apparent total disregard for the protection of civilians during and after military operations”.
He added that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is also investigating other alleged violations of international humanitarian law, “many of which may amount to war crimes”.
The violations include alleged arbitrary arrests and enforced disappearances; summary and extrajudicial executions; and sexual violence as a means of reprisal.
The new agreement does not mention human rights violations, only binding Rwanda and DRC to facilitate the “safe, voluntary, and dignified return of refugees” and end the conflict to enable the return of internally displaced persons to their homes. It also charges the Congolese authorities with creating enabling conditions for humanitarian agencies to deliver “emergency relief to vulnerable populations, consistent with their obligations under international humanitarian law and with relevant UNSC resolutions.”
The fighting has left communities devastated, forcing thousands to flee their homes in search of safety, and creating one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises. Reports detail an alarming surge in sexual violence, with survivors recounting horrific experiences of abuse and exploitation.
“The lives of hundreds of thousands of people here in eastern DRC are hanging by a thread,” said Jan Egeland, Norwegian Refugee Council’s Secretary General, reflecting the dire situation of victims caught in the conflict.
An overview highlighting the scale of displacement affecting victims conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) shows that thousands of people have been pushed into extremely precarious situations. Figures from UNHCR indicate that since January 1, approximately 500,000 people have been displaced in the mineral-rich eastern DRC. The agency estimates that over 20,000 of these individuals have fled to neighbouring countries, while an additional 882,965 were already seeking asylum as of December 31, 2024.
“The escalation of violence in eastern DRC since January 2025, including the targeting of displacement sites and destruction of key infrastructure such as schools and health centres, has increased the number of people displaced within the country to an all-time high of 7.3 million,” warned UNHCR.
Stakeholders are also concerned that some rebel groups, which have been at the centre of escalating the instability in eastern DRC and have committed serious human rights violations, are not included in the agreement. The parties agreed that DRC neutralise the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR – Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda) rebel group to encourage Rwanda to stop its “defensive measures” in its neighbour’s territory. It mentions the M23, which Rwanda has denied supporting, in the context of the rebel group’s ongoing Qatar-brokered peace talks with the DRC government.
ALSO READ: Proposed war crimes court holds hope for justice and accountability in Liberia
Critics regard this as a weakness of the pact, which is seen as a direct result of the M23 rebels’ escalation of the conflict. In the early months of 2025, international focus was on the conflict in eastern DRC as the M23 rebel group intensified its offensive in North and South Kivu provinces, capturing and seizing control of large parts of eastern DRC, including the regional capital, Goma, the city of Bukavu, and two airports. The rebel group is said to have established its authority over the region and is collecting taxes.
The alarming advance of M23 prompted President Felix Tshisekedi to ask the US for a minerals-for-security partnership. Therefore, the exclusion of M23 from the US-brokered deal has raised questions about the fate of peace in the area, with the rebel group remaining in charge. The group has already distanced itself from the US-brokered peace deal, saying it does not apply to its soldiers. Instead, it is said to have cast its lot with the ongoing Qatar-led negotiations, with Al Jazeera reporting that both the Congolese government and M23 representatives agreed that they would return to the Middle East state for further discussions on ending the conflict.
The American-brokered agreement was preceded by reports of negotiations for mineral deals with US entities. Congolese officials were reported to have expressed optimism at reaching a deal to secure US investment in minerals and support to end the Rwandan-backed rebellion in the eastern part of the country. This has led many stakeholders to question whether the pact would sow peace or was just an excuse for another foreign entity to plunder eastern DRC’s rich mineral deposits.
Concerns that the deal is just another commercial venture have prompted scepticism over its effectiveness, with former Congolese President Joseph Kabila quoted as dismissing it as “nothing more than a trade agreement” and “a propaganda agenda”. “Congolese people deserve the truth, not a diplomatic show,” he told the BBC.
Congolese human rights activist and Nobel laureate Denis Mukwege was quoted on X commenting about the deal, which he said, “suggests it (the peace accord) benefits the unsanctioned aggressor, who will thus see its past and present crimes whitewashed as ‘economic cooperation.’”
In May 2025, The Financial Times reported that the US-negotiated peace deal could involve minerals such as tungsten, tantalum and tin, as America’s foreign policy in Africa shifts from assistance to transactions.
Experts say US companies hope to gain access to minerals like tantalum, gold, cobalt, copper, and lithium, which are needed to meet the demand for technology.
This validates fears that the agreement may be only useful as a tool to aid US companies to exploit eastern DRC’s rare earth minerals. It is a major concern as it echoes the long history of conflict in Africa as foreign entities escalated violence to enable them to plunder the continent’s natural resources.
The resurgence of M23 is directly linked to the minerals in eastern DRC. According to The Associated Press (AP), a confidential United Nations report claims that Rwanda provided “critical” support to the M23 rebels’ recent offensive in eastern Congo to secure Kigali’s access to the region’s minerals. M23 is aligned to the AFC (Alliance Fleuve Congo) movement operating in eastern DRC and is openly associated with several non-governmental armed groups.
“Evidence indicated increasing risk of cross-border fraud as minerals from North Kivu, particularly coltan from the AFC-controlled Rubaya mine, continued to be smuggled to Rwanda. These minerals were then mixed with production of Rwandan origin and exported downstream,” the report said.
The rebel group’s assault on Goma led to a sharp decline in North Kivu’s mineral exports in 2024 and a corresponding increase in Rwanda’s exports.
Peace in eastern DRC would give international justice efforts a chance to take off. The International Criminal Court (ICC) began intervening in the DRC in 2004 after the government referred war crimes and crimes against humanity to the court, which consequently prosecuted militia leaders responsible for atrocities like child soldier recruitment, mass killings, and sexual violence. Thomas Lubanga was convicted in 2012 for using child soldiers and sentenced to 14 years imprisonment; Germain Katanga was sentenced in 2014 for war crimes and crimes against humanity; and Bosco Ntaganda was given a 30-year sentence in 2019 for murder, rape, and child soldier conscription.
The DRC submitted a second referral in May 2023, alleging that the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and M23 were responsible for atrocities in North Kivu. Prosecutor Karim Khan announced on October 14, 2024, the renewal of investigations by the ICC, focusing on the purported crimes that occurred since January 2022.
Khan said the renewed investigation would be conducted within the scope of the existing DRC situation opened in June 2004, as the recent violence was found to be interconnected with longstanding patterns of conflict in the region.
Human rights organisations, including the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and its Congolese members like the African Association for the Defence of Human Rights (ASADHO) and Groupe Lotus, welcomed the ICC’s renewed focus.
Despite Rwanda’s denials, it has long been suspected of supporting the M23 rebel group, including troops and military aid. According to the UN, between 3,000 and 4,000 Rwandan army troops are in the DRC, supporting the M23 rebels. Rwandan President Paul Kagame has asserted his country’s right to self-defence, maintaining that Rwanda is responding to security threats posed by armed groups such as the FDLR, which he views as a direct danger stemming from the 1994 genocide in his country.
Rwanda is facing significant pressure internationally for its role in the DRC. The US has imposed sanctions on key figures, including James Kabarebe, Rwanda’s Minister of State for Regional Integration, accusing him of playing a crucial role in backing M23. The European Union (EU) has also sanctioned senior Rwandan officials, among them Francis Kamanzi, the CEO of the Rwanda Mines, Petroleum and Gas Board (RMB), and companies, such as Gasabo Gold Refinery, for their alleged roles in fuelling the conflict in the region through illicit exploitation of natural resources.
