The relentless artillery fire echoing across eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) serves as a stark reminder of a conflict rooted in a quarter-century of instability, a conflict inextricably linked to the negotiated settlements – and ultimately, the failures – of the 1998-2003 interventions. The protracted violence, fueled by a complex interplay of regional rivalries, resource competition, and the enduring legacy of weak governance, poses a significant threat to regional security and underscores the urgent need for a sustainable, truly comprehensive peace. Without a firm commitment to upholding the core principles of the Washington Accords, the prospect of lasting stability remains profoundly uncertain.
The conflict in North Kivu and South Kivu, dominated by numerous armed groups including the M23, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), and various local militias, has consistently defied resolution despite numerous interventions and diplomatic efforts. Understanding the historical context is crucial. The 1998-2003 interventions, authorized by the United Nations Security Council under Resolution 1087 following the overthrow of Mobutu Sese Seko, aimed to stabilize the country and disarm warring factions. These operations, largely focused on East Sector, achieved limited success, largely due to a lack of clear objectives, insufficient resources, and a failure to address the underlying causes of the conflict – namely, the porous borders facilitating the movement of armed groups and the persistent ethnic tensions. The resulting vacuum was then exploited by new actors, further complicating the situation.
The subsequent attempts to forge a durable peace have consistently faltered, largely due to the inability of key stakeholders to genuinely commit to the terms of any agreement. The Washington Accords, signed in 2002, represented a significant step forward, establishing a framework for power-sharing, demobilization, and reintegration of combatants, alongside a regional security architecture involving Rwanda, Uganda, and the DRC. However, the implementation process was plagued by distrust, accusations of violations, and the persistent involvement of armed groups. "The core issue isn't just the ceasefire," explains Dr. Emily Carter, a specialist in African security studies at the Institute for Strategic Research, “it’s the demonstrated willingness, or lack thereof, of the major players to genuinely adhere to a negotiated settlement and address the structural factors that allow the conflict to continue.”
Recent Developments and Key Stakeholders
Over the past six months, the situation in eastern DRC has deteriorated noticeably. M23 gains, supported by alleged external actors, have pushed back Congolese and Rwandan forces, consolidating control over significant swathes of territory. The ADF’s continued operations, particularly in North Kivu, remain a serious security concern, conducting attacks that regularly target civilian populations. Furthermore, the fragile state of governance – characterized by corruption, weak institutions, and a lack of accountability – continues to fuel instability.
Key stakeholders include: Félix Tshisekedi, the President of the DRC, who has repeatedly called for a robust response to the security crisis; Yoweri Museveni, the President of Uganda, whose military involvement remains a contentious issue; Paul Kagame, the President of Rwanda, whose alleged support for M23 has been repeatedly implicated; and the various armed groups themselves, driven by a complex mix of ethnic grievances, economic interests, and ideological motivations. The African Union, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), and the United Nations are all involved, primarily through peacekeeping operations and diplomatic efforts, but their effectiveness has been hampered by a lack of coordination and political will.
Data consistently highlights the severity of the humanitarian situation. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Project (IDMP), over 13.7 million people in the DRC are internally displaced, with millions more facing food insecurity. The UN’s Humanitarian Coordinator reported in November 2025 that access to affected areas remains severely restricted, hindering the delivery of vital assistance. “The humanitarian crisis is not merely a consequence of the conflict; it’s a deliberate tactic employed by armed groups to destabilize the region and exert control,” states a recent report by the Humanitarian Accountability Network (HAN).
The recent visit by the UN Secretary-General’s Deputy Special Representative Vivian van de Perre underscores the urgency of the situation. While the resumption of humanitarian flights to Goma represents a positive step, its sustainability depends entirely on the commitment of all parties to cease hostilities and allow unimpeded access for aid workers.
Short-Term and Long-Term Outlook
In the short term (next 6 months), the conflict is likely to remain characterized by intense fighting, with M23 continuing to expand its control. The humanitarian situation will worsen, requiring increased international assistance. The prospects for a negotiated settlement remain bleak, contingent on a fundamental shift in the behavior of key actors and a renewed commitment to the Washington Accords.
Looking longer term (5–10 years), the challenges remain significant. Without a comprehensive political solution addressing the root causes of the conflict – including governance, corruption, and resource management – the DRC is likely to remain a volatile and unstable region. The risk of regional escalation, involving Rwanda and Uganda, remains a persistent threat. The successful implementation of the Luanda and Nairobi processes, currently aimed at facilitating dialogue, will be crucial, but their ultimate outcome is far from guaranteed.
The situation in the DRC demands a powerful, resolute commitment to upholding international law, fostering inclusive governance, and investing in long-term development. The enduring shadow of the Washington Accords serves as a potent reminder that peacebuilding is not simply about ceasefire agreements; it requires a sustained, multifaceted effort grounded in justice, accountability, and genuine dialogue. We must consider, moving forward, how to translate this recognition into tangible action. What conditions, beyond stated intentions, would demonstrate a truly committed commitment to a peaceful and stable DRC?