THE CONQUEST OF EASTERN DRC BY RWANDA: A GEOSTRATEGIC PLAN DATING BACK TO THE END OF THE COLD WAR
 |
| KAGAME-KABILA-NANGAA |
Why Kagame Defies American Sanctions. The Origins of Rwanda's Occupation of Eastern Congo.
The
Deep-Rooted Origins of the New Rebellion of Joseph Kabila's Front for the
Refoundation of the Nation (FRN) and Its Repercussions Throughout the Region.
By Emmanuel
Neretse
Brussels, Belgium
November 7, 2026
INTRODUCTION:
JOSEPH
KABILA'S DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (DRC).
On
October 12, 2026, in Goma, Joseph Kabila surprised everyone by announcing that
he had taken command of a new armed group, the Front for the Refoundation of
the Nation (FRN), which absorbs the AFC/M23. Thirty years after the AFDL of his
alleged father, the former President of the DRC is once again providing a
Congolese face to a war being conducted by Kagame, at the risk of continuing to
plunge the country into chaos.
This
is the culmination of how Hyppolite Kanambe, alias Kabila, has manipulated the
Congolese people following the death of Mzee Laurent-Désiré Kabila and since
2006 with the CNDP, in 2012 with M23-1, marking the beginning of this
aggression, in 2021 with M23-2, AFC, TWIRWANEHO, RED TABARA, FNL, GUMINO,
ANDROID, CODECO, ADF-NALU, ADF-MTN, and now FRN!
Thus,
Joseph Kabila's true colours are gradually becoming apparent. He is no longer
hiding. He is informing the Congolese people that he was the mastermind behind
the armed groups used to keep the democratically elected government under
threats and pressure until its eventual downfall.
Joseph
Kabila, who embodies Paul Kagame, therefore remains the greatest danger to the
Republic.
However,
Joseph Kabila's actions and commitments in the service of Paul Kagame since
1996 can be better understood by revisiting the book written by Valens
Kajeguhakwa, a Tutsi and one of the founders of Paul Kagame's RPF, which was
published in 2001.[1][2]
LATEST
DEVELOPMENTS
Joseph
Kabila's declaration of war against the DRC, a country over which he ruled for
18 years, is therefore actually intended to provoke a conflict and provide the
invader, Paul Kagame, with an apparently credible pretext to claim that this is
a war between Congolese people (traitors versus patriots)!
Indeed,
Joseph Kabila emerged from hiding just a few weeks after the legitimate
government had submitted to Parliament and the judicial authorities a draft law
providing for the organization of a referendum in which the people would decide
on the current Constitution, which dates back to 2006.
As
soon as this referendum proposal became public, the main opposition parties
formed a coalition known as C64.
It
was in this tense political atmosphere that Joseph Kabila surprised everyone by
declaring war on October 12, at the head of his FRN, which had just swallowed
up the AFC/M23.
Seeking
to respond to current developments, the five leaders of the newly formed C64
opposition coalition decided to meet on October 27, 2026, in Rome, Italy.
This
was the first in-person meeting since the coalition's creation for Martin
Fayulu, Delly Sesanga, Jean-Marc Kabund, Matata Ponyo and Moïse Katumbi, the
latter two living in exile.
At
the end of this conclave, they issued a statement announcing their intention to
meet President Tshisekedi, as well as former President Kabila, who has just
taken command of the rebellion in eastern DRC.[3]
Following
the discussions in Rome, the five leaders now have a common document. What
remains is to obtain the agreement of the proposed interlocutors to hold the
suggested meetings and consultations on the conditions for dialogue.
On
Tuesday, October 27, the FRN also declared itself ready to meet the C64
delegation. However, no timetable was provided.
The
problem is that, according to certain analysts and regional specialists,
seeking to meet both the President of the Republic and a former President who
has been convicted of treason risks placing the two on the same footing: the
elected Head of State and the leader of an armed rebellion.
Such
neutrality, whether intentional or not, benefits the person who has taken up
arms against the country's institutions.
Those
who describe themselves as "opposition figures" in the DRC are
bringing nothing new to the process of restoring peace and territorial
integrity in eastern DRC.
THE
ROLE AND INFLUENCE OF CENCO AND CARDINAL FRIDOLIN AMBONGO
C64
is calling for the resumption of the African-led facilitation process conducted
by Angola and Togo, around the mediation efforts of the Catholic and Protestant
Churches (CENCO and ECC).
It
is calling for commitments accompanied by a timetable and precise verification
mechanisms.
This
demand for inclusivity echoes the warning issued the previous day in Italy by
Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo.
In
Rome, the Archbishop of Kinshasa denounced a dialogue process blocked by
preconditions and exclusions:
"A
dialogue that excludes those with whom one is at war is not dialogue; it is a
monologue."
As
it happens, this prelate, who was also in Rome at the time of the meeting of
the five opposition leaders united under C64, appears determined to make
himself indispensable to any political and diplomatic process in the DRC.
He
had already been the patron of Corneille Nangaa, who was an ally of CENCO when
he chaired the Independent National Electoral Commission (CENI).
At
that time, the "Mass" — that is, the appointment of elected officials
at every level throughout the country — was effectively conducted by the CENCO
prelates, who had demanded that Corneille Nangaa be appointed to that position.
They
also blessed him two years ago when he transformed himself into an armed rebel
leader at the head of the AFC/M23.
Now,
these same prelates are glorifying Joseph Kabila, who has just absorbed
Nangaa's movement, so that it will no longer look so much like Paul Kagame, who
occupies eastern DRC.
WHY
DOES PAUL KAGAME REFUSE TO BACK DOWN AND PERSIST IN HIS CRIMINAL ADVENTURE, IN
VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?
A
DISTURBING OBSERVATION
In
this war relaunched by Paul Kagame against the DRC in 2021, despite mediation
attempts, including those undertaken by major powers such as the United States,
we are witnessing the stubbornness and blatant disregard for international law
displayed with complete impunity by Rwanda's dictator, Paul Kagame.
These
superpowers and institutions, which are supposedly responsible for ensuring
compliance with international law and sanctioning offenders such as Paul
Kagame's Tutsi regime, appear cornered.
They
seem to be trying to convince public opinion that they are taking action
against Paul Kagame for his violations of international law in the DRC, while
simultaneously allowing him to continue committing war crimes and crimes
against humanity.
We
can identify, without examining them in greater detail here, several possible
reasons and motivations behind the cynicism of Western superpowers, which do
not dare take the decisive step of putting an end to the dictatorial and
bloodthirsty regime of Paul Kagame's RPF.
Meanwhile,
they continue to give its victims in Rwanda and throughout the Great Lakes
region, particularly in eastern DRC, hope that peace will one day be achieved,
even though Paul Kagame remains in power and continues working to undermine
that peace.
This
paradoxical and scandalous situation is attributable to the following factors:
1.
FAVOURABLE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR RWANDA'S DICTATOR AND CRIMINAL, PAUL KAGAME
a)
The world has become unipolar and is governed according to the law of the
strongest rather than the rule of law.
b)
The weakness, or even the disappearance, of the United Nations from the
management of world affairs, including peacekeeping and peace restoration,
despite this being its fundamental purpose.
c)
The betrayal, compounded by a lack of awareness, of certain members of the
Congolese political class and civil society.
2.
WHY THE SO-CALLED INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ALLOWS PAUL KAGAME TO CONTINUE
VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW AND COMMITTING WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST
HUMANITY
Certain
powers and entities that created the RPF in 1987, planned the military conquest
of Rwanda by the Tutsi minority originating from the Ugandan army, placed Paul
Kagame at the head of this group, and enabled it to seize power in 1994 after a
devastating war lasting nearly four years, from 1990 to 1994, would not want to
contradict themselves by acknowledging that their strategic plan was inhumane
and destructive for the Great Lakes region.
This
plan was intended to test the response and conditions proposed by certain
strategists from NATO military academies in the late 1980s in answer to the
following questions:
"In a country with two or three ethnic groups whose populations are very unequal in size, could the minority ethnic group ever gain power in that country, given that it would always lose in democratic elections? If so, how could it gain power, and what would be required for it to remain in power?"
The
answers provided by the military strategists, who were candidates for the title
of "War Thunderbolts", were clear, direct and unequivocal:
1) To gain power in such a country, the minority ethnic group would have to seize power by force, using a well-armed group that was trained, supervised and supported by certain neighbouring countries.
2) To remain in power, the regime installed by this ethnic minority would have to be exempted from democratic principles, such as the existence of an opposition, the electoral principle of "one person, one vote", respect for human rights, and so on.
It would also have to be exempted from compliance with international law under the United Nations Charter.
3) Finally, the powers that facilitated or enabled this minority to seize power would have to ensure that its regime was never held socially or economically accountable to the majority of the population, which would remain in poverty while everything — power, knowledge, wealth, and so on — was monopolized by the minority.
In
1988, we personally had the opportunity and privilege of attending a strategic
workshop that discussed this subject in a purely academic context, without
imagining for a moment that this model could one day be applied to our country,
Rwanda.
Unfortunately,
in 1990, the Anglo-Saxon powers therefore instructed their strategists to apply
this theory to Rwanda as a testing ground, and to install the Tutsi minority in
power under the conditions defined by the theorists.
Above
all, they were to ensure that this minority remained in power while being
exempted from democratic constraints and, especially, guaranteed impunity for
its crimes.
The
implementation of this theory has therefore continued for 36 years, and its
initiators are not prepared to abandon it.
We
shall identify some of these powers and entities and explain their motivations.
a)
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In
the United States, the Bill Clinton faction, which placed its bets on the
conquest of Rwanda by Tutsis coming from Uganda in 1994, and later on their
conquest of eastern DRC through a change of government in Kinshasa to install
Congolese proxies serving Paul Kagame's Tutsis, remains influential.
This
powerful lobby is still at work, and its leaders are part of Paul Kagame's
parallel government, known as the "Presidential Advisory Council"
(PAC).
b)
CANADA
In
Canada, General Roméo Dallaire, who was dispatched under the cover of a United
Nations peacekeeping mission in 1992 to help facilitate the conquest of Rwanda
by Paul Kagame's RPF, and who successfully accomplished his mission, remains
active as a "Senator for life".
He
does not intend to witness, during his lifetime, the overthrow of the regime he
helped install, or its replacement through democratic means.
This
is particularly so because the individuals who, during the period covered by
the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), advocated
the denial of truth and justice regarding the crimes of Paul Kagame's Tutsi
regime in Rwanda remain active in Canada and have even been promoted.
This
is the case with Louise Arbour, the former Prosecutor of the ICTR, who did
everything possible to prevent the prosecution of crimes committed by the RPF,
even though the United Nations had required such crimes to be investigated when
the Tribunal was established in 1994.
She
has now been appointed Governor General of Canada, making her the Head of
State's representative, on behalf of the King of the United Kingdom.
Canada
is therefore a Dominion whose sovereign is the monarch of the United Kingdom.
c)
THE UNITED KINGDOM
In
the United Kingdom, Tony Blair's faction remains active in promoting the
interests of Paul Kagame's dictatorial Tutsi regime in Rwanda.
Tony
Blair and members of his entourage, including his wife Cherie Blair, are part
of Kagame's famous parallel government, the "Presidential Advisory
Council" (PAC).
They
use their influence to put pressure on the judicial system so that it does not
prosecute Paul Kagame's agents, even when they have been caught red-handed,
while ensuring that it targets democratic and peaceful opponents of his regime
who are living in exile in the United Kingdom.
d)
FRANCE
In
France, it is the political Right, embodied by Nicolas Sarkozy and subsequently
continued under the Macron administration, that advocates for Paul Kagame's
dictatorial and bloodthirsty Tutsi regime in Rwanda, despite its human rights
violations in Rwanda and its war crimes and crimes against humanity in the
region.
e)
BELGIUM
In
Belgium, Paul Kagame has managed to establish a political and judicial
machinery designed to guarantee his impunity and crush his democratic opponents
who have found asylum in that country.
This
has been made possible thanks to circles that have supported him throughout his
military conquest of Rwanda, from 1990 to the present day, including the
occupation of North and South Kivu and the invasion of the DRC in 1996.
Among
these circles, one can mention the radical Right within the MR party, formerly
known as the PRL, which is dominated by the Michel family, father and son.
To
achieve this, he has lawyers who devote themselves to defending him in every
possible way and prosecuting his Rwandan or foreign opponents and adversaries.
Among
them is Me Bernard Maingain, a lawyer registered with the Brussels and Paris
Bars, who happens to be Paul Kagame's declared lawyer in both countries and,
therefore, within the European Union.
Thus,
as President Tshisekedi's diplomatic efforts on behalf of the DRC began making
progress within the European Union against Paul Kagame, Bernard Maingain,
accompanied by his son Brieuc, filed a high-profile complaint before the
Belgian judicial authorities on July 8, 2025, against nine members of the
Tshisekedi family, accusing them of systematic looting of mines in the DRC.
However,
behind the lawyer's robe lies a political strategist, a man whose legal cases
consistently align with Kigali's interests.
His
legal engagement is therefore inseparable from his pro-Kagame activism, his
vigorous defence of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), and his repeated
interference in the affairs of the Great Lakes region.
This
is probably why we are witnessing confusion and contradictions in Belgium's
official diplomatic position regarding this conflict.
Belgium's
current diplomacy, headed by Namur-born Maxime Prévot, no longer seems to know
how to position itself between the two protagonists, both of which are also
former Belgian colonies.
SOME
HESITATIONS
On
October 28, 2026, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United
States Department of the Treasury imposed sanctions on Rwanda's Ministry of
Defence and the "Zigama Credit and Savings Society".
The
US Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent, stated:
"Rwanda
must cease its support for M23 and withdraw its troops from eastern DRC."
[4]
As
usual, Paul Kagame's dictatorial and bloodthirsty Tutsi regime in Rwanda
reacted vehemently, using the fanciful and cynical arguments for which it is
renowned.
The
Paul Kagame regime claims that:
"The
Washington Agreements [5] contain clear commitments (...), particularly
regarding the neutralization of the genocidal militia FDLR, which is supported
by the DRC."
It
further claims that these commitments have not been respected to date and that
no responsibility has been established.
As
early as March 2026, following American measures against the Rwandan army, the
Rwandan government had already stated in a press release that it regretted the
"one-sided" sanctions, which "present a distorted picture of the
reality of the conflict".
Kagame's
Rwandan regime therefore continues to brandish the FDLR issue as a pretext,
while pretending to ignore the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the
FDLR and the DRC government concerning their surrender, disarmament and
encampment, a process that is currently underway and has been unanimously
welcomed by the international community, beginning with the mediators and
facilitators involved in this war of aggression.
Once
again, Rwanda under Kagame is contesting the situation and shifting
responsibility back to the DRC.
These
sanctions are supposed to signify that a relationship has changed.
Yet,
in many areas, the United States remains a partner of Rwanda, and Kagame sees
this as the weak point of the sanctions: proof that Washington's anger is
confined to one ministry while the rest of their relationship continues.
A
SIMPLE SOLUTION, BUT ONE THAT REMAINS UNATTAINABLE BECAUSE OF WEAKNESS,
COMPLICITY OR LACK OF INTEREST
Paul
Kagame must be addressed in a language that he understands and has mastered
since his childhood and adolescence in Uganda: the sound of gunfire.
WHO
IS DIRECTLY CONCERNED, AND WHAT SHOULD THEY DO?
-
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DRC AND ITS ARMED FORCES
The
government of the DRC and its Armed Forces should understand that the limited
American sanctions imposed on Paul Kagame do not constitute a definitive
victory.
They
represent only a diplomatic opportunity that belongs to them and that they must
transform into concrete progress on the ground in terms of sovereignty,
territorial integrity and the protection of their populations.
In
other words, they must do everything necessary to ensure a favourable balance
of power on the ground, unlike what we have witnessed over the past three
years.
-
OPPONENTS AND VICTIMS OF PAUL KAGAME'S DICTATORIAL TUTSI REGIME
Rwandans
who are committed to peace, democracy and human rights, regardless of their
ethnic background, region or political orientation, should convince themselves
that the common and immediate objective is the overthrow, neutralization,
disappearance, etc., of Paul Kagame, whatever the circumstances.
This
would then make it possible to replace his dictatorial regime with a genuinely
democratic government and establish Rwanda as a state governed by the rule of
law.
CONCLUSION
Paul
Kagame has long benefited from a privileged relationship with Western powers,
particularly the Anglo-Saxon countries, with the United States at the
forefront.
However,
international alliances are never love marriages. They are primarily based on
converging interests.
The
United States no longer has the same strategic reasons to support a regime that
was useful to it at a particular moment in history, following the fall of the
Berlin Wall.
Respect
for human rights, democracy and the well-being of ordinary people in Rwanda;
peace in the Great Lakes region; stability in Rwanda's neighbouring countries;
and better protection of Western powers' geostrategic interests in the region —
all of these objectives must necessarily begin with the removal or downfall of
Paul Kagame in Rwanda, by any means necessary and as quickly as possible.
This
should be the immediate objective of all those concerned, without hesitation
and without necessarily having to consult one another.
NOTE:
This article is also available in French.
REFERENCES:
[1]
Kajeguhakwa niwe wapangiye Kagame gahunda yo gutera Congo.
[4]
United States Sanctions Rwandan Ministry of Defence over Its Support for M23 in the DRC.
[5]
DRC: What the Security Cooperation Memorandum between Washington and Kinshasa Reveals.
posted by Mamadou Kouyate @ 7:32 PM
0 Comments
