October 25, 2010
Love a Man in Uniform? Think Twice in Congo
In today’s world, rarely do raping and pillaging so routinely coincide as in Eastern Congo's conflict. Increased scrutiny from the US Congress and concerned activist networks are highlighting the systematic rape and abuse of Congolese women and girls by marauding security forces, particularly Congo’s National Army. Equally appalling is Congo’s 'conflict minerals' problem—mineral ores extracted from mines controlled by various military factions, fueling the lucrative anarchy that is crippling the East and supporting the communications technology central to our way of life. Greater scrutiny should bring practical solutions, but our policy makers are missing the elephant in the room.
So is it greed, governance or grievance driving this crisis? Eastern Congo is a vast ungoverned space; some of its many armed groups are foreign, others domestic. Yet none treat the civilian population as brutally as President Kabila’s own National Army. A recent Human Rights Watch survey indicates that Congolese soldiers are the primary rapists in the East.
Since President Kabila took office in 2006, all three national security services—police, army, and intelligence—have operated as a winner-take-all bonanza where pedestrian pocket change, rare timber, protected fauna, and high-value minerals are equally expropriated by the services. As under Mobutu, a deliberate lack of oversight and no threat of sanction encourage economic opportunism among security officers, made easier with guns and uniforms with which to intimidate and extort. Would be public service providers but instead instruments of a nimble kleptocracy, state security services have become ‘Public Enemy Number One’, say Congolese here, raping and stealing instead of protecting and serving.
Police are generally circumscribed to towns; soldiers roam the country’s wild spaces, hence their freedom to occupy remote mining areas in the mineral-rich eastern provinces. Together they comprise a legion of footmen driving an extensive parallel economy whose profits rival those skimmed from government coffers by politicians in the capital. Low-level shakedowns of average citizens, taxi drivers and small-time traders generate large sums to be paid back up the chain and pocketed by the top brass. Urban traffic cops, for instance, must meet a daily quota of 50$ to 100$ a day. Failure means they lose their uniform and weapon, the sole means of improving their lot in life.
Outside observers, and many Congolese, believe that chronically unpaid soldiers and police must be destitute and thus obliged to extort, steal and beg in order to survive. The reality is that without a convincing deterrent to extraction and extortion—and their fantastic spoils—the security sector will continue to ransom the population into perpetuity. Lucrative extortion rackets and resource extraction are far more attractive than the promise of regular salaries, public accountability and civilian oversight. The current array of foreign-funded security sector reform programs, totaling hundreds of thousands of foreign tax dollars annually, contain only carrots, no sticks.
Besides elections, two additional factors may have motivated the recent ban, the first sign of interest in public reform in years. First, the country’s investment climate is horrible. If nothing improves, Congo will sink to the lowest rung among the world’s business environments, where it is currently next-to-last. Second, Congolese voters are sick of their fraudulent political class, and pervasive immunity for a contemptible security sector. Official investigations into the June murder of a prominent human rights defender at the hands of the national police continue to languish in predictable opacity.
But with smuggling now flourishing and tin reaching its highest price in years, the moratorium is clearly window dressing, deliberately ignoring the elephant in the room: Kabila’s outlaw security sector. Why hasn’t Kabila gone after the commanding officers running the mines, and leave legal operators and pilots efforts at clean mining alone? Most likely, he fears upsetting the apple cart and directly tackling his criminalized security sector—these are hardened thugs who could very easily take his life, just as they took his father’s in 2001.
It is no coincidence that Kabila and international donors are both ignoring Congo’s primary driver of chaos, its security sector. But pressuring global tech companies, as recent US legislation seeks to do, or penalizing legitimate mining efforts in country as with Kabila’s mining ban, are both missing the point and, worse, risk a serious misstep. Recall the ill-fated ‘Blood Oil’ campaign of the late 1990s in which western oil companies, named and shamed by activists into quitting the country, sold their concessions to Malaysians and Chinese firms. The moral victory was short-lived as the new operators proved entirely deaf to any reform agenda.
Yet we know from the Kimberley Process and the campaign against West Africa’s ‘Blood Diamonds’ that naming and shaming combined with looming profit loss can motivate improved resource management in fragile states. Under international pressure to manage its natural wealth, Congo will either do the right thing or offer its concessions to less scrupulous operators, with no interest in transparency or rule of law. Unlike diamonds, the world needs Congo’s minerals, and as such there will always be a market.
The real problem is not the riches in Congo’s soil, or its lack of a justice system to try rapists after the fact. Prospects for better natural resource management and a definitive end to the rape epidemic hang entirely on a single public institution—domestic security forces. Equally passive as the international community, President Kabila is either protecting them, hoping their license to pillage and rape will translate into support for him, or simply fears their wrath should he try to change their ways.
Taming Congo’s security forces will require sustained, well-coordinated reform efforts, funded by the international community and enforced by Kabila’s senior cadres. Neither the international community nor the Congolese government has yet to demonstrate a credible commitment to either of these necessary conditions for ending Congo’s crisis.
Posted by Edward Rackley at 01:00 AM | Permalink






















Comments
I enjoyed reading this article very much.
"Taming Congo’s security forces will require sustained, well-coordinated reform efforts, funded by the international community and enforced by Kabila’s senior cadres." Does the international community really want to assist in restoring order to this country though? Why would the richest countries in the world help Congo manage their natural resources when they are clearly benefiting from ‘conflict minerals’. ‘Conflict’ seems to be the popular word in regards to Congo. Why don’t we hear the words that describe what’s really going on ‘war’, ‘rape’, ‘mutilation’ or ‘slavery‘? Perhaps because then the international community would have to do something about it?
“Would be public service providers but instead instruments of a nimble plutocracy“. Exactly what makes this war so terrifying. How do you know who is your friend or enemy? The Congolese people have nowhere to turn, so they turn on each other.
I think the first step is consumer awareness. The demand for conflict minerals in the west is great. Most people don’t know what minerals are used in our electronics, let alone where they come from and at what price. Unfortunately the war in DRC is rarely on the television news or in the papers or on the cover of our magazines. As long as we are in the dark, Congo will never have a hope for light. The violence, corruption and lawlessness will never change unless we take responsibility for the part we play in the war in Congo.
Posted by: Kate Clark | Oct 26, 2010 2:50:02 AM
Women are Heroes
Posted by: Carlos | Oct 26, 2010 5:07:24 AM
Beautiful video Carlos. Thanks for the link!
Posted by: Bill | Oct 26, 2010 6:14:21 AM
It is highly unlikely that the issues surrounding the Congo regarding SSR or conflict minerals will be resolved without initiating a heightened awareness among consumers who indrectly fuel the conflict. Those in power within the Congo or the international community will not likely surrender the benefits that exploiting these resources yield. Therefore, change must come from both the bottom up and town down. Then and only then will sanctions be an option and motivations shift. Resolving the conflict in the Congo simply must become a priority of the State Department and the international community at large but the question remains will that become a reality if those who benefit from the exploitation of the countless Congolese suffering every day refuse to raise their voices in protest. I think not.
Posted by: Sonya Shannon | Oct 26, 2010 4:50:05 PM
While we're at it, let's all ignore darfur like rwanda.
Posted by: odysseus14 | Oct 26, 2010 7:23:50 PM
Post a comment