DR Congo: FDLR - " A son of a swastika of '45 parading a peroxide standard "

Chimpreports reports

FDLR Threaten To Kill Tutsi Civilians In DRC

                    FDLR Soldiers  genocidal killers whom if not already dead I can only hope soon attain that condition.

As the United Nations Intervention Brigade and DRC government troops come under intense pressure to make good on their mandate by attacking FDLR, the militia whose leadership and ideology led to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, has vowed to kill Tutsis in DRC. 

I have argued that no one can set the timetable for FARDC, MONUSCO and it's Intervention ( Africa ) Brigade other than those organisation themselves when it come to neutralising the FDLR, I was it would seem wrong. This is an FDLR suicide note and one I suggest the actors involved respect, FARDC, MONUSCO and the Intervention Brigade should look at this as a request for voluntary euthanasia and  kill these bastards as soon and as violently as possible. 

In a statement seen by Chimpreports on Sunday, the FDLR which recently joined forces with PS Imberakuri to form what is now known as ‘FPLC’, warned the international community especially the UN, European Union, the African Union and regional organizations “against the loss of life that this unnecessary war will cause again to the poor Congolese population as well as to the Rwandan refugees present on our territory.”

Killing off the FDLR and remaining Interahamwe fools is not unnecessary it would seem, I had hoped that was the case after reading the December 30, 2013 declaration of cessation of hostilities issued by the FDLR but as I blogged my skepticism was well placed. 

" I am guessing that MONUSCO has also been dropping leaflets from the air, there is no postal service in the territory that the FDLR control. The consequence of fighting have been disastrous for M23 and the ADF are being decimated in their scrap with FARDC, MONUSCO and the Intervention Brigade. I am skeptical about the sincerity of the FDLR but keeping the faith with a genocidal ideology of hatred is insane and many if not most of the perpetrators must be getting on or dead. I don't imagine recruitment is that easy."

‘General’ Gad Ngabo further warned in the statement that an attack on their bases would lead to “mourning in the many families and thus revive the wounds of broken hearts.”

The FDLR bases that will certainly be attacked, it is interesting this faux 'general' seems oblivious to the effects of  " mourning in the many families and thus revive the wounds of broken hearts.” that will be caused by his resumption of genocide against the Tutsi community.

The United Nations Mission for Stabilization in Congo (MONUSCO) has reportedly been preparing to attack FDLR.

It would be very surprising if it wasn't planning to attack the FDLR, given that these apologists for members of humanity have been deemed worthy of elimination by the UN and that is part of the MONUSCO and Intervention Brigade mandate from the Security Council.

However, observers say this may not be possible as FDLR supported the UN Brigade and DRC forces in neutralising the M23 rebels in 2013.

Then those observers are fools. Eliminating M23 has been completed, the ADF ( Ugandan Muslim rebels ) are being eliminated having surprisingly managed to make themselves a more urgent problem than the FDLR. In mid January I blogged on the prioritisation:  

" The FDLR were I would have said a far more significant target but the scale of activities and sheer brutality of the ADF has made it urgent that this mess be cleaned up first."

Further more the FDLR have never supported the Intervention Brigade or the MONUSCO. There has been criminal cooperation with corrupt FARDC elements but that seems to have come to a halt.

The UN has in previous publications explained serious crimes committed by the Hutu FDLR against the Tutsi population in DRC.

In November last year, UN Security Council said FDLR as “a group under UN sanctions whose leaders and members include perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda have continued to promote and commit ethnically – based and other killings in Rwanda and the DRC…”

The FDLR it is clear remain unreconstructed genociders, this threat against the civilian Tutsi community in the Eastern DR Congo proves in the twenty years since they murdered 800,000 civilians in the Rwandan Genocide nothing has changed, other than they have had a further 20 years of robbing, raping and killing Congolese civilians.

The Council strongly condemned the continuing violence and abuses of human rights by FDLR and other armed groups “including summary executions, sexual and gender based violence and large scale recruitment and use of children,” said Liu Jieyi of China, on behalf of the 15-member body.

All of which are crimes against humanity.

It is thought the FDLR intend to use the threat of attacking Tutsi civilians in DRC as leverage in their quest for a power–sharing deal with the Rwanda government.

Something that will never happen. The idea that the perpetrators of the Rwandan Genocide could ever be trusted in a governmental capacity is laughable. The only way out for these killers is unconditional surrender the leadership being sent to the Hague and rank and file members undergoing rehabilitation and reintegration into Rwandan society. The alternative is death and quite frankly it is in my opinion the FDLR deserve the latter, I hope they are stupid enough to avail themselves of that option.

The FDLR announced in their Declaration of 30 December 2013 they officially laid down their arms and demanded negotiations with the Government of Rwanda.

Kigali has consistently maintained its position that it would not talk to the terrorists and has urged fighters to renounce the genocide ideology.

The FDLR are in no position to demand anything it also seems to have escaped them that they are on Congolese territory and Kinshasa is the sovereign power not Kigali. Kigali is correct to spurn talks with terrorist groups, it is a shame that both Kampala and Kigali failed to recognise that when M23 was making similar batshit crazy demands on Kinshasa.

Several FDLR fighters who have in recent years crossed to Rwanda have undergone rehabilitation courses to enable them discard the extremist ideology.

Rwanda President Paul Kagame last year emphasized that a sustainable solution to the political turbulence in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) must include the neutralization of the FDLR.

Kagame told Russell Feingold, the US Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region of Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo at his Urugwiro Village office that the genocidal militia must be firmly dealt with “as a matter of priority.”

Kagame needs to tread very carefully on this issue. He has won the war against the FDLR already, there is just the battle to come and the timing for that is as it should be, with the forces tasked with the destruction of the FDLR. 

Regional leaders remain split on how to deal with the aftermath of the defeat of M23 rebels in Eastern Congo who had provided a buffer zone to Rwanda against attacks by FDLR.

Really ? Maybe I should have blogged this. 
" The president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Joseph Kabila, announced an amnesty on Wednesday for former members of the defeated M23 rebel army.

The amnesty covers "acts of insurgency, acts of war and political offences" committed in the DR Congo up to December 20, 2013, when the bill was approved by the government." 

Rwanda believes that FDLR should be crashed if the militia is not willing to surrender and demobilize.

I suspect that should be crushed and if so I agree.

However, Tanzania wants to see Uganda and Rwanda talk to ADF and FDLR terrorist groups, a suggestion scorned by the Kampala and Kigali.

Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete has a legitimate interest in this issue having provided troops to the Intervention Brigade but is he serious ? Does he think the Great Lakes region will benefit from having Muslim militants intent on bring Jihad to Uganda or genocidal thugs returning to power in Rwanda ? I don't say it lightly but Kikwete should shut the fuck up. The ADF and FDLR are deserving of the fate they have selected.
Uganda and Rwanda are also not willing to see the two terrorist groups rearm and recruit new combatants across their borders.

I think both Uganda and Rwanda would love to get the ADF and FDLR across their respective borders and they would not be doing any recruitment if that was to happen. As it stands if any of the leadership of these militias are taken alive that is what should happen to them. In short surrender now and face the justice of the ICC with the added benefit of living. Or fight and die at the hands of FARDC, MONUSCO and the Intervention Brigade. If they survive then it would seem reasonable to repatriate them to Uganda and Rwanda, they having spurned the ICC option.

DR Congo: This American ' road map ' to peace won't work without some new cartography.

All Africa reports

Congo-Kinshasa: Bringing Peace to the Congo - a Blueprint for Special Envoy Feingold

                                        Congolese allies protest M23 in front of the White House by Joseph Mbangu

The clashes in the eastern Congo over the past week have once again brought into sharp focus the enduring conflict between the M23 rebels and the Congolese military as well as the role of the recently-deployed United Nations intervention brigade. As the new United States special envoy for the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Great Lakes Region of Africa, Senator Russ Feingold, embarks on his first trip to the region, it is imperative that he takes steps now to engage in the economic and commercial issues that are at the heart of the conflict.

I am having a huge amount of difficulty swallowing this as I imagine many of the Congolese people. But lets start with a little bit of accuracy. Senator Russ Feingold, is no longer a US senator, another point worth bearing in mind is that this conflict I agree is on one level very much about economic and commercial interests and to date Rwanda has been ruthlessly exploiting the resources of the Eastern DR Congo with until very recently the if not the direct support, then at least a tacit approval of the United States.

To be successful in the herculean task of helping end the world's deadliest war since World War II, Feingold would do well to learn from one of the most effective U.S. special envoy missions of our time, George Mitchell, during his tenure as President Bill Clinton's envoy to Northern Ireland. While many people remember Mitchell as having brokered peace in Northern Ireland, few recall his strategic approach: to focus on economics first, in order to build trust and lay the foundation for tackling the tough security issues.

I actually agree with an economic approach and think despite the historical revisionism that I feel is implied the authors are on the right track. So we have an idea but as yet no mechanism. If we want to rebuild security and I mean physical and economic then the west must be prepared to invest in the people of the region at a micro level. I am no Northern Ireland expert but I imagine the Irish investment was made at a macro level because however hard  " The Troubles " were, there is absolutely no comparison to be made between Northern Ireland and the Eastern DR Congo. The issues of education, infrastructure and  just the ability of the Congolese government to interact with its citizens are far more complex. Add in that the British and Irish governments were both actively supporting the process and we have a very different situation. ( The Government of Rwanda is doing all it can to derail the process ). 

A decade after his tenure, Mitchell described the key to achieving sustainable peace in Northern Ireland: "I stress the economy. ... These and other conflict situations... all have an important economic underpinning. I've come to believe that you have to deal with political and security measures, but you have to include economics right at the very top. You need economic growth, you need job creation, you need opportunity for people... if you want to reduce the likelihood of conflict. That isn't guaranteed stability... but without it, it's very difficult to obtain."

Agreed, but it is verging on the insulting for the authors to prescribe this cure and then treat it as job done. Mitchell is describing Ireland not the DR Congo. His prescription needs to be adapted to local conditions. 

A critical part of Clinton and Mitchell's strategic vision for the Northern Ireland peace process was economics, and they stuck by it patiently until it bore fruit. It was predicated on creating jobs, revenue and commercial opportunities in order to reduce violent tension between the two sides and incentives for peace and alternatives to conflict. Despite the violence at the time, Mitchell organized a White House investment conference on Northern Ireland in 1995, building on the recommendations of business leaders from Northern Ireland, Ireland, and the U.S., who believed there was far greater economic potential from peace than from war. The conference sparked the first meeting between Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams and Northern Ireland Secretary of State Patrick Mayhew, senior leaders from the opposing sides of the conflict.

The senior players in the Great Lakes Region have met many times. It is fine to say that Gerry Adams met with Patrick Mayhew but remember that Kabila and Kagame not to mention Museveni meet several times a year. It is also worth remembering Rwanda's absolute refusal to meet with the FDLR and abuse of Tanzanian President Kikwete. I have no doubt that the region has far more to gain through peace but it is an option Rwanda refuses to entertain.  

“Those who think that Rwanda today should sit down at the negotiating table with FDLR simply don’t know what they are talking about,” she said adding that it is unfortunate that the rebel group has sympathisers in the region, including President Kikwete himself, should he not retract his comments.

The U.S. then contributed $100 million to a development fund for Northern Ireland and businesses set up cooperative bodies to facilitate cross-border trade, job creation, and infrastructure improvements.

There is a similar major opportunity with the war in eastern Congo today, and Special Envoy Feingold should follow the Clinton-Mitchell playbook.

I disagree, the situation on the ground is far different. In Ireland there was hatred but there was also business, effective courts and taxation authorities, checks and balances and no ingrained culture of corruption. The approach as I have said must be at a micro level. Obama / Feingold need to rewrite the Clinton / Mitchell playbook. 

There are critical security issues that must be dealt with, such as ensuring that the new UN Intervention Brigade contributes to the solution rather than exacerbates it. But the potential benefits to all parties of an economically prosperous eastern Congo would provide a major incentive for constructive negotiations, and commercial and economic issues can and should be addressed concurrently.

What a load of drivel. The authors obviously have no concept of the role of, or the situation faced by not only the Intervention Brigade ( Africa Brigade ) but MONUSCO as a whole. The role of the Africa Brigade is to stop the depredations of armed groups principally M23 and the FDLR, but a variety of others as well. That will necessarily exacerbate the situation with Rwanda for example. But it should happen regardless and the world should be making it very clear to Rwanda the price of sabotaging the efforts of the Intervention Brigade. I would hope the other international organisation such as the Commonwealth and Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie are involved in applying pressure to the regional players to force compliance.

For too many years, elites in Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda have exploited eastern Congo's mineral wealth, prolonging the war. But calculations are starting to change. Armed groups' profits from three out of four conflict minerals are down by an estimated 65 percent. Ten percent of the mines in the region have been validated as conflict-free and regional governments have signed up to a comprehensive minerals certification process. In a major development, local business leaders who had previously trafficked minerals for weapons for armed groups, last year refused to support the M23 rebels. As John Kanyoni, a leading exporter of minerals from North Kivu, said, "As long as there is conflict there, no one [internationally] will be purchasing minerals." In short, significant progress has been made in the commercial and economic sphere despite the conflict.

In short, no there has not. Yes there has been progress in reducing the amount of illegal minerals exported but that did nothing to slow down the flow of arms. One could argue it increased them in fact. Where did M23 develop an ability to conduct night operations ? Who gave them night vision equipment ? Not selling minerals means that the wealth is not realised today but there is no new wealth being created to replace the mineral receipts, and there is now no trickle down from the illegal exports.  

Feingold can take advantage of this momentum in three ways. Firstly, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim has already announced an unprecedented U.S. $1 billion initiative for new projects that would help provide a "peace dividend" for the region. The U.S. should work with the World Bank to accelerate the implementation of the package. Priority should be given to investments in roads, agriculture and energy projects, and small and medium enterprises.

I agree. This can only be done at a macro level and these projects take time and are very prone to corruption, backhanders and embezzlement. We are dealing with kleptocracies so we need to have some checks and balances in place to make sure that not only we, but more importantly the people of the The Great Lakes Region also see the results of this investment.  

Second, Feingold should help speed up the mineral certification process in the region, so that Congo and neighboring countries, especially Rwanda and Uganda, can begin selling "peace minerals," people on the ground can benefit commercially, and companies can source from the region in good conscience, in fulfillment of the Dodd-Frank legislation, which discourages American companies from trading in conflict minerals. Some Congolese miners have already seen wages double at conflict-free mines, but this must be replicated at other mines.

Rwanda has minerals to sell ? Well that is good news that geologists will be pleased to hear, although I suspect that they will be somewhat mystified to learn about it. The minerals the authors refer to were stolen from the Eastern DR Congo. Could I suggest they have a look at the dramatic fall in Rwandan mineral receipts since the embargo and their expulsion from the Eastern DR Congo. 

Feingold should also urge Presidents Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Paul Kagame of Rwanda to enhance the credibility of the Regional Certification Mechanism of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, so that it provides proper verification of conflict-free minerals by the end of 2013. A transparent, certifiably conflict-free mineral sector will help to attract more investment and unlock wealth-creation opportunities that are sustainable, peace-generating and contribute to greater regional trade.

I hope Feingold has something very potent to urge with. Something like a warrant from the Hague. This is dreamland stuff far removed from the realpolitik of the region. Feingold should certainly emphasis economic opportunities but not for Rwanda to export minerals they don't have.

Finally, Senator Feingold should work with the U.S. Public-Private Alliance on Responsible Minerals Trade to organize an investment conference that brings together potential investors with leaders from the Great Lakes region to identify opportunities for conflict-free, transparent investment. A successful investment conference would be a win-win-win for people living in eastern Congo, companies looking to invest, and regional governments seeking legitimate revenue streams to replace foreign aid.

That idea has potential for the DR Congo alone. If this is an exercise in reducing foreign aid then at least be honest about it and lets call it western greed and selfishness. We need to increase the amount of aid and the accountability for that aid not reduce it. We need to get that aid to the people, first to provide them with security then to rebuild, then to reestablish their lives and finally to build up the regions economies.

There have been many U.S. envoys appointed over the years to tackle the seemingly impossible conflict in Congo, but Feingold now has a unique opportunity to leave a lasting legacy. If he can draw on the successful lessons of George Mitchell, incorporating the economic agenda from the beginning, Feingold can help the Great Lakes region join the other countries in Africa that have begun to experience impressive economic growth and opportunity.

I agree that he ( Feingold ) along with quite a few others working on the issues associated with the Great Lakes Region can make a real difference this time. Here is again the rub, America has contributed hugely to the situation in the DR Congo. It is little wonder previous envoys have failed, they were meant to and like the authors of this article they were either too blind or too loyal to Washington to do the job properly. I have no doubt this is an American ' shift the blame ' propaganda piece. America can be part of the solution and Feingold is probably the right man for the job, but to be part of that solution America needs to acknowledge its complicity in the past and its ability to collaborate with others for the good of the people of the region, not the regions political leaders or American corporate greed. 

Witney Schneidman is Senior International Advisor on Africa at Covington & Burling LLP, a Nonresident Fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African affairs. Sasha Lezhnev is Senior Policy Advisor at the Enough Project and author of Crafting Peace: Strategies to Deal with Warlords in Collapsing States.

Both should know a damn site better than to have produced this half useful roadmap, to use the American vernacular. It is at least a start I will concede. 

Tanzania: An application to join the Crocodile club.

News of Rwanda reports

If President Kikwete is Tanzanian, then most Rwandans being expelled are Tanzanians too

As of August 15, 2013, more than 7,000 people of Rwandan ancestry had been forced out of Tanzania. The expulsions have reignited a centuries old debate as to who should be considered a perfect citizen of a given country. Recently, I met an elderly couple that lived in Burundi since the early 1950s, and their view of the evictions made me stop for a second to think though what they had said.

“Kikwete could be originating from Gitega in Burundi,” is how the elderly couple put it. They are of Rwandan origin, but speak Kirundi and solely prefer to be viewed as Burundians. By virtual of that country’s laws, they are indeed Burundians.

So where did President Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete come from?

There are no original residents of Bagamoyo in Tanzania where Kikwete’s parents are traced. Most people from that area are remnants of slaves who were seem as unfit for the market during the slave trade era. Bagamoyo formally (Bwagamoyo) was one of the biggest slave trade centres in East Africa and people were being traded from various areas of East Africa. For those of Bagamoyo, however, almost all came from Burundi and Zaire.

Slight problem  

" ...there is little evidence to support that Bagamoyo was a major slave port Kilwa, much further south, has earned this status. "

And

" About 5 km south of Bagamoyo, the Kaole Ruins with remnants of two mosques and a couple of tombs can be dated back to the 13th century, showing the importance of Islam in those early Bagamoyo times.
Kaole Ruins in Bagamoyo, Tanzania.

Until the middle of the 18th century, Bagamoyo was a small and insignificant trading center where most of the population were fishermen and farmers. The main trading goods were fish, salt, and gum, among other things."

More “Tanzanians” from outside

Historical discourse shows that most Tanzanians are from other neighbouring countries. The Ngoni people came from Zulu land in South Africa; Yao used to belong to Mwanamtapa Kingdom; Arabs of Unguja and Pemba Irelands in Zanzibar came from Oman during the rule of Sultan Sayid Said.

Chaga, Maasai and Meru people of Northern Tanzania are traced in Kenya; Hangaza people from Burundi; Haya people from Uganda; Waha (Ha people) arrived in from Zaire and Burundi; the Makonde people (tribe of former Tanzania President Benjamin William Mkapa) came from Mozambique; Nyasa People relocated from Malawi; almost all Mara region dwellers came from Kenya and the list can cover about 80percent of all Tanzanians.

The Singida and some Arusha people like Warangi, Wasandawe, Wabaebaig, Wairaq and Hadzabe are not Bantus, but Semi Nilotic who found themselves in that country after immigration for survival.

I really wish people wouldn't make sweeping statements without something to back it up. The Ethnicity of Tanzanians is covered quite well in the East African Living Encyclopedia . I realise the purpose of this article is to belittle Tanzania in line with the current Rwandan anger at President Kikwete for having the arrogance to suggest that Rwanda try negotiating with its FDLR rebels. The irony here is I totally agree with much that this report contains.

Tanzania’s current Constitution states that all people who were present in 1961 from 00.00 mid night during Tanganyika Independence are legally Tanzanians despite their vast origins. It is beyond comprehension therefore why Rwandans who were in Tanganyika from 1959 and before are being evicted as illegal immigrants.

Elderly women are being rounded up at gun point with nothing on them, and forced out to the Rwanda-Tanzania border. The children they had with Tanzania men are remaining, because according to President Kikwete, the children are Tanzanian and not their mother. The same thing is happening to men married to Tanzanian women.

This is fucking madness on the part of Tanzania. It is the sort of batshit crazy the regions Crocodiles indulge in. Tanzania seems to be trying to head down this road and I have no idea why with regard to the citizenship issue. Kilwete I would have to say seems to have decided that he wants to join the Crocodile club.  

" Last week President Kilwete of Tanzania declared that he was ready to defend his country against any foreign aggressors. His rousing speech is seen as the latest escalation of a dispute with Tanzania's small neighbour Malawi, who traditionally claims complete ownership of the part of Lake Malawi that borders on Tanzania.
President Joyce Banda has stood firm, not willing to concede any territory, and no wonder, it is widely thought that there is oil under the lake.
Until now Tanzania has shown no interest in owning the lake, the southern half of which is shared by Malawi and Mozambique.
In his speech Kilwete made no direct reference to Malawi but the inference was not lost, and he also promised to deal with any new aggressors in the same way in which Tanzania dealt with Uganda when it invaded Tanzanian territory in 1979, when Idi Amin was in power across that border." 

Tanzania nationality law

A Tanzanian citizen is anyone who is in possession of citizenship of the United Republic of Tanzania. Nationality law is mentioned in the Constitution of Tanzania. The citizenship law came into force independence in 1961, and amended in 1964 when Tanganyika and Zanzibar united to form Tanzania.

Any child born within the borders of the United Republic of Tanzania, on or after Union Day, 26 April 1964, is granted citizenship of Tanzania, except for children of foreign diplomats, as stated in the Tanzania Citizenship Act of 1995. Citizenship is derived from various scenarios.

Citizenship by descent: A person born outside Tanzania enjoys a right to Tanzanian citizenship from birth provided that at least one parent is a Tanzanian citizen by birth or naturalization.

Citizenship by naturalization: Any foreign national with no ancestry or birth ties with Tanzania may apply for citizenship through Naturalization. In order for a foreign national to become a Tanzanian citizen through naturalization, the following conditions must be met.

• (A). Residence in the United Republic throughout the period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of the applications.
• (b). During the ten years immediately preceding the said period of twelve months, total residence in the United Republic for periods amounting in the aggregate to not less than seven years.
• (c). Adequate knowledge of Kiswahili or the English language.
• (d). Good character.
• (e). would be a suitable citizen in terms of past and potential contribution to social and cultural welfare as well as economic, scientific, or technological advancement of Tanzania.
• (F). Intention, if naturalized, to continue to reside permanently in the United Republic. Following the lodging of the application, the applicant must publish a notice of intention to naturalize in two consecutive issues of the registered newspapers. After the application has been scrutinized by various officials, a final recommendation is made to the Minister of Home Affairs, who ultimately decides whether or not to approve the application

A person receiving Tanzanian citizenship by naturalization must renounce foreign citizenships under current law.

The case for Minors: In the case of minors, according to the citizenship act of 1995, once the parents are granted citizenship to the United Republic of Tanzania, the child is also by right entitled to receive citizenship, considered they are under legal age and still living under the care of their parents.

Dual citizenship: Tanzania does not currently allow its citizens to hold foreign citizenship in addition to their Tanzanian citizenship, except in the case of Tanzanian woman acquiring foreign nationality through marriage. The ban on dual citizenship has historically been motivated by suspicions about potential disloyalty amongst the sizable Asian minority. Nevertheless, in recent years a debate has arisen about permitting dual citizenship. In August 2007, the minister of home affairs submitted a report recommending that the law be changed.

How can one lose Tanzanian citizenship?

Those who acquired Tanzanian citizenship at birth cannot be involuntarily stripped of their citizenship, though they may voluntarily renounce it. Those wishing to renounce their Tanzanian citizenship must provide evidence of another country’s citizenship as well as return their Tanzanian passport.

Those who acquired Tanzanian citizenship by naturalization may have their citizenship revoked for quite understandable reasons.

At least from the above explanation, how can the thousands of people being expelled from Tanzania be graded; Tanzanians. Those being forced out include unemployed youths born in Tanzania, but have Rwandan origins; women and men who left Rwanda as babies in 1959; babies and teenagers born in Tanzania; elderly women/men who crossed into Karagwe long before Tanzania was born.

                                         Photo 24Tanzania         

It is absolute Insanity.   ( I am not sure but that may be the Rusumo bridge border crossing a new crossing is being built to improve regional commerce between Rwanda and Tanzania ).

" Jean Minani, 53, who lived in Karagwe, said he left behind his Tanzanian wife with whom they had four children.

Another returnee speaking a mixture of Kiswahili and Kinyarwanda lamented that he left behind his businesses, farms, agricultural produce and family members with Tanzanian origin."

The Tanzanian government using all its instruments of law and order, are holding meetings with local leaders from which a simple message is given; ALL RWANDANS OUT. First, the targeted people are forced to give up their officials Tanzanian documents. So a villager in Karagwe region who barely makes ends meet turns to those considered Rwandans, and since they no longer have documents, everything is taken.

In all his speeches, President Kikwete addresses his countrymen/women ad “fellow Tanzanians”. So if more than 80 percent current “Tanzanians” came from outside, then just as President Kikwete is, then a majority of the 5,793 people expelled so far, are Tanzanian too.

In many ways I suspect that this is a result of the on going stouch between the leadership's of both nations. But they are neighbours and need to work this stuff out with out turning ordinary people into victims. Breaking up family groups because your pissed at Kigali  is a bloody silly thing to do.

DR Congo: Obama signals policy change ?

The White House press release 

Remarks by President Obama and President Kikwete of Tanzania at Joint Press Conference

Q    My question to President Obama -- Mr. President, there has been no peace in Congo for almost 20 years now.  As a powerful nation in the world and a permanent member of the Security Council with a lot of influence to major players of the Congo conflict, how is the U.S. going to assist the DRC and Great Lakes to reach a permanent peace?  Thank you. 


"...a lot of influence to major players of the Congo conflict. " That is a very perceptive part of question and Obama didn't duck it. 

 
PRESIDENT OBAMA:   Well, the people of Congo need a chance.  They need a fair chance to live their lives, raise their families.  And they haven't had that opportunity because of constant conflict and war for way too many years.  And of course, the tragedy is compounded by the fact that Congo is so rich in natural resources and potential, but because of this constant conflict and instability, the people of Congo haven't benefited from that. 
 
I want to congratulate, again, President Kikwete and others who have helped to shape a peace framework.  Because one of the things that I've said throughout this trip is, the United States doesn’t seek to impose solutions on Africa.  We want to work with Africans to find solutions to some of these ongoing security and regional problems.


All this is fairly standard stuff but the acknowledgement that the Congo is resource rich and that the people of the Congo have not benefited from the mineral wealth begs the question who has benefited ? 

 
And so, the fact that you now have a peace framework that the various parties have signed onto is critical.  But it can't just be a piece of paper; there has to be follow-through.  And so, one of the things that I discussed with President Kikwete is how we can encourage all the parties concerned to follow through on commitments that they've made in order to bring about a lasting solution inside of Congo.  That means, for example, that President Kabila inside of Congo, he has to do more and better when it comes to dealing with the DRC's capacity on security issues and delivery of services.  And that’s very important, because if there's a continuing vacuum there, then that vacuum sometimes gets filled by actors that don’t have the best interests of Congo at heart.  And we're prepared to work the United Nations and regional organizations and others to help him build capacity.

 
That is a accurate way to describe the failings of FARDC and the ongoing security issues in the Eastern DR Congo.
"...then that vacuum sometimes gets filled by actors that don’t have the best interests of Congo at heart." 
One gets the feeling Susan Rice is about to have a bad day.  


The countries surrounding the Congo, they've got to make commitments to stop funding armed groups that are encroaching on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Congo.  And they've signed onto a piece of paper now, now the question is do they follow through. 


Wow. Did I read that right.  Hope that Rwanda are paying attention. Susan Rice is going to find it difficult to run cover for you now.

 
And so, we're prepared to work with anybody to try to make this happen.  Ultimately, though, the countries involved have to recognize it is in their self-interest to do so.  We can't force a solution onto the region.  The peoples of the region have to stand up and say that’s enough; it's time to move forward in a different way.  And, by the way, that means holding those who've committed gross human rights abuses accountable for what they've done.


The list of human rights violators is not a short one.

 
But there's an opportunity for peace here.  And the countries surrounding the Congo should recognize that if the Congo stabilizes, that will improve the prospects for their growth and their prosperity, because right now, it's as if you have a millstone around your neck.  If you have one of the biggest countries in terms of geography in all of Africa with all these natural resources, but it's constantly a problem as opposed to being part of the solution, everybody suffers. 
 
Tanzania should be doing more trade with the DRC.  Rwanda should be doing more trade and commerce with the DRC.  One of the things we're talking about it how do we get more inter-Africa trade, because if countries like Tanzania are going to improve their economic position in the globe, the first thing they have to do is to make sure they can trade with each other more effectively. 

It is hard to know how to interpret these statements. The absence of an acknowledgement of western neocolonialism is a bit of an oversight. 
 
Right now, in Africa -- this is true not just in Tanzania, but in Kenya and Uganda and other places -- it's easier to send flowers or coffee to Europe than it is to send it across the way.  And that means that fewer businesses are getting started and fewer jobs are being created.
 
So we want to work with the existing international structures like the United Nations, and we're supportive of the brigade that’s been shaped and in which Tanzania is making a contribution.  But ultimately, it's going to be the African countries themselves that have to follow up on the commitments that they've already made. 

All in all not a bad answer to the question.

Hat Tip Clemence Umutesi Barati on Facebook

Rwanda: Louise Mushikiwabo does batshit crazy.

New Times ( Rwanda ) reports

‘Kikwete’s remarks on FDLR shocking’

Mushikiwabo says President Kikwete could be just another sympathiser for the group whose ideology is still being fought in Rwanda and worldwide. The New Times/File.

Remarks made by President Jakaya Kikwete on the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) rebels have been described as “aberrant” and “shocking”.

The Tanzanian President suggested - during an AU summit on Sunday in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia - that Kigali should negotiate with the Congo-based rebels. The Summit tackled security issues on the continent, including instability in eastern DR Congo.

Rosebell Kagumire drew this spat to my attention on facebook this morning.

" And this madness from Rwanda shdnt be allowed by East Africans! Jakaya Kikwete calls for talks between Rwanda and FDLR and we have Rwandan genocide survivors saying he has a plan to exterminate them! why dont we respect history and not misuse these words!! "

Rosebell Kagumire ( Facebook ) 


But in an interview with Radio France Internationale (RFI) on Monday, Rwanda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Louise Mushikiwabo said Rwanda will not consider negotiating with people who are responsible for the 1994 Genocide against Tutsi.

There can be little doubt that the perpetrators of the genocide in an ideal world should not be negotiated with. We don't live in an ideal world. Imagine if you can that Nelson Mandela had decided to adopt the same approach to the apartheid regime that preceded the ANC's assumption of power. 


“Those who think that Rwanda today should sit down at the negotiating table with FDLR simply don’t know what they are talking about,” she said adding that it is unfortunate that the rebel group has sympathisers in the region, including President Kikwete himself, should he not retract his comments.


President Kikwete has very legitimate reasons for wanting negotiations Tanzania is leading MONUSCO's Africa brigade. This is to become the offensive arm of the MONUSCO deployment anything that limits the potential casualties that may be inflicted on the Africa brigade should be considered and if that means talking to the FDLR however distasteful that may be, it should be done.


Mushikiwabo told the French broadcaster that she did not expect President Kikwete to suggest that Rwanda negotiate with known terrorists since he has served as a foreign affairs minister for his country and knows the FDLR background.


Which shows Mushikiwabo's geopolitical failings and unsuitability for her role.


Minister Mushikiwabo pointed out that President Kikwete could be just another sympathiser for the group whose ideology is still being fought in Rwanda and worldwide.

Ignorance springs to mind.


“There are many spokespeople for the FDLR. Some are ideologically aligned to the FDLR. We stopped the Genocide but we didn’t stop the ideology,” she added.

That amounts to a major admission of failure on Rwanda's part. Alex Engwete  points out on this issue.

" Mushikiwabo, who has the reputation in the DRC of a mudslinger extraordinaire, is the only person in the region who doesn't see the logic in Kikwete's statement." 

The FDLR is made up of members who are largely responsible for the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. The group, named by the UN as a terrorist organisation, has been involved in creating instability in eastern Congo along with several armed militia roaming in the region and it attacked Rwanda twice last year, killing two people.

After 20 years ? I doubt it. Yes they are rebels but most of them would have been children when the 1994 genocide occurred.
Reactions from experts

At the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the African Union- celebrated last weekend in Addis Ababa, a meeting involving parties concerned by the Addis Ababa Peace, Security, and Cooperation Framework for the Democratic Republic of Congo and the region signed in February was held, during which President Kikwete called for all-encompassing talks with belligerents in the Congo.

Something that would seem very reasonable to me.

He reportedly told participants at the meeting, including Rwandan and Ugandan Presidents Paul Kagame and Yoweri Museveni, that the recently deployed UN brigade will only be able to help temporarily, essentially calling for all the concerned parties to enter into talks with rebels.

I find that hard to believe. Mind you I wouldn't blame Tanzania one bit for starting to get disheartened given the stupidity both the DR Congo and Rwanda are indulging in at the moment.


The Tanzanian President suggested that Rwanda engages in direct talks with the FDLR and that President Museveni holds talks with the rebels from the Allied Democratic Forces-National Army for the Liberation of Uganda (ADF-NALU) that is opposed to his government.

Several experts and analysts in Rwanda reacted to Kikwete’s comments with condemnation.

Professor Pierre Rwanyindo, Director of the Kigali-based Institute of Research and Dialogue for Peace (IRDP) told The New Times yesterday that negotiations with the FDLR are simply impossible and Kikwete seems to “ignore the history”.

“He (Kikwete) should first ask himself how FDLR ended up in Congo since they are not Congolese. The Rwandan government encourages all Rwandan refugees to return home, but the FDLR just want to attack Rwanda because of the crimes they committed during the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi,” Rwanyindo said.

Foxtrot Foxtrot Sierra. Who is ignoring history here ? Interesting what happens to Rwandans who return home though.

Insult to Rwandans

The Chairperson of Parliament’s Foreign Affairs committee, MP Gideon Kayinamura, also said negotiating with the FDLR is insulting.

“You just don’t enter into negotiations with genocidaires. It’s an insult on Rwandans,” he said.

Alice Umutoni, a survivor of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi said that as Tanzania’s President, Kikwete should know better.

“Given that the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is based in Tanzania, we have no doubt that President Kikwete has been following the court proceedings and should comprehend the threat posed by the FDLR to Rwanda’s and the region’s peace and security,” Umutoni said.

Last month, the United States renewed its staked $5 million (about Rwf3.2 billion) for information leading to the arrest, transfer and conviction of FDLR’s leader Sylvestre Mudacumura.

Rwanda grow the fuck up.