Geneva Peace Talks Between DRC and Rwanda Face High Hurdles Amid Eastern Congo Fighting

Diplomats from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda have convened in Geneva for high-stakes negotiations scheduled for September 16 and 17, testing the durability of a peace framework signed in Washington more than a year ago. Despite extensive regional and international diplomacy aimed at curbing hostilities, heavy fighting persists across eastern Congo, leaving local populations skeptical of whether conference-room discussions can genuinely alter conditions on the ground.

The diplomatic standoff between Kinshasa and Kigali remains deeply entrenched, driven by overlapping disputes regarding armed militias, cross-border military incursions, and sweeping territorial gains made by rebel forces. Even as bilateral delegations meet in Switzerland to discuss the implementation of their bilateral accords, the Congolese government is simultaneously engaged in a separate, Qatar-mediated negotiation track involving the political and military alliance that backs the M23 rebel movement.

At the center of the dispute between the two neighboring nations is the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, widely known as the FDLR. The armed group was established in the aftermath of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, when former Rwandan soldiers and militia fighters responsible for the killings fled across the border into the territory of eastern DRC. The Rwandan government has consistently identified the enduring presence of this group along its borders as a fundamental threat to its national security.

Under the terms established by the Washington framework, the Congolese government pledged to neutralize the FDLR through targeted processes, including disarmament and demobilization. Kinshasa insists that these operations are actively moving forward according to plan. Congolese Minister of Information and Government Spokesperson Patrick Muyaya reaffirmed that the administration is honoring its commitments to neutralize the group through established demobilization programs, while simultaneously condemning Kigali for maintaining expansionist ambitions on Congolese land.

Rwandan leadership, however, has expressed strong skepticism regarding Kinshasa’s progress. Late last month, Rwandan President Paul Kagame publicly dismissed the measures taken against the FDLR as insufficient, underscoring Kigali’s insistence on verifiable and robust guarantees that anti-Rwanda insurgent groups will not be permitted to operate from Congolese soil. Kigali has repeatedly denied that it harbors territorial ambitions, framing its posture entirely around national border protection.

The disagreement illustrates a fundamental clash of principles between the two governments. While Kigali maintains that its actions represent vital security measures to shield its territory from hostile cross-border factions, Kinshasa views the presence of foreign forces inside its borders as an unacceptable violation of national sovereignty. This profound mutual mistrust continues to complicate negotiations in Geneva, as neither government appears prepared to modify its military posture without firm concessions from the other.

Compounding the crisis is the rapid territorial expansion of the M23 rebel group, which altered the balance of power across eastern Congo after capturing the strategic city of Goma in January 2025 and subsequently taking Bukavu, the provincial capital of South Kivu. Although M23 is not a direct signatory to the Washington bilateral agreement, its commanding battlefield presence remains central to the broader regional instability the pact seeks to mitigate.

The M23 operates under the umbrella of the Congo River Alliance, known as the AFC, which is currently engaged in the separate dialogue facilitated by Qatar. While international mediators have divided the diplomacy into distinct tracks—bilateral state-to-state relations in Geneva and domestic political-rebel reconciliation in Qatar—the realities of the war make these issues nearly impossible to isolate. Developments in the internal rebellion directly influence Kinshasa’s strategic choices, which in turn affect the military dynamics along the Rwandan frontier.

Because these conflicts are tightly interwoven, regional observers note that a diplomatic breakthrough strictly between Kinshasa and Kigali may reduce cross-border tensions, but it would not automatically guarantee an end to internal armed combat in eastern DRC. Continued military clashes inside the country remain capable of destabilizing the wider regional security environment at any moment.

For civilians living in conflict-affected zones like Goma, the diplomatic process in Europe feels distant from their daily struggles. Local residents and activists point out that more than a year of proclaimed peace frameworks has yielded few tangible improvements for communities enduring ongoing displacement, physical danger, and devastated agricultural fields. Pro-democracy activist Josue Akuzwe Walayi expressed this frustration from Kinshasa, noting that citizens are still waiting for the promised benefits of peace while continuing to suffer from violence and loss of land.

Walayi emphasized that security arguments presented by Kigali cannot override international law or Congolese territorial integrity. He argued that the existence of the FDLR should never be used as a justification for foreign military operations within Congolese borders, maintaining that no country should build its national security at the direct expense of its neighbor's sovereignty.

Local residents who witnessed the capture of Goma, such as Sadiki Bitha, continue to monitor the Geneva discussions with cautious hope, demanding that regional leaders and international mediators establish concrete mechanisms to hold all signatories accountable to their signed agreements. Without strict enforcement, residents fear that diplomatic accords will do little to prevent further bloodshed.

On the ground, fighting has continued between the Congolese national army, supported by allied armed formations, and M23 combatants across North and South Kivu. AFC-M23 spokesperson Lawrence Kanyuka recently accused Kinshasa of launching attacks on populated centers and violating existing ceasefire understandings, claiming the rebel alliance would take measures to secure populated areas. These allegations of ceasefire breaches have not been independently confirmed.

The volatile atmosphere was further highlighted on August 27, when the AFC-M23 reported that an aircraft transporting humanitarian relief supplies and essential aid had been targeted. As delegators in Geneva attempt to salvage the Washington framework, the stark divergence between diplomatic declarations and escalating battlefield hostilities underscores the immense difficulty of breaking eastern Congo's protracted cycle of war.