As the United States showcases a “historic” peace agreement in Central Africa, heavy fighting continues in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
On Thursday, US President Donald Trump will bring Rwandan President Paul Kagame and DRC President Felix Tshisekedi together in the newly renamed Donald J. Trump US Institute of Peace.
The White House says the leaders will sign what Trump calls a peace agreement. It is presented as part of a package that blends security commitments with an economic and strategic minerals partnership.
But on the ground, the war is far from over.
In the Congolese province of South Kivu on Wednesday, officials described an escalating humanitarian disaster.
“Many houses have been bombed, and there are many dead,” said Rene Chubaka Kalembire, an administrative official in the M23-held town of Kaziba.
The M23 rebel movement has captured major cities including Goma and Bukavu in recent months, triggering mass displacement and civilian deaths. It is a movement described by Kinshasa, the UN, and independent researchers as Rwandan-backed, an accusation Kigali denies.
Kinshasa questions Rwanda’s intentions
At a Washington press conference on Wednesday, DW correspondent Janelle Dumalaon pressed Congolese officials on how they interpret the intensifying clashes.
“It’s just a proof that Rwanda doesn’t want peace,” said DRC Minister of Communication Patrick Muyaya.
“Since the [signing] of this agreement, we are doing our best to make sure we did our part… Peace for us means withdrawal of Rwandan troops, means [of stopping] any kind of support to M23,” Muyaya told DW.
Muyaya added that only once this happens can the region “start talking quietly about peace, about development, about integration.”
Asked what Kinshasa expects from the Trump administration, Muyaya offered both gratitude, and a pointed reminder of Washington’s leverage.
“We are very happy for what President Trump did… This time, the objective is to make sure we bring back peace.”
He said the United States has “tools” to ensure Rwanda respects its “commitments,” including troop withdrawal and halting all support to M23.
DRC presidential spokesperson Tina Salama also insisted that Washington’s involvement should translate into “concrete” results on the ground.
Kinshasa, she earlier told reporters, rejects claims that it is trading minerals for peace.
“This isn’t selling out on minerals to the Americans… It’s not peace for minerals as has been said.”
A peace deal overshadowed by minerals and by war
Trump has repeatedly celebrated what he calls a string of global peace “victories” since returning to office in January. DR Congo, he argues, is next on that list. He says it is also a gateway to securing US access to critical minerals essential for electric vehicles and advanced electronics.
DRC holds some of the world’s largest reserves of cobalt, as well as other strategic resources including copper, tantalum, gold, and lithium.
The deal expected to be inked on Thursday is structured around several pillars: a security agreement purporting to end the conflict, an economic integration framework to draw Western investment into the Great Lakes region, and a “strategic partnership” granting the US a role in the exploitation and development of natural resources.
For critics, the arrangement exposes Washington’s priorities, placing mineral access on the same level as, or even above, the urgent need for peace.
“For the US, this is just an economic deal…” Passy Mubalama, a leading Congolese democracy and human rights advocate, told DW.
“Unfortunately, they are not taking into account the protection of the people in the region. Children are still dying, women are still being raped.”
Rwanda says ‘peace is a process’
Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe, speaking to Reuters, acknowledged recent fighting but insisted the situation was improving.
“Peace is a process… There is a kind of stability on positions. There’s no more territory expansion,” he said.
He blamed the Congolese army for ceasefire violations, accusing the government’s armed forces (FARDC) of using “fighter jets and attack drones” against M23 and civilians.
He also defended Rwanda’s military presence in eastern Congo as “defensive measures” that will only end once Congo neutralizes the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a Rwandan Hutu armed group with links to the 1994 genocide.
“We are yet to see any… operations against the FDLR that can give us trust the DRC is of good faith,” he said.
Researcher challenges Kigali’s narrative
But Rwandan researcher and human-rights defender Samuel Baker Byansi sharply challenges Kigali’s narrative.
“Rwanda is lying that its troops are inside DRC for defensive purposes,” he claimed.
“It has been recycled for years, whenever the Kagame regime wants to justify a new deployment or an escalation. The idea that everything hinges on the FDLR being neutralised has become a political tool more than an honest security argument.”
Byansi argues that the FDLR threat serves as a convenient pretext for Kigali’s ambitions in eastern Congo.
“Kagame’s regime uses it to mask its broader ambitions inside eastern DRC,” he said. “If Kagame’s real goal were peace, we would have seen consistent demobilisation, transparency around troops and movement in that region, and cooperation mechanisms already in place. Instead, we have seen the opposite.”
He points to expanding areas under M23 and Rwandan Defense Forces influence.
“Local administration in areas seized by rebels operate under Rwanda-allied influence, and minerals continue to flow out through illicit channels… These are not accidents, it is a revised strategy.”
According to Byansi, history shows that Kigali rarely honors withdrawal commitments.
“Look at the previous ceasefire, the 2013 commitment, the Nairobi and Rwanda processes, and even frameworks from the 1990s. Rwanda always finds a way to stay in the DRC — through proxy groups, intelligence networks, or special forces. Anytime Kigali signs something, military activity resumes shortly after.”
Ceasefire history breeds skepticism
Human-rights defenders, activists, and civilians in eastern DRC say the ceremonies in Washington feel disconnected from daily reality.
“People are still being killed… The situation is still very difficult here,” said Mubalama.
She believes Kinshasa has prioritized international legitimacy over civilian safety and argues that the US should refuse to sign the deal while war continues.
“They should ensure that the conflict ends, then the economic agreement can follow.”
The Washington Accords come after years of ceasefires that never held. Even this week, both sides accused each other of undermining the new peace process. M23 claims FARDC launched attacks on its positions, while the Congolese government insists the rebel group has continued expanding offensives across the east.
This is a point Muyaya insists on.
“The fighting on the ground shows a lack of seriousness by Rwanda. It just proves that Rwanda doesn’t want this,” he said.
Rwanda rejects that.
The United States, meanwhile, maintains that the new deal represents the most ambitious opportunity yet to end a conflict that has killed millions over three decades.
Janelle Dumalaon contributed reporting
Edited by: Keith Walker
