Policy Brief by the Senior Advisor

to the President of the United States

Contact: Z0136635

THE US AND THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF

CONGO: SEEKING STABILITY AND PEACE
 THE US AND THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF
CONGO: SEEKING STABILITY AND PEACE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since 1996, more than 6 million people
have died in violent conflict in the DRC.1
A combination of historic turmoil, corrupt
governance and ethnic tensions has led to
intensified atrocities, ethnic cleansing,
slavery and crimes against humanity. The
Tshisekedi government has failed to
deescalate the situation, ignoring sanctions
and arming volatile militias as a form of
counterinsurgency. The US must lead the
international community and act in order
to avoid further escalation and large-scale
genocide. Beyond morality, this crisis
threatens the US’ economic interests due
to the DRC’s large cobalt supply and
threatens regional stability through ethnic
conflict and an increased refugee flow.
The US should lead a peacekeeping
coalition that would improve and extend
the existing MONUSO operation in the
DRC.
CONTEXT AND SCOPE
OF THE CRISIS
Despite an ostensibly legitimate and
peaceful transfer of power in 2019, the
Democratic Republic of Congo (the DRC)
has found itself in the hold of an escalating
humanitarian crisis. The combination of
rising insurgencies, a contested presidency,
1
http://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-
conflicts/congo
1
ethnic tensions, corruption and the
country’s lucrative natural resources has
led to a rise in modern slavery, ethnic
killings and serious human rights breaches.
This section will outline the threefold
significance of this crisis through its
nature, root causes and US policy
implications.
THE PROBLEM
The crisis in the DRC is a humanitarian
emergency. Amid the DRC’s snowballing
civil war, a recent UN report has found
evidence of crimes against humanity. Both
insurgency movements and government
backed militias have been weaponizing
rape and sexual violence against women
and children. There has been a meteoric
rise in modern slavery and a continual use
of child soldiers. Forms of ethnic cleansing
are budding, resulting in targeted ethnic
killings and reports of Luba women being
enslaved and systematically impregnated
by their captors. Traffickers and rebels
have used the combination of this crisis
environment, the DRC’s rich natural
resources and an increasing global demand
for cobalt to force refugees, ethnic
minorities and children to work in illicit
artisanal mines. In turn, these illicit
activities have exacerbated other illegal
activities such as drug trafficking and
forced prostitution. The US economy
depends on Congolese cobalt, as the US
works to atone for its own stain of slavery
domestically, its economic involvement in
these activities is a case for concern.
Secondly, the DRC crisis is a threat to
regional stability. In an already unstable
region, a civil war and ethnic strife will
have a spillover effect both in terms of
conflict escalation and an increased
refugee flow. Indeed, the spillover from
the Rwandan civil war in 1996 is still felt
today in the DRC and is a contributing
factor to this conflict. The crisis in the
DRC does not only threaten US morals but
also its national interests. Citizens
tormented by genocide and disenchanted
by the international community do not
make good neighbours, both regionally
and globally. Genocide and crimes against
humanity goad citizens into accepting
violence as an acceptable vehicle to
change, while children radicalised by
extremists are more vulnerable to terrorist
recruitment. Hence, the escalation of the
DRC crisis and further radicalisation is a
threat to the US democratic vision of a
humane world, democratic peace, human
rights and progress. In an increasingly
globalised world, US interests are no
longer confined to its own borders, nor do
its borders offer protection from
international difficulties. Furthermore, in
failing to provide prompt intervention, the
US will bear even greater cots in aiding
millions of refugees and superintending
wider regional reconstruction. Left
unchecked, the DRC crisis will undermine
American interests, namely in terms of
security, moral and economic concerns.
Thirdly, this crisis threatens global
economic activity. The DRC is the
world’s largest producer of Cobalt,
recently added to the list of 35 minerals
critical to the US economy. Cobalt is vital
2
to the production of mobile phones,
electric devices and electric vehicles. A
disruption in its supply threatens to
disadvantage US companies such as Ford
or General Motors in the global race to
electrify their vehicles. Almost half of the
DRC’s cobalt output is owned by China,
any disruption in China’s cobalt supply is
going to have ramifications for the US
economy. These concerns are only
amplified by the new laws backed by
President Félix Tshisekedi which would
subject foreign companies to increased
taxes and royalties. These laws are a
symptom of the wider problem of
Tshisekedi’s corruption and volatility. The
situation in the DRC will be bad for
Chinese business, potentially resulting in a
foreign policy shift from non-
interreference to calls for the President to
step down. Hence, as the Congolese
political crisis continues to expand, it will
disrupt the US’ crucial supply of cobalt
and create further global instability.
THE ROOT CAUSES
The crisis in the DRC is complex and
multifaceted, resulting from decades of
political turmoil, foreign interference,
corruption and ethnic tensions. This
section will briefly express the root
complexity of the crisis - a combination of
political corruption and ethnic tensions.
Weak and corrupt governance is integral to
understanding the current DRC’s crisis.
Despite heralds of the Congo being a
nascent democracy, the 2019 general
election was rigged, giving Tshisekedi a
highly contested, illegitimate, victory.
Though still a welcome respite from
Kabila, Tshisekedi’s regime has allowed
corruption and the humanitarian crisis to
fester. The government’s capacity has been
depleted by its recent political history, a
persisting kakistocracy, decades of conflict
and an inability to organise planned and
legitimate responses to the DRC’s crises.
From the kleptocracy and repression of
president Mobotu Sese Seko (1965-1997),
the violent assassination of Laurent-Désiré
Kabila (1997-2001), to the political
repression and neglect of Joseph Kabila
(2001- 2019). The further one reaches
back into the DRC’s past, the more
grounding for lasting instability is found.
The term ‘civil war’ does not do justice to
a crisis with over 30 armed groups,
militias, insurgencies and
counterinsurgencies. This conflict is not
about clear-cut competing ideologies,
religion or philosophical differences. The
current animosity is a result of political,
social and historical rot from decades of
bad governance, mistreatment and
corruption.
The 1996 Rwandan civil war created a
steady flow of refugees and increased
ethnic tensions in an already weak state.
More recently, uprisings such as the
Kamwina Nsapu rebellion have stemmed
from ethnic tensions and the government’s
intolerance to political dissent, leading to
the Nsapu rebels engaging in ethnic
cleansing of non-Luba people, enslaving
civilians and recruiting child soldiers.
Instead of countering the Nsapu rebellion,
the government-backed Bana Mura
militant launched attacks against the Luba
people, enslaving and massacring them.
Hence, the government’s response to rising
insurgencies and rebellions have only
inflamed the DRC’s civil war and its
myriad of human rights abuses.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE US
3
In brief bullet points, this section reiterates
the policy implications of the DRC’s crisis
for the US.
 The global economy: The Congo
crisis has the ammunition to disrupt
economic activity globally, potentially
obstructing the supply chain of
products vital to the functioning of the
global economy and wider
international society.
 Regional instability: The instability in
the DRC is likely to spread across its
neighbouring countries, endangering
US allies and partners. An unstable
region threatens the US’ ideals of a
humane world, democratic peace,
human rights and progress. This
threatens the US as a global moral
leader.
 Renewed refugee crisis: An increased
refugee flow will be costly to the US
and the UN in long term aid provisions
and humanitarian crisis management.
 The US as a moral leader: the DRC
crisis overturns the US’ democratic
values and renders its words hollow.
Standing by while innocent civilians
are massacred, enslaved and raped
weakens the US’ expedient position as
a recognised moral leader.
POLICY ALTERNATIVES
This policy brief recommends the US
partners with the DRC’s existing
peacekeeping mission MONUSCO in
order to create a peacekeeping coalition.
Before this recommendation is explored,
this section will outline other policy
alternatives and explain why they are not
viable options for the US in this situation.
This brief has identified 6 possible routes
of action for the US: (1) deploying ground
troops (2) air strikes (3) continue with
containment (4) supporting or arming the
opposition (5) strengthen the existing UN
peacekeeping mission (6) do nothing. By
keeping US domestic interests at the centre
of this analysis and weighing policy costs
and benefits, this brief has come to the
following conclusions.
A criterion of consideration vital to this
decision is whether a policy would be
approved domestically. In this vein, a
‘boots on the ground’ approach would be
too costly Biden’s political subsistence.
The US is still carrying the weight of the
Covid-19 pandemic, a costly military
intervention is inadvisable and would be
received with contempt domestically.
Opinion polls are still fragile, with Biden
still establishing himself as president elect.
The potential loss of US lives through such
military intervention would be too
politically costly. Though air strikes would
prevent a loss of US lives, they are not a
good fit for the DRC crisis. Due the
amount of warring fraction and the
complexity of the issue, air strikes would
be difficult to deploy and are unlikely to
bring about the intended result. What is
more, the limited public awareness of this
issue does not bode well for public support
of such an invasive operation. Further,
Arming the opposition in the DRC would
not necessarily achieve the desired
humanitarian outcome. A legitimate
opposition is unclear and the potential for
crisis escalation is high with this policy. In
order to save face, retain the DRC’s
sovereignty and avoid a prolonged war,
this route should be avoided.
Moreover, inaction is no longer a viable
policy for the US. The extent of the crisis,
4
its continual intensification as well as the
previously outlined policy implications
have made inaction costly both
domestically and globally. Passivity would
endanger US credibility as a moral leader,
seeing further regional deterioration,
which would cost the US economy directly
though aid payments and inadvertently
through a potential global cobalt shortage.
Similarly, the US’ current approach of
containment, sanctions and diplomatic
pressures have proven ineffective. Though
the Biden administration has already
increased sanctions against Tshisekedi,
this appears to have only angered the
President, with no notable changed. This
approach should therefore be reconsidered.
POLICY
RECOMMENDATION
Instead of continuing to use sanctions and
diplomatic pressure, the US should take an
active peacekeeping approach to the crisis.
Last year, UN resolution 2556 (2020)
extended the MONUSCO peacekeeping
mission in the DRC to December 2021 and
approved its gradual exit. However, the
current escalation of the DRC’s
humanitarian crisis stresses the continued
necessity of peacekeeping in the DRC.
This brief proposes a continuation of the
MONUSCO mission, supported by the
DRC, with improved capacity and a wider
coalition of states involved. This proposal
would involve strengthening diplomatic
relations between the US, the African
Union, the EU and other states invested in
MONUSCO peacekeeping. The US would
share its expertise, peacekeeping troops
and resources to support those already
involved in MONUSCO, making it more
efficient as the Congo crisis escalates. The
US would act in accordance with its role as  Highlight that this is a win-win
a global leader to encourage other states to situation for all parties, it is a
pool their resources, preventing the crisis multilateral approach that ensures
from escalating. existing peacekeeping structures
are not eroded, ensuring the
This peacekeeping coalition would
African Union continues to play a
support:
role in African peacekeeping while
 Civilian protection: Especially in the the mission receives more
eastern part of the Congo. The priority attention, funding and expertise.
is prevention and deterrence through  All states on the security council
working with local communities, have a vested interest. Other than
maintaining a stark presence and serious humanitarian moral
encouraging local mediation initiatives. incentives, cobalt is vital for the
Particular attention should be drawn to global economy and a resource of
vulnerable communities such as ethnic interest to the council. Though
minorities and internally displaced China traditionally takes a non-
people. Similarly, the mission should interventionist approach, its heavy
lay the groundwork for NGOs to work interest in the cobalt industry
effectively and in tandem with our makes it likely to support western
operations. efforts in the DRC.
 Stable and good governance: The
mission should support the
stabilisation of public institutions and
governance. For instance, supporting
the state in developing a functional
justice and security system. Similarly,
the mission should aid the government
in developing a functional system to
monitor and police mining activities,
ensuring forced and child labour is
prosecuted and adequately
discouraged.

For this policy to pass, the US should call

a UN Security Council meeting to bring
the issue on the negotiating table. In order
for these recommendations to be enacted,
the following needs to be brought up at the
meeting:

 The US needs to put pressure on

the security council to extend
MONUSCO, its scale, capacity and
stakeholders.

5
 CONSULTED SOURCES

Redd, S.B., (2005). The Influence of Advisers and Decision Strategies on Foreign Policy Choices:
President Clinton's Decision to Use Force in Kosovo. International Studies Perspectives, 6(1),
pp.129–150.
 Redd’s (2005) analysis of Clinton’s intervention Kosovo 1999 used to inform how
poliheuristic theory can be employed in the DRC. This informed the policy alternatives
section.

Minz, A. (2004). How Do Leaders Make Decisions?. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48:3–13

 Helped to narrow down policy recommendation by outlining domestic politics as a

noncompensatory option and outlining outcomes that would damage it.

Boin, A. et al., (2005). The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership Under Pressure
 Framing: Choosing to set the tone of the brief by continually describing the situation
as a ‘crisis’, the US as a ‘moral leader’ defending democratic values. This was
intended to dramatize the situation, appealing to the government’s existing ‘threat
biases’.

Matthew Levinger, (2015). A Core National Security Interest: Framing Atrocities

Prevention. Politics and governance, 3(4), pp.26–43.
 Incorporating ‘security’, ‘moralistic’ and ‘legalistic’ language into the brief (as
Levinger outlines Obama did in Libya).

Albright, K.M., & Cohen W.S. (2008). Preventing Genocide: A Blueprint for US
Policymakers
 Used for jargon and framing such as genocide being against US national morals and
interests.