The Presidents of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda are expected to travel to Washington next week to formally endorse a bilateral peace agreement aimed at de-escalating tensions in the mineral-rich but war-afflicted eastern Congo. The summit, anticipated for December 4, is reportedly to include discussions with US President Donald Trump as part of wider American efforts to attract Western investment to the region and assert diplomatic influence.
This high-level engagement comes after a protracted period of instability marked by the resurgence of the M23 armed group, accused of launching offensives that have displaced over 800,000 people and claimed thousands of lives in 2025 alone. Despite prior agreements signed in June and additional frameworks on regional economic integration, little substantive change has occurred on the ground.
Tina Salama, spokesperson for Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi, confirmed the Washington meeting, noting that both parties are expected to ratify previous deals. The Rwandan presidency and the White House have not yet issued public statements on the summit.
While the optics of diplomatic engagement suggest progress, scholars and observers across the continent have urged caution, noting that peace agreements in the Great Lakes region often fail not in design, but in implementation and inclusivity.
A 2022 report by the South African Institute of International Affairs argues that the M23 crisis cannot be resolved through security-based approaches alone. Instead, it is a manifestation of deeper issues involving regional mistrust, weak governance structures, and recurring patterns of exclusion and militarisation (Wolters, S. 2022. The M23 Crisis: An Opportunity to Bring Sustainable Peace to the Great Lakes Region link).
Similarly, Machibya and Sukabdi (2025) argue that tensions between Congo and Rwanda have been fuelled by unresolved historical grievances, including the role of refugee populations, the legacy of the 1994 genocide, and the perceived instrumentalisation of rebel movements for geopolitical leverage (Machibya, L. & Sukabdi, Z. 2025. The Tension in the Great Lakes Region Over the M23 Rebellion link).
In that context, Rwanda’s alleged support for M23, which it denies, continues to shape both regional diplomacy and public sentiment. A United Nations expert report published in July stated that Rwanda exercises command over the M23 group, a claim that Kigali refutes, framing its security interventions as defensive in response to the threat posed by the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), based in Congo.
The renewed peace efforts have also coincided with increased international interest in the region’s vast deposits of cobalt, tantalum, lithium and other critical minerals. However, scholars such as Fernandes (2025) caution against framing African peace processes solely through the lens of foreign trade and investment, arguing that short-term economic interests can eclipse genuine efforts at building peace with justice and local accountability (Fernandes, B. 2025. Balancing Peace-Making Aims with Strategic Trade Goals link).
Indeed, a broader pattern is emerging in which conflict resolution is increasingly externalised, with Western and Gulf powers playing key roles while African multilateral platforms remain marginalised. Yet as D. Monda (2024) argues, the leverage exercised by actors such as Rwanda—through proxies like M23—demonstrates how power asymmetries within Africa itself shape negotiations, raising important questions about the sovereignty and voice of less influential states (Monda, D. 2024. Rwanda: Punching Above Its Weight in the Great Lakes Region link).
Nevertheless, there are efforts to re-anchor peacebuilding in African frameworks. Pan-African researchers such as Filip Reyntjens (2023) highlight the necessity of reconnecting peace processes to grassroots governance, regional cooperation, and long-term institution building if cycles of violence are to be broken (Reyntjens, F. 2023. The Great Lakes Region: Thirty Years of Instability link).
President Tshisekedi has reiterated Congo’s desire for integration with neighbouring states but made clear that this cannot come at the cost of national sovereignty. As peace continues to prove elusive, analysts suggest that only an African-led process rooted in justice, history, and community participation can offer a path to genuine transformation.
The Washington meeting, while politically symbolic, must be viewed as one step in a broader and unfinished journey toward sustainable peace in one of Africa’s most contested and strategic regions. Whether it leads to meaningful change will depend less on signatures in foreign capitals and more on commitments made and kept at home.
