Kinshasa/ Kigali – After years of simmering hostilities and a spiraling humanitarian crisis in eastern Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda are poised to sign a U.S.-brokered peace agreement this Friday—marking what could be the most ambitious international effort yet to end the long-running conflict that has killed millions.

The accord, reportedly crafted during months of quiet diplomacy under the Trump-era U.S. Africa policy framework, follows renewed violence and regional tensions fueled by the resurgence of the M23 rebel group. While the DRC and Rwanda are not officially at war, Kinshasa accuses Kigali of militarily supporting the rebels—allegations Rwanda strongly denies.

The latest push for peace comes amid growing interest from Washington in the DRC’s untapped mineral wealth. Critics are warning the deal may be less about stability and more about securing access to cobalt, coltan, and other strategic minerals essential to Western tech and defense sectors.

Background: A War That Never Really Ended

The roots of the DRC-Rwanda conflict date back to the 1994 Rwandan genocide, after which thousands of Hutu militants fled into eastern Congo. Rwanda’s repeated attempts to neutralize them ignited the First and Second Congo Wars, drawing in regional powers and leaving behind a legacy of armed groups, weak governance, and systemic exploitation of Congo’s resources.

To this day, over 100 militias operate in eastern DRC, many with ethnic or economic motivations. One of the most powerful is the M23, a rebel movement made up primarily of Congolese Tutsis. Originally formed in 2012, it accuses the Congolese government of marginalization and exclusion. The group’s resurgence in 2022 has seen it capture key cities like Goma and Bukavu, despite international condemnation.

A 2022 UN report pointed to active Rwandan military involvement in the DRC, including the presence of up to 4,000 troops supporting M23—allegations that led to U.S. sanctions against senior Rwandan officers. Kigali, in turn, accuses Kinshasa of backing FDLR remnants—the same Hutu rebels responsible for the 1994 genocide.

What’s New in This Peace Plan?

While the final text of the agreement has not been made public, negotiation drafts suggest it contains three key pillars:

According to diplomatic sources, the deal also includes provisions for the disarmament and integration of non-state actors, as well as plans to repatriate displaced civilians and refugees.

Qatar reportedly played a supporting role in the mediation process, with its Emir hosting President Félix Tshisekedi and President Paul Kagame in rare face-to-face talks in March.

A Peace Deal or a Resource Pact?

The peace push coincides with U.S. interest in securing strategic minerals. Under a proposal floated by the Tshisekedi government earlier this year, Kinshasa offered Washington “minerals-for-stability” guarantees. This has sparked concern among regional analysts, who fear that foreign involvement may be less about peacebuilding and more about control over DRC’s vast mineral deposits.

“Peace without justice is just polished exploitation,” warns Lindani Zungu, a pan-African political economist. “If this deal simply swaps old warlords for multinational corporations, then we’ve only reshuffled the players—not changed the game.”

Can It Hold?

Skepticism lingers over the durability of this deal, especially in a region where past ceasefires have crumbled quickly. The DRC’s weak governance structures, rampant corruption, and an under-resourced judiciary have long enabled cycles of violence to continue unchecked.

According to Kambale Musavuli of the Center for Congo Research, the path to sustainable peace must go beyond elite agreements.

“Accountability is non-negotiable. There must be a transparent process to address past atrocities, systemic looting, and political manipulation—from both Congolese leaders and foreign actors,” he told WafricNews.

Meanwhile, ethnic tensions continue to smolder. The M23 claims to represent the grievances of Congolese Tutsis who face discrimination and violence—allegations the Congolese state has done little to investigate or remedy. However, many observers accuse the group of using this as cover for regional geopolitical ambitions, potentially destabilizing the region further.

What Next?

Even if signed, the deal would only be the beginning. Implementation—disarmament, refugee return, resource sharing, and justice for atrocities—remains the real test.

Observers say the international community must resist the urge to declare victory prematurely and instead invest in long-term accountability, infrastructure, and institution-building in eastern DRC.

“This deal must not become another paper promise,” warned one civil society leader from Goma. “We’ve had plenty of those.”