Blog

When Presidents Kagame and Kabila met in Goma on August 9th 2009, marking the end of more than a decade of hostilities between Kigali and Kinshasa, it was historical.

Both leaders had decided to turn the page and literally work together towards making this region a conflict free zone, prosperous in nature and conducive to mutual business opportunities. According to many well-advised observers, this was to be the first step of a long and difficult journey.

To make this a reality, both sides had to make a show of goodwill towards the other, and by doing so prove that they were ready to go the extra mile for the sake of common interests.

This was the logic behind Rwanda’s intervention when Laurent Nkunda was marching on Goma during the war between Kinshasa and the CNDP. Rwanda would later go a step further by supporting the idea of casting aside General Nkunda for the sake of better integration of the CNDP in the new Congolese landscape.

The message was loud and clear: Kigali wanted nothing more than being in the best of terms with Kinshasa and proved it.

But with so many casualties and victims of war, so many people displaced and so much hate propaganda for so long, who in their right mind would bet on such a horse? How do you reconcile a people in such a context of fear, hate, ignorance, and worries of possible revenge killings that could potentially escalate in a never-ending cycle of violence in the region?

The leadership of both countries did in fact put in place different mechanisms meant to monitor and reinvent the future for both countries. The joint military operations and the Joint Permanent Commission (JPC) are the results of this vision. And both sides have appreciated the deliverables.

The FDLR has been pushed back and partially neutralized, the CNDP case was resolved through political means and their combatants integrated in the FARDC and the road for a closer economical integration is well underway thanks to the JPC.

The DRC, being only at the early stages of a post conflict society, has been under constant pressure from the International Donors Community through their local representatives; external powers that differ most often than not in perspective and vision on how to handle the “under reconstruction” DRC.

Even the best intentioned amongst them seems to only focus on areas of self-interest and fail to consider the local and regional dynamics and contexts.

Their failure to do so constantly puts at great risk a much too young and fragile peace. Case and point: Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. In a show of absolute disregard to the more than inappropriate timing, this not so ‘gentle’ man tweeted President Kagame to encourage the arrest of General BoscoNtaganda during the 18th commemoration of the 1994 Genocide of the Tutsi.

The timing chosen by MR. Roth goes way beyond insensitivity towards the plight of survivors of the Genocide (as this was his only message addressed to Rwanda from that organization); it was clearly meant to create a buzz at a time where all eyes were on Rwanda.

Ultimately, this move only goes to show the mercenary nature of such organizations claiming to be guided by humanitarian sentiments for the greater good of mankind.

A heavily criticized presidential election in DRC gave the Western donors’ society the opportunity to exercise quite some pressure and maintain a grip on the newly re-elected President Kabila.

France for instance threatened to cut back on development cooperation and to move the next Francophonie Summit scheduled to be hosted by the DRC to another country. Really?!!! As if France was a criminal free country! Last time I checked, it was and still is a safe haven for genocide perpetrators and war criminals.

The pressure on President Kabila went up ten levels when he was asked to hand out General BoscoNtaganda who had previously integrated the National Army three years ago alongside other CNDP combatants as part of the process to restore the authority of the central government and peace in the Kivu.

Despite the presence of so many UN troops on the ground, the international community was not ready to do the job; the responsibility was left to the Congolese. Amani Leo, UmojaWetu, the integration and pacification of Eastern Congo was to be sacrificed on the altar of Western Donors.

The war that ensued from this pressure is today indeed jeopardizing the process of pacification and reconstruction started in 2009. The number of victims, deaths and rapes and the displaced populations has simply skyrocketed as a result of this.

Is this the outcome expected by the ICC, HRW and the West?
How will this all end? Who will pick up the pieces of a broken down DRC? How close are we of falling back to square one? For now Kinshasa is not healing the wounds but rather deepening them.

More actors have now taken center stage. FDLR fighters are very active again and so are the militia, the Mai Mai and others, putting the Congolese populations of the Kivu at more risk, while making life impossible for President Kabila.

How deep do we have to descend in horror? If the Congolese government persists in this conflict it will be even more difficult to move out of it; like quicksand it will drag the DRC deeper into problems. And a small movement like the M23 or otherwise will have all the reasons to grow and challenge Kinshasa.

During the last High-level meeting of the JPC in Kigali, the Congolese Foreign Affairs Minister said, and I quote: “…if love exists, it needs to be shown or materialized”, end quote. What more can Rwanda do to show the “love”?
Rwanda’s support went far beyond what normally is expected from a close friend.

Reasonably, President Kabila should know that in the short or the long run he can count more on Rwanda and the region than on the International Community.

A homegrown solution is worth much more than Washington, Paris and Brussels, ICC or HRW’s vision of the future for the DRC. On that inevitable day when the eventually turns away from them, the Congolese will be left with only their neighbors to contend with. So I ask you again: “Who will pick up the pieces?”

In the past, when the global economy weakened, sub-Saharan Africa fared very badly. Not so in recent years.

While the global economy spluttered last year, the region notched up five per cent growth, with some low-income countries growing even faster.

Even in the depths of the global economic recession in 2009, most countries in the region carried on growing.

So, what is different now? And what are the chances that the region’s solid growth performance will continue even if the world economy runs into further problems – for example, if euro zone financial problems intensify or oil prices surge again?

My assessment is that, despite these global risks, the outlook for sub-Saharan Africa remains positive.

Consider first what has happened since the eruption of the global financial crisis nearly four years ago.

While output in many advanced economies has yet to return to pre-crisis levels, growth in sub-Saharan Africa has stayed within sight of the boom period of 2004-08, when low income countries’ growth averaged 6%.

However, some middle income countries in the region – including South Africa – have been more severely affected by global problems, reflecting their closer integration into the world economy.

Since the global crisis began, only emerging Asia has outpaced the growth of sub-Saharan Africa among the world’s major regions—and the IMF expects a broadly similar outcome in 2012, with sub-Saharan Africa growing by about 5 ½%.

Despite strong adverse shocks in recent years linked to political strife, repeated droughts, and the global crisis, Kenya still fared quite well, recording robust growth rates of 5.8% in 2010 and 4.4 % in 2011.

Moreover, fiscal discipline has been maintained even with strong spending pressures, public debt levels remain sustainable, financial inclusion has made remarkable progress, and recent inflationary pressures are being addressed through a tightening of monetary policy.

These developments testify not only to the resilience of Kenya’s private-sector led economy, but also that economic reforms implemented with the support of the IMF’s Extended Credit Facility have started paying real dividends.

This is a very welcome change from sub-Saharan Africa’s low growth and economic crises in the 1980s and 1990s.

Clearly, many factors lie behind this increased resilience. The region is, by and large, more stable politically; commodity prices have moved in favour of many of its exporters; and, crucially, most governments have pursued prudent economic policies and growth-supporting reforms.

In particular, economic policies in the last decade have been directed firmly toward economic stability and market liberalisation.

Inflation has been generally tamed, foreign reserves have risen, and debt burdens have been reduced – thanks, in part, to debt relief.

As a result, investment levels have risen steadily, banking systems are playing an expanded role in attracting savings and providing loans, and the adoption of new technologies is boosting labour productivity.

Robust economic policies also served sub-Saharan Africa well when the global crisis hit. Because inflation was low, and government fiscal positions were generally sound, countries were able to take measures to offset the sudden drop in demand for their exports.

Strong domestic deposit bases largely insulated African banking systems from global financial stresses.

As long as growth remains robust, governments should focus on improving their fiscal positions and build up sufficient cushions to be able to respond in the event of further global shocks.

Gudmundsson is the IMF Resident Representative, Nairobi Kenya