The conflict in eastern Congo reveals crucial weaknesses in the Congolese military, which struggles against the M23 militia. President Tshisekedi’s efforts to strengthen the army have failed, leaving him isolated and with waning support. M23, backed by Rwanda, has captured significant territories, illustrating the dual impact of external interference and internal disarray in Congo’s military capabilities.
The ongoing conflict in eastern Congo highlights significant weaknesses within the Congolese military, which has a history of corruption, extortion, and abuse. The army is undermanned, underfunded, and suffers from internal divisions, leading to its inability to confront the M23 militia, which has made territorial gains, capturing key cities and strategic airports in the region.
President Félix Tshisekedi attempted to enhance military capabilities to tackle the armed groups in the east, but his efforts have faltered against the advancing M23. As a result, he faces diminished support domestically, stalled peace negotiations with regional stakeholders, and limited backing from the international community.
The M23 militia is reportedly supported by Rwanda, Congo’s smaller neighbor, which has allegedly provided training and resources to the rebel forces. While Rwanda acknowledges its military presence in Congo, it denies any direct control over M23’s operations, complicating the conflict’s dynamics.
“This conflict has two sides,” stated Fred Bauma, director of the Ebuteli research institute, pointing to both Rwandan support for M23 and the weak governance within Congo as contributing factors to the instability in the region. Additionally, President Tshisekedi noted in a recent interview that the army suffers from foreign infiltration, which he attributes to the inaction of previous administrations.
The struggles faced by the Congolese army underscore the complex interplay of internal weaknesses and external influences contributing to the ongoing conflict with the M23 militia. The matter is exacerbated by the army’s lack of resources, strategic missteps by the government, and foreign involvement, emphasizing the need for comprehensive reforms and international support to restore stability in the region.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
