War and Its Causes: The Military Struggle Between Congo and Rwanda in Central Africa

The article I chose to evaluate from The Economist centers upon the ongoing military struggle between Congo and Rwanda, two impoverished, warring nations in Central Africa. On the surface, it seems like just another dispute in a heavily troubled region; but the violence is a prime illustration of the different ways war can be fought. In addition, it is a perfect example of the principal causes of war: greed, and ideological differences, and in particular ethnic conflict.

The war currently being fought in the Congo has been recurring for several years, with only occasional bouts of peace. When neither party is ready to change their point-of-view, and instead wishes to defend it at any cost, conflict will almost always ensue. There are actually several smaller issues within the larger scope of the war, one of which seems to be a difference in political ideals. A group that calls themselves the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (or the FDLR) has been trying to press their political agenda upon the country but, according to the article, "Rwanda's government has refused to negotiate directly with the FDLR". While refusing to negotiate with groups that utilize terrorism tactics is something most nations practice, in this case it is extremely ineffective; "Rwanda refuses the FDLR's demand to return and transform itself into a political party and contest elections", and by refusing to even recognize this volatile group's requests they are only endangering their citizens even further. Differing beliefs as to what should be the dominant political system have been a major source of conflict, in just about every war in the past century. Like the Cold War - another war caused by a difference in ideals - this war in Rwanda will most likely continue well into the future if the Rwandan government continues to ignore this group calling themselves the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda.

Another key reason for war, ethnic conflict, is tied heavily into the FDLR; deeply rooted in their beliefs, beneath their political agenda, exists a hatred for people of a certain ethnicity. The FDLR have been key players in ethnic conflict in this region in the past: "the Liberation of Rwanda, composed in part of former Rwandan soldiers and Hutu extremists [is] responsible for orchestrating the genocide of 800,000-plus people in Rwanda, mainly Tutsis, in 1994". This catastrophic event is remembered by many as being a horrific display of the worst side of human kind - and it is quite probable the FDLR will once again begin this cycle of ethnic cleansing, especially if they are unable to gain the attention of the government in any other way. This could mean this domestic dispute could once again become an international issue. One of the most disgusting and reprehensible forms of warfare, ethnic cleansing is certainly an effective war tactic, especially since the UN can do relatively little to counteract or punish the offenders. This group seems to have no boundaries, and will utilize whatever they can to reach their goals including terrorism, guerilla warfare, and any form of asymmetrical warfare they see fit. Kidnapping, rape, and massacring of innocent civilians occurred in the previous war, and will certainly be employed once again by this group if they feel they will receive no punishment for their actions.

In fact, this war is steadily looking more and more like the Vietnam War - an insurgency war, fought by a group backed by another country and utilizing non-traditional combat forces to destabilize (and hoping to overthrow) the current regime. Not only is Congo doing little to force the FDLR to disarm, but "credible reports support Rwanda's accusations that the Congolese army colludes with the FDLR". Congo has also accused Rwanda of aiding insurgency groups for their own gain: "Congo accused Rwanda of sending troops over the border to abet the North Kivu insurgents". Once again, as with most wars, there are several reasons for conflict, the most classic of which is greed. It is mentioned in the article that there is a struggle occurring with Rwanda and Congo "over control of North Kivu's lucrative mineral trade", and as history has shown through the Gulf War and numerous others, disputes over natural resources can quickly grow at alarmingly fast rates into more that just regional disagreements. There is simply no way to stop a fight over resources, especially when each party believes they have a right to the access and production, and especially trade, of these resources.

Should this escalate, it could be quite negative not only for the Rwandan people, but for our country as well - America is known for interfering in other countries' insurgency wars, in order to keep them from spreading or escalating into a full scale total or hedgemonic war. All in all, this domestic dispute that is barely under the world's radar, what with the huge economic issues we are facing as well as the continuing war in Iraq, could become an enormous political and humanitarian issue and even an international war. Unfortunately, as the article puts it, "if Rwanda does invade Congo again, UN troops will be unable to do much about it". Sadly, this is the case with most domestic disputes; without an effective trans-national governing institution, other nation-states can do little effectively (or at least legally, and with the approval of other nation-states) to stop genocide and insurgency war from occurring.

Work Cited
"Old Foes, New Threats". The Economist. October 16, 2008. The Economist Online.