Background and History
What’s unfolding in the Kivu Region of the Eastern DR Congo is not an internal dispute — it’s a long-engineered campaign of aggression, driven by external forces with deep political and economic interests.. It is the result of decades of calculated aggression and foreign interference — driven primarily by the Rwandan government under Paul Kagame. Since the invasion of Congo in 1996, Rwanda has consistently violated Congolese sovereignty, using military force and armed proxies like M23 to destabilise the region, exploit its resources, and weaken the Congolese state.
This manufactured chaos has never been about ethnic protection or border security. It has always been about control — control of Congo’s minerals, its people, and its future. Under Kagame’s leadership, Rwanda has exported war to our soil while presenting itself abroad as a model of stability and progress. The world applauds Rwanda while Congolese families bury their dead.
As sons and daughters of Grand Kivu, we carry the memory of this history. We were born in the land where this war began. And we are the ones who will expose the truth — because only through truth can there be justice, and only through justice can there be peace.
Below are some of the key events that reveal how Rwanda interference has fueled decades of conflict in Eastern Congo.
Post-genocide spillover (1994 onward)
After the Rwandan genocide, an estimated 1.5 million Hutu refugees—including extremist FDLR fighters—fled into eastern DRC. Tensions grew as Rwanda cited these groups as a security threat, justifying cross-border interventions in North and South Kivu
M23 resurgence (2012 & 2022–2025)
Initially active around 2012, the March 23 Movement (M23) claimed the government violated a 2009 integration deal. The group lay dormant until it re-emerged in 2022, coinciding with new offensives backed by regional forces
Regional Backing & Proxy Warfare
Rwanda’s involvement
A UN expert report from 2023–24 documented 3,000–4,000 Rwandan Defense Forces fighting alongside M23 in key eastern territories (e.g., Nyiragongo, Rutshuru, Masisi). They provided arms, SHORAD, antidrone systems, and operational command over rebel forces. These actions enabled M23 to ground FARDC air assets
Uganda’s role and AFC formation
UN reports suggest Uganda also supported M23 and helped form the Alliance Fleuve Congo (AFC), which gives M23 a political face. This is part of a broader Tutsi-led RDC regional competition where Uganda counters Rwanda’s influence through proxies like M23, CNLC, and others
Declare M23 a Terrorist Group
Donation is a great way to support the Humanum community. Your contribution will help create significant changes and progress in our society.
Sign Our Petition form
United States United States 
Canada 
South Africa 
United Kingdom Canada Canada Canada 
Tanzania United Kingdom United States United States South Africa South Africa South Africa South Africa United Kingdom 
Congo (Kinshasa) Canada Canada Military Campaigns & Humanitarian Toll
Key offensives of 2025
January–February saw M23’s lightning campaigns: capturing Goma (28 Jan) and Bukavu (5–16 Feb), turning them into their stronghold. FARDC struggled to hold airfields like Kavumu, and Burundian and regional forces were forced to withdraw
Human rights and civilian impact
M23/AFC forces have been accused of terrorizing civil society—including threats, detentions, forced labor, executions, sexual violence, and repression of journalists and activists. Human Rights Watch highlights threats to independent voices in Goma and Bukavu
Humanitarian emergency
According to UN and local testimonies, more than 600,000 people have been displaced, with unimaginable suffering—medical shortages, food insecurity, and protection risks in refugee sites
AFC/M23’s Narrative: “We Did Not Choose War”
The AFC/M23 public outreach frames the conflict as imposed—blaming Kinshasa’s neglect and corruption, and defending it as a “call for dialogue, peace and truth.” They argue their fight is rooted in demanding political inclusion and protection for marginalized communities, not territorial expansion
Diplomacy & Peace Efforts
Angolan-mediated talks
In mid-March 2025, Angola hosted direct DRC–M23 negotiations in Luanda. However, the failure of peace pauses (e.g., Walikale ceasefire in mid-March) shows M23 and AFC often disregard diplomatic efforts
US–Rwanda–DRC peace accord (June 27, 2025)
The U.S.-brokered agreement includes troop withdrawal, economic integration, and mineral trade frameworks. Yet, excluding M23 prevents the ceasefire from applying to them. Observers fear mineral interests overshadow justice and inclusive peace
Why “Exposing the Truth” Matters
Accountability for external interference
The page highlights external actors—especially Rwanda and Uganda—who covertly orchestrate violence, undermining DRC sovereignty.
Shining light on media suppression
With M23/AFC targeting journalists, activists, and NGOs, calls for truth aim to defend free expression and spotlight abuses.
Promoting a narrative beyond mineral interests
By exploring underlying governance failures in Kinshasa—corruption, exclusion, political sidelining—the movement contests simplistic geopolitical explanations that reduce Eastern Congo to a resource corridor.
“Kivu Will Never Be Rwanda” and the AFC/M23 messaging offer a multifaceted exposé of the conflict—from its genocidal legacy, through regional proxy dynamics, to on-the-ground atrocities and political narratives. Their claim to fight for neglected voices forces listeners to consider not just who is pulling the strings, but who suffers.
Frequently Asked Questions
This crisis is not a spontaneous civil war or tribal conflict. It is a planned and coordinated campaign, largely backed by Rwanda, using armed militias like M23 to destabilise the Kivu region. The goal is to control land, resources, and political influence — not to protect any community or fight for justice.
Goma is strategically located and rich in valuable minerals like coltan, gold, and cobalt — essential for global tech industries. Controlling Goma means controlling access to billions of dollars in natural resources, which is why it’s central to Rwanda’s proxy strategy.
Rwanda disguises its soldiers as M23 fighters, fuels misinformation, stages fake ceasefires, and uses humanitarian crises to manipulate international opinion. These tactics are designed to avoid blame while continuing their interference in Congolese territory.
M23 is not a grassroots movement. It was created, trained, and funded by the Rwandan government. Although it first appeared in 2012 and was defeated, it resurfaced in 2021 — aligned once again with Rwanda’s growing economic and military interests in Eastern Congo.
No. While ethnic narratives are often used as a smokescreen, the real motive is power and profit. Rwanda and M23 claim to defend certain communities, but their actions have led to widespread violence, displacement, and resource theft — harming the very people they claim to protect.
The first step is to acknowledge Rwanda as the aggressor. We call on the UN, African Union, and world powers to stop hiding behind diplomacy and take action: impose sanctions, cut military aid, and support Congo’s right to sovereignty and peace.
Donec fringilla congue dolor, ac porttitor magna cras vel libero hendrerit vel sapien id urna egestas cursus. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante eget ipsum primis in faucibus.