KEY INSIGHTS
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) – Rwanda peace agreements, negotiated at separate times with U.S. and Qatari mediation, have so far failed to halt fighting in the eastern Congo and the displacement of more than 6.9 million people. March 23 Movement (M23) massacres, pro-government militia violence, and Rwandan Defense Force (RDF) involvement in the crisis also continues to undermine the settlements. These failures threaten security and linked mineral and infrastructure frameworks, raising civilian consequences and operational hazards for organizations operating in the region.
ANALYSIS
The Washington Accords negotiated with U.S. involvement, signed by the foreign ministers of the DRC and Rwanda, on June 27 and the Doha Declaration of Principles mediated by Qatar, signed between representatives of the DRC and the M23, on July 19, are failing. Each side has interpreted obligations differently and retains incentives to fight. Kinshasa views “restoration of state authority” as requiring M23 withdrawals, which the group rejects. Meanwhile, the Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) continue to frame their role as defensive, but U.S. and United Nations sources reaffirmed RDF elements fighting alongside M23 forces.
The DRC holds some of the world’s largest deposits of critical minerals, including an estimated 70 percent of global coltan. Despite resources valued at $24 trillion, Congolese citizens see little benefit because extraction and trade remain contested by armed groups and foreign interests. The Washington Accords’ economic frameworks aimed to formalize supply chains and advance regional projects. However, strategic sites such as the Rubaya coltan mine and the Ruzizi hydropower project lie in contested or M23-controlled areas. The U.S. Treasury sanctioned four entities producing and trading conflict minerals, showing compliance risks spreading into global markets.
OUTLOOK
We encourage organizations operating in the DRC and individuals traveling to the region to be mindful of the following considerations:
- Security and Continuity: Persistent clashes threaten key transport corridors, logistics, and site security. Armed security must be adequately equipped to mitigate risks.
- Regulatory and Compliance Exposure: International scrutiny is rising, with the Trump administration sanctioning entities tied to conflict minerals, potentially putting additional pressure on firms.
- Financial and Project Feasibility: Hydropower and mining ventures face indefinite delays until control stabilises. In escalation, contested projects risk seizure or abandonment, creating stranded assets.
- Reputational and ESG Risk: Firms linked to contested resources risk NGO campaigns, shareholder action, and exclusion from ESG portfolios.
- Operational Resilience: Road closures, airspace restrictions, or communications blackouts are likely. Crisis planning should include fallback sites outside of the eastern Congo and evacuation protocols.
Authored by: Oliver Maund
