Rwandan army had 'critical' role in DR Congo offensive: UN experts
Rwanda denies providing military support for the M23, but UN experts have long said that the neighbouring country backs the armed group -- and said that there was ample evidence that the Rwandan army had played a direct combat role in the recent offensive in eastern DRC.
"RDF (Rwandan armed forces) operations were critical to the conquest and occupation of new territories and towns," the United Nations' group of experts on the DRC said in a report due to be published in the coming days, of which AFP has obtained a copy.
The analysis came after the DRC and Rwanda signed a peace deal on Friday in Washington to end the conflict in eastern Congo, where M23 fighters seized the provincial capitals of Goma and Bukavu in a lightning offensive in January and February.
Both countries pledged to pull back support for guerrilla fighters, in a deal that US President Donald Trump hailed as the start of a "new chapter of hope and opportunity" for the region.
Mineral-rich eastern DRC has been devastated by conflict for more than three decades, with the violence escalating in recent months as the M23 seized large swathes of territory.
The UN expert group said it had obtained photos, videos, drone footage, testimony and intelligence "confirming systematic and massive border incursions by RDF" and the Rwandan army's "reinforced presence" in the region.
The evidence shows "RDF positioning at front lines and direct engagement in combat, and RDF handling of high-tech weaponry", the report said.
It said that a week prior to the attack on Goma, "Rwandan officials confidentially informed the (UN expert group) that (Rwandan) President Paul Kagame had decided to imminently take control of Goma and Bukavu".
Fragile peace deal
Kagame denies military backing for the M23, but his government says it maintains "defensive measures" because Rwanda is threatened by the presence in eastern DRC of the FDLR, a group founded by ethnic Hutu leaders involved in the 1994 Rwandan genocide of the Tutsis.
Rwanda lashed out at the UN experts' latest findings.
The new report "deliberately misrepresents Rwanda's longstanding security concerns related to the persistent threat of the FDLR and its affiliated groups, which necessitates the defence posture in our border areas," Rwandan government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo said on X.
The latest surge of violence in eastern DRC has killed thousands of people, according to the UN and the Congolese government, and deepened a humanitarian crisis faced by hundreds of thousands forced from their homes.
Kagame and Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi are due to meet in Washington in the coming months to solidify the peace deal, signed by their foreign ministers, whose terms have not yet been implemented.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Pakistan court junks plea for case against Trump over US strikes on Iran
A local court in Pakistan's Karachi on Wednesday dismissed a bizarre petition seeking registration of a criminal case against US President Donald Trump over recent airstrikes carried out by the United States on Iranian nuclear sites. The court in the port city of Pakistan rejected the petition and ruled that the matter fell outside its petitioner, Advocate Jamshed Ali Khowaja, representing members of the International Lawyers Forum, claimed that the airstrikes caused psychological distress among Muslims, including Pakistani nationals. advertisementWhile rejecting the petition, which was filed on June 24, the court cited international law and the principle of functional immunity. The judge said such cases require the presence or extradition of the accused, which is not possible in this context. While calling the application 'devoid of merits' the court dismissed it at the outset.- Ends IN THIS STORY#Pakistan
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
The thick red line: Why India shouldn't agree with US on agri
July 9, Donald Trump's tariff deadline, is fast approaching. He's expecting a "very big deal". Indian officials camping in Washington, DC, have extended their stay, with External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar rushing to the US capital to meet his counterpart, Marco Rubio. Amid all this diplomatic hustle and heat, New Delhi's goal is clear — secure a favourable interim deal for India before Trump's threatened high tariffs, up to 26%, on Indian exports, kick in. But there's an impasse in the talks. India has a "big red line", on which it will find difficult to negotiate. Team Trump is reportedly seeking concessions from India in the agriculture and dairy sectors. There are big reasons why India shouldn't agree to the US demands on agri and Delhi has dug in its heels, and is determined to safeguard India's domestic agricultural sector, and the dairy domain. Millions of Indians, about 40% of the population, are employed in the sector, even though it's not as heavily subsidised as farming in the US, whose government is driving a hard bargain to ensure American agricultural products don't face steep import tariffs in the US tries to project it as an attempt at creating a level playing field, the situation is heavily tilted in its favour. A mere quid pro quo tariff regime will not address the mismatch created by the US by providing massive subsidies to its farmers vis-a-vis farmers in India. While farmers in the US get over $61,000 in subsidies annually, their counterparts in India get just $282 a India rightly called the agriculture and dairy sectors a "big red line", it, in all likelihood and fairness, shouldn't give in to Trump's demands because doing so could jeopardise the livelihoods of nearly half the country's workforce dependent on agriculture, say the data and could expose the Indian market to heavily subsidised US farm dumping, undermine food security standards, some tied to religious and cultural practices, fear experts and reportedly the Indian government and a think tank."As far as the import of genetically modified (GM) soybean, maize and dairy products from the US is concerned, the government does not seem to be ready for it at all," agricultural expert Om Prakash tells India Today there are risks of cross-pollination from GM crops that could harm India's native seed varieties. There's also the matter of dietary sensitivities and consumer trust, especially in dairy, where feeding cattle animal remains clashes with Indian cultural and religious values."India is protective of its farmers, which is why they have relatively high tariffs compared to anywhere in the world," agricultural trade expert Sharon Bomer Lauritsen told Politoco."They're going to protect their farmers," added the former negotiator of the US Trade ROLE IN EMPLOYMENT: INDIA-US CONTRASTadvertisementFirst, let's look at the numbers. They will highlight how agriculture produces, employment, and their demand and supply vastly differ between India and the US, and why trade negotiations must acknowledge these realities with of 2020, around 196.64 million people were employed in agriculture in India, compared to just 2.11 million in the US. Agriculture accounts for 41% of total employment in India, while in the US, it is merely 1%. At 14.6%, agriculture is one of the biggest components of India's GDP, while it contributes 0.92% to the American it comes to average farm size, the difference is average farm holding in the US is about 180 hectares, while in India, it is just 1.08 in the US also receive significantly more government support, with an average of $61,286 per farmer (2016), compared to $282 per farmer in India (2018–19), according to World Trade Organisation (WTO) data, accessed from Kisan Tak, India Today Digital's sister portal on agriculture, farmer welfare and expert Om Prakash says that India has been constrained by the WTO's discriminatory policies since the Agreement on Agriculture (AOA) came into effect on January 1, 1995. He argues, "India's farm subsidy is significantly lower, even more so when adjusted per farmer, yet the WTO continues to pressure India to reduce it even further".advertisementKisanTak's Prakash ties them directly to the WTO's flawed subsidy accounting WTO's subsidy accounting method is flawed because it doesn't look at how many farmers India has. It just counts the total money given to them. On the other hand, the US, with fewer farmers, gives more money, and each farmer gets a much bigger sum. But in India, where millions of farmers get little help, it looks like India is giving more than it should, even when it's IF INDIA LOWERS TARIFFS ON US FARM AND DAIRY GOODS?To ring-fence its farmers and the agriculture sector, India is forced to charge much higher import tariffs on agricultural products compared to the average, India puts a 39% tax on farm goods coming from other countries. But for the items that are imported the most, the tax goes up to 65%. This shows how strongly India protects its farmers by making imported farm goods more expensive. In contrast, the US keeps its agricultural import taxes lower, with a simple average of just 5% and a trade-weighted rate of 4%, according to data from the New Delhi-based think-tank Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) has warned that reducing import tariffs on subsidised US agricultural products, particularly grains, could harm Indian farmers and destabilise food prices in India. Lowering tariffs could allow cheap, subsidised US grains to flood the Indian market, especially when global prices are would potentially undercut local farmers and disrupt the domestic food supply in staples like frozen shrimp, basmati rice, and spices still lead India's export basket, there's been a notable surge in shipments of processed cereals and other value-added food products. On the import side, India continues to source premium items from the US, with almonds, pistachios, and walnuts making up a significant AAYOG BACKED GM IMPORTS, CONGRESS PROTESTEDA March NITI Aayog discussion paper titled Promoting India-US Agricultural Trade Under the New US Trade Regime highlighted stark productivity gaps between the two noted that "India's average soybean yield has stagnated around "one tonne per hectare", whereas in the US, it is "3.4 tonnes per hectare". Similarly, "maize yields in India are just 3.5 tonnes per hectare," compared to "11.1 tonnes per hectare in the US".advertisementThese differences, the now-withdrawn paper says, show there is "a clear scope for improvement" in India's agricultural paper, whose withdrawal attracted Congress MP Jairam Ramesh's attack on the Centre, argued that beyond strategic trade management, "India must undertake medium-term structural reforms to improve the global competitiveness of its farm sector". These reforms should focus on "bridging the productivity gap with developed nations by embracing appropriate technologies", while also "nudging states to undertake long-pending reforms".It further called for "liberalising private sector participation", enhancing logistics, and developing "competitive value chains" to strengthen India's agricultural exports. The Centre's move to do the same suffered backlash during the farm protests of is the world's biggest buyer of edible oil, and the US has a lot of soyabean oil to export, which comes from genetically modified crops. The NITI Aayog paper said India could allow some imports of this oil to reduce the trade imbalance with the US, without hurting local farmers."Except for cotton, no other GM crop is allowed to be cultivated in India. In such a scenario, the question of importing GM soybean and maize from the US for consumption simply does not arise. In essence, the US-India trade deal poses a trial by fire for the Indian government, to safeguard the interests of farmers, agriculture, and the faith of the country's vegetarian population," Om Prakash tells India Today NITI Aayog paper also said India should try to get better access to the US market for top exports like shrimp, fish, spices, rice, tea, coffee, and rubber. India earns about $5.75 billion every year from farm exports to the US, and this could grow if India negotiates for lower duties or special trade leader Jairam Ramesh, on June 30, pointed out that the NITI Aayog working paper had been withdrawn from the think-tank's website. India Today Digital also could not access it. Ramesh alleged that the paper recommended duty-free import of GM maize and soyabean from the US. He added, "For the Modi sarkar, the interests of Midwestern American farmers and large Multinational Corporation traders are bigger than that of the maize farmers of Bihar and soyabean farmers of MP, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan".Lowering tariffs could also disrupt India's food security."In today's geopolitically unstable world, food security must remain sovereign," GTRI Founder Ajay Srivastava was quoted as saying by news agency Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in a June interview with the Financial Express, said that New Delhi will not compromise on areas that affect vulnerable domestic said that agricultural and dairy sectors remain "very big red lines" in the HOLDS FIRM ON BAN OVER ANIMAL-FED COW MILK PRODUCTSThen there are dietary, cultural and religious sensitivities that complicate the issue of dairy imports from the US, especially when it comes to genetically modified products or items derived from animals not raised according to the norms of several Indian communities. These concerns are deeply rooted and can't be dismissed as mere trade hurdles, as they touch upon dietary restrictions, traditional practices, and firmly maintains its ban on importing dairy products from cows fed animal-derived feed, according to the USRT's National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report, according to news agency ANI."Imagine eating butter made from the milk of a cow that was fed meat and blood from another cow. India may never allow that," GTRI's Srivastava wouldn't like to compromise with milk and dairy products as they are used in religious rituals are several reasons why the big red line exists when it comes to food imports. Cultural beliefs, employment, the agricultural markets, and concerns over the long-term impact are some of them. GM crops' impact on health and the environment is another concern. These are not just policy preferences but emotional and political red zones trade is deeply sensitive in India too. These developments follow the massive farmer protests in 2020-21 and again in 2024. The policy shift revamping agricultural trade triggered protests and resistance, enough for the Centre to a way forward may be there. Sure, it'll take time, persuasion, trust-building, and change, which could be in favour of one of the two parties. But why not both?- EndsTune InMust Watch
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Is US-Israel attack on Iran's nuclear sites backfiring?
While direct combat has stopped along the borders of Israel and Iran, a lot has been going on in diplomatic circles in the aftermath of the airstrikes. The US joined the Israel-Iran conflict last month and bombed three key nuclear sites, Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan read more A satellite image shows damage to the tunnel entrances of the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Research Center, following U.S. airstrikes amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Isfahan, Iran, June 22, 2025. File image/ Reuters It has been over a week since Israel and Iran reached a ceasefire. The US has been boasting about its strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, which reportedly pushed the country's atomic programme by two years. While direct combat has stopped along the borders of Israel and Iran, a lot has been going on in diplomatic circles in the aftermath of the airstrikes. The US joined the Israel-Iran conflict last month and bombed three key nuclear sites, Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Here's what has been happening since then: Iran suspends cooperation with IAEA Iran has officially suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after a law seeking the severance was approved by President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday. A few days ago, Pezeshkian slammed IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi for not condemning Israel and US' attacks on Iran despite them being in flagrant violation of the UN charter and the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. 'What guarantee is there that our facilities won't be attacked again, even if we cooperate?' the Iranian president told his French counterpart during a conversation over the phone, according to local media. Germany calls it 'disastrous signal' Germany has called Iran's move to sever ties with the UN nuclear watchdog a 'disastrous signal', with its foreign ministry spokesperson saying, 'For a diplomatic solution it is essential for Iran to work with the IAEA.' Earlier, UK and France had joined Germany to urge Tehran not to suspend cooperation with IAEA. Pentagon report on US strikes US intelligence assessments indicate that strikes on Iranian nuclear sites set the country's atomic program back by up to two years, the Pentagon said on Wednesday. 'We have degraded their program by one to two years at least – intel assessments inside the (Defense) Department assess that,' Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told journalists, later adding: 'We're thinking probably closer to two years.' American B-2 bombers hit two Iranian nuclear sites with massive GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs last month, while a guided missile submarine struck a third site with Tomahawk cruise missiles. Iran's Nobel laureate speaks Following Israel's 12-day war, which significantly weakened Iran's leadership, a prominent human rights defender now warns that the regime may crack down on its own citizens in a bid to tighten its grip on power. Talking to Wall Street Journal, Narges Mohammadi, who received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2023, said, 'The situation for Iranian people is more dangerous now than before the war.' Is Iran switching to cyberwar? Meanwhile, a report by Axios says Iranian hacktivists are waging a separate war and are sharing tools with Russian and other hackers. Alexander Leslie, a threat intelligence analyst at Recorded Future, told the news outlet, 'More than 100 hacktivists groups, 90 of which are linked to pro-Iranian positions, have been targeting organisations in Israel and throughout the Middle East, North Africa, Western Europe and North America since Israel's strikes last month.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In addition to this, Iran-linked hackers recently threatened to publish emails purportedly stolen from Trump allies. With inputs from agencies
