Rwanda-DRC peace talks under intense pressure as US sets ambitious deadline
A senior U.S. diplomat has stated that the United States is intensifying pressure for rapid progress in peace talks between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), with the goal of brokering a peace agreement as early as June or July.
The United States is urging rapid advancements in peace talks between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Key negotiation principles are in place, but implementation details remain under discussion.
The security crisis in eastern Congo, exacerbated by rebel activity, drives international concern and engagement.
Speaking at an online briefing attended by participants and stakeholders, the U.S. State Department's lead official for African affairs, Troy Fitrell, provided an update on the ongoing negotiations between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, the two warring nations.
He said: " This coming week, we have technical teams on the ground to try to move to the next stage,"
Fitrell stressed the urgency of the situation, noting that while key principles of negotiations have been established, debates remain on implementation and agreements, with a June or July peace deal still in sight.
He also added, " There's no time for delay. If we're going to make this happen, we need to act now," underscoring Washington's push to accelerate negotiations.
His comments come amid persistent tensions between Kinshasa and Kigali, where a planned peace deal meeting in May between the Rwandan and Congolese foreign ministers was canceled; highlighting the fragility of dialogue despite ongoing mediation from Washington and Qatar.
Notably, the United States' renewed diplomatic urgency stems from growing concerns over the escalating security crisis in eastern Congo, where the M23 rebel group has recently seized large tracts of territory, triggering mass displacements and posing a threat to regional stability, which in turn could impact potential US mining investments and future operations in the region.
Mediation in Doha
In a complementary effort, Qatar-led peace talks have been underway in recent months, with delegations from the DRC government and M23 rebels set to reconvene in Doha for further discussions.
This initiative is tantamount to the US-led regional peace push and aims to address the ongoing military conflict in North Kivu, where the M23's resurgence has raised concerns about cross-border involvement.
Both initiatives seek to protect individual interests, particularly the region's natural resources.
The DRC's accusations that Rwanda is backing the M23 rebels remain a point of contention, with Kigali consistently denying the allegations.
According to diplomatic sources, mutual distrust between the two nations continues to hinder peace efforts, despite increased international engagement
U.S. Mediation Role
Recall the recent diplomatic push to stabilize the Great Lakes region, where the US has taken on a key role. In March and May, Washington hosted senior officials from the DRC and Rwanda for backchannel talks, and Secretary of State, Marco Rubio urged a ceasefire through diplomatic channels.
However, analysts caution that without stronger political will and trust-building measures, any agreement may be fragile.
A Western diplomat familiar with the process noted, " Diplomatic timelines have limits; sustainable peace requires concrete action and genuine engagement from both sides.'
As technical teams reconvene and mediators intensify their efforts, the focus is on whether the parties can overcome their deep-seated animosity to achieve a breakthrough in the coming weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
At Supreme Court, steady wins for conservative states and Trump's claims of executive power
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court term that ended Friday will not be remembered for blockbuster rulings like those recent years that struck down the right to abortion and college affirmative action. The justices scaled back their docket this year and spent much of their energy focused on deciding fast-track appeals from President Trump. His administration's lawyers complained too many judges were standing in the way of Trump's agenda. On Friday, the court's conservatives agreed to rein in district judges, a procedural victory for Trump. What's been missing so far, however, is a clear ruling on whether the president has abided by the law or overstepped his authority in the U.S. Constitution. On the final two days of term, the court's conservative majority provided big wins for Republican-leaning states, religious parents and Trump. The justices gave states more authority to prohibit medical treatments for transgender teens, to deny Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood clinics and to enforce age-verification laws for online porn sites. Each came with the familiar 6-3 split, with the Republican appointees siding with the GOP-led states, while the Democratic appointees dissented. These rulings, while significant, were something short of nationwide landmark decisions — celebrated victories for the Republican half of the nation but having no direct or immediate effect on Democratic-led states. California lawmakers are not likely to pass measures to restrict gender-affirming care or to prohibit women on Medicaid from obtaining birth control, pregnancy testing or medical screenings at a Planned Parenthood clinic. The new decisions echoed the Dobbs ruling three years ago that struck down Roe vs. Wade and the constitutional right to abortion. As the conservative justices noted, the decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health did not outlaw abortion nationwide. However, it did allow conservative states to do so. Since then, 17 Republican-led states in the South and Midwest have adopted new laws to prohibit most or all abortions. On this front, the court's decisions reflect a 'federalism,' or states-rights style of conservatism, that was dominant in decades past under President Reagan and two of the court's conservative leaders, Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Both were Arizona Republicans (and in O'Connor's case, a former state legislator) who came to the court with that view that Washington holds too much power and wields too much control over states and local governments. With the nation sharply divided along partisan lines, today's conservative court could be praised or defended for freeing states to make different choices on the 'culture wars.' The other big winner so far this year has been Trump and his broad claims of executive power. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has asserted he has total authority to run federal agencies, cut their spending and fire most of their employees, all without the approval of Congress, which created and funded the agencies. He has also claimed the authority to impose tariffs of any amount on any country and also change his mind a few days later. He has dispatched National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles against the wishes of the governor and the mayor. He has asserted he can punish universities and law firms. He has claimed he can revise by executive order the 14th Amendment and its birthright citizenship clause. So far, the Supreme Court has not ruled squarely on Trump's broad assertions of power. But the justices have granted a series of emergency appeals from Trump's lawyers and set aside lower court orders that blocked his initiatives from taking effect. The theme has been that judges are out of line, not the president. Friday's ruling limiting nationwide injunctions set out that view in a 26-page opinion. The conservatives agreed that some judges have overstepped their authority by ruling broadly based on a single lawsuit. The justices have yet to rule on whether the president has overstepped his power. Justice Amy Coney Barrett summed up the dispute in a revealing comment responding to a dissent from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. 'Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary,' she wrote. Missing from all this is the earlier strain of conservatism that opposed concentrated power in Washington — and in this instance, in one person. Last year offered a hint of what was to come. A year ago, the court ended its term by declaring the president is immune from being prosecuted for his official acts while in the White House. That decision, in Trump vs. United States, shielded the former and soon-to-be president from the criminal law. The Constitution does not mention any such immunity for ex-presidents charged with crimes, but Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said a shield of immunity was necessary to 'enable the the President to carry out his constitutional duties without undue caution.' Since returning to the White House, Trump has not been accused of exercising 'undue caution.' Instead, he appears to have viewed the court's opinion as confirming his unchecked power as the nation's chief executive. Trump advisors say that because the president was elected, he has a mandate and the authority to put his priorities and policies into effect. But the Supreme Court's conservatives did not take that view when President Biden took office promising to take action on climate change and to reduce the burden of student loan debt. In both areas, the Roberts court ruled that the Biden administration had exceeded its authority under the laws passed by Congress. Away from Washington, the most significant decision from this term may be Friday's ruling empowering parents. The six justices on the right ruled parents have a right to remove their children from certain public school classes that offend their religious beliefs. They objected to new storybooks and lessons for young children with LGBTQ+ themes. In recent years, the court, led by Roberts, has championed the 'free exercise' of religion that is protected by the 1st Amendment. In a series of decisions, the court has exempted Catholic schools and charities from laws or regulations on, for example, providing contraceptives to employees. Friday's ruling in a Maryland case extended that religious liberty right into the schools and ruled for Muslim and Catholic parents who objected to new LGBTQ+-themed storybooks. At first, the school board said parents could have their young children 'opt out' of those classes. But when too many parents took the offer, the school board rescinded it. The clash between progressive educators and conservative parents reached the court when the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty appealed on behalf of the parents. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the parents believed the books and stories offended their religious beliefs, and he ordered school authorities to 'to notify them in advance whenever one of the books in question is to be used ... and allow them to have their children excused from that instruction.' This decision may have a broader impact than any from this term because it empowers parents nationwide. But it too has limits. It does not require the schools to change their curriculum and their lessons or remove any books from the shelves. The conservatives fell one vote short in a case that could have brought about a far-reaching change in American schools. Split 4 to 4, the justices could not rule to uphold the nation's first publicly funded, church-run charter school. In the past, Roberts had voted to allow students to use state tuition grants in religious schools, but he appeared uncertain about using tax money to operate a church-run school. But that question is almost certain to return to the court. Barrett stepped aside from the Oklahoma case heard in April because friends and former colleagues at the Notre Dame Law School had filed the appeal. But in a future case, she could participate and cast a deciding vote.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
At least 81 people killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza, Hamas-run health ministry says
At least 81 Palestinians have been killed and more than 400 injured in Israeli strikes across Gaza in the 24 hours until midday on Saturday, the Hamas-run health ministry said. In one incident, at least 11 people, including children, were killed after a strike near a stadium in Gaza City, Al-Shifa hospital staff and witnesses told news agencies. The stadium was being used to house displaced people, living in tents. Footage verified by the BBC shows people digging through the sand with their bare hands and spades to find bodies. The BBC has contacted the Israeli military for comment. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said he was hopeful a ceasefire could be agreed in the next week. Qatari mediators said they hoped US pressure could achieve a deal, following a truce between Israel and Iran that ended the 12-day conflict between the countries. In March, a two-month ceasefire collapsed when Israel launched fresh strikes on Gaza. The ceasefire deal - which started on 19 January - was set up to have three stages, but did not make it past the first stage. Stage two included establishing a permanent ceasefire, the return of remaining living hostages in Gaza in exchange for Palestinians imprisoned in Israel, and the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. On Thursday, a senior Hamas official told the BBC mediators have intensified their efforts to broker a new ceasefire and hostage release deal in Gaza, but that negotiations with Israel remain stalled. A rally was organised on Saturday evening in Tel Aviv calling for a deal to free the remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza. Organisers said "the time has come to end the fighting and bring everyone home in one phase". Meanwhile, Israeli attacks in Gaza continue. Friday evening's strike near the Palestine Stadium in Gaza City killed at least 11 people, hospital staff and witnesses said. One witness said they were sitting when they "suddenly heard a huge explosion" after a road was hit. "This area was packed with tents - now the tents are under the sand. We spent hours digging with our bare hands," Ahmed Qishawi told the Reuters news agency. He said there are "no wanted people here, nor any terrorists as they [Israelis] claim... [there are] only civilian residents, children, who were targeted with no mercy," he said. The BBC has verified footage showing civilians and emergency services digging through the sandy ground with their hands and spades to find bodies. Fourteen more people were reported killed, some of them children, in strikes on an apartment block and a tent in the al-Mawasi area. The strike in al-Mawasi killed three children and their parents, who died while they were asleep, relatives told the Associated Press. "What did these children do to them? What is their fault?" the children's grandmother, Suad Abu Teima, told the news agency. More people were reported killed on Saturday afternoon after an air strike on the Tuffah neighbourhood near Jaffa School, where hundreds of displaced Gazans were sheltering. The strike killed at least eight people, including five children, the Palestinian health ministry said. One witness Mohammed Haboub told Reuters that his nephews, father and the children of his neighbours were killed in the strike. "We didn't do anything to them, why do they harm us? Did we harm them? We are civilians," he told the news agency. The health ministry said ambulance and civil defence crews were facing difficulties in reaching a number of victims trapped under the rubble and on the roads, due to the impossibility of movement in some of the affected areas. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has not yet commented on these reported strikes. The IDF released a statement on Saturday evening saying it had killed Hakham Muhammad Issa al-Issa, a senior figure in Hamas's military wing, in the area of Sabra in Gaza City on Friday. The IDF said he was one of the founding members of Hamas's military wing, a member of Hamas's general security council, and played a "significant role in the planning and execution" of Hamas's 7 October 2023 attack on Israel. The Israeli military launched its bombardment of Gaza in response to the attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage. More than 56,000 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. Gaza mediators intensifying ceasefire efforts, Hamas official says UN condemns Gaza aid 'death trap' as dozens reported killed by Israeli fire GHF boss defends Gaza aid operation after hundreds of Palestinians killed near sites
USA Today
4 hours ago
- USA Today
Medicaid cuts, no taxes on tips and overtime: What's in the Trump-backed Senate megabill?
Big changes are ahead for Americans if the Trump-backed bill becomes law. Republicans are trying to pass it by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. WASHINGTON − High-income earners, waiters and waitresses could soon see greater tax breaks locked in under a bill backed by President Donald Trump that's on track for votes this weekend in the Republican-led Senate. People who rely on Medicaid access and funds for federal food aid would come out on the short end of the stick under the plan, too. There's plenty more that could affect the lives of everyday Americans inside the Senate's latest 940-page version of the Trump-backed megabill that emerged near midnight and which Republicans are scrambling to turn into law ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline. It's still unclear if the GOP will have enough votes when the debate begins around 2 p.m. EDT on June 28 on the president's biggest second-term priority for the Republican-led Congress. Supporters are emphasizing the chief engine of the Senate's proposal - extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts - and significant boosts to military and border security spending. They are also proceeding despite needing to remove sections of their bill that didn't meet the Senate's unique rules that would have repealed student loan relief and environmental regulations, restricting federal judges' powers and the Trump administration's efforts to bulk up immigration enforcement. More: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned "If you like higher taxes, open borders, a weak military and unchecked government spending, this bill is your nightmare," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman of the Budget Committee, said in a statement. Graham's team did have to make several adjustments in recent days. Certain Medicaid-related proposals were also left on the Senate cutting room floor. But other reforms − including new work requirements for able-bodied Americans − survived a complex review process and are now on deck for approval in the upper chamber. The Trump administration 'strongly supports' the Senate version of the bill, in a White House Office of Management and Budget statement June 28. 'President Trump is committed to keeping his promises, and failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal," the statement said. Democrats are not on board with the legislation that Trump and Republicans have dubbed the "big, beautiful bill." Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, said the president's legislative agenda looks more like a "big, ugly betrayal" because it gives tax breaks to wealthier Americans while cutting services to low-income people. "I am dedicated and determined to fight these kinds of changes that really impact adversely everybody in Connecticut and the country," Blumenthal said in a June 27 video posted to X. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, has been working behind the scenes to whip his members into a consensus. He's got support from Trump, who has spent days putting public pressure on any GOP senators considering defection. But it's still far from clear if Thune and Trump will be successful. Here's a closer look at what's in the Senate bill as the weekend floor debate gets underway. Medicaid and SNAP Medicaid, which provides health insurance to more than 71 million low-income Americans, has been a regular point of contention for both chambers grappling with the legislation. After the House narrowly approved big changes to the program that would save at least $625 billion − and potentially cause 7.6 million Americans over the next 10 years to lose their health insurance − the Senate sought even deeper cuts. Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough axed a handful of changes from the Senate bill, including prohibiting coverage for non-citizens and barring funds for gender-affirming care. The upper chamber's legislation maintains new work requirements and increased eligibility checks. The Senate plan seeks to force able-bodied adults to work 80 hours per month until age 65 to qualify for benefits, but it does include exemptions for parents or guardians of children under 14 and those with disabilities. Reforms to SNAP, another federal aid program long known as "food stamps," were sifted through the Senate's review process. MacDonough initially rejected Senate Republicans' attempt to push costs onto states. But the parliamentarian gave them the go ahead after Senate Republicans did some tweaking to the language that included giving states more time before they start paying. The latest version would also give Alaska and Hawaii temporary exemption from the cost-sharing and able-bodied requirements for up to two years, if the Agriculture secretary finds the two states are making a "good faith effort" to comply with the requirements. Many view the offer as a way to keep Alaska's two GOP senators, particularly Sen. Lisa Murkowski, in support of the overall bill. Extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts The heart of the legislation is an extension of the big tax cuts that Trump passed in 2017, which are set to expire on Dec. 31, 2025. The highest earner would continue to be taxed at a 37% rate under the bill, instead of 39.6% if the tax cuts expired. For individuals making between $9,525 and $38,700, they would continue to be taxed at 12%, instead of the 15% rate that would kick in if the legislation doesn't pass. More: How much will Trump's tax bill save you? Gains could vary by income. The 2017 law made other big changes to tax policy that will remain in place under the Senate bill, including doubling the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000 and nearly doubling the standard deduction. Other provisions in the 2017 tax law that affect both individuals and businesses will remain. 'This bill prevents an over-$4 trillion tax hike and makes the successful 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, enabling families and businesses to save and plan for the future,' Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said in unveiling the bill language. No taxes on tips, overtime Addressing one of Trump's most high-profile 2024 campaign promises, tipped employees like waiters and hairstylists would be able to claim a new tax deduction for tips through 2028, as could workers who are paid overtime wages. More: Americans are tired of tipping. Experts say no tax on tips could make things worse. The Senate kept this measure from the House version of the bill, but added on a $25,000 per year cap for the deduction and weakened the tax break for individuals whose income is above $150,000 or married couples making more than $300,000 combined. $5 trillion debt limit increase The Senate version looks to raise the nation's debt limit by $5 trillion, which is expected to aggravate fiscal hawks who were already concerned about the House bill, which projections say would raise that limit by $4 trillion. Including the language in this overall bill would give the federal government the OK to pay for programs that Congress has already authorized. Billions for U.S. military and 'Golden Dome' defense One area Republicans didn't spare an expense is defense spending, which some MAGA allies had suggested was "too much" in the lead up to the legislation's unveiling. More: Trump pushes $175 billion 'Golden Dome' missile defense plan The proposal injects roughly $150 billion into the military, including $9 billion for service members quality of life such as housing, healthcare, childcare and education. Another $1 billion is earmarked for border security, which Republican committee members have said will help carry out the president's immigration and "counter-drug enforcement" plans. One of the larger expenditures is $25 billion allotted for an initial investment in a "Golden Dome" missile defense shield that Trump promised will be fully operational by the end of his term in 2029. Green energy roll-backs A handful of moderate senators had pushed for a gentler approach to rolling back green energy tax credits passed under former President Joe Biden. The Senate's proposal heeds their call, slowing the phase-out of multiple clean energy provisions that the House had sought to eliminate more quickly. Billions for the border, deportations The Senate held onto the massive increase in funding for the Department of Homeland Security, increasing the department's budget by roughly $150 billion – which would more than double its current funding. The bill authorizes $45 billion for new immigration detention centers. Under the DHS umbrella, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement already operates more than 160 detention centers around the country. Many are full, as the Trump administration ramps up arrests of immigrants. Another $27 billion would go to fund the administration's mass deportation campaign, including to pay for 10,000 more deportation agents. ICE currently has about 6,000 deportation agents. At that funding level, the current administration "will be poised to dramatically expand community arrests and expand cooperation with state and local law enforcement agencies," according to an analysis by the American Immigration Council, which advocates for immigrant rights. The Trump administration's border czar, Tom Homan, said without additional money, "it's going to be a hard road" to achieve the president's goal of deporting 1 million immigrants this year. "We have a lot of people to look for, a lot of people to arrest, a lot of national security threats we know are in this country," Homan said during a White House press conference June 26. "We need to find them. We need more money to do that. We need more agents to do that."
