The peace agreement signed in June 2025 between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) under the auspices of the Trump administration raises serious concerns about whom it truly serves. Rather than securing lasting peace for the Congolese people, the deal appears poised to benefit corporate and financial interests eager to access the country’s vast mineral wealth. Investigating these interests, this Policy Brief alerts that the US firms and oligarchs set to profit from the deal lack the interest, history, and know-how to make peace happen and last. Barring a radical shift, this deal may only perpetuate the deadly cycle of exploitation that has plagued the country for centuries.

On June 27, 2025, a peace agreement was signed between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) under the auspices of the Trump administration, after extensive diplomacy work and mediation by Qatar. On the surface, the deal offered hope to a country devastated by three decades of war, which have claimed over six million lives, displaced millions more, and inflicted widespread suffering.

The most recent escalation began in 2024, when the M23 rebel group and the Rwandan Defense Forces launched a violent offensive, exacerbating an already massive humanitarian crisis. The United Nations has gathered overwhelming evidence that Rwanda was actively supporting and directing M23’s offensive in eastern DRC. President Kagame has framed the intervention as a defense of the Tutsi population – targeted during the 1994 genocide – but it has been extensively documented that Rwanda’s illegal extraction of the DRC’s highly valuable minerals has been a major driver of the conflict. The DRC, rich with mineral reserves worth US$24 trillion, produces 70 percent of the world’s cobalt, and has large reserves of several critical minerals. Rwanda’s support of M23 has allowed it to take over much of eastern DRC, capture many mines, and perpetrate massacres and egregious human rights abuses. It is estimated that up to 90 percent of Rwanda’s coltan exports are illegally sourced from eastern DRC and that many of the armed groups involved in the area are financed by this illegal extraction.

Image

The peace deal came under criticism even before it was signed. The 2018 Nobel Peace Prize recipient Denis Mukwege warned that the deal “would amount to granting a reward [to Rwanda] for aggression, legitimizing the plundering of Congolese natural resources, and forcing the victim to alienate their national heritage by sacrificing justice in order to ensure a precarious and fragile peace.” In June, a coalition of 80 Congolese non-governmental organizations and public interest attorneys, called for “the rejection of the hasty and ill-conceived peace and business agreement.” The appeal from the Mobilisation pour la Sauvegarde de la Souveraineté et de l’Autonomie Congolaise (MOSSAC) alerted on a number of critical shortcomings in the agreement, a draft of which had been leaked in previous weeks. Their concerns included impunity the deal provides to perpetrators of violence and abuses; and that it was forced upon the DRC and thus may not benefit the country and its people. It was also criticized for allowing Rwanda’s continued plundering of the DRC’s mineral resources while ultimately catering to the interests of US mining and corporate interests.

These concerns are legitimate given the deal is not just a peace agreement between two warring countries – it unusually also involves the expansion of mineral exploitation in partnership with the US government and American investors. President Trump even claimed at the signing of the deal: “We’re getting, for the United States, a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo as part of it.”

At the launch of the “Declaration of Principles” that preceded the peace deal in April 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated, “Our firms are good corporate citizens, American firms, and they’ll bring good governance and ensure responsible, reliable supply chains for things like critical minerals that benefit regional governments and our partners and allies as well.”

However, the terms of the peace agreement are vague on business arrangements with US interests. The text does not indicate which US firms would be involved and how they would deliver on the above promises. Details on specific business interests are expected to be disclosed in a forthcoming US-DRC critical minerals agreement.

Read full report: oaklandinstitute.org

Source: The Oakland Institute

In the last two weeks, TANAPA rangers have killed two villagers within the disputed boundaries of the Ruaha National Park in Tanzania. These murders shatter promises made just a month ago by the Tanzanian government and the World Bank to end ranger violence and allow livelihood activities to continue within the park.

On April 26, 2025, six fishermen were confronted by rangers outside of Mwanjurwa, near Ikanutwa and Nyeregete villages in the Ihefu Basin. As they tried to escape, rangers shot 27-year-old Hamprey Mhaki in the back. It is believed that Mr. Mhaki succumbed to his gunshot wound, as the search party only found a large amount of blood where he was last seen. He remains missing – while his pregnant wife and grieving family search for answers and demand justice.

In another incident, on May 7, 2025, a group of herders and their cattle in the Udunguzi sub-village of Iyala village were attacked by a TANAPA helicopter that opened fire with live ammunition. Eyewitnesses report that Kulwa Igembe, a 20-year-old Sukuma herder, was shot in the chest by one of the rangers on the ground. He died at the scene. Mr. Igembe is survived by his widow and young daughter.

According to Tanzanian media, four TANAPA rangers are being held by the Mbeya Regional Police Force for their involvement in Mr. Igembe’s killing. His body remains at the Mochwari Mission hospital, as his family has refused to proceed with burial until authorities conduct a full and transparent investigation. Furthermore, local sources state that over 1,000 cattle belonging to several herders were seized and impounded at the Madundasi ranger post following the attack. About 500 cattle have been reclaimed after herders paid TSh100,000 per head [US$37] in fines – delivering a substantial financial blow.

The Bank’s  REGROW project, now cancelled, built the enforcement capacity of the rangers who committed these murders. In the 2024 investigation by its Inspection Panel, the Bank conceded that by “enhancing TANAPA’s capacity to enforce the law,” the project “increased the possibility of violent confrontations” between rangers and villagers. The Panel found the Bank to have failed to adequately supervise TANAPA and ignored rangers use of “excessive force,” in violation of international standards. Already over the course of the REGROW project, at least 11 individuals were killed by police or rangers, five disappeared, and dozens suffered physical and psychological harm, including torture and sexual violence.

“The murders of Mr. Igembe and Mr. Mhaki make it painfully clear that the Tanzanian government has no intent to end atrocities against local communities for tourist revenue. These brutal actions not only constitute abject crimes but are also a blatant violation of the commitments the government made to the World Bank,” said Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of the Oakland Institute. “The Bank created a monster in TANAPA and must be held accountable along with the rogue ranger force,” Mittal added.

In its April 2, 2025 press release, the World Bank stated that “The Government of Tanzania has committed to implementing the MAP [Management Action Plan],  and the World Bank will support and supervise its implementation.” The Action Plan is based on the premise that the government will honor its now broken promise that there will be no resettlement and villagers can continue their livelihood activities, like grazing and fishing. Iyala village, where Mr. Igembe was killed, is one of the five villages consumed by the October 2023 expansion of Ruaha National Park.

The Bank also committed to addressing violence by TANAPA rangers through a grievance mechanism and trainings on “relevant good international practice in protected area management.” Unfortunately, the Oakland Institute’s warning to the Bank’s officials, that given the extent of TANAPA’s human rights abuses, these measures would fail in preventing future harms, has come true.

“The violence hasn’t stopped. Villagers are being killed, their cattle stolen, their lives destroyed. Local communities are desperate for the world to listen. The Oakland Institute joins them in demanding that the World Bank take responsibility and act now. Every day of silence costs lives. The victims and their families deserve justice, truth, and the chance to live without fear,” concluded Mittal.

Source:The Oakland Institute