Diplomatic sources indicate that the European Union (EU) is facing increasing pressure to suspend its comprehensive minerals agreement with Rwanda, as concerns grow about its role in exacerbating the ongoing conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
The unrest in eastern DRC has prompted voices in Brussels to reconsider the pact with the Rwandan government, designed to secure vital materials used in smartphones and electric vehicles.
Signed in February 2024, this agreement was initially regarded as a significant move towards ensuring a stable supply of essential materials for the green and digital transition. However, it has drawn criticism for overlooking the illicit mineral trade facilitated by Rwandan-supported rebels in DRC, a situation highlighted by reports from the United Nations (UN).
Recently, the Rwandan-backed M23 rebels have strengthened their hold on parts of Goma, a key city in North Kivu province, and are reportedly pushing further into South Kivu province. This advancement has raised alarms as it is seen as a breach of international law.
The conflict predominantly occurs in mineral-rich areas abundant in gold, coltan, tin, tantalum, and other essential materials. For years, both Congolese and UN officials have accused Rwanda of using M23 rebels to exploit mining sites and smuggle these minerals, thereby feeding into their supply chains.
Critics argue that the EU-Rwanda agreement contributes to the entry of ‘conflict minerals’ into international supply chains. They contend that the monetary gains from these smuggled minerals are likely funding the armed groups driving this ongoing strife, leading to severe humanitarian issues for the regional populace.
During a visit to Morocco, Belgium’s Foreign Minister Bernard Quintin expressed his concerns, urging his fellow European officials to take decisive action. “We have leverage, and we must determine how to implement it,” he told reporters.
Diplomatic insiders have revealed that Belgium has proposed the suspension of the EU’s minerals agreement. On Thursday, Hilde Vautmans, chair of the European Parliament’s Africa delegation, emphasized the necessity for the EU to convey a “strong message” to Rwandan President Paul Kagame by halting the agreement until Rwanda demonstrates an end to its interference in DRC.
Here’s a closer look at the conflict and the mounting pressure on the EU to take action.
Current Situation in Eastern DRC
The complex history of conflict in DRC’s border regions with Rwanda goes back to the 1994 Rwandan genocide, which resulted in the deaths of approximately 800,000 people, primarily ethnic Tutsis, at the hands of Hutu extremists.
A Tutsi-led uprising, spearheaded by current Rwandan President Paul Kagame, ultimately halted the genocide, causing around one million Hutus to seek refuge in DRC. Since then, the region has experienced three decades of conflict, including two successive wars, with persistent ethnic tensions.
The M23 group, comprised of Tutsis, claims to represent the rights of the minority Tutsi population in eastern DRC. Meanwhile, the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), an armed Hutu organization formed by former genocide leaders, continues to operate in the area. Rwanda alleges that the FDLR poses a threat to its national security and that there remains the risk of genocide against Tutsis.
Recently, the M23 has overtaken significant areas of Goma, a crucial logistical and trading center in DRC located on the border with Rwanda. Reports have emerged of intense clashes between government forces and the rebels.
M23 has also reportedly secured several key towns integral to the mineral trade in the region. UN experts indicate evidence of Rwandan military forces exerting “de facto control” over M23’s actions by providing training and armament support.
Although President Kagame has consistently denied any state-backed support for M23, mounting evidence contradicts these claims. UN peacekeeping chief Jean-Pierre Lacroix recently stated, “It is undeniable that Rwandan troops are present in Goma assisting M23.”
On Thursday, an EU spokesperson reiterated the bloc’s call for Rwanda to “halt support and collaboration with the armed group, M23.”
Details of the EU-Rwanda Agreement
In February 2024, Brussels and Kigali formalized a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ aimed at establishing a “sustainable supply of raw materials” for the EU, in exchange for investment to bolster Rwanda’s mineral resources and infrastructure.
This initiative is part of the EU’s €300 billion Global Gateway infrastructure program, which seeks to reduce dependency on strategic rival nations such as China, with over €900 million earmarked for Rwanda.
Jutta Urpilainen, the former EU chief for international partnerships, previously characterized the agreement as enhancing the “sustainable, transparent, and resilient value chain of critical raw materials.”
The pact recognizes Rwanda’s significant role in global tantalum production and its capabilities in tin, tungsten, gold, and niobium extraction. The agreement also highlights Rwanda’s “potential” for lithium extraction, which is crucial for electric vehicle batteries and rare earth materials.
However, Guillaume de Brier of the Antwerp-based International Peace Information Service (IPIS) noted discrepancies in Rwanda’s mineral output, claiming that it is implausible that the country can mine all that it exports. This assertion echoes concerns previously voiced by the US Department of State.
Concurrently, Rwandan President Kagame has cultivated friendly relations with European leaders and positioned the nation as a key partner in managing migration flows. A report from last September suggested that accommodations designed for the UK-Rwanda asylum plan may be utilized for asylum seekers arriving in Germany.
Reasons Behind Calls for Suspension of the Minerals Deal
A growing body of evidence indicates that M23, allegedly backed by Kigali, has been systematically exporting minerals into Rwanda through fraudulent means.
A June 2024 UN report found that M23 has set up a “parallel administration” governing mining operations and trade in eastern DRC, with estimates pointing to the export of at least 150 tons of coltan to Rwanda.
Moreover, it’s estimated that M23 has been generating around $300,000 (€288,000) monthly from its control over mining territories. Following this trend, Rwanda’s mineral exports surged from $772 million (€741 million) in 2022 to $1.1 billion (€1.06 billion) in 2023, signaling deepening trade ties with international partners.
The DRC finance minister has alleged that the country loses nearly $1 billion annually in gold, tin, tantalum, and tungsten smuggled out by Rwanda. Recently, the Kinshasa government initiated criminal proceedings in France and Belgium against subsidiaries of major tech companies like Apple, accusing them of utilizing conflict minerals. Legal representatives for the DRC have claimed that at least nine refiners supplying Apple with tantalum source it from Rwanda, despite Rwanda’s near-zero production of the material.
Potential EU Responses
Belgium, having a historical legacy as the former colonial power in DRC, has been at the forefront of urging a robust EU response. Earlier this month, an EU diplomatic spokesperson signaled the bloc’s readiness to explore new restrictive measures against those perpetuating the armed conflict and instability in DRC.
However, suggestions to reconsider the minerals agreement have met with resistance. A spokesperson for the European Commission affirmed, “The partnership with Rwanda aims to support the sustainable and responsible sourcing and processing of raw materials.”
“The Memorandum of Understanding is designed to improve traceability and transparency while combatting the illegal trafficking of minerals,” they added.
Additionally, the EU continues to support Rwandan troops deployed to counter the rising Islamist insurgency in Mozambique’s Cabo Delgado province, having allocated an additional €20 million under the European Peace Facility last November.
When questioned about whether the alleged support of Rwandan forces for M23 could affect the funding from the European Peace Facility, a spokesperson refrained from commenting, noting that such a decision would necessitate unanimous agreement among all EU member states.
Photo credit & article inspired by: Euronews
