Once again, Congolese political circles and Muyaya’s paid media outlets have been in vilkage excitement mode over alleged plans “to sanction Rwanda in the United States Congress.”
This time, the claim is that the US Congress, supposedly with the backing of Vice President JD Vance, is preparing to impose severe measures.
This puerile jubilation did not emerge from an official congressional decision or a formal policy statement. It originated from an article published in US tabloids about Africa and was quickly turned into a political event. Imagine such a desperation!
For those that have been following Muyaya’s propaganda, the method is familiar and deliberate. A story is written, its relevance inflated, and then amplified by Kinshasa’s lobbying networks until it acquires the appearance of credibility. Celebration follows, not because anything has changed on the ground, but because illusion is mistaken for progress.
There have indeed been discussions in the US Congress. That much is true. But they were not convened to punish Rwanda. They focused on reviewing the implementation of the peace accords signed under the mediation of President Trump, with both parties asked to provide details of the steps taken so far.
What continues to be ignored is that the accords are structured around a clear chronology. They are not designed as a one way obligation imposed on Rwanda alone. Each provision is meant to follow the previous one, forming a sequence that cannot be selectively rearranged.
The issue of FDLR illustrates this clearly. The accords explicitly require the group to be dismantled, disarmed, and its members repatriated to Rwanda to face justice. This commitment was written, signed, and accepted, yet it is precisely the step Kinshasa avoids confronting.
Instead, attention is redirected toward slogans. Calls for Rwanda and M23 to leave Congolese territory are repeated endlessly, without addressing the practical questions of where, how, and under what security arrangements. Slogans replaces responsibility, and noise substitutes work. Typical of Kinshasa regime.
Sanctions are then presented as a solution. It has never worked, in fact, history suggests otherwise. Across the world, sanctions imposed by powerful states have rarely delivered peace; more often, they hardened extremisms and prolonged crises.
If the United States were ever to pursue sanctions for its own strategic reasons, including mineral interests facilitated by an inept leadership in Kinshasa, it would be a serious miscalculation. Imagining American forces confronting M23 or Rwanda belongs more to political fantasy than to policy reality.
Such a move would also compromise Washington’s role as a mediator.
The reality is simple: peace can only not come from respecting signed commitments, and doing the work they require.
Everything else is noise.
ellenkampire