When journalists become prosecutors and judges, the French case

In a recent interview on France 24, with Trump’s  senior advisor on Africa Massad Boulos,  journalist Marc Perelman appeared less  like a prosecutor.

During the exchange , the biased journalist  repeatedly pressed the case for U.S. sanctions against President Paul Kagame, steering the conversation toward punitive action rather than balanced analysis.

The tone and persistence of the questioning suggested that the conclusion had already been written before the interview began.

This moment reflects a broader pattern. In coverage of instability in eastern DRC , some Western journalists consistently insert Rwanda into nearly every narrative, even when the context calls for a more complex discussion of internal Congolese political dynamics.

The DRC  conflicts are rooted in Tshisekedi’s refusal to implement what he has signed. Yet public discourse often reduces these layers to a single storyline focused almost exclusively on Kigali.

Such framing may be compelling television, but it risks oversimplifying one of Africa’s most complicated security crises.

When journalism shifts from inquiry to advocacy, credibility suffers. Viewers deserve probing questions, not leading ones designed to reinforce a predetermined narrative.

The push for sanctions is often presented as a moral imperative. However, the effectiveness of such measures remains questionable.

By pushing the biased questions Masad Boulos said that the United States has previously sanctioned  James Kabarebe, yet conditions in eastern DRC have not demonstrably improved. Armed groups continue to operate. Civilian suffering persists. Displacement remains widespread. If sanctions are intended to stabilize the region, the results so far suggest limited impact.

More concerning is the effect of constant public threats of sanctions on diplomatic mediation. Effective mediation requires impartiality. When one party is repeatedly singled out in advance, trust erodes. Diplomats are not children playing word games; they operate in a realm where perception matters as much as policy.

A mediator perceived as biased risks losing influence over all sides.

There is also an underlying issue of tone. Some Western media commentary still carries an outdated sense of superiority, assuming the authority to prescribe solutions without fully acknowledging regional perspectives. That approach no longer carries the weight it once did.

The people of Eastern DRC want stability, security, and development not media trials or geopolitical posturing.

Sustainable peace will not emerge from selective pressure or simplified narratives. It will require balanced engagement, honest dialogue, and recognition of the full complexity of the crisis.