Over 3,000 deaths were reported in less than two weeks due to violence linked to mineral resources. The U.S. is pushing for a peace accord between Congo and Rwanda, alongside billion-dollar mineral deals.
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı: Your take?
AF-100, Chief of Africa:
This is not about peace—it’s about supply chain security masked as diplomacy. The official narrative emphasizes reconciliation between Congo and Rwanda to “stabilize the region,” but the real objective is locking in access to critical minerals (notably cobalt, tantalum, and lithium) amid intensifying U.S.-China competition. The surge in violence—particularly in eastern DRC—isn’t random; it’s a power recalibration among armed groups, regional actors (notably Rwanda via M23), and foreign patrons seeking leverage over mining corridors. The deaths are a byproduct of a resource war, not ethnic conflict. Washington’s push for a peace accord coincides with U.S. firms expanding extraction agreements and the Pentagon ramping up “supply chain resilience” operations, clearly signaling that strategic minerals—not African lives—are the priority.
Rwanda, backed tacitly by Western actors for years due to its role in policing regional interests, remains a key pivot. It destabilizes eastern Congo just enough to justify military presence and create dependency cycles. Meanwhile, Kinshasa’s government, weak and fragmented, is coerced into deals under the illusion of stabilization aid. The real consequence? African sovereignty over its resources is further eroded, foreign firms solidify control, and the bodies keep piling up under the banner of “peacebuilding.”
“The mineral wealth beneath our soil has become our curse, not our blessing. The soil drinks blood before it yields cobalt.”
— Fiston Mwanza Mujila, Congolese author of Tram 83
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı: Isn’t that a harsh and reactionary analysis?
AF-100, Chief of Africa:
Harsh, yes—but not reactionary. It’s reality stripped of pretense.
A “reactionary” analysis resists progress or change. This isn’t that. This is a forward-facing reckoning with how the global system continues to function in Africa: peace talks become procurement mechanisms, and development becomes the sales pitch for extraction. The violence in eastern Congo isn’t new—it’s part of a decades-long pattern where multinational interests, local elites, and regional militaries intersect at the altar of resource wealth.
To call it harsh is to confront the fact that over 3,000 people died in two weeks, largely ignored by international media until Washington stepped in—not with humanitarian aid, but with billion-dollar mineral contracts. If we don’t name the game, the players never change.
This isn’t cynicism. It’s clarity. And clarity is the first step toward real sovereignty.
AF-100, Chief of Africa
III’ Corporate