In an interview with KilaloPress, public interest lawyer and climate advocate Olivier Ndoole welcomed the signing of the peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, seeing it as a significant step toward regional stability. While recognizing the potential for beneficial cooperation — particularly with international partners such as the United States — he emphasizes the need to implement the agreement in a way that respects the rights of local communities, national sovereignty, and environmental protection.
In the DRC, where the scars of conflict remain visible at every crossroads, the prospect of lasting calm between Kinshasa and Kigali brings both hope and skepticism. Though peace has been announced, its outlines remain vague. And in a region historically marked by violent resource exploitation, the memory of the past urges caution in interpreting diplomatic promises.
“We can only welcome these steps,” says Ndoole, “if they are steps aimed at stabilizing the region, at breaking with a bloodstained history of exploitation.”
But he warns: history has shown that agreements without solid guarantees can quickly become instruments of plunder. For such agreements to truly benefit Congolese communities and their environment, peace declarations must translate into concrete, inclusive, and transparent mechanisms. Behind the carefully worded official statements, civil society remains vigilant.
As Ndoole puts it bluntly: “At this stage, it’s difficult to conduct a thorough analysis because the process has been kept secret — perhaps under the pretext of being secured.”
Yet despite these shadowy areas, his analysis is not an outright rejection. It is rooted in firsthand experience and a clear understanding of the geopolitical moment the DRC is going through.
“We can only welcome these steps if they are steps meant to stabilize the region, to foster an environment — if you will — that breaks with bloodstained exploitation.”
The past looms large in every sentence: colonial exploitation, massacres, the looting of resources under international silence — traumas that have nurtured justified mistrust.
“First, the Congolese had to be massacred, driven off their lands… so the minerals could be exploited, so phones could be made. That is unacceptable in the 21st century.”
Yet Ndoole distinguishes this painful past from a present that, though uncertain, offers a glimmer of opportunity. And he raises a critical question — central to the debate on energy transition and ethical supply chains:“Strategic minerals — strategic for whom?”
Here, he subtly refers to the growing involvement of actors like the United States, which has recently expressed a willingness to cooperate with the DRC, including through regional stabilization efforts. This renewed international interest could be beneficial — but only under strict conditions.
“Can Congolese minerals become a real strategy for the Democratic Republic of Congo, one that takes into account the interests of Congolese communities as well as the sovereignty of the country? That will depend on the operational framework.”
Skepticism remains high: so far, no annexes of the agreement have been made public, and no environmental clauses or guarantees regarding profit redistribution are known. But the possibility of a turning point is not dismissed — provided this agreement breaks with past extractive abuses.
Ndoole insists that provisions must ensure “accountability clauses and due diligence that take into account the cherished rights of local communities.” In other words: no peace without justice. No cooperation without sovereignty. No global energy transition at the expense of the Congolese people.
“Having an agreement is one thing. But making it operational so that we, the small farmers on the ground, can truly benefit from it… that’s another matter.”
Ndoole is neither naïve nor closed off. He acknowledges that “States survive through cooperation” and that the goal is not to reject all collaboration. But he demands that such cooperation be fair, transparent, rooted in law, and environmentally respectful.
“We must look for bridges, connecting elements.”
These could include regional diplomacy, partnerships with the United States, African institutions — but never at the cost of silence over past and present violence.
What Ndoole proposes is a demanding peace. A conditional peace. A peace as a rupture, not as a repetition.
He reminds us that a political agreement, if it ignores local dynamics, ancestral lands, and community rights, is just a piece of paper. And a document, without justice and transparency, can become the mask of a new form of dispossession. While negotiators speak of stability, those living on mining lands are still waiting for proof. Real peace, he suggests, will begin the day Congolese people no longer have to flee their land so the world can recharge its batteries.
By KilaloPress