A recent report issued by the American Medical Association (AMA) has had me and SOS FED’s staff thinking about some possibly unexploited “entry points” in the fight against sexual violence in Congo. The AMA report revealed that 74% of reported rapes in the Kivus and Ituri Province in 2009 occurred during active combat. This is not surprising, as conflict breeds insecurity and vulnerability in a manner more potent than possibly any of the other factors of the rape epidemic in Congo under current scrutiny. It’s evident that when chaos takes root, the most vulnerable of the population, in Congo the women and children, suffer disproportionately. These cases represent three-fourths of the cases of rape in Congo.

However, SOS FED beneficiaries being interviewed by our field staff have begun to tell a different story concerning their vulnerability which draws a bit of our focus towards the remaining quarter of cases from the AMA study-the women being raped in areas where conflict isn’t a daily reality. While fighting occurs semi-regularly in SOS FED program areas (some areas worse than others), the majority of the rapes SOS FED beneficiaries report occur while they are pursuing the most mundane of daily tasks under relatively peaceful regional circumstances. Often, the rapes occur in broad daylight in villages deemed more secure than others in Fizi Territory. The beneficiaries report to us that cultivation, collection of firewood, and taking water from Lake Tanganyika have gone from predictable work to be done on a daily basis to frightening and risk-filled work. This forms a troublesome question to consider: Why exactly does the number of rapes continue to increase in areas where fighting has lulled, accounting for nearly a quarter of the cases of rape reported in eastern Congo in 2009?

One major factor to consider in answering this question is the presence of soldiers across eastern Congo, even in areas not directly involved in current fighting. Contrary to widespread perception of Congo, there are areas in which gunshots don’t regularly provide the evening soundtrack. Nevertheless, in these areas we encounter no shortage of FARDC troops. These soldiers have been brought up and trained in the Congolese military system in which impunity and lack of oversight are the norms. MONUSCO supports them with medicine, food, ammunition, but has not yet come to the point where monitoring of what they do with these materials occurs in any clear fashion. Thus, we see large brigades of underpaid, well-armed, soldiers not necessarily involved in defense (because of lack of a clear enemy or lack of a will to protect civilians) of a community. The stage is set in this way for even secure villages to be overtaken by sexual violence and other crimes against civilians as these soldiers not only lack a clear mission but also lack the oversight necessary to ensure that undisciplined soldiers do not feed off the population.

Civilian rape is possibly a more compelling point of interest in assessing the vulnerability Congolese women face, even when residing in more secure regions of the country. A recent study by the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative (HHI) shows nearly a 17-fold increase in the incidents of civilian rape reported to organizations working with victims of sexual violence between 2004 and 2008. One of the contributors to this study, which was conducted in South Kivu, commented that, “Before [rape] was like a gun in a war. Today, though things have cooled down, the mindset remains in people…” Thus, we see that rape has becoming increasingly normalized among civilians. If it’s true that violence begets violence, by the same logic rape begets rape. Civilians have not only viewed rape on an immense scale throughout the years, but also seen that very few violators are punished for their crimes. The international community has a controversial role in this regard; MONUSCO’s extensive support to the FARDC is on shaky ground given that nearly 80% of the rapes reported in the region occur at the hands of their troops. Does this not send the wrong message to soldiers and civilians alike across Congo?

It is possible that the insufficient focus has been place on the “25%” of the AMA study. If nearly 75% of rapes occur during active conflict, then a quarter of the rapes occurring in eastern Congo occur in areas enjoying periods of relative peace. For those hoping to stop sexual violence in Congo, this quarter of cases demonstrates a key point of entry. Steven Levitt noted in Freakonomics that arms are simply a way to upset the “natural order” of things, and nowhere is this more evident in Congo. A woman who knows her rights, knows how to stay safe, and does not expose herself to vulnerability-increasing behavior still will fall when it comes down to an armed man with an intent to rape. In a conflict-ridden Congo, this is a given despite the best efforts by NGOs and civil society groups. Perhaps an emphasis on prevention (collective cultivation, education, rights training, etc.) among women in areas not rife with fighting is a means of eliminating the cases of sexual violence which represent the 25% of the non-conflict related rapes occurring across eastern Congo ever year.  These cases being eliminated would surely represent the most significant reduction of sexual violence which has occurred in Congo to date since the epidemic came to be in the early years of the conflict.

Working to eliminate the 25% of cases occurring in non-conflict situations could have significant implications on the 75% of cases occurring in conflict. First, the empowerment of a group of women who otherwise would have been victimized forms a potent tool in the regional effort to eliminate sexual violence. Secondly, and more importantly, if and when the conflict in eastern Congo comes to a close, the prevention of rape in non-conflict situations will be valuable to ensure that civilian rape is curbed. It would be ill-advised to assume that rape in Congo will end because of the end of the conflict, given that numbers of civilian rape are on the rise.

This thinking has really informed our approach to sexual violence in Congo for 2011. We hope to stress prevention in areas where prevention can work. This is not to say that we ignore areas where conflict induced vulnerability reigns supreme, but means that we place equal value in the effort to prevent rape where possible through programs and education as we do in our effort to treat women who suffer rape in Fizi Territory’s more dangerous conflict zones. It is a fine balance, but focusing a bit on the 25% of cases which don’t occur at the barrel of a gun might make significant progress in the fight against sexual violence in Congo.

Ned Meerdink

One of the more frustrating aspects of working in the regions of Congo currently under the yoke of Kimya II operations is the stopping of programs already in place due to declining security and risky travel situations. Admittedly, this is a paltry inconvenience when compared with the problems facing civilians all too often directly in the line of fire; their worries are much more significant than those NGOs face. Entire rural villages are being burned up by rebels it daily recently in South Kivu. However, when speaking of the declining quality of life and availability of services that face Congolese during active combat and operations, the blocking of NGO work definitely comes into play. Examples…

One of the AP partners in eastern Congo with whom I have been working, SOS Femmes en Danger, recently appealed to the foundation run by Diane Von Furstenburg for financing to get uniforms and supplies to children of rape victims and single mothers (many mothers themselves are still young enough to be students) in Fizi Territorry villages currently more or less run by FDLR and Mai-Mai militias. Ms. Von Furstenburg was more than generous with us, and the huge hurdle that gaining even minimal amounts of financing usually is for organizations in eastern Congo was made remarkably simple. With the money in place, we got to work putting together hundreds of uniforms and supply sets for kids who pretty much wouldn’t be able to even find their obligatory uniforms due to the cutting of supply routes in their area. This all seems to be adding up to what could be called a ‘successful intervention’ by many, n’est-pas?

Here’s the gritty part: The Kimya II operations in our area have more or less closed the roads due South. Roads that are still passable are manned by a variety of militia soldiers, obviously generally unconcerned with letting free school uniforms get through to more isolated communities. On the contrary, OCHA offices have informed me that not only will the Mai-Mai in question likely interrogate and extort us along the road, but they will likely take whatever is being carried towards Fizi and simply refuse the parcels back after ‘inspection.’ I’ve got no problem riding on a motorbike with heavy boxes for 14 hours, but not just to get robbed along the way. So, we look into taking a boat on Lake Tanganyika around the heavy combat zones, and we’re told that will cost for the moment is about $600 due to the regional insecurity and soaring gas prices (those lines have been cut off or at least limited as well). No chance…

So, as the deadline for the beginning of the school year creeps closer, this prime example of frustrations encountered by NGOs with limited financing is rearing its ugly head. Waiting and wringing our hands is an option, but can only go so far. Hopefully, we’ll be able to convince the UN helicopters moving everywhere these days to organize a good old fashioned air drop, but that seems more than a little far-fetched. Welcome to eastern Congo during the epoch of Kimya II.

Ned Meerdink

Where in the world is the FDLR?

That seems to be the question going around Uvira recently, as the current government military operation called Kimya II (which means something like ‘quiet’ or ‘invisible’ in Swahili) is taking hold in South Kivu. Kimya II is being conducted against the usual suspects-the Rwandan FDLR rebels, who have at their leadership certain participants in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. The operation is more than confusing, as it combines battalions of former enemies like the Mai Mai and CNDP (formerly led by Laurent Nkunda) with the Congolese FARDC forces in order to form a force capable of tracking the FDLR rebels and bringing an end to their long-standing presence in eastern Congo. The success of Kimya II seems unlikely for a number of reasons, primarily because the force meant to fight off the FDLR is composed of forces which have traditionally been extremely antagonistic to each other. For example, just last December, the CNDP was literally within spitting distance of taking Goma from the FARDC forces, with the Mai Mai lingering in the era and periodically attacking both the CNDP and FARDC. Massacres, pillaging, and rape were committed by all three forces involved in the Goma fighting-even by FARDC soldiers fleeing the occupation of their city. Additionally, the now reintegrated CNDP soldiers were part of the battalions which attacked and occupied Bukavu in 2004, raping and pillaging indiscriminately. No one has forgotten this. Now, the Congolese government is hoping all three will work together in harmony to throw out the FDLR, which is marked as an enemy of all armed groups involved.

FDLR positions in eastern Congo. Uvira is located about 30km south of Sange. (courtesy: MONUC)

FDLR positions in eastern Congo. Uvira is located about 30km south of Sange. (courtesy: MONUC)

The population here is obviously almost unanimously against Kimya II and the threat it poses to civilians in South Kivu. First, there is little proof that the FARDC is capable, even with its new found ‘friends,’ of threatening the FDLR rebels. The FDLR rebels are well-entrenched throughout South and North Kivu and commonly regarded as more adequately trained than the FARDC. The Kimya II force seems merely to anger the rebels, then flee their attack, leaving civilians exposed to FDLR ‘revenge.’ Going further, all the groups intended to force the FDLR out are more used to acting directly AGAINST the best interests of the civilian population. Recent investigations by Oxfam (interviews in 20 communities within South Kivu) and Human Rights Watch (interviews throughout North and South Kivu) in the East have commented on the massive abuses by both the FARDC soldiers and their Mai Mai allies, most surveys concluding that communities here have at least as much fear of ‘their own’ troops as the FDLR rebels. These interviews included many of the reintegrated forces (combining former rebels with FARDC) which form the Kimya II force. Finally, no one in the community is neglecting to mention the obvious truth that when the FDLR are being hunted down, the massacres of civilians invariably increase in frequency.

Recent killings across South Kivu have revealed a clear pattern. First, the government forces attack a particular FDLR rebel stronghold as part of Kimya II operations. The FDLR then recedes into surrounding forest areas in order to regroup and plan a counter-attack. This counter-attack occurs, the FARDC troops flee, and the FDLR is left to attack the civilians. This just happened in Busurungi village in South Kivu, with at least 100 civilians killed. A Washington Post article commented that the attacked FDLR rebels recaptured Busurungi village ‘…without resistance from the government forces, who had already moved to another area,’ and then simply arrived to massacre the civilian population. These types of attacks have created the current IDP (internally displaced person) problem in eastern Congo, with at least 900,000 fleeing their homes in North and South Kivu since January. Add to that the 300,000 which fled in December 2008, and you have over 1 million new IDPs in the last 7 months or so.

If anything, Kimya II is merely inciting more violence, causing more distrust and fear among the community, and creating a situation where the IDP population will continue to increase in number. I am certainly seeing this aspect of the ‘fall out’ in Uvira recently, as the constant stream of IDPs fleeing violence in surrounding villages ends in Uvira. Trucks have been coming in to town with astonishing frequency full of IDPs leaving their homes in Lemera, Sange, Livungi, and other villages with strong FDLR presence. Simple lines of those fleeing on foot carrying everything they own are now unfortunately a part of the landscape between Uvira and Bukavu. This is just another situation in Congo which seems to lack a clear military solution, as civilians always bear the brunt of these ‘efforts at consolidating the peace.’ The question I am curious is to ask those leaving their homes is whether they are fleeing the FDLR rebels, the Kimya II forces, or both. Frustratingly typical in Congo, civilians merely move from one hot spot to another, with no one reliable to turn to for protection and no time to come up for air.

Ned Meerdink

My border crossings in Congo have become rather intricate afffairs with the complexity of the process increasing in proportion to the amount of time spent in Congo. I really had not realized exactly how bizarre this seemingly simple (and ‘official’) process had become until this last week, when three very typical border crossings led to accusations that I am: 1) participating in the arms trade, 2) traveling with a fake passport, and 3) carrying (and producing!) fake visas. It seems that the longer I stay in Congo, the more explaining I have to do in terms of justifying my existence. Unlike a worker for a large NGO or a consultant with a clearly defined arrival/departure date, I just sort of keep ‘sticking around’, which has led to lots of stories forming in officials’ heads about why exactly I prefer to spend so much time in Congo rather then spending more time in more ‘familiar parts of the world.’

As Congo has been thoroughly upset through the last few decades by the gamut of foreign threats, it is not so surprising that border guards and soldiers could be extremely cautious. But, these guys in Congo take it to a while new level. One of the complicating factors, in my opinion, is my designation as a ‘student’ which leaves a lot of room for people to fill in what ever they think might be your real intentions here. If you say you are a student, guards often test out a hypothesis of you being engaged in intelligence gathering for a number of countries, typically including Rwanda and Uganda. If this theory is quickly dismissed by some well-placed manufactured stupidity (e.g. asking the guard, ‘Where is Uganda?’) then other theories quickly surface, such as mineral trading or political ‘agitating’. Education in eastern Congo is looked on as a tool for outsiders to become better plunderers, better critics of the government, or better informed as to the atrocities going on daily in Congo. In this unique circumstance, Western education doesn’t open many doors, but can keep you from going through ones you have a right to pass through.

The truly disturbing part for me, however, is how ready and willing the border guards charged with curbing foreign threats from arriving on Congolese territory are to accepting any small amount of money to let any possible trumped up violation vanish into thin air. After any accusation, an offer will eventually arise hinting that a few dollars will make all these problems disappear. Accused of moving AK-47s in checked baggage? ‘Irrigate’ the guard a bit and this baggage goes through without so much as a once-over. Has your passport’s validity been questioned? Pay a little and you could pass the border with bar coaster with your name scribbled on it in purple crayon. No one is undertaking the heavy questioning and suspicion I meet at border crossings for any reason except to get paid off and any questions of legality or protection of civilians, even in cases where guards might find someone doing something less than above board, will always be quickly swept under the rug by border guards looking for a quick payout. I consider it a point of pride to refuse these and all bribes, and rely on a healthy does of patience and competitive spirit (‘I can wait out even the most persistent corrupt guard’). Getting accused of horrendous things isn’t scary. However, understanding how easily these things occur in this atmosphere of complete impunity (despite a well-manned border patrol) is the scary part. The fight against small arms, counterfeit money, and all other undesirable inputs will always be futile if it only takes a little money and negotiation to bring them onto Congolese soil.

Ned Meerdink

As I have been writing recently about the Mai-Mai militias in North and South Kivu, I wanted to offer up this article from the Irish Times speaking about the links between MONUC, the UN peacekeeping operation in Congo, and this militia, which is famous for their arbitrary attacks, ‘side-changing,’ and their medication taken to deflect bullets and RPG rounds (called ‘mai,’ which is appropriate as it is made of a mixture of herbs, water-mai is Swahili for water, and local booze).  It’s said to make you invulnerable, but I’ve definitely seen the opposite to be true following FARDC vs. Mai-Mai battles.

This article definitly speaks to the chaos which could break out if this current operation againt the FDLR (called ‘Operation Kimya’ [Swahili for 'quiet,' or 'silent']) ends up anything like the last December offensive, which was a part of Kimya as well and a disaster.  FDLR massacres in remote villages have already begun again with the growing pressure on their bases, and they are not ignorant to the fact they are soon to be ‘hunted’ in eastern Congo again, causing violent backlashes against Congolese.

Take a look at this article and let me know what your thoughts are.  I am confused as you might be.

Ned Meerdink

Terrified civilians say a UN-backed military force is raping, looting and killing villagers at will: Minova/Sud Kivu, Congo

by STEPHANIE MCCRUMMEN in the IRISH TIMES, 28 June 2009

A CONGOLESE military operation against Rwandan rebels who have caused years of conflict in eastern Congo is unleashing fresh horrors across this region’s rolling green hills.

The mission, backed logistically by UN peacekeepers and politically by the US, aims to disband the remaining 7,000 or so Rwandan Hutu rebels who fled into eastern Congo after the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

But since the operation began in January, villagers have recounted nightmarish stories that raise questions about whether the military action will ultimately cause more destruction than it prevents.

At least half a million people have fled a rebel campaign of village burnings and retaliatory killings, including a massacre of more than 100 people in which several civilians were decapitated. At the same time, people are also fleeing the advance of their own predatory army – a toxic mishmash of mostly unpaid, underfed, ill-trained former militiamen churned into the military after various peace deals.

According to an army spokesman, the deputy to the commander in charge of the operation is an ex-militia leader and wanted war crimes suspect known as the Terminator. Villagers say soldiers are killing people accused of collaborating with the rebels. And in scenes that recall the brutalities of Belgian colonial rule, commanders are forcing locals to carry supplies across the forest, killing those who collapse from exhaustion.

“Pastors, teachers, students, everyone must carry, and not for one day, for weeks,” said Kalinda Hangi, a former teacher who has filled a notebook with names of people killed by the rebels and the army in his area. “They make you build their tents, take water – if you don’t obey, they kill you.”

In its mission, the army is being supported by trucks, food, attack helicopters and other equipment provided by the UN peacekeepers, but the co-operation has spawned criticism.

Humanitarian workers say the operation has paralysed assistance to newly displaced persons, and a UN inter-agency committee last month described “a fundamental conflict” between the UN support of the army and the world body’s mandate to protect civilians.

“This operation is definitely doing more harm than good,” said Julien Attakla, who heads the UN human rights section in North Kivu province, where the operation has been centred. The rebels “have never been as dangerous to the population as they are now. And the Congolese army – what are the chances of them carrying out a successful operation? They are looting houses, looting farms, raping everywhere, using forced labour – that’s the real face of this operation.”

Diplomats from the UN, Europe, the US and especially from neighbouring Rwanda have pressured Congo for years to act against the Hutu rebels, who are known as the FDLR (Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda) and include leaders accused of helping organise Rwanda’s genocide.

Although they are no longer considered an immediate threat to the Rwandan government, the rebels have in the past collaborated with the Congolese army, sharing weapons and fighting against common enemies. The rebels have set up parallel administrations in many areas, preying on villagers and controlling much of the region’s lucrative mineral trade.

Their presence has prompted Rwanda to invade Congo twice, and to back two Congolese rebel movements, fuelling a complex conflict that has become the deadliest since the second World War.

By some estimates, the fighting and related turmoil have left at least five million people dead over the past decade.

US and UN officials say the operation – initially supported by thousands of Rwandan soldiers – is a crucial part of a wider political and economic deal to mend the destructive relationship between Rwanda and Congo, and to return stability to Congo’s long-suffering east. They say the operation has forced hundreds of rebels to desert and has disrupted their command and weakened their hold on the mineral trade, though analysts dispute the latter two gains.

Top UN officials say that if they were not co-operating with the army, human rights abuses would be worse.

“We’ve been mandated to support this army, and we are trying to the best of our ability to improve their performance and protect civilians,” said Hiroute Guebre Sellassie, head of the UN office in North Kivu province.

Still, there have been dozens of rebel attacks since the operation began, many advertised in advance by rebels who have left leaflets in villages promising death to anyone who helps the army.

The most brutal attack came last month in the village of Busurungi, where at least 100 people were massacred, according to several survivors.

The army had taken up position in the formerly rebel-held village, but most of the soldiers had moved on by the time the rebels arrived one night. A few militiamen tried to fight back, but ran out of ammunition.

“They called us civilians and said, ‘Our bullets are finished, try to run’,” said Angelus Bahavu, secretary to a traditional king in the area.

As he ran, he saw rebels force screaming women and children back into their huts, which they set on fire. Rebels guarded the doors to prevent anyone from escaping, he and others said. The rebels slammed babies against trees, and people fleeing were killed with arrows, machetes and guns.

In a tactic aimed at terrorising those who might co-operate with the army, rebels decapitated several people, whose heads were then placed on tree branches planted at the entrance to the village.

“They told people, ‘You are bringing these troops to hunt us, now we will hunt you’,” said Bahavu, who eventually made his way to a sprawling camp of banana-leaf huts. – ( LA Times-Washington Post )