Lead

One year after Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo signed a US-brokered peace agreement in Washington, Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe has accused the United States of increasingly biased mediation and of unfairly targeting Kigali with sanctions. Speaking to France 24 and RFI, Nduhungirehe said Washington had sanctioned Rwandan entities while Kinshasa had failed to honour its own commitments under the 2025 accords. At the same time, residents of eastern Congo told Africa News that little has changed on the ground, with violence and displacement continuing in a region already facing one of the world’s most severe humanitarian crises.

The agreement, signed on 27 June 2025 and witnessed by US President Donald Trump, was intended to address core security concerns on both sides. The Democratic Republic of Congo committed to dismantling the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), an armed group Rwanda links to the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, while Rwanda agreed to withdraw its forces and end alleged support for the M23 rebel group. Multiple outlets report that neither side has fully delivered.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting from RFI, AllAfrica and France 24 centres on Nduhungirehe’s complaints about US policy and the fresh sanctions imposed on Gasabo Gold, a Rwandan gold-refining company, along with two of its executives and three related mining firms. Those measures, announced around 25 June, freeze assets and bar US persons from dealing with the entities; Washington alleges the companies helped smuggle gold from areas controlled by M23. Nduhungirehe framed the sanctions as one-sided, arguing that Kigali alone is being punished while the Congolese government has neither observed a ceasefire nor neutralised the FDLR and has instead, he claimed, supplied the group with weapons.

Africa News takes a different emphasis, focusing on conditions in eastern Congo a full year after the signing. Residents of Goma, a strategic city still under M23 control, expressed frustration that the diplomatic breakthrough produced no tangible improvement. Independent political analyst Jacinthe Maarifa, quoted by Africa News, identified a persistent lack of trust as the greatest obstacle, noting that both parties began interpreting the text to suit their own interests almost immediately and continued inflammatory rhetoric. Maarifa also suggested that sanctions imposed by the mediators themselves weakened the process from the outset.

RFI and AllAfrica supply additional context on the broader conflict: eastern DRC has endured decades of fighting involving the national army and more than 100 armed groups competing for land, power and minerals such as gold and coltan. M23 controls large swathes of the east; the DRC, the United Nations and several Western governments accuse Rwanda of supporting the rebels, a charge Kigali denies. Rwanda in turn names the FDLR as its principal security threat and accuses Kinshasa of failing to dismantle it. France 24 reports that the United Nations estimates 6,000 to 7,000 Rwandan troops remain deployed in the DRC; Nduhungirehe declined to commit to a withdrawal, insisting the deal is bilateral and that peace cannot rest on only one party implementing its obligations. The same outlet notes that on 26 June the DRC filed a case against Rwanda at the International Court of Justice alleging a genocidal campaign, a move Nduhungirehe dismissed as a political manoeuvre.

Across the four outlets the core timeline and the existence of the sanctions are consistent, while the weight given to Rwandan official statements versus civilian voices in Goma differs. All sources present the peace process as fragile and under renewed pressure.

Key Claims

  • Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo signed a US-brokered peace agreement in Washington on 27 June 2025, as reported by RFI, France 24, AllAfrica and Africa News.
  • The United States imposed fresh sanctions on Gasabo Gold, a Rwandan gold-refining company, two executives and three related firms over alleged links to mineral trafficking from M23-controlled areas, according to RFI, AllAfrica and France 24.
  • Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe stated that Kigali is being unfairly blamed and that the Congolese government has failed to meet its commitments under the deal, a position carried by RFI, AllAfrica and France 24.
  • Nduhungirehe accused the United States of sanctioning Kigali alone while Kinshasa fails to honour the 2025 Washington Accords and described US mediation as increasingly biased, as reported by France 24 and echoed in RFI and AllAfrica.
  • The M23 rebel group controls large swathes of eastern Congo, according to RFI and AllAfrica.
  • Rwanda identifies the FDLR as its main security threat and accuses the Congolese government of failing to dismantle the group, as stated in RFI and AllAfrica reporting.
  • Residents of eastern Congo, including in M23-held Goma, say little has changed on the ground since the agreement was signed, according to Africa News.
  • The conflict has displaced millions of people and produced one of the world’s most severe humanitarian crises, as reported by Africa News.
  • Independent political analyst Jacinthe Maarifa believes a lack of trust between the parties remains the greatest obstacle to implementation, a view carried by Africa News.

Perspectives

Rwandan government

Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe maintains that Rwanda is being singled out by US sanctions and biased mediation while the Democratic Republic of Congo has neither ceased fire nor neutralised the FDLR. He argues the agreement is bilateral, rejects unilateral withdrawal of Rwandan forces, and dismisses the DRC’s ICJ case as a political manoeuvre.

Congolese and regional security claims

The DRC, the United Nations and several Western governments assert that Rwanda supports M23, an allegation Kigali denies. Kinshasa has taken the matter to the International Court of Justice, accusing Rwanda of waging a genocidal campaign. On the ground, civilians in eastern Congo report continued violence and no improvement a year after the accords.

Independent analysis

Political analyst Jacinthe Maarifa attributes the stalemate primarily to mutual distrust, noting that both sides quickly reinterpreted the agreement to serve their own interests and that mediator-imposed sanctions further undermined confidence.