 Despite multiple agreements and negotiations calling for the rebel group M23 to stop their hostilities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the group has continued to be on the offensive. Massive amounts of casualties and large-scale displacements have been caused as a result of the group's actions. The group is active primarily in the eastern region of the DRC, bordering Rwanda. Kambali Musavili from the Center for Research on the Congo talks about the history of the rebel group, the forces backing them, and why has this violence continued through the decades despite multiple peace treaties? When we discuss the M23, it's really important to really know the historical trajectory of the DRC from 1996 to present. The M23 often is discussed as a new rebel group. Most people who enter the Congo now to understand why are people being displaced, they will not know that the M23 that we are discussing today were called AFDL in 1996. It's really the same rebel group. What happened in 1996? There was an invasion of the DRC by Rwanda and Uganda supported by the United States and the United Kingdom, because they are a US-LIN, a British ally on the so-called war on terror. When the 1996 war started, we know today over 6 million communities have died in the conflict. The IRC estimated from 1998 to 2007, 5.4 million communities have died in the conflict, half of them being children under the age of five. We're talking about over 3 million children under the age of five died in the conflict. What is this conflict about? It's to get access to Congo's resources, it's to displace populations from places where resources are and continue to keep the Congo in the so-called production chain of the capitalist world as a place where it's used for plunder of resources and that the human beings that live on the land, who live on the land are not considered as human beings. They are considered as colliderals. That's what we've had millions. The M23 today is not as much different as the M23 1996 when they were called AFDL. It's not as much different as the so-called RCD rebel group in 1998. It's not as much different as the rebel group called the CNDP in 2009 and then in 2012 they changed the name to M23. As we speak right now, they don't call themselves M23 anymore. They call themselves ARC, our main revolutionary corollais, which is revolutionary corollais army. So in a few years we'll be referencing them as ARC. So they keep changing the name, but the commanders are the same. Sultanim Akemga, a former Rwandan soldier, was leading the CNDP, was leading the RCD, was leading the AFDL. It's the same rebel group. So why are they stopping? They will never stop until there is accountability for the crimes in DRC. This is something that every corollais know. There is a culture of impunity in DRC. What does that mean? We've had over 6 million people dead. Who has been held accountable for the killing in DRC? Be it an international level or local level? Who has been really held accountable for the plunder of Congo's resources? So when we look at the framework, militia groups are behaving in a way that is exactly the same as the culture of impunity. As long as there is a culture of impunity, there will always be crimes. So there is a body in East Africa, the East African community. Congo is not a member of the East African community that has met multiple times. They have created a path to peace in DRC through an Nairobi communique and through the African Union, the African Union has appointed Angola as a mediator and has had the presence of Angola Lorenzo, also engage in it. And there is a further route, as they call it, from the Lwanda calling for parties to not support rubber groups. Calling on Lwanda actually to stop supporting rubber groups and calling on the M23 to stop taking over town after town. They have also even sent troops in DRC, the East African community. There is a military force being sent. When this military force was sent in DRC, the Congolese society was really clear that it would not work. Why? We've had military solutions for a very clear political problem. There is a political problem of Congo's neighbor invading the Congo, looting their resources and not being held accountable. To solve it, we're going to a praxis force, asking the praxis force to stop. When the UN clearly showing that Rwanda is arming the rubber group, so how will the M23 stop when the M23 is financed back from Rwanda and Rwanda is not sanctioned? So until there is bold diplomacy, we know what will stop. The cultural impunity needs to stop. What does that actually mean? A clear sanction from foreign institutions to Rwanda. I'm not a fan of unilateral sanctions from the United States to other nations, but I'm in support of African nations looking at the situation in DRC and saying due to the death toll, due to the killing, Rwanda should not either be part of the African Union, should not be allowed to use a so-called image polished by Tony Blair and Bill Clinton around the world as a miracle success story based on lives on the blood of the Congolese, that there is a consensus around the world, just as we had a consensus around apartheid. That apartheid is a crime against humanity. When it comes to the millions of dead in the Congo, the world must say that there is a genocide happening in the Congo and we should hold those perpetrating these violence, these killings accountable. How will they do it? On October 1st, 2010, the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights in Geneva published the UN Mapping Excesses report. This report says that what's happening in the Congo are war crimes, crimes against humanity, and possible genocide if proven in a competent court. They specifically added the if proven and competent court because of actually Rwanda's blackmail, the initial report actually just say end genocide. After Rwanda putting pressure on the United Nations that if they don't change the sentence genocide, they will remove the troops for UN peacekeeping missions and that's something for people to know. That's why Rwanda's role in the world is to serve as proxy of foreign interests or Western interests. That's how the troops are in Haiti, in Mali, in Central Africa, Republic and in Mozambique. So that's a while. If you do not change that word, we are going to remove our troops. So it's changed. So the report say war crimes, crimes against humanity, and possible genocide if proven in the competent court. So if we have to prove it in the court, we need a tribunal. And the same report proposed that there need to be an international tribunal for the crimes committed in the Congo. The Congolese support this initiative. This is why the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Dr. Mukwege, who has done tremendous work with the people of the Congo, especially the women who have been affected by war in the U.C. by treating them there, in his Nobel Peace Prize speech, he clearly said that justice is not negotiable. That was his speech, his acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony. And he said that it is time for accountability for crimes and for the creation of an international tribunal for Congo so that people in the Congo can try those weapons that are portrayed. That's the solution. So when we create a tribunal, which will have international jurisdiction, we can hold the perpetrator of violence accountable. But it is not what's being proposed. What's being proposed is a military force. So we've had the East African community send its soldiers, right? And when the soldiers arrive in the Congo, what have they done? They've actually created a buffer zone where the Congolese army cannot enter and where the M23 is operating. And the buffer zone hasn't stopped the M23 from taking over town after town. And this has angered the Congolese population because we are asking ourselves, what did the Kenyan forces come to the DRC? What did the Burundian force come to the DRC? What did the Ugandan forces come to the DRC? And we also have random soldiers, officers also in the operation operating in the DRC when the M23 is not being stopped and moving from town to town. So we are clear that the military solution is not going to work. We've seen the military solution from the Monusco, the UN mission in the DRC. That has not worked. We saw an effective action by the Sadek community in 2012 where Sadek nations actually send their troops in the DRC as part of the FIB, the force intervention brigade. And they were successful at stopping the M23 a decade ago. A decade later, the M23 reappears with the backing of the same nation. So as long as we don't hold Randa and Uganda accountable and that they actually held accountable with reparation, with justice, because we know the people implicated in the killing. The names exist. They are in this report. As long as that does not happen, tomorrow, next month, a year, we will talk about the M23. We may talk about the ARC or we may talk about another rebel group. So the path to peace in the DRC goes through justice. That justice will exist with the creation of the international tribunal for Congo to try those accountable, be it in the DRC, be it in the region, be it on an African continent, and not only that, be it at the international level, from the Bill Clinton's to the Tony Blair.