Geneva talks test whether DRC and Rwanda can break cycle of eastern Congo conflict

The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda are sitting down across from each other in Geneva again, more than a year after they signed an agreement meant to stop their confrontation. In eastern Congo, the guns have not stopped firing.

M23 fighters took the city of Goma in January 2025 and later seized Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu. They now control large swaths of the eastern region. The two governments are negotiating in Switzerland while, on the ground, their armies and allied militias continue to fight. The DRC is also holding separate talks with a political alliance backing M23. The conflicts the diplomats are trying to contain are not separate, even if the negotiations are.

At the root of the dispute between Kinshasa and Kigali sits the FDLR—the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda. The group emerged from the wreckage of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, when members of the former Rwandan army and perpetrators of the killings fled across the border into what is now eastern DRC. Rwanda has long viewed the group's presence near its border as a direct security threat. Under a framework agreed in Washington, the DRC committed to a process of neutralizing the FDLR, including demobilization efforts. The Congolese government says that work is underway. But Rwandan President Paul Kagame called the agreement on the FDLR "insufficient" at the end of last month. Patrick Muyaya, the DRC's minister of information and government spokesperson, rejected that assessment, saying Kinshasa is honoring its commitments while accusing Rwanda of harboring "expansionist ambitions" in eastern DRC.

The disagreement runs deeper than whether the FDLR process is moving fast enough. It reflects a fundamental clash over security and sovereignty. Rwanda wants guarantees that armed groups hostile to it will not operate from Congolese soil. The DRC argues that Rwanda's security concerns cannot justify the presence of foreign forces on Congolese territory. What Kigali sees as a necessary security measure, Kinshasa sees as a violation of its sovereignty. That mistrust now sits at the center of the Geneva talks.

M23 is not a party to the Washington agreement, but the group is central to the conflict the agreement was supposed to help contain. M23 operates under the political umbrella of the Congo River Alliance, which is engaged in separate Qatar-led dialogue with Kinshasa. The Geneva process focuses on the confrontation between the DRC and Rwanda, while the Qatar process addresses the Congolese government's dispute with the alliance and M23. Yet on the ground, those conflicts cannot be easily separated. M23's territorial control shapes how Kinshasa calculates its moves. The DRC military's response affects the security environment along Rwanda's border. Rwanda's concerns about armed groups in eastern DRC are bound up with its position toward M23. Kinshasa continues to demand the withdrawal of Rwandan forces. A settlement between the two capitals could reduce regional tensions, but it would not necessarily end the fighting inside eastern DRC.

In Goma, residents have lived through repeated cycles of fighting and displacement. Sadiki Bitha, who experienced the city's capture in January 2025, is following the Geneva talks and wants the parties and their mediators to ensure that their commitments are actually honored. Josue Akuzwe Walayi, a pro-democracy activist in Kinshasa, said another round of talks will mean little unless people begin to see a change in their daily lives. "People are still waiting for the real benefits of peace that have been trumpeted for over a year," he told Al Jazeera. "Fields continue to be ravaged in the east, and further displacement is still being reported." He accuses Rwanda of supporting violence in eastern DRC and of invoking the FDLR threat to justify its military actions. "Rwanda prefers to attack us in order to secure its borders within our country, something we cannot accept," he said. Rwanda rejects accusations that it is pursuing territorial expansion.

While the talks continue, fighting persists in North and South Kivu between the DRC army and allied armed groups on one side and M23 fighters on the other. The AFC-M23 alliance has accused Kinshasa of attacking populated areas and violating the ceasefire. On August 27, the alliance said an aircraft carrying humanitarian aid had been shot down by the DRC army, describing it as a civilian aircraft. The DRC army's acting spokesperson declined to comment on the allegation. Without a trusted mechanism for establishing what actually happened, disputed incidents quickly become another source of confrontation. That makes verification central to whether any ceasefire can survive.

Herve Amani, a civil society activist, believes the Geneva meeting should not be dismissed simply because previous diplomatic efforts have failed. "This meeting in Switzerland should be seen as an opportunity rather than yet another diplomatic exercise," he told Al Jazeera. "We must not underestimate the difficulties, but we must also recognise that dialogue remains preferable to escalation." Geneva will not resolve decades of mistrust between Kinshasa and Kigali. Nor will it settle M23's position or, on its own, end the wider conflict in eastern DRC. But it can still matter if it produces commitments that are concrete, implementable and verifiable. For Rwanda, that means credible progress toward neutralizing the FDLR and addressing its security concerns. For the DRC, it means respect for its territorial sovereignty and progress toward the withdrawal of Rwandan forces. For civilians caught between armed groups and national armies, the test is simpler: whether the guns finally fall silent. Bitha, who lived through Goma's capture, says he still believes the Geneva meeting can offer a way forward. "We have high hopes for this meeting," he said. "We believe this is an opportunity for the people of Congo and Rwanda to speak with one voice and silence the guns by mutual agreement."