Western silence in the face of unfolding atrocities in Minembwe amounts to complicity in Kinshasa’s campaign to eradicate Banyamulenge communities. This silence will force AFC/M23 to intervene once again.
As detailed in the latest AFC/M23 communiqué and corroborated by recent human rights reports following the movement’s withdrawal from the city of Uvira, the situation has become catastrophic.
Jean-Paul Ngahangondi, President of the Convention for the Respect of Human Rights (CRDH), a Beni-based organization in North Kivu, has documented grave abuses, including murders; sexual violence (rape); persecution based on ethnicity and origin; forced deportations; arbitrary arrests; unlawful detention; torture; and enforced disappearances. He further reports war crimes under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, notably deliberate attacks against civilians, systematic looting, and the use of heavy weapons—including drones—against populated areas. Taken together, he warns, these acts constitute a serious risk of genocide.
This escalation is the direct consequence of U.S. pressure on AFC/M23 to withdraw from Uvira. That withdrawal forced nearly 99 percent of the city’s Banyamulenge population into exile and cleared the way for Tshisekedi’s coalition forces to resume their assault on Minembwe.
The movement now faces a narrowing set of options, none of which is benign.
After leaving Uvira, AFC/M23 expected a de-escalation consistent with the ceasefire framework agreed in Doha. Instead, the High Plateaus were rapidly converted into a heavily militarized zone. The latest communiqué documents repeated strikes on homes, churches, and schools, with women and children bearing the brunt of the violence. The complete shutdown of internet access and the blockade of Minembwe point to a deliberate effort to operate beyond scrutiny.
The argument advanced by some international actors—that pressuring AFC/M23 alone will produce peace—has already collapsed. Uvira proves the opposite: unilateral restraint by the movement did not reduce violence; it merely displaced it onto civilians. External pressure without ceasifire enforcement mechanisms and a neutral force to protect civilians has instead emboldened extremists in Kinshasa.
If the international community continues to refuse to take decisive action—by imposing a ceasefire on Kinshasa, compelling the withdrawal of coalition forces from Minembwe, and establishing credible civilian protection—AFC/M23 will be left with a stark choice. Remaining withdrawn while civilians are massacred would amount to political and moral abdication. Redeployment toward Uvira would then become inevitable: a defensive necessity to break the siege and prevent further entrenchment by unaccountable actors: Burundian troops, mercenaries, and FDLR/Wazalendo militias.
Attacks on Minembwe are the cost of inaction. By tolerating mass violence, international actors risk triggering precisely what they claim to oppose: renewed fighting in Uvira, wider regional instability, and the collapse of the Doha process.