Since the AFC/M23 withdrew from Uvira, Banyamulenge communities in South Kivu have continued to face a relentless campaign of violence. Drone strikes, fighter-jet bombardments, artillery fire, and ground attacks have killed and wounded many civilians, while schools, health facilities, homes, and other civilian infrastructure have been damaged or destroyed. For communities already living under the threat of displacement and mass violence, the fear of further attacks has become a daily reality. This cannot continue indefinitely.
The alliance between Twirwaneho, the Banyamulenge self-defence group, and AFC/M23 forces that has held its ground around Minembwe, despite facing a numerically superior coalition, has demonstrated its ability to withstand sustained military pressure and protect the population in areas under its control. But the central question is whether a purely defensive posture can continue to protect civilians when attacks are repeatedly launched from outside those areas.
From the perspective of the alliance, the answer increasingly appears to be no. If the attacks on Banyamulenge communities continue, the rebel leaders may conclude that simply defending positions around Minembwe is insufficient and that the broader sources of the threat must be addressed. In their assessment, Uvira and Baraka are central to the military infrastructure supporting operations in the surrounding areas.
These two strategic towns on the shores of Lake Tanganyika have become important logistical and military hubs in the South Kivu conflict. They provide access routes for troops and supplies and serve as staging areas for operations farther inland.
AFC/M23 spokesman Lawrence Kanyuka recently reiterated Corneille Nangaa’s argument that Uvira can only be effectively protected from within Uvira and Baraka themselves. Whatever one’s view of that claim, it reflects a broader strategic assessment within the Congo River Alliance that the security of the Banyamulenge areas cannot be separated from developments in these two cities.
That creates a profound diplomatic dilemma.
The principal obstacle to any major military move toward Uvira is likely to be the opposition of Washington and other Western actors. For the AFC/M23, therefore, the question is not simply whether it has the military capacity to neutralise the attacks. It is also how far it can go without triggering a much broader diplomatic and political confrontation.
But there is another side to that equation. For communities that have experienced years of violence, displacement, and massacres, international diplomatic pressure can seem increasingly disconnected from the immediate question of survival. Repeated calls for restraint mean little to civilians when death lurks around them daily.
This is the dilemma facing the AFC/M23. Remaining on the defensive may preserve diplomatic space, but it also leaves Banyamulenge communities in danger. Neutralising the threat at the source in Uvira and Baraka, on the other hand, could fundamentally alter the diplomatic landscape and carry consequences far beyond South Kivu.
The Banyamulenge have endured decades of discrimination, displacement, and mass violence. They have repeatedly accused Kinshasa of failing to protect them and of tolerating or supporting armed groups that have targeted their communities. Whether the international community accepts that assessment or not, the persistence of violence demonstrates that the existing security arrangements have failed to provide them with lasting protection.
That is why the question of Uvira cannot be reduced to a debate about territory. At its core is a much more difficult question: how can civilians be protected when the political mechanisms intended to resolve the conflict continue to fall short?
If the attacks continue, the pressure on the AFC/M23 to abandon a purely defensive posture will only grow. The international community may be able to discourage escalation, but it cannot indefinitely expect vulnerable communities to absorb the consequences of a conflict without a credible security solution.
Ultimately, the choice facing the region is not simply whether the AFC/M23 should advance toward Uvira. It is whether the international community can produce a political and security arrangement capable of protecting Banyamulenge civilians. If it cannot, the logic of the battlefield will once again overwhelm the logic of diplomacy.