#Angola ceasefire announcement

[newsbites]

Fighting continues on Tuesday in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), despite the announcement on March 3 in Luanda of a new ceasefire accepted by the M23 rebellion, we learned. from local sources.

Fighting had resumed on Monday morning between the army and the M23 on the northern and southern fronts in the province of North Kivu, leaving several civilians dead and injured according to hospital and humanitarian sources.

[warningsine]

After two and a half years of fighting and several broken agreements, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have put a temporary halt in the conflict between the Congolese army and the Rwandan-backed M23 rebellion in eastern Congo's North Kivu province.

M23 rebels launched the offensive in the mineral-rich region at the end of 2021. Since then, they have seized large swathes of territory in an effort to gain a share of North Kivu's major deposits of copper, gold and diamonds.

Angola, which has been mediating to resolve the conflict, announced the peace deal on Tuesday after talks in Luanda, adding that the truce would come into effect from midnight on Sunday. 

Uganda and Kenya have previously been involved in mediating peace talks between the warring parties.

Troops from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) were last year deployed to eastern Congo to neutralize the M23 rebel group — but they struggled to restore peace and security to the restive region.

'Hypocrisy' in the mediation process

The fresh deal comes as a humanitarian truce between the M23 rebels and government forces obtained through the United States was due to expire on August 3.

However, analysts are sceptic about the new deal because previous truces inked by both countries were never respected for more than a few weeks.

Justine Masika, an activist living in the province of North Kivu, believes that there is too much hypocrisy in these various mediation processes. She told DW that the parties involved in the conflict have too many interests and the well-being of the population is not their priority.

"The truce has been declared, but the problem we still have in this conflict in eastern DRC is that the parties to the conflict don't respect the agreements they've signed."

"There are still papers that are signed but they continue the war and the population continues to die every day."

The UN estimates that fighting in North Kivu province has displaced more than 1.7 million people, driving up the number displaced in Congo by multiple conflicts to a record 7.2 million.

A UN Security Council report revealed that 3,000 to 4,000 Rwandan soldiers have been fighting alongside the M23, indicating that Kigali exercises "de facto control" over the group's operations.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame has not explicitly denied the presence of Rwandan forces in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). However, he has openly stated his readiness to take a "defensive" stance to protect Rwanda's interests.

Political scientist Christian Moleka believes that, like many peace initiatives, this one is limited by the fact that there are not enough elements of pressure that can be exerted on Rwanda.

"By tacitly signing the ceasefire agreement, Rwanda is presenting itself as a co-belligerent, because only those involved in a military operation can sign a ceasefire. So its signature confirms the fact that Rwanda is a player on the ground," he said.

However, Moleka said this signature is not binding on the M23.

"As much as Rwanda can sign the ceasefire, the M23 can disassociate itself from it, especially as the Luanda process does not include the M23 in its dynamics," he said, adding that Nairobi was the second mechanism offering the M23 a political way out.

Angola's president hailed as 'champion of peace'

Although some are sceptical on the new agreement, Angolan President Joao Lourenco is being referred to as the 'Champion of Peace' in this conflict.

Soy Komba, an Angolan specialist in international relations, told DW that Angola has been playing the role of mediation in a very intelligent way.

"The conflict between these two countries also affects Angola, because we have a very large territorial border with the DRC," Komba said. "If instability persists, there is also a disadvantage for our country, because refugees from this conflict can also cross the border into Angola."

He emphasized that the potential influx of refugees from the conflict into Angola has been a key motivator for the Angolan president’s active mediation efforts.

Augustin Muhesi, who teaches political science in eastern Congo, is optimistic but cautious about the new truce, which he said was the result of the diplomatic ballet in the region.

"People who have been at loggerheads for a long time won't return to good feelings in a day, but it's already a process that presents analogies but also breaks with what may have happened," Muhesi told DW.

Cease-fires welcomed by the West

Former colonial power Belgium has welcomed the cease-fire agreed between both countries but urged all sides to stick to the deal. 

In a statement, Belgian Foreign Minister Hadja Lahbib thanked "Angola for its crucial role, and encouraged the parties to uphold their commitments."

"This step is essential to ease the suffering of the population and lead to a resolution of the conflict in Eastern DRC," he added.

France, the European Union, and the United States hailed the signing of the latest agreement on Wednesday.

"We hope this agreement will help create the conditions for de-escalation of tensions between the DRC and Rwanda and enable the safe return of those internally displaced to their homes," said Stephane Dujarric, the spokesperson for UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.

Eastern Congo has been racked by fighting for 30 years, involving both local and foreign-based armed groups, tracing back to the regional wars of the 1990s.

[wingsfreedom]

It's time to share this again: the true face of Zionism. This is an essay written by Ayelet Shaked in 2014 in her Facebook page (in a now deleted yet archived post); the Israel Minister of Justice who initiated and drafted laws against "terrorism". Please read all of this. (Rough translation ahead)

"The Palestinian people have declared war on us, and we must fight back.

No operation, no rolling, no low intensity, no controlled escalation, no demolition of terrorist infrastructure, and no targeted thwarting. Enough of inventing vague nicknames. This is a war. Words have meaning. This is a war. This is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. The reality is that this is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started it.

I do not know why it is so difficult for us to define reality in the simple words that language has made available to us. Why should a new name be invented every two weeks for this war, and just not call it by its name. What is so shocking is the understanding that the entire Palestinian people are the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, the whole, is the enemy. Declaring war is not a war crime. Certainly not a war return. And not the use of the word "war," nor a clear definition of the enemy. On the contrary. The morality of war (and there is such a thing) is based on the assumption that there are wars in the world, and war is not a normal situation, and in wars usually the enemy is an entire people, its elders and wives, its cities and villages, its property and infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is impossible not to harm the enemy citizens. It does not condemn the British Air Force that bombed and completely destroyed German Dresden, and the US planes that destroyed Polish cities and destroyed half of Budapest, places whose wretched inhabitants never did evil to America, but had to destroy them to win the war against evil. Does not call for the prosecution of Russia by bombing and destroying towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not condemn the UN peacekeeping forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO force that bombed Milosevic's Belgrade, a city of a million citizens, elders and the wives, women and children. The morality of war accepts in principle, and not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including massive bombing of populated settlements, including the creation of a refugee movement of hundreds of thousands of people fleeing the horrors of war, and thousands left no home to return to.

And in our war this is doubly true, because enemy soldiers are hiding within the population and only because of its support can they fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Participants in the incitement in the mosques, the writers of the murderous curricula, the shelters, the car suppliers, and all those who give moral respect and support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.

This week there are mourning and honor celebrations in two homes of two despicable killers. I suppose they opened mourning tents there, and all the dignitaries of the city come to pay homage to the mother and father who raised the devil. These two houses need to be bombed from the air, in order to destroy and to kill. And it should be announced that this will be done from now on for every house of every martyr. There is nothing right about it, and probably nothing effective about it either. Every suicidal person should know that he is taking his parents and his house and some of the neighbors with him. Every Umm Jihad heroine who sends her son to hell should know she is going with him. Along with the house and everything in it.

The frustration cannot be targeted. This is how it is in wars. What is focused is not frustrating and what is frustrating is not focused. Neither have we started this nasty war nor can we end it. The keys to a ceasefire are in the hands of the Palestinian people. We can only burn their fingers until they want to use them."

_this essay got over 5000+ likes

Note: This was posted the year of Gaza famous genocide in 2014 (which was carried on in the holy month of Ramadan while people are fasting)

[pndiho]

DRC AND RWANDA AGREE ON CEASEFIRE

DRC AND RWANDA AGREE ON CEASEFIRE

By Paul Ndiho Rwanda and Congo agreed to reduce tensions following a day of talks between their presidents mediated by Angola, Congo’s presidency announced on Wednesday. According to the statement, the two countries will revive a Congo-Rwanda commission which will resume activities on July 12 in the Angolan capital, Luanda. Unconfirmed reports say the Congolese rebel group M23 says that talks…

[itsnelkabelka]

Speech: "Anti-personnel landmines are nothing short of indiscriminate killers."

Mr. President,

I’d like to thank Mr Zuev and Ms Ochoa for their vivid briefings and I want to particularly thank you for bringing this issue before the whole of the Council. It’s an issue that we seldom discuss, but it has an impact on conflict after conflict ever since the United Nations came into existence. Sadly those impacts are still being felt in too many places today.

To simply treat this as another issue on our agenda would be a mistake. Anti-personnel landmines are nothing short of indiscriminate killers. They don’t recognise sides in conflicts. They recognise no age or affiliation. I am proud to represent a country that wants to see an anti-personnel mine-free world. In 1995, our predecessors sat round this table and unanimously adopted a resolution recognising the global threat posed by those devices. At the time, we focused on Rwanda and a select group of countries. Two years later Princess Diana walked the streets of Kuito, Angola, greeting children affected by the scourge of landmines. She spoke with the survivors and saw the human face of an epidemic; a man-made epidemic. One that took the form of a 100 million mines scattered throughout more than 70 countries. 20 years ago, landmines claimed a new victim every 20 minutes.

That was the state of play two decades ago. And in the face of what seems to be insurmountable odds, we collectively said then that this must end. Later that year we came together as governments, civil society, and survivors from round the world to channel momentum and agree a treaty banning anti-personnel mines.

20 years later, we’ve undoubtedly come a long way. But 2015 showed what’s at stake if we take our foot off the accelerator. That year saw a 75% increase in casualties from 2014 and it was the most deadly year on record since 2006. This marked increase is largely due to the increase in use of improvised anti-personnel mines by non-state armed groups in the Middle East. What’s worse is that of the 6,461 people killed or injured that year, more than 1 in 3 was a child.

The thousands who lost life and limb do not tell the full story. Millions more are forced to live alongside land littered by anti-personnel mines, cluster munitions and other explosive remnants of war. By virtue of their very existence, livelihoods are put at risk. They prevent children from attending school. They prevent farmers from growing crops to feed their communities. They prevent humanitarian aid from reaching those in need and they make the journey home impossible for refugees.

It is for all these reasons that the United Kingdom announced in April that we would be increasing our support for anti-mine action. We announced more than $125 million for the UK Global Mine Action Programme over the next three years. These funds build on the existing $38 million dollars our Department for International Development has already committed to and that will be used to clear 150 square kilometres of land of mines, cluster munitions, and other explosive remnants of war. Because of these projects 800,000 people will no longer live under the threat of landmines and 100,000 people will receive education on the dangers they pose. The United Kingdom is also making significant progress towards meeting its obligations under the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention to demine the Falkland Islands after we announced a new $25 million dollar programme phase in September last year, which we are implementing now.

And we are focusing our efforts on the countries where we can make the biggest impact, where the greatest number of people live in the shadow of explosive remnants of war. By the end of the three years, Afghanistan, Somalia, and South Sudan amongst others will be among those that have benefited from this UK-sponsored project.

Sadly, this will not be enough. 60 countries and four territories are still contaminated with landmines. Nearly a dozen of these have more than 100 square kilometres that have been forfeited to mines. Landmines are still destroying opportunity and hope. If we are to restore that hope, we must come together again, as we did 20 years ago. Ending this will require money, education and survivor assistance. We call on each and every government that will speak in this Chamber today to play their part.

Mr. President,

As conflicts subside today, the explosive remnants of war do not. Landmines respect no ceasefire. They respect no peace agreement. In any given week this Council discusses the need to end violence, conflict and war in some part of the world. If we don’t tackle the global scourge that is landmines, we are putting those who have emerged through conflicts even further behind.

20 years ago, we showed that collective action was possible. Now it’s time to finish the job.

Thank you.

from Announcements on GOV.UK http://ift.tt/2sxKdyL via IFTTT