In an unprecedented Oval Office event, President Donald Trump hailed a newly signed agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) as a monumental achievement for peace. He extended invitations to Rwandan President Paul Kagame and DRC President Félix Tshisekedi to formalize further agreements, termed the “Washington Accord,” in Washington this July.
U.S. Senior Advisor for Africa Massad Boulos described this moment as a significant step toward resolving decades-long tensions between the two nations.
The engagement of various high-level mediators—including the U.S., Angola, Kenya, Qatar, Togo, and the African Union—was pivotal in bringing the conflicting parties back to negotiation tables.
This resurgence in mediation efforts began during a tense period surrounding DRC’s presidential elections in late 2023, with the U.S. intensifying its involvement as the conflict escalated.
Following violence prompted by the Rwandan-backed M23 militia, the United States implemented sanctions against Rwandan and M23 officials in early 2025 in an attempt to pressure compliance.
In March 2025, negotiations rekindled through efforts led by Qatar’s emir. With Boulos’ appointment, the U.S. resumed its prominent mediation role, working closely with Qatar to facilitate discussions.
The newly established peace agreement primarily focuses on mutual respect for territorial integrity and the cessation of hostilities.
A critical provision of the agreement stipulates that Rwanda must withdraw its forces from DRC territory within 90 days, demonstrating a commitment to ending support for militia groups.
In addition to these central terms, the agreement lays out the disengagement, disarmament, and conditional integration of non-state armed factions, the enhancement of humanitarian access, and the reaffirmation of the United Nations mission’s mandate in the DRC.
A joint security coordination mechanism was also established to oversee the implementation of these commitments, with the U.S. and Qatar serving as observers.
The signing of the regional economic integration framework, also part of the “Washington Accord,” is anticipated in July, highlighting the importance of economic ties in sustaining peace.
Despite the optimism surrounding the peace agreement, significant challenges remain, especially concerning a history of entrenched mistrust and the existence of over 100 armed groups in eastern DRC.
As Cecily Brewer notes, the success of the peace deal largely hinges on the parties’ commitment to adhere to their agreements.
The potential for tangible consequences linked to the agreement’s implementation, as highlighted by President Trump’s mention of possible penalties for non-compliance, has created a cautious hope for lasting peace.
Both countries’ foreign ministers underscored the critical need for continued U.S. commitment to the implementation process, emphasizing the risks associated with historical patterns of broken agreements.
However, the question remains whether commitments made at the negotiating table will translate into real-world actions.
Of particular concern is the M23 militia, which has not signed the peace agreement. The peace prospects hinge on addressing M23’s role in the conflict, as Qatar actively seeks to broker a cease-fire between M23 and the DRC government.
Moreover, the return of former DRC President Joseph Kabila, alleged to have ties with M23, may complicate the political landscape, reopening historical rivalries and rival interests that could perpetuate instability in the region.
The implications for regional stability and international investment if the peace deal fails could be dire.
Kent Brokenshire warns that such a failure would exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in eastern DRC, further destabilizing the Great Lakes region.
It would also impede U.S. investments in critical mineral resources such as cobalt and copper, worsening the current dominance of Chinese interests in Africa’s mineral sector.
The implications extend beyond economic ramifications; a failed peace process would undermine U.S. credibility in Africa, as President Trump’s mediation represents a historic direct engagement by a sitting U.S. president in DRC affairs.
President Tshisekedi remains optimistic, asserting that peace could lead to improved investment climates for American and Western mining companies.
Despite the geographical distance between the conflict and the DRC’s mineral-rich areas, establishing peace and stability is critical for attracting foreign investments necessary for infrastructure development and enhancing the nation’s economic prospects.
Regarding the intersection of critical minerals and the conflict, the Trump administration’s focus on this aspect highlights its wider strategic interests in ensuring a supply of critical minerals independent of China.
While the peace agreement briefly mentions critical minerals, it is in the upcoming regional economic integration framework where these discussions will be further elaborated.
The framing of the peace initiative as essential for mutual benefits can potentially shift the entrenched thinking that has perpetuated violence for decades, but achieving meaningful change will require diligent follow-through.
Brewer asserts that the ultimate measure of peace is not merely the signing of documents in Washington, but rather the tangible benefits brought to the people of eastern DRC and the broader region.
While the peace deal opens the door to future economic dividends, realizing these promises necessitates overcoming the historical legacy of corruption and rebuilding trust among the parties involved.
image source from：usip
