VZCZCXRO4891
OO RUEHBZ RUEHDU RUEHGI RUEHJO RUEHMR RUEHRN
DE RUEHKI #0046/01 0171219
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 171219Z JAN 08
FM AMEMBASSY KINSHASA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7377
INFO RUEHXR/RWANDA COLLECTIVE
RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AF DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUFOADA/JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KINSHASA 000046 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV KDEM PHUM MOPS PREL CG
SUBJECT:    MONUC's Kivus Conference Report - 
            Sitrep #7 (January 12, 2007) 
 
REF:        Kinshasa 0040 
 
Note:  The following report was prepared by MONUC (pls protect) and 
was shared with U.S. team in Goma.  Reftel is the previous 
installment in this series.  End note. 
 
BEGIN MONUC REPORT 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary:   The ethnic communities of South Kivu commence 
their presentations in the fourth Plenary session. Tension rises 
swiftly when the Bembe and the Fulero issue anachronistic anti-Tutsi 
declarations, and the Banyamulenge demand the recognition of the 
Minembwe Territory. The Conference President proposes the 
intervention of the Comit des Sages, and suggests a thorough truth 
and reconciliation exercise to heal the unaddressed wounds provoked 
by waves of violence during successive wars in South Kivu. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) On 12 January, the speeches issued in the Plenary session 
by the ethnic communities of South Kivu set the tone for the 
forthcoming political debate on pacification in South Kivu, and 
revealed the root (local) causes of the 1996 and 1998 wars in the 
Province.  From the beginning, the radical anti-Tutsi speech of the 
Bembe representative raised issues of indigeneity, citizenship, the 
contradiction between civic law and custom, conflict between herders 
and cultivators/gatherers, as well as tension between majoritarian 
and minoritarian tribes.  The interventions were ideologically 
articulated in two categories: the majority "indigenous" tribes 
inhabiting the "South-South" (the Southern part of the Province), 
i.e. the Bembe and the Fulero, who attacked the Banyamulenge and 
blamed them for expansionism and subversion of the state, and 
demanded that they submit (as subjects) to the authority of their 
customary chiefs. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Neglecting that the 2005 electoral registration and the 
post-electoral institutional order already guarantee the 
Banyamulenge's citizenship, both the Bembe and the Fulero quoted 
colonial historical sources to demonstrate that the Banyamulenge are 
lesser citizens than the "indigenous" Congolese.  Both expressed 
their categorical refusal to the recognition of the Minembwe 
Territory that was created by the RCD-G in 1999, demanded punishment 
for the massacres committed during the RCD-G era, and requested that 
the name "Banyamulenge" be renounced (something they consider a 
historical manipulation) and therefore to re-instate the original 
terminology "Banyarwanda" (the ones coming form Rwanda), which they 
have been using until the 1970s. Neither of the two ever mentioned 
the FDLR as a source of insecurity. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Comments:  The tone of the two statements was racist and 
disruptive. It is surprising that both tribes demanded the 
Banyamulenge to shed an identity constructed intentionally (Mulenge 
is indeed a location of the Moyens Plateaux of Uvira originally 
inhabited by the Pygmies) to dissociate from the Rwandan Tutsi and 
be accepted by the other Congolese.  Such strong language could have 
been expected from the Bembe (whose anti-Tutsi attitude dates from 
the 1960s), but similar sentiments expressed by the Fulero, who live 
in symbiosis with the Banyamulenge and have made greater efforts to 
reconcile, were less predictable.  End comments. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The other set of speeches was made by smaller ethnic 
groups: the Babuyu, the Babwari and the Banyamulenge.  The Babuyu 
and the Babwari denounced the abuses by the Bembe illegal militia 
(non-brassaged Mayi-Mayi troops), and the Bembe's tendency to 
militarily occupy their land and to impose their political 
authority.  They demanded that their rights be re-established and 
(similarly to the Bembe and the Fulero) requested that the Bembe 
submitted to their legitimate customary authorities. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Evidently the most relevant declaration issued by a 
minority tribe was that of the Banyamulenge, which was read by 
Alexis Gisaro, the son of late National Deputy Frederic Gisaro 
(Mobutu regime), elected by the Uvira constituency in the 1970s. In 
reaction to the two previous anti-Tutsi speeches, Alexis Gisaro also 
revisited the history of the Banyamulenge's arrival from Rwanda and 
Burundi, which he dated as the 16th century.  He then argued that 
the Tutsi were politically discriminated against and targeted by 
systematic violence.  He gave an account of the massacres and abuses 
which targeted the Banyamulenge, notably the Gatumba massacre 
(August 2004), that Alexis blamed on a Congolese commando supported 
by the FNL.  The most controversial statement, however, was his 
request that the Minembwe territory be recognized.  The statement 
immediately triggered open hostility from the majority of the 
participants, who booed at the speaker. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Gisaro concluded his speech by listing the "pistes de 
 
KINSHASA 00000046  002 OF 002 
 
 
solutions" (leads in the search for solutions) for the South Kivu 
conflict: (a) stop ethnically targeted abuses and address issues of 
discrimination; (b) suspend hostilities and start dialogue (with the 
Insurgents); (c) repatriate the FDLR; (d) provide sufficient 
logistical support to the Integrated Bdes deployed in the Hauts 
Plateaux; (e) repatriate the refugees by establishing Tripartite 
accords (GoDRC - UNHCR - host country); (f) repatriate the bodies of 
the victims of the Gatumba massacre, and bury them with honor: (g) 
recognize the "Territory" of Minembwe; (h) set up post-Conference 
mechanisms to ensure genuine ethnic cohabitation through constant 
dialogue; (i) provide supplementary protection to the FARDC elements 
of Tutsi origin; (j) extend amnesty to the military who have been 
accused but as yet not tried; (k) the Bembe and the Fulero should 
submit to the laws of the country and respect legitimate rights, as 
well as stop exploiting other minority tribes. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Comments: Gisaro's speech, though more sophisticated and 
better structured than the ones of the Bembe and the Fulero, was a 
provocative one.  Most non-Tutsis delegates from South Kivu were 
expecting the Banyamulenge to request the recognition of Minembwe as 
a Territory, a demand that had triggered violent demonstration in 
the past in South Kivu.  From sources within the Bureau, MONUC was 
informed that the problem will be discussed in the Grand Atelier du 
Sud Kivu, yet it will require the intervention of the "Comite des 
Sages" (Committee of Wise Men). 
 
¶9.  (SBU) In the evening of 12 January, MONUC took part in the daily 
meeting between the Bureau and the External Facilitators' Team. In 
the debrief with Fr. Malu Malu, he mentioned that the day was marked 
by high tension and that the groups radicalized their positions 
against the Banyamulenge.  Fr. Malu Malu commented on the Plenary 
identifying few main issues: (a) All peoples of South Kivu have gone 
through (in different phases) a horrific cycle of violence. The 
psychological wounds are still unaddressed; (b) the tension existing 
between Fulero, Bembe, and Banyamulenge is the most serious problem 
in South Kivu, and must be addressed; (c) it has emerged that most 
delegations are composed of radicals; (d) there is a need to address 
the past and seek forgiveness in order to de-traumatize these 
communities. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) He informed that it would be the task of the Comit des 
Sages to handle the matter, which is emerging as one of the biggest 
challenges of the whole conference (reportedly, the tone of the 
North Kivu declarations was more conciliatory).  He further 
commented that the heated historical debate of the origin of the 
Banyamulenge was a senseless one, as the issue of nationality was 
already solved during the Electoral process.  Concerning the issue 
of the Minembwe Territory recognition, he appeared dismissive, 
arguing that it would be difficult to create a Territory outside the 
framework of the Constitution.  He suggested, however, that 
developing the Hauts Plateaux, improving governance and 
administration, and enhancing the rule of law (especially at the 
borders with Rwanda and Burundi) would be a way to reduce the 
tension and respond to the Banyamulenge's expectations. 
 
END MONUC REPORT 
 
Garvelink 
 
 
Page 4 of 4