The Economist has a great article that says that the seven year war in Congo is over and that the country is at relative peace, for the moment. The potential from here on out could go one way or the other:
Congo is a big place””?bigger, for instance, than all the states that voted for John Kerry in America’s election last November put together. It shares a border with nine other countries, and touches every sub-Saharan region: central, south, east and west. A stable Congo could be Africa’s healthy heart. Arterial roads could be built through it; it has a huge trove of untapped minerals and enough hydroelectric potential to light up half the continent. Conversely, a return to chaos could be a continental heart attack.
There’s also a great summary of how Africa’s “world war” of the past seven years started.
Optimists point out that the country’s current president, 33-year-old Joseph Kabila, is probably its best since independence in 1960. Pessimists retort that that is not saying much. His best-known predecessor, Mobutu Sese Seko, who ruled from 1965 until 1997 and renamed the country Zaire, was a ruthless crook who fitted his palace with a nuclear shelter, hired Concorde for shopping trips and so gutted the treasury that inflation between October 1990 and December 1995 totalled 6.3 billion per cent. He lost control because he and his flunkies filched too much. Unpaid soldiers refused to defend the regime against a rebellion led by Laurent Kabila, Joseph’s father, who seized power and restored the country’s old name.The senior Kabila turned out to be even worse than Mobutu. He was equally brutal and corrupt, but less intelligent. He had people executed while he was drunk and then forgot that he had done so. He ordered diamond dealers to sell their gems to a state-backed monopoly for near-worthless Congolese francs, and then wondered why the country’s largest source of export revenues dried up. He provoked Rwanda, Congo’s aggressive neighbour, by arming and supplying the perpetrators of the 1994 genocide, who were hiding in eastern Congo’s forests. Mobutu had done the same, which was why the Rwandan army helped Kabila topple him. Now Rwanda backed a revolt to topple Kabila, too.
That was how the war started in August 1998. Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia rushed to Kabila’s defence. Uganda sided with the Rwandans, but later fought them. Then it got really confusing. In all, six national armies and dozens of rebel groups and militias joined the fray. All sides plundered Congo’s minerals. When Joseph Conrad spoke of “the vilest scramble for loot that ever disfigured the history of human conscience”Â?, he was describing Congo under Belgium’s King Leopold II, but his phrase has not dated.
Here’s to a brighter future.

Comments to this entry
Mike
June 11, 2005
7:02 am
You want peace in Congo, then get rid of all the people. I mean read this stuff! They are out of control. Without aid from the outside world Africa would depopulate within 50 years.
Another choice quote:
". . . his men are alleged to have eaten people. Mr Bemba dismisses the allegation, but it is widely believed and will not endear him to voters."
Really? No way, I thought cannibalism was something the voters would definately want in a Congolese president.
Eddie
June 11, 2005
7:15 pm
"....Africa's centres of conflict "“ and Darfur remains what the United Nations has described as "the world's greatest humanitarian catastrophe "“ hold the key to all other issues. The self-sufficient and self-reliant people of Darfur were never dependent on hand-outs and aid and were not in need of G8 Summits and the rest. It is man-made conflict that has dispossessed them and until that conflict is resolved progress of any kind is impossible....."
There can be no hopeful future for Africa until the powers that be take strong, bold and forceful action to punish and wipe out these militias that terrorize the people and destabilize the various corridors of the continent.
Otherwise, its going to be hell on earth in Africa for decades to come, regardless of what one or three progressing countries accomplish.
This is alarming when addressed with our self-interest in mind, let alone morality. One or more failed states in Africa (or regions of unabashed chaos and mayhem) constitute a direct threat to the security of America, as terrorists can head there to reconstitute after their losses in the WOT.
This is Martey Dodoo
June 11, 2005
11:55 pm
Curzon at Coming Anarchy points to an Economist article on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I disagree with the article’s assertion that stability or the lack thereof in the DRC will make or break Africa (it seems too close to the pre-war c...
Mike
June 12, 2005
11:21 am
Eddie
June 12, 2005
12:48 pm
It won't take American troops, but it will take an American "Africa" policy that looks towards long-term trends and developments rather than the reactionary policy we've had for decades. American/NATO nations training the militaries of African nations will help, especially if the training is not just a one-shot affair but a decade-long process with good, useful relationships established between both parties.
We cannot save everyone, but we must put a serious effort into doing what is possible and what is neccesary for our security.
Btw, if Clinton had not ran from Somalia, Somalia would likely be in a far different state than it is now. We staggered the warlords, but at the first instance of serious casualties, we pulled out.
Save The GOP » News Round-up
June 14, 2005
9:38 am
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Ninjas in the Congo
October 20, 2005
3:06 pm