### Vital Kamerhe: a rallying cry or a warning about the fragility of the DRC?
On February 4, 2025, during the opening of an extraordinary session of Parliament, Vital Kamerhe, president of the lower house, uttered words that resonate like an echo of warning about the gravity of the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). His statements, both balanced and hard-hitting, calling President Félix Tshisekedi a “negotiator” while placing him on the ground of defending national interests, highlight a crucial issue: how to navigate in an unstable geopolitical and security context without sacrificing national sovereignty?
### What negotiations and with which actors?
Kamerhe’s assertions about President Tshisekedi’s negotiating intentions raise many questions. Given the polarized nature of the conflict in eastern DRC, it is pertinent to ask who the government might consider engaging in dialogue with. The March 23 Movement (M23), labeled by Kinshasa as a “terrorist movement,” or regional actors such as Rwandan President Paul Kagame? This ambiguity hints at the underlying tensions that could influence the DRC’s diplomatic relations.
It is essential to remember that the DRC has a history of negotiations, sometimes deemed unproductive, that have often led to resounding failures. Previous peace agreements, including the Inter-Congolese Dialogue in the 2000s, are a reminder of the complexity of establishing a peaceful environment. Engaging in dialogue in a climate of mistrust could herald a repeat of past mistakes.
### A Warning Against Balkanization
Kamerhe’s warning about the risks of balkanization in the DRC resonates with alarming significance. Exploring historical precedents, one can draw parallels with other countries in the Great Lakes region, where state breakups have often been the result of heightened ethnic and political tensions. Institutional fragility, coupled with the exploitation of natural resources, has already created scenarios where territories have been reduced to enclaves over which external powers have exerted a sway.
Divisions within the country, whether real or perceived, can fuel not only internal conflicts but also attract unwanted international interventions. The example of South Sudan, which ultimately saw its independence followed by a devastating civil war, is a warning to all states plagued by internal tensions.
### An opportunity to reconsider governance
Faced with this tense situation, Vital Kamerhe’s speech can also be interpreted as an invitation to completely rethink governance in the DRC. Rather than focusing on knee-jerk reactions to the security crisis, the government could focus on sustainable development and community inclusion initiatives. This could, in the long term, ease regional tensions and provide better integration of different parts of the country.
Statistics show that conflict prevention actions within a community, such as peace education, local development and public-private partnerships, can significantly reduce the risk of violence (according to a report by Together for Peace in Africa, 2024). Thus, commitment to these approaches is not only necessary, but vital.
### Conclusion: Towards national resilience
In summary, Vital Kamerhe’s statements should not be heard as a simple political message, but as a call for concerted and thoughtful action. The DRC is at a critical juncture, and its future will depend on its leaders’ ability to navigate a future that places the peace, security, and dignity of every Congolese at its core. Raising one’s voice in a parliament rife with doubts may seem risky, but it is an act of courage that could well forge new national resilience. As a nation, the DRC has an opportunity to redefine its priorities and unite for a future that rejects fatalism and embraces the potential of its people.