In a recent speech delivered by Joseph Mukungubila, a Congolese religious and political leader, a strong and alarming message has emerged, highlighting persistent tensions within the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in the face of armed conflicts, especially those Implying the M23 movement, supported by Rwanda. Well beyond a simple political declaration, his speech resonates as a rallying cry and an appeal to the collective memory of a people in search of truth and justice. However, it raises crucial questions about the nature of leadership and socio -political psychology in the face of adversity.
** A call for collective suffering: an echo to past trauma **
The war in the DRC, which has made millions of victims since the late 1990s, left behind a trail of largely unfinished injuries. Mukungubila’s speech not only evokes the sorrow of families bereaved by the M23, but it also affects a painful collective memory which will have to be recognized to allow real reconciliation. Shared suffering is indeed a powerful tool to unite a people in a context where ethnic and political tensions are exacerbated.
Compared to other conflicts in the world, such as those observed in Balkans or Rwanda, we can learn essential lessons on the need for healthy collective memory. In these contexts, the way in which political leaders tackle the issue of victims and their families has often been decisive to forge or destroy inter -ethnic relationships. In this regard, recognizing the sufferings of the past may prove to be a vital element in the construction of a post-conflict nation. The management of collective traumas could be integrated into educational programs from an early age, thus promoting an intergenerational dialogue.
** legitimization of political discourse by faith: an ambivalent tactic **
Mukungubila clearly aligned his speech with an appeal to faith in God, asking his compatriots to make glory to the Lord rather than exalt political figures. This recourse to religion as a framework of legitimation raises interesting questions: in what way can faith increase the resistance of a population in the face of war, but at what cost?
Historically, religious figures have played roles, sometimes healthy, sometimes harmful in the contexts of conflict. The period of the Christian Revolution in Latin America saw pastors and priests sometimes defend the rights of oppressed, sometimes to serve as unconditional allies for the powers in place by an electoral discourse based on religious dogmas. In the DRC, Mukungubila could become an agent of change or a catalyst for an even greater polarization, according to the way in which his message will be interpreted and received by an already strongly divided population.
** Leadership in the face of conflicts: reflection on the Congolese model **
The behavior of Congolese policies in this period of crisis, as evoked in discourse, also deserves special attention. The alleged flight of certain personalities to Europe with their families during the armed struggles raises a question of responsibility and commitment: what does it really mean to be a leader in a country at war?
As part of a comparative analysis, similar scenes can be observed in other countries where the elites, under pressure, often choose to abandon the ship in particular when threats become tangible. In Ukraine, for example, at the start of the invasion, several political figures chose to stay in Russia or outside, while others were fighting on the ground. An authentic commitment in times of crisis could potentially redefine leadership: staying with your people, sharing your burden, and thus rebuilding confidence.
** Conclusion: towards an inclusive dialogue and a collective reflection **
Finally, Mukungubila’s speech calls for a deep respect for historical wounds, preservation of memory and a requirement for justice. It is an invitation to change the framework of peace discussions, from a leading competition to a inclusive participation where each voice runs out of steam by conflicts is important.
The real challenge remains to prevent Mukungubila’s committed speech-as justified as it is-itself becoming a cornerstone of Congolese divisions. In a fractured society, the aspiration for dialogue, reconciliation and justice will have to organize around a common project rather than around nationalist mantras which could further accentuate historical rivalries. We must keep in mind that the stake is not only to say “no” to the other, but to dare to say “yes” to a common future. The way to sustainable peace lies in commitment to bereaved families and in the collective awareness of the atrocities of the past, which can guide the DRC towards a real healing process.