### Rwanda, information guard and military actor at the heart of the M23 conflict: decryption of a control strategy
In a context where armed conflicts in Africa Great Lakes are constantly causing the attention of international media, a worrying phenomenon has intensified: manipulation of information through the regulation of foreign journalists. According to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, Rwanda is not only positioned as military support from the rebels of the M23 movement, but also as the undisputed regulator of the media content issued by this rebellion.
### Methodical control
The situation in Goma, a city strategically located in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), perfectly illustrates this new role that Rwanda has given itself. With the closure of Goma airport, Rwanda has become the only possible access for journalists wishing to cover the situation on the ground. This dynamic has facilitated a control framework where journalists must now obtain Rwandan or Ugandan press accreditation to be able to do their work.
The implications of this requirement are considerable. Journalists are not only in the face of an accreditation system; They are also subject to a form of censorship before even set foot in Goma. They are asked to detail the subjects they wish to deal with, an approach which gives the Rwandan regime the possibility of filtering the information circulating in the field.
### A historical comparison
To better understand this maneuver, it is interesting to put it in perspective with similar strategies observed in other recent conflicts. For example, in Syria, the government of Bashar al-Assad has implemented strict accreditation systems for journalists, which has enabled an almost total control of the narration of events. Situations are similar in other conflicts, where information control becomes a crucial power tool. The thesis of “controlled journalism” by state actors is therefore not an isolated phenomenon, but a scheme that is repeated in the four corners of the globe.
### An economic and ethical cost
The requirement to pay to obtain accreditation – which can reach up to 1000 USD – raises ethical and economic issues. Why such high sums to be able to do an essential work for the dissemination of truthful information? This not only introduces a financial barrier for many journalists, but it also creates a risk of dependence on a state actor who could guide reports according to his own interests.
### Press freedom in danger
This scheme illustrates the challenges encountered by journalists in conflict zones. They are often taken between the desire to inform and the need to comply with conditions imposed by the authorities. Far from a simple journalistic exercise, this situation testifies to a form of hegemony where access to information has become controlled goods.
In addition, the actions of Rwanda show a desire to maintain a narration favorable to its intervention in the conflict, both national and international. The abolition of critical or undesirable reports using this media control is a classic self-promotion method on the international scene.
## Political and social consequences
The consequences of this media regulation are not limited to the integrity of information. They extend to the international perception of conflict and foreign policy. By controlling the story, Rwanda can also influence diplomatic decisions and strategic interventions of neighboring countries or Western powers. The international community could react in a biased way, perceiving the M23 from an angle which is favorable to it thanks to the controlled dissemination of information.
In conclusion, the current reality in Goma illustrates how behind a facade of cooperation and development, hides a complex control mechanism orchestrated by Rwanda. The union between military support and information control constitutes a strategy that cannot be ignored by observers of the international scene. The challenges of press freedom in the conflict areas in Africa of the Great Lakes deserve sustained attention, because they represent a crucial issue for the future of democracy and human rights in the region. The lessons in history must serve as a guide to understand the long -term consequences of this authoritarian drift on access to information in neuralgic areas.