I watched and listened to speeches made at the recent 70,011th UN Security Council meeting in New York, chaired by US Secretary of State John Kerry, whose agenda was “The Situation in the Great Lakes Region: Supporting the Great Lakes Framework.”

Prior to the meeting, three related incidents were causing anxiety.

Unkind words were exchanged between President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame over whether to talk or not to talk peace with the latter’s rebels holed up in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Two, war escalated between M23 rebels and DRC President Joseph Kabila’s army; and, the day before, a US State Department spokeswoman had called on Rwanda to “immediately end any support for the M23” and “withdraw military personnel” from eastern Congo.

I normally take little interest in such meetings, but I wanted to see if this time round the UN would seize the moment.

This turned out to be overly optimistic.

As is the norm, feel-good speeches were read, then Mr Kerry distanced himself from his spokeswoman’s statement and called on “all parties” to “immediately end their support for armed rebel groups” in Congo and for “all governments” to “hold human rights violators and abusers accountable”.

A friend watching with me loudly wondered whether Mr Kerry was in charge of things at the State Department!

Most surprising to me, however, was that the UN seemed to not only be missing early warning signs — for instance, of an emerging and pointless Tanzania-Rwanda wrangle and its likely implication to the “intervention brigade” that the former is leading in Congo — but also not to be listening to its members.

While all players broadly support the regional “peace, security and co-operation framework”, more specifically, they called for a political, not military, solution for Congo.

Yet, instead of investing in the former, the UN is banking on the latter, the so-called peace enforcement, through the “brigade”.

Through Ambassador Nathaniel Tuvako Manongi, Tanzania reiterated President Kikwete’s position that war is no solution and “all countries must engage (read talk to) their respective armed opposition groups” if sustainable peace is to be achieved.

Rwanda’s Foreign Minister said: “Rwanda… nonetheless believes it could have been strengthened by including ongoing regional efforts, particularly in support of the Kampala peace talks established under the auspices of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region.”

This position was fully owned by Uganda’s Foreign Minister Sam Kutesa.

And while DRC Foreign Minister Raymond Tshibanda claimed all violent conflict there “bears the same genetic signature”, that is, supported by Rwanda, he did not bank on peace enforcement as the solution to Congo’s problems.

This then begs the question: Why is the UN putting money where its members’ hearts are not? How does it expect the “brigade” to succeed without genuine regional support?

Why is the peace enforcement, costly in material and human terms, prioritised over the Kampala process in which both M23 and President Kabila were actively engaged?

What makes the UN think the “brigade” will succeed where Monusco has failed with more than 20,000 soldiers?

Interestingly, the UN was never created to enforce peace; it was created to maintain world peace and security. Traditionally, this role is pursued through peacekeeping with the consent of all parties to the conflict as stipulated under Chapter VI of the UN Charter.

Peace enforcement, under Chapter VII, is reserved for exceptional cases, particularly where world peace is threatened. But, although Congo is bleeding, the belligerents are, or were, talking peace until the “brigade” happened.

Isn’t the UN undermining its own charter and established principles? Whose interest is it serving?

Schooled by the cold reality of UN’s past failures in peace enforcement, say, in Somalia et al, I can only predict failure, although I want it to succeed.

The sad thing, however, as we have learnt from survivors of Rwanda’s genocide, will not just be the UN’s failure to protect Congolese but creating the illusion of protection, which will likely lead to further suffering and death.

Dr Christopher Kayumba, PhD, is a senior lecturer at the National University of Rwanda and Managing Consultant at MGC Consult Ltd. E-mail: [email protected]; Twitter: @ckayumba