The signing of a peace “declaration” in Nairobi on Thursday, December 12, between the Kinshasa government and the M23 rebel group was the result of behind-the-scenes manoeuvres by Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni to get the two sides to eventually agree to deal.

It was incumbent on Museveni, who as chair of the IGCLR has led the talks between the two parties in Kampala, to save the day. But it took skilful persuasion and dexterity.

In the first place, the reason the agreement had remained unsigned in Kampala was that Kinshasa felt that because it had defeated M23 and the group had renounced the rebellion, it no longer existed in a form that would compel President Joseph Kabila’s government to enter into an agreement with it.

Two birds with one stone

Kinshasa, however, could not make this position public because M23’s renouncing of rebellion was something Museveni had agreed to negotiate with the rebels if, in turn, the Congo government would conclude the talks according to already agreed parameters.

In victory, however, Kinshasa saw no need to make commitments to a process it had been forced into back in December when M23 overran Goma and embarrassed President Joseph Kabila’s army and government.

Because of this, when the government delegation came to State House Entebbe on November 11, ostensibly to sign the agreement, they declined to enter the room where the function was supposed to take place and sit around the same table as M23.

READ: Key players in M23 rebellion

Following that botched event, Museveni brought pressure on his Kinshasa counterpart to honour his side of the promise.

Kinshasa, however, insisted that the title of the document be changed from an agreement to a declaration. Museveni agreed to persuade M23 to accept this on condition that none of the substance (the real articles within the document) would be tampered with.

In getting Museveni to do this, Kinshasa had scored another small victory, because an agreement, which M23 was seeking, is a binding document that gives certain entitlements to either party, whereas a declaration, which Kabila’s government proposed, is just a set of statements that are neither here nor there.

The choice of Nairobi appears to have been informed by convenience, since all the leaders were going to be in the Kenyan capital for the country’s 50th Independence celebrations, but also, perhaps more importantly, to shore up Uhuru Kenyatta’s regional profile in his continuing fight to avoid appearing before the International Criminal Court.