Rwanda quits Central African bloc in dispute with DRC
Rwanda says it will withdraw from the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), underscoring diplomatic tensions in the region over an offensive this year by Rwanda-backed M23 rebels in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Kigali had expected to assume the chairmanship of the 11-member bloc at a meeting on Saturday in Equatorial Guinea. Instead, the bloc kept Equatorial Guinea in the role, which Rwanda's foreign ministry denounced as a violation of its rights.
Rwanda, in a statement, condemned DRC's "instrumentalisation" of the bloc and saw "no justification for remaining in an organisation whose current functioning runs counter to its founding principles".
It wasn't clear if Rwanda's exit from the bloc would take immediate effect.
The office of DRC President Felix Tshisekedi said in a statement that ECCAS members had "acknowledged the aggression against the Democratic Republic of Congo by Rwanda and ordered the aggressor country to withdraw its troops from Congolese soil".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
11 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Trump confirms DR Congo-Rwanda peace deal, gripes about Nobels
WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump took credit Friday for a peace deal negotiated in Washington between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda -- and complained that he would not get a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. The warring African nations said in a joint statement on Wednesday that they had initialed an agreement aimed at ending the conflict in eastern DRC -- to be formally signed in the US capital next week. "This is a Great Day for Africa and, quite frankly, a Great Day for the World!" Trump said in a Truth Social post confirming the breakthrough. But his triumphant tone darkened as he complained that he had been overlooked by the Norwegian Nobel Committee for his mediating role in conflicts between India and Pakistan, as well as Serbia and Kosovo. He also demanded credit for "keeping peace" between Egypt and Ethiopia and brokering the Abraham Accords, a series of agreements aiming to normalize relations between Israel and several Arab nations. Trump campaigned for office as a "peacemaker" who would use his negotiating skills to quickly end wars in Ukraine and Gaza, although both conflicts are still raging five months into his presidency. Indian officials have denied that he had any role in its ceasefire with Pakistan. The government of Pakistan, meanwhile, said Friday it would formally recommend Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize "in recognition of his decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership" during the recent conflict. However, Trump's claims for the Abraham Accords being able to "unify the Middle East" have yet to be realized, with war breaking out between Israel and Iran, and no end in sight to the conflict in Gaza. And critics say the Republican greatly exaggerated the significance of the 2020 Serbia-Kosovo agreements, which were statements of intent that were thin on details and quickly unraveled. The president said officials from DR Congo and Rwanda would be in Washington on Monday for the signing, although their joint statement said they would put pen to paper on June 27. The resource-rich eastern DRC, which borders Rwanda, has been plagued by violence for three decades, with a resurgence since the anti-government M23 armed group went on a renewed offensive at the end of 2021. The deal -- which builds on a declaration of principles signed in April -- was reached during three days of talks between the neighbors in Washington, according to their statement. Trump has received multiple Nobel Peace Prize nominations from supporters and loyal lawmakers over the years. He has made no secret of his irritation at missing out on the prestigious award, bringing it up as recently as February during an Oval Office meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. President Barack Obama won the prize soon after taking office in 2009, and Trump complained during his 2024 election campaign that his Democratic predecessor was not worthy of the honor.
Mail & Guardian
2 days ago
- Mail & Guardian
African tax awakening: Reclaiming our revenue, reclaiming our voice
The African Tax Administration Forum was created to stop Africa from bleeding money through illicit financial flows, loopholes and skewed tax treaties. Graphic: John McCann/M&G Fifteen years ago, as African governments struggled with rising development needs and shrinking fiscal space, we acknowledged an uncomfortable truth: Africa was bleeding revenue. Illicit financial flows, legal loopholes and tax treaties skewed against our interests were draining the continent. What we needed was a bold, continental response, technically capable, politically grounded and unapologetically African. That's why we created the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF). What began in 2009 as a conversation in Pretoria about taxation, sovereignty and state-building soon evolved into a movement. I was then a group executive at the South African Revenue Service (Sars), part of a small team determined to build something that would outlast us. By the time the ATAF was formally launched in Uganda's capital Kampala, 25 countries had already signed up. Today, we are 44 strong. Our early structure mattered. The Executive Council brought together seasoned leaders like Mary Baine of Rwanda and Daniel Ablorh-Quarcoo of Ghana, professionals who had long understood the political economy of taxation in Africa. We weren't there to imitate international models. We were there to build something from within. Since our formation, we've helped member countries reform laws, build audit capacity and navigate international tax policy. ATAF-supported work with the Zambia Revenue Authority, for example, helped recover more than $64 million in tax from the mining sector between 2020 and 2022, money that funds schools, hospitals and infrastructure. In Uganda, we supported the audit of its vital coffee sector, recovering $79 million in reassessed taxes. Importantly, we have always taken an African-to-African approach. When Rwanda needed support on revenue forecasting, it was Sars that provided it. When Mauritius began implementing digital taxation, lessons were shared from across the continent. These peer-based interventions were not just about capacity, they were about building trust, building relationships and building a new tradition of collaboration. The ATAF was never just about numbers. It was about power. For decades, Africa was expected to receive decisions, not shape them. I've sat in too many rooms where our voices were noted but not counted. The ATAF changed that. We made our presence felt in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Sharing, or Beps. We stood behind the call for a UN tax convention. And while we didn't always get the deal we deserved, we were no longer on the margins. We were in the room and we stayed there. Along the way, we built infrastructure: the ATAF Tax Academy, a research network focused on African data, and the Women in Tax Network that centres equity in policy conversations. These weren't symbolic add-ons, they were designed to shift power from outside actors to African experts. Today, the challenges have evolved. Digitalisation, climate finance, AI and regional integration bring new tax implications. The ATAF is responding by developing a tax technology innovation hub — our way of future-proofing the fiscal sovereignty of our member states. Our work with the AU and the African Development Bank is expanding and we are gearing up to offer a new generation of tools and strategies that meet the moment. We also understand the geopolitical context. The return of trade tariffs, the rise of economic nationalism and shifts in multilateralism all affect Africa's fiscal future. These trends might not speak the language of tax, but they are tax, hidden in pricing structures, supply chains and new power blocs. That's why the ATAF's role is more relevant than ever. As South Africa prepares to host the G20, the world's attention will briefly turn to Africa. This is our chance not just to be visible but to be consequential. The ATAF stands ready to provide technical depth, policy direction and a platform for a united African voice. For me, this journey has been about African success, African belief and building a good African institution. I've seen what's possible when African countries work together with courage, competence and clarity. To the next generation of African tax leaders I want to say this: 'You belong in the room. Be bold. Be prepared. Build coalitions. Ask hard questions. And, above all, keep our agenda centred on justice, dignity and sovereignty and work hard to obtain results.' The ATAF proves that African collaboration isn't just possible, it's powerful. We will tax, we will govern and we will build on our own terms. This is the African tax awakening. And it has only just begun. Logan Wort is the executive secretary of the African Tax Administration Forum.
IOL News
2 days ago
- IOL News
The Spectacle of Innocence: How the Narrative of 'Stolen Children' Became the West's Weapon of War
The portrayal of children in the Ukraine-Russia conflict serves as a potent tool of propaganda, revealing the complexities behind the narratives that shape public perception and policy, writes Gillian Schutte. Image: IOL / Ron AI In war, the image of a suffering child has long been one of the most potent tools of propaganda. A child is the cipher of innocence, the mirror of adult failure, the vessel into which we pour our grief, outrage, and moral certainty. It is no wonder, then, that in the ongoing geopolitical conflict between NATO-backed Ukraine and Russia, children have become a front line in the information war. The Washington Post's tear-soaked profile 'Thousands of Ukraine's children vanished into Russia. This one made it back' follows the return of 12-year-old Illia Matviienko, a child allegedly abducted, reprogrammed, and rescued just in time from the clutches of Russian state adoption. It is a finely crafted narrative. Illia is traumatised but eloquent. His grandmother is tireless and brave. His toys are metaphors. His memories are edited for maximum effect. But behind the Lego blocks and Garfield plush toys lies a darker machinery of manipulation. The story reads like it was written by a Pentagon-funded scriptwriter, with emotional cues planted at every paragraph break, not to report on the tragedy of war, but to mobilise sentiment for war. Let us look past the misty-eyed storytelling and ask the harder questions. What really happened to Ukraine's children? Who is keeping the score? And who benefits from turning their suffering into clickbait diplomacy? The Propaganda Template, From Wag the Dog to Wag the Child The Washington Post, long known for its role in manufacturing consent for U.S. foreign policy, frames Illia's ordeal as evidence of systematic Russian child theft. His story becomes the keystone in a broader claim: that tens of thousands of Ukrainian children have been deported, re-educated, and erased by the Russian state. The article even cites figures: 'at least 19,500 children' according to Yale University's Conflict Observatory, whose funding, incidentally, is being cut under Donald Trump's administration. Ukrainian officials inflate the figure still further: 'maybe 50,000, maybe 100,000.' No one knows for sure. No one can prove anything. But certainty is not required in the spectacle of war propaganda, only repetition and righteous tears. The real figures? According to Russia's official delegation at the Istanbul peace talks, led by Vladimir Medinsky, the only list ever presented to Moscow by Ukraine contains 339 names. Russia says it has already returned 101 of these children. Ukraine, for its part, has returned 22 Russian children who ended up in its care. These are verifiable exchanges. And yet the Western press refuses to mention these facts. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading Selective Suffering, Why Is Only One Child a Headline? The case of Illia Matviienko is tragic. But why is it the story? Because it performs well. It has all the ingredients of pathos: dead mother, lonely boy, forbidden adoption, grandmother's heroism, poetic justice. It sells. It moves. It inflames. But in Russia's version of events, there are also children traumatised by shelling, evacuated from war zones, not abducted. Many were found alone in buildings or hospitals. Others were taken to safety at great personal risk by Russian soldiers, some of whom died in the effort. And when relatives come forward, parents, aunts, grandmothers, the children are reunited. No obstacle, no cover-up. Just bureaucracy and war. Yet these stories are not told. There are no Washington Post front pages for the Russian soldier who saves a wounded child under fire. There is no Pulitzer bait in the case of a child returned to a reunited family in Donetsk. These children do not cry in English. They are not crying for NATO. Manufactured Numbers, Manufactured Consent Russia has repeatedly demanded evidence: names, documents, statements from parents. None have been forthcoming. The Ukrainian and U.S. positions rely on estimates, projections, and a deep well of emotional speculation. Russia, meanwhile, says: here is the list you gave us, here are the returns we've made. The disparity between accusation and evidence is not accidental. It mirrors the propaganda campaign that preceded the war in Iraq, the intervention in Syria, the bombardment of Libya. Western soft power thrives on emotional shorthand: Saddam's incubator babies, Gaddafi's Viagra-fuelled soldiers, and now Putin's child kidnappers. It is a pattern. The facts are fluid. The imagery is fixed. What Russia Says, and the West Won't Print Medinsky's statement in Istanbul was clear. Russia is open to verification. Russia is returning children. Russia is establishing regular exchanges. It has proposed temporary ceasefires in 'grey zones' so commanders on both sides can collect the corpses of fallen soldiers, a practical and humane suggestion, met with silence. Meanwhile, Western media focuses on Lego toys and bedtime trauma. It does not ask why Ukraine will not publish a full list of the missing children. It does not examine the political utility of these stories in maintaining Western support, arms supplies, and diplomatic cover. Nor does it question why the first move in any peace negotiation is not truth and reconciliation, but a spotlight on Russian war crimes. The narrative must be secured before the facts can catch up. The Illusion of Innocence Yes, Illia's story is heartbreaking. All war stories involving children are. But to isolate it from the broader matrix of wartime reality, to use it as a blunt weapon against the Russian state, to decontextualise and sentimentalise it into a moral fable, is to exploit that child all over again. War is complex. Children are not pawns. But in the battle of narratives, they become precisely that. They are used to distract from inconvenient truths, to derail diplomacy, to justify endless escalation. And while the West cries for Illia, what of Vitalii, the friend left behind in the Donetsk hospital? What if he was never abducted, just never found? What if he was just another casualty of the same propaganda war that made Illia a headline? Beyond the Toy Box The Washington Post piece may be compelling. It is certainly emotive. But it is not journalism. It is spectacle. A carefully staged morality play in which there are only villains and victims, no context, no complexity, no dissenting voice. The weaponisation of children is one of the oldest tricks in imperial warfare. And as long as mainstream media continues to traffic in half-truths and Hollywood storylines, the real victims of this war, on both sides, will remain unheard. We should care for every child affected by war. But we should be suspicious of which children we are told to care about, and why. The portrayal of children in the Ukraine-Russia conflict serves as a potent tool of propaganda, revealing the complexities behind the narratives that shape public perception and policy, writes Gillian Schutte. Image: IOL
