The Pole Institute convened representatives from diverse sectors of the Congolese society to share their analysis and prescriptions for addressing the de-criminalization of natural resources so that they can be a benefit to the Congolese people. Below are some excerpts geared towards the International community and the myriad efforts underway to address “conflict minerals.” Click here to download the full report.

Select Excerpts:
In order to rehabilitate and decriminalize the mining industry, which according to [Aloys] Tegera, generates more than two-thirds of the revenue of North Kivu, it is necessary to, in the first place, work towards the re-establishment of the Congolese state. Any efforts by the international community to re-organize and legislate for the Congolese mining industry without taking this fundamental step into account risk failure, “unless, of course, the various lobbies have in mind a Congo without the Congolese, which would clearly be absurd.” Introduction page 3

A glaring lacuna in all these efforts is the lack of involvement of the Congolese people in seeking solutions to problems that face them in their own country, and Johnson argues that unless the Congolese people are brought “back in” all these international efforts will remain, for their originators, an exercise in creating the DRC after their own image. Introduction page 4

[Dominic] Johnson argues that because of this failure to include the Congolese people in crucial debate on ‘their’ issues, the international community has made a serious error of judgment in not recognizing that the situation in the east of the DRC goes beyond just a presumed squabble over minerals and raises fundamental questions of the structuring of state power which have to be taken into account by anyone hoping to work with the Congolese state in order to reform the Congolese mining sector. Introduction page 4

It is imperative that the various people and organizations of good will who are determined to ensure that the minerals of Kivu are ‘clean’ or conflict-free first work towards a definition of the basics necessary for the re-establishment of the Congolese state. Only when this is in place will the control of the mining industry be possible. The various initiatives will not be effective unless this basic condition is met. Aloys Tegera page 11

It is argued that important aspects of the regulatory model now emerging are partly based on an erroneous and outdated analysis of the conflict dynamics in Eastern Congo and that this is likely to weaken its effectiveness on the ground. The error consists in regarding competition around minerals as the main reason for conflicts in Eastern Congo and the establishment of government authority as the main mechanism for ending such competition and thereby the conflicts themselves. Reforms centered around strengthening the rôle of the state in Eastern Congo rather than the people will, we contend, exacerbate conflict instead of ending it, even if they succeed in curbing the excesses deriving from mineral trade. Dominic Johnson page 22

It is therefore perfectly possible, under the certification and due diligence schemes now on the table, to claim to have solved a decades-old conflict about control of a mineral-rich region and the control of the trade of its produce without addressing any of the issues involved, without resolving conflict on the ground and without contributing to peace and human security in a manner visible to the local population. Dominic Johnson page 43

However, beyond the possibility or even the impossibility of an international intervention to render the minerals of eastern DRC ‘clean’ for use, in other words conflict-free, it is important to emphasize that the criminalization of the mining industry underestimates the fact that more than two-thirds of the revenue of a province like North Kivu depends on mineral exports. Aloys Tegera page 8

Click here to find out more about the Pole Institute.

Also find here prescriptions for addressing Congo’s challenge from select Congolese groups:

Women scholars and activists
http://friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/womens-voices.html

Elected officials
http://congofriends.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html

Congolese youth
http://conflictminerals.org/conflict-mineral-critique/

Human Rights
http://congofriends.blogspot.com/2010/06/long-live-spirit-of-floribert-chebeya.html

Remember to join us for Congo Week from October 17 – 23 as ordinary people throughout the globe join in solidarity with the people of the Congo in their quest to fulfill their enormous human and natural potential.

1. The Conflict Minerals narrative leaves the public believing that the source of Congo’s challenge is rebel groups that brutally rape women to control lucrative mines. When in fact the source of Congo’s challenge has been the attempt by the West to weaken this wealthy and strategically important country through wars, invasions, assassinations and propping up of dictators.

2. It wipes out 14 years of crimes committed against the Congolese people in which foreign governments and multinational corporations are complicit and have not been held to account.

3. It says absolutely nothing about mining companies (Banro, AngloGold Ashanti, OM Group, Freeport McMoRan are but a few examples) operating in the Congo that have either been implicated in illegally exploiting Congo’s wealth or involved in odious contracts that do not accrue to the benefit of the Congolese people.

4. It takes none of the prescriptions that have been offered by Congolese women, youth, politicians or business groups over the years into account.

5. It offers no evidence whatsoever that certification and auditing of the extraction of minerals from Eastern Congo will end the conflict.

A few simple questions to Ponder:

1. Rwanda is a top buyer of Congo’s conflict minerals according to Bloomberg News (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=a1p3C4mCsY2o&pid=20601087) and Uganda is building a refinery ostensibly to refine conflict minerals from Congo (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8662680.stm ) but the US has said or done nothing about their allies. The US continues to give both countries aid, military equipment and training. And shockingly Conflict Minerals advocates are silent about a main buyer of conflict tin. Why demonstrations in front of apple store but none in front of the Rwandan Embassy?

2. According to Dow Jones news Rwanda stands to make $200 million in 2010 from Tin, Tantalum & Tungsten, none of which it has large quantities but rather secure these conflict minerals from the Congo. Yet, the conflict minerals advocates are deadly silent. Why?

3. If US allies Rwanda and Uganda triggered the conflict with two invasions 1996 & 1998 and they either have international arrest warrants for their leaders as is the case with Rwanda’s leaders or international ruling against them as is the case with Uganda where the International Court of Justice ruled in 2005 Uganda owes Congo $10 billion in reparations, why is the State Department not saying or doing anything about this? There is law on the US books PL 109 – 456 Sec. 5 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-2125) calls on US to withhold aid from countries that destabilize the Congo yet no action is being taken.

4. Finally, atrocious crimes have been committed over the last 14 years where an estimated 6 million people have died. The United Nations via four studies (http://www.friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/reports-a-studies.html) have implicated over 100 companies a number of which is American but yet the State Department Contact Point has refused to act on recommendations from the United Nations. Companies such as AngloGold Ashanti (the largest investor is American John Paulson of Paulson & Co. – http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ajab_txy3yJM&pos=4) and Banro corporation stand to reap billions from the region of the most vicious violence against Congolese civilian. And the outcry from conflict minerals advocates? NONE!!!

In light of the above facts, conflict minerals efforts appear to be an awkward attempt to cover for US allies and US corporations (See previous Huff Post article by Congolese youths: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kambale-musavuli/conflict-minerals-a-cover_b_391506.html)

What should be done to end the conflict?

1. US should fully implement it’s own law, PL 109-456, especially section 105.

2. US should pressure its allies Rwanda and Uganda to stop the destabilization and looting of the Congo

3. US should hold its corporations accountable, especially its mining companies

4. US should engage in Congo differently by prioritizing diplomatic and political approach over a military approach. Read more about prescriptions http://www.friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/policy-a-issue-briefs.html

Rwanda’s Mining Sector Output Grew 20% In 2008 – IEPA

Last update: 5:44 a.m. EST Jan. 5, 2009
Jan 05, 2009 (Dow Jones Commodities News via Comtex) — DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

Rwanda’s mining sector output grew 20% in 2008 from the year earlier due
to increased export volumes of tungsten, cassiterite and coltan, the
country’s three leading minerals, the country’s Investment and Export
Promotion Agency said Monday.

By the end of October 2008, mineral export revenues increased to $89
million compared with $71.5 million for the whole of 2007.

“Although the mining sector is still largely artisan, based on the
export figures as of October, the revenues will hit more than $100
million in 2008,” IEPA said, adding that the mining sector is poised to
overtake coffee, tea and tourism as the country’s top revenue earner By
2010.

In 2007, mineral exports accounted for 40% of the country’s total export
revenue earnings, IEPA said. However, the report didn’t state the
quantities of minerals exported.

Rwanda now aims to increase annual mineral export revenues to $200
million by 2010 by attracting higher investment, modernizing mining
methods and expanding exploration. As a long term-measure, the country
also expects to attract more investments in mineral processing.

Rwanda has no large-scale mining industry and aid agencies say a large
part of the minerals are smuggled into the country from Congo’s
mineral-rich North Kivu province which has strong social and economic
links with the tiny.

-By Nicholas Bariyo, contributing to Dow Jones Newswires

Click here (PDF) to read entire critique!

Executive Director of Friends of the Congo, Maurice Carney, provides core elements for those seeking to understand the Congo, its history, current situation and how one should approach, learning, research, advocacy and policy around the Congo.

Part II

Part III

Part IV

In the April edition of Mother Jones, Adam Hochschild notes “The real problem is not conflict minerals, but the fact that Congo’s long-suffering people reap only a tiny share of their country’s vast wealth.” Read the entire article here: http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/02/congo-gold-adam-hochschild

Congolese filmmaker Petna Ndaliko Katondolo speaks about the non-profit industrial complex at the 2009 “Congo in Harlem” film festival.

GRITtv with Laura Flanders is a new, news and arts discussion show, available daily, in multiple formats, with interactivity and a positive take on whats going on. The show launched May 12, 2008. Made possible by Free Speech TV, GRITtv is viewer-supported. Checks in support of GRITtv, made out to Laura Flanders Limited, may be sent to GRITtv at the address below.

CONTACT: 641 6th Ave., 4th Fl., NY, NY 10011 || (212) 871-8100 || grittv@grittv.org

Kambale Musavuli of Friends of the Congo stopped by the GRITtv studio to remind us of the situation in Congo and our responsibilities there.

http://www.grittv.org

CBS ought to be commended for covering the “resource” aspect of the Congo conflict. It is a limited sign of progress for the corporate media that have been silent on the more than decade-long scramble for precious and strategic minerals in the heart of Africa. The broadcast left casual followers of the Congo perplexed because of the gross omissions regarding the resource war that has ravaged the country since 1996.

After 13 years, an estimated 6 million dead, hundreds of thousands of women and children systematically raped as a weapon of war, and widespread pilfering of Congo’s resources, CBS and proponents of the conflict mineral approach were deadly silent on the Western corporate exploitation of Congo’s riches. An orgy of looting and corporate plunder has occurred in the Congo at the expense of the Congolese people. Antonio Guterres, Chief of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights said to the world in a 2008 Financial Times interview, “The international community has systematically looted DRC and we should not forget that.”

The companies at the root of the supply chain responsible for pillaging the Congo have been well documented. The United Nations identified some 85 in four studies from 2001 – 2003 and the Congolese government began a review of 61 in 2007. Below is a limited sample of some of the companies:

Anvil Mining
African Resources
Afrimex
Amalgamated Metal Corporation
AngloGold Ashanti
Banro Corporation
H.C. Starck
Blattner Elwyn Group
Cabot Corporation
Danzer Group
De Beers
Eagle Wings/ Trinitech
El Nino Ventures
Freeport McMoRan
First Quantum
George Forrest International
Katanga Mining
Kemet Corporation
Lundin Mining
Moto Gold
Nikanor
OM Group
Traxys
Trademet
International Finance Corporation of the World Bank Group

How is it that after 13 years of witnessing the grotesque carnage playing out on the bodies of Congolese women and not one of these companies was mentioned, referenced or even called to account in the 60 Minutes piece? How is it that proponents of the conflict mineral approach omit ALL of these companies? (Visit  http://conflictminerals.org/us-canadian-companies-involved-in-congo/ to obtain comprehensive listing of companies that CBS and the conflict mineral campaigners omit)

The above companies have been identified as either contributing to the fueling of the conflict, illegally exploiting the natural riches of the Congo or involved in odious contracts to the detriment of the Congolese people. They exploit strategic minerals such as coltan (key to cell phone and electronic devices), gold, copper, cobalt, diamonds, tin, tungsten and many more minerals that are vital to the function of modern society.

CBS traveled all the way to the Congo and did a major broadcast on exploitation of minerals (gold) in the Congo but none of the above companies was mentioned in its broadcast, in spite of their being chaperoned by two Western experts intimately familiar with the Congo.

Reference was made to a study by Human Rights Watch but neither the study nor the company (AngloGold Ahsanti, partly owned by Barrick Gold of Canada) identified in a 2005 Human Rights Watch study “The Curse of Gold,” was mentioned in the broadcast. At the end of the broadcast, viewers were left to believe that Walmart was the culprit in the Congo.

A plethora of studies and institutions have identified the sample of companies referenced above as either fueling the conflict or exploiting the Congolese people. Institutions such as the United Nations, the Congolese Parliament – Lutundula Report, Human Rights Watch, Global Witness, Rights and Accountability in International Development, Greenpeace, Duncan and Allen, Carter Center, Netherlands Institute for Southern Africa (NIZA), Belgian Senate, Southern Africa Resource Watch and the list goes on; have identified the companies. There is no shortage of studies or reports on this matter. Why the silence? Why no mention of the companies?

It is time that the conflict mineral proponents and the corporate media join Dan Rather (see former CBS Anchor Dan Rather’s Emmy nominated investigative report (http://blip.tv/file/1850129/) on American mining company, Freeport McMoRan in Congo) and others in Breaking the Silence on the systematic looting and exploitation of the Congo, its resources and its people.

Click here to take action to end the conflict in the Congo!

Other useful analysis:
Show Me The Data

Three Problems With 60 Minutes
By Dr. Dan Fahey