In the midst of the ongoing turmoil in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the world is watching as tensions between Rwanda and South Africa escalate. This clash of words and military setbacks is far more than just a diplomatic spat—it’s a showdown of geopolitical proportions, with Rwanda caught in the crossfire of accusations, distortions, and missteps from global powers. At the center of it all is the DRC conflict, where rebel group M23 has taken control of Goma, escalating an already volatile situation. The presence of foreign mercenaries, including those from Romania and France, has further complicated the issue, drawing in international players who are quick to blame Rwanda while attempting to sanitize the actions of others.
South Africa and Rwanda are locked in a bitter diplomatic confrontation, exposing deep-seated tensions that have been simmering for years. What began as a military misadventure in the DRC has spiraled into an embarrassing episode for South Africa, whose army suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of forces it barely understood. Now, in an effort to salvage its image, Pretoria is lashing out at Kigali, blaming Rwanda for its battlefield failures, while Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame is responding with characteristic bluntness, exposing South Africa’s contradictions and strategic incompetence.
South Africa has long postured as the continent’s big brother, seeking to dominate regional affairs with grandstanding rhetoric and self-proclaimed moral authority. Yet, its military has been exposed as a disorganized, ill-equipped force that struggles even in low-intensity combat. In reality, the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) is a shadow of what it once was, a bloated and inefficient outfit that can’t even catch a rabbit or kill an impala, let alone engage in meaningful warfare. Now, with its troops stranded in the jungles of eastern Congo, suffering casualties and logistical nightmares, pressure is mounting back home. The South African public is outraged, demanding answers from President Cyril Ramaphosa, who is struggling to explain why their soldiers are fighting and dying in a foreign war with no clear objective. Families of the troops are demanding their return, questioning why they were sent into battle with inadequate training and substandard equipment.
Today, after exchanges between officials on X, Presidents Kagame and Ramaphosa took to the platform to air their differences. South Africa’s official stance, voiced by President Cyril Ramaphosa, framed the country’s military presence in the DRC as a peacekeeping mission, despite mounting evidence that the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) had been embroiled in combat operations, caught in crossfire and, according to some, poorly equipped and poorly trained for such a volatile mission. Ramaphosa’s statements on X echoed a sense of pride in South Africa’s commitment to peace but also a thinly veiled attempt to downplay the realities of the mission’s failure.
Ramaphosa expressed condolences for the loss of South African soldiers in the DRC, stating that “13 brave soldiers…were dedicated to their mission and committed to peace,” and emphasizing the necessity of supporting the families of the deceased. He spoke of South Africa’s role in the SADC Mission in the DRC (SAMIDRC), casting the country’s presence as part of a broader African effort to maintain peace and protect lives. Yet, his narrative was clouded by the contradictions and frustrations of a mission that had quickly spiraled into a military and diplomatic debacle.
In contrast, President Kagame’s response on X today was sharp and direct. He made clear his discontent with the way the situation had been handled, particularly by South African officials, whose statements, according to Kagame, contained “distortion, deliberate attacks, and even lies.” He clarified several key points, starting with the nature of Rwanda’s military force: “The Rwanda Defence Force is an army, not a militia.” He further stated that SAMIDRC was not a peacekeeping force but rather a belligerent one, authorized by SADC to engage in offensive combat operations. SAMIDRC’s involvement, Kagame argued, was part of a broader strategy to assist the DRC government in its fight against its own people, working alongside genocidal armed groups like the FDLR, which target Rwanda. He underscored the risk posed to Rwanda itself, especially as these groups, including mercenaries from Romania and France, were operating within the DRC.
Kagame did not mince words when addressing the missteps of South Africa. He pointed out that the presence of SAMIDRC had displaced the East African Community Regional Force, which had been a genuine peacekeeping force, thus contributing to the failure of negotiations aimed at resolving the crisis. He also questioned Ramaphosa’s claim of a “warning,” saying, “President Ramaphosa has never given a ‘warning’ of any kind, unless it was delivered in his local language which I do not understand.” Kagame continued, adding that if South Africa wanted to contribute to peaceful solutions, it should do so, but that the country was in no position to take on the role of a peacemaker or mediator. He ended his response with a clear message: “And if South Africa prefers confrontation, Rwanda will deal with the matter in that context any day.”
The accusations against South Africa were not just about military missteps but also about its historical role in harboring Rwanda’s enemies. Over the years, South Africa has been a safe haven for dissidents, some of whom have orchestrated grenade attacks and coordinated FDLR operations against Rwanda from the DRC. These attacks have been part of a broader effort to destabilize Rwanda, and yet, the world has often turned a blind eye, focusing its criticisms on Rwanda instead.
Meanwhile, the West’s dirty hand in this conflict has been slowly unveiled. Rwanda’s generosity in foreign policy stands in stark contrast to the narrative pushed by many Western powers. Despite being ganged up against, Rwanda has remained a beacon of humanity. In a historic turn of events, Rwanda facilitated the peaceful and graceful repatriation of 280 Romanian mercenaries, who had been involved in war crimes, sending them back home with the utmost respect and humanity. This gesture of goodwill came despite the fact that these mercenaries had committed atrocities in the region, and their presence had contributed to the escalation of violence. Rwanda’s approach was one of peaceful resolution, choosing to allow these individuals to return home without further escalation.
As Kagame’s statements resonate, they reveal not just a response to Ramaphosa’s comments, but a broader, deeper frustration with the international community’s selective outrage. While Rwanda faces constant criticism, including from the West, for actions that are often taken out of context, the true perpetrators of violence and destabilization—be they foreign mercenaries or armed groups like the FDLR—are given a pass.
Back home in South Africa, there is growing outrage over the country’s involvement in the DRC mission. Citizens and military officials alike are questioning why their soldiers were sent into a dangerous conflict ill-equipped and poorly trained. The public pressure on President Ramaphosa is mounting, with many calling for the immediate withdrawal of the SANDF from the DRC and a reassessment of the country’s foreign policy. The nation is beginning to realize that posturing as the “big boys” of Africa, as South Africa has often done, is no substitute for real military capability or diplomatic skill.
This conflict is not just a regional issue but a microcosm of the broader global power dynamics at play. While Rwanda’s foreign policy continues to reflect its commitment to peace, security, and human dignity, the actions of other nations, including South Africa, are increasingly being called into question. As the international community watches, one thing is clear: the narrative is shifting, and the truth about the DRC conflict is slowly but surely coming to light.