A diplomatic rift between Rwanda and the United Kingdom has deepened following false claims made by UK Minister for Africa, Lord Collins of Highbury, during a House of Lords session. The UK Minister alleged that Rwanda’s Foreign Minister had “denied and refuted” accusations of Rwanda’s involvement in a terrorist attack on a church in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) by the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated Ugandan terrorist group.
Rwanda swiftly responded by summoning the UK High Commissioner in Kigali, making it clear that Lord Collins’ statement was false, inflammatory, and dangerous. Kigali outlined three key objections: the ADF was never discussed in the Geneva meeting between Rwanda’s Foreign Minister and Lord Collins, making the UK Minister’s claim entirely untrue; Rwanda has no links to the ADF, which operates far from its borders, and on the contrary, is actively fighting an ISIS-linked terrorist group in Mozambique, making such accusations deeply offensive; and that the UK’s focus on unfounded accusations against Rwanda while downplaying Rwanda’s long-standing security threats from the DRC, particularly FDLR attacks and FARDC violations, was irresponsible and dangerous.
While the UK has been vocal in accusing Rwanda of supporting the M23 rebel movement in eastern DRC, it has largely ignored the three-decade-long security threat Rwanda has faced from the DRC-backed FDLR militia, which is composed of remnants of the 1994 genocide perpetrators. The UK has also failed to acknowledge the cross-border attacks on Rwandan territory by Congolese forces and allied militias.
Recent attacks on Rubavu and Musanze by FARDC and FDLR, including heavy shelling and civilian casualties, have drawn little to no condemnation from London. Instead, the UK continues to pressure Rwanda over the M23 conflict, despite Kigali repeatedly emphasizing that the real issue is the DRC government’s continued support for genocidal forces and its ethnic persecution of Congolese Tutsis.
Before Rwanda summoned the UK High Commissioner in Kigali, the UK had already summoned Rwanda’s High Commissioner in London, Johnston Busingye, and issued veiled threats of freezing bilateral cooperation if Kigali did not align with the UK’s stance on the DRC conflict. This attempt to pressure Rwanda into silence highlights the one-sided approach the UK has taken toward the conflict, ignoring Rwanda’s security concerns while amplifying accusations made by Kinshasa.
The diplomatic standoff reflects broader frustrations in Kigali over Western double standards—where Rwanda is criticized for alleged involvement in eastern DRC, but the DRC government is given a free pass for its documented support of FDLR, its shelling of Rwandan territory, and its refusal to address the root causes of conflict.
Rwanda has made it clear that it will not allow itself to be scapegoated for the DRC’s internal failures or be pressured into overlooking real security threats. While Lord Collins has privately admitted his mistake and promised to correct the record in the House of Lords, Rwanda insists on a public correction and a formal apology from the UK government.
Kigali has also reaffirmed its commitment to regional peace efforts through the African Union (AU), the East African Community (EAC), and SADC-led processes. However, it maintains that no peace deal will succeed unless the international community acknowledges the FDLR threat and the systematic persecution of Congolese Tutsis—issues that remain deliberately ignored by the UK and its allies.
As tensions continue to rise, the question remains: will the UK and other Western powers continue to ignore Rwanda’s legitimate security concerns, or will they finally acknowledge the full reality of the conflict in eastern DRC?
