oluwatosin oyeniyi GENEVA — Representatives of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda are meeting in Geneva on September 16 and 17 to assess implementation of the Washington peace accords, as continued fighting in eastern Congo tests the latest international effort to end years of regional conflict.
The two-day meeting of the Joint Security Coordination Mechanism (JSCM) brings together officials from both countries, with the United States, Qatar, Togo and the African Union Commission supporting the process. The mechanism was established to monitor and coordinate the security commitments made under the peace agreement.
The talks come at a critical point for the peace process. The DRC and Rwanda have signed agreements and repeatedly reaffirmed their commitment to implementation, but fighting and disputes over security obligations continue to complicate progress.
The question in Geneva is therefore less about whether the two governments support peace in principle and more about whether they can translate their commitments into verifiable action on the ground.
Two Security Commitments at the Centre
Among the most sensitive issues are the DRC’s commitment to neutralise the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) and Rwanda’s obligation to disengage its forces and lift what it describes as defensive measures in relation to the conflict.
These commitments are closely connected.
Rwanda has long argued that armed groups operating from Congolese territory, particularly the FDLR, pose a security threat. The Congolese government, meanwhile, has accused Rwanda of supporting armed groups operating in eastern Congo, allegations Kigali has rejected.
The peace process therefore requires both sides to take security measures while also building enough trust to ensure that one party’s actions are not interpreted as an opportunity for the other to gain an advantage.
The JSCM is intended to provide precisely that coordination and monitoring function.
From Agreements to Verification
The Geneva talks follow a fifth JSCM meeting held in July, when the DRC and Rwanda again committed to accelerating implementation of the Washington Accords.
At that meeting, the parties also agreed to explore verification mechanisms and strengthen information-sharing about developments in eastern Congo.
That emphasis is important because peace agreements can falter when governments disagree over what has actually happened on the ground.
Independent or mutually accepted verification could help establish whether forces have disengaged, whether armed groups are being neutralised and whether agreed security measures are being implemented.
Without reliable verification, accusations can quickly replace evidence, making it harder for mediators to determine responsibility for violations and respond before tensions escalate.
Eastern Congo Remains Unstable
The diplomatic process is unfolding against continued instability in eastern DRC, where armed groups and competing security interests have created one of Africa’s most persistent conflicts.
The region’s instability has also produced a major humanitarian crisis, with civilians repeatedly displaced by fighting and insecurity.
The Washington process is part of a wider diplomatic effort involving regional and international actors to address the conflict. The United States has played a central role, while Qatar, Togo and the African Union have supported different elements of the mediation architecture.
But the multiplicity of actors also makes coordination essential. A peace process involving several mediation tracks can only be effective if the parties receive consistent messages and the various initiatives reinforce rather than undermine one another.
What Success in Geneva Would Look Like
The immediate measure of progress should be concrete.
That could include agreement on verification arrangements, clearer timelines for security commitments, improved information-sharing and mechanisms for addressing alleged violations before they trigger renewed fighting.
The parties also need to maintain direct communication even when implementation disputes become politically difficult.
For the international mediators, sustained engagement will be necessary. Diplomatic pressure can help keep the parties at the negotiating table, but implementation ultimately depends on decisions taken by the governments and security actors involved.
A Narrow Window for Diplomacy
The Geneva meeting does not guarantee an end to the conflict.
It does, however, provide another opportunity to convert the Washington peace framework into practical security arrangements.
For communities in eastern Congo, the significance of the talks will ultimately be measured by what happens outside the negotiating room: whether armed violence declines, whether displaced people can safely return and whether neighbouring states stop treating security concerns as justification for continued military confrontation.
The central challenge is therefore clear.
