Armed groups and political inclusion in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo

Since 2003, the DRC’s ‘post-conflict’ period has been marred by violence and insecurity. This is particularly true of the country’s troubled eastern provinces of North and South Kivu, where around 70 armed groups operate. This project examines why, despite more than a decade of international efforts to build peace in the country, sustainable peace and security remain elusive. So far, peacebuilding initiatives have failed to acknowledge the fundamental role of the politics underpinning the armed group phenomenon, and as a result have focused on short-term fixes that compound conflict in the long-term. Using fieldwork and remotely gathered data, the project seeks to better understand armed groups and identify potential entry points for engagement.

The different actors associated with the current crisis in the eastern DRC understand the causes and drivers of the conflict very differently. As a result, international and local actors have largely divergent views on what the solutions to insecurity in the region should be, and on what the priorities are to bring about peace and development. This project seeks to understand where competing views and needs are preventing dialogue, and where needs are complementary.

International media and aid actors tend to characterise armed groups as rhetorically incoherent, opportunistic, and predatory. Therefore, armed groups are often disregarded as political actors, and efforts to curb their violence have focused on military rather than political approaches. However, despite UN claims about victories over certain armed groups, everyday insecurity for Congolese citizens remains high.

The research has found that relatively few members of armed groups are coerced into joining. Most see armed group membership as a response to wider governance failures such as political marginalisation, lack of internal and border security, and lack of livelihood opportunities.

The research highlights the need for a political solution to the armed group phenomenon, which is driven by intensely political problems, and facilitated by a wide range of political actors. 

Researchers: Suda Perera (DLP) and Congolese research partners Victor Anas and Josaphat Musamba.

See also: 

 

Related items

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal 15th October 2015

Innovation: transactional or transformative?

Given the fascination with 'innovation' in the field of development, it's time to discuss what the word might mean.

Opinion by Chris Roche 23rd March 2015

Adding gender and power to the TWP agenda

Why bring gender into Thinking and Working Politically?

Opinion by Sally Moyle 6th August 2015
Opinion by Dan Hymowitz 3rd February 2017

Gender analysis, and thinking and working politically – bridging the gap

Guest post on Devpolicy  introducing panels at this week's Australasian Aid Conference

Opinion by Chris Roche 14th February 2017

Inclusive political settlements: who and what gets included, and how?

First of six posts on political settlements by researchers, policymakers and practitioners.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal 13th July 2015

Politics, risk and development: three takeaways

Reflections from two conferences

Opinion by Chris Roche 19th February 2016

International donors - aiding or abetting?

The 'donor's dilemma' is discussed in a new DLP paper.

Opinion by Niheer Dasandi 10th September 2015

Being 'there': reflections on fieldwork in the DRC

Fieldwork in fragile places part 1: the security dilemma

Opinion by Suda Perera 5th November 2014

Authoritarianism, democracy and development

What does the evidence say?

Opinion by Tim Kelsall 27th November 2014

Being 'there': Bermuda Triangulation

Fieldwork in fragile places part 2: data difficulties

Opinion by Suda Perera 6th November 2014

Do donors have realistic expectations of their staff when it comes to 'thinking and working politically'?

Is learning to ‘think politically’ like learning a new language? 

Opinion by Heather Marquette 9th June 2014

What do we do on Monday? Political settlements in theory and practice

The value of the political settlements framework

Opinion by Edward Laws 15th July 2015

Cancer and the links between medicine and development

Guest post for From Poverty to Power

Opinion by Chris Roche 15th April 2015

Developmental leadership: putting inclusiveness first

Inclusiveness should be the first step towards building more robust states.

Opinion by Seth D. Kaplan 24th September 2015

‘Crows who come in search of dollars’: NGO legitimacy in conflict zones

Do political dynamics affect NGO legitimacy more than performance?

Opinion by Oliver Walton 19th August 2014

Forgotten South Sudan tangled in factionalism and failed politics

A toxic blend of complex historical identity politics and short-term elite politicking

Opinion by Jonathan Fisher 4th September 2014

The inclusiveness test: making change work

Guest post for openDemocracy

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal 4th November 2015

Neither 'good guys' nor 'bad guys': Positive engagement with armed groups

Final post in a series on 'Power, politics and positive deviance', theme of DLP's 2016 Annual Conference.

Opinion by Suda Perera 5th February 2016

Identifying rebels with a cause (and effect)

'Power, politics and positive deviance' is the theme of DLP's 2016 annual conference.

Opinion by Chris Roche 1st December 2015
Opinion by Heather Marquette 10th November 2014

Security and justice – the mismatch between policy and practice

What hinders more politically nuanced security and justice programming?

Opinion by Shivit Bakrania 21st July 2014
Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal 29th March 2016
Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal 24th November 2014

Somaliland's route to peace

What can we learn from Somaliland's approach to peacebuilding? 

Opinion by Sarah Phillips 12th December 2013

Indonesia and the political settlements trap

The challenges of 'resettling the settlement'

Opinion by Graham Teskey 17th July 2015

Two remarkable transitions: lessons from Oman and Somaliland

Political settlements and international power structures

Opinion by Sarah Phillips 20th July 2015

Shuffling the decks: quick fixes versus long-term stability

Guest post for Development Progress on 'post-conflict' DRC

Opinion by Suda Perera 22nd January 2015

The road to transparency in resource-rich Myanmar

Myanmar's EITI process and its contribution to broader reform

Opinion by Taylor Brown 1st April 2016

About DLP

The Developmental Leadership Program (DLP) is an international research initiative that explores how leadership, power and political processes drive or block successful development.

DLP focuses on the crucial role of home-grown leaderships and coalitions in forging legitimate political settlements and institutions that promote developmental outcomes, such as sustainable growth, political stability and inclusive social development.

Find out more

News

New article: A typology of interaction between politicians and bureaucrats

Tuesday 14th March 2017

DLP Research Fellow Niheer Dasandi has co-authored a new article on how bureaucrats and politicians interact, and how this affects reform efforts. It appears in 'Public Administration and Development'.

Read more

Power and systems, and their role in developmental change: Guest seminar with Duncan Green

Tuesday 21st February 2017

Seeing power and complex social systems clearly is the first step towards supporting positive developmental change, says Oxfam Strategic Director and DLP research partner Duncan Green. He discussed the themes of his latest book at a recent International Development Department guest seminar at the University of Birmingham.

Read more

Follow: @dlprog