Fifth Meeting of Joint Monitoring Group Task Force

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KINSHASA 000078 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV KDEM PHUM MOPS PREL CG SUBJECT: Fifth Meeting of Joint Monitoring Group Task Force (JMG-TF) in Goma Ref: (A) 07 Kinshasa 1419 (B) 07 Kinshasa 1426 (C) Kinshasa 0007 (D) Kinshasa 36 ¶1. (U) Reftels are reports on prior meetings of the JMG-TF. ¶2. (U) Summary: The Task Force of the Joint Monitoring Group had its fifth meeting January 18 in Goma. The Rwandans promised to have the list of genocidaires (perhaps over 10,000) ready in time for relocation of ex-FAR elements to reception centers in DRC. The Task Force agreed to use the next meeting January 25 to go to Rwanda to view Rwanda's efforts to reintegrate ex-FAR returnees. End Summary. ¶3. (SBU) The fifth meeting of the Task Force of the Joint Monitoring Group, held at and chaired by MONUC January 18, saw some of the same focus as in previous meetings but some shift as well. The Rwandan delegation (with the same personnel as in previous meetings) was as ever well-prepared and very careful about the minutes of the previous meeting. The Congolese side, minus its usual head of delegation Col. Mamba (said to be sick in Kinshasa),was even weaker than usual, let by his usual number two, Major Ambroise Nanga. ¶4. (SBU) The genocide list continued to take much time. The Rwandans insisted that the minutes not reflect statements that they had made at the previous meeting concerning the list of genocidaires (though they did not dispute that they had made them),to the effect that the process "was taking longer than originally foreseen because new evidence was emerging from traditional courts and was being verified." MONUC Political Director Christian Manahl suggested that, Rwanda having already delivered to DRC a list of Most Wanted Genocidaires, it might consider a temporary measure of delivering a somewhat expanded list, but not an exhaustive list. One member of the Rwandan delegation noted that it had urged DRC, for the time being, to use the Most Wanted list and wondered how having a "list of 10,000 or more" would help DRC in its program of sensitization of ex-FAR. DRC's Major Nanga, in response, insisted on the language of the Nairobi communique, which calls on Rwanda to share with DRC and MONUC a list of all categories of wanted genocidaires. The head of the Rwandan delegation, Major Franco Rutatengwa, insisted that Rwanda was not in violation of the Nairobi communique, since (in Rwanda's interpretation of the communique) Rwanda was only required to provide a list when ex-FAR were in cantonment. After much back and forth, the Rwandan delegation agreed to the following commitment: "to submit the list of genocidaires in time for the beginning of relocation of ex-FAR elements to reception centers/cantonment sites in the DRC." ¶5. (SBU) In this meeting, the DRC appeared to abandon its previous emphasis on its right to pursue internal negative forces as a first priority (note: a reasonable shift given its defeat by Nkunda and the then ongoing Kivus conference, with its objective of bringing a political solution to Nkunda and other internal armed groups). Major Nanga's emphasis was, rather, on the Kivus conference's unanimity on the need to expel the ex-FAR/Interahamwe/FDLR. Manahl recommended that Rwanda, having failed to attend the Kivus conference's opening January 6, attend its closing, since the conference was an effective step in the DRC's program of sensitization of ex-FAR. (Note: Rwanda did not attend the closing ceremony January 23.) Rutagengwa reviewed the many steps it had taken to ensure effective repatriation of ex-FAR, noting that a former leader of FDLR was now the coordinator of the reintegration program. Manahl suggested that Rwanda send him and others to DRC or use Radio Okapi to help the DRC in its sensitization program. Manahl pointed out that, even if FDLR leaders tried tightly to control information flow into their camps, there was nonetheless some information flow. Manahl urged Rwanda to help DRC as much as possible, given that there were persistent rumors in DRC, perhaps instigated by FDLR leaders, that ex-FAR returning to Rwanda often faced arrest and imprisonment. He suggested that Rwanda provide factual information on how many returnees had been arrested and imprisoned. ¶6. (SBU) Another change of focus was the Rutagengwa's suggestion that the Task Force do more operational monitoring. To this end, Rutagengwa invited the Task Force to devote its next meeting, January 25, to a visit to Rwanda to review its efforts to reintegrate returnees, to which all participants agreed. ¶7. (SBU) MONUC's North Kivu Brigade and the OCHA representative gave briefings to the Task Force. The military briefing indicated that the past four weeks had been generally calm. The OCHA briefing underlined that, as a result of that calm, there had been a modest return of IDPs to their homes, particularly among residents of Mweso, where half the population (some 4-5,000 persons) had fled but KINSHASA 00000078 002 OF 002 had now returned. OCHA said that after some discord among IDPs in Kirolirwe, 200-300 men had moved with cattle to Ngungu. Meanwhile, humanitarian agencies had fully resumed their activities on all axes, from Masisi through Rutshuru. HAYKIN