A ray of hope in the heart of Africa

Dec 19th 2005
From The Economist Global Agenda

Voting has been extended in a referendum that marks the first democratic, nationwide vote in Congo in four decades. If endorsed, a new constitution should allow for general elections in 2006 and might help establish democracy after years of war and dictatorship. The future of this resource-rich and massive country, the size of western Europe, may do much to influence Africa’s prospects as a whole

IT IS one thing to end a war; quite another to keep the peace, hold fair elections and see a decent government installed. As in Iraq, another resource-rich and hard-to-govern country that matters greatly to its region, the Democratic Republic of Congo is supposed to be leaving behind dictatorship and conflict in favour of democracy. A referendum on a new constitution, which began on Sunday December 18th, marks an important moment in that process. Despite some violence and intimidation, many of the roughly 24m registered voters, from the bustling streets of Kinshasa, the capital, to remote jungle villages that are reached only by canoe, turned out to approve (or not) a new set of institutions for the former Belgian colony.

Congo’s last democratic and national election was held some 40 years ago. The intervening decades were dominated by Mobutu Sese Seko, a photogenic dictator fond of leopard-skin hats and dark glasses, whose misrule and massive corruption helped ruin the country. Despite fertile soil, huge rivers and mineral riches that would make Midas’s eyes twinkle, Congo’s people are among the world’s poorest. Mobutu finally fled in 1997, as the country fell into utter disorder. Rebel armies took control of the east and surged west to the capital. But Mobutu's successor, Laurent Kabila, was then assassinated as civil war raged from 1998.

During the war perhaps 3.8m people were killed, most from hunger and disease. Meddling neighbours did not help. Rwanda and Uganda poured troops into the east, supporting rebel factions, stealing minerals and attacking a group behind Rwanda’s 1994 genocide. In response Zimbabwe, Angola and others sent soldiers to back the government in Kinshasa. The whole of central Africa was in effect sucked into war.

But a peace deal signed late in 2002 by Kabila’s son and successor, Joseph, has brought a calm of sorts. A power-sharing government was formed in 2003. Rebel leaders laid down their guns and submitted to be vice-presidents, with the 34-year-old Joseph as president. To date, the comforts of office—salaries, flash cars and the relative luxury of Kinshasa—have kept the rival leaders happy. The foreign armies are also gone (though doubts remain about Rwanda’s intentions). Instead, a huge United Nations force—the world’s largest, costing some $650m each year and comprising 16,000 foreign soldiers—helps to keep an uneasy peace. A new national army is also supposed to be created, integrating rebel soldiers with government ones, though Human Rights Watch, a pressure group, gave a warning last week that progress here has been worryingly slow.

Half of Africa’s modern wars have reignited within a decade of ending, typically because post-war regimes do not tackle the problems that caused fighting in the first place. Congo is supposed to be different. Nasty battles occasionally erupt anew in the east, where rival factions squabble over gold-rich soil. But few expect a full-scale war to restart.

It would help, however, if voters approve the proposed constitution so more powers, including the right to levy some tax, could be devolved to local leaders. A new post of prime minister would also be created. And the president would be limited, in theory, to serving two five-year terms. Most important, Congo is supposed to see a comprehensive round of general elections by June 2006—though sceptics note that a first deadline for those elections to be held, by June of this year, was missed.

Joseph Kabila has given warning that a rejection of the constitution would be “catastrophic” for peace, though some opposition groups asked voters to reject it in protest against the government, which continues to be corrupt (if not quite on Mobutu’s breathtaking scale). At the weekend some violence erupted. Riot police clashed with youths who had gathered outside a polling station in Kinshasa and told people not to vote. Elsewhere, stampedes at voting booths proved deadly: a woman and a four-month-old baby were crushed to death near Goma, in the east.

A low turnout was predicted in areas dominated by opposition groups. Some voters were also expected to struggle to reach any of the 9,000-odd polling stations, with others unsure what the referendum was about. Campaigning and mass education were difficult in a country where few roads reach beyond the edges of large towns. But the result is likely to be positive, and the preparations for this poll will serve as practice for next year’s planned general elections.

Congo’s year?

Whatever the result, there are some other reasons to be cautiously hopeful about Congo. The economy is finally improving, as some investors dare venture back and inflation drops. Anecdotal evidence suggests some ordinary lives are improving too: university teachers in Kinshasa, for example, are finally getting paid a decent wage; a booming mobile-phone network is widely appreciated; traffic on the massive Congo river that was long stopped by war has restarted; some old rail lines have been re-opened; private companies now offer cheap flights between larger towns. Foreign aid is also flowing faster: the UN’s aid chief, Jan Egeland, predicted last week that 2006 would be the “year of the Democratic Republic of Congo”, when the country will get a billion dollars in relief aid.

The rest of Africa is also keen to see Congo succeed. Countries that once lined up to loot their large neighbour are now holding back. Others are deploying peacekeepers: South Africa contributes many of the men in the UN force, for example. There are long-mooted plans afoot to integrate Congo’s massive hydroelectric capacity into a regional energy network. And many of the new investors looking at Congo are Africans. The reason is simple: if Congo prospers, the rest of Africa should also benefit. Given the current high prices for the country’s copper, gold, cobalt and other minerals, this seems a good moment to try. But if Congo slips back to war, economic and political recovery in the rest of central Africa will be forgotten too.

Copyright © 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.