Author: admin

Speaking alongside Netanyahu, Trump suggested that Iran may be attempting to restore its weapons capabilities at new sites after a massive U.S. strike on Iranian facilities earlier in the year.

'We know exactly where they’re going, what they’re doing … and I hope they’re not doing it,' Trump told reporters, indicating Washington’s awareness of Tehran’s activities and the possibility of future action if the threat grows.

The meeting focused on advancing the next phase of the Gaza ceasefire plan that the United States helped broker between Israel and Hamas. Trump emphasized the need for Hamas to disarm, warning the militant group of serious consequences if it fails to do so. Israel and Hamas have accused each other of breaching the existing ceasefire, complicating efforts to move the peace process forward.

Trump also discussed broader regional security concerns, including Iran’s growing influence and military activities and the role of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Netanyahu reiterated Israel’s interest in ensuring the durability of the Gaza ceasefire and addressing Tehran’s strategic ambitions.

The Gaza ceasefire agreement, first reached in October after two years of intense conflict, envisioned a series of steps including a partial withdrawal of Israeli forces from the enclave, increased humanitarian aid, and the deployment of international peacekeeping forces. However, progress has stalled amid mutual distrust and key conditions that both sides have struggled to fulfill.

In addition to warning Iran and Hamas, Trump reiterated his support for Israel’s leadership in pursuing regional stability, even as differing views on issues such as the Israeli‑occupied West Bank persisted between the two leaders.

U.S. President Donald Trump issued a stern warning to Iran that the United States could support further military strikes if Tehran resumes rebuilding its ballistic missile or nuclear weapons programs, following a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Trump’s Mar‑a‑Lago estate.

Rania Umutoni

The announcement was made by a newly-appointed spokesperson, who assumed the same nom de guerre, Abu Obeida, during a televised press conference.

The new spokesperson, wearing the uniform associated with the title, confirmed that Abu Obeida, whose real name was Hudhaifa Samir Al-Kahlout and also known as Abu Ibrahim, had died.

He said Abu Obeida “remained connected to his people during the darkest circumstances” and confirmed that several other senior leaders were also killed, including former Hamas military leader Mohammed Sinwar.

In 2005, Abu Obeida was appointed the military group’s official spokesperson.

He became widely known after announcing the capture of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in 2006 and later gained prominence during Israeli military offensives on Gaza, particularly in 2014.

Abu Obeida delivered his last recorded statement on July 18, and was killed in an Israeli airstrike on Gaza on Aug. 30, according to sources within Hamas.

On Aug. 31, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said that the spokesman of Hamas’s armed wing, Abu Obeida, had been killed in a strike in the Gaza Strip.

Abu Obeida (C), a spokesman for Hamas’ armed wing, holds a press conference in Gaza City March 26, 2010.

Xinhua

This op-ed is a demand for intellectual honesty. It is written against the rising boldness of those who rewrite history with the coolness that distance and denial with Western indifference will protect them. Rwanda deserves better. The victims deserve better than disappearing in meaningless narratives. Equally, we should accept, the living owes the dead the truth and not anything less.

A dictionary as weapon

The disparagement of altering Rwanda’s history reached an almost dreamlike level in September 1994, when Le Petit Robert Dictionary published a summary of Rwanda’s history that read like a guidebook of transposition.

According to this text, in a respected dictionary in the Francophone world, in 1973 when President Juvénal Habyarimana ousted president Gregory Kayibanda, had pursued reconciliation with Tutsi, only to be opposed by elements within his own army. In 1990, the dictionary claimed,Tutsi refugees 'invaded' Rwanda as the RPF, forcing negotiations. Then came the most obscene distortion of all: the assertion that in April 1994, the RPF assassinated Habyarimana and launched an offensive 'marked by massacres,' provoking the flight of millions into a 'security zone' established by France through Operation Turquoise.

What a historical fraud rather than an error. In this account of events, those who planned and implemented the genocide in Rwanda against the Tutsi disappeared into abstraction. The victims melted into an unspecified mass of refugees. The culprits were rebranded as a government seeking reconciliation. And France, long associated with supporting the genocidal system, was cast as the savior.

The newly installed RPF Government of Rwanda sued Le Petit Robert Dictionary and won. The word and phrasebook was forced to rewrite its entry. That legal victory counted, but it also exposed to some degree, something far more disturbing: the ease with which authoritative Western institutions could put on a normal footing denial when African lives were at stake.

The level of such cynicism here is not easily measurable. When those who stopped genocide are accused of committing it, truth itself turn out to be the first casualty.

Operation Turquoise as a mission

Few episodes illustrate the moral contortions of genocide denial better than the praise lavished on Operation Turquoise. Imagine Operation Turquoise branded as a salvation. Salvation? Come on! Salvation for Whom?

Presented as a humanitarian intervention, it has often been credited with saving Rwanda. The reality is not merely less comforting; it is profoundly absurd.

Operation Turquoise was launched late in June 1994, when the extermination of Tutsi was already well in total reality, and its geographical design was not close to being neutral. By carving out a so‑called 'safe humanitarian zone'.

Clarity is paramount. In the southwest of Rwanda, the operation effectively created an escape corridor for the very forces that had planned, organized, and executed the genocide. Political leaders, military officers, Interahamwe commanders, and propagandists crossed into Zaire under the eyes of an international force that neither disarmed them nor arrested them. They were not confused refugees. They were perpetrators retreating intact.

To describe this as salvation is to ask: salvation for whom? For the hunted, or for the hunters? From its inception, Operation Turquoise did not mean to dismantle roadblocks where people were slaughtered. It was not meant to neutralize Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines, which continued to incite murder.

The operation, certainly, did not arrest any member of the interim government directing the genocide. What it did accomplish—objectively and verifiably—was the preservation of the génocidaire command structure, allowing it to regroup in exile, destabilize the region for decades, and prolong the suffering of millions in the Great Lakes Region of Africa.

This was predictable and not a sheer reflection. French authorities came to Rwanda in1994 knowing whom they were dealing with. France had trained the army and Interahamwe militia, armed—and politically reinforced the same regime whose militias were now carrying out Tutsi extermination. To later present a military deployment as only humanitarian, while disregarding its strategic consequences, is not kindheartedness but narrative laundering.

The eventual indecency is not just that Operation Turquoise failed to stop the genocide. It is that, in the dominant Western narrative, it is every so often credited with doing so—while the RPF, which actually defeated the genocidal army, is defamed. In this upside‑down moral universe, those who shielded perpetrators are praised, and those who stopped the genocide are placed in the dock. Petit Robert Dictionary was performing a cover-up. The failure of the international community and French complicity.

Dallaire’s charge and implications

No serious discussion of Rwanda can avoid the words of Roméo Dallaire, the UN force commander who witnessed abandonment firsthand. In his Shake Hands with the Devil, the Canadian General wrote:

'Still, at its heart the Rwandan story is the story of the failure of humanity to heed a call for help from an endangered people. The international community, of which the UN is only a symbol, failed to move beyond self-interest for the sake of Rwanda. While most nations agreed that something should be done they all had excuses why they should not be the ones to do it. As a result, the UN was denied the political will and material means to prevent the tragedy.'

This is an indictment not just of institutions, but of moral imagination. Rwanda did not lack warnings. It lacked courage from those with power.

Yet even Dallaire’s account, as powerful as it is, omits a crucial chapter: the RPA’s rescue operations in Kigali. While the United Nations Security Council was endlessly busy debating mandates and force levels, RPA units secured locations where thousands of rescued civilians were sheltered. They organized safe routes under fire. They transported survivors to safety in Byumba.

These were not emblematic gestures. They were life-saving operations. In doing so, the RPF liberators demonstrated what the United Nations could have done—had political will been matched with logistical capacity. The difference was not resources. It was determination.

Most RPA commanders in 1994 were amazingly young.

A day the world shouldn’t forget

On December 28, 1993, Kigali witnessed a moment pregnant with promise—and heavy with foreboding. The guests who entered the city that day did not arrive from Nairobi, London, Paris, Madrid, Washington, or Brussels. They came from Mulindi, in Byumba Prefecture, in the north of Rwanda. They were not tourists but politicians and cadres of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), escorted by 600 soldiers of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA), exactly as stipulated by the Arusha Peace Agreement of August 4, 1993. The journey took almost eight hours, with these guests escorted by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) forces.

From Nyacyonga through Gatsata and Kinamba, all the way to the Parliament building in Kimihurura, thousands of Rwandans lined the road. They cheered, not because they were naïve, but because they were desperate for an end to a politics of exclusion that had already destroyed generations. This was the human layout of hope. The Arusha Accords promised a Broad-Based Transitional Government (BBTG) and a Transitional Parliament. It was an arrangement designed to end monopoly rule, neutralize extremist factions, and reintegrate refugees who had been exiled for decades.

But this government never saw the light of day. Not because the RPF refused it. Not because power-sharing was impossible. It failed because Hutu Power ideologues never intended to share power with anyone—least of all Tutsi refugees they had spent years portraying as existential enemies. Arusha was not just a compromise to them; it was a threat.

The RPA soldiers’ battalion stationed in Kigali were not a force on a study tour. They were a liberation and a peacekeeping contingent agreed upon by both parties, lodged at the Conseil National de Développement (CND) building. Their presence was meant to stabilize the transition. Instead, they would become the thin line between life and death for thousands when the state itself turned genocidal.

When the genocide was unleashed in April 1994, Kigali became a killing field. The Rwandan Armed Forces (FAR), the Presidential Guard, and the Interahamwe militia were not acting impulsively. They were executing a plan refined over years—one lubricated by hate propaganda and administrative efficiency.

In that inferno, the RPA battalion in Kigali did what the world’s most powerful institutions like the UN refused to do: it acted. Against overwhelming odds, surrounded by thousands of hostile forces, and cut off from reinforcement, those soldiers contained the genocidal army in the capital. From April 7 until at least April 11, 1994, they held positions, secured corridors, and mounted rescue operations that saved thousands of lives.

This fact alone defeats the lie—repeated unceasingly in deniers’ circles—that the RPF’s primary objective was conquest rather than rescue. Had conquest been the goal, the RPA battalion would have attempted an immediate breakout. Instead, it prioritized civilians. It protected those who had been hunted—whether Tutsi or politicians and other individuals who were against the genocidal killings. It created islands of safety in a city sinking in abandonment.

What these soldiers did was not theoretical humanitarianism. It was applied, hands-on, disciplined, and costly action. That truth will outlive denial.

These are Rwandans who saved Rwanda

The fact remains, stubborn and unyielding: Rwandans saved Rwanda. Not the United Nations. Not Western powers. Not last-minute gestures wrapped in humanitarian language.

Under the leadership of the RPF, Rwandans stopped a genocide that the world looked at with folded arms.

What followed, after defeating the genocidal forces, was equally unparalleled. The movement that ended the genocide formed a Government of National Unity. It fought the intoxicating pull of collective vengeance. It rebuilt national institutions in a country where the same institutions had been weaponized against citizens. It was a deliberate choice.

Consider the historical analogy that best captures the magnitude of this restraint: imagine a Jewish-dominated army defeating Nazi Germany, liberating the death camps, and then being accused—by international commentators—of having orchestrated the Holocaust. The irrationality of the comparison reveals the moral bankruptcy of Rwanda’s detractors.

Most RPA commanders in 1994 were amazingly young. Many were in their early or mid-twenties; few were beyond their mid-thirties. These were not hardened old-timers of never-ending wars. They were young men and women advancing through towns and hills where they inevitably encountered the bodies of their families and friends—killed for the crime of being Tutsi.

The sadness or sorrow they carried is impossible to measure. Yet discipline held. Orders were obeyed. Civilians were protected. The restraint shown by these soldiers remains one of the least acknowledged moral achievements of the post—Cold War world.

It is easier, perhaps, to invent myths of equal culpability than to confront the reality that victims can act with dignity—and that perpetrators often hide behind narratives of complexity to escape judgment.

Refusal: Against forgetfulness

This article ends where comfort ends. It ends in refusal—refusal to allow the Genocide Against the Tutsi to be dissolved into vagueness, moral equivalence, or diplomatic euphemism. It refuses the lazy language of 'complexity' when what occurred was a clear, state‑organized project of extermination, resisted and defeated by Rwandans whom the world had already written off.

There is something especially outrageous about watching institutions that failed Rwanda later claim authority over its memory. The same international community that withdrew peacekeepers, discussed semantics while bodies filled churches, rivers and roadsides—and hid behind procedural excuses now feels entitled to arbitrate truth. We often hear lectures to survivors about restraint—and those who question the motives of those who saved lives. We also witness efforts to rehabilitate the reputations of governments that stood on the wrong side of history.

This is not neutrality but continuity of indifference, dressed up as balance. The rewriting of Rwanda’s history is not an academic exercise. It has consequences. It emboldens denialists. It legitimizes genocidal ideologies under the guise of dissent. It teaches future perpetrators that if they lose militarily but win the narrative war, time will soften their crimes and confuse their victims.

Against this, the facts remain immovable. The genocide was planned and executed by a Hutu Power state and its militias. The United Nations knew, was warned, and chose inaction. France supported the regime that prepared the killings and later enabled its retreat. And the RPF—demonized precisely because it shattered this chain of impunity—stopped the genocide and then did something history rarely records: it refused to govern through revenge.

That refusal is crucial. It is because the army that ended the genocide belonged to the same political movement whose people had been marked for annihilation. It matters because restraint was not the absence of pain, but mastery over it. Young commanders, advancing through landscapes littered with the remains of their own families, chose discipline over reprisal. They chose to rebuild a state rather than avenge its destruction.

Those who minimize this achievement reveal more about themselves than about Rwanda. They cannot imagine victims acting with moral clarity, because doing so would expose the bankruptcy of those who watched from a distance. It would force an uncomfortable reckoning: that courage was available in 1994, and it was not found in the chambers of powerful countries.

History will not be kind to cynicism. Dictionaries and other books can be rewritten, editorials can beat around the bush, and fabricated symmetries can be taught for a time. But the record endures. The mass graves endure. The survivors stand firm. And so does the truth that Rwanda was abandoned—and then saved—by its own.

History is not merely a record of events. It is a moral ledger. When it is fabricated, the consequences ripple outward—into policy, memory and future violence.

To rewrite Rwanda’s history is to teach the world the wrong lessons. The memory of the victims, the profound suffering of survivors, and the restraint of those who ended the slaughter deserve a central place in how Rwanda is remembered. Not as footnotes. Not as contested claims. But as settled truth.

We should honor those—Rwandans and non-Rwandans alike—who sincerely helped the post-genocide government heal, rebuild, and rise from the ashes. But gratitude must never become amnesia. Assistance does not erase prior complicity, nor does it entitle anyone to rewrite the past.

This is why memory must be defended without apology— as an obligation. Because when genocide is deliberately distorted, the dead are killed again, and the living are warned that their suffering is negotiable.

Rwandans are not asking the world for absolution. They are demanding honesty. And honesty requires saying, clearly and without fear, that when humanity failed, Rwandans acted. When excuses multiplied, the RPF chose responsibility—and when history was later held hostage by cynicism, truth remained the last form of justice.

The international community did not save Rwanda. It failed Rwanda. And history, however cynically manipulated, will remember that when the world chose pretexts, some determined Rwandans chose obligation to save their country’s future. That choice—and its consequences—must remain beyond distortion.

Under the leadership of the RPF, Rwandans stopped a genocide that the world looked at with folded arms.

Tom Ndahiro

I arrived in Morocco in early December 2025. Located in north-western Africa and often associated with desert landscapes, the country surprised me with its cold weather. Contrary to my long-held assumption that Arab countries are uniformly hot like much of Africa, Morocco experiences biting cold during certain months, largely due to its diverse climatic conditions.

Another immediate impression was the level of security. Upon arrival at the airport, security checks were exceptionally thorough, comparable to those conducted before boarding a flight, despite having just landed.

Travellers from most European countries do not require visas to enter Morocco. Rwandan citizens, however, are required to obtain visas, although the process is relatively fast and efficient.

From my observations, Morocco is a country whose civilisation predates colonial influence by centuries. This is evident in its architecture, historic homes and everyday social practices. Rather than imitating European models, Moroccans display a strong attachment to their own culture, which remains visible across many aspects of daily life.

Travelling between the four cities by road offered a revealing glimpse into the country’s landscapes. Traditional homesteads of farmers and pastoralists sit alongside vast, modern farmlands cultivated with machinery. The colour of the soil changes from one region to another, often reddish, sometimes taking on a khaki-like hue, reflecting Morocco’s varied geography.

The cities are linked by wide, well-maintained motorways known locally as autoroutes. These modern roads were among the most striking features of the journey and play a crucial role in facilitating trade and economic activity in a region historically shaped by commerce and long-distance travel.

Morocco generally follows a culture that discourages alcohol consumption, although alcohol is available in designated outlets, most of which close early. Visitors who wish to purchase it must plan ahead or rely on hotels, where it is more readily available. For non-drinkers, the country offers an abundance of well-prepared tea and coffee, both of which are central to Moroccan hospitality.

Marrakech: The southern gateway

The first city I arrived in, flying from Cannes in southern France, was Marrakech, often described as the southern gateway to Morocco.

Founded around the 11th century by Berber dynasties, Marrakech quickly emerged as a political, commercial and cultural centre in the Maghreb. It earned the nickname 'the Red City' due to the distinctive colour of its walls and buildings.

Over the centuries, Marrakech served as the capital of several dynasties and as a key junction for caravan routes linking sub-Saharan Africa to the Mediterranean basin. Its historic Medina, meaning 'the City', remains a vibrant hub of markets, craftsmanship and religious heritage, bearing strong testimony to the city’s enduring cultural significance.

Casablanca: Morocco’s economic engine

Casablanca, whose name traces back to the ancient port of Anfa, has a history shaped by conflict, reconstruction and transformation. Influenced by Portuguese and later French rule, the city evolved steadily over the centuries. By the 20th century, it had become Morocco’s principal economic and industrial centre.

Its Atlantic coastline and modern urban districts underline its role as a commercial gateway connecting Morocco to global markets. Today, Casablanca stands as the backbone of the national economy, driven by its port, industrial sector, cultural industries and manufacturing base.

Rabat: The political capital

Rabat is home to the royal palace of King Mohammed VI and the country’s key state institutions. It serves as Morocco’s administrative and political capital and also hosts the Embassy of Rwanda, which represents Rwanda’s interests in Morocco as well as in Mauritania and Tunisia.

Historically, Rabat developed from a military fortress along the Atlantic coast and experienced major growth during the Almohad dynasty in the 12th century, remnants of which still stand today. In the 20th century, it became the centre of modern Moroccan governance.

Today, Rabat combines historical heritage, government institutions and recreational spaces. Among the cities visited, it stood out for its greenery and calm atmosphere. In 2012, the city was inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List in recognition of its outstanding historical value.

Ben Guerir: A city of knowledge and innovation

I also visited Ben Guerir, a relatively young city that represents Morocco’s investment in education, research and industrial development. Unlike Marrakech, Casablanca and Rabat, whose identities are shaped by centuries of history, Ben Guerir is a product of modern planning.

Located in the El-Rhamna region, the city expanded rapidly in the 20th century due to phosphate mining activities led by the Office Chérifien des Phosphates (OCP), followed by large-scale development projects.

Since the early 2000s, Ben Guerir has emerged as a centre of higher learning with the establishment of Mohammed VI Polytechnic University (UM6P). Founded in 2013 on the initiative of OCP and supported by international partnerships, the university focuses on applied research in agronomy, engineering, energy and advanced technology, closely aligned with national and regional industrial needs.

The presence of UM6P, along with its postgraduate programmes and research laboratories, has elevated Ben Guerir’s profile as a hub for innovation, sustainable development and economic transformation.

Together, Marrakech, Casablanca, Rabat and Ben Guerir form a complementary portrait of Morocco. Marrakech reflects royal heritage and craftsmanship; Casablanca embodies economic power; Rabat represents governance and institutional history; while Ben Guerir illustrates the country’s forward-looking investment in education and industry.

Collectively, these cities reveal a nation of remarkable depth and diversity, one where ancient traditions and modern aspirations coexist and reinforce one another.

The beauty of the city of Marrakech in photos.

This road leads to Casablanca.

The terrain is very different from Rwanda, with much of the land being desert.

Although Morocco is in North Africa, its winters can be surprisingly cold.

It is a country of vast landscapes, with well-maintained roads that make traveling by car smooth and hassle-free.

A variety of economic activities thrive across the country.

Moroccan architecture is characteristic of that seen across Arab countries.

As soon as you arrive, the genuine essence of Moroccan culture is evident.

Marrakech is a city where architecture tells the story of Morocco’s history and development.

As you travel through Casablanca, the landscape changes from one area to another.

The country has an advanced system for transporting people and goods.

Morocco is a kingdom, and King Mohammed VI paid a state visit to Rwanda in 2016.

Cleanliness is visible throughout the city, with considerable effort invested to ensure it.

Moroccan cities are notably developed, with infrastructure like street lighting well maintained.

Morocco has a population of over 37 million, predominantly Muslim.

Morocco was ruled under French and Spanish protectorates from 1912 until it regained independence in 1956, ending foreign control and restoring full sovereignty.

In Morocco, a litre of petrol is priced at 1,500 Rwandan francs.

The people of Morocco are known for their warmth and hospitality.

Morocco is home to numerous industries, including textile manufacturing and the production of various automotive components.

Ben Guerir is a rapidly developing city in Morocco that has become important for education, industry and innovation.

Ben Guerir is a city engaged in diverse types of trade and commerce.

Coffee and tea are widely enjoyed throughout Morocco.

The architecture in these cities is distinctive and remarkable.

[email protected]

Karirima Ngarambe Aimable

In his end-of-year message addressed to officers, men, and women of the RDF and other security agencies on Monday, President Kagame expressed deep appreciation for their dedication, noting that their work continues to uphold Rwanda’s values, sovereignty, and national security.

'Through adversity and challenge, the men and women of the Rwanda Defence Force and other Security Organs have consistently served with unwavering distinction — both here at home and on missions far beyond our borders,' the President said.

He highlighted the role of security organs in protecting Rwanda’s territorial integrity and ensuring a stable environment that enables citizens to pursue their daily economic and social activities. According to the Head of State, the country’s progress across multiple sectors is closely linked to the peace and stability guaranteed by the nation’s security forces.

President Kagame also praised Rwanda’s contribution to peacekeeping efforts across the continent, saying RDF personnel deployed abroad continue to honour Rwanda’s commitment to protecting human life with professionalism and resolve.

'As I have mentioned before, the Rwanda Defence Force and other Security Organs are today the forces I have always wished to have,' he said, describing them as a pillar of national unity, dignity, and strength.

Looking ahead to the new year, the President urged security organs to maintain high standards of integrity and accountability, while remaining vigilant and adaptive to evolving security threats in pursuit of a secure, prosperous, and united Rwanda.

He paid special tribute to personnel serving away from their families during the festive season, acknowledging their sacrifice and that of their loved ones. The President also honoured families who have lost relatives in the line of duty, assuring them of continued support from the state.

“On behalf of the Rwandan people, the government, and my own family, I extend my warmest wishes to you and your families for a joyful festive season and a successful year ahead,” President Kagame stated, adding, “May you continue to serve with honour and may your sacrifices always be recognised and rewarded.”

In his end-of-year message, President Paul Kagame commended the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and other security organs for their service, sacrifice, and professionalism, noting their crucial role in safeguarding the country’s peace, stability, and ongoing socio-economic progress.

The Head of State highlighted the role of security organs in protecting Rwanda’s territorial integrity and ensuring a stable environment that enables citizens to pursue their daily economic and social activities.

President Kagame addresses RDF soldiers during a past event.

Wycliffe Nyamasege

The suspension, confirmed by Congolese authorities, was authorised by the Chief of General Staff of the FARDC, Lieutenant General Jules Banza Mwilambwe, and signed on December 28, 2025. It came a day after Gen Maj Ekenge appeared on state broadcaster RTNC and warned against marrying Tutsi women, claiming they do not bear children with people from other ethnic groups.

The comments sparked fierce backlash, reigniting concerns over the normalisation of ethnic slurs by senior state officials at a time of heightened tensions, particularly in the country’s conflict-affected eastern regions.

In announcing the suspension, Lt Gen Mwilambwe said the remarks were inconsistent with the army’s doctrine and national policy. However, critics argue that the decision amounts to damage control rather than a genuine break from a broader pattern of ethnic hostility tolerated at the highest levels of power.

Fanny Kaj Kayemb, the Deputy Director General for Finance of the AFC/M23 coalition, dismissed the suspension as cosmetic, saying the army spokesperson merely articulated a line sanctioned by senior authorities.

'An army spokesperson does not think independently; he executes,' Kayemb said. 'He speaks according to a line approved by the top military leadership. In the DRC, the person at the very top has a name: Félix Tshisekedi, the Supreme Commander.'

Kayemb described the disciplinary action as a theatrical manoeuvre designed to mislead both Congolese citizens and the international community, arguing that the remarks reflect unspoken views embedded in the current political leadership’s ideological orientation.

The controversy has also revived scrutiny of the state’s long-standing failure to act against figures accused of inciting hatred against Tutsi communities. For years, MP Justin Bitakwira openly targeted Tutsi, particularly the Banyamulenge, referring to them as an 'evil ethnic group', without facing consequences at home. He was only sanctioned by the European Union in 2022.

Further inflaming tensions, President Félix Tshisekedi hosted two Congolese nationals from the United States on 22 December 2025 under the banner of 'Congolese Unity'.

One of them, Jean-Claude Mubenga, has previously described Tutsi as 'cockroaches' and a virus who should be eliminated, remarks that drew sharp condemnation.

Observers caution that when such rhetoric is voiced or tolerated by state institutions, it evokes a troubling historical legacy, leaving open the question of whether these statements are mere slips of the tongue or a deliberate psychological warfare strategy reminiscent of the Hutu Ten Commandments that preceded the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda.

While the suspension of Gen Maj Ekenge may momentarily ease pressure, many observers contend that it does little to address the underlying climate of impunity surrounding hate speech and ethnic incitement within the DRC’s political and security establishment.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has suspended its army spokesperson, Major General Sylvain Ekenge Bomusa, following a wave of public outrage triggered by remarks widely condemned as ethnic hate speech targeting Congolese Tutsi.

IGIHE

This meeting was part of his official visit to Brazzaville, which included a series of other engagements.

'Amb. Bazivamo, after conveying the greetings of the Chairman of the RPF Inkotanyi, His Excellency President Paul Kagame, who wished them good health and prosperity in their endeavors, presented Rwanda’s national development agenda. He also took the opportunity to remind them that, as Rwandans, they should actively contribute to these efforts,' reads a statement from RPF Inkotanyi shared on X account.

Amb. Bazivamo reminded the Rwandans that Rwanda, their homeland, fully supports them in their development endeavors and that the country stands ready to assist them in every possible way.

He also encouraged the Rwandan community to uphold core Rwandan values, particularly the principles of unity, collaboration, and integrity.

Amb. Bazivamo also extended his heartfelt wishes for a happy and prosperous New Year in 2026 to all those present.

Amb. Bazivamo is currently in Congo, where he was invited to attend the sixth congress of the ruling political party, Parti Congolais du Travail (PCT).

He noted that both PCT and the RPF Inkotanyi share similar governance principles based on inclusivity and citizen welfare. He emphasized the strong desire of the RPF Inkotanyi to further strengthen its relationship with PCT and to enhance cooperation between Rwanda and Congo.

The two countries have long enjoyed diplomatic and political relations. Rwanda opened its embassy in Congo-Brazzaville in August 2016.

In 2011, Rwanda and Congo-Brazzaville signed several agreements in key sectors such as aviation, tourism, energy, security, justice, environmental protection and fisheries.

In 2023, President Denis Sassou Nguesso of Congo-Brazzaville visited Rwanda, significantly boosting bilateral relations between the two countries.

The visit occurred a few hours after Congo-Brazzaville had granted Rwandans visa-free access. This visit also resulted in the signing of eight additional cooperation agreements, bringing the total number of agreements between the two nations to 33, following the signing of 25 agreements during President Kagame’s visit to Congo-Brazzaville in April 2022.

The Secretary General of the RPF Inkotanyi, Ambassador Christophe Bazivamo, on Sunday, December 28, 2025, met with Rwandans living in Brazzaville, the capital of the Republic of Congo, where he delivered a message from President Paul Kagame.

This meeting was part of Amb. Bazivamo’s official visit to Brazzaville, which included a series of other engagements.

IGIHE

The UK’s Home Office announced visa restrictions on DRC citizens late on Saturday, citing the country’s insufficient cooperation with British authorities in repatriating migrants without legal status in the UK. The restrictions include the revocation of fast‑track visa processing and preferential treatment for VIPs and decision‑makers. The UK government warned that further measures, up to a complete halt of visas for DRC nationals, could follow if cooperation does not improve.

At the same time, Angola and Namibia have agreed to accept the return of illegal migrants and foreign criminals. The agreements were reached after the British government threatened visa penalties for any country that refused to cooperate with deportations of its nationals living in the UK without legal permission.

British Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the UK expects countries to 'play by the rules' and take back their citizens if they have no right to be in the UK. She added that the visa measures are part of broader reforms intended to tighten asylum rules and ensure faster deportations of irregular migrants.

The move to curb DRC visas comes amid a wider push by the UK government to enforce stricter immigration controls, reflecting ongoing challenges related to irregular migration and asylum backlogs. While Angola and Namibia responded positively to the UK’s pressure by agreeing to take back migrants, the DRC has yet to meet the cooperation standards required, prompting the visa curbs.

UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced visa restrictions on DRC citizens late on Saturday, citing the country’s insufficient cooperation with British authorities in repatriating migrants without legal status in the UK.

Rania Umutoni

On the evening of December 27, 2025, the state broadcaster RTNC featured Major General Sylvain Ekenge in a segment ostensibly providing updates on security in eastern DRC, particularly South Kivu amid ongoing conflict.

While the primary focus was on military developments, the discussion largely shifted to attacks on Rwandans and Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese, especially Tutsis, whom Ekenge accused of deception.

He warned viewers to be cautious about marrying Tutsi women, alleging that traditional leaders facilitate such unions only for the woman’s relatives, such as cousins or uncles, to later intervene.

Ekenge claimed these relatives father children with the wife, attributing the offspring to supposed genetic dominance in the Tutsi community, and described the practice as a scam to infiltrate marriages.

Minister Nduhungirehe noted that this came after the DRC government had cooperated with the FDLR terrorist group in attacks on Banyamulenge in Minembwe and hosted Jean-Claude Mubenga in Kinshasa, where the latter allegedly called Tutsis “cockroaches” and a virus that must be eradicated.

He added that General Ekenge was now endorsing Gitera’s document.

'The spokesperson of the Congolese army now, FARDC, is adopting on national television RTNC the first of the 'Ten Commandments of the Hutu’ [1990] from the extremist Rwandan newspaper Kangura,' he said.

Gitera founded the Association for the Social Promotion of the Masses (APROSOMA), which fostered division and hatred among Rwandans. He issued the set of ten commandments during a party meeting in Ngoma, Butare, on September 27, 1959.

The first prohibited Hutus from trusting Tutsis, while subsequent ones forbade praising them, forming relationships with them, among others designed to divide Rwandans.

These ideas were later republished and expanded in Kangura, a magazine that promoted genocidal ideology, in its December 1990 edition.

Minister Nduhungirehe observed that General Ekenge appeared to be drawing from material by intellectuals such as Professor Filip Reyntjens , as the term “intelligence” (often used by the Belgian academic to describe Tutsis) was a focus of the military officer’s remarks.

'This Congolese general does not stop there and even goes as far as repeating colonial theories that laid the foundation for the 'ethnic’ division and the Genocide against the Tutsi, specifically the idea that the Tutsi are 'Nilotics’ who conquered Rwanda and oppressed the Hutu, even appropriating 'their Bantu language” Kinyarwanda,' Nduhungirehe said.

The minister concluded by warning that, even if President Félix Tshisekedi dismisses General Ekenge due to embarrassment or Western advice, the Congolese Tutsi community would still suffer the consequences of his words unless the international community responds decisively.

IGIHE

In a speech broadcast by the Houthi-run Al-Masirah television channel, al-Houthi stated that his forces consider “any Israeli presence in the Somaliland region a military target,” “aggression against Somalia and Yemen, and a threat to the security of the region.”

He added that the group would take “all possible supportive measures to stand with the brotherly Somali people.”

Al-Houthi, whose movement controls large parts of northern Yemen, indicated that Israel aims to “make Somaliland a foothold for hostile activities against Somalia, African countries, Yemen, and other Arab countries,” a move he said would destabilize an already fragile region.

He also called for a “firm and serious” Arab and Islamic stance in support of Somalia and its people, urging collective action to counter what he characterized as Israeli expansionism.

Meanwhile, several Arab and Muslim countries issued a joint statement on Saturday condemning Israel’s recognition of Somaliland, and reaffirmed their support for Somalia’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

A member of the Houthi security forces stands guard in front of a giant screen broadcasting leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi in Sanaa on September 19, 2025. (AFP)

Xinhua