The political landscape in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been shaken by fresh allegations from opposition figure José Makila Sumanda, who has directly implicated President Félix Tshisekedi in the resurgence of the M23 rebel movement in Kinshasa.
During a live broadcast on Space with journalist Stanis Bujakera Tshiamala, Makila delivered a scathing critique of the current administration’s handling of the eastern security crisis, particularly the group’s presence in the capital. The former vice-prime minister dismissed long-standing accusations of former President Joseph Kabila’s alleged ties to the M23, arguing that historical evidence contradicts such claims.
no protection for Kabila in M23-controlled zones
Makila categorically rejected the notion that Kabila received special protection from M23 forces during the rebellion’s occupation of North and South Kivu provinces. « No M23 member provided security for Kabila », he asserted, emphasizing that civilians living under M23 control faced the same conditions as all residents regardless of political affiliation.
The opposition leader acknowledged Kabila’s role in defending national territorial integrity during his presidency but firmly stated that the former president had no personal disputes with M23 leaders like Makenga or Nanga. « Now that he no longer holds office, what exactly is he being accused of? » Makila challenged his audience.
Tshisekedi’s policies blamed for M23 normalization
The crux of Makila’s argument centered on what he described as Tshisekedi’s normalization of relations with the M23 movement. « It wasn’t Kabila who brought M23 to Kinshasa — it was Tshisekedi » he declared, suggesting that the current president’s diplomatic overtures had legitimized a group previously considered a rebel faction.
The opposition figure drew a sharp distinction between an interstate war and an externally supported rebellion, rejecting comparisons to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Makila questioned why the DRC’s military assets like Sukhoi jets and drones weren’t deployed against Rwanda if this were a formal state-to-state conflict. « If we’re at war with Rwanda, why aren’t our aircraft striking Rwandan territory? » he queried, highlighting the absence of direct military action as evidence against formal war declarations.
political rather than military analysis
Throughout the discussion, Makila maintained a strictly political perspective on the crisis. « I am one hundred percent political in my analysis » he concluded, refusing to engage in military assessments that he deemed outside his expertise. His remarks come at a critical juncture as security tensions continue to escalate in eastern DRC, with regional and international actors closely monitoring the evolving situation.
