Global Policy Forum

By Ian Fisher

Goma, Congo -- "Lusaka dead?" asked Bizima Karaha, a spiffy rebel alternating between two cellular phones, then a third served up like soup by a hovering assistant. "What I can say is that the Lusaka accord is suffering."

The accord, drafted earlier this month, is the closest that the huge African nation of Congo has come to peace since its most recent rebellion began a year ago, on Aug. 2, 1998. The deal's complexity is mind-bending, involving six countries charged with putting down no fewer than nine guerrilla outfits that operate inside Congo.

The most immediate obstacles are the three home-grown rebel groups fighting to oust the President of Congo, Laurent Kabila. When the accord was drafted in Lusaka, Zambia, the outside powers who have, for various reasons, intervened in this Congo war signed it. Three rebel groups, squabbling not over its substance but who among them should sign, did not.

A second meeting, stretching over six days, tried to resolve the controversy, but ended on Tuesday in Tanzania with no agreement. Many outside officials worry that this infighting will kill the peace.

"Our real concern is that if we don't get it in the very near term, the whole process may unravel," said one Western diplomat.

The dissension is perhaps inevitable. From the start, the rebels have been mere allies of convenience, representing half a dozen of the fractious constituencies inside Congo, from exiled intellectuals to former officials under the dictatorship of Mobutu Sese Seko, who held destructive sway over Congo for 30 years before he was ousted from power in 1997 and then died.

Moreover, the rebels operate on a second, more complex level: to represent the interests of neighboring Rwanda and Uganda, which support competing rebel groups with arms and troops.

And it appears that all sides -- the rebels as well as their sponsors -- are maneuvering for their roles in the next act in this violent drama in Central Africa, whether it is peace or yet more war.

On the surface, the failure of the rebels to sign involves one man, Ernest Wamba dia Wamba, a soft-spoken professor who was recently ousted as the leader of the rebel group called the Congolese Rally for Democracy. Wamba dia Wamba has insisted that he still sign, even though he no longer has any troops supporting him. But the new leaders of the group, known by its French initials, R.C.D., refuse to sign if Wamba dia Wamba does.

Making matters more complicated still, the leader of the third group, Jean-Pierre Bemba, the son of one of Congo's biggest businessmen, will not sign unless Wamba dia Wamba does. Karaha, a top official in the Rally for Democracy, accuses Wamba dia Wamba of sacrificing peace for millions of people for his own political gain.

At the recent talks in Tanzania, Karaha said, "I personally asked Wamba, I said, 'Professor Wamba, my dear colleague, do you believe deep in your heart that you are the president of the R.C.D., that you can sign the cease-fire and give orders that will be respected?'

"The answer was 'no.' Followed by a 'but -- But I want to sign with one of you guys.' "

Then later in the talks, Karaha said, "He said, 'I want to sign because I want guarantees for my future political career.' We said, 'Whoa, things are now starting to become a little clearer.' " Wamba dia Wamba, calling Karaha a "liar," denied the conversation ever took place.

But he did say that who signs the document is important: the signatories have an amplified voice in how the next step in the Congo -- a national dialogue between Kabila, the rebels and other opposition groups -- is shaped. He is essentially afraid of being cut out of that debate.

"There is no way it can be guaranteed that someone who is not a signatory can become a member of the national dialogue," he said in an interview by satellite telephone.

Diplomats and other observers have no doubt the in-fighting is real. Rwanda, which backs the Rally for Democracy, says that this internal fight alone is blocking the signing. "It matters who gets power," said Emmanuel Ndahiro, a spokesman for the Rwandan military and a top Government official. "They have an internal disagreement and it has to be resolved."

But many outsiders believe that both Rwanda and Uganda could force the groups to sign, if they chose. Just as Rwanda supports the Rally for Democracy, Uganda is allied with Wamba dia Wamba and Bemba. "The rebel groups are still dependent on their sponsors," the Western diplomat said, discounting claims from Rwanda and Uganda that they are powerless to influence their clients. The question thus becomes: If they really want peace, why are Rwanda and Uganda not forcing the rebels to sign?

One theory is that they want to gain points internationally for talking peace while still waging war against Kabila. Even since the accord, the Rally for Democracy has continued to advance on the diamond-producing city of Mbuji-Mayi and Bemba has made gains in the northwest, while Kabila's troops resist. Another theory is that the failure to sign represents maneuvering on the part of Rwanda and Uganda, against each other, to influence the next Government of Congo.

From the start, Rwanda in particular has made clear its interest in Congo's internal politics. It says it entered the war to keep its borders clear of militant Hutu, who carried out the killings of at least half a million ethnic Tutsi there in 1994, then fled to Congo. Since then, the they have launched raids into Rwanda from Congo, and Rwanda wants some control over the borderlands.

"Rwanda would like to have a way of having control over the new regime that is going to come to Congo," Wamba dia Wamba said. "One way of doing that is either to push through with the war or to be in a position to control the national dialogue that is going to take place."

Without saying why, Karaha suggested that Uganda was to blame because it has not asked Wamba dia Wamba to step aside. The Rally for Democracy, Karaha noted, has no objection to including Uganda's other ally, Bemba, in the peace document.