Uvira Changes Hands: The Geopolitical Crisis in Eastern DR Congo Behind a "Troop Withdrawal"
20/01/2026
On the last Sunday of May, the jeeps of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) army returned to the dusty streets of Uvira. For local resident Alain Ramazani, it was the first time in over a month that he had seen government troops in uniform again. However, the welcoming applause was interrupted by sporadic gunfire, and the air was thick not only with dust but also with a heavy sense of uncertainty. Uvira, a strategic town in South Kivu province bordering Burundi, had just experienced a swift change of hands: the Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group, after occupying it for a month, announced a unilateral withdrawal, followed by the return of the DRC government forces and the pro-government Wazalendo militia.
On the surface, this appears to be a tactical adjustment within the framework of a U.S.-mediated peace process. The M23 claims its withdrawal is a confidence-building measure at the request of the United States. However, the gunfire has not ceased. The wording in the Congolese military's statement about consolidating positions and ensuring security seems more like an acknowledgment of a fragile and unstable status quo. The recapture of Uvira is by no means the end of the conflict, but rather the latest footnote in a complex war that has lasted over 20 years in eastern Congo, deeply embedded in the power struggles of regional powers and the scramble for resources. Behind this battle lies the death of more than 1,500 people, the displacement of 300,000, and a world-class humanitarian disaster zone torn apart by over 100 armed groups, leaving more than 7 million people homeless.
Uvira: More Than Just a Fallen Town
To grasp the strategic significance of Uvira's change of hands, it must be examined within the context of the overall collapse in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly in South Kivu province. The fall of the provincial capital, Bukavu, in February this year had already shattered the authority of the DRC government in South Kivu. Uvira, as the government's last major stronghold in the province, saw its symbolic importance and practical geopolitical value rise sharply.
### The Corridor Connecting East and West and the Threshold of Burundi
The fall of Uvira signifies that the M23 armed group has successfully established a broad corridor of influence spanning the eastern region. This corridor not only consolidates the rebels' control over mineral-rich areas but also pushes their military presence right to the doorstep of neighboring Burundi. Burundi has long stationed troops in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and the conflict in Uvira has instantly escalated a domestic confrontation into a transnational crisis with direct regional spillover risks. Any accidental clash could draw Burundi deeper into the conflict, potentially triggering direct confrontations between the DRC and multiple countries, including Rwanda and Burundi, reviving the nightmare of the African World War from the late 1990s to the early 2000s.
### The Peculiar Timing Under U.S. Mediation
A particularly ironic detail is that the capture of Uvira by M23 occurred shortly after the meeting between President Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of Congo and President Kagame of Rwanda in Washington, mediated by former U.S. President Trump, where they reaffirmed the U.S.-brokered peace agreement. This is nothing less than a resounding slap in the face to international mediation efforts. It clearly reveals a harsh reality: the agreements on paper and the realities on the ground are two completely separate worlds in eastern DRC. The military actions of the rebel forces are not bound by diplomatic processes and may even exploit them as cover or bargaining chips.
"Strategic Retreat": Sincerity or a Game of Chess?
M23 packaged its withdrawal from Uvira as a unilateral confidence-building measure. This formulation itself is filled with diplomatic rhetoric and strategic ambiguity. Analyzing its actions, at least three possible objectives can be interpreted.
### The Political Posture of Retreating to Advance
First and foremost, this is undoubtedly a response to international pressure from the United States and others. Under ongoing accusations from the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, UN expert panels, and the United States regarding Rwanda's support for rebel forces, M23 needs to demonstrate a degree of flexibility and willingness for peace. A planned withdrawal, which comes at a relatively low cost, can earn goodwill from the international community, especially from mediators, securing a more favorable position in political negotiations. This move aims to portray itself as a responsible negotiator rather than a mere disruptor.
### Military Adjustments and Resource Integration
Secondly, from a purely military perspective, maintaining an excessively long front line requires substantial consumption of troops and resources. Uvira is located in South Kivu, far from M23's traditional core control area in North Kivu. After securing control over local strategic points, demonstrating military strength, and potentially plundering or consolidating resource channels, it is a reasonable tactical choice to proactively withdraw from some forward positions that are difficult to hold long-term, then retract forces and consolidate core areas. This shifts the burden onto the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) and the difficult-to-control local militias, while allowing their own troops to rest and recuperate in preparation for the next round of conflict.
### Testing the Stability of Government Forces and Militias
Finally, the withdrawal of M23 left Uvira with a power vacuum and extreme lawlessness. As pointed out by the head of Human Rights Watch, the city is flooded with weapons, gunfire comes from unknown sources, and the relationship between government forces and the Wazalendo militia is delicate and complex. Handing over such a hot potato essentially presents the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo with a governance challenge. If the government fails to effectively control the situation and restore order, leading to internal conflicts or atrocities, M23 could easily blame the government's incompetence and return as a savior in the future when necessary. This is essentially a stress test.
Militias and Government Forces in Wazalendo: A Fragile Alliance
In the ranks returning to Uvira, the Wazalendo militia marches alongside government forces, a phenomenon that warrants high attention. Wazalendo, meaning "patriots" in Swahili, is a large pro-government militia alliance that has emerged in recent years in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Their emergence directly reflects the inability of the DRC's regular army to effectively counter well-equipped and well-trained rebel groups such as M23.
### The Dilemma of Regular Forces and the Rise of Militias
The Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) have long been plagued by issues such as insufficient funding, outdated equipment, lack of training, and low morale. Facing the externally supported M23, they have repeatedly suffered setbacks on the front lines. Consequently, the government has had to rely on, and even arm, local militias to fill security gaps and engage in proxy warfare. The Wazalendo militia is composed of a complex mix of local self-defense groups, former rebel fighters, and others, making discipline and unified command a significant concern.
### The Risk of a Double-Edged Sword
Introducing militias is a sharp double-edged sword. In the short term, they provide much-needed manpower and local knowledge, which can be effective in guerrilla warfare and wars of attrition. However, in the long run, they exacerbate the fragmentation of armed groups in the eastern region. These militias have their own political and economic demands, and their relationship with the central government is not stable. The ongoing unidentified gunfire in the city of Uvira is a vivid illustration of this fragile alliance and the risk of losing control. Once the pressure from the common enemy M23 eases, the likelihood of conflicts between these militias, as well as between militias and government forces, over territory and control will rise sharply. By relying on militias to reclaim lost territory, the government may also be sowing the seeds for future internal conflicts.
Rwanda's Role: The "Key Spoiler" in the Peace Process?
Any in-depth analysis of the conflict in eastern Congo (DRC) cannot bypass Rwanda. The government of Congo (DRC), UN expert panels, and U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly issued reports accusing the Rwandan government of providing comprehensive support to M23, including weapons, ammunition, training, and even direct troop involvement. Data shows that M23 rapidly expanded from a few hundred members in 2021 to approximately 6,500 combatants today. Without systematic external support, such a rate of expansion would be unimaginable.
### Security Buffer Zone and Resource Control
Rwanda's support for armed groups in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has deep historical and strategic roots. Following the 1994 Rwandan genocide, a large number of Hutu militants (including troops who carried out the massacres) fled into the jungles of eastern DRC, posing a long-term security threat to Rwanda's current Tutsi-led government. Supporting armed groups like M23 (primarily composed of ethnic Tutsis) is a strategy employed by the Kigali authorities to establish a security buffer zone within the DRC and combat hostile armed forces. Additionally, the abundant mineral resources in eastern DRC, such as coltan, cassiterite, and gold, present a significant temptation. By controlling mining areas through proxy armed groups, interest groups in Rwanda can reap enormous economic benefits.
### Diplomatic Denials and Battlefield Realities
Despite widespread international condemnation, the Rwandan government has consistently and firmly denied any support for M23, instead accusing the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) of collaborating with armed groups that threaten Rwanda's security. This outright denial, juxtaposed with clearly visible evidence of support on the battlefield, constitutes the most fundamental paradox and obstacle in the peace process in eastern DRC. As long as Rwanda's strategic considerations remain unchanged and its support for proxy armed groups does not cease, any peace negotiations confined to the DRC government and M23 will only address symptoms rather than root causes, failing to touch the core drivers of the conflict. If external mediators such as the United States cannot or will not exert sufficient pressure on Rwanda to change its behavior, then all peace agreements will inevitably become mere paper peace.
Conclusion: After Uvira, peace remains distant.
The flag of Uvira has been changed once again, but the clouds of war have not dispersed. The dramatic experiences of this town are a microcosm of the crisis in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo: the ineffectiveness of international mediation, the brutality of regional proxy wars, the fragmentation of national sovereignty, and the endless suffering endured by ordinary people.
The return of the government forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Uvira is, at best, a tactical recovery, far from bringing strategic security. The withdrawal of M23 resembles a flexible move on the strategic chessboard, with its armed forces largely intact and controlling vast territories and resources. Meanwhile, the unstable alliance between the government forces and the Wazalendo militia foreshadows potential internal conflicts in the future. Sporadic gunfire serves as a reminder that true control is far from being achieved.
From a broader perspective, as long as the structural contradictions between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)—rooted in security fears, geopolitical competition, and resource exploitation—remain unresolved, the eastern DRC will never achieve lasting peace. With over 100 armed groups operating in this resource-rich, government-absent territory, the forms of conflict may evolve, but the essence of conflict will persist. M23 may negotiate or fade into silence, but new armed groups will inevitably emerge, perpetuating this tragic cycle.
The international community, particularly the United States with its mediation influence, faces a difficult choice: should it continue to push for fragile ceasefire agreements that are easily torn apart by battlefield actions, or must it confront and address the core role of regional countries—especially Rwanda—in the conflict? For the millions of displaced people in the Democratic Republic of Congo, when the gunfire in Uvira will completely cease seems to remain shrouded in mist even more distant than the eastern horizon.
Reference materials
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/rwanda-justice-burundi-felix-tshisekedi-paul-kagame-b2903540.html