Transcript
THE RESOURCE CONFLICT IN CONGO Background Information Many authors, poets, and scholars alike have written about conflict. The subject of conflict is a broad one. It is not humanly possible for one to cover its breadth andwidth unless by narrowing down to the specific topic one wants to talk about. The scope of this piece will focus on the resource conflict in the Democratic Republicof Congo, formerly known as Zaire. The DRC as we know it today has undergone a metamorphosis in its history andculture. In order to sustain relevance in this paper, the history of the DRC shall beconsidered in brief from the time of the Congo Free State under King Leopold II of Belgium. Ewans, (2002, p.2) describes the Congo Free State era as the period from1877-1908. During this time, Congo was considered a private estate or Kingdom forthe King, and in an effort to enrich himself, exploitation was carried out in large scale,with brutality, greed, and disregard for the sanctity of human life. The next phase in the development of the Congo was the Belgian Congo, which is theperiod that runs from 1908 after the Belgian parliament exerted pressure to theBelgian King to hand over the colony. Despite the change in regime, during thisperiod, not much changed as the white minority, who encompassed the ruling class,had a patronizing attitude to the indigenous people of the Congo Free State, nowrenamed Belgian Congo. This era continued until 1960 when Congo gotindependence.For eleven Years, Congo was known as ‘The Republic of Congo’ until Mobutu Ssesekotook over power through a coup and changed the name to Zaire. This would be thename that DRC would assume until the Change to ‘The Democratic Republic of Congo’.Basing from the history of the DRC, one can make claims that the history of thecountry is one marred by conflict all along, and is perhaps the best example of ‘ Theresource curse’ . Introduction Various scholars have written extensively about resource conflict in the Congo, andhave addressed pertinent issues as regards resources and conflict. Throughintegration of the various conflict theories, the focus has mainly been to understandthe conflict from an international perspective. This piece will try to analyze theresource conflict in the DRC from an African Perspective integrating the relevantconflict theories.Before embarking on the issue of conflict in the Zaire, it is imperative to first discussthe contending issues. The term conflict itself has been vague and ambiguous in itsdefinition. To draw from Mwagiru’s argument, (2000, p.3) Conflict is a state of differing opinions and or interests on anything.Again, to examine the perception of conflict from Diana Francis, we see that it canalso be defined as the friction caused by difference, proximity and movement, sincepeople and their lives are fortunately, not identical, isolated or static. (Francis, 2002,p.3)Having come up with at least a common idea about the conception of conflict as astate of differences, whether in opinion or otherwise, the next concept that needs tobe tackled is that of resources, what are resources and as in the case of Congo,Strategic resources. The Online Business dictionary defines a resource as an economicor productive factor required to accomplish an activity, or as a means to undertake anenterprise and achieve a desired outcome. In the case of strategic resources in theDemocratic Republic of Congo, it is those resources that are of a significantly morevalued benefit, such asGold, Coltan, (used in the manufacture of electronic andmilitary weapons) Cassiterite (Used in the manufacture of Tin) and Wolframite (Usedin the manufacture of tungsten, for lighting filaments and also in weaponry and tools)Alao, (2007, p.353) asserts that the link between natural resources and conflict isprobably as old as human settlement.With regards to most conflict countries in Africa, and the DRC being no exception, ithas been suggested that (Banon and Collier, 2003, p.10) the conflict is likely tocontinue or persist unless radical measures are taken up to inhibit the high dependency on proceeds from legal or illegal exploitation of resources. If such stepsare not taken, then the conflict sweeps away any chances of positive and sustainabledevelopment and instead promotes disappointing development and spectacularunderdevelopment.In order to ensure a clear and concise communication of ideas, this paper will bedivided into three sections, section A that will introduce and elucidate on the relevanttheories of conflict, section B that will focus on validating the application of theproposed theories, and section C that will focus on the possible future for the conflict. Section A Conflict is part and parcel of our lives and conflict situations are not necessarily bador harmful as widely perceived.Conflict situations are only harmful when the conflictis allowed to escalate into a more volatile state of affairs.With respect to the DRC, three conflict theories will be discussed in this section of thepaper. That is the military industrial complex, the Marxist theories and the Economictheories. The Military Industrial Complex The Military-Industrial Complex, a concept popularized by President DwightEisenhower in his 1961 farewell address,warned against the possibility of a stronginfluence and power produced by the combination of ahuge military establishmentand a large arms industry. Below is an excerpt from Eisenhower’s 1961 speech. ‘…wehave been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions’Dwight was in essence trying to warn the American people, of the increasinginfluence of the complex, and that they should not let it dictate their lives.Defined, Military Industrial Complex is a phrase that attempts to describe therelationship between government and the military or defense industry and otherplayers, mostly private companies and powerful individuals within government thatare charged with the responsibility to manage arms production. To put it simply,James (2002, 46-48)it is a “war for profit” theory. By war for profit, itimplies that going to war is a business as opposed to a difference in opinions becauseof the few who benefit from the sale of arms and war related paraphernalia. The idea of war for profit is nothing new in the realm of human history.It can be datedback a few centuries ago when the competing super powers of Europe investedheavily in naval weaponry as they sought to outdo each other in conquering newcolonies. It has been suggested that that arms race, which may today seemprimordial is what has developed to today’s complex Military Industrial Complex.It cannot be hidden anymore; the defense industry stands to reap most benefits whena nation commits to a long term war overseas. It only makes perfectsense to utilizethe resources of the defense industry to accomplish the mission. To cement the above assertions, Charles King (1997, p17) claims that no civil wartoday is ever wholly internal. EconomicTheory ‘’The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freemanand slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman…” KarlMax 1848.Most of the conflict theories that have a social orientation have their ideas deeply tiedto those of Karl Marx, where the roots are deep in the class conflict The economic perception of conflict is that it grows from competition in terms of economic interests. It is worth to note that at this point the conflict is perceived tohave escalated to the state of war.These events are made possible by the fact thatthe international system is anarchical in nature.Normally, economics deal with the process of earning income, Hirshleifer (2001, p.13)talks of earning income through the dark side, that is through conflict. He alsopredicts that leaders will always lean to the side of conflict in an effort to maximize ontheir benefits and minimize on their losses.An important assertion of the economic theory that should not be left out is thatthrough the competition for the limited goods against unlimited wants, society is usually put off balance until the governing party gains control of the situation throughthe use of power. In the international relations perspective the dominant party is thestate as states are the main actors in the international arena.Once the dominance is set, then it is a matter of oppression. The weaker actors areforced to give in to the demands of the bigger and more powerful actors. The givingin to demands is not in the literal sense but figurative in that the relations will beunfair or exploitative. The maximizing of benefits is not mutual.During the pursuit of economic interests, actors employ all means necessary tomaximize on their benefits up to and including destabilizing states and toppling weakgovernments. The interference with internal affairs in a country is mostly the casewhen the weak actors formulate unfavorable policies. The conflict because of economic interests guarantees and sustains wars which willnot end unless the market system disappears or a revolution occurs. This is accordingto Karl Marx’s ideas. Marxist Theories of conflict The fundamental assumption from the Marxist theories of conflict is that all wars areas a result of class conflicts. The classes being talked about are the bourgeoisie andproletariat, as advanced by Karl Marx. The relationship is also one that is not fair, thatis one of exploitation and dominance by one group over the other. The group thatdominates is the bourgeoisie, because they own the means of production.Peter Worsley (2002, p11) opines that no other author has influenced the course of history in the twentieth century more that Karl Marx ever did. Worsley is a proponentof Marxism but in his work dwells on the concepts of Marxism that are relevant in thecontemporary world, he also presents those that are debatable or elicit variedreactions and does not forget to mention the few that he considers irrelevant intoday’s world.Back to the Marxist debate as relates conflict and one can observe that conflict andwars will never cease as long as the class system persists. The class system thatgives rise to this conflict is capitalism, and as long as capitalism exists, that is a
