The voices of those suffering in eastern Congo are being silenced in peace talks, and it’s a tragedy that demands our attention. But here’s where it gets controversial: while global powers negotiate, the people most affected are left out of the conversation. Lawyer Néné Bintu Iragi, a fearless advocate for displaced women and president of the civil society of South Kivu, is determined to change that. In a powerful interview, she sheds light on the devastating conflict tearing apart the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and the flawed peace efforts that ignore the very people they claim to protect.
Iragi’s story is both personal and political. Exiled from her home in Bukavu after its capture by M23 rebels—backed by Rwandan forces—she now works from Uvira, documenting atrocities committed by both rebel groups and pro-government militias. Her crime? Speaking truth to power. And this is the part most people miss: while high-profile agreements like the June 2025 Washington deal between the DRC and Rwanda, and the July 2025 Doha accord with the M23, grab headlines, they fail to address the root causes of the conflict or include local voices. Iragi argues these agreements are little more than band-aid solutions, pointing out that even as diplomats shook hands, civilians were being slaughtered just miles away.
The situation is dire. In Goma alone, 3,000 women were raped during the city’s fall, and 10,000 people died in the aftermath—all under the watch of UN peacekeeping forces. Iragi’s collective, Maman Congo, amplifies the stories of displaced women, but their work is dangerous. Pro-government paramilitaries, known as Wazalendo, threaten those who dare expose human rights abuses. Here’s the bold truth: civil society activists like Iragi are caught in the crossfire, not because they’ve chosen a side, but because they refuse to.
Iragi places her hope in UN Security Council Resolution 2773, which demands an end to hostilities and the withdrawal of foreign forces. Yet, she’s skeptical of mediators like Qatar, whose investments in both the DRC and Rwanda—including a gold refinery processing Congolese minerals—raise questions of neutrality. Is a mediator with vested interests truly impartial? She insists on an inclusive peace process that involves all stakeholders, including Burundi and Uganda, not just the DRC and Rwanda.
As we reflect on this crisis, a thought-provoking question arises: Can peace ever be sustainable if those most affected are excluded from the table? Iragi’s fight is a call to action—not just for Congo, but for anyone who believes in justice. What’s your take? Do global peace efforts need a radical rethink to prioritize local voices? Let’s debate this in the comments.