NGOs Urge EU to Cancel Mineral Pact with Rwanda Over Congo War

In a joint statement, 64 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have called on the European Union (EU) to cancel its mineral pact with Rwanda, citing concerns over the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The EU-Rwanda Raw Materials Partnership, signed in February 2024, aims to "nurture sustainable and resilient value chains for critical raw materials" for the EU's green and clean energy objectives. However, the NGOs argue that the partnership risks exacerbating the conflict and human rights abuses in the DRC.

The NGOs, including the International Peace Information Service (IPIS) and PAX, have published a briefing paper analyzing the EU's conflict minerals regulation and its impact on the ground. The paper highlights the failure of the regulation to achieve its key objectives, such as breaking the link between mineral exploitation and conflict financing and addressing human rights abuses in the supply chains. The NGOs argue that the EU's raw materials deal with Rwanda may contribute to the illicit trade of minerals from the eastern DRC, potentially undermining the effectiveness of the regulation.

The NGOs call on the EU to take several steps to better enforce the existing regulation and adopt new measures to improve supply chain transparency while increasing direct support for responsible sourcing in producing countries. These include:

1. Making it mandatory for EU importers to trace their imports back to the mine(s) of origin, regardless of whether they are sourcing from a CAHRA or not, and imposing dissuasive penalties on importers who persistently fail to comply with the Regulation's obligations.
2. Widening the scope of the information that EU importers should disclose to the public to enhance transparency and accountability.
3. Equipping the European Commission with more capacity to play a leading role in the Regulation's implementation, which in turn should reinforce the work of Member States Competent Authorities.
4. Avoiding overreliance on industry-led schemes and third-party audits, and instead using them as one useful tool among others, such as information obtained from non-governmental organizations, academia, journalists, and affected communities themselves.
5. Strengthening the EU's collaboration with 3TG producing countries, including to better inform the relevant stakeholders on the evolving EU due diligence requirements. Sourcing more directly from CAHRAs and the ASM sector allows to shorten the supply chain and better promote practices that respect both the local communities – including artisanal miners' livelihoods – and the environment.

The NGOs warn that the EU's mineral pact with Rwanda may indirectly support the Rwandan military's involvement in the conflict in the DRC, as well as the illicit trade of minerals from the DRC into Rwanda. They argue that the EU should take a more active role in addressing the root causes of the conflict and promoting sustainable development in the region.

In conclusion, the NGOs' call for the EU to cancel its mineral pact with Rwanda highlights the ethical implications of the EU's continued support for Rwanda, given its involvement in the conflict and the potential for EU investment to contribute to the financing of armed groups like M23. The EU must carefully consider these implications and take steps to ensure that its investment in Rwanda does not exacerbate human rights abuses and environmental degradation in the DRC, while also promoting sustainable and responsible mineral supply chains.