DRC: Another Item for the Obama Agenda

The past week has been filled with talk of the "Transition Agenda," and President-Election Barack Obama and his team no doubt have fielded many calls from people eager to make their mark on the plans. It's like a "Change Vacuum."

On the international front, one possible (hopefully) priority already has the backing of the U.S. Government. Hannah McCrea at The Seminal points out that, in his presidency, Obama will now have the chance to implement his own bill, the Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006:

"I point this out because, while it is abundantly clear that addressing the DRC will not be at the top of Obama’s 'to-do' list come January 20, he can nevertheless act to stem some of the current suffering in the DRC once he is President. His own bill gives him a legal basis to “hold accountable individuals, entities, and countries” working to undermine peace in the country which, very broadly interpreted, could include 'individuals' like Robert Mugabe, corporate 'entities' such as De Beers, and 'countries' like China. Perhaps more realistically, the Act requires the U.S. to use its influence at the UN, which administers MONUC, to promote peace in the DRC, and specifically to help make available 'personnel, communications, and military assets that improve the effectiveness of robust peacekeeping, mobility, and command and control capabilities of MONUC.'

"In other words, should the new president turn his attention to the violence in the DRC, he would find he has given himself a useful vehicle for taking swift and meaningful action."

As McCrea notes, one provision of the bill allows for the U.S. to suspend aid to the DRC if the government fails to make sufficient progress towards the bill's long list of policy objectives---which seems sensible, at first glance. But development and reconstruction never occur on a straight trajectory, and given that some Congolese officials might not be keen on aid aimed at reforming government corruption, CFR analyst Anthony Gambino argues that such a withdrawal would produce the opposite of its intended effect. (For more on Gambino's article, see One, Two, and Three.)

Clearly, the U.S. cannot continue to fork over money that is being funneled into conflict, or directly into someone's pocket, which means that Obama and his team need to find a better point of leverage to hold the Congolese government accountable. But, as McCrea points out, the framework is already there---the U.S. Government is already committed. Now it's a matter of making it work.

For up-to-date tracking of developments in the DRC, see Michael's Humanitarian Relief blog, and the new DRC page from Ushahidi.