From Kivu, both to the north and south, where they were deployed on a contentious mission to protect the unrecognized interests of Burundian President Évariste Ndayishimiye, approximately ten thousand Burundian soldiers, comprising ten battalions, were compelled to withdraw following the capture of Bukavu by opposing forces.
This unfortunate situation not only highlights the condition of the Burundian army but also underscores the complexity of the geopolitical dynamics in the African Great Lakes region, an area characterized by historical conflicts, ethnic rivalries, and power struggles that frequently extend beyond national borders.
A significant number of Burundian soldiers perished in the conflict, while others, driven by desperation or pragmatism, surrendered to the enemy. Some, overwhelmed by fear, concealed themselves in the forests to avoid engagement with opposing forces. The fortunate ones returned home, burdened with the humiliation of defeat. This retreat raises questions regarding accountability for this situation. Some analysts and observers attribute the failure to President Évariste Ndayishimiye himself, rather than the army, which has demonstrated professionalism in other contexts, making the current developments even more perplexing.
The Burundian army boasts a history of success, as demonstrated by its intervention in Somalia, where it was deployed in 2007 to combat Al Shebab rebels. In this context, the Burundian army was technically equipped and benefited from clear and robust support from international organizations such as the African Union (AU) and the United Nations (UN). The mission was well-defined, and the soldiers were motivated by a common objective: restoring peace and security in a region ravaged by terrorism. In contrast, the current retreat of the Burundian army in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) starkly contrasts with these past successes, as it confronted a more formidable adversary, better equipped and committed to a deeper cause, namely Islamic extremism, which posed a significant challenge to regional stability.
As part of his engagement in the DRC, Évariste Ndayishimiye discreetly visited the field, deploying Imbonerakure, along with other newly recruited soldiers, often inadequately prepared and unmotivated by the cause at stake. This strategic choice was particularly problematic, as it resulted in a lack of cohesion and strategy on the ground. Furthermore, while the Burundian military previously had other professional and technically equipped soldiers as allies, their allies in the DRC proved to be the unmotivated FARDC (Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo) and FDLR militias, driven by an ancestral hatred of Tutsis and similar groups. These combined factors created a disadvantageous combat environment for the Burundian troops, rendering their failure almost inevitable.
The failure of this mission was therefore foreseeable, and it has become evident that the Burundian president, now perceived as the primary loser in the dual capture of Goma and Bukavu by the M23, is attempting to deflect attention by invoking a threat from Rwanda to the entire region, a strategy that may not suffice to conceal his vulnerabilities and ultimately his position at the helm of the country and his political party. The humiliation is acutely felt not only by a defeated army but also by the generals and the elite of his political party who blindly followed a president striving to salvage his waning grip on power. He was desperate to secure a few million dollars to rescue Burundi's faltering economy and, by extension, his power that depended on it.
The deficiencies in planning, strategy, and uncoordinated deployment, coupled with a lack of a clear cause and combat mission, have exposed the inadequacies of the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Not only has he solidified his image as an inept politician, but he also appears to be a poor tactician and an ineffective strategist. This is reinforced by his tendency to interpret the situation through an ideological rather than a political lens, by framing the conflict as an opposition between the Bantu and the Hima empire.
He has also recently declared that if the international community is not vigilant, the war could spread throughout the entire region, a statement that seems motivated more by a need to rally national support than a genuine assessment of risks and strategies. Even to observers unfamiliar with war tactics, it is evident that this was a poorly executed engagement destined to end in disaster.
For instance, rather than securing the Bukavu region bordering his country before advancing north towards Goma, he chose to leave his rear flank exposed, leaving his border with the DRC unsecured. By the time it occurred to him that his army should retreat to their rear flank, it was too late; they were in disarray, fleeing an enemy he had underestimated.
A well-trained commander could have anticipated this failure from the outset of their engagement in the DRC war. When they joined the FARDC on the front lines, they were abandoned in the face of an enemy unleashed on multiple occasions by their Congolese colleagues. Once this had occurred on more than one occasion, they should have realized that they had incompetent partners.
Not only were there strategic errors, but intelligence failures marred this ill-fated deployment. Ndayishimiye and his army appear to have been caught off guard by the technical and tactical superiority of their northern neighbor. The ensuing rhetoric demonstrates his concern as his army and he himself confront their shortcomings.
This intelligence failure comes as no surprise to anyone except Ndayishimiye. Situated in the president’s office, far from any oversight, Burundi’s intelligence service has become a tool of repression, dedicated more to the regime's survival than to national security. It has been accused of severe human rights violations, including torture, rape, kidnapping, and extrajudicial killings. National security has been relegated to a secondary priority on the national intelligence agenda, leaving intelligence agents to pursue enemies and perceived enemies of the regime and the president.
This focus on regime survival has resulted in a purge of all elements deemed unreliable, including Tutsi elements. Today, the civilian and military intelligence services are almost exclusively composed of Hutu elements, the majority of whom originate from the Imbonerakure militia, more trained in the application of ruthless violence against presumed opponents than in the art of gathering tangible and actionable intelligence.
However, the unfolding events, which appear unfavorable to him, compel him to reassess his stance and qualify his remarks on Rwanda. It is in this context that he issued a recent tweet, stating: "Following discussions with countries allied to Rwanda, those who anticipated an attack by Rwanda on Burundi must revise their expectations. However, Burundians must remain vigilant, as no one knows when such an attack could occur."
This change in tone reflects the mounting pressure on his administration but does not resolve the numerous questions arising from the fall of Bukavu, a situation that has caused tremors with repercussions still far from being settled. Rumors of escalating tensions between Burundi and Rwanda continue to circulate, fueled by nationalist rhetoric and military maneuvers on both sides of the border. The current situation leaves President Évariste Ndayishimiye facing a geopolitical dilemma of remarkable complexity, one that jeopardizes not only his political survival but also his personal safety. He finds himself in a precarious position: will he choose to disengage from the DRC to avoid becoming entrenched in a conflict that could prove catastrophic, or will he decide to further engage, thereby risking turning Burundi into a veritable battlefield?
Regardless of his decision, it is evident that the stakes have never been higher, and the consequences of his choices could have lasting repercussions for the stability of the region as well as his own political future. The stakes are further heightened as the international community observes with increased scrutiny, aware that any misstep could lead to an escalation of violence and a new cycle of conflict in an already unstable region.
Comentários