After decades of cyclical crisis management in the Great Lakes region, the United States has finally introduced a framework built on a fundamentally different premise: that sustainable peace emerges from shared economic interests, not humanitarian intervention alone.
The Washington Accord represents a departure from traditional American engagement in Central Africa. Rather than defaulting to emergency relief followed by inevitable disappointment when violence resurfaces, this approach acknowledges a straightforward reality: people invest in stability when they have something concrete to gain from it.
While other global powers positioned themselves as transactional partners willing to overlook governance concerns for resource access, Washington remained caught between moral positioning and ineffective interventions. The new framework offers a third path: structured economic cooperation that makes conflict costlier than collaboration.
A Diplomatic Breakthrough Decades in the Making
To understand what makes this accord significant, consider what it overcame. Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo have been locked in mutual suspicion since the 1990s. Multiple wars, millions of deaths, and countless mediation attempts failed to produce lasting cooperation. The animosity ran so deep that basic diplomatic communication often proved impossible.
Previous international efforts, led by the UN, African Union, and various European powers, consistently foundered on the same obstacles. Neither side trusted the other’s intentions, mineral wealth fueled ongoing conflict, and armed groups profited from instability. By 2024, most regional observers considered the relationship irreparable.
What changed was the approach. Massad Boulos, the U.S. President’s Senior Adviser for Arab and African Affairs, who received the Africa file only on 1 April 2025, managed within a short period of time to break the stalemate and drive negotiations. His command of Arabic and French, two languages that remain central to diplomatic engagement across Africa and the broader region, allowed him to communicate more directly with leaders, avoid unnecessary intermediaries, and reduce the risk of misinterpretation. His long experience engaging with African environments and his familiarity with the region’s political dynamics meant he understood the historical grievances, cultural sensitivities, and domestic pressures each side faced.
At one point in the negotiations, discussions nearly collapsed over mineral certification protocols. Congolese officials feared Rwanda might use technical standards to dominate processing, while Rwandan counterparts worried that weak oversight could allow unregulated competitors to undermine legitimate trade. Instead of allowing the disagreement to harden, Boulos encouraged both parties to adopt practical confidence-building measures, including more transparent and jointly monitored procedures. While the technical design of the verification system emerged from the broader negotiations, his mediation ensured that transparency and mutual oversight became central pillars rather than afterthoughts.
His negotiating style focused on making early benefits visible and concrete. Instead of demanding comprehensive agreements upfront, he secured quick wins, reopening specific border crossings and establishing pilot programs for mineral traceability, which built momentum and demonstrated good faith. Communities saw tangible changes within weeks, not years.
Building Stability Through Mutual Interest
The framework that emerged centers on economic interdependence rather than traditional security guarantees. When Congolese exporters require Rwandan infrastructure and Rwandan manufacturers depend on Congolese raw materials, both nations gain practical reasons to maintain functional relationships. This creates a network of business stakeholders whose interests align with regional calm.
The approach also confronts the mineral question directly. Eastern Congo contains deposits critical to electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy systems, and modern technology. Previous frameworks avoided this reality or treated it as peripheral. This accord places resource governance at its center, establishing transparent protocols that acknowledge the strategic importance of these materials.
The joint certification system already shows results. In its first four months of operation, certified mineral exports from eastern Congo increased by 34 percent while reports of smuggling through unofficial channels dropped significantly. More importantly, revenues from certified minerals are reaching provincial governments rather than disappearing into opaque networks. North Kivu province, long synonymous with resource fueled conflict, reported a 28 percent increase in provincial revenues between April and September 2025, funds now directed toward infrastructure and local services.
Real Changes on the Ground
Six months into implementation, the accord’s impact extends beyond statistics. The Rubavu Goma border crossing, which processed minimal legitimate trade for nearly a decade, now handles more than 200 commercial vehicles daily. Congolese truckers who previously paid bribes to armed groups at illegal crossings now move goods through official channels where processing takes hours instead of days.
In Bukavu, a Congolese cooperative of cassiterite miners has partnered with a Rwandan processing facility in Kigali. The arrangement provides Congolese miners with guaranteed prices and technical support for meeting certification standards, while giving Rwandan processors reliable supply. The cooperative’s 400 members have seen incomes rise by an average of 40 percent since June. Several members report sending children back to school and repairing homes damaged during previous conflicts.
A Rwandan logistics company has opened a warehouse facility in Goma, employing 65 Congolese workers. A Congolese agricultural exporter is using Rwandan cold storage facilities to reach East African markets. These ventures would have been unthinkable 18 months ago due to political risk.
The Kibumba Bunagana corridor, a 30 kilometer stretch that saw intense fighting as recently as 2023, has been largely peaceful since May 2025. Local officials attribute the calm to the economic activity now flowing through the area. Former combatants have found work in transport and warehousing. “When young men have jobs, they don’t join militias,” a Congolese provincial official noted in August. “It is that simple.”
Addressing Valid Concerns Without Losing Perspective
Critics raise legitimate questions about whether this framework prioritizes supply chain security over human rights considerations, or whether it risks becoming another extractive arrangement under diplomatic cover.
These concerns warrant serious attention. However, they must be weighed against the status quo that preceded this accord. Minerals flowed through unregulated channels that financed armed groups while undermining legitimate governance. American influence remained minimal, and violence persisted despite repeated humanitarian interventions.
The current framework introduces mineral traceability mechanisms that track resources from extraction to export. Border checkpoints that sat unused for years now process legitimate commercial activity, reducing the profitability of smuggling networks that flourished in ungoverned spaces.
This engagement provides Washington with tools for shaping outcomes rather than observing from a distance. Active partnership creates opportunities to channel mineral wealth toward regional development instead of following the extraction focused model that characterized other powers’ involvement. Disengagement offered no such possibilities.
November’s Expansion Signals Durability
On November 13, 2025, both countries agreed to expand the original April framework. The update strengthened mineral certification standards and deepened coordination on cross-border supply chain management. Regional observers characterized this development as consolidating the integrated economic model that underpins the accord.
What made this expansion significant was that it came from both governments voluntarily. Neither Washington nor any external actor pushed for it. Both Kinshasa and Kigali recognized that the framework was working and wanted to deepen it. This represents a fundamental shift from previous agreements where international pressure forced reluctant compliance.
The expanded framework introduced additional trade corridors, extended certification protocols to include cobalt and lithium, previously limited to tin, tantalum, and tungsten, and established a joint economic zone near the Goma Gisenyi border where businesses from both countries can operate under harmonized regulations.
Implications for Other Fragile Regions
Should this framework prove durable, it offers a potential model for other zones of instability from the Sahel to Sudan. It demonstrates that prosperity centered diplomacy represents strategic pragmatism rather than wishful thinking.
Negotiations cannot produce lasting stability when populations have no material stake in peaceful outcomes. Functional markets do not replace values based considerations, but they frequently reinforce them more effectively than external pressure campaigns.
Boulos understood this dynamic from direct experience. His work demonstrated that economic opportunity and political reform strengthen each other, and advances in one domain create momentum in the other. When communities see both livelihood improvement and fair political processes developing together, they transition from passive observers to active participants in maintaining stability.
What Comes Next
The Washington Accord will not transform the Great Lakes region rapidly. Peace in areas that have endured prolonged trauma rarely follows linear trajectories. Setbacks and disputes will occur. Yet this framework represents the most substantial U.S. supported structure the region has seen in years.
The coming months will test several critical elements. Monitoring mechanisms must continue building confidence between parties. The economic benefits need to reach communities beyond border areas. And Washington must maintain sustained attention as other global priorities compete for resources and focus.
But the foundation is strong. The incentive alignment is sound, and the diplomacy reflects genuine regional understanding. Boulos and the U.S. administration designed a strategy grounded in how the region actually functions rather than how external actors wish it would function. The early results, measured in reopened trade routes, new businesses, increased provincial revenues, and communities experiencing peace for the first time in years, suggest this approach can achieve outcomes that decades of relief cycles and disappointment never produced.
For those who have long advocated for American approaches that treat African nations as partners rather than recipients, this framework represents the most concrete progress in that direction. It deserves the opportunity to prove itself.