Negative reactions from those named in UN Panel report

Individuals, companies and governments named in the latest UN report on the illegal exploitation of natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) have, so far, denied their involvement. The report, released on Monday, stated that despite the withdrawal of foreign forces from the DRC, "elite criminal networks" had become so deeply entrenched that continuing illegal exploitation of the country's natural resources was assured, independent of the physical presence of foreign armies. "Three distinct criminal groups linked to the armies of Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe and the government of the DRC have benefited from overlapping micro-conflicts [and] will not disband voluntarily even as the foreign military forces continue their withdrawals," said the latest report from the United Nations Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth of the DRC. "The looting that was previously conducted by the armies themselves has been replaced with organised systems of embezzlement, tax fraud, extortion, the use of stock options as kickbacks, and diversion of state funds conducted by groups that closely resemble criminal organisations," it said. The Rwandan government, which was harshly criticised by the report, said on Tuesday it rejected the report in its entirety and would make a formal and appropriate response "in due course". It added: "The report says nothing new and, like previous reports, simply recycles unsubstantiated allegations and blatant falsehoods. "The report attempts to not only criminalise the government and people of Rwanda but also to intimidate and blackmail them into silence and inaction against the authors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, the ex-FAR [former armed forces of Rwanda] and Interahamwe [Hutu extremist militias]. This is neither acceptable nor justifiable." Regarding Rwanda's repeated claims concerning its security as justification for the continued presence of its armed forces, the panel reported to have "extensive evidence to the contrary". Using a term employed by the Congo Desk of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA), Rwanda's "real long-term purpose" was to "secure property". The panel said: "RPA battalions that specialise in mining activities remain in place, though they have ceased wearing RPA uniforms, and will continue the activities under a commercial guise. The rationale for Rwanda's presence is to increase the numbers of Rwandans in the eastern DRC and to encourage those settled there to act in unison to support its exercise of economic control." The Rwandan government said it would "continue to fulfil its obligations to ensure peace and security for her people and will not be derailed from meeting these obligations by the same international community that abandoned Rwanda at her greatest hour of need". The government was referring to the 1994 genocide of some 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and politically moderate ethnic Hutus. Uganda, several of whose military leaders and businessmen were heavily implicated, has yet to release an official reaction. However, speaking to Ugandan government-owned The New Vision newspaper on Tuesday, Foreign Minister James Wapakhabulo said his government was carefully studying the report. "But we are waiting for the [Ugandan] report of the judicial commission of inquiry led by Justice David Porter, according to the recommendations of the first UN panel report last year. We are acting in step with UN recommendations," the paper quoted him as saying. "After we have compared both reports, we assure our people and the international community that we shall implement the findings." The Porter Commission is expected to submit its report by 15 November. Although no reaction was yet available from the government of Zimbabwe, Gen Vitalis Zvinavashe, commander of his nation's armed forces, told his country's official Herald newspaper that the report was "meaningless". "No one in the world, especially in the West, was happy with the assistance that we rendered to the DRC government. So they just want to tarnish our names," he said. Zvinavashe, who was named in the report, said opponents of Zimbabwe's involvement in the Congo war were behind the UN probe. While the Congolese government has not yet commented on the report, a minister cited by the UN panel for involvement in illegal exploitation of his country's natural resources, Augustin Katumba Mwanke, said on Monday that the government must institute an inquiry into the report's findings. "I wouldn't answer to things like these. Let an inquiry speak for itself," Katumba, the minister of the presidency and portfolio, told IRIN. France, a permanent member of the UN Security Council that has been a major force in supporting the work of the panel, said on Tuesday it welcomed "the seriousness of this report, which reflects considerable work both in terms of the breadth of the subject and also its methodological rigour". France's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was "deeply concerned at the ongoing pillage, brought to light by the report, of Congo's natural resources, in particular by uninvited foreign armies". It added that France was also concerned that pillaging remained one of the main causes of the continuing conflict and instability in the eastern part of the country. "This report does not put an end to the problem, the international community must be more vigilant than ever in regard to the smuggling of raw materials, condemned by the experts, and it must show itself determined to fight the smuggling," the ministry said. Meanwhile, two of the world's largest gem and mining firms have denied any involvement in unethical activity in the Congo. Anglo American and De Beers diamond company, were among dozens of multinationals in South Africa, Europe and the United States that allegedly violated ethical guidelines on conflict zones stipulated by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The De Beers spokesman in South Africa, Brian Roodt, told IRIN on Tuesday that his company was puzzled by its inclusion in the report. "We're trying to get hold of the UN to find out what the specifics are in relation to their allegations," he said. Meanwhile, Anglo American issued a statement saying it had had no operations in the Congo "for several years". The firm added: "The group's interests have included a couple of potential projects, only one of which ... proceeded beyond the earliest form of pre-feasibility stage. It was precisely because of the company's concerns with regard to broad governance issues surrounding mining in the DRC that Anglo American hesitated to become further involved in the country."