The arrival in the United States of the first shipment of Rwandan tungsten, sourced from the Nyakabingu mine just a few dozen kilometers from the Congolese border, raises serious questions about the neutrality and transparency of the American initiative. Between historic support for Kagame’s regime, opaque commercial deals, and the targeting of Congolese populations, one question looms large: are the United States genuinely pursuing peace, or primarily safeguarding their strategic interests in the Great Lakes region?
On August 28, 2025, Kigali and Washington signed a high-profile commercial agreement deemed “historic.” Less than two months later, on September 30, U.S. Ambassador to Rwanda Eric Kneedler publicly celebrated the arrival of the first official shipment of tungsten labeled “made in Rwanda” in the United States.
This export, the result of a partnership between Rwandan company Trinity Metals and the American firm Global Tungsten & Powders (GTP), reportedly originates from the Nyakabingu mine, located roughly 70 kilometers from the Congolese border. This proximity raises suspicions: how credible is full transparency when Rwanda is accused of mixing its modest domestic production with minerals illicitly extracted from the Congolese soil, exporting the combined resources under its own label
Risk of conflict of interest and recent U.S. congressional criticism
This question is reinforced by a recent debate in the U.S. Congress. In August 2025, about forty Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, denouncing the lack of Congressional consultation and the opacity of the critical minerals pact negotiated with the DRC. They expressed deep concerns over a potential conflict of interest, noting that a political associate of the president was involved in consortiums targeting Congolese deposits. Several lawmakers also publicly criticized the State Department for “secretive discussions” regarding DRC minerals, labeling the process “far too opaque” for a conflict zone and warning of the credibility risks for U.S. diplomacy.
U.S. Duplicity: Mediation and Business Intertwined
The paradox is glaring. While Washington presents itself as a mediator in the DRC-Rwanda peace process, it simultaneously celebrates the arrival of a shipment of tungsten labeled “Rwandan.” A historic first, according to Ambassador Kneedler, but it illustrates a troubling duplicity.
Logic would dictate that an impartial mediator demand the suspension of resource exports from the conflict zone until a final agreement is reached. Instead, the U.S. is supporting mining deals (Trinity Metals – Global Tungsten) in the midst of negotiations.
By intertwining peace and business, Washington muddies the waters and erodes trust.
Historical U.S. support for Kagame and the FPR
This trust deficit is far from trivial. Since the 1990s, the United States has consistently supported the Rwandan Patriotic Front (FPR) and Paul Kagame, including during his military training at a U.S. academy, contributing to the overthrow of the Hutu-led government and Kagame’s rise to power in 1994. This support has continued throughout his rule, often in spite of documented human rights violations and breaches of international law. Meanwhile, the systematic targeting of Hutus in exile and populations suspected of allegiance to the former regime has occurred on Congolese territory, resulting in massacres, mass displacement, forced recruitment into militias, and sustained instability in eastern DRC.
This long-standing U.S. complicity underpins a structural deficit of confidence in any American-mediated process in the region.
Control of congolese minerals and “Transparent Supply Chains”
The recent commercial agreement, hailed as “historic” by Kigali, reinforces this perception: behind the rhetoric of “transparent supply chains” lies the capture of Congolese minerals relabeled as Rwandan. Evidence abounds—testimonies, investigations, and reports show how the 3Ts (tantalum, tin, tungsten) are extracted from the Congo, rebranded as “made in Rwanda,” and exported abroad.Meanwhile, Goma and Bukavu continue to suffer. Kidnappings and forced recruitment by the M23 persist, while containers of Congolese tungsten discreetly transit through Kenyan ports to supply the U.S. industry.
Washington, self-proclaimed mediator, does not halt these flows; on the contrary, it celebrates them.When U.S. mediation becomes a source of doubt
The DRC-Rwanda peace process is thus undermined by this deliberate conflation of diplomacy and business. The central question arises: are the United States genuinely pursuing peace in the Great Lakes region, or are they leveraging the process to secure strategic advantages vis-à-vis China, at the expense of Congolese sovereignty?
By celebrating exports shrouded in opacity, Washington demonstrates that its mediation is neither neutral nor transparent. For Congolese citizens, vigilance is crucial: without a clear separation between peace efforts and commercial interests, U.S. facilitation resembles more a cover-up operation than a genuine conflict-resolution initiative.
