UNION
POUR LA DÉMOCRATIE
ET LE PROGRÈS SOCIAL

[Fwd: Lu pour vous] EMILE ILUNGA vs WASHINGTON

Linda de Hoyos : "live" on a riot against Kagame's Dr. Emile Ilunga!

LEESBURG, Oct. 25 (EIRNS)--CSIS SEMINAR TURNS INTO NEAR-RIOT AGAINST RCD LEADER EMILE ILUNGA. A seminar of the Center for Strategic and International Studies featuring Dr. Emile Ilunga, head of the Rwandan-backed Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD), turned into a near brawl this afternoon. The seminar drew approximately a hundred people, of which about half were Congolese. The atmosphere for confrontation was set by the CSIS itself, whose new director of African Studies, Tony Smith, declared that all questions had to be written down and filtered through the CSIS chair. This prompted an audience outbreak led by former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Hank Cohen, who demanded to know why Ilunga did not want dialogue and why this procedure was being followed. "I've been coming to CSIS events for 15 years, and this has never been the procedure," said Cohen. The CSIS's Smith then said, "No, it is often procedure"--which is a lie, as everyone in the room knew.

That was just for starters. Ilunga, in his presentation and in answers to questions thereafter, with his aides at the podium Medard Mulangala (translating from the French for him), and Alexis Thambwe, spewed forth one lie after another with smirking grins on their faces. This attitude, backed by the CSIS iron fist, did not sit well with the audience.

Ilunga claimed he was in Washington to deliver a "peace message." What he made clear he is asking for, during his three-day visit, is money and backing to continue the war against Kabila and also against all anti-Uganda and anti-Rwanda insurgents in the area. His speech was a short pastiche of lies.

Despite the attempts of the CSIS's Smith to put all the questions in the best light, it is clear that most of the questions were hostile and "provocative," as Smith later denounced them. On the question of the unity of the Congo, Ilunga said the RCD always stood for unity--although as everyone knows they are backed by the Rwandan military, which considers the Kivu provinces part of Rwanda.

On whether or not they have any support from the Congolese people, Ilunga answered that it was "faible," which was translated as "not as much as we had hoped for." At this point, Cohen, who is an official lobbyist for Kabila in Washington, denounced the translator, since "faible" means "weak," with a shouting match ensuing for the next seven minutes on this point.

In answer to another question, Ilunga denied that there was ever any invasion of the Congo by Rwanda and Uganda, and that such an invasion is never mentioned in the Lusaka Accords, which Ilunga is very proud of. This lie precipitated a new round of very heated disruptions from the Congolese present, especially those from the Kivus.

In justifying his disgusting "rebellion" and the war his forces have caused in Congo, Ilunga said that the Congolese people wanted to change the Kabila regime and the system, but they did not want war. But thanks to the fact that the RCD had "taken up arms," they now had a chance--through the Lusaka accords--to change the system and get rid of Kabila. Without the war, there would be no Lusaka accords, and no support from the international community.

When asked if political parties are permitted to operate in the RCD-controlled territory, which Ilunga claimed is one-third of the Congo, the translator mistranslated the question as, "Will political parties be permitted to operate," which then sparked new complaints against him from the floor--all of which were ruled out of order.

When asked if the Rwandan Hutu rebels who are disarmed would be permitted then to live in the Congo peacefully, Ilunga had this to say: "Those Hutu rebels who are convicted of genocide, will then have to return to their country and face trial." Conviction, and then trial? This is not reassuring.

When asked how the RCD would deal with the Kivus, Ilunga said that the Kivu provinces did not deserve "special treatment" and that the "local problems would have to be dealt with"--that is, killed.

This last answer resulted in absolute mayhem in the room, and the seminar broke down, with members of the audience coming close to blows. Those in the room who were denouncing Ilunga were strongarmed by Smith's cohorts (not the young staff members), but those who were screaming back in Ilunga's defense received no reprimand, including one who nearly hit this reporter in the face in his zeal to point the finger against "a Hutu," as he derided his opponent.