Democratic Republic of the Congo: Vote on a Draft Resolution Renewing the Sanctions Regime*
Tomorrow afternoon (29 June), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution renewing the 1533 Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) sanctions regime until 1 July 2027, and the mandate of the Group of Experts (GoE) assisting the 1533 DRC Sanctions Committee until 1 August 2027.
Background
On 5 June, the 1533 DRC Sanctions Committee held informal consultations to discuss the GoE’s final report—which was due by 15 June but was submitted ahead of schedule—and its recommendations. As Council members have yet to agree on the allocation of subsidiary body chairs, Colombia, the Security Council’s president in June, chaired the meeting.
According to an 18 June press release, Committee members expressed deep concern regarding the continued deterioration of the security and humanitarian situation in eastern DRC and urged all parties to fully comply with their obligations and implement relevant Security Council resolutions, including resolution 2773 of 21 February 2025—which, among other things, called for a permanent ceasefire in eastern DRC—and resolution 2808 of 19 December 2025, which last renewed the mandate of the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO).
It seems that France, the UK, and the US had proposed adding six individuals and two entities to the sanctions designation list in May. The proposal was under a no-objection procedure (NOP), but Russia apparently placed a hold on the proposal. Subsequently, on 2 June, the US imposed national sanctions on two of the individuals in the proposed list, who are senior commanders of the Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23) rebel group and the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda (FDLR), an ethnic Hutu armed group active in eastern DRC that was implicated in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda.
Previously, in March, the US also sanctioned the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) as an entity and four senior RDF officers for their alleged support to the M23 and its affiliates in eastern DRC. In April, the US imposed sanctions on former DRC President Joseph Kabila for his alleged support to the M23.
The DRC, which has been advocating for punitive measures against the M23 and Rwanda, has welcomed the US’ actions. However, the M23 reportedly questioned the US’ role as an impartial mediator in the peace process in light of the sanctions imposed on the M23 and not on any government leaders. In a 5 June press statement, Rwanda welcomed the US’ continued engagement under the Washington process, while also stating that the problems in eastern DRC cannot be solved through the selective application of the Washington Accords, which were agreed by the DRC and Rwanda in December 2025. On 25 June, the US announced new sanctions against the Gasabo Gold Refinery, a Rwandan company, for allegedly smuggling minerals from eastern DRC to Rwanda.
Negotiations on the Draft Resolution
France, the penholder on the DRC, shared an initial draft of the resolution with all Council members on 17 June and held a first round of negotiations on the following day (18 June). It then incorporated inputs and comments by Council members and circulated a revised text for another round of comments until 22 June. Subsequently, France made further revisions and placed the draft text under silence procedure until 24 June. However, the A3 members (the DRC, Liberia, and Somalia), China, and Russia broke silence over several aspects of the draft text. (This was the first time that the DRC had the opportunity to participate in negotiations on the situation in its country since becoming an elected Council member in January.) The penholder made additional revisions to accommodate their concerns and placed the text under a second silence procedure until 25 June. China and Russia broke silence again on one issue that was divisive during the negotiations. The penholder then made further changes to the draft text and put it under another silence procedure on Friday (26 June), which it passed on the following day (27 June). The text was then put in blue, to be voted on tomorrow (29 June).
The penholder introduced two new elements in the draft text. The first element concerned the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), a Ugandan armed group operating in eastern DRC. France suggested language referencing the links between the group and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) as well as proposed amendments to the ADF narrative summary and consolidated list entries to include “ISIL-DRC” and “the Islamic State-Central Africa Province (ISCAP)” as the group’s aliases. The second element was a proposed new designation criterion on obstructing the implementation of MONUSCO’s mandate.
Compared to the previous three years, the negotiations apparently required more substantive discussions among Council members. One of the apparent sticking points concerned the reference to the link between the ADF and ISIL. It seems that several Council members—including Bahrain, Denmark, Latvia, Panama, the UK, and the US—supported the inclusion of the reference, arguing that the link has been well documented and reported by the GoE. On the other hand, the A3 members, China, and Russia opposed the addition of this reference, maintaining that the proper way to address the issue is through the 1267/1989/2253 Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee.
In an attempt to find a compromise, the penholder removed from the third revised draft the operative paragraph which proposed amendments to the ADF narrative summary and consolidated list entries and replaced it with new language which expressed the Council’s intention to consider the reported links through the 1267/1989/2253 ISIL/Da’esh and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee. China and Russia nonetheless broke silence, insisting on their position. Taking into account the readiness expressed by the A3, China, and Russia to consider listing the ADF in the 1267/1989/2253 ISIL/Da’esh and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee, the penholder proposed another compromise in the fourth revised draft by adding a general preambular reference to the link between the ADF and international terrorist groups, which was acceptable to all Council members and was retained in the draft in blue.
Another issue requiring discussion was the new designation criterion proposed by the penholder, which several Council members apparently supported in light of the operational constraints facing MONUSCO in effectively carrying out its mandated tasks. However, it seems that the A3 members and Russia proposed focusing the criterion on armed groups to avoid ambiguity and creating precedent for other sanctions regimes. China apparently also sought clarifications on the specific acts that would constitute grounds for designation. To reach a compromise, the penholder proposed revised language which limits the focus to armed groups. As a result, the draft text in blue states that armed groups (individuals and entities) shall be designated by the 1533 DRC Sanctions Committee for “deliberate and grave obstruction of the implementation of MONUSCO’s mandate, including through denial of access, restrictions on freedom of movement, or interference with patrols and monitoring activities”.
During the negotiations, the US apparently proposed a new operative paragraph which requested the GoE to provide reporting on the production and trade of minerals illegally exploited in the region that fuel conflict, to investigate entities involved in the illicit supply chains, and to present opportunities to strengthen traceability. China, supported by Russia, apparently opposed the inclusion of this paragraph, underscoring the need to avoid placing disproportionate emphasis on the issue of natural resources and arguing that these issues should be addressed through other national, regional, and international frameworks.
Nonetheless, China apparently indicated its flexibility to consider a preambular paragraph which recalls the GoE’s relevant reporting on armed group activities related to the illegal exploitation of natural resources. As a compromise, the penholder removed the reference to natural resources from the operative section, while retaining the related preambular paragraph with revisions taking into account China’s suggestion. The draft text in blue therefore recognises the link between natural resources and conflict, including the illicit activities of armed groups operating in the DRC and the wider region. In this regard, it recalls the GoE’s reports on such activities and underscores the importance of efforts by regional states to strengthen transparency and traceability in natural resources exports.
Finally, it seems that there was discussion around references to the investigation into the March 2017 killing of two GoE members and four Congolese nationals who were accompanying them. (For background, see our 30 March 2017 What’s in Blue story.) Media reports indicate that, on 9 June, a Congolese military court sentenced Jean de Dieu Mambweni, an army colonel, to death over his involvement in the March 2017 incident.
Following comments from several Council members, the penholder added a new operative paragraph based on agreed language from past resolutions, which recalls the Secretary-General’s commitment to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice and stresses the importance of continued assistance to the Congolese authorities with the ongoing prosecution and national investigation, within existing resources.
Latvia apparently proposed language which called on the GoE, in consultation with national judicial authorities, to pursue investigative lines of inquiry aimed at identifying those responsible for planning, directing, or sponsoring the killing. One member apparently opposed this proposal, however. As a compromise, the draft text in blue retained only part of the proposed language, which underscores the need to continue efforts to bring all those involved, including by planning, directing, or sponsoring the killing, to justice, without assigning a specific role to the GoE in this regard.
_______________________________________________________________
**Post-script: On 29 June, the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2825, extending the 1533 Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) sanctions regime until 1 July 2027 and renewing the mandate of the Group of Experts assisting the work of the 1533 DRC Sanctions Committee until 1 August 2027.
