[GreatLakesEye] A day after the fall of Uvira to the AFC/M23 rebellion, on December 09, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported that more than 74 civilians had been killed, 83 wounded, and thousands had crossed borders into Burundi and Rwanda following clashes between Congolese forces and the rebels since December 2. The source of this information was Radio Okapi.
From New York, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told journalists that civilians in South Kivu were facing emergency levels of food insecurity after the UN World Food Programme suspended food assistance. He said civilians “are sharing the last of their food with displaced people.”
Haq warned that the DRC Humanitarian Response Plan was only 22 percent funded, “leaving a gap of nearly $2 billion.” He added that in Burundi, less than $33 million had been mobilized against a requirement of almost $77 million to support new arrivals.
Hundreds of miles away from Uvira, within a single day, the so-called humanitarian actors had precise figures on deaths, injuries, displacement, and the exact amount of money required. How can such detailed numbers be produced with no individual having set foot in areas under rebel control?
Human Rights Watch and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) issued a joint statement from their headquarters on December 12 describing a devastating situation. They claimed that “even before the fall of Uvira, violence had continued to increase, causing the displacement of 5.7 million people, 90% of whom are in North Kivu, South Kivu, and Ituri.”
However, in Goma, Bukavu, and other territories controlled by AFC/M23, daily life tells a different story. Schools have resumed after interruptions, hospitals are functioning, roads are being built, and businesses continue to operate. Yet international “rights watchdogs” release alarming updates with striking regularity, reports of massacres, mass rape, and displacement figures running into the millions.
To the outside world, these reports are presented as moral advocacy for suffering civilians. In reality, they increasingly resemble a business model rather than a neutral effort to document facts because their survival depends on visibility, media attention, and how relevant donors consider their findings. Yet, these reports shape global media narratives and diplomatic pressure.
More at the link