

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The rebel Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR)
brutally slaughtered at least 100 Congolese civilians in the Kivu
provinces of eastern Democratic Republic of Congo between January 20
and February 8, 2009, Human Rights Watch said today.
Human Rights Watch researchers interviewed dozens of victims and
witnesses who recently arrived from neighboring areas of Ufamandu and
Walowaluanda (North Kivu province) and from Ziralo (South Kivu
province) at displaced persons camps near Goma, the capital of North
Kivu. Their accounts are the first reports of killings of civilians by
the FDLR since joint operations between Rwandan Defense Forces and the
Congolese army against the group began on January 20. Some of the
civilians died during the fighting between these forces.
"The FDLR have a very ugly past, but we haven't seen this level of
violence in years," said Anneke Van Woudenberg, senior researcher in
the Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "We've documented many
abuses by FDLR forces, but these are killings of ghastly proportions."
The joint military operations are intended to dismantle Rwandan
armed groups that have been present in eastern Congo since 1994. Some
leaders of the FDLR are accused of having participated in the 1994
Rwandan genocide.
As Rwandan and Congolese coalition forces advanced toward the FDLR's
former headquarters at Kibua, in Ufamandu, North Kivu, the FDLR
abducted scores of local residents from neighboring villages and took
them to their camp, apparently intending to use them as human shields
against the impending attack. Witnesses said that when coalition forces
attacked Kibua on January 27, the trapped civilians tried to flee. The
FDLR hacked many civilians to death and others died in the crossfire.
One witness at Kibua saw FDLR combatants kill at least seven people,
including a pregnant woman, whose womb was slit open. Another saw an
FDLR combatant batter a 10-year-old girl to death against a brick wall.
As the FDLR fled the military confrontation, they abducted dozens of civilians, forcing them to carry their goods.
In Remeka village in Ufamandu, the FDLR rebels called a meeting at
which they accused the population, local leaders and the Mai Mai armed
group with whom they had been allied, of having betrayed them. A local
resident present at the meeting said the FDLR told residents they would
not be allowed to leave and that they were "sharpening their spears and
machetes." Another said, "The FDLR told us that if they were shot at by
anyone that they would hold us responsible and kill us."
Following the meeting, the FDLR erected barriers to prevent people
from fleeing. When some tried to flee, the FDLR attacked them, killing
dozens with guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and machetes. "As I ran, I
saw bodies everywhere - men, women and children," said one witness.
"They had all been killed by the FDLR."
FDLR combatants also raped more than a dozen women whom they accused
of having joined the government side against them. For instance, in
southern Masisi territory (North Kivu), on January 27, FDLR combatants
raped and killed a woman and then raped her 9-year-old daughter.
The message given at the Remeka meeting was repeated in a letter
sent from the FDLR to the governor of South Kivu in early February. In
the letter, the group warned that if the local population collaborated
with the Rwandan army they would be considered the FDLR's "mortal
enemy" and treated as a "belligerent party."
Following the attacks in Ufamandu, FDLR forces fled through
Walowaluanda in Walikale territory to the Ziralo region in South Kivu,
where they continued to kill civilians. A woman from Lulere village in
Ziralo told Human Rights Watch that the FDLR said they would not leave
Congo without "first exterminating the Congolese people." The FDLR
forces then killed her 73-year-old father and 80-year-old uncle by
smashing their skulls with small hoes.
Witnesses told Human Rights Watch that FDLR forces abducted at least
50 civilians in early February in Lulere, Mianda, Kalingita, Katale,
and Kirambo villages, on the border between North and South Kivu
provinces. They were reportedly taken to Kinono forest in Ziralo, South
Kivu. Their fate is unknown.
The Congolese government nominally leads the joint operations
against the FDLR, but the coalition troops that attacked the FDLR in
Ufamandu were largely soldiers from the Rwandan Defense Forces. These
Rwandan soldiers were allegedly responsible for having raped several
women since the start of operations against the FDLR.
"The Tutsi [Rwandan] soldiers accused me of being the wife of an
FDLR combatant, just because I'm Hutu," said one woman who was raped by
a Rwandan army soldier in Remeka. "After they raped me, they burned my
house, saying it was the house of an FDLR. I was pregnant, but there's
no more movement in my womb. I think I have lost my first child."
The United Nations Mission in Congo, MONUC, has a mandate to protect
civilians and provides logistical support to the Congolese army, but it
was not involved in planning the joint operation. Although the
coalition forces say they are open to sharing information with MONUC
about their campaign, such information-sharing has been scant and too
late to permit the UN forces to be able to plan for providing the
needed protection.
In November 2008, the UN Security Council authorized an additional
3,000 troops for the mission to help carry out its mandate to protect
civilians. None of these additional troops have yet arrived.
International humanitarian law - the laws of war - applies to both
states and non-state armed groups. Parties to a conflict must take all
feasible steps to minimize harm to the civilian population, including
permitting civilians to flee to safer areas. The laws of war prohibit
murder, rape and abductions. Those who commit such acts are responsible
for war crimes.
"Protection of civilians needs to be given a top priority in the
military operations to help prevent, once again, Congolese civilians
paying the highest price," said Van Woudenberg.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
The president's decision means the US "will not illegally intercept and seize the entirely legal and legitimate sovereign trade in oil," said one observer.
President Donald Trump said Sunday that his administration would let a Russia-owned tanker carrying an estimated 730,000 barrels of oil to reach Cuba, loosening the illegal fuel blockade that has intensified the island's already-grave humanitarian crisis.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said that "if a country wants to send some oil into Cuba right now, I have no problem," backing off his previous threat to tariff any nation that supplied the besieged island with fuel. Cuba has not received any oil imports since January 9, sparking nationwide blackouts and food shortages and leaving hospitals without critical supplies—with deadly consequences for patients.
Trump insisted that the oil on the Russian tanker—which experts say is enough to buy Cuba at least several weeks of energy—is "not going to have an impact," declaring, "Cuba is finished."
"They have a bad regime, and they have very bad and corrupt leadership," added Trump, who presides over what analysts have deemed the most corrupt administration in US history. "Whether or not they get a boat of oil is not going to matter."
Reporter: There's a report that the US is going to let a Russian oil tanker go to Cuba?
Trump: If a country wants to send some oil into Cuba, I have no problem with that.
Reporter: Do you worry that that helps Putin?
Trump: It doesn’t help him. He loses one boatload of oil.… pic.twitter.com/8Vh6gHwaxs
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 30, 2026
Trump's comments came after The New York Times reported that, "barring orders instructing it otherwise," the US Coast Guard would not intercept the Russian tanker as it approached Cuba.
The Russian vessel, known as the Anatoly Kolodkin, is expected to reach the island by Monday night, providing some reprieve to a nation whose economy has been strangled by unlawful US economic warfare for decades. In recent days, an international convoy of activists has delivered tons of food, medicine, and other aid to the island, but the shipments are a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.
Michael Gallant, a member of the Progressive International Secretariat, welcomed news that the US is allowing the Russian tanker to reach Cuba as "very good news"—but said Trump's decision is hardly deserving of praise.
Very good news. “The US will allow,” of course, means “will not illegally intercept and seize the entirely legal and legitimate sovereign trade in oil” https://t.co/YF2RRIXC2S
— Michael Galant (@michael_galant) March 29, 2026
Trump imposed the fuel blockade in January, absurdly characterizing Cuba as an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to US national security.
Earlier this month, Trump threatened to "take" Cuba by force, calling it a "very weakened nation." Trump's remarks prompted Cuba's president, Miguel Díaz-Canel, to vow "impregnable resistance" to any US attempt to seize the island. The Trump administration is reportedly seeking Díaz-Canel's removal as a necessary condition in talks with the Cuban government.
Trump's threats led Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) to introduce legislation last week that would prohibit the administration from using federal funds for any attack on Cuba without congressional authorization.
"Trump has started illegal regime change conflicts in Venezuela and Iran and is now threatening Cuba," Jayapal said in a statement. "These military attacks put our troops in danger, endanger innocent civilians, waste billions of taxpayer dollars, and are not what the American people want."
"Trump promised to end forever wars—he lied," Jayapal added. "Congress alone has the power to declare war, something Trump clearly does not respect. He has no plan to improve conditions for the Cuban people or promote democracy, and we must pass this legislation to block him from acting on a whim."
"This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war."
Pope Leo XIV used his Palm Sunday sermon to take what appears to be a shot at US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
In his sermon, excerpts of which he published on social media, the pope emphasized Christian teachings against violence while criticizing anyone who would invoke Jesus Christ to justify a war.
"This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war," Pope Leo said. "He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them."
The pope also encouraged followers to "raise our prayers to the Prince of Peace so that he may support people wounded by war and open concrete paths of reconciliation and peace."
While speaking at the Pentagon last week, Hegseth directly invoked Jesus when discussing the Trump administration's unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran.
Specifically, Hegseth offered up a prayer in which he asked God to give US soldiers "wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy," adding that "we ask these things with bold confidence in the mighty and powerful name of Jesus Christ."
Mother Jones contributing writer Alex Nguyen described the pope's sermon as a "rebuke" of Hegseth, whom he noted "has been open about his support for a Christian crusade" in the Middle East.
Pope Leo is not the only Catholic leader speaking against using Christian faith to justify wars of aggression. Two weeks ago, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, said "the abuse and manipulation of God’s name to justify this and any other war is the gravest sin we can commit at this time."
“War is first and foremost political and has very material interests, like most wars," Cardinal Pizzaballa added.
"Trump’s problem is that whatever the claims he might make about the damage to Iran’s nuclear and military capacity, which is substantial, the regime survives, the international economy has been severely disrupted, and the bills keep on coming in."
President Donald Trump is reportedly preparing to launch some kind of ground assault on Iran in the coming weeks, but one prominent military strategy expert believes he's heading straight for defeat.
The Washington Post on Saturday reported that the Pentagon is preparing for "weeks" of ground operations in Iran, which for the last month has disrupted global energy markets by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz in response to aerial assaults by the US and Israel.
The Post's sources revealed that "any potential ground operation would fall short of a full-scale invasion and could instead involve raids by a mixture of Special Operations forces and conventional infantry troops" that could be used to seize Kharg Island, a key Iranian oil export hub, or to search out and destroy weapons systems that could be used by the Iranians to target ships along the strait.
Michael Eisenstadt, director of the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told the Post that taking over Kharg Island would be a highly risky operation for American troops, even if initially successful.
“I just wouldn’t want to be in that small place with Iran’s ability to rain down drones and maybe artillery,” said Eisenstadt.
Eisenstadt's analysis was echoed by Ret. Gen. Joseph Votel, former head of US Central Command, who told ABC News that seizing and occupying Kharg Island would put US troops in a state of constant danger, warning they could be "very, very vulnerable" to drones and missiles launched from the shore.
Lawrence Freedman, professor emeritus of war studies at King's College London, believes that the president has already checkmated himself regardless of what shape any ground operation takes.
In an analysis published Sunday, Freedman declared Trump had run "out of options" for victory, as there have been no signs of the Iranian regime crumbling due to US-Israeli attacks.
Freedman wrote that Trump now "appears to inhabit an alternative reality," noting that "his utterances have become increasingly incoherent, with contradictory statements following quickly one after the other, and frankly delusional claims."
Trump's loan real option at this point, Freedman continued, would to simply declare that he had achieved an unprecedented victory and just walk away. But even in that case, wrote Freedman, "this would mean leaving behind a mess in the Gulf" with no guarantee that Iran would re-open the Strait of Hormuz.
"Success in war is judged not by damage caused but by political objectives realized," Freedman wrote in his conclusion. "Here the objective was regime change, or at least the emergence of a new compliant leader... Trump’s problem is that whatever the claims he might make about the damage to Iran’s nuclear and military capacity, which is substantial, the regime survives, the international economy has been severely disrupted, and the bills keep on coming in."