

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 government of the Democratic Republic of Congo should urgently investigate and prosecute senior army officials allegedly involved or complicit in rampant sexual crimes against women and girls, as part of its efforts to combat sexual violence, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Human Rights Watch also called for a series of other actions to prevent sexual violence during conflict in Congo.
The 62-page report, "Soldiers Who Rape, Commanders Who Condone: Sexual Violence and Military Reform in the Democratic Republic of Congo," documents persistent sexual violence by the army, and the limited impact of government and donor efforts to address the problem. The report looks closely at the conduct of the army's 14th brigade as an example of the wider problem of sexual violence by soldiers. The brigade has been implicated in many acts of sexual violence in North and South Kivu provinces, often in the context of massive looting and other attacks on civilians. Despite ample information about the situation, military, political, and judicial authorities have failed to take decisive action to prevent rape.
"We have seen progress in the prosecution of ordinary soldiers for sexual violence," said Juliane Kippenberg, Africa researcher for Human Rights Watch's Children's Rights Division. "But senior army officers continue to be untouched. Their own crimes and their command responsibility for the crimes of their soldiers must be investigated and held to account."
During 2008, the United Nations registered 7,703 cases of sexual violence by the army, rebels, and other actors in the Kivus, in eastern Congo where the army has been fighting various rebel groups. The majority of the victims were girls. Military courts in Kivu convicted 27 soldiers of crimes of sexual violence during 2008. In March 2009, 11 soldiers were convicted on charges of rape as a crime against humanity in Walikale, North Kivu.
But the most senior officer convicted of crimes of sexual violence in the region was a captain - no colonel or general has been prosecuted for rape, and no officer has been prosecuted for committing or condoning sexual violence under his command. On May 7, 2009, Congolese military justice officials arrested Colonel Ndayanbaje Kipanga, accused of raping four girls in Rutshuru, North Kivu. While this could have been a landmark case in holding high-level commanders to account for rape, Colonel Kipanga escaped two days after his arrest due to lax detention procedures.
To end sexual violence by the army, the government should create a vetting mechanism to remove abusive officers from the army, establish a strict chain of command, improve living conditions and salaries for soldiers, and strengthen the military justice system, Human Rights Watch said.
Human Rights Watch also called on the government to consider establishing a "mixed chamber," staffed by Congolese and international judges and prosecutors, to help overcome the weaknesses of the country's justice system. The special chamber would operate within existing national courts and prosecute military and civilian leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including sexual crimes, beyond the few cases that will be tried by the International Criminal Court. President Joseph Kabila, in a meeting with Human Rights Watch on July 2, proposed the idea of a mixed court with a similar mandate.
Sexual violence by the army is widespread despite efforts by the Congolese government and international community to end it. President Kabila's wife, Olive Lemba Kabila, in 2007 opened a nationwide campaign against sexual violence. In early July 2009, the government publicly recognized that a policy of "zero tolerance" to human rights violations by the army has become necessary following intense criticism by international groups, including Human Rights Watch. The Congolese army sent out instructions to all troops that protecting the population is their duty, and warning that rape and other crimes against civilians will be punished.
"Zero tolerance for rape is a noble aim, but it's meaningless if the government doesn't prosecute commanders most responsible for rape," Kippenberg said. "The Congolese government, the UN, and others have done a lot to support the victims of sexual violence, but less to end the permissive atmosphere that causes it."
In March 2009, the UN Mission in Congo (MONUC) developed a comprehensive strategy to combat sexual violence, which the government endorsed. As part of the UN efforts, Security Council members, during their visit to Congo on May 18 and 19, handed President Kabila a list of five senior army officers accused of rape and asked the president to take action. To date, none have been arrested.
The United Nations, the European Union, and other donors have provided assistance to Congo for military reform, including army training on international humanitarian law and help with improving the command structure. They also provide crucial support to the country's justice institutions, including the military justice system.
"Reforming the security sector, in particular the army, is a top priority for international donors, but reforms so far have achieved shockingly little in reducing sexual violence against women and girls," said Kippenberg. "Both the Congolese government and its international partners need to turn their good intentions on ending rape into concrete actions that bring results."
The Security Council plans to hold an open debate in August 2009 on how to carry out Resolution 1820 on sexual violence in conflict, adopted in June 2008. The resolution spells out concrete obligations of individual countries and UN entities to prevent and punish sexual violence when it is used as a weapon of war.
Human Rights Watch called upon the Security Council to use Resolution 1820 to initiate tough measures against governments and armed groups that commit sexual violence in Congo and elsewhere. These should include funding benchmarks, measures such as travel bans against responsible individuals, sanctions, and refusing UN cooperation with abusive parties. Human Rights Watch also called for the creation of a special envoy or representative on women, peace, and security to serve as a high-level advocate and coordinator for these efforts.
Background
UN agencies estimate that 65 percent of the victims of sexual violence in 2008 were children, the majority adolescent girls. Girls who are raped may suffer especially serious injuries, have difficulty finding a partner, drop out of school, be rejected by their families, or have to raise a child born from rape.
Sexual violence has been widespread and systematic in Congo over the last 15 years, with over a dozen armed groups using rape to terrorize, punish, and control civilians. The Congolese army, because of its sheer size and geographical spread across the country, is the single largest perpetrator of sexual violence. Since January 2009, when the army began a campaign against the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) - a Rwandan Hutu armed group - rape cases have doubled or tripled in North and South Kivu provinces of eastern Congo, according to information collected by Human Rights Watch. Perpetrators of sexual violence include the Congolese army, the FDLR, and Congolese rebel groups.
Witness Accounts
"I was just coming back from the river to fetch water.... Two soldiers came up to me and told me that if I refuse to sleep with them, they will kill me. They beat me and ripped my clothes. One of the soldiers raped me... My parents spoke to a commander and he said that his soldiers do not rape, and that I am lying. I recognized the two soldiers, and I know that one of them is called Edouard."
- 15-year-old girl, Minova, South Kivu, March 2009
"I had gone to the fields to find potatoes. I was returning to the house. Then I saw soldiers coming toward me. They asked what I was doing in the fields. They said I could choose: give them food or become their wife. I said to take the food. They refused and took [raped] me, then they took the food anyway. They were two soldiers of the 14th brigade, with purple epaulettes and a solid color uniform. When the rape happened, there had been fighting and insecurity. The 14th brigade had fought CNDP [National Congress for the Defense of the People ] that same day."
- 18-year-old woman, Sake, North Kivu, March 2009 (17 years old at the time of the rape)
"We were three young women and we were on our way to Cirunga.... They [the soldiers] raped us and dragged us to their camp, which was not far away. I stayed there for one month, under constant supervision.... There was no conversation between us, he had sex with me at any moment, when he felt like it, and with a lot of violence. I spent my days crying. I begged God to free me from this hell."
- 23-year-old woman, Kabare, South Kivu, April 2009
"One evening some soldiers came to attack us. This was in February or March 2008. They said they would kill our father. The soldiers were angry with my dad because he had stopped them from cutting down an avocado tree [as firewood].... We stayed in the living room. Two soldiers raped my bigger sister. When he had finished, he injured her with a knife at the eye, and he did the same with my brother.... Then they left. My mother brews beer and they took the money she had earned from that."
- 13-year-old girl, Kabare, South Kivu, April 2009
"I was on my way back from Bagira. I met a group of girls and we walked together. We encountered a group of soldiers. It was around 6:30 p.m. and dark. Those who had the strength ran away. The soldiers caught two girls and raped them. They were about 14 or 15 years old. I fled and heard the screams of the girls. People made loud noise so the soldiers ran away. The girls cried all the way home. There have been no judicial investigations."
- Teacher, Kabare, South Kivu, April 2009
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.
"ICE abductions of noncitizen journalists take the reporters best equipped to cover immigration enforcement off the beat."
Press freedom groups on Friday were calling for the immediate release of Estefany Rodríguez, a journalist with Nashville Noticias and Univision 42 Nashville, after she was detained by federal immigration agents while traveling in her marked press vehicle.
The Freedom of the Press Foundation said it was not yet clear whether Rodríguez was detained "in retaliation for her reporting" on US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) mass detention and deportation operation under President Donald Trump.
"But we certainly wouldn't be surprised," said the group in a statement on social media. "ICE abductions of noncitizen journalists take the reporters best equipped to cover immigration enforcement off the beat."
Rodríguez was with her husband, a US citizen, on Wednesday when she was arrested outside a gym. She was in a car marked with the Nashville Noticias logo when several other vehicles surrounded her, the outlet said in a statement Friday.
"Several men got out and demanded that our colleague be taken into custody for reasons that the legal team will specify at a later date," said Nashville Noticias. "Estefany Rodríguez was taken to a detention center."
Pablo Manríquez of Migrant Insider reported Friday that Rodríguez had been taken to the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center, "a facility infamous for solitary confinement and sexual abuse by guards against detainees."
Nashville Banner reported that Rodríguez arrived in the US in 2021 on a tourist visa and then applied for political asylum. Her lawyer, Joel Coxander, told the outlet that Rodríguez had reported on armed groups in her native Colombia and had received threats for doing so, leading her to file at least one police report before coming to the US. After getting married, the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) reported, Rodríguez "filed for permission to adjust her status to that of a lawful permanent resident."
She had never had an interaction with ICE until January 8, Nashville Banner reported, when she received a G-56 "call-in" letter asking her to come in to a local ICE office for "processing and additional information" on January 26.
Coxander told Nashville Banner that the letter advised Rodríguez to come to a meeting to "help ensure the best outcome for your case." She was also told she would receive a Notice to Appear (NTA) at the meeting, an official document initiating an immigration court case.
The local office was closed on January 26 due to inclement weather, and a makeup appointment was scheduled for February 25.
Media and an associate of Coxander's went to the ICE office two days before the rescheduled appointment to confirm whether Rodríguez had to go to the meeting and ask if the NTA could simply be sent to her attorneys. They were told no appointment was in the system for Rodríguez and a third appointment was scheduled for March 17.
Nine days later, Rodríguez was arrested, with ICE agents presenting the NTA rather than a warrant after they surrounded her car.
An ICE officer at the local office told Coxander's associate after Rodríguez was detained that she had been arrested because she was considered a "flight risk" because she had "missed" two meetings.
“She’s being told, ‘We’re holding it against you that you didn’t do this thing we told you you didn’t have to do,” Coxander told Nashville Banner. “They’re saying, ‘Hey, you didn’t show up to this invitation letter, so you’re a full flight risk.’”
Rodríguez has covered ICE's operations in Nashville. CJR reported that on Tuesday, the day before she was arrested, Rodríguez "reported from the parking lot of a residential complex where three ICE agents detained a man believed to be of Venezuelan origin."
Her arrest comes weeks after federal agents arrested journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort, accusing the two US citizens of conspiring with organizers to disrupt a church service at a protest they were covering. Last June, an Emmy-winning reporter named Mario Guevara was arrested and held for more than 100 days before being deported. His deportation "is believed to be the first case of a journalist being removed from the US in retaliation for their work," wrote CJR's Carolina Abbott Galvão.
The Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition said Rodríguez is a "beloved community member and trusted journalist in the community."
"It’s not lost on us that as a reporter, Estefany honestly and courageously told real stories about the harms caused by ICE and the people they targeted and detained," said the group.
Media Action Plan, a Canada-based press freedom group, said Rodríguez's arrest "is another attack on the free press."
Rodríguez's husband set up a GoFundMe for the family, which also includes a young daughter. The fundraiser had raised nearly $9,000 as of Friday afternoon.
“The last time a country ‘unconditionally surrendered’ to the US was after we dropped atomic bombs on Japan,” noted one foreign policy scholar.
President Donald Trump’s demand for an ‘unconditional surrender” from Iran is raising fears that the massive military campaign he unleashed this past weekend will turn into an unmitigated disaster, potentially unseen since the Second World War.
“There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,” the president wrote Friday morning on Truth Social. “After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, explained how unprecedented this demand was.
"The invasion and occupation of Iraq and replacing the Taliban with the Taliban after 20 years in Afghanistan were disastrous enough without seeking their formal surrender,” he said.
Each of those conflicts entailed the deployment of more than a million US soldiers and dragged on for years, costing hundreds of thousands of lives.
“The last time a country ‘unconditionally surrendered’ to the US was after we dropped atomic bombs on Japan,” Williams added.
With each passing day, the Trump administration has seemed to extend its projections for the scope and duration of its regime-change campaign in Iran.
Last Saturday, the first day of “Operation Epic Fury,” which killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Trump projected that the war would be over in “four weeks or less.” The next day, he adjusted that to say it could go on for “four to five” weeks, or perhaps “much longer.”
By Wednesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the war could drag on for as long as “eight weeks.” That same day, Politico reported that US Central Command (CENTCOM) had requested additional intelligence officers for its Tampa headquarters to support Iran operations for “at least 100 days but likely through September.”
According to data analyzed by the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), part of a US-based human rights monitor for Iran, at least 1,168 civilians have been killed in the US-Israeli war against Iran, where Hegseth boasted earlier this week that the US is raining down “death and destruction from the sky all day long.”
Investigations have revealed that the deadly bombing of a girls' school, which killed at least 175 people last weekend, mostly children, was "likely" carried out by the US, and several other schools have also been attacked.Following retaliation from the Iranian-aligned militia Hezbollah, Israel has launched a new onslaught into Lebanon. This week, the Israeli military ordered more than half a million people to flee their homes immediately and has pounded Beirut and other areas with airstrikes, killing more than 200 as of Friday, according to the Lebanese health ministry.
Trump reportedly began the war expecting a swift and painless display of overwhelming force akin to his abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. But Iran has mounted a fearsome retaliation that has hit US bases and other infrastructure in several of the wealthy Persian Gulf states aligned with the US and Israel, killing at least six American troops.
"Trump demands Iran's unconditional surrender," said Sina Toosi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy. "Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, global economic costs are rapidly mounting, Iranian missile and drone strikes continue, several US [missile defense] and radar facilities have been hit, interceptors are being drained, and Israeli air defenses are showing strain."
"Inside Iran, there are no signs of regime disintegration or unrest. The Islamic Republic’s base, and beyond it, continues to be mobilized in the streets across the country while officials assert they are prepared for a long war," he continued. "Gulf allies haven’t joined in attacking Iran and appear more angry that Trump launched this war against their wishes."
"The reality on the ground," Toosi said, "looks nothing like the fantasy seemingly in Trump's head and being sold by some in Washington."
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that Trump’s demand for an unconditional surrender suggests that rather than seeking an offramp, he is retreating further into delusion about the ease with which the US can force Iran to capitulate.
“He was lulled into believing that Iranian surrender is in the cards,” Parsi said. “It isn’t.”
Parsi said Trump rejected diplomatic solutions, including a deal mediated by Oman just before the attack began, under which Iran had agreed to stop stockpiling enriched uranium and degrade what it has to the point where it could not be used for a nuclear weapon.
“The false lure of surrender,” he said, “is why his war is turning into a disaster.”
"Medicare for All, or endless foreign wars?" asked Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner. "Anyone in the House or Senate giving the wrong answer should lose their seat."
The daily price tag of US President Donald Trump's illegal war on Iran would be enough to cover the daily costs of federal nutrition assistance for more than 40 million Americans, as well as daily Medicaid costs for the roughly 16 million people expected to lose health coverage due to the Republican budget package that Trump signed into law last year.
That's according to an analysis published Thursday by the National Priorities Project (NPP), which noted that—on an annual basis—the estimated $1 billion-per-day cost of the US war on Iran is "higher than the appropriated budget of any federal agency except the Pentagon itself."
"That money could cover the things we need here at home," wrote NPP's Alliyah Lusuegro and Lindsay Koshgarian. "The tradeoff is clear: the Trump administration—backed by several members of Congress—is cutting healthcare and food assistance for millions of families while spending $1 billion a day on this emerging war."
"The question isn’t whether the money exists—it's what we choose to spend it on," they wrote.
In a social media post on Friday, Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner—a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars—posed what he characterized as a "simple question" to members of Congress: "Medicare for All, or endless foreign wars?"
"Anyone in the House or Senate giving the wrong answer," Platner added, "should lose their seat."
"The cost of the war in Iraq ended up being almost $3 trillion. This could be astronomical, easily.”
The Pentagon's early estimate of the Iran war's cost was first reported by Atlantic journalist Nancy Youssef, who cited an unnamed congressional official.
In a separate analysis released earlier this week, the Center for Strategic and International Studies put the cost of the first 100 hours of the Iran war at $3.7 billion, or $891.4 million per day. The Pentagon is reportedly planning to ask Congress to approve at least $50 billion in supplemental funding for the war, a historically unpopular assault that lawmakers did not authorize.
“Without support from the American people, Donald Trump led the country into a reckless war with Iran that has taken the lives of six service members and injured several others," said Kendall Witmer, rapid response director for the Democratic National Committee. "Now, the White House is scrambling to come up with a plan as the cost of Trump’s war skyrockets. Working families are already struggling with soaring prices and a hollowed-out job market—they can't afford Trump’s war of choice."
On Thursday, Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) asked the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to conduct a thorough analysis of the financial costs of the Iran war, including scenarios in which the assault drags on for more than five weeks and the US launches a ground invasion.
“Taxpayers deserve a nonpartisan estimate of the financial and economic impact of President Trump’s reckless war in Iran that has already led to the tragic deaths of American servicemembers," said Boyle. "American families don’t want billions of dollars wasted on an unnecessary war—they want lower costs and affordable healthcare.”
Koshgarian of NPP told CNN that the costs of war are "highly unpredictable, and so we won’t know the cost of it until it’s over."
"The cost of the war in Iraq ended up being almost $3 trillion,” Koshgarian said. “This could be astronomical, easily.”