On June 27, 2025, a historic peace agreement was signed between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in Washington, brokered by the Trump administration. The significance of this event extends far beyond regional diplomacy. It marks a clear and calculated demonstration of what principled, interest-based American leadership can accomplish on the global stage. For decades, the eastern DRC has been a battleground for proxy conflict, mass displacement, and mineral exploitation. Now, for the first time in a generation, the path toward stability has been set, and the United States is leading the way.
This agreement is not symbolic. It is substantive, detailed, and backed by clear enforcement mechanisms. It commits both parties to cease support for non-state armed groups, mandates the disarmament and vetting of rebel forces, and establishes a joint security mechanism with U.S. and Qatari oversight. Within ninety days, a series of economic initiatives focused on hydropower, conservation, and mineral transparency is slated to begin. Refugee return and humanitarian access are prioritized, reflecting a rare fusion of strategic interest and human impact.
Why should this matter to us here at home? The answer lies in national interest, global competition, and the projection of disciplined power.
First, this agreement safeguards access to critical minerals essential to American industry and national defense. The DRC is the world’s leading source of cobalt, a resource central to everything from advanced batteries to aerospace components. At present, Chinese firms dominate the extraction and refinement process across the region, building de facto control over supply chains that affect both economic competitiveness and military readiness. Stabilizing eastern DRC and enabling transparent, U.S.-aligned investment is not simply an economic opportunity; it is a national security imperative.
Second, the deal serves as a strategic counterweight to Chinese influence across the African continent. For years, Beijing has deployed a transactional, extractive approach to African partnerships, offering infrastructure and aid in exchange for long-term resource rights and political leverage. By delivering a peace framework rooted in stability, development, and security-sector cooperation, the United States reasserts itself as the partner of choice—one that offers not exploitation, but sovereignty and growth. The geopolitical implications of this repositioning are profound.
Third, this agreement exemplifies a foreign policy model conservatives have long demanded: one grounded in realism, focused on outcomes, and aligned with core American values. It confronts atrocity without slipping into open-ended intervention. It asserts American interests without apologizing for them. It strengthens alliances while maintaining clarity of purpose. This is not nation-building; it is pure statecraft.
However, skepticism is warranted. Previous peace agreements between Rwanda and the DRC have collapsed under the weight of mistrust, competing interests, and international neglect. The M23 rebel group continues to control significant territory and remains a wildcard in the implementation process. Rwanda’s initial statements regarding troop withdrawals have been ambiguous, and the durability of this agreement will depend on verification, enforcement, and continued diplomatic pressure. Yet the structure of this deal, its defined timelines, oversight mechanisms, and phased benchmarks, offers a realistic chance at progress where others have failed.
Critics may also question whether American resources should be expended in Central Africa while domestic challenges remain acute. The reality is that strategic neglect has a cost. Failing to engage today risks far greater instability tomorrow. A region rich in critical minerals, situated along key geopolitical fault lines, and vulnerable to both Chinese exploitation and Islamist radicalization, cannot be ignored without consequence.
By October, key indicators of success should be measurable: a reduction in cross-border attacks, the redeployment of Rwandan forces, the initiation of economic projects, and the beginning of refugee repatriation. The Joint Oversight Committee must function as more than a bureaucratic formality. It must serve as an accountability mechanism that ensures both parties meet their commitments, with U.S. diplomats and observers actively shaping implementation.
This agreement also sends a broader message. It signals that the United States, when led with clarity and conviction, remains the indispensable global actor. It proves that America First does not mean America absent. It means America acting decisively where interests align, where leverage exists, and where outcomes can be secured without sacrificing lives or strategic focus.
This is what foreign policy should look like: strength without overreach, engagement without entanglement, compassion without naiveté. It is a model for conservative statecraft and a reminder that when America leads, peace becomes possible.