The March 23 Movement (M23) has expressed strong disapproval of the African Union’s (AU) condemnation of its recent drone operation at Kisangani Airport in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The armed group, in a statement issued on Thursday, labeled the AU’s stance as unjust and biased, further accusing the continental body of failing to address what it sees as the true provocations in the region. The group defended its military actions, asserting that the airstrike on Kisangani was a legitimate operation aimed at neutralizing a military threat.
M23’s Response to AU’s Position
Benjamin Mbonimpa, the Permanent Secretary of the M23, articulated the group’s discontent with the AU’s reaction, which condemned the drone strike, calling it an attack on civilian infrastructure. Mbonimpa questioned why the AU, led by Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, did not denounce the numerous bombings carried out by the Kinshasa regime, which M23 claims have targeted both military and civilian positions, including schools, hospitals, and churches in various areas of the DRC. He accused the AU of being silent on the use of drones by government forces, which he said had intensified civilian suffering in several regions of the country, particularly since January 2026.
The group pointed out that since January 22, 2026, government forces have reportedly launched a series of drone strikes on several locations, including Minembwe, Twangiza, and Katogota, among others. Mbonimpa accused foreign mercenaries of piloting the drones on behalf of the Kinshasa government. According to M23, these drones have consistently attacked both military and civilian sites, contributing to a growing humanitarian crisis.
Justifying the Kisangani Drone Strike
The M23 defense of the Kisangani strike centered around its claim that the operation specifically targeted military infrastructure rather than civilian areas. Mbonimpa stated that the airport in Kisangani, which the AU referred to as civilian infrastructure, was in fact a critical military hub for the Kinshasa government, heavily involved in the coordination of attacks on both civilians and M23 positions.
Mbonimpa emphasized that the operation aimed at neutralizing the drones posed no harm to civilians and was intended to protect innocent populations from further harm. “The operation was a necessary step to neutralize drones targeting military assets and to safeguard civilian lives,” Mbonimpa affirmed, further noting that the strike was in line with the ceasefire provisions laid out in the Doha Agreement.
In contrast to the AU’s view, which suggested the strike was an act of terrorism, M23 presented a different perspective, insisting that their military actions were driven by the need to defend their territory and protect civilians from further drone attacks. The group’s narrative highlighted the ongoing pattern of airstrikes by government forces on civilian infrastructure, which they argued should be the focus of the AU’s attention.
Accusations Against the Kinshasa Government
Mbonimpa also criticized the Kinshasa government for its failure to protect civilians and adequately secure military installations. He claimed that the government’s negligence in guarding military equipment at airports had made it vulnerable to attacks, justifying M23’s actions. According to the group, the strike on Kisangani was a necessary measure to disrupt military operations targeting both their positions and civilian areas.
He further stated that the M23 would not tolerate attacks on civilians and would continue to take action against those who directly or indirectly contribute to these attacks. “We will never sit idly by while innocent civilians are systematically targeted,” Mbonimpa declared, reinforcing the group’s commitment to military defense in response to what it perceives as unlawful aggression by the Kinshasa regime.
The Role of the African Union in Conflict Resolution
While M23 has criticized the AU’s condemnation, it also reiterated its commitment to a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Mbonimpa called on the AU to adopt a more balanced and fact-based approach to the situation. He emphasized that impartiality and a clear understanding of the events on the ground would be essential in resolving the conflict in the DRC.
“The African Union must take a responsible approach to this issue, one based on the realities on the ground,” he said. “Only through such an approach can we hope for a just and lasting peace.”
The M23 statement highlighted the group’s desire for peace while also defending its military actions as a means of protecting its people and territory from external threats. Despite the escalating tensions and recent military actions, Mbonimpa stressed that M23 remains committed to finding a negotiated solution to the ongoing conflict, urging the AU to support this effort through constructive dialogue.
The Broader Context of the DRC’s Struggle
The ongoing conflict in the DRC, particularly in the eastern regions, is a complex and multifaceted issue, with various armed groups, including M23, engaged in battles against government forces. The conflict has resulted in significant loss of life and displacement, with civilians often caught in the crossfire of the violence. The DRC government has faced repeated criticism for its handling of the crisis, particularly in its dealings with armed groups and the use of foreign mercenaries.
In the midst of this turmoil, the African Union has been called upon to take a more active role in mediating the conflict and fostering peace. However, the AU’s approach has often been criticized for its lack of effectiveness in addressing the root causes of the conflict, including ethnic tensions, political instability, and the exploitation of natural resources in the region.
The International Dimension of the Conflict
The international community has been closely monitoring the situation in the DRC, with concerns over the involvement of foreign powers in the conflict. M23’s accusations regarding the use of foreign mercenaries highlight the increasing international dimension of the war, with various countries and private military contractors reportedly involved in supporting one side or another.
The ongoing conflict has drawn attention to the broader issue of foreign intervention in African conflicts, with many observers calling for greater accountability and transparency in the role of external actors. The DRC’s struggle, particularly in the eastern provinces, has become a focal point for debates about sovereignty, foreign influence, and the responsibility of international organizations like the AU to intervene in such crises.
