View Full Version : U.S./U.K. Allies Grab Congo Riches and Millions Die: 2001-03 UN Expert Reports

Paul Rigby
11-05-2008, 06:51 AM

U.S./U.K. Allies Grab Congo Riches and Millions Die: 2001-03 UN Expert Reports

By Prof. Peter Erlinder

Global Research, November 4, 2008

Once again, the suffering of African people caught up in a war that makes little sense to non-Africans has made the front pages in western media, as more than a million people have been displaced in the past week by re-newed fighting in the Eastern Congo. For most Americans who don’t pay much attention to the details of African history and politics, the humanitarian disaster in the Congo has exploded into public consciousness, as if the 25-year war to control Central Africa began only yesterday.

The "Congo story" Behind the Headlines

But, in fact, the human rights disaster that the people of the world are watching on our TV screens is just the most recent human tragedy in a 25 year struggle for economic and political dominance in Central Africa that has been raging since the decline and eventual collapse of the Soviet influence in Africa in the 1980’s and early 1990’s. A sad fact of the 20th Century is that, even after the end of formal "colonialism" in the mid-20th Century, ruling African elites in virtually every African nation have looked to one or more powerful "sponsors" in the developed world to gain or retain power. And, to grab the personal wealth that goes with political/military power in Africa.

In Africa, "government" is a well-accepted avenue for trained and educated African elites to get ahead economically, without having to immigrate to more developed nations outside of Africa. Few major private multi-national economic entities are based in Africa, and "para-statal" government monopolies or government-approved contracting with private foreign sources of capital from the developed world are the main sources of economic development in many African countries. The result is that political and military power is inevitably entwined with economic benefit for those who manage to achieve state-power whether by the ballot, or by force.

In addition, direct support from industrialized nations in the form of "aid" must be funneled through governmental agencies. And, even today, "donor income" from the industrialized world makes up a large portion of the budgets of nearly every African nation. And, after the end of support from the Soviet Bloc in about 1990, local leaders were forced to choose between Anglo-American aid and investment or from former colonial masters that comprise the EU countries, at least until China began developing economic relations with African nations within the past few years.

"Blood Diamonds," Leonardo DeCaprio’s recent film, makes the point that every lengthy war in Africa is possible only with support from foreign governments or private interests (or both)…..which necessarily have designs on African resources in return. And, so it is with the 25-year war for control of the riches of Central Africa, of which the humanitarian disaster in the Congo is the most recent example.

The recent British/French "diplomatic initiative" to discuss yet another ceasefire with Congo’s President Kabila and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, makes absolutely clear who the real protagonists are in this most recent eruption of the war in the Congo. It is now generally understood that the Congo "rebels" are closely-enough connected to Kagame’s Rwanda that it is more important to negotiate with him than with Gen. Laurent Nkunda, the titular leader of the Congolese-tutsi "rebel" army.

But, the connections between the suffering in the Congo and either Rwanda or Uganda are rarely discussed in mainstream media, least in the English-speaking world. And, to the extent we are informed about the reasons for the Congo War at all, we are told that Gen. Nkunda is at war "to protect the tutsi minority." That the continued fighting as something to do with the 1994 "Rwanda genocide." And, that "hutu genocidaires" have to be rooted out of the Eastern Congo to protect both Congolese "tutsis" and the territory of Rwanda, itself.

However, it has been more than 14 years since Kagame seized complete power in Rwanda, which means that anyone under 30 could not have been directly involved in the 1994 events in Rwanda that Kagame’s government calls the "Genocide". Today’s teenage combatants were either children or not yet born, when civilians-killed-civilians in Rwanda in 1994. At most, Gen Nkunda is fighting the "children of the genocidaires"…and the scope of the fighting as reached far beyond the limited areas near the Rwandan border where anti-government Rwandan-refugees (both tutsi and hutu) are actually located.

And, even without considering the wars in Uganda and Rwanda that lasted from 1981 to 1994, at least, there can be no dispute that the Congo war has been raging since 1996…which means that the war is not only inter-generational…but must be funded from outside Africa in a "Blood Diamonds"-like scenario….and it is.

Origins of the Congo War: 2001-03 UN Experts’ Reports

In fact, evidence has long existed that the war in the Eastern Congo, between 1996 and today, has little or nothing to do with "ethnicity" or capturing "genocidaires." Like "weapons of mass destruction" used to justify another war of aggression by the U.S. on Iraq.…."ethnic" and "response to the genocide" have been used by both Uganda and Rwanda to justify a war of aggression, waged for economic reasons, described in the UN Experts Reports. Not coincidentally, Uganda and Rwanda are two of the largest recipients of US and British economic and military assistance in Africa. Wars initiated by Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, have raged in Central Africa since Museveni’s 1981 invasion to seize power in Uganda, which the Red Cross reported had killed at least 300,000 civilians by the time he took power in 1986.

The real reasons for the ongoing war in the Congo is described in great detail in several United Nations Security Council Expert Reports, make clear that war and massive civilian deaths in the Eastern Congo since 1996 have little, if anything to do with "tribalism," "ethnicity," or even the "Rwanda genocide." But, rather, have everything to do with the rape of the Congo’s resources by the militaries of Rwanda and Uganda and their local surrogates.

According to three separate UN Security Council Reports, issued between 2001 and 2003, war on the Congo began when Uganda and Rwanda made common-cause with local Congolese leader Laurent Kabila, and other Congolese elites, to control the vast resources of the Eastern Congo in 1996. The UN Reports show that that since, the 1996 invasion and a second invasion in 1998, Rwanda and Uganda have become the major trading centers for diamonds, precious metals and other natural resources that are not found in either country.....but which exist in great quantities in the Congo. As of 2003, the UN Security Council Reports put the cost of civilian lives at some 3 million (the current estimate is more than 5 million lives….so far).

The Rwanda/Uganda Rape of the Congo Continues Today

For more than 3 decades, the "anti-Communist" credentials of the former Congolese Joseph Mobutu had protected him from western criticism during the Cold War, despite his brutal kleptocracy that had been matched only by vicious pre-independence colonial rule of Belgian King Leopold. But, after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s and Mobutu became politically expendable, Uganda/Rwanda-supported "Congolese rebels" replaced him with Laurent Kabila in 1997 and Kabila agreed to a treaty that split economic dominance of the Eastern Congo between Uganda and Rwanda in the areas adjacent to their own borders.

By 1998, however, Uganda and Rwanda invaded Eastern Congo again, after the new President Kabila began attempting to reclaim military and economic influence in the areas of his country controlled by Rwanda and Uganda. Unlike 1996, Kabila had made alliances with other African nations that opposed the foreign-supported aggression against the Congo and troops from Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia entered the war in support of the Kabila government. Despite a 1999 Lusaka peace treaty, which also provided for the creation of MONUC (UN Observer Mission in the Congo), the war continued. In 2000, while the U.S. media was distracted by the Bush/Gore campaign, the Uganda/Rwanda began vying for control over portions of the Congo and the long-standing alliance split over control of the resources of the Eastern Congo.

UN Experts: Decades-long Congo Resources Rape

By January 2001, this "first world war of Africa" had killed more than 3 million people, Laurent Kabila was assassinated and was replaced by his son, Joseph. For many years, the Rwandan government had claimed that its interests in the Congo was protection from "genocidaires" hiding in the Congo…but the falsity of this claim was exposed in July 2001, when the UN Security Council received its first preliminary report on the exploitation of Congo’s resources. The first, interim report documents the plunder of coffee, timber, diamonds, gold and "coltan" (the grey gold that is in every cell phone that can be found only in the Congo) by Rwandan and Ugandan forces in the areas each controlled.

Another more extensive report in October 2002 documented the seizure of banks, sugar refineries, mines and provides the names of local leaders and war-lords with ties to Uganda and Rwanda…as well as describing the ties between both "hutu" and "tutsi" Rwandans who were working together to enrich themselves, and their Rwandan and Ugandan sponsors, at the expense of the indigenous Congolese. And the October 2003 Security Council Report states:

"….The Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) still play an important but highly discreet role in the [RCD-Goma’s] operations…." And, that the Rwanda-linked network in the Eastern Congo had the objective of "…permanent, autonomous control over the territory of the eastern DRC…" (citing training operations and lines of communication to Kigali).

By 2008, the MONUC "peacekeeping-observer" mission has grown to 17,000 troops, the largest in UN history, but its Spanish military commander resigned last week "for personal reasons" after only a month in his post when Kagame/Nkunda troops over-ran Congolese military postsand war-torn Congolese began stoning UN forces for failing to protect them. But MONUC is the creation of the UN Security Council. But, U.S. and Britain have Security Council veto-power that can prevent more aggressive options, as also occurred during the Rwanda War in 1994, when the US/UK prevented UN-military opposition to Kagame and Museveni’s military adventures.

A History of Big Power-Central Africa Disinformation

Although the real reasons for the Congo War have been well-documented by UN Security Council sources, as well as the fact that US/UK surrogates are getting rich in the Congo, neither the United States nor Britain have much of an interest in helping critics and Human Right activists "connect the "dots" that link Yoweri Museveni/Kagame’s 1986 military-takeover of Uganda or Paul Kagame’s military-takeover of Rwanda in 1994, with the horror that has engulfed the Congo since the joint Rwanda/Uganda invasion of 1996. The indisputable evidence of the Museveni/Kagame/Nkunda "axis of evil" in Central Africa has rarely, if ever, seen the light of day.

After Museveni seized power in 1986, Uganda became, and remains, a major recipient of British aid to Africa, as well as the beneficiary of British military training and armaments. After Museveni took power, the CIA also established its major African electronic listening post in Kampala, Uganda’s capital. And, Kagame’s long-standing Pentagon ties can be traced to the 1980’s and he was actually had been receiving U.S. officer training in Ft. Leavenworth Kansas which he returned to Uganda, then Rwanda, to lead the 1990 invasion. His reputation in U.S. military circles remained intact when he seized power in 1994, during his first invasion of the Congo in 1996 AND during the 1998 second Congo invasion.

By the time of the 1996 Congo invasion, the Rwandan military had been receiving U.S. military training for at least two years (and perhaps more) and Kagame’s Pentagon ties had been established for at least ten years. Today Britain remains Uganda’s largest foreign patron. And, U.S. support as swelled the Rwandan army from 7,000 Belgian/French-trained troops under the previous government when Museveni/Kagame invaded in 1990, to an estimated 70,000 to 100,000 U.S.-trained and armed troops in 2007.

But, the mutually-beneficial relationships between the U.S. and Britain and their African surrogates goes both ways. Not only are Rwandan and Ugandan elites basking in the Congo’s stolen wealth, but "private contractors" from both countries are two of the largest contingents of military-mercenaries in Iraq and in Darfur, where the Chinese-supported Sudanese government has rejected US/UK investment and have been labeled "genocidaires" in a far less-bloody conflict than the Rwandan/Ugandan adventure the Congo. Ugandan troops are also part of the U.S.-Ethiopian "Christian" occupation of "Muslim" Somalia….which was the greatest humanitarian tragedy in Africa before last week…. when the Congo War disaster reached the headlines, again.

Casual visitors to Uganda and Rwanda can’t help but notice that both Central African countries are better off than their neighbors, both economically and in terms of social organization. Compared to other African countries that lack close relationships to wealthy sponsors, these two, small, densely-populated nations appear to be outposts of calm and relative prosperity on a continent. But, the fact is that the relative prosperity and calm in Museveni’s militarized Uganda and Kagame’s militarized Rwanda has come at the terrible price of more than 5 million Congolese lives, as documented by the UN Reports.

"Piercing the Veil" of Central Africa Disinformation

There is now no doubt that , when Ugandan Major Paul Kagame invaded Rwanda in 1990, he was accompanied by nearly 25% of the Ugandan army and Ugandan complicity has been confirmed by formerly confidential US and UN files at the UN Tribunal for Rwanda. And, like other African wars, the cost of supporting the Museveni/Kagame 4-year war of attrition must have come from outside the country. And, most probably, the massive support must have come from or been known by Uganda’s main foreign sponsors, the US and UK. As one former U.S. State Department source has stated:

"Either Museveni was misusing (the U.S. support ) he was receiving and was not being called to account…or he was using it for the purpose intended."

Previously classified U.S. and UN documents and testimony, now in evidence at the UN Rwanda Tribunal, show that Kagame, himself, touched off the "Rwanda genocide" by assassinating former Rwandan President and launching an assault to seize power within minutes after shooting down President Habyarimana’s plane on the night April 6, 1994.….long before any of the alleged civilian killings began, in response to the assassination. The well-planned and organized "blitzkrieg" controlled the eastern-third of the country by the third week in April, and civilian killings were reported to the UN in the Kagame-controlled area days later.

Even former UN Rwanda Tribunal Chief Prosecutor, Swiss Judge Carla del Ponte, and former Chief Investigator, Australian Barrister Michael Hourigan have called for the UN Rwanda Tribunal to prosecute Kagame. And, even though both France and Spain have issued INTERPOL warrants for Kagame and his associates, he continues to receive invitations to speak at prestigious institutions in the US and Britain, where the INTERPOL warrants have been ignored.

The Rwanda/Congo "Genocide" Connections

Perhaps most important, at least from an American perspective, recently de-classified UN and State Dept documents show that U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher had reports of massive civilian killings by Kagame’s no later than September 1994. And, despite the evidence in contemporaneous UN and US documents, the U.S. has permitted Kagame’s crimes to be blamed on others…and to be re-characterized by Kagame and the ICTR as a "genocide" committed by Kagame’s enemies. Which, if true, would make the Rwanda War the first in history in which only the losing side in the war committed crimes and atrocities. A WWII analogy would to blame the Japanese, not only for their own crimes, for U.S. bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, too, or blaming the Germans for the fire-bombing of Dresden, the massacres on the Eastern Front and the sack of Berlin.

The former UN Chief Prosecutor Del Ponte has publicly described how she was to the State Department in the summer of 2003 by Bush Ambassador for War Crimes, Pierre Prosper. Prosper, also a former ICTR Prosecutor, told her that she must drop all investigations of Kagame’s crimes, or risk being removed from office. When Judge Del Ponte insisted that the evidence required that he be prosecuted for war crimes and genocide, she was removed from her office at the Rwanda Tribunal within 90 days, at the insistence of the U.S. and Britain.

And, now that we know (from the 2001-03 UN Security Council and UN original UN Rwanda documents) that we have been the victims of a disinformation campaign, when it comes to the origins and reasons for the Congo War. If the role of Rwanda and Uganda in the Congo have been distorted, how can we be sure of Kagame’s version of how he came to power in Rwanda in 1994, as a "saviour"…when the Security Council knew that, less than two years later, Kagame and Museveni invaded the Congo to enrich themselves and are responsible for more than 5 million deaths since that time?"

Either the 2001-03 Reports are wrong….and former UN Chief Prosecutor Del Ponte is wrong….and the UN Chief Investigator Hourigan is wrong….or the story of the Congo War, as well as the "Rwanda Genocide" must be re-investigated… and re-written. But we need not start a debate before the research into original, contemporaneous documents is more complete than it is now.

Some the answers about the "Rwanda Genocide" are in the formerly classified documents now in evidence at the UN Tribunal for Rwanda, but which have received no more attention than the 2001-03 UN Security Council Experts’ Reports that detail the Ugandan and Rwandan rape of the Congo. The evidence exists in publicly accessible archives of the UN Security Council and Rwanda Tribunal….just waiting to be read!

This version does not contain endnotes. An updated version containing endnotes will be posted shortly.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

© Copyright Peter Erlinder, Global Research, 2008

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=10815

Magda Hassan
11-08-2008, 02:09 AM
This interview was made before the Western media noticed there was fighting in the Congo again.

War financing

german-foreign-policy.com recently interviewed David Barouski about General Laurent Nkunda and mineral smuggling activities in Eastern Congo. Mr. Barouski is a freelance researcher, primarily on African affairs, and he authored the book "Laurent Nkundabatware, his Rwandan Allies, and the ex-ANC Rebellion: Chronic Barriers to Lasting Peace in the Congo," last year.

german-foreign-policy.com: North Kivu warlord Laurent Nkunda is the leader of a militia called National Congress for the People's Defense (CNDP). Who are they?

David Barouski: Well, in short, the CNDP and its http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/pics/masisiklein.jpgmilitary command is a politico-military movement officially formed by General Nkunda in 2006. It is comprised primarily of Tutsi. Its political base is situated in Masisi Territory in the Eastern Congolese Province of North Kivu (see our map (http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/57175)), where General Nkunda was born. Several military commanders and CNDP cabinet members are relatives of Gen. Nkunda. The CNDP attracted the Tutsi elements of the RCD and its armed wing the ANC, isolating the Hutu elements led by former Governor Eugene Serufuli.

gfp.com: Waging war costs a lot of money. Where does Nkunda get it from?

Barouski: The CNDP has a parallel government administration. They collect "taxes" and "donations" from the villagers in Masisi, be it in the form of money, livestock, or family members to fight for him. His men also loot heavily in Rutshuru Territory and areas of Masisi Territory in the northern expanse above the village of Mwesso (see our map (http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/57175)). Still, it is very difficult to imagine that by doing so they are getting enough to pay for all their military expenses. His men and the Rwandan Army control Virunga Forest in Jomba, Bukima, Bikenge, and near Bunagana to the Rwandan border. According to Wildlife Direct, a man named Kanamaragi, has named himself the CNDP's Minister of the Environment, and Rwandans are allowed to pay him, or rather the CNDP, to be able to tour Virunga in CNDP controlled territory on the border and watch the Mountain Gorillas. Sources in the region claim Mr. Kanamaragi is believed to be Rwandan. I have also heard reports of CNDP members selling various animals on the black market for money.

gfp.com: A UN report documents that Nkunda and his militias have been staying at the Lueshe mine. Is it possible that they exploit the mine illegally to get money?

Barouski: It is theoretically possible, but I no longer think so. It appears that Gen. Nkunda and his men are not actually smuggling from Lueshe themselves. New research I conducted revealed that individuals have apparently paid him to be able to carry the minerals out of the country and mine in territory he controls. This is exactly what had been happening some years ago with the Albers case. He was able to work in North Kivu but he had to pay the militants occupying the territory, in that case, the Rwandan Army and the ANC.

gfp.com: What about Lueshe?

Barouski: Well, on November 20th, amidst a new outburst of fighting in North Kivu from Gen. Nkunda and the Rwandan Defense Forces, the company Somikivu SPRL announced to Bloomberg News that it had made a deal with the Ministry of Mines and was going to restart pyrochlore extraction from Lueshe. Somikivu is 70% owned by the German company Gesellschaft fuer Elektrometallurgie (GfE). They signed the contract with a Russian trader named Conrus, who is going to buy all of Lueshe's output. Somikivu is run by its General Manager, Mr. Modeste (Mode) Makabuza.

gfp.com: Who is Mode Makabuza?

Barouski: Mr. Makabuza is not only the managing director of 70% German owned Somikivu. He is a Tutsi from Masisi Territory, and representative of Rwandan interests. It has been reported many times that he is a relative of Rwandan President Paul Kagame. At one point, he had a cassiterite purchasing business in Goma. He also runs Jambo Safari, a large transport company, and was a shareholder in two other transport companies. According to my sources, Mr. Makabuza has a house in Rwanda, he in fact returns to Rwanda every night to sleep at a place which is secure for him. During the 2nd Congo War, he was aligned with the RCD, but when the CNDP was formed, he allied with them and turned on Mr. Serufuli and General Amisi, the current Congolese Chief of Staff. A source in the region claims Mr. Makabuza worked with Gen. Nkunda during the time his men occupied Lueshe.

gfp.com: Mr. Makabuza said he would produce pyrochlore from Lueshe. Do you believe he is smuggling the pyrochlore out of the Congo via Rwanda?

Barouski: If Mr. Makabuza wanted to smuggle pyrochlore via Rwanda he has the resources to do so. One source in the industry claims that he was smuggling some pyrochlore while Gen. Nkunda controlled Lueshe, but I am not 100% convinced of this claim. There are two good reasons why he would not want to do so. Reason number one: Pyrochlore ore is not really as likely to turn a large profit. Since Lueshe is the only site the pyrochlore can be mined, and the pyrochlore in Lueshe is very impure, roughly 2% as I was told, money-wise it would not turn a big a profit. Because it is impure, a lot of it would be needed to have enough actual component minerals worth selling. The ore is heavy and would incur a heavy fuel cost to ship. Also, pyrochlore ore is not worth that much on the market compared to other ores available in the Congo. High-grade cassiterite, copper, or coltan for example.

In addition, because the site has not been used in years, the industrial miner would have to spend investment capital to repair and replace some of the equipment, which would also make it a requirement to hire technical experts. This obviously would delay the startup of the project, and Mr. Makabuza claims he is going to be producing 96 metric tons within a month? Well, his timetable did not happen since that claim was made back in November. GfE and Somikivu have not developed anything on the site, though Gen. Nkunda's men no longer occupy it as of this interview.

One of the richest area of cassiterite in Congo - and in fact in the world - is a territory west of Masisi. It is called Walikale Territory (see our map (http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/57175)). There is a large cassiterite mine in Bisie. There, the ore contains not only quality tin but also iron. This compound of tin and iron - Walikale is the only place in the world you can find that. The ore is worth a lot of money. Gen. Nkunda and the Rwandan army twice fought and captured that territory, in late 2004, and late 2005, but were eventually pushed out both times. At the moment, Mode Makabuza and his brother Alexis are reportedly trying to get into Walikale Territory legally so that they can exploit it through the Sapphir Society and Bangandula Mining Group, but they are in competition with Kivu Resources holding company and renegade Congolese soldiers. Officials are reportedly trying to find a compromise to please all parties, which may prove difficult. It is interesting to note, to my knowledge none of the firms I've mentioned involved in North Kivu are on the list of contracts to be reviewed by the Ministry of Mines.

gfp.com: What is the second reason for Mr. Makabuza not to smuggle pyrochlore from Lueshe?

Barouski: Potential buyers in Europe would know that the pyrochlore is coming from the Congo because Lueshe is the only pyrochlore mine in the area and therefore incoming pyrochlore must have been exploited illegaly. It is also known that Somikivu doesn't currently have the right to exploit Lueshe because the Congolese Government in 1999 sold the legal rights to mine Lueshe to Krall Metal Congo, however there are ongoing legal battles over the validity of this agreement. It would be obvious that the pyrochlore must be coming from the Congo because the only other viable places that you can extract pyrochlore from is from a mine in Canada, a mine in Brazil and a small mine in Gabon. The big issue is that the Brazilian and Canadian mines are both owned by the US company Metalurg, usually through a subsidiary, but Metalurg is the end owner. Metalurg also is the owner of GfE, which, as mentioned owns 70% of Somikivu, the company that reportedly signed this new contract to exploit Lueshe.

That means Metalurg has a monopoly on the pyrochlore market and is able to dictate how much supply is available based on how much they mine. They could theoretically hold pyrochlore out of the market to adjust the price if they wanted to. If someone else like Krall would go in and exploit pyrochlore from Lueshe, they would break that monopoly. That's why I have come to believe that the primary reason why Nkunda was in Lueshe and why Mr. Makabuza is now reportedly legally controlling the mine on behalf of Somikivu is to keep other companies off in order to sustain the monopoly for GfE, and through it Somikivu's owner, Metalurg.

gfp.com: But Mr. Makabuza announced he would exploit the mine...

Barouski: Yes, but the profit they would likely make is relatively small due to costs of transporting the ore to a port city, fuel for the transport, and the factors I mentioned earlier. In addition, the floatation plant on the mining site is old and needs a investment for repairs. What they could potentially do is mine a certain amount of pyrochlore dictated by how much Metalurg wants on the market at that given time. The relatively small amount extracted from Lueshe would not be enough to drastically effect the worldwide supply and thus drive the market buying price for Lueshe down but would still be enough to meet the legal requirements of the contract signed with the Congolese Ministry of Mines so as to avoid a contract review and potential sanctions. The deal is good for all involved: Mr. Makabuza will make some money as the General Director and a shareholder at Somikivu. Even if Somikivu does nothing on the Lueshe site he will be paid for his job as the acting General Director to do nothing but ensure no one else can mine on the Lueshe site. Metalurg is happy because via GfE they will continue to have their monopoly on pyrochlore. The deal pleases the Rwandans as well because they will have the potential to profit from the taxes as part of the shipping route to Mombasa, or perhaps Dar es Salaam in light of the tragedy in Kenya, which has affected the export business.

gfp.com: Are other minerals potentially being smuggled?

Barouski: Statistics at the United States Geological Survey and information from my sources show for example that relatively large amounts of tungsten are being exported from Rwanda - amounts that Rwanda is just not known to have in the country as potential reserves. According to the statistics, much of it goes from Rwanda to Austria. This is interesting when you keep in mind that certain Austrian companies state publicly that they are engaged in extracting and/or purchasing tungsten in the Congo. It makes one wonder why the statistics do not match.