Since King Leopold messed up Congo when the Belgians made it their colony and the exploitation and enslavement of the natives there was horrible, Belgium (though people from there would hardly like this) has quite some responsibility in making things better in that region.

The proposal of EU military intervention is good. However, this is definitely not a situation where war is fought for the sake of war. Were Americans to run this, mostly the Cold War generation, they would start planning the details of war-fighting and not think about where it's leading. (Afghanistan is an example. The US didn't think about what to do after taking down the Taliban)

A better way would be a clear grand objective/panoramic that is non-military, and the military is used to support this objective.

For example, the people in that region are so ethnically militant against each other. Race killing race. I think it's probably because the Europeans, when they occupied Africa in the 19th century, didn't care about the boundaries of the different African tribes but drew arbitrary lines on the African continent to carve out colonial pieces, and the those colonial borders ran in the middle of ethnic demography, randomly enclosing parts of several populations to form a "country".


Even though in the "West" people are loath to speak of race and usually pretend it doesn't exist, it is very much a factor in people's lives. And in Congo it seems to be a very important concern. A good long-term solution would be a solution that views the concerns of the region in the local (and not Euro-centric "race is politically incorrect" context) context and addresses the local concerns.

Thus I propose that Congo be dissolved, and some of the neighboring African countries also be dissolved, because those were merely arbitrary lines drawn by foreigners, putting together fragments of ethnic population (just like in the Middle East) that were never historically united in a "country", through all the millenia. And new ethnic nations should be made. A Hutu nation, a Tutsi nation, and whatever other main race there is there. And new borders be drawn.

It's of course, easy to write this. But this is the only long-term peace solution. Within the current "countries" throughout much of Africa, people will continue to kill each other. So, if there is a way to get all those factions to agree to make new, ethnic countries, each according to their historical tribal lands, then it'd be great to deploy the EU military in support of the accomplishment of this grand objective, almost like a security force.

Otherwise, the societies are very messed up in the current (arbitrary) borders, and I hardly see the long-term benefit of picking a side and using EU soldiers as reinforcement. Because of the political/cultural/ethnic climate in that region (because of the European colonial arbitrary carving of Africa), any faction stronger than others is likely to bully/kill people from the other factions. That means, with the current atmosphere, even propping up a losing side would eventually result in that side becoming the aggressor itself, within years, decades, or century, etc.

So, if the current borders are to be kept, it would be better if EU and UN made massive country-improving works in Congo, like FDR's New Deals, and got everyone in Congo to work rather than in militias. Paving roads, for instance, or building dams, or digging irrigation canals and clearing farmlands, and building other kinds of infrastructure. It would require resources on the level of an army intervention, but it would have so much better results.

So:
- Best solution: dissolve Congo and remake countries of ethnic-nations, possibly incorporating neighboring countries as well.
- If Congo is to be kept with current borders: better to put all the Congolese to work (massive New Deal like FDR) and not in militias, rather than intervening as part of a war
- After the country get industrialized, or at least, infrastructure gets built, people's outlook will be somewhat better and can decide on partitioning of Congo or not (like how Belgium has the Wallons on the West side, and the Flemish on the East side, and Bruxellois in the middle) so that every tribe gets its own zone.

This is written with no knowledge of Congo other than a few paragraphs here and there. Barely know the name of the capital city, have no idea what languages are spoken. Before today, didn't even know there were Hutu and Tutsi in Congo. Thought that was only Rwanda. In other words, this is written by an ignorant person whose proposal might not fit the situation.