This blog was written by Harrison Mitchell and Nicholas Garrett, two of the founding directors of Resource Consulting Services.

The debate surrounding possible solutions to the insecurity crisis in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo has for some time focussed on the trade in minerals, often described as "conflict minerals", due to a perceived link to the country's instability and violence. Yet, mineral resources are central to Congo's development, both because they sustain the livelihoods of millions and because they are the principal source of revenue for the state.

Minerals, both today and in the future, are a vital means for Congo's government to finance security, social services and infrastructure, and to invest in agriculture and other productive activities. While military groups are benefiting from the minerals trade, our recent report based on several months of on-the-ground research, suggests that it is incorrect to suggest that minerals are the cause of conflict, or that disrupting the trade will help to end instability in the east.

Instead, our findings suggest that the fundamental problem in Congo is governance failure. At the heart of this failure lies the inability of the Congolese government to bring order to its territory, and the failure of the international community to properly support the establishment of a functioning Congolese army, which has for some time been a major source of insecurity.

Human rights abuses, including terrible violence against women, and military gain from the trade in minerals are in fact symptoms of the insecurity and lack of governance. Attempts to tackle the causes of insecurity and governance failure in Congo provide a much more suitable approach to resolving the humanitarian crisis than disrupting the minerals trade - the only viable and non-violent livelihood option available to many Congolese.

LIMITED LIVELIHOODS

The "blood diamond scenario" - where miners are forced to mine at gunpoint - does occur in some mines in the eastern region of South and North Kivu controlled by the Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a Hutu rebel group responsible for the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. However, the majority of mines in Ituri, North Kivu, South Kivu, Northern Katanga, Orientale, and Kasai Oriental are run on military taxation schemes, where the level of human rights abuses are often less severe.

In this context we find the portrayal of Congolese miners as victims or illegal operators misleading. These miners work in appalling conditions, but make a decision to do so given the very limited choice of livelihood alternatives they have. It is not enough to say that these miners must seek alternative livelihoods when they are doing what people living in extreme poverty do the world over - their best to survive and care for their families.

DISRUPTING THE MINERALS FLOW

Despite the damage done when military actors benefit from the minerals trade, our research casts doubt on whether a ban or disruption on the flow of minerals would have as much effect on the insecurity in eastern Congo as some suggest. Arguments that indicate that control over the minerals trade is the primary reason of the conflict, or even the primary means of sustaining the conflict, are in our view unconvincing.

The National Congress of the Defence of the People (CNDP), a Tutsi rebel group formerly led by Laurent Nkunda, controls a relatively non-mineralised area of eastern DR Congo and their November 2008 offensive struck at the regional capital and geo-political asset of Goma, not the mineralised areas.

In addition, the military groups' taxation of other sources of income such as civilians, land, cattle and dairy products, drugs and border crossings, suggests that a ban on the minerals trade would make little difference to embedded military groups who are able to diversify their revenue base locally.

And while it is doubtful that control mechanisms over high volume minerals such as tin can be successfully implemented, it is certain that no control could be established over the high value, easy to conceal and smuggle commodity of gold. The FDLR trades mainly in gold mined in highly dispersed locations across the territory they control.

Systems to regulate the trade - such as certification schemes like the Kimberley Process for Rough Diamonds - tend to promote transparency in the existing areas of formal trade, but in reality they have little or no effect on the security dynamics on the ground. This is mainly because verification of origin in Congo will be unfeasible to implement effectively due to the size of the areas involved and the severe lack of capacity to monitor the trade. Therefore, it is impossible to disconnect the FDLR rebel group from their primary source of income through economic interventions.

WAYS FORWARD

We believe a three-tier strategy is the way forward.

Firstly, there is a need to engage and formalise those actors that can be enticed out of the informal, shadow economy so they can contribute to Congo's broader revenue base. Mineral sector stakeholders have done little to further transparency until now. The strategy therefore must include concerted efforts on the part of industry actors and representatives to make transparent their activities in the Congo and ensure correct payments to the government.

However, this strategy explicitly excludes engaging with the FDLR, which the U.S. State Department labels a terrorist group. Instead of deliberating economic interventions that will have no effect on the FDLR's operational capacity, we suggest that short to medium term actions against the group be conducted through counter-terrorism legislation and a regional military strategy.

Secondly, security sector reform remains essential and the international community must provide the necessary resources to build an indoctrinated, trained and well-paid national army that is a source of security, not insecurity.

Finally, we must continue to strengthen Congo's state institutions to yield sustainable security and begin the deep reform processes necessary for the country to flourish in line with its potential.

Read more about Resource Consulting Services' research on the mining industry in Congo in their new report Trading Conflict for Development. Visit the Resource Consulting Services website to find out more about their work in general: www.resourceglobal.co.uk

To read a slightly different take on these issues why not take a look at: VIEWPOINT: Conflict minerals and crimes against humanity in Congo

Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.