Fatou Jarju: Proxy Wars And Plausible Deniability – Are States Avoiding Accountability?

Throughout history, war has been an inevitable feature of international politics, that have  appeared across many nations. Over time the reasons for conflict have changed  drastically; wars fought in the name of faith, monarchies or land acquisition was replaced  by economic prospect and military strife. Namely so, the 21st century had seen this major  transition, with the introduction to proxy wars across nations in the global South and the  global North such as Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Taiwan, The Democratic Republic of Congo and  Rwanda. The question raised in this piece is to what extent does proxy warfare allow  democratic states to avoid political and moral accountability?  

What are proxy wars?  

Proxy warfare is often fought by one or more nation with powerful nations in-explicitly  partaking in the conflict. Countries of influence may fund a particular cause or provide  military intervention if they believe there is a resourceful outcome that will bolster their  economy or political standing. States do not fight proxy wars because they’re immoral.  

From a realist perspective, states engage in proxy warfare because survival and national  interest take priority over moral considerations. 

These campaigns are often at the expense of a developing nation or non-Western nation,  and although some would argue that the conflict is concentrated in a particular region the  overall death toll curated in the wars are devastating. The Cold War era had estimated 20  million people had died in these conflicts. Those statistics only apply to one specific era  

however, the longevity of these campaigns amass to millions of deaths every year.  

Plausibility Deniability  

Western democracies often showcase strategic interest in these wars but simultaneously  admonish themselves of having any direct interest or involvement in proxy wars. Amos C.  Fox states in his journal article (Conflict and the Need for a Theory of Proxy Warfare) ‘Proxy war is not unique to one method of war-fighting, but instead possess its own  nuance.’ (p.44) It is a fusion of geopolitical competition, military & technological  advancement as well as intelligence cooperation. Fox points out that dominant nations  often have laws that impartially acquits them of accountability. ‘The American joint  doctrine fails to account for proxy war, as noted by the absence of any reference to proxy 

environments, proxy wars, or proxy forces within Joint Publication 3-0, Operations. This is  problematic given the dominance of proxy wars in contemporary conflict.’ (p.44) 

Case study of proxy warfare in The Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda  Proxy warfare remains one of the most persistent challenges to international law and  global security. Although the international community possesses the legal mechanisms to  sanction states that undermine peace and sovereignty, their employment is often  inconsistent. Some conflicts attract immediate diplomatic intervention whilst others are  met with limited action, raising the important question about accountability and Western  democratic intervention in proxy wars.  

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo have seen many trials and tribulations.  With an estimated 8 million people to have been displaced in the last 30 years and  6 million people have been killed in the Democratic Republic of Congo following the  Rwandan genocide in 1994. Numerous residents fled into neighbouring countries; DRC  and Uganda as refugees however, extremist militias followed, stating the Hutu tribe rebels  had crossed the borders with the refugees. This ultimately began the proxy war with  sources stating the rebel group in Eastern DRC is subsequently being funded by Rwanda  as they pursue interests within the country and avoid accountability on the international  stage.  

Rebel groups such as M23, have reignited the conflict in 2022, however an article written  by AOAV noted the clear distinction as to why the issues in these countries persist. ‘Two  primary factors fuel this conflict: the ghosts of the 1994 Rwandan genocide and the vast  

deposits of rare minerals buried beneath Congolese soil. Rwanda justifies its actions by  pointing to the continued presence of Hutu extremists in eastern DRC – men accused of  participating in the genocide against the Tutsi. Meanwhile, the Congolese government  under President Félix Tshisekedi claims that Rwanda’s true motive is economic – using  M23 as a proxy to control lucrative resources such as coltan and cobalt, essential for the  global tech industry.’ Overton, I. (2025, February 9) Thus creating disparities and political  instability within both nations, we can visibly see the long-lasting effects of proxy warfare  in these nations. Congo’s military has been exhausted with corruption and exploited  financially causing soldiers to leave their posts, weakening the country’s security.  

These wars have debilitating, and enduring consequences that prevent states from fully  recovering long after the fighting has ceased. With geopolitical competition taking  precedence over humanitarian concerns Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo  demonstrate the destructive human, economic, and infrastructural costs of proxy warfare.  Their experiences illustrate how indirect conflict not only prolongs instability but also  undermines sustainable development. Ultimately the inconsistent application of  international law and sanctions raise serious questions about the credibility of the  international system. If powerful states are able to pursue strategic interests through 

proxy actors whilst avoiding accountability, the principles of justice, sovereignty, and  collective security risk becoming secondary to geopolitical advantage. 

Bibliography 

Fox, Amos C.. “Conflict and the Need for a Theory of Proxy Warfare.” Journal of Strategic  Security 12, no. 1 (2019) : p.44 – 45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.12.1.1701 

Overton, I. (2025, February 9). Rwanda and the DRC on the brink: A proxy war over minerals and memory – AOAV. AOAV. https://aoav.org.uk/2025/rwanda-and-the-drc-on-the-brink-a proxy-war-over-minerals-and-memory/