Arizona — An online statement circulated by an AFC/M23 supporter has rejected reports of serious divisions within the movement’s leadership and urged Congolese communities to exercise caution when encountering claims about internal disagreements. The message comes amid renewed public debate over the cohesion of AFC/M23 freedom fighters and continuing diplomatic efforts aimed at ending the war in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
The statement, posted on X social media by Mr. Willy Nshuti who is their permanent representative to international bodies and the Congolese diaspora, he alleged that misleading information was being circulated to generate fear and mistrust among AFC/M23 members and their supporters. They believe that rumor has been spread by Kinshasa to create confusion in the region. The announcement maintained that the movement remained united and called on diaspora communities to verify information before accepting or sharing reports concerning its leadership.
“Verify information, demand evidence, and stand for truth,” the statement said, while urging communities not to allow unverified reports to deepen divisions. The message also expressed support for General Sultani Makenga, entire leadership and described civilian protection, security and peace as priorities.
The intervention follows recent reporting alleging tensions involving political and military figures within AFC/M23. On September 23, Africa Intelligence reported an alleged internal effort to challenge Makenga’s authority. The Critical Threats Project subsequently summarized those allegations, saying that M23 military and intelligence officials had reportedly responded to an internal leadership dispute. These accounts remain contested, and the social-media statement presented by an AFC/M23 supporter categorically disputes the broader portrayal of a fractured leadership.
Concerns over misinformation are not entirely theoretical in the region. Earlier in September, a document circulated online claiming that AFC/M23 had ordered the suspension of university activities in areas under its administration. Lawrence Kanyuka, an AFC/M23 spokesperson, publicly rejected that document as false and advised students to rely on the movement’s official communication channels.
The dispute over internal cohesion unfolds against a much larger political and security confrontation in eastern DRC. AFC/M23 continues to accuse Kinshasa of violating ceasefire commitments, even as diplomatic processes supported by Qatar, the United States, the African Union and other international partners seek to reduce hostilities and establish a sustainable political settlement. The Congolese government has been also accused of genocide against Congolese civilians who speak kinyarwanda since colonial times when the border was cut behind their homeland.
At the same time, international reporting and official assessments have also documented concerns involving forces aligned with Kinshasa. The United States has previously condemned cooperation between elements of the Congolese armed forces and the sanctioned Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, or FDLR terrorist group, while simultaneously condemning Rwanda’s support for M23. Washington has argued that dialogue involving the Congolese government and armed groups is necessary for a durable resolution of the conflict.
For civilians in eastern Congo, the competing allegations highlight the importance of separating verified information from political messaging. Claims concerning leadership changes, military operations or peace negotiations can spread rapidly across social-media networks, particularly among diaspora communities far from events on the ground.
The latest message from the AFC/M23 supporter therefore reflects a wider struggle over information as well as territory and political authority. Whether allegations of significant internal divisions can be independently substantiated remains false rumors and misinformation from their adversaries. What is clear is that eastern Congo’s prolonged crisis continues to demand credible information, protection of civilians and implementation of diplomatic commitments capable of moving the region away from armed confrontation and toward a negotiated peace.
