As Laurent Kabila’s victorious Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo (AFDL) consolidates its hold over Kinshasa this week, diplomats here are asking if the renamed Democratic Republic of the Congo will be permitted to determine its own future.

At issue is what leverage neighbouring countries believed to have helped the rebel leader-turned-president now will seek to wield.

The Alliance’s swift success at overthrowing dictator Mobutu Sese Seko and defeating his armed forces has fueled speculation that several neighbouring countries — notably Uganda, Rwanda and Angola — helped the AFDL’s war effort.

Although all three countries have denied any military collaboration with Kabila’s forces, U.N. officials have said their soldiers were observed fighting in support of Alliance troops in several instances.

“In this case, many countries had an interest in stability in Zaire,” says one U.N. official, speaking on condition of anonymity. Pragmatic political considerations — ranging from Rwanda’s desire to end Mobutu’s support for former Rwandan troops based in Zairean refugee camps, to Angola’s effort to shut down Zairean bases for that nation’s rebels — brought in some outside support for the AFDL’s offensive.

But other leaders dispute that contention. “What happened (in Zaire) is the reaction of the people” against the poverty and corruption of Mobutu’s 32-year regime, says President Sam Nujoma of Namibia. “I don’t think that the revolution of Kabila was instigated by other countries.”

Nujoma adds that there is no public evidence that neighbouring troops fought on behalf of the Alliance.

However, many of the nations involved have conceded that soldiers from their countries may have fought — although, they add, briefly and on a voluntary basis — with Kabila’s diverse forces.

Semakulu Kiwanuka, Uganda’s U.N. ambassador, notes that troops from his country did in fact cross the border into Zaire late last year — but only to repel cross-border attacks from Ugandan rebels based in Zaire and not to assist the Alliance.

“Uganda cannot be expected to fold its its arms when dissident groups invade our country and wreak havoc on the people,” Kiwanuka says, arguing that Mobutu long provided shelter to two Ugandan insurgencies loyal to former dictator Idi Amin.

Likewise, the Ugandan envoy adds, “the situation in Zaire was partly triggered by the refugee situation, which was made worse by the actions of the Interahamwe”. He cites a variety of reports that the Interhamwe, a paramilitary group linked to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, launched attacks on that country from camps in Zaire.

Nor is the Alliance the only party believed to have received outside support. According to U.N. sources, Mobutu’s forces reportedly were augmented by mercenaries from Serbia and Belgium and soldiers from the former Rwandan government and the rebel National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), all to no avail.

More decisive support, however, came in the form of thousands of ethnic Tutsi volunteers, many from Uganda and Rwanda, who beefed up the Alliance’s forces when it first seized a swathe of eastern Zaire last fall, say U.N. officials. Anlaysts here say this military support in the early days of the Alliance’S offensive gives the governments of Uganda and Rwanda considerable leverage with Kabila.

Many diplomats here believe that Kabila’s close ties to Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and to Paul Kagame, Rwanda’s powerful vice president and defence chief, date back to when all three men were revolutionaries based in Tanzania.

One official here claims that the leaders of both countries were in constant phone contact with Kabila in recent months, as the AFDL beat back Mobutu’s unpaid and ineffective troops. A diplomat who recently met Kabila within hours of talking with Kagame, adds that Kabila already seemed to have been informed of the diplomat’s earlier conversation with the Rwandan vice president.

What effect such outside contact had is hotly debated here. A month ago, U.N. officials were worried that Angola, in particular, was pushing Kabila to take a hard line on Mobutu’s ouster in response to Mobutu’s meddling in Angola’s 1975-94 civil war. But now, following the largely peaceful surrender of Kinshasa last Saturday, some officials are more upbeat that other countries helped to ease the way to a relatively bloodless transition.

“What was remarkable about the Zaire situation was the degree of involvement by other countries in the region…who cooperated in the search for a soft landing,” says U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard, noting especially South African President Nelson Mandela’s mediation. “Everyone involved was trying to steer this thing in the right direction.”

Yet foreign involvement in the Zaire conflict may not continue to be so benign. Eckhard notes that the United Nations is still seeking to account for some 230,000 of the Rwandan refugees still in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, following reports that many refugees have been massacred, apparently in revenge for the 1994 genocide.

Similarly, some diplomats here are wary of what role Angola intends to play following the ouster of its hated nemesis, Mobutu. The Angolan government is “keeping an eye on Kabila,” who remains an unknown quantity to Lusaka, says one Western diplomat. As a result, he adds, Angola may choose to keep troops stationed at Cabinda, an Angolan enclave inside western Congo.

Neighbouring governments at least have one clear prize in sight: The country, which is equal in size to the United States west of the Mississippi river, and has a population of some 45 million, is potentially one of the richest in Africa. With its mineral wealth, it could be a major economic engine for the entire region, Nujoma notes.

“It has huge potential in terms of economic development,” he says. “It has unfortunately been exploited by foreign countries…if the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with new leadership, really developed, it would also set an effective good example for neighbouring countries.”