Analysts are concerned that there is a security risk in transferring power from the soon to built Inga Dam in the Democratic Republic of Congo to South Africa. Pictured here is the city of Atlantis, on the outskirts of Cape Town South Africa, where people access power illegally. Credit: Lee Middleton/IPS

By John Fraser and Maurice Wa ku Demba
JOHANNESBURG/LUBUMBASHI, Aug 17 2013 (IPS)

There are big aspirations for Africa’s largest hydroelectric project, the Inga III that is set to be built in the Democratic Republic of Congo. But analysts are sceptical that such an ambitious project will ever be realised.

In May, Congolese Minister of Energy Bruno Kapandji made the announcement that the project was moving forward, adding that that Inga III would generate 4,800 megawatts (MW). The project will be constructed on the site of two existing dams on the lower Congo River in western DRC. It will be built on one of the largest waterfalls in the world, the Inga Falls, where the Congo River drops almost a hundred metres and flows at an enormous speed of 43 cubic metres per second. South Africa is both a partner in and the major client of the project.

Independent economist Ian Cruickshanks praised the vision behind Inga III, but expressed concerns about whether it would ever go ahead.

“The potential of this project is enormous and exciting and could make a huge difference to sub-Saharan Africa,” he told IPS.

“It could provide cheaper and cleaner electricity than is currently produced in coal-fired power stations. The river is there – you need to put in the turbines and to build the power lines.”

Inga III will require 12 billion dollars in total, with dam construction costs estimated at 8.5 billion dollars of this amount. The project will take six years to complete.

As a first step, the World Bank and the African Development Bank (AfDB) have to approve a 63-million-dollar technical assistance package for the project. According to the World Bank information sheets on the project, 43 million dollars will come from its concessionary funding arm, the International Development Association, and the remainder would come from the AfDB.

However, Cruickshanks cautioned that it will be a challenge to transport electricity over the long distance to South Africa. “My one concern follows experiences of the Cahora Bassa Dam project on the Zambezi River in Mozambique. [It] generates electricity, but the transmission to customers in South Africa isn’t efficient,” Cruickshanks said.

“Then there is a huge security problem of giant power lines [running] across the DRC, which is at war with itself.”

According to the United Nations Refugee Agency, the security situation in eastern DRC has been precarious since July 2011.

Fresh fighting between M23, an armed group started by former Tutsi soldiers who mutinied in April 2012, the DRC army, and other local armed groups, has uprooted thousands more. Some 2.2 million people were displaced internally.

Independent engineer and commentator on energy issues Andrew Kenny told IPS that regional projects are essential for developing Africa’s electricity supply, which are key for development.

“Transmission lines linking different countries are vitally necessary. Since actual demand in most African countries is so small, many generating projects will provide more power than the whole country needs, and the excess should be passed on the neighbours in need,” he argued.

“Grand Inga is only possible if it is a regional project providing power to many other countries. Similarly with a large coal station that Botswana was considering.”

He echoed Cruckshanks concern about the instability in the DRC.

“At the moment investors would fear political and commercial risk from an unstable government in a country wracked with bloody conflict.

“There would also be risks in payments for the electricity, operation and maintenance of the hydro plants, sabotage, confiscation, nationalisation and inability to repay debt. They would also fear risk from surrounding countries owning transmission lines: risks of confiscation, imposition of very high tariffs and incompetent maintenance.”

Senior research and strategy analyst at Frontier Advisory, Simon Schaefer, told IPS that he shares Cruickshanks’ concerns that such an ambitious project would be possible in a troubled part of Africa.

“I think the Inga III project has to be seen in the greater context of the political situation of the country and the region,” he said. “The DRC is very fragmented internally. It is questionable whether the government in Kinshasa actually exercises effective control/power of all parts of the country.”

He also noted that the project has been on the cards for many years. However, he suggested that the size of the project, the complex political landscape and problems of the DRC and the region were key obstacles to its implementation.

“The political situation in the DRC is instable and the country has often been described as a failed state. Other major problems in the DRC are rampant corruption and the lack of credible institutions. All these factors are not the ideal starting point for multi-billion dollar project with a long investment horizon,” he said.

However, he did emphasise the benefits of collaboration between African nations in tackling power challenges – an issue which was highlighted by U.S. President Barak Obama on his recent trip to Africa, when he pledged billions of dollars in U.S. funding to support energy infrastructure in Africa.

“I think African countries are well advised to tackle power deficits by developing cross-board projects and to focus on integrated transmission networks across multiple countries,” Schaefer told IPS.

“This would allow countries to share the financial burden of the project and ensure absorption of the generated electricity. South Africa’s commitment to purchase a set amount of electricity from the DRC is a first step to increased integration in the power sector. While the key objective of the DRC may be the generation of revenues and job creation from the construction of the dam, the country has to be realistic about the off-take of power by countries in the region.”

The Mai-Mai Kata-Katanga rebel group operating in Katanga, in south eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, say that they are engaged in an armed campaign for the autonomy of the province because they have not benefited from its rich mineral deposits.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a Mai-Mai member told IPS: “In 2012 alone, mining companies in Katanga paid out 96 million dollars in royalties. It shows that we are a rich province, but this isn’t reflected in the standards of living in the province.” Katanga’s main minerals are copper, cobalt and gold.

The Mai-Mai fighters hail from a number of Katanga’s ethnic groups native to five territories in the north of the province, though no precise figures are available about their numbers. In Swahili, “Mai” means “water” and “Kata Katanga” means “cut off Katanga.” But the group is called Mai-Mai because its members spray themselves with a “magic” potion, containing water, that they believe shields them from bullets.

On Mar. 23, about 350 Mai-Mai Kata Katanga insurgents launched an incursion on Lubumbashi, the provincial capital of Katanga. Dressed in civilian clothing with green, red and white bandanas, the insurgents were armed with about 30 AK-47 rifles, rockets, javelins, bows and arrows, and charms.

They tried, without success, to seize the seats of the governorate and provincial assembly.

After being routed in armed clashes with the Congolese armed forces, the rebels surrendered to the United Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the DRC. Thirty-three people were killed and 60 were wounded in the conflict.

But according to Alexandre Kawaya, a deputy in the Katanga Provincial Assembly and a member of President Joseph Kabila’s political coalition, talks should have started between the government and the Mai-Mai Kata-Katanga over their demands.

“We have generals and CEOs, who have been rebels. These citizens (the Mai-Mai) once surrounded Lubumbashi to stop an invasion from foreign forces. We should talk to them, hear what they have to say,” Kawaya told IPS. He added that the government is also currently in talks with rebel movements in the DRC, including the M23.

The Mar. 23 attack was not the first Mai-Mai Kata-Katanga strike. In May 2010, they hoisted their flag at the Place de la Poste square in Lubumbashi. They are also thought to be behind a number of other attacks, including two on the Lubumbashi airport and a prison break to rescue their leader, Gédéon Kyungu, in October 2011. The fight for the liberation of Katanga goes as far back as July 1960 when they tried to secede from the rest of the country.

But according to local NGO Justicia ASBL, the rebel group has displaced some 340,000 people from their homes through their sustained conflict.

Fabien Mutomb, from the opposition party Union for Democracy and Social Progress, believes that the impunity enjoyed by the rebels from one attack to the next proves some level of complicity from within the state.

“Each investigation by the powers that be yields nothing,” he told IPS, adding that the investigations were staged productions by leaders of local and national government institutions.

Breaking the impasse

Jean Pierre Muteba, who heads the civil society coordination structure in Katanga, told IPS “the Mar. 23 attack in Lubumbashi is an expression of revolt.” He believes that the solution would be a national dialogue with all the actors.

But Timothée Mbuya, the director of the voluntary organisation Justicia ASBL, gave a different view.

“When we are confronted with such destructive forces that they drive over 340,000 people in Katanga from their homes in the belief that violence is a legitimate form of engagement, we have no option but to focus on reforming the army and security services to remove external agents,” he told IPS.

“The Congolese army and security services have been weakened because they obey orders from different quarters. If these services are rid of external actors, they would be in a better position to secure the country against prospective attacks, both from within and outside,” he said.

For his part, Congolese Minister for Internal Affairs and Security Richard Muyej said he would wait for the results of a government enquiry on the Lubumbashi assault. Those found responsible will be prosecuted.

Two weeks after the Mai-Mai attack, Kabila suspended General Michel Ekuchu, the commander of the 6th Battalion based in Lubumbashi, on a charge of “grave dereliction of duty.”

“That won’t solve anything,” Fidèle Ramazani, an officer in the Coalition for a Referendum on the Self Determination of the Katanga People, another rebel movement in the province, told IPS.

He believes that the Congolese state has become “a repository of unresolved conflicts, where dissatisfaction and despair have become entrenched, and the most effective and sustainable solution is in the reconstruction of the entire state structure.”