Kinshasa Accord: 5 Harsh Truths About Chad’s Crisis
The Kinshasa Accord is under growing scrutiny as Chad’s political crisis deepens. Once viewed as a beacon of hope, the agreement now appears to be faltering. In this article, we uncover 5 harsh truths that raise critical questions about its future and relevance in restoring stability to Central Africa.
With regional leaders and international bodies watching closely, the fate of the Kinshasa Accord could determine whether Chad emerges from its current turmoil or slips further into conflict. This makes evaluating the accord’s progress — or lack thereof — an urgent matter for both policymakers and citizens alike.
The Kinshasa Accord: Origins and Intentions
Signed after the sudden death of President Idriss Déby in 2021, the Kinshasa Accord was intended as a roadmap for Chad’s political transition. Supported by regional powers and institutions such as the African Union and the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), it aimed to facilitate inclusive dialogue, oversee constitutional reforms, and prepare for democratic elections within 18 months.
The agreement was widely welcomed at the time as a vital tool for avoiding a political vacuum and restoring institutional legitimacy. Its creation was seen as an opportunity to break from decades of authoritarian rule and violent power struggles.
Truth #1: The Kinshasa Accord Lacks Effective Implementation
Despite its ambitious goals, implementation of the Kinshasa Accord has stalled. Transition timelines have repeatedly been pushed back, and core reforms remain incomplete. Critics argue that the transitional authorities have shown little genuine commitment to the accord’s principles, instead using it as a means to extend their control.
As deadlines pass without meaningful progress, public confidence in the agreement is eroding. Transparency is minimal, and efforts to engage civil society or opposition groups have largely failed, making it difficult to claim any real success.
Truth #2: Political Exclusion Is Fueling Unrest
One of the central promises of the Kinshasa Accord was inclusive governance. However, opposition parties and armed groups report systematic exclusion from the transition process. Many accuse the ruling military council of monopolizing power and marginalizing dissenting voices.
This exclusion has provoked renewed violence and deepened mistrust between communities and the state. In some regions, armed resistance has reemerged, threatening national stability and casting doubt on the accord’s ability to deliver peace.
Truth #3: Regional Support Is Fading
While regional and international actors were instrumental in launching the Kinshasa Accord, their continued involvement has waned. Diplomatic attention has shifted to other crises, and enforcement of accountability measures has been weak. Some observers suggest that Chad is no longer a priority in the broader geopolitical landscape of Central Africa.
This vacuum has left the transition process vulnerable to manipulation and weakened the pressure on authorities to stay aligned with the accord’s objectives. Without renewed external engagement, the chances of reform are slim.
Truth #4: Civil Society Is Losing Hope
Inside Chad, citizens are growing increasingly disillusioned. Activists, youth groups, and religious leaders have criticized the process as elitist and disconnected from the population. Despite initial hopes, many now see the Kinshasa Accord as another broken promise, failing to address systemic issues such as corruption, inequality, and repression.
Protests have erupted across major cities, demanding more transparency and participation in the political process. However, these demonstrations have often been met with heavy-handed crackdowns, further undermining public trust.
Truth #5: The Risk of Authoritarian Regression
There is a growing concern that the Kinshasa Accord is being used not as a path to democracy, but as a tool to justify prolonged military rule. By repeatedly delaying elections and restricting freedoms, the transitional government risks pushing the country back toward authoritarianism.
Without robust safeguards and independent oversight, the accord could entrench the very political behaviors it was meant to overcome. This danger underscores the urgent need for reform, accountability, and inclusive dialogue.
Reinvigorating the Kinshasa Accord: Is There a Way Forward?
Despite its many shortcomings, the Kinshasa Accord does not have to fail. There is still an opportunity to correct course—if political will exists. Key reforms include establishing an independent electoral commission, setting realistic but firm timelines, and genuinely involving all political actors in decision-making.
Additionally, regional and global stakeholders must re-engage meaningfully. Tools like conditional financial support, diplomatic mediation, and public pressure can all be leveraged to revive the process. A recent International Crisis Group report has echoed similar recommendations, urging a renewed focus on peacebuilding and long-term governance reform.
Connecting the Dots: Broader Regional Implications
Chad’s stability is not only critical to its citizens but also to the entire Central African region. Unrest in Chad has the potential to spill over into neighboring countries such as Sudan, Libya, and the Central African Republic, where borders are porous and conflicts are interconnected.
For more insights into how similar peace agreements have succeeded or failed in Africa, read our in-depth article on African peace accords and their impact. Learning from past experiences can help shape a more strategic approach to Chad’s transition.
Conclusion: Kinshasa Accord at a Crossroads
The Kinshasa Accord was designed to guide Chad through one of the most challenging transitions in its history. Yet, without urgent reforms, it risks becoming just another symbolic gesture in a region plagued by broken promises. The time for bold leadership, both domestic and international, is now.
Whether the accord becomes a historic step toward democracy—or a footnote in another failed transition—will depend on the actions taken in the coming months. One thing is certain: Chad’s people deserve a process that is transparent, inclusive, and genuinely committed to peace.
