Over the past ten months, I have consistently highlighted five major obstacles to the US peace-for-minerals strategy proposed for the DRC in December 2025. 1. Unresolved structural causes of violence in eastern DRC. I had warned that state-sponsored insecurity, ethnic animosity, and unresolved structural causes of violence in eastern DRC pose significant risks to the sustainability of US investment. Based on my existing political economy analysis on the DRC, I suggested that, without a sound understanding of these conflict dynamics, US investment initiatives was very likely to face political, security, and operational obstacles that undermine their long-term effectiveness. Addressing the root causes of conflict is therefore essential to mitigating investment risks and creating the conditions for sustainable economic engagement. 2. Conflict dynamics and political risks The ongoing conflict in eastern DRC constrains the government’s capacity to support investment, as security priorities and political sensitivities divert attention and resources from other sectors. The government’s focus on political survival and on mobilising domestic and international support may also shape how investment initiatives are prioritised and implemented. Furthermore, the politicisation of relations with Rwanda complicates regional cooperation and increases the risk of inconsistent policies. These dynamics, I have argued, were to expose US investment to political uncertainty and undermine the stability required for long-term commercial engagement. 3. Institutional fragmentation and weak governance Overlapping mandates and competition among government ministries, public institutions, and central and provincial authorities contribute to fragmented decision-making and blurred accountability. Parallel decision-making structures involving presidential advisers and political elites do further complicate investment approvals, delay project implementation, and create opportunities for undue influence. Inconsistent public messaging from senior officials also weakens policy coordination and institutional credibility, making it more difficult for international investors and development partners to assess government commitments and anticipate regulatory changes. 4. Regulatory complexity and corruption risks The DRC’s investment environment is further undermined by fiscal complexity, cumbersome licensing and registration procedures, opaque procurement practices, and inconsistent regulatory implementation. There are more than 80 taxes, duties, and levies which increase compliance costs and administrative delays. Culture of embezzlement, overcharging, retrocommission arrangements, and demands for informal payments to politically influential individuals raise additional concerns about transparency and the integrity of commercial transactions. 5. China has a head start and can use unethical channels that US investors would not. China’s entrenched position in the DRC’s mining sector, particularly in copper and cobalt, presents a significant strategic challenge for US investment. Through long-term concessions and major projects such as Tenke Fungurume, Kamoa–Kakula, and Sicomines, Chinese companies have secured substantial commercial interests that they are unlikely to relinquish voluntarily. Furthermore, China’s established networks and ability to navigate opaque political and commercial arrangements give it a competitive advantage in the DRC. US investors, constrained by stricter anti-corruption and compliance requirements, may be unwilling to use similar channels, creating an uneven investment environment. I had recommended that the US should not assume that a minerals agreement linked to diplomatic mediation of the eastern DRC conflict will secure access to Chinese-held assets. Instead, US strategy should focus on new investment opportunities, transparent partnerships, diversified supply chains, and infrastructure development, supported by credible conflict analysis, governance safeguards, and protection of the rights of communities in mineral-producing regions. Implications for US investment strategy These interconnected risks suggest that investment promotion alone will not be sufficient to secure sustainable outcomes in the DRC. US investment initiatives require a robust assessment of political and security conditions, stronger institutional coordination, greater transparency in public procurement, and predictable regulatory enforcement. They should also account for the structural drivers of conflict and the regional political dynamics affecting eastern DRC. Integrating these considerations into investment planning would help mitigate exposure to corruption, institutional dysfunction, and political instability while improving the prospects for durable economic engagement.