To add to this, it just occurred to me that the peace signing between the DRC and Rwanda, was probably the USA's idea, and likely had to push the DRC for it to be a part of the deal.
The USA need legals and optics to be seen to be doing things above board, to show results. Trump already bragged about bringing peace to the DRC. But it really needs to be official.
Otherwise them having operatives in Africa feels a bit off, like siding militarily to the DRC.
If a peace deal is signed, then the US opposing any M23 activity in the DRC is not an act against Rwanda, it's providing security for their own mineral supply in the DRC against terrorists.
The DRC want Rwanda out but fucked if they want to shake hands with their enemy, they hate them like nothing else.
So the point I'm making here is that if this is the case, then the DRC would not be insisting that the peace agreement must be signed before they approve the AVZ/Kobald deal.
Again this is just more speculation from me, but what else are we meant to talk about?