Formula 1’s planned return to Africa has sparked a political row

Dubai: Democratic Republic of Congo foreign minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner has warned that Formula 1 would help “polish the image of an authoritarian leader” if it proceeds with plans to stage an African Grand Prix in Rwanda.
Rwandan President Paul Kagame announced the planned race on Tuesday alongside F1 chief executive Stefano Domenicali and FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem.
The event is expected to take place at a yet-to-be-built circuit in Bugesera, near the capital Kigali, in the early 2030s. Formula 1 last held a race in Africa in 1993.
The Democratic Republic of Congo, the United States and UN experts have accused Rwanda of supporting M23 rebels in eastern DRC. Rwanda maintains that its security measures are designed to protect the country from threats posed by armed groups operating across the border.
Kayikwamba Wagner said she had warned F1 chief executive Stefano Domenicali and the sport’s authorities in February 2025 that allowing Rwanda to host a Grand Prix would be “morally indefensible”.
While welcoming Formula 1’s return to Africa, she argued that giving Rwandan President Paul Kagame the platform would improve the image of an authoritarian leader whose government has contributed to a devastating conflict in the DRC.
She also expressed support for South Africa’s competing efforts to bring Formula 1 back to the continent.
Kayikwamba Wagner added that the situation presented F1 with an opportunity to demonstrate its values, calling for credible and independent assurances that funding for the race would not come from minerals linked to conflict or the exploitation of Congolese resources.
The DRC has previously criticised Rwanda’s efforts to boost its international image through sport, including high-profile sponsorship deals with major European football clubs.
In March, the United States imposed sanctions on Rwanda’s military and four senior officers over alleged support for M23 rebels in eastern DRC. Rwanda rejected the measures as one-sided, arguing they misrepresented the conflict.