By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
September 18
-- After the
MONUSCO
peacekeeping
mission under
his command
assisted a
meeting to
recruit one
militia to
fight
another in the
Congo, the
UN's Herve
Ladsous openly
refused to
answer
any questions
about it.
Ladsous,
in
fact,
pretended that
the question
was not asked,
saying even as
the
question was
being asked,
"No other
questions?" Video
here, from
Minute 5:06. Afterward
another
UN official
said Ladsous'
too-ample
paychecks
should be cut.
"If
he can't
answer
questions
about the
peacekeeping
missions he
supervises he
should go,"
the official
said. "He's
obviously not
cut out for
this."
Minutes
before
Ladsous'
stakeout where
he selected
only the
questions he
liked, Inner
City Press put
a MONUSCO
question to Peter
Wittig, this
month's
Security
Council
president.
Wittig, who it
should be
noted is NOT
paid by the
UN, took and
answered the
UN Department
of
Peacekeeping
Operations
(thus,
Ladsous)
question, as
he had a
question on
Yemen by Inner
City Press
earlier in the
day.
About the
Congo
peacekeeping
mission
overseen by
Ladsous,
Uganda's
foreign
minister Henry
Okello Oryem told reporters,
during
Ladsous'
uninspiring
trip, that
the
International
Conference for
the Great
Lakes Region
"has lost
faith in
MONUSCO [the
UN
peacekeeping
mission in the
Congo]. If it
was doing its
job with its
large numbers
and budget, -
I don't think
we would still
have the
crisis in the
DRC today."
When Inner
City Press
asked about
this (video
here from
Minute 3:43)
Wittig
answered
diplomatically
that the
engagement of
neighboring
countries is
welcome:
"We
take note of
the engagement
of the region
-- which is
something
positive and
the
International
Conference of
the Great Lake
Region has
been engaging
in that
crises. And
that a priori
is a very
positive
development.
We also take
note of their
suggestion --
that has been
mentioned
today -- to
explore the
possibility of
a neutral
force. That,
of course, has
to be
discussed when
the time
comes. But I
think all of
us welcome
regional
engagement
that helps to
solve that
crisis in the
DRC."
A
substantive
response
should come
from Ladsous,
who is paid to
oversee and
answer for
MONUSCO, one
of the
largest
missions
placed, however
unwisely,
under his
command. But
it
did not.
Ladsous' usual
spokesman
Kieran Dwyer,
seen earlier
in the
afternoon, was
not the one
Tuesday
playing m.c.
at Le
Show de Herve
Ladsous:
it was a
different
spokesman.
What type of
spokesperson
goes along
with this?
More
importantly,
what type of
"public"
organization
accepts and
enables this?
We
are compelled
to repeat:
when he was
France's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
in the UN
Security
Council in
1994, he
defended the
Rwanda genocidaires.
This, along
with questions
about
statement
concerning
Aristide
leaving Haiti
and setting up
flights for
Michele
Aliot-Marie on
planes of
cronies of
Tunisia
dictator Ben
Ali were
put to Ladsous
when he took
the DPKO job,
and he could
have answered
them. But
he
refused.
Perhaps he
thinks the UN
is a privately
owned company.
Perhaps that
is where he
should work.
There
are other
Congo
questions
for Ladsous.
What was the
body count
when MONUSCO
used
helicopter
gunships and
rockets in
North Kivu?
Ladsous
since
May-- why it
was May is
another story
-- has said he
will not
answer Press
questions such
as these.
While this
goes back to
Inner City
Press' factual
reporting on
how Ladsous
was switched
for prior
nominee Jerome
Bonnafont,
it became
Ladsous'
"policy" after
unanswered
questions
about his
proposal that
the
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations use
drones.
Who would get
the
information
gathered by
Ladsous'
drones? All
193 member
states? Only
the 15
Security
Council
members? Only
the Permanent
Five? Only
France? The
questions have
yet
to be
answered.
What
does it say
about
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon that
this is his
chief of
peacekeeping,
that he allows
this? Watch
this site.
