By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 16 -- When the UN Security Council's meeting on Mali ended on Wednesday, Inner City Press asked envoy Bert Koenders about Mauritania's offer to contribute troops to his mission, MINUSMA, but only if they could remain close to their own country's border.
It is unclear if UN Peacekeeping, which supervised MINUSMA and Koenders, accepts or should accepts such dictates by Troop Contributing Countries.
Koenders replied that Mauritania's offer is being discussed and negotiated with the Malian government.
But again: doesn't the UN have a position, since it is a UN peacekeeping mission, paid from the UN -- that is, other states' -- money?
Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Gerard Araud, including because France has owned the top post in UN Peacekeeping for the last four times, more than 16 years, if the UN could live with the restrictions Mauritania proposed in Mali.
Araud replied that Mali is sovereign, that's why they have to be negotiated with.
Let's say he meant that the host countries of UN Peacekeeping missions get to veto particular Troop Contributing Countries. But once a TCC is approved, can the TCC dictate where -- and how -- it will serve? It remains UNclear. Watch this site.
Inner City Press also asked Koenders about Paragraph 16 of his statement to the Council, which while referring to impunity to did not mention the gang rape charges against MINUSMA peacekeepers from Chad.
Koenders said it is being investigated and that witnesses can be interviewed by Chad, as they have not left Mali. We'll see.
When France's Gerald Araud followed, Inner City Press asked him about the (echoing) Malian minister's reply that MINUSMA should do more to protect civilians in Gao and Kidal. What explains the UN in the DRC reacting to the shelling of Goma with attack helicopters, and doing nothing when Gao was shelled?
Araud said the difference is that MINUSMA is so new. Is that the only difference? Who's being servile, or Serval, to whom? Watch this site.
