UNITED NATIONS, May 30 -- For months there have been calls in South Sudan for Hilde Johnson to go. When she resigned on May 30, the UN Mission quickly clarified she had not quit, she was simply leaving after three years. Thou doth protest too much?
Immediately the spin machine began.
Voice of America, which earlier this week acted as a pass-through for Hilde Johnson's putative boss Herve Ladsous, called it analysis when they ran a few random tweets, ending with an arch "comment, which was posted on South Sudan in Focus' Twitter feed, accused Johnson of cozying up to opposition leader Riek Machar. That comment included profanity and will not be published. Karin Zeitvogel contributed to this report from Washington."
The above was date-lined Juba, mind you. VOA's worst byline is at the UN - as is the case with some other publications including behind paywalls. One had predicted an American would replace Johnson, then said more quietly this won't be the case.
Background: Here's how it works at the UN: in South Sudan UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous emflamed people by transporting Ghana soldiers' weapons, mislabeled, by road into a conflict zone.
On May 27 when the Council scaled back the UN Peacekeeping mission UNMISS, Ladsous did not come to the UN Television stakeout, as even his predecessors Alain Le Roy and Jean-Marie Guehenno would have done.
And now it has, here. Voice of America doesn't mention the Ghana weapons, or Ladsous' refusal to make public that report, or one on cluster bombs -- which are mentioned in the Council's March 27 resolution. The soft-ball story is entirely pro UN, quoting Ladsous without any critical questions. It is pathetic.
Background: after the UN Security Council amended its South Sudan mission's mandate on May 27, including support to Juba's police ostensibly subject to the UN's "Human Rights Due Diligence Policy" (Operative Paragraph 4(a)(vi) of the resolution, here) -- what does that Policy actually mean?
UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous instead of taking questions at the UN Television stakeout about the policy, and failures in South Sudan, met Voice of America's scribe in the hall. There is history of this: video here.
There were other questions he should have answered, about the failure to publicly issue the report on cluster bombs or the admitted failure in moving Ghana's troops weapons by land.
New questions were raised about UN Peacekeeping firing in the air in South Sudan, and giving the government as little as 48 hours notice to sign off on logistics or be charged with obstruction.
The human rights due diligence policy is supposed to mean that the UN will not support units which engage in abuse for which they are not held accountable.
But in the Democratic Republic of Congo, after only two FARDC soldiers were convicted for more than 130 rapes in Minova in November 2012, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous has NOT suspended support to the 41st and 391st Battalions implicated in the rapes.
So are Council members fooling themselves, or others, by saying it's meaningful that UNMISS' support in South Sudan would be under this UNexplained and UNenforced "Human Rights Due Diligence" policy?
And, separately, what of UNMISS chief Hilde Johnson welcoming and taking photographs with David Yau Yau? We'll have more on this.
Background: after the May 12 South Sudan speech of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon welcoming “the ceasefire agreement signed in Addis Ababa on Friday,” Inner City Press asked Ban about the ceasefire being broken, and elections now delayed two or three years.
Ban replied that he is disappointed that the ceasefire “was not honored in Bentiu,” and said he is engaged with the regional IGAD leaders about it. UN Transcript below. Ban did not respond on the delay in elections, even as he called for the elections in (parts of) Ukraine to go forward this May 25.
Ban's opening statement to the press also addressed Boko Haram's kidnappings in Nigeria, saying he has sent UN envoy Said Djinnit there.
He did not bring up Syria, but two of the questioners selected for him by his spokesman brought up Syria: the projected departure of envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, and if Ban, said to be too mild on accountability in Syria, supports a referral to the International Criminal Court.
The cynically sculpted resolution to refer to the ICC not all of Syria, to exclude the Golan Heights and even some fighting Assad, reflects weakness not strength on international justice. But perhaps that can be addressed in Ban's next press availability. Watch this site.
Footnotes: in fairness the Free UN Coalition for Accessopines that this Ban press availability was better than many of Ban's in the past. It was not limited to, although it featured many, of the insiders of the UN Correspondents Association who met with Ban and used some quotes but never released a tape or transcript. It included some less than fawning questions. And, we'd say for both those reasons, Ban did better than usual. Could it be a trend? We'll see.
On the other hand we have to note that standing to the side of Ban's stakeout was his head of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who outright refuses to answer Press questionssuch as the interplay between the UNMISS mission and the IGAD force.
In the face of mounting, factual questions about UN Peacekeeping, including Ban's Human Rights Due Diligence Policy in the aftermath of a mere two convictions for 130 rapes by Congolese Army units the UN supports, this cannot continue. What this site.
Update with UN Transcript:
Inner City Press: You praised the agreement – the South Sudan agreement that was reached in Addis. But it seems that since then, both sides have said that the ceasefire has been broken, and also the Government of Salva Kiir has said there will be no election in 2015; that it should be put back two or three years. I wondered if you think that is a good thing for the country, and also what role does IGAD regional force, in your view, should play with UNMISS? Should they coordinate militarily? Should it be under UNMISS? What does the UN think of that?
SG: It is disappointing that this agreement on Friday has not been implemented and has not been honored. The fighting has taken place in the area of Bentiu, and I am urging the two leaders to abide by their agreement.
At the same time, the special envoys of IGAD met this morning to discuss this matter. We will continue to work with the IGAD leadership. I myself, as well as my Special Representative, Hilde Johnson, will continue to contact both leaders, so that they are committed to meet their obligations which they signed just a few days ago.
When political leaders commit themselves, they should honour their commitment. We will continue to do that, and I asked the Security Council that they should continuously be engaged, and render strong political messages, including taking necessary measures.
Now it is not to be: Audibert is leaving his Quay d'Orsay post, including on the Iran P5+1, to become Francois Hollande's “G7 and G8 sherpa.” This will leave Araud in place, at least for now.
Since December when he was asked for France to be transparent about how much it is charging the UN under a “Letter of Assist” for air field services in northern Mali, Araud has resisted Press questions. He threatened to sue about an article using an NYPD document on which his mission had been asked to comment in advance, but chose instead to try to intimidate against publication by saying it would be a “hostile act” and access would cease.
So what will Araud remaining at the UN mean? There's more here. Watch this site.
Footnote: For the upcoming G7 (not G8) in Paris, Hollande is slated to dine with US President Barack Obama on June 5 -- and, as pointed out, to also dine with Putin. US Ben Rhodes hastened to say there will be no “trilateral” dinner, maybe Hollande dines more than once. We'll see.
UNITED NATIONS, May 30, more here -- For weeks there have been rumblings about “Helen Clark's cut backs” at UNDP, the UN Development Program.
This week the rumbling spiked, with the UNDP staff union holding a meeting in the UN's basement on May 29 to discuss the loss of up to 30% of UNDP's jobs in New York.
Another source told Inner City Press that Clark wants to “force people, many women, many who are head of household, to be deported after one month [when their G-4 visas would expire], and force many staff who are just 2, 3, 4 years from early retirement age out, so they will miss out on their after-service health insurance. If they get away with this at UNDP, it will quickly spread to the rest of the UN system. Oh, and by the way, the men and women at D1, D2 and ASGs are unaffected.”
This, Secretariat staff say, is similar to current Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's mobility or “5 year rule” - now imposed on regular staff, but seemingly not applied Ban's higher ranking friends. UNease is growing. Another description here, from IPS.
The connection is that Helen Clark wants to replace Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, despite the the post as his successor said to be reserved for the Eastern European group which has never held it. Clark is banking on gender trumping geography, and job cutting seems to be her campaign issue for Western, donor countries.
A well placed source tells Inner City Press Clark told management currently employed at UNDP to “drop what they are doing and work on her campaign” for S-G, they would be rewarded with a higher post in the Secretariat if she comes to replace Ban.
Footnote: In the Secretariat, the hold-over staff union which barely fought Ban during its time in power now presents itself as supporting UNDP worker, and as... still the staff union, despite the December vote and controversy since.
UNITED NATIONS, May 30 -- After Ukrainian defense official Andriy Ordinovych said that the country's 18 helicopter crews might be recalled from UN Peacekeeping missions to take part in operations in Eastern Ukraine, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it.Video here.
On helicopters, Dujarric said he was not aware of any talks. Later on May 30 his office sent this to Inner City Press:
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org Date: Fri, May 30, 2014 at 2:59 PM Subject: Your question on Ukraine To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com
The UN relies on the voluntary contributions of Member States for boots on the ground and equipment. Decisions as to whether specific units are withdrawn belong, ultimately, to the responsible national authorities. Approximately 600 Peacekeepers from Ukraine continue to serve in our various operations around the globe. Ukrainian personnel are valuable and highly-skilled and play important roles in implementing our mandates in our Missions, and we continue to remain grateful for their service and contributions.
Inner City Press also on May 30 asked UN Spokesman Dujarric why he had confined Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's comment on the May 25 election to an "if-asked" he read out only part of when Inner City Press asked on May 27. Dujarric replied, "I'm the one at the podium, it's my call." Video here.
Inner City Press: I wanted to know if the UN has any position on the jets bombing and strafing around Donetsk in Ukraine and the ultimatum to surrender or be killed that’s been issued by Government, as well as the death of an Italian and Russian journalist over the weekend.
Spokesman Dujarric: The Secretary-General is alarmed by the continuing violence that we’ve seen in the east over the weekend where clashes in Donetsk, as you said, left dozens dead. The Secretary-General urged that the restoration of State control over Government facilities be achieved through exclusively peaceful means, including an inclusive political dialogue. And obviously, we very much regret the deaths of the journalists who were killed covering the story.
Inner City Press: Does that mean that “surrender or die”... by the Government or the Government waiting for the new President, that this is something that the UN doesn’t support?
Spokesman Dujarric: I think what I’ve just said is that the Secretary-General urged that restoration of State control over Government facilities be achieved through exclusively peaceful means, including an inclusive political dialogue.
During the May 27 briefing, Dujarric made no comment on the election in Ukraine, and no comment or “off the cuff” statement from Ban Ki-moon went up on the UN's website.
27 May 2014 – While welcoming the “generally peaceful” nature of Ukraine’s weekend presidential elections, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today expressed concern that eligible voters in some parts of the county’s crisis torn eastern region were not allowed to participate in the national poll.
“The Secretary-General welcomes the fact that polling in most of Ukraine took place in a generally peaceful and orderly manner and largely in line with international standards and fundamental freedoms, according to a number of national and international monitors,” according to a statement read out be a UN spokesperson.
At the same time however, Mr. Ban is concerned that eligible voters were denied the right to vote in parts of eastern Ukraine, said the statement, echoing media reports suggesting polling irregularities and disruptions in the east, which has seen a wave of anti-Government sentiment over the past two months.
“The SG is alarmed by continuing violence in the east, where clashes in Donetsk left dozens dead yesterday,” the statement went on to say, adding that the UN chief urged that restoration of State control over Government facilities be achieved through exclusively peaceful means, including an inclusive political dialogue.
But where was the line said, or “read out b[y] a UN spokesperson”?
Inner City Press looked on the UN Spokesperson's website: not there. So at the May 29 noon briefing, as spokesman Dujarric tried to end the briefing after only two questions, Inner City Press asked.
Dujarric replied that the statement was read out to “some of your colleagues” in the hallway. Moments later he e-mailed this to Inner City Press, as “shared language” --
The Secretary-General welcomes the fact that polling in Ukraine took place in a generally peaceful and orderly manner and largely in line with international standards and fundamental freedoms, according a number of national and international monitors.
The Secretary-General is concerned, however, that eligible voters were denied the right to vote in parts of eastern Ukraine.
The Secretary-General is alarmed by continuing violence in the east, where clashes in Donetsk left dozens dead yesterday. He urged that restoration of state control over government facilities be achieved through exclusively peaceful means, including an inclusive political dialogue.
Inner City Press asked, If this was a prepared statement, why was it not read out in the briefing room and put on the SG's or Spokeperson's web site?
Dujarric replied, “It was an if asked.”
But why would the UN make its statement on the Ukraine election an If-Asked?
It appears that when no one asked in the briefing room, somehow Dujarric got asked by... UN News Center? So, a cynic might conclude, the UN can arrange to be asked by its own media.
Note that the UN News Center Russia page reversed the If-Asked “shared language” to start with the last part, more palatable to Russia:
27/05/2014 - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is alarmed by reports of continued violence in the east of Ukraine, particularly in Donetsk, where dozens of people were killed. This was announced by his press secretary Stephen Dyuzharrik. "Secretary-General strongly resembles that restoration of state control agencies should be only through peaceful means, including an inclusive political dialogue" - a spokesman said at a press briefing on Tuesday. Secretary General welcomed the fact that "the vote in many parts of Ukraine took place in a peaceful manner, in accordance with international standards and ensuring fundamental freedoms, as reported by a number of national and international observers." Meanwhile, the head of the UN is concerned that in some parts of eastern Ukraine. legitimate voters were denied their right to vote. Dyuzharrik Stephen noted that the United Nations deeply regrets the deaths of journalists covering the events in Ukraine. He expressed hope that the issue of protection of journalists will be reflected in the next report of the UN mission to monitor the situation of human rights in the country. According to media reports, in eastern Ukraine were killed Italian journalist Andrea Rokkelli and his Russian translator Andrei Mironov.
UNITED NATIONS, May 30, more here -- After the UN's Burundi cable of April 3, detailing the ruling CNDD party arming its youth wing, was published and asked about by Inner City Press, the UN has been stonewalling.
On May 30 UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric read out a statement, we have received questions about the case of Mr Mbonimpa, "we are indeed concerrned." Dujarric said Mbonimpa is in pre-trial detention due to things he said on a radio station; Dujarric said the UN has "no way to substantiate" what Mbonimpa said.
Inner City Press asked Dujarric, does this mean the UN is backing away from its own April 3 cable, which Mbonimpa discussed on the radio, along with youth wing training in a camp in the Eastern Congo.
Dujarric said of the "leaked cable, we won't comment on that." Why won't the MONUSCO UN Peacekeeping mission under Herve Ladsous go check the camps? Dujarric said, I have "nothing on that."
So is it that the UN can't substantiate what Mbonimpa said? Or that the UN doesn't want to?
Background: Inner City Press is informed that Mbonimpa was cynically offered his freedom only if he would agree to
1) make public apology
2) renounce investigation of and communications about on paramilitary trainings to be held in Kiliba Ondes in Democratic Republic of Congo
3) refrain from making any declaration of victory on his release from prison.
These sources say that the US "premature" announcement that Mbonimpa had already been freed "boomeranged." Much to his credit, Mbonimpa would not agree to the conditions, including that he speak no more about the arming and training of the youth wing, described in the UN cable, and allegedly taking place in the Democratic Republic of the Congo without any inquiry by the UN Mission in the DRC, MONUSCO.
Inner City Press has asked the UN a dozen times about the cable, yielding answers more and more surreal. US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, when Inner City Press asked her at the Security Council stakeout,provided a more substantive Burundi answer, here.
Even as Mbonimpa of the Association pour la protection des droits humains et des personnes détenues(APRODH) was arrested, the UN denied it received his and others letters, and stonewalled on letters from opposition parties. Mbonimpa is 23rd on this letter given to BNUB but still denied by the UN, click here as Inner City Press first published it.
It was good news. But in the sixteen hours after, no on else confirmed it, least of all the Burundian government. Questions mounted, and at 11:25 am on Saturday in New York, Inner City Press reported them.
An hour later Ambassador Power said, "Now word Burundi's government has not in fact freed Pierre Mbonimpa."
Some in Burundi surmise that the Presidency informed Power that Mbonimpa was being freed, or was being offered freedom, and ask what the US thinks of conditioning a human rights defender's freedom on not speaking out anymore.
And what about the UN, which claims a "Rights Up Front" approach since its failure in Sri Lanka? The UN is silent.
On May 22 UN spokesman Stephane Duarric still denied even receiving Mbonimpa's letter, and the letter of opposition political parties that Inner City Press is reliably informed was given to the BNUB mission.
Inner City Press: I’m sorry to ask this again, but I wanted to ask about Burundi again, in the sense that the opposition parties there have affirmed and re-affirmed that they sent to a letter to Secretary-General about this leaked cable of the arming of the youth wing of the CNDD (National Council for the Defence of Democracy) Party. And so, I asked and Vannina said the NGO (non-governmental organization) letter wasn’t received and she’ll check on the letter of the Opposition Party that was the seventh [of May]. I asked you on the sixteenth [of May]. Who should I ask? I mean, it seems like if the UN is [covering up]
Spokesman Dujarric: I will check again all the possible recipients of the letter.
Inner City Press: There was a speech or press conference held by the SRSG (Special Representative of the Secretary-General) in Burundi, essentially apologizing to the Government for the leak of the cable, but not in any way… I mean, I’ve asked here a number of times, like people there seem to believe it’s true. The human rights defender has named the camp… a camp where he says there are being trained in the DRC. Has MONUSCO (United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo) even gone to that camp? Is there any coordination?
Spokesman Dujarric: If I have something new on Burundi, I will share with you, but I don’t at this point.
On May 22 Dujarric announced "Yesterday, Matthew, you asked about two letters from NGOs [non-governmental organizations] and political parties. We’ve checked again this morning for you and we cannot ascertain that we have received such letters at the Secretariat."
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask about Burundi. There are two letters that have emerged that were sent to the Secretary-General, people say they were sent. One was from a group of [non-governmental organizations] in Burundi and now, a group of 12 political parties, including the major, all the major opposition parties wrote to the Secretary-General asking for UN investigation of the 3 April cable saying that the Government was arming the youth wing… to remain in power. And, I wanted to know, one, maybe you won’t have it here, but can you, today, confirm or deny that these two letters were received and say whether… what the response has been? Whether, in fact, the UN is, itself, investigating the contents of the cable?
Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci: Okay, let me check first if we did, indeed, receive these two letters and we’ll start there. Okay?
Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci: No. We checked on Burundi. You asked about two letters, is that right? There’s one by the NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that we did not receive. We’re still waiting for an answer on the other one. So that’s one thing.
Pierre Claver Mbonimpa was arrested. Belatedly, Human Rights Watch spoke -- but in a statement that doesn't even MENTION the April 3 UN cable. Why not? Well, HRW has a history of not criticizing the UN.
In fact, when Inner City Press asked HRW to simply summarize what issues its Ken Roth raised to the UN's Ban Ki-moon -- Haiti cholera impunity? Minova rapes by the UN's partners in the Congolese Army? UN Peacekeeping's Herve Ladsous' use of drones? -- HRW's lobbyist at the UN Philippe Bolopion, a former France 24 and Le Monde scribe at the UN, replied that such summaries are not public (apparently only for funders), in order to retain HRW's access:
"Hi Matthew: To preserve our ability to have frank discussions with UN officials and advance our advocacy goals, we don't typically communicate on the content of discussions we have with them." Click here for that.
Here, to not speak of the UN cable and the UN's shameful silence on the expulsion of its author -- is irresponsible.
Back on May 14the issue was expected to be addressed in the Security Council's May 14 meeting.
But UN envoy Parfait Onanga-Anyanga lavishly praised the government, with Interior Minister Edouard Nduwimana sitting at his side. He referred vaguely to a propensity to confrontation between youths affiliated to the political parties, adding that this phenomenon is particularly preoccupying when it also touches youths affiliated to the party in power.
Ah, diplomacy. (The Swiss chair for the Peacebuilding Configuration's speech was somewhat more frank; we have uploaded it here. But under current, unACTed on Council rules, he cannot enter the Council's consultations.)
Burundi threw out of the country the UN Security Chief quoted in the cable; Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson told Inner City Press that a letter from civil society organizations was not received, and never answered Inner City Press' question on a letter from opposition parties. This is not diplomacy, some say: this is a cover-up.
Background: the UN has been asked to investigate the April 3 cable, first by Burundian civil society organizations and then by 12 political parties. Inner City Press has obtained the letter of the 12 parties, including Uprona and Frodebu, and today puts it online here.
What will the UN do?
When Inner City Press asked at the UN noon briefing and of US Ambassador Samantha Power at the UN Security Council stakeout, the UN came up with an interim answer.
(Also, as set forth below, 23 civil society organizations wrote to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to request a full international and independent investigation of the cable: letter here, annex here.)
UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric announced that the UN had sent its Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide Adama Dieng to Burundi. But it was not possible to ask Dieng about his visit and findings, either when he appeared at a think tank across from the UN at a genocide commemoration or inside the UN building. Until on May 2 when Dieng took questions after briefing the Security Council about South Sudan, and Inner City Press asked him about his Burundi visit and the cable, video here.
Significantly, in terms of the UN using Dieng's visit as evidence of action on the cable, Dieng answered that his visit was planned before the cable was "released." But he ran through a litany of concerns: rampant impunity, people "around" the president who are trying to hold on to power, and the arrest of opposition leader Alexis Sinduhije.
Beyond putting the video online, Inner City Press is also today putting online the Burundi NGOs' letter and annex, here. How has the UN responded?
While sources in the UN Security Council told Inner City Press on April 24 that they want an investigation of the April 3 leaked UN cable about the party in power in Burundi arming its youth wing, it was the media that first reached one of the Generals at issue, Nduwumunsi.
The cable, as published by Inner City Press, stated that "General Nduwumunsi (currently Director General of former Combatants) and General - Major Niyungeko Jevenal aka KIROHO (currently head of the Office of military Cooperation) would be supervisors of these activities (distributions of weapons and military and police uniforms)."
Now IWACU runs quotes from Nduwumunsi but concludes, "Pour les autres accusations des Nations unies sur une distribution d’armes, il a promis de s’exprimer ultérieurement." ("For other charges UN distribution of weapons, he promised to speak later.")
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about Burundi. There was a consultation yesterday of the Security Council; Mr. [Jeffrey] Feltman went, some other people from DPA [Department of Political Affairs]. I was told afterwards that basically there’s a call to investigate that same cable, 3 April cable about distribution of weapons to the youth wing of the Government party in power. So I wanted to know what is, one, can you say whether the persona non grata DSS [Department of Safety and Security] chief…actually who left the country or if the protest has worked? And what is UN’s task from this in terms of investigating the contents of the cable?
Spokesman Dujarric: The DSS person, the person that was declared persona non grata, when that happened, was out of the country. He has not returned to Burundi. Can you rephrase the first part of your question?
Inner City Press: It was said afterwards by a participant in the consultations that there’s been a request by the Council that the contents of it be investigated. If DSS chief is not there, what is the role of either the country team, DSS or DPA to actually, more than expressing concern, actually look into the facts alleged in that cable?
Spokesman Dujarric: You know, obviously, this allegation of arms distribution… that allegation has taken more and more of a centre stage in political discourse in Burundi. We’ve noted the Government’s public statements rejecting the allegations and we welcome them. But we still call on the Government to investigate, to embark on a credible and transparent investigation into these allegations. We’ve offered assistance to assist in this credible and transparent investigation and we stand ready, but we have not been asked, but it is the primary responsibility of the Government to lead such an investigation.
So the UN "welcomes" the government's statements on the cable - a vituperative denial?
Meanwhile journalists in Burundi face demands to name and give up their sources: "Alexis Nkeshimana et Eloge Niyonzima, respectivement correspondants de Bonesha FM et RPA à Bubanza comparaissaient devant le substitut du procureur de la République à Bubanza, ce jeudi 24 avril, sur plainte du Cndd-Fdd" -- that is, a complain by the same CNDD-FDD party.
Back on on April 24, a week after Burundi ordered out of the country the UN security chief who authored a leaked cable reporting the President arming his youth wing, a team from the UN Department of Political Affairs rushed into an unscheduled Security Council meeting. A Permanent Representative told Inner City Press the topic was Burundi.
But afterward, despite the UN's claims about "Rights Up Front" and sounding the alarm, no one spoke at the UN Television stakeout to even summarize the meeting on Burundi.
Off camera, a source who had been in the closed door meeting told Inner City Press, "their main concern was about the leak" of the cable. Inner City Press first published the cable; the full text is below.
Update of 7 pm -- After publication of the above, a proponent of the Security Council's performance on this told Inner City Press that while it's being kept quiet, there are requests that not only the leak but the substance of the cable be investigated. Another questioned why all that the Council's "pen-holder" on Burundi belatedly put out about the April 24 was a tweet by its political coordinator. Inner City Press has posed questions. We'll see.
On April 21, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric if the "PNG-ed" UN staffer left, and about the president now meeting with his youth wing, video here:
Inner City Press: On Burundi, you’d said on Thursday that the UN was troubled by the “PNG” letter. I wanted to know, one, the head of security, has he complied with the letter from the Government and left. And does the UN have any comment on the President of Burundi since Thursday having done a meeting or a rally with his youth wing. The same youth wing that the UN memo said was being handed weapons.
Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: No. I have… I don’t know what the status of the staff member who was “PNG-ed”. We can check. And on Burundi, I think what we had to say last week stands.
Is that good enough, to simply stand on a past statement as new fact unfold? On April 21 the Banque de la Republic de Burundi - the nation's central bank - was enveloped in smoke. The excuse? Burning bills. Meanwhile staff say there are threats. But old UN statements "stand."
So Inner City Press asked the US State Department spokesperson, albeit in a Twitter Q&A, for a comment on the President meeting with the youth wing, and if the government did in fact ask US intelligence to help investigate the cable. So far, no answer: review here.
Twenty years after the "genocide fax" from Rwanda to the UN in New York was largely ignored, for a week earlier this month there was little visible reaction to a strikingly similar cable from Burundi, about AK-47s being distributed to the youth-wing of the Hutu aligned CNDD party.
And now one of the authors of the cable has been ordered to leave Burundi in 48 hours, see below.
Inner City Press on April 9 put the cable online, submitting questions about it to UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric and on April 10 online and at the Security Council stakeout to Ambassador Gerard Araud of France, pen-holder on Burundi in the Council.
But it was US Ambassador Samantha Power who took and answered the question, telling Inner City Press that it is very troubling, that there have been fast trials of 21 young opposition figures and a threat to change the constitution and now, these reports. Video here and embedded below.
At the April 10 noon briefing, UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric who had sent Inner City Press a wan response to its April 9 questions about the cable (and about actions by one of the three addressees, Herve Ladsous of UN Peacekeeping) read out a list of contacts the UN had made.
Inner City Press asked if the UN, whose cable it was and is, had done anything to check into the weapons given to the youth-wing: pistols in February, AK-47s since. Dujarric said he didn't understand the question and had nothing to add. Video here.
Hours later, the UN Security Council issued a press statement, here.
And now, a week later, one of the UN authors, Paul Dobbie of the UN Department of Safety and Security ("UN Burundi Chief Security Adviser") has been told to leave Burundi within 48 hours of April 17.
How will Ban Ki-moon's UN react? Inner City Press asked on April 17,video here.
That the cable was in fact sent from the UN in Burundi to three top UN officials -- Jeffrey Feltman of the Department of Political Affairs, Herve Ladsous of UN Peacekeeping and Great Lakes envoy Mary Robinson -- was reliably confirmed. Inner City Press and the new Free UN Coalition for Accessput this photoonline here and here. Below, the full text of the cable is published.
On April 9, UK Mission to the UN spokesperson Iona Thomas replied to Inner City Press that "I can confirm that Feltman raised this issue in the Council discussion on Burundi yesterday and members of the Council expressed their concern at the reports."
That UN read-out says that "the Secretary-General expressed strong concerns about reports concerning activities of Burundian youth groups and urged the relevant national authorities to investigate these reports."
But it is the government itself that is accused of distributing pistols, uniforms and AK-47s to the "youth groups," which the UN read-out leaves unnamed. Is this "Rights Up Front"?
US Ambassador Samantha Power traveled from Rwanda to Burundi andissued a statement that the "United States will provide $7.5 million in assistance for the Burundian electoral process" and expressing concerns, here. It did not directly mention the alleged distribution of weapons to theImbonerukure or the cable.
France, in the same week that it snubbed the Rwanda genocide commemoration and called any suggestion it was complicit in the 1994 killings "disgraceful," holds the pen on Burundi in the Security Council.
That is to say, it was up to France after Feltman came and raised the memo to then pen and push for fast adoption some output: a resolution or Statement. But this did not happen -- until a week after the cable.
Australia's Ambassador to the UN Gary Quinlan tweeted, "#UNSC discussed deteriorating situation in #Burundi for 2nd time in 2 weeks - signs of political exclusion & oppression deeply concerning."
The French Mission to the UN -- the penholder on Burundi -- was even less specific: "Under Secretary General Jeffrey Feltman has briefed #UNSC on current political tensions in #Burundi."
So is the main difference in 20 years since the Rwanda genocide the speed of leaks and of social media?
Other questions are pending. Here is the full text of the April 3, 2014 cable:
CONFIDENTIAL
OUTGOING CODE CABLE
TO: FELTMAN, UNATIONS, NEW YORK
INFO: LADSOUS, UNATIONS, NEW YORK
ROBINSON, O-SESG-GL, NAIROBI
FROM: [for] ONANGA-ANYANGA, BNUB, BUJUMBURA
DATE: 3 April 2014
REFERENCE: CDN-037
SUBJECT: Reports of alleged distribution of weapons to the Imbonerakure
Summary: Informs on reports of alleged distribution of weapons [to] ruling CNDD-youth wing and actions taken by BNUB.
1. "This follows my cable CND-022 of 26 February in which I informed of allegations of distribution of weapons to the ruling CNDD-FCC youth wing the "Imbonerakure."
2. Yesterday UN Chief Security Adviser (CSA) in Burundi conveyed the following message from the DSS daily sitrep:
"After information gathered from key informants, there was distribution of weapons and outfits military and police during the months of January and February for youth affiliated to the CNDD - FDD (IMBONERAKURE) party and the demobilized ex-AIMP Rumonge. An ad-hoc meeting was held in a hotel call[ed] KUKANYAMUENZA belonging to a "General de Brigade" located Nduwumunsi in Rumonge. A night training for the handling of these weapons would be located on the side of the central prison of Rumonge (KUMUREMBWE) and the surrounding population would have heard gunfire. These same activities (distribution of weapons) would be considered to take place in the commune of Nyzana-Laca, Kibago and Mabanda in Makamba province. Another face which tends to confirm the news, these are the statements of people who participated in these meetings but refused to receive weapons.
Two generals originating in the province of BURURI ex-AIMP whose names follow: Bde General Nduwumunsi (currently Director General of former Combatants) and General - Major Niyungeko Jevenal aka KIROHO (currently head of the Office of military Cooperation) would be supervisors of these activities (distributions of weapons and military and police uniforms). In this meeting they emphasized especially, that the beneficiaries of these weapons must remain vigilant and that when there is a trigger that each take care of their opponents in their proximity / neighbourhood."
3. I have undertaken consultations with key embassies including United States, Belgium and the Netherlands, all involved in security sector support activities, to corroborate the information and plan to raise the matter with the relevant ministers. The ambassadors informed have confirmed the grave nature of the allegations which if confirmed may have implications for bi-lateral assistance programmes.
Observations
4. CSA in Burundi confirmed the reliability of the sources.
5. The Imbonerakure actions have been on the rise since the beginning of the year and are one of the major threats to peace in Burundi and to the credibility of the 2015 elections as they are responsible for most politically motivated violence against opposition. BNUB has documented 27 cases implicating the Imbonerakure so far in 2014, 23 of which have been politically motivated.
6. The Imbonerakure act in collusion with the local authorities and with total impunity. In the country side they have replaced the law enforcing agencies and act as a militia over and above the police, the army and the judiciary. Opposition parties have repeatedly complaint [sic] about the Imbonerakure violence.
7. One can only speculate about the purpose of the distribution of weapons and uniforms in Bururi which is a traditional stronghold of the UPRONA. However the last sentence of the message indicated a highly decentralized chain of command which is consistent with reliable information on Imbonerakure modus operandi on the ground.
8. In February BNUB had informed of the disappearance of 500 uniforms from military and police installations as well as the distribution of 9mm pistols. Although not confirmed there are indications that the weapons distributed this time can be AK-47 assault rifles. DSS has also informed in the past of radio messages for the population "to be ready."
9. We will continue to closely monitor the situation and keep you informed.
