UN Flew FDLR Leader, Now Speeches on 6 Month Delay In Disarmament - Until Rwanda Is Out of Security Council

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 7, more here -- That the FDLR militia continues in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was cited by speaker after speaker in the UN Security Council on August 7. But why has this happened?

  UN envoy Martin Kobler told the Council that the SADC and ICGLR meeting “on the 2nd of July in Luanda extended this timeline from 22 days to six months started on July 2.” Not surprisingly, the FDLR then cancelled meetings.

 Even before that, Kobler's and Herve Ladsous' MONUSCO flew the FDLR leader to Kinshasa, despite him being on the UN's sanctions list. To Press questions, and to a formal complaint to the 1533 sanctions committee, there has been no response.

  Rwanda diplomats tell Inner City Press that the six month delay for FDLR, from July 2, lines up exactly with their remaining time on the Security Council. UN Peacekeeping is run by a man with this history, see memo.

  And so, the hype, the hand-wringing, the speeches. We'll have more on this.

Amid reports on June 27 that the UN flew a sanctioned militia leader of the FDLR militia on a UN aircraft in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujurric about it at the UN noon briefing on June 27:

Inner City Press: why did MONUSCO [United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo] fly him to Goma to Kisangani and then to Kinshasa when, in fact, I think there’s an arrest warrant for him?

Spokesman Dujarric: I’m not aware of any other services provided to him by MONUSCO.

 But it turns out that UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous flew the sanctioned FDLR leader from Eastern Congo to Kinshasa. Rwanda complained about this, in writing, on June 26.

  On July 16, Inner City Press asked Rwanda's Deputy Permanent Representative what has been Ladsous' Department of Peacekeeping Operations' response. 

  There has BEEN no response - in more than three weeks. Video here, and embedded below.

  Little more than an hour later, Ladsous floated into the Security Council to talk about Central African Republic -- without having answered a written complaint from a Security Council member in more than three weeks. We call this: unaccountable. 

Dujarric on June 27, and in the subsequent times Inner City Press asked, insisted that not only Mary Robinson (who today left her post as the UN's Great Lakes envoy) but also US envoy Russ Feingold requested the waiver, and that the FDLR leader Gaston Iyamuremye a/k/a Rumuli hadnot traveled to Rome, arguing that only that was important.

  Inner City Press disagrees -- why would UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous given his history on Rwanda, representing France in the Security Council in 1994 arguing for the escape of the genocidaires into Eastern Congo, fly a sanctioned FDLR figure linked to the genocide around? 

  On July 15,  Haq said Rumuli  was escorted from Kinshasa back to the east. Video here.

  Inner City Press asked about MONUSCO escorting Rumuli.

  Haq said what he had read did not say MONUSCO did the escorting. So who did? And if not the UN, how does the UN know where Rumuli went? Watch this site.

   

UN Won't Say if Mary Robinson or Ban Ki-moon Knew of DRC Deadline, "Fiasco" Alleged, Ladsous & AFP

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- After UN Peacekeeping run by Herve Ladsous announced a 48 hour "ultimatum," in New York several Security Council members told Inner City Press that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon or at least his Great Lakes envoy Mary Robinson hadn't known of and weren't happy with the threat.

Inner City Press went to the August 2 UN noon briefing, after being "shut down" on the topic on August 1 by Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky, and asked:

Inner City Press: On DRC, the ultimatum or 48-hour deadline, questions have arisen, including here, among Security Council members, of whether the Secretary-General and Mary Robinson, were they given any prior notice of that? There’s been some criticism of the way it was announced from the ICGLR [International Conference on the Great Lakes Region]. So, just to understand how these things occur, I know that missions may have total independence, but was the Secretary-General and was Mary Robinson, as his envoy to the Great Lakes, were they told in advance of this impending 48-hour deadline?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, missions don’t have total independence. I think you understand that, Matthew. They operate under Security Council mandate, and the Force Commander and the Special Representative for the Mission have clear reporting lines, so I don’t think that you should see this as some kind of autonomous decision-making.

Inner City Press: one follow-up on that because I understand that there is a reporting line, there is a mandate; I guess the question is, someone on the Council said that they don’t micromanage these things, so my question to you is a decision such as to announce a 48-hour deadline to have all weapons out of that area, is that the kind of thing that gets checked at Headquarters before it’s announced, or is that viewed as simply as implementation of a mandate given from New York and can be announced?

Spokesperson: I think it would depend on the circumstances. I don’t think that I am in a position here to lay down the certain policy on how Force Commanders take decisions in the field. When I say that they have a reporting line to the Security Council, it’s obvious that the Security Council is not sitting there giving instructions every day. I mean that there is a clear mandate provided, in this case, not least, for protection of civilians in part. Therefore, the need for the Mission to carry out the operation that it’s carrying out is to ensure that civilians are better protected in an area where they have suffered enormously. Let me go to other people and I will come back to you.

  While appreciated, especially after the August 1 "shut down" (video here), it still didn't answer: were Ban Ki-moon and Mary Robinson told of the ultimatum in advance?

  Department of Peacekeeping Operations sources who,unlike Herve Ladsous actually answer Inner City Press' questions, said that Ladsous' spokesperson Keiran Dwyer "screwed up" by distributing the MONUSCO press release and map in New York, "making it a big deal than it was, and a fiasco."

  It's ironic, because Dwyer and the three people who work for him have not responded now in five weeks to Inner City Press' simple request for yes or no if DPKO supports units of the Congolese Army named in the UN Group of Experts report as supporting the FDLR, recruiting child soldiers, raping and looting.

One DPKO spokesperson said they would answer after that weekend, five weeks ago. Then, nothing. Finally Nesirky said that DPKO will not answer about unit numbers. But the numbers, like the 41st Battalion implicated in the 135 rapes in Minova, ARE listed in MONUSCO's own press conference documents.

Meanwhile Agence France Presse today ran a story citing the"UN panel of experts" report, the full text of which Inner City Press exclusively put online in June -- but only on M23 and Rwanda, no mention for example of its statements on Congolese Army units / commanders supporting the FDLR units.

  Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row atop DPKO, previously served on an AFP managerial board; at the UN, he summons AFP and a handful of others to hand out (false) answers to questions he refuses to answer when Inner City Press asks them.

Click here for the "Ladsous in the Hallway" (with AFP, Reuters and Voice of America) video. Recently at the Security Council stakeout, Ladsous' mic-grabbing spokesperson brushed off the head of the Darfur mission to insist that AFP be given the microphone, click here for that.

  Given that Ladsous was France's Permanent Representative at the UN during the Rwanda genocide, arguing for the escape of the genocidaires into Eastern Congo, and now (mis) manages an all-African Intervention Brigade there -- some question whether if should be recused from this whole matter. Watch this site.

   

In DRC, South Africa Prepares to Redeploy, No Ladsous Answers on War Criminals

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 10 -- After M23 took Goma while the UN Mission MONUSCO did almost nothing, criticism of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations began to grow.

   Over the weekend, Ugandan President Museveni said MONUSCO is no more than "military tourism." At Monday's UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked if there was any UN or DPKO response, but there was none.

   Later on Monday, Inner City Press asked South Africa's Permanent Representative Baso Sangqu if it is true the South African forces currently serving in MONUSCO -- or MONUSELESS as many Congolese now call it -- will transition out to the neutral international force called for in the Kampala communique.

  Yes, Sangqu told Inner City Press. He called MONUSCO "a force not being seen to be doing enough. We're to a point where the TCCs [Troop Contributing Countries] don't want to implement, they must move. Africa is ready."

  Sangqu told Inner City Press this was discussed at the day's Secretary General luncheon, "we must do more." Inner City Press asked when to expect the South African switch.

   "Once concept of operations is endorse for the neutral international force," Sangqu replied.

   The discussion took place just after the opening ceremony for a photo exhibit celebrating the UN's -- and South Africa's -- work in Timor Leste. 

  Ladsous was scheduled to appear, but given his refusal to answer even the most basic questions, like "what is the UN's role in Abyei," while on UN TV at the Security Council stakeout, time seems better spent following the Mali bilateral meetings in the Security Council.

   But on the link between Timor Leste and the UN in the Congo, we note a photograph recently tweeted at Inner City Press, of alleged war criminal Tono Suratman in the Congo with MONUSCO in 2010. Click here to view.  What standards does DPKO have? Even less, it seems, under Ladsous.

   DPKO chief Herve Ladsous responded soon after the Goma failure by claiming MONUSCO had done well, then refusing to answer Press questions about rapes in Minova by Congolese Army units the UN may or may not work with. 

  Instead, Ladsous summoned hand-picked correspondents into the hallway. Video here.

   Recently Inner City Press learned that General Shavendra Silva of the Sri Lankan Army, whose troops are depicted in the UN's report on Sri Lanka as engaged in war crimes, went to Lebanon to "inspect" the troops of Ladsous' UNIFIL mission there. Ladsous has refused questions about having Silva as an adviser on Peacekeeping Operations.

   Inner City Press is told a tale of Ladsous' predecessor Alain Le Roy taking a personal interest in whether UNMIS (or UNAMID) dealt with ICC indictee Ahmed Harun in Southern Kordofan -- and answering questions about it. 

   Ladsous by contrast refuses human rights questions. Well, he defended the Hutu governmental genocidaires in Rwanda in 1994, click here to see Inner City Press first profile. And watch this site.

On Mali, Some See DPA for US and DPKO for France, Rights in Resolution?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 5 -- After the West African group ECOWAS "deplored" the recommendations by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that a mission to Mali be paid for by voluntary contribution and not through the UN budget, representatives of ECOWAS, the African Union and Mali addressed the Security Council on Wednesday.

  Many close observers noted that Mali's representative Traore Rokiatou Guikine seemed to say that the Tuaregs cannot be negotiated with, and asked Inner City Press, what sort of message does this send? Answer: not one likely to avoid military action.

  After the open meeting, Inner City Press asked each of them, and France's Ambassador Gerard Araud, about the mission that has been named AFISMA. 

  The African Union representative Tete Antonio said that voluntary contributions had not worked for the AU missions in Darfur, AMIS, and AMISOM in Somalia, at first.

  Inner City Press asked Antonio if the resistance of the US to fast military action in Mali, made public recently by General Carter Ham, wasn't similar to France dismissing the position of the regional group ICGLR that the M23 mutineers should be negotiated with -- both representing a Permanent Five member dissing an African regional grouping.

  Antonio said, let's keep this to Mali, and keep an open mind.

   Other well placed UN sources told Inner City Press this was a case of the UN Department of Political Affairs, led by American Jeffrey Feltman, issuing recommendations similar to the US position, while the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, led by its fourth Frenchman in a row Herve Ladsous, pushes the French line. 

  There are many who say that: but Ladsous find such questions so insulting, he refuses to take any more Press questions in the UN.

   Not so French Ambassador Araud. He took Inner City Press' question, after the closed door consultations, about how the UN's Huamn Rights Due Diligence Policy would apply to this AFISMA mission with the Malian military. Training, he said, to be conducted by ECOWAS and the European Union.

  Inner City Press asked Araud, Is France comfortable with Mali's post-coup military? He said it is not a question of being comfortable. He also took a Press question about how the UN's Human Rights Due Diligence Policy is being, orshould be, implemented in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Watch this site.

Exclusive: At UN, Malcorra M23 Meeting Panned, Angolan Presence in Bukavu Acknowledged

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, November 28 -- After the UN Security Council extended Congo sanctions on Wednesday morning for another 14 months, Congolese representative Ileka Atoki then his Rwandan counterpart spoke in the Council chamber. Dysfunction was on display.

   Rwanda made a pointed reference to some Security Council members' "escapades" in the Great Lakes region. Chief among these would be France. Notably, sitting in the chamber now representing UN Peacekeeping was Herve Ladsous, who was France's Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN during the Rwanda genocide in 1994.

Afterward in front of the Council the references became clearer, with the Habyarimana regime, which France in 1994 supported, being named.

Further details emerged about Tuesday's closed door consultations, after which Ladsous refused to answer any Inner City Press question, including what his MONUSCO did while the Congolese Army committed at least 21 rapes in Minova.

  The photographs Ladsous showed were called "pathetic." It emerged that Susana Malcorra claimed that in her visit to Makenga in Goma she saw weapons indicating external support. "Since when is she a guns expert?" it was asked. "These are just DPKO talking points."

  Inner City Press has been exclusively told that France confronted Malcorra and asked her by what right or authority she spoke with the M23 rebels. One Council member mused, what about the rebels in Syria?

  When French Ambassador Gerard Araud left the Council on Wednesday, Inner City Press asked him, to be sure, if France supported Malcorra meeting with M23.  It is already happened, Araud said with a smile. "There is no question of supporting, she has already done it."

   The more nuanced argument is that the Security Council is undermining the decision of the International Community of the Great Lakes Region, the type of regional organization the Council says it supports. The ICGLR said among other things that the Kabila government should address the legitimate concerns of the M23.

  It emerges that in consultations, a member insisted that is only one legitimate force in the DRC: the government. This is NOT what that government says about the government of Syria, it was pointed out, so it is a position of politics, not principle.

  Also afterward, Inner City Press spoke with Ileka Atoki of the DRC, asking about the rapes in Minova, which Ladsous refused to answer about. (Previously, Ileka Atoki has referred to UN peacekeeper's baisodrome on the Congo, their sexual exploitation.)

  Ileka Atoki to his credit expressed concern that the military leader sent to Minova might be too hard line.

When Inner City Press asked Ileka Atoki about reports of Angolan troops in Bakuvu, positing that these must have been false, Ileka Atoki told Inner City Press exclusively, "not so false, a line had to be drawn."

  Inner City Press asked, but what about the sanctions and arms embargo on the Congo?

Ileka Atoki replied that there were there only as part of the (future?) International Neutral Force. He said that the UN Security Council should listen more to SADC than the ICGLR, since SADC will be providing the troops.

So are some major members in the UN Security Council picking which regional group to purport to support? And how can the head of UN Peacekeeping get away with refusing to answer questions about his peacekeepers' inaction while the FARDC they partner with committed at least 21 rapes in Minova? We will have more on this. Watch this site.

In Congo, ICGLR Plan Puts UN Between M23 and Goma, After Ladsous' Failure, No Answers, Human Rights Questions

By Matthew Russell Lee

 

UNITED NATIONS, November 24 -- After the statement on the M23 mutineers issued by a meeting of the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region, Inner City Press asked the three top UN spokespeople for UN "comments and plans on the roles assigned to it by what was announced."

  Surprising to many, the UN's MONUSCO mission, which did nothing as the M23 took over Goma, was assigned the task of standing between the new territory taken by M23 and the city of Goma, which the statement says M23 should leave - except, paradoxically, for its airport.

  But so far the UN has had no response. This is a pattern: basic questions Inner City Press posed to the UN on November 23 are still not answered 24 hours later.

   Inner City Press asked the UN to "please describe any and all of MONUSCO's interaction with or support of elements of the Mai Mai or NYATURA so far this year."

But more than three hours later, it was Ladsous' spokesman Kieran Dwyer who purported to respond. But on this, all he said was "I am looking into this."

   In the 21 hours since, no information has been provided. Questions have had to be asked of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, including that "in Minova, there have apparently been rapes and looting by FARDC units as they retreated. Has anyone from OHCHR visited Minova?"

   Inner City Press also asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to "please specify all damage or injury to UN system staff, facilities or property in the Democratic Republic of Congo since November 20, including but not limited to in Bukavu, Bunia, Goma, Kinshasa and Kisingani."

   More than three hours later, all Dwyer responded with was, "I am looking into this." And as with the question above about Mai Mai and NYATURA, no information was provided in the 21 hours since.

   How could the Department of Peacekeeping Operations purport to have no answer to this? UN buildings have been set aflame, rocks thrown at cars, mortars reportedly fired at the MONUSCO base in Monigi. But after 24 hours,no information at all was provided.

Back on November 21, it was Kieran Dwyer who for Ladsous asked UN personnel to not give Inner City Press the microphone as its question "would MONUSCO protect Bukavu" was asked.

  Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's three spokespeople to "please state the Secretariat's position on its Department of Peacekeeping Operations' spokespeople directing staff of the UN Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit and UN Television / audio to hold the Security Council stakeout microphone away from Inner City Press, most recently by spokesman Kieran Dwyer on November 21."

 

This question was paradoxically referred to Dwyer himself, and he did not purport to answer it or even claim "I am looking into it."

  There was another, entirely factual question about Herve Ladsous, to which Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office has replied only that "We do not comment on recruitment processes." We'll have more on this.

 

Meanwhile, Ladsous' Department of Peacekeeping Operations is issuing short statements about the "background" and mandate of MONUSCO. What about its failures? Who will be held accountable? Watch this site.