In South Sudan, Revenge Killings in Akobo, NGOs Hiding, UN Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, March 14 -- In the UN's continued withholding of news and answers about South Sudan, the reports of the UN's own knowledge of abuses are now being withheld from its own impacted national staff.  So Inner City Press has published below multiple leaked documents from inside UNMISS and from non-governmental organizations.

  Amid or because of this reporting on what the UN knows but doesn't say, on February 19 at the demand of UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press was thrown out of the UN. Audio here;petition here.

Inner City Press' UN Pass was confiscated and its files seized. Questions sent to Gallach and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric have still  not been answered. A new ouster occurred on March 10, video here.

 Nevertheless, and pending reversal of Gallach's no due process order, Inner City Press continues with its exclusive reporting, this time from Akobo in Jonglei State, on which the UN is silent. An NGO in Akobo has just written, as obtained exclusively by Inner City Press:

"“Revenge killings have normally averaged 1 a month since 2013 but this week there were nearly 8 revenge killings.

2.  [NGO 1] had one staff killed as a result of revenge killings. [NGO 1] has been on lockdown since yesterday.

3.  One [NGO 2] staff is still in hibernation since last week due to issues related to revenge killings.

4.  One [NGO 2] staff has been evacuated from Dengok

5.  [NGO 3] member evacuated from Akobo to Juba after realizing he was insecure.

6.  [NGO 4] Field Manager has been evacuated to Juba due to security concerns.

7.  During this dry season, there is high mobility resulting in some of the perpetrators coming into Akobo from various parts such as Walgak.

8.  There was suggestion that head of NGOs arrange to meet the commissioner to express concern on the deteriorating security situation. [Individual 1] to take lead.

9.  The Bieh State IO Governor, Deputy Governor, several Generals and Akobo Commissioner are all in Akobo. The Governor, the deputy and the generals are planning on moving to Waat anytime soon.

10. UNHCR Protection team is in Akobo to assess the Payams for the possibility of relocation of people from Juba. Approximately 300 people may be relocated.

11. Verification of IDPs from kaikuny may start next week Monday, [NGO 2] to take lead but would appreciate participation of other agencies."

 We'll stay on this.

 On March 11, the UN released a report on South Sudan -- given to insider scribes under embargo, apparently in exchange for coverage not critical of UNMISS -- which while detailing many of the abuses was silent, at least in Prince Zeid's gloss, on the UN's many failings.

  It concludes, without apparent irony, by urging "that the freedoms of opinion and expression are guaranteed" -- this while Ban's and Gallach's UN throw the Press into the street, repeatedly, as it reports on the UN's failings.

Inner City Press asked UN officials Ivan Simonovic and David Marshall about this, including the UN's ouster without due process, on March 11, video here from Minute 22:20.

  Inner City Press asked if the UN's ouster undermines its credibility or consistency in raising press freedom issues. (As Inner City Press asked, the two UNCA representatives present cut in, video here at Minute 23:40; spokesman Dujarric did nothing despite the "civility" rule USG Gallach cited against Inner City Press, to oust it.)

Simonovic replied, I got your mail and I will respond, after checking facts.

Simonovic, on Inner City Press' Malakal question, said it is good it is being investigated, asking why arms were in the camp, how uniformed men penetrated the camp and what the UN did about property burned down. (He did not mention reports that the UN Peacekeepers SHOT civilians.)

Marshall said the score of the report was violations by the state and non-state actors. Why not the UN?

Here are some of the omissions in the report:

Sexual assault in UNMISS camp;

Upper Nile: No mention of chemical agent aerial bombardment by UPDF air assets on civilians in IO territory which Inner City Press raised late last year;

CES : No real coverage of use of chemical agents used in Wonduruba. JMEC’s MVM denied entry via Juba-Yei road,

Ransacking of parts of Yambio town by SPLA and no UNMISS patrols. etc.

 On March 8 Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about more UN cover up, including in Pibor and meeting with governors of the 28 "new" states.UN transcript.

On March 9, Inner City Press asked Dujarric's Deputy Farhan Haq about more fighting, in Nasir. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan, I'd asked Stéphane yesterday about reported fighting in Pibor and people fleeing, seeking protection.  Now there's a report in the town of Nasir of significant fighting between SPLA [Sudan People’s Liberation Army] and SPLA in Opposition and maybe a third force there.  What is UNMISS' [United Nations Mission in South Sudan] knowledge? I saw they did a press conference, but it seems like all of the questions were about International Women's Day.  What's the state of their knowledge of the fighting in Pibor, Nasir and elsewhere in the country?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, we certainly were informed that they're looking into the reports of fighting in Pibor.  I don't have any details to give yet, but they are looking into it.  And if they have details about the latest reported fighting, we'll share that with you in subsequent days.

 But when Dujarric returning with a canned statement on March 10, it was to cover up Pibor; nothing on Nasir.

 A group of community leaders in Malakal sent UNMISS a detailed complaint about the killings there, including that UNMISS did nothing despite being told in advance to impose preventive measures. See here and here and here, as exclusively published by Inner City Press.

 The letter says that UNMISS shot five people seeking safety in the UN "Protection of Civilians" site, and some died.

At the March 3 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about this, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I want to ask you about Malakal since you mentioned something at the top about it.  There's a letter from the UNMISS [United Nations Mission in South Sudan] IDP [internally displaced person] representatives and community leaders in Malakal directed to the deputy SRSG [Special Representative of the Secretary-General], also to the troika, and to the EU, which says that… that the threat of violence was communicated to UNMISS along with certain requests before the killings took place and that nothing was done.  And they also say that UNMISS itself shot five individuals who were trying to enter the Protection of Civilians sites, and some number of those died.  And I wanted to know, is that the case?  What is… what's been UNMISS' response to this letter from the representatives of the IDPs?  And… and if UNMISS shot people entering, why did they do it?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, we've already described what the UN Mission in South Sudan, UNMISS, did in terms of trying to make sure that the Protection of Civilians site was… was kept safe.  I… that doesn't include any information about deaths.  If I have any information on that, we'll let you know.  But, certainly, we've already shared when this incident happened last week, the details about their actions.

Inner City Press:  Is UNMISS… I guess I'm saying, in response to a letter from community, Nuer and other leaders in the camp, is UNMISS doing an investigation of itself for possibly shooting at and killing IDPs?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, first of all, I have no confirmation that that’s what's happened.

Inner City Press:  No, I'm saying…

Deputy Spokesman:  If… if there's anything to those allegations, we'll let you know, but I've already disclosed… or Stéphane [Dujarric] already disclosed about a week ago what their actions were.  And we'll have to see what their follow-up is after that.

  In the hours after, nothing.

  UN Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, Kyung-wha Kang went on to Malakal and on February 26 said:

“I am outraged by what I have seen in Malakal. Civilians who had sought safety in the PoC have been attacked, killed, traumatised and displaced once more, with whole sections of the PoC completely and systematically burnt down and destroyed, including medical clinics and schools. Those responsible for these heinous acts must be held to account.”

  Would that include UNMISS, for negligence, not search for weapons smuggled in, and covering up initially for the SPLA?

 On UNMISS' failure to search for weapons, entirely ignored or covered up at the UN Security Council on February 19, here is a first-hand account exclusively provided to Inner City Press:

"“Peacekeepers were given info 2 days ago as was info passed out raising concerns. IDPs (Shilluk and Nuer elders raised this direct with UNMISS at the time of being aware of info. UN sat on it until first incident erupted. That came about as Padiang dinka 'IDP' walked passed UN contracted gate guards (Warrior Security I think) with significant volume of ammunition for weapons and was stopped by Shilluk IDPs. Fight broke out, Padiang dinka killed and ammunition given to UN.

According to the information  obtained from the camp, this problem started day before yesterday when UNMISS Protection Security Officers received sufficient security report that Dinka Internally Displaced Persons staying in Malakal UNMISS Protection Camp received illegal weapons smuggled from main town center into IDPs camp by their tribe security agents controlling the town since first week of July 2015 when SPLA- IO withdrew tactically from Malakal town. UNMISS protection soldiers wanted to conduct the search for illegal weapons smuggled inside the protection camp but Dinka Internally Displaced Persons refused to allow UNMISS Security to conduct the search for weapons then the attack happened last night at 8:00pm.”

 Here is another internal email exclusively leaked to and published by Inner City Press, with names redacted for obvious reasons:

"From FAO Wau
From Wau: Subject: Serious Security Situation in Wau
Dear XXX

I hereby wish inform you about a serious security situation we are currently experiencing in Wau since yesterday evening.

Indeed security has been recently shaky in Wau and vicinity, but yesterday it worsened to the extent that many of our staff members had to seek for a refuge at night at the UNMISS compound.

Since this morning, all the vehicles are grounded at the office, as no driver could move and there is no authorization for any vehicle to move out of the UNMISS compound.

We are in contact with the FSCO, although no information has been circulated so far. With regards, XXXX”"The full document we have put online here. A quote:

In March 2014, a labelling error was discovered whilst transporting containers loaded with duty equipment for the UN Ghanaian peacekeepers in Unity State which brought strained relations to even a lower point. The error was exploited to galvanise hostility towards the UN in favour of the government by falsely presenting the UN as supplying weaponry to the opposition. It took elaborate interventions, investigations
and communications to clear the false impression that this created.

[ICP note: the same type of "labeling" or "clerical" error occure this months with weapons headed to MONUSCO. This is what UN Peacekeeping has become under Herve Ladous, who linked peacekeepers' rapes to "R&R, here.]

We'll have more on this.

On South Sudan, Kiir's Reservations Would Delete Groups' Disarmament, Follow the Money

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive series

UNITED NATIONS, August 27 -- After the South Sudan peace agreement was signed by President Salva Kiir, saying that he had reservations, there has been a lot of vague talk about these reservations, with the US "not recognizing" them, some saying they've seen them but not publishing, and others saying wait and see. Now it's time to see: Inner City Press is publishing the 12 page docuemnt, here, just as Inner City Press earlier put online the August 17 Compromise Agreement, as first  obtained, here.

  The 12-page reservation document says to delete the provision about disarming Darfur based armed groups including JEM, SLA-Minnawi, SLA-Abdulwahid, as well as the SPLM-North.

  It resists calling the Army the NDFSS and referring to the "Armed Opposition" instead of the SPLM/A-IO. It says the National Army will remain inside its headquarters, and would delete Juba from the list of cantonment areas. It says there is a need to reconstitute the Monitoring and Verification Mechanism.

  It says to limit the JMEC and delete the word "oversee" throughout.

 The article on reparation and compensation is to be removed.

 Who would be vice president(s) would be up to Kiir: no reward for rebellion, or "gambling" on who ministers will be. The rebels should not be governors in Unity, Jonglei and Upper Nile State. Power sharing should be 70-20, not 46-40.  Funds should be with the Minister of Finance. As always, follow the money -- Inner City Press would add, to Kenya Commercial Bank and beyond. We'll have more on this.

  Before Kiir signed, Uganda's Yoweri Museveni advised him to get the UN out of the country, saying having the UN is is a sign of weakness and that the UN preserves terrorism.

 Past 5 pm New York time on August 26, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon offered praise for Kiir signing, saying nothing of the reservation or of the UN being openly trashed by Museveni.

  It is to Museveni that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has been deferring on Burundi, still not having named a UN envoy as the UN Security Council called "imminent" two weeks ago. (Ban was in France on August 26, praising the country's ambassadorial corps without a single mention of French troops' alleged rape of children in the Central African Republic, covered up by Ban's (French) head of UN Peacekeeping, Herve Ladsous.)

  In fairness to Museveni, his reference may have been in part to Ladsous' MONUSCO failing to act on armed groups in Eastern Congo -- including the FDLR, which also impinges on Burundi. We'll have more on this. Here was Ban's August 26 statement:

"The Secretary-General welcomes the signature today by President Salva Kiir of the Agreement on the resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan. This is a critical and necessary step towards ending the 20 month-long conflict that has devastated South Sudan and subjected its people to unspeakable suffering." full statement here.

  In front of the Security Council on August 26, there was loose talk about Kiir signing; an African diplomat told Inner City Press, "He signed! He was obliged!" with no mention of the reservations. The UN had no noon briefing  -- it said it woul only have one if something important happened, this was apparently not important - here are answers from August 24 and August 25, Inner City Press' South Sudan questions have been not been answered.

  On August 25, Ellen Loj, the head of the UN Mission in the country UNMISS told the UN Security Council that Kiir is expected to sign the agreement on August 26. Inner City Press asked, how might that impact the pending draft resolution on sanctions and an arms embargo?

  After consultations on August 25, Security Council President for August Joy Ogwu of Nigeria emerged with Elements to the Press including:

“The Council members expressed concern on the deteriorating humanitarian and security situation. They condemned the continuing fighting by the parties and underlined the need for a peaceful resolution of the crisis.

  “They expressed optimism that President Salva Kiir would follow through on his commitment to sign the IGAD Plus Peace Agreement without reservation.

  “They stressed the importance of full implementation of the Agreement. Council members underscored the need to remain engaged on the situation in South Sudan. In this regard they expressed their readiness to act immediately if President Kiir does not sign the agreement tomorrow as he has undertaken."

  Inner City Press asked Ambassador Ogwu about sending the draft resolution's annexes to the African Union and IGAD, as an African delegation told Inner City Press about. Ogwu answered that speed is important, but also that it be concerted, a consensus, like an orchestra, it doesn't matter who writes the notes, but... Periscope video here; here's fast transcript of Q&A from InnerCityPro, which also has analysis:

Inner City Press: Some members talked about sending the annexes to the AU or IGAD. Was there discussion of that? When you say immediately, does it include that? 

Amb Ogwu: We all understand the need for urgency, because the situation is urgent. But also there is the need for concerted action, for consensus. It is a stage and all the players must act as an orchestra, play the symphony, it doesn’t matter who writes the notes but it’s important to act in unison, act with one voice.

Q: Can you clarify, if he does not sign tomorrow, will you vote on the US draft resolution?

Amb Ogwu: We decided that we will take immediate action if he does not sign, or if he signs with reservations....

Inner City Press: Any discussion of the military situation? Which side is more responsible for the military action since the Addis meeting?

Amb Ogwu: We are seeking peace. We are not apportioning blame to any particular side. We are urging all the parties to come together to relieve the dire humanitarian situation and to stop the fighting.

Q: What about justice? We heard from Stephen O’Brien this morning…

Amb Ogwu: I don’t think Stephen O’Brien mentioned anything about justice.

Q: He spoke about women being raped, atrocities.

Amb Ogwu: Yes. That is an outcome. But that is left for another department. I would not want to go into that. But we all agreed I would say on measures to be taken that anybody who is found culpable will be held accountable. There is one voice in the Council.

  In her national capacity, Nigeria's Ambassador Ogwu emphasized the need for an arms embargo, and to check where the weapons in the country are.

  Loj said, "a Mini-Summit has been called for tomorrow, where the Government of the Republic of South Sudan, in the interest of peace, is expected to sign the proposed agreement. Despite this hopefully positive development, the security situation on the ground has been volatile and tense. Fighting in the Greater Upper Nile region has remained intense and further escalation of hostilities in southern Unity State has had increasingly severe consequences for the civilian population. Major offensives conducted by the SPLA and its allied militias into Opposition-held areas have led to further deterioration of the security and humanitarian situation since April, and have resulted in numerous reports of grave human rights violations. Most recently, on August 19, fighting occurred between SPLA and Opposition forces around Leer town, with both sides trading accusations of having initiated the attack.

  Loj spoke of discouraging some from entering the UN's "protection of civilian" camps, without addressing the blocking of civilians fleeing fighting from the UN's Yambio camp, which Inner City Press has repeatedly asked about. Nor did she address if UNMISS' radio station, Radio Miraya, kept rigt on broadcasting amid a strike by media in the country to protect the assassination of journalist Peter Julius Moi.

  On August 18, Inner City Press asked UN Associate Spokesperson Maestracci, "do you have any comment on, or does the mission have any comment on, Salva Kiir having said at the airport on his way to Addis that 'if anybody among journalists does not know that this country has killed people, we will demonstrate it one day, one time'?" 

  By August 21, after South Sudanese journalist Peter Julius Moi was assassinated in Juba, Inner City Press asked the next UN Associate Spokesperson Eri Kaneko this question, video here:

Inner City Press: In South Sudan,  virtually all media there, the Union of Journalists in South Sudan and the Association for Media Development in South Sudan, have agreed to a media blackout in mourning and as a protest of the murder of the journalist Peter Julius Moi.  They’re saying that UNMISS’ Radio Miraya is going to keep broadcasting.  Is that the case?  Is Miraya part of sort of the media of South, what’s the position of the UN on this?

Associate Spokesperson:  I’m not aware, but I will look into that.

  Eight hours later and counting, there has been no answer. Video here.

  On both August 18 and 19 when Inner City Press asked, UN spokesperson Maestracci declined to confirm or deny any of the fighting in the country -- a pattern for UNMISS under UN Peacekeeping boss Herve Ladsous. On August 19, Maestracci told Inner City Press, "As soon as I have [information], I will give it to you." None came: also a pattern.

  But Inner City Press sources tell it of ongoing clashes in Upper Nile, in Pageri, East Equatoria, still ongoing. The Juba – Nimule road, the only "proper tarmac road" in the country, remains closed; limited communications within the fragmented phone networks confirm that civilians are being targeted.

   West Equatorial Governor Joseph Bakasoro is still detained.

  Also, here is UNMISS sit-rep for insiders, not meant for the public, apparently:

“Following attacks in Pageri on 18 Aug 2015 host country security forces have advised that there is still military operation in the vicinity of Pageri town (30 kms North of Nimule).

UN Security advises that:

·        UN/INGO travels on the Juba - Nimule road are currently restricted.

·        UN Security will re-assess the situation in the next 24 hours and will advise accordingly.

·        In the interim all missions should be cleared with UN Security until further notice.

·        Additionally, UN/INGO missions into Pageri are to be suspended until a clearer picture is established as there are reports of heavy host country security forces deployed in Pageri.” 

  ... This is how things are at UN Headquarters and elsewhere in the system, especially in UN Peacekeeping under Ladsous. The Free UN Coalition for Access is challenging this.

Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, Aug 17, online via Inner City P... by Matthew Russell Lee

  On August 19 after UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson briefed the Council behind closed doors - he stopped and told Inner City Press is was not a short consultation, only a scheduling misunderstanding - he stopped on the way out and spoke again.

  Inner City Press asked Eliasson the question the UN Spokesperson has for two days declined to answer: "Have the two sides started fighting again?"

  Eliasson to his credit answered: "There are reports, they are very worrying. And this is also why, it is important if there is this progress towards signing of an agreement, that it is accompanied by the need for a ceasefire. A diplomatic solution cannot be found if there is not a de escalation."

  Moments later New Zealand's Ambassador Gerard van Boheman stopped and spoke about the US submitted draft resolution that the US' Susan Rice had alluded to the day before, that that it "does deal with an arms embargo also posits additional sanctions, if the agreement is not signed. I think there’s general recognition that the situation in South Sudan is not good, there’s a recognition that the IGAD and that the IGAD plus countries have been doing all they can. We want to be able to support their efforts.”

  Ambassador van Boheman said that “it’s quite a technical resolution. So I think it will take quite a bit of work to get everyone on the same page.”  Could that timing be related to the 15 days from August 17 deadline for Salva Kiir to sign?

  Inner City Press also asked van Bohemen about Yemen, but that's another story.

 On South Sudan, from the UN's August 18 transcript:

on South Sudan, can the Mission there, or do you have anything on reported, an attack by the Government on the opposition in a place called Imatong?  And do you have any comment on, or does the mission have any comment on, Salva Kiir having said at the airport on his way to Addis that "if anybody among journalists does not know that this country has killed people, we will demonstrate it one day, one time"?  It's a comment that CPJ has criticized, and I wonder if the mission has seen it and what they think of it.

Associate Spokesperson:  So on Imatong — is that what it's called?

Correspondent:  Yeah.

Associate Spokesperson:  I actually do not have a statement.  On South Sudan and the comments on the media that were made by Salva Kiir, yes, the Mission told us they were very concerned about, over the curbing of the press freedom in South Sudan, including recent closure of media houses and threats to journalists.  And they've also reiterated the importance of independent, free and pluralistic press.

Question:  Is the Deputy… I just wanted to ask one thing.  I saw that the Deputy Secretary-General's schedule says appointments are internal.  Did he come back from Addis?  Is there some way…

Associate Spokesperson:  He is on his way back.

  On August 19, Inner City Press asked Maestracci again - still no information on Imatong, nor Upper Nile, Pageri or other attacks since. From the August 19 UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask about South Sudan.  I’d asked you yesterday about whether UNMISS could confirm reports of fighting and now there’s increased reports of fighting and counter charges by the Government and the opposition of fighting in Upper Nile State, also near the Ugandan border.  So I’m wondering if UNMISS, given its presence in the country, it seems important to know is this taking place and if so which side is instigating it?

Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci:  We’re checking and we’re waiting for an answer.  As soon as I have one, I will give it to you.

  Nothing was given, but see above.

 Inner City Press asked DSG Eliasson of reports of fighting in South Sudan, he acknowledged the reports, Periscope video here. We'll have more on this.

   

In South Sudan, Fighting Escalates After Visit by UN Security Council & Ellen Loj: Now What?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 15 -- The South Sudan visit of the UN Security Council is over. And fighting has escalated, in Bentiu and in Ayod, Jonglei State and elsewhere.

   New UN envoy Ellen Loj accompanied the Security Council's trip, but it is not clear what if anything she has said yet. And what of the Council-threatened sanctions?

  Back on August 6 after six Nuer aid workers were killed in Maban County, South Sudan, the UN Security Council, as well as Ban Ki-moon and the US State Department, issued statements of outrage. 

 The Security Council's statement, issued at 9 pm on August 6, called on "the Government of South Sudan to immediately take steps to ensure the safety of all civilians, to swiftly investigate these incidents, and to effectively bring the perpetrators of these heinous acts to justice, and to fully respect international human rights law and international humanitarian law."

  Meanwhile South Sudan president Salva Kiir was in Washington at the US' Africa Summit. At the Security Council Inner City Press asked Council president Mark Lyall Grant if the Council will meet Riek Machar during its now disclosed trip to South Sudan and the region. Lyall Grant said both sides will be talked to, but did not want to give details.

  Nor did the UN. When Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq to confirm that the aid workers needed to be evacuated were all Nuer, Haq refused. Who does this serve?

Hilde Johnson has left left as UN envoy to South Sudan. On June 30 when Johnson gave her last UN press briefing on June 30, Inner City Press asked her who used cluster bombs in this stage of the conflict, and about having in 2012 told Inner City Press that militia leader Peter Gadet leading “disarmament” was OK. Gadet is now under US sanctions.

  Johnson dodged on the cluster bombs, that UN Peacekeeping's UNMAS had made a report “to New York” -- still confidential -- and that she couldn't go beyond what UNMAS has said publicly: nothing.

  UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous routinely refuses Press questions and refuses to provide the most basic answers, such as about flying sanctioned FDLR leader Rumuli in the DR Congo. It seems to have spread to Hilde Johnson, even as she leaves.

  On Gadet, Johnson recounted that he was a militia leader brought in by Salva Kiir's “Big Tent” strategy, which she said was “unavoidable” and brought peace. Well, it didn't bring peace: was it unavoidable? Doesn't the UN usually pretend to speak for accountability? Or not any more, under Ladsous?

Inner City Press had hand raised to ask another question, about press freedom. But Ban Ki-moon's spokesman gave some media but not other a second round. For this reason, setting aside the first question to UNCA, in this case Pamela Falk, is UNacceptable. When all questions can't be asked, no one should automatically get the first question. Will it even be reported on? Watch this site.

   

In South Sudan, Machar's Birthplace Leer Said Destroyed by Kiir, Ladsous Only with Kiir's Government?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 2 -- In South Sudan a spokesperson for Riek Machar, Lul Ruai Koang, has said that the army of Salva Kiir has taken and destroyed Leer in Unity State, in violation of the cessation of hostilities agreement signed in Addis Ababa.

  Leer is Machar's birthplace. Koang said "the latest destruction of Leer town... has no strategic, operational or tactical importance," and that Kiir derived vengeful "satisfaction" from it being burned down.

   Doctors Without Borders MSF has said, "There are no longer any patients or staff left at Leer hospital."  It seems, however, that the UN has said nothing. The head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous during his visit is set to meet only "with senior [Kiir] Government officials." This is hardly impartial. The line is: leering at the re-taking of Leer?

  Previously, James Gatdet Dak, has accused the Ugandan troops of violating the cessation of hostilities agreement signed in Addis Ababa and attacking the Machar forces around Bor in Jonglei state.

  On January 31 Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Farhan Haq to state any UN view on the Ugandan troops continued presence in South Sudan and any UN role in monitoring the cessation of hostilities agreement.

  Haq said that UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, in South Sudan on February 2, will meet with "senior Government officials."

   Well, if that's all he meets with, what role COULD his UN Peacekeeping have in impartial monitoring? It's like in the DRC: his UN Peacekeeping takes sides, based at least there on history. From the UN transcript, video here and embedded below:

Inner City Press: South Sudan, first, I wanted to know whether there’s any UN view of Riek Machar saying he stands to be charged with treason and that will set back all the, what was agreed in Addis. And I want to know, does the UN think that at this point charging or threatening to charge Mr. Machar with treason is productive? And also whether the UN agrees with Norway, which is one of this troika group, saying that the Ugandan… they believe at this point that the Ugandan troops that assisted the SPLA in retaking cities should leave. And finally, is there a UN role in monitoring of what was agreed in Addis? I know that you said Mr. Ladsous will be there and will be discussing… I didn’t hear the phrasing… is there a UN role in monitoring what was agreed to?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Yes, in terms of what I just read, yes. He’ll meet with senior Government officials to discuss the implementation of the recently signed ceasefire agreement and that will be one of his tasks. We’ll provide updates when we get them of his trip. Regarding the monitoring mechanism, I believe earlier this week we stressed the importance of having a monitoring mechanism, and I said at that point that the UN Mission in South Sudan — UNMISS —would try to assist as needed for the work of the monitors. But this is a separate monitoring mechanism that’s being set up.

Inner City Press: So will he meet with the other side, say, Mr. Machar, or the other side that reached the agreement in Addis?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: We’ll try to provide you with some details of his meetings once we get them. As I said just now, I just had the announcement of his trip. But we’ll try to do that. Certainly, he’s trying to meet with all parties and we hope that the parties continue to abide by the terms of the ceasefire agreement and work with each other and we would urge them to refrain from any unhelpful actions.

  
   We'll see what updates the UN and UN Peacekeeping actually give. 

  UN envoy in Juba Hilde Johnson of Norway, closely aligned with Kiir, has during the crisis been substantially lower profile than her deputy Tony Lanzer. On January 31 Inner City Press asked if the UN (and Hilde Johnson) share the view of Norway, that Uganda's troops which helped dislodge Machar's from Bor and Bentiu should now leave South Sudan. Haq did not answer this either.

  So what is the UN doing in South Sudan? For example, what has the UN Development Program accomplished? A close observer opines, as to constitutional review, that UNDP "funded the process including the commission yet the process was never inclusive. Its members were mainly individuals from the ruling party. They supported the same constitution that gave powers to the President and they reported its completion as a success."  Sounds like the UN...

  Right before the South Sudan cessation of hostilities (and cessation of "hostile media") deal was signed, Inner City Press asked Haq about the deal, and allegations against the UNMISS mission. Video here and embedded below.

  The signed deal, we note, has as one of three IGAD Special Envoys the Sudanese General Mohamed Ahmed Dabi, whose role in Syria in 2011 for the Arab League gave rise to much criticism. Look at him now.

 Inner City Press asked UN Security Council president Jordan's Senior Deputy Permanent Representative if the UN would have any role under the Monitoring and Verification Mechanism. He wasn't aware of you. His summary said the members of the Security Council "condemned the accusations" against UNMISS. One wondered: what if they're true?

   In his noon briefing response, Haq said the UN was "monitoring" the talks. He refused to comment on the allegations, calling them statements by South Sudanese officials. But what about the underlying facts? Did the UN return government vehicles? Did a UN staff member send text messages for rebels? 

Haq would not answer.  He referred back to his comments of two days before -- which said the government minister of information was banned from entering an UNMISS camp not only for arms, but also cameras. Could the cessation of hostile media policy be in place?

   That the UN banned from one of its bases a South Sudan minister citing his armed guards is one thing. But the UN has also cited that the minister's party had cameras. What's wrong with that? Especially when the UN publishes its own photographs of those inside the camps?

  Inner City Press on January 21 asked deputy UN spokesperson Farhan Haq to confirm that the Minister was blocked. Haq confirmed it, citing both arms and cameras. Video here.

  Inner City Press asked, what's wrong with cameras? It and the Free UN Coalition for Access have protests against various forms of attempted censorship by and at the UN. Haq backed off on cameras. But he'd said what he said, and not improvising: it was a written script. So what gives?

   With Uganda bragging of its role in re-taking Bor in South Sudan, the marginalization and double standards of the UN are ever more in focus.

  For week the Press asked the UN about Ugandan troops' presence in South Sudan, and if the UN as elsewhere at least called for restraint in the re-taking of population centers. 

   The UN dodged the questions, as recently as January 16 saying the Ugandans' presence -- offensive as now confirmed -- was just a bilateral matter between governments, and saying its focus is on protecting civilians in its bases.

  What is the message of Uganda bragging of having helped Salva Kiir retake Bor from rebels loyal to former vice president Riek Machar? What is the UN's role, if any, in the "cessation of hostilities" talks in Addis Ababa? The UN on those wouldn't even call for more inclusion of women, as it has for example on the Syria talks in Switzerland. We'll have more on this.

 In South Sudan, the lack of transparency by UN Peacekeeping does not serve it. On December 30, Department of Peacekeeping Operations chief Herve Ladsous admonished South Sudan to not put in "caveat" on accepting troops from any country.

Though Ladsous didn't name the country -- for reasons that soon became obvious -- and later in the week UN spokesperson Farhan Haq declined to specify any country being considered for South Sudan, later on December 30 at the UN Mission of an African (and troop contributing) country Inner City Press was told Ladsous was trying to push into South Sudan peacekeeping from Morocco. Click here for more on that.

  After telling Inner City Press "I don't answer you Mister," Ladsous dodged about the impact of shifting peacekeepers out of Darfur, where two had just been killed, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Then he mentioned, for South Sudan, "half a regiment" from the MINUSTAH mission in Haiti. UN Video here, from Minute 3:09.

  Now, which country's half-regiment could that be? Questions have been asked, particularly in light of UN Peacekeeping's dubious record in Haiti: the introduction of cholera, multiple cases of sexual abuse or exploitation, nearly always followed by mere repatriation and no update on any discipline meted out, for example in the case of repatriated Sri Lanka peacekeepers.

  The website of the UNMISS mission in South Sudan lists fully 55 countries as contributing peacekeepers (Morocco notably is NOT among them) and some additional countries contributing UN Police, including Zimbabwe.

On January 2 Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: Yes, Farhan. I wanted to ask you two questions about peacekeeping in South Sudan. One is that, it’s reported that India is unhappy with not being consulted in some of the ways their peacekeepers were used and intends to send its own military team to meet with its peacekeepers there. I wanted to know, separately, [Permanent Representative Asoke Kumar] Mukerji has, over the holidays, said that the Force Intervention Brigade may put peacekeepers in danger. What’s your response to that? And also, if you could confirm, I’ve heard that the UN wants to send Moroccan peacekeepers to South Sudan and they’re pushing back. And one of their reasons for pushing back is that Morocco is not a member of the African Union due to the Western Sahara. And I wanted if it’s DPKO’s (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) position that countries don’t have a right to have a sort of principled, political stand on why they wouldn’t take peacekeepers? Or should they take anyone that DPKO sends?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Well, first of all, we wouldn’t comment on the specifics of how we’re trying to bring more peacekeepers in. We, as you know, are in touch with a number of Member States trying to build up the forces, as was approved by the Security Council. And when we have details of which countries are coming in, we’ll provide those details at that point. But, I don’t have any specific names to give up until more arrivals come in.

Inner City Press: I ask that only because Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous at the stakeout made a big point of saying, it’s not… when the house is on fire, anyone must be taken. So, I just wanted to know, can you say… is that the UN’s position? That even if there’s a political, principled stated reason not to take them… that wouldn’t… that should be overridden?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: For us, the priority is to get as many peacekeepers in as we can. They’ve been authorized by the Security Council. We’re trying to get the right numbers in order to stop the bloodshed as soon as we possibly can. So, that’s our priority. But, if we have any specific announcements to make about different countries joining in, we’ll make it at that point. But, that’s not ready at this stage.

Inner City Press: And on India?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: I wouldn’t have any comment on that. Is that it? Okay? Pam?

Correspondent: Hi, Farhan. I’d like to just correct the record that was established at this briefing a few weeks ago that the UN Correspondents’ Association has not… does not have any new Samsung TV sets in the room, never has had and has never accepted any donation or loan from the UN for Samsung TVs. Thank you.

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, thanks. I’m in receipt of a letter from the United Nations Correspondent’s Association, which says, which does read: “Please be advised that there are no new Samsung TV sets in the UNCA room and have never been. And the UN Correspondents’ Association has not accepted a donation or loan of new Samsung TVs”. Thanks for that update. We’ll try to get any updated guidance about the language that we had earlier received. Yes?

Inner City Press: Because I’m thinking maybe you’ll correct the transcript on theanswer that was given to me in writing about the television. If so, do you have any response about the note verbale that was filed by Syria that we previously discussed here?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: No, there’s no response to that at present. But, yes, if there’s any fresh language on the language that was given to you, we’ll try to correct the record here. Yes, Lou?

Watch this site.

   

On South Sudan, As Machar Cites Ugandan Violations, UN's Ladsous Only with Kiir Officials?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 1 -- In South Sudan, the spokesperson for Riek Machar, James Gatdet Dak, has accused the Ugandan troops of violating the cessation of hostilities agreement signed in Addis Ababa and attacking the Machar forces around Bor in Jonglei state.

  On January 31 Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Farhan Haq to state any UN view on the Ugandan troops continued presence in South Sudan and any UN role in monitoring the cessation of hostilities agreement.

  Haq said that UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, in South Sudan on February 2, will meet with "senior Government officials."

   Well, if that's all he meets with, what role COULD his UN Peacekeeping have in impartial monitoring? It's like in the DRC: his UN Peacekeeping takes sides, based at least there on history. From the UN transcript, video here and embedded below:

Inner City Press: South Sudan, first, I wanted to know whether there’s any UN view of Riek Machar saying he stands to be charged with treason and that will set back all the, what was agreed in Addis. And I want to know, does the UN think that at this point charging or threatening to charge Mr. Machar with treason is productive? And also whether the UN agrees with Norway, which is one of this troika group, saying that the Ugandan… they believe at this point that the Ugandan troops that assisted the SPLA in retaking cities should leave. And finally, is there a UN role in monitoring of what was agreed in Addis? I know that you said Mr. Ladsous will be there and will be discussing… I didn’t hear the phrasing… is there a UN role in monitoring what was agreed to?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Yes, in terms of what I just read, yes. He’ll meet with senior Government officials to discuss the implementation of the recently signed ceasefire agreement and that will be one of his tasks. We’ll provide updates when we get them of his trip. Regarding the monitoring mechanism, I believe earlier this week we stressed the importance of having a monitoring mechanism, and I said at that point that the UN Mission in South Sudan — UNMISS —would try to assist as needed for the work of the monitors. But this is a separate monitoring mechanism that’s being set up.

Inner City Press: So will he meet with the other side, say, Mr. Machar, or the other side that reached the agreement in Addis?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: We’ll try to provide you with some details of his meetings once we get them. As I said just now, I just had the announcement of his trip. But we’ll try to do that. Certainly, he’s trying to meet with all parties and we hope that the parties continue to abide by the terms of the ceasefire agreement and work with each other and we would urge them to refrain from any unhelpful actions.

  
   We'll see what updates the UN and UN Peacekeeping actually give. 

  UN envoy in Juba Hilde Johnson of Norway, closely aligned with Kiir, has during the crisis been substantially lower profile than her deputy Tony Lanzer. On January 31 Inner City Press asked if the UN (and Hilde Johnson) share the view of Norway, that Uganda's troops which helped dislodge Machar's from Bor and Bentiu should now leave South Sudan. Haq did not answer this either.

  So what is the UN doing in South Sudan? For example, what has the UN Development Program accomplished? A close observer opines, as to constitutional review, that UNDP "funded the process including the commission yet the process was never inclusive. Its members were mainly individuals from the ruling party. They supported the same constitution that gave powers to the President and they reported its completion as a success."  Sounds like the UN...

  Right before the South Sudan cessation of hostilities (and cessation of "hostile media") deal was signed, Inner City Press asked Haq about the deal, and allegations against the UNMISS mission. Video here and embedded below.

  The signed deal, we note, has as one of three IGAD Special Envoys the Sudanese General Mohamed Ahmed Dabi, whose role in Syria in 2011 for the Arab League gave rise to much criticism. Look at him now.

 Inner City Press asked UN Security Council president Jordan's Senior Deputy Permanent Representative if the UN would have any role under the Monitoring and Verification Mechanism. He wasn't aware of you. His summary said the members of the Security Council "condemned the accusations" against UNMISS. One wondered: what if they're true?

   In his noon briefing response, Haq said the UN was "monitoring" the talks. He refused to comment on the allegations, calling them statements by South Sudanese officials. But what about the underlying facts? Did the UN return government vehicles? Did a UN staff member send text messages for rebels? 

Haq would not answer.  He referred back to his comments of two days before -- which said the government minister of information was banned from entering an UNMISS camp not only for arms, but also cameras. Could the cessation of hostile media policy be in place?

   That the UN banned from one of its bases a South Sudan minister citing his armed guards is one thing. But the UN has also cited that the minister's party had cameras. What's wrong with that? Especially when the UN publishes its own photographs of those inside the camps?

  Inner City Press on January 21 asked deputy UN spokesperson Farhan Haq to confirm that the Minister was blocked. Haq confirmed it, citing both arms and cameras. Video here.

  Inner City Press asked, what's wrong with cameras? It and the Free UN Coalition for Access have protests against various forms of attempted censorship by and at the UN. Haq backed off on cameras. But he'd said what he said, and not improvising: it was a written script. So what gives?

   With Uganda bragging of its role in re-taking Bor in South Sudan, the marginalization and double standards of the UN are ever more in focus.

  For week the Press asked the UN about Ugandan troops' presence in South Sudan, and if the UN as elsewhere at least called for restraint in the re-taking of population centers. 

   The UN dodged the questions, as recently as January 16 saying the Ugandans' presence -- offensive as now confirmed -- was just a bilateral matter between governments, and saying its focus is on protecting civilians in its bases.

  What is the message of Uganda bragging of having helped Salva Kiir retake Bor from rebels loyal to former vice president Riek Machar? What is the UN's role, if any, in the "cessation of hostilities" talks in Addis Ababa? The UN on those wouldn't even call for more inclusion of women, as it has for example on the Syria talks in Switzerland. We'll have more on this.

 In South Sudan, the lack of transparency by UN Peacekeeping does not serve it. On December 30, Department of Peacekeeping Operations chief Herve Ladsous admonished South Sudan to not put in "caveat" on accepting troops from any country.

Though Ladsous didn't name the country -- for reasons that soon became obvious -- and later in the week UN spokesperson Farhan Haq declined to specify any country being considered for South Sudan, later on December 30 at the UN Mission of an African (and troop contributing) country Inner City Press was told Ladsous was trying to push into South Sudan peacekeeping from Morocco. Click here for more on that.

  After telling Inner City Press "I don't answer you Mister," Ladsous dodged about the impact of shifting peacekeepers out of Darfur, where two had just been killed, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Then he mentioned, for South Sudan, "half a regiment" from the MINUSTAH mission in Haiti. UN Video here, from Minute 3:09.

  Now, which country's half-regiment could that be? Questions have been asked, particularly in light of UN Peacekeeping's dubious record in Haiti: the introduction of cholera, multiple cases of sexual abuse or exploitation, nearly always followed by mere repatriation and no update on any discipline meted out, for example in the case of repatriated Sri Lanka peacekeepers.

  The website of the UNMISS mission in South Sudan lists fully 55 countries as contributing peacekeepers (Morocco notably is NOT among them) and some additional countries contributing UN Police, including Zimbabwe.

On January 2 Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: Yes, Farhan. I wanted to ask you two questions about peacekeeping in South Sudan. One is that, it’s reported that India is unhappy with not being consulted in some of the ways their peacekeepers were used and intends to send its own military team to meet with its peacekeepers there. I wanted to know, separately, [Permanent Representative Asoke Kumar] Mukerji has, over the holidays, said that the Force Intervention Brigade may put peacekeepers in danger. What’s your response to that? And also, if you could confirm, I’ve heard that the UN wants to send Moroccan peacekeepers to South Sudan and they’re pushing back. And one of their reasons for pushing back is that Morocco is not a member of the African Union due to the Western Sahara. And I wanted if it’s DPKO’s (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) position that countries don’t have a right to have a sort of principled, political stand on why they wouldn’t take peacekeepers? Or should they take anyone that DPKO sends?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Well, first of all, we wouldn’t comment on the specifics of how we’re trying to bring more peacekeepers in. We, as you know, are in touch with a number of Member States trying to build up the forces, as was approved by the Security Council. And when we have details of which countries are coming in, we’ll provide those details at that point. But, I don’t have any specific names to give up until more arrivals come in.

Inner City Press: I ask that only because Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous at the stakeout made a big point of saying, it’s not… when the house is on fire, anyone must be taken. So, I just wanted to know, can you say… is that the UN’s position? That even if there’s a political, principled stated reason not to take them… that wouldn’t… that should be overridden?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: For us, the priority is to get as many peacekeepers in as we can. They’ve been authorized by the Security Council. We’re trying to get the right numbers in order to stop the bloodshed as soon as we possibly can. So, that’s our priority. But, if we have any specific announcements to make about different countries joining in, we’ll make it at that point. But, that’s not ready at this stage.

Inner City Press: And on India?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: I wouldn’t have any comment on that. Is that it? Okay? Pam?

Correspondent: Hi, Farhan. I’d like to just correct the record that was established at this briefing a few weeks ago that the UN Correspondents’ Association has not… does not have any new Samsung TV sets in the room, never has had and has never accepted any donation or loan from the UN for Samsung TVs. Thank you.

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, thanks. I’m in receipt of a letter from the United Nations Correspondent’s Association, which says, which does read: “Please be advised that there are no new Samsung TV sets in the UNCA room and have never been. And the UN Correspondents’ Association has not accepted a donation or loan of new Samsung TVs”. Thanks for that update. We’ll try to get any updated guidance about the language that we had earlier received. Yes?

Inner City Press: Because I’m thinking maybe you’ll correct the transcript on theanswer that was given to me in writing about the television. If so, do you have any response about the note verbale that was filed by Syria that we previously discussed here?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: No, there’s no response to that at present. But, yes, if there’s any fresh language on the language that was given to you, we’ll try to correct the record here. Yes, Lou?

Watch this site.