Showing posts with label mopti. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mopti. Show all posts

Friday, August 7, 2015

UN Silent As Staffer Said Killed in Mali Hotel Attack in Sevare, Ladsous Berated Malians For Not Thanking France


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 7 -- When UN Peacekeepers are determined, by the UN itself, to have killed three civilians in Mali by using excessive force, what accountability is there?  None - and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous on April 2 refused to answer questions about his own responsibility. Video hereVine here.  
  On August 7 at the UN's noon briefing Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric if it was true that a UN staff member was killed in an attack in Sevare in Mali, and another taken hostage. From the UN's transcript:
Inner City Press: I was kind of expecting you to have readout on this attack in Mali on the hotel in Sevare.  Are… are UN peacekeepers involved in the hotel, what is the status?

Spokesman Dujarric:  The information we received from our Mission is that obviously they are aware of these reports of an attack by unknown armed men near the hotel in Sevare, Mopti.  The Mission is closely monitoring the events and following up with its office in Mopti, as well as with the Malian authorities.  So the situation is ongoing.  As soon as they report back to us we be will able to share information with you.

Inner City Press:  Actually because the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry has said that one of its nationals is involved and held hostage.  Are there Ukrainians serving with MINUSMA in Sevare?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I’m not able to answer that from this podium at this time. 

 So Dujarric would not answer "for this podium." But throughout the afternoon of August 7, Dujarric did not answer in any other way.
 Amid increasing reports of the UN staffer's death, allegedly confirmed by MINUSMA - which sent out no announcement -- Inner City Press re-inquired with the spokesperson's office and obtained a hard-copy only statement, re-typed below. Then the UN Spokesperson's Office closed. Ladsous, it seemed, remained on vacation. Here is the statement:
  “Early this morning, unidentified armed men launched an attack on a Malian military site in the town of Sevare, in the Mopti region. The attackers, who were pushed back by the Malian Armed Forces, then took refuge in a hotel in town (Byblos). Confrontation between the attackers and the Malian Armed and Security Forces continued throughout the morning and shots continue to be fired sporadically at the hotel and in its vicinity.
  “Available reports indicate that a member of the international personnel associated with MINUSMA was killed in the attack. MINUSMA condemns this despicable attack in the strongest terms. MINUSMA continues to very closely monitor developments and to coordinate its efforts with the Malian authorities and the representatives of the international community and Barkhane.
  “At the request of the Malian authorities, MINUSMA has taken measures to ensure the transport of a Malian rapid intervention team from Bamako to Sevare as reinforcements for the national armed and security forces who are on location. This team is accompanied by MINUSMA Police experts who will provide technical support, if necessary. MINUSMA has also reinforced security at the Sevare - Mopti airport and deployed a medical team that is already stationed at the airport to provide any necessary assistance.”
 Back on August 3, MINUSMA issued a statement on two separate attacks against Mali's Army and National Guard, which the Free UN Coalition for Access translates here:
“MINUSMA condemns with vigor the cowardly terrorist attacks against the National Army and security forces of Mali by unidentified armed men in the center and north of the country. The first attack targeted the Malian Armed Forces on August 1 in an ambush on the  Diabaly-Nampala axis, six kilometers from Toule in the commune of Nampala, in the Segou region. The second attack was carried out early on August 3 against a unit of the National Guard based in Gourma Rharous, 120 kilometers east of Timbuktu.
  “MINUSMA extends its condolences to the Government, Army and security forces of Mali as well as to the families of the victims. It wishes for a fast recovery for the wounded. MINUSMA underlines again the urgency of advancing the peace process with the goal of assuring that the government and the parties act together with the support of the population to stop the terrorist threat posed to Mali and its people.”
  Back on July 24, after a mortar attack on the UN Peacekeeping camp at Aguelhok that caused no casualties, MINUSMA issued a statement.
  One might note: the UN speaks out strongly about a mortar attack on it which caused no damage, while in Burundi as opposition figures and civilians are killed, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon from an undisclosed location called the elections peaceful, and is for now silent on the attack on human rights defender Mbonimmpa.
  On July 2, after an attack 45 kilometers from Timbuktu killed six peacekeepers and injured five, MINUSMA issued a statement which the Free UN Coalition for Accesstranslates here:

   “This morning around 9 am, a patrol of the MINUSMA forces was the subject of an armed attack by unidentified assailants on the Goundam - Timbuktu axis, some 45 kilometers southwest of Timbuktu. Preliminary reports indicate that six peacekeepers were killed and five more were wounded. Their evacuation is underway. Two MINUSMA vehicles were destroyed. 
"Reinforcements from MINUSMA are en route to the site of the attack and attack helicopters have also been deployed from Timbuktu for air support. Mongi Hamdi, the head of MINUSMA, said 'I condemn this new terrorist attack against our Blue Helmets. Those responsible for this crime should be identified and brought to justice without delay.' The chief of MINUSMA extends his condolences to the families of the victims and wishes for a fast recovery for the wounded. He recalls that the UN Security Council in Resolution 2227 of June 29, 2015 renewing the mandate of MINUSMA declared itself read to consider sanctions against those who launch attacks against MINUSMA or threatened to do so.”
  The reference to attack helicopters is noted.
After his May 16 press conference in Bamako, Ladsoussaid the UN's report about its killings in Gao will never be released; follow up question here. During the press conference, tellingly, Ladsous berated Malians for not sufficiently thanking... France and its Force Serval. Audio here, Minute 27:52.  
  Ladsous said, referring to criticism of him and his mission by Mali's president and others at the signing ceremony the day before, "Did I hear a single word of thanks for France and its Operation Serval? No." (Translation by Free UN Coalition for Access.)
   In this use of his UN post to serve France, for which he was a (most undiplomatic) diplomat for decades, this is similar to Ladsous' much worse intervention into the process of the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in trying to get fired OHCHR whistleblower Anders Kompass, who exposed reports of French Sangaris Force soldiers raping children.
  This appears in the UN Dispute Tribunal rulingreinstating Kompass, at Paragraph 9. It was not contested by OHCHR.  Ladsous, breaking with his striking refusal to answer Press questions, told Inner City Press, "I deny that." Video here.
 But Ladsous has not explained or answered what he is denying: getting involved in l'affaire Kompass at all, or just the wording? Ladsous was not asked this question in Bamako. 
 On May 18, Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq who Ladsous was speaking for:
Inner City Press: Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous of DPKO held a press conference in Bamako over the weekend.  There was some criticism, by actually the President of Mali, of the mission.  But, I wanted to ask specifically, in his press conference, he said that he sort of chided, he said:  Was there even a word of thanks for its operation in Sangaris?  No.  Isn't that curious?  And I wanted to know, in what capacity was he saying that?  Is the UN?  Does the UN have a position on Malians not being sufficiently grateful to France or was he speaking in some other capacity?

Deputy Spokesman:  I don't have any real comment.  I would just refer you to the text of his statements.  And if you have anything further, you can ask our colleagues in peacekeeping.
  Later on May 18, a well placed African Permanent Representative said "Ladsous should resign."
 On May 10, two UN Peacekeepers were wounded in Mopti in Mali, see below.

 Now Ladsous is under fire for appearing in a UN Dispute Tribunal ruling as urging the firing of the whistleblower who exposed rapes by French soldiers in the Central African Republic. Ladsous denied it - to Inner City Press - but the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights did not dispute it. Accountability?
 On May 10 "around 1 pm, the forces of MINUSMA on patrols hit a mine or an improvised explosive device 25 kilometers from Tenenkou, in the region of Mopti,” MISUMSA said in a statement.
  “Two blue helmets were seriously injured by the explosion and their evacuation to the MINUSMA hospital in Timbuktu was underway, MINUSMA said.
   “The head of MINUSMA Mongi Hamdi strongly the attack against the peacekeepers and emphasized that MINUSMA remains more determined than ever to implement its mandate in support of Mali and its people.”
 On May 8, the UN announced what the Press already knew, that Mbaranga Gasarabwe, a Rwandan national, is moving from the Department of Safety and Security in New York to become Hamdi's deputy in Mali. We wish her well.
Tellingly, Ladsous refused an invitation to attend a "protection of civilians" high level event in Rwanda in May, click here for that scoop.
 Back on April 27 the MINUSMA mission issued a statement that the Platforme group attacked the town of Manaka, loosely translated by Inner City Press below. But how does UN Peacekeeping killing civilians, then its boss refusing to answer or even take questions about it, impact the UN's credibility?
 Here is our loose translation of the MINUSMA press release of April 27:
SRSG Mongi Hamdi called for the armed groups to immediately cease hostilities and return to their positions. “This resurgence of tension puts in jeopardy all efforts to restore durable peace in Mali,” Hamdi said. MINUSMA said that on Monday near noon the mission learned of an attack launched by the MAA-Platform and GATIA groups on the town of Menaka, held by elements of the Coordination of Movement of Azawad (CMA). MINUSMA said it deployed helicopters to evaluate the situation.
Hamdi went to Nouakchott on April 26 to meet the representatives of the CMA, who reaffirmed their adherence to the peace process under way, and confirmed their intention to initial the agreement.
Two months of intense negotiations involving all of the parties with a view to put an end to the Malian crisis could be threatened. These actions are a grave violation of the ceasefire accords reiterated in the declaration of February 19, 2105,” Hamdi said in his statement.
Hamdi also cited the UN Security Council's statement of February 6 which threatened the imposition of targeted sanctions on anyone who returned to hostilities and violated the ceasefire.
I therefore appeal for calm and reason for the benefit of all Malians. The only solution to this crisis is through the route of dialogue. I remain convinced that all the parties will show wisdom and reason and sign this historic peace agreement,” Hamdi said.
  Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN about Darfur on April 27:
Inner City Press: on Darfur, I saw the clarification put out by UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur], but the Government of Sudan is saying that the UNAMID peacekeepers killed seven civilians, and I wonder, what… beyond just UNAMID putting out a press release, some of which in the past have been press releases that the UN has ultimately walked away from, is there an intention to do the type of report that was done in Mali when people were killed or in Haiti when people… when people were shot at?

Deputy Spokesman Frahan haq:  On that, I actually expect that we will have a statement from the Spokesman for the Secretary-General responding to the latest events in Darfur.  So, I'll wait until… until we get that.

Inner City Press:  But, is the protocol if a Member State alleges that UN peacekeepers have killed civilians to do such a report, or is there no such protocol?

Deputy Spokesman:  Like I said… first of all, I… as you know, you're aware of the press release from UNAMID, which is their clarification of the situation, and then beyond that, we do expect to have a statement attributable to the Spokesperson.
  But when the statement came it did not even mention the government's allegations. Khartoum's credibility may be low - but what about Ladsous'? We'll have more on this.


 
  

Sunday, February 2, 2014

In Mali, Kidal was UNheard in Mopti by UNSC, After Killings, Gang Rapes UNresolved, Servile like Serval


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 2 -- With UN Security Council members in Mali, it is one thing that they did not visit the north due to safety concerns. But given the centrality of Kidal to the split in the country, how could their meeting in Mopti with "civil society" from the north not include Kidal? 

  It is confirmed, by French-selected scribes: the Council met with it "civil society from Timbuktu, Gao and Mopti" - and NOT from Kidal. But the scribes, typically, did not question the omission, much less disparities in description of killings in Kidal or the lack of transparency by the UN about gang rapes by its peacekeepers, despite claims of "zero tolerance."

  On February 3, France's Operation Serval is set to make a presentation. While the Security Council has so far remained silent about France's Operation Sangaris' killings in Central African Republic, and taking sides and leaving some at risk as even Navi Pillay noted, more should be expected in person in Mali.

MaliActu, a publication on which the government in Bamako has previously cracked down and threatenedreported that Kidal was notrepresented in the meeting: "Les émissaires de l’ONU ont rencontré les représentants de la société civile -chefs religieux ou traditionnels, fonctionnaires- de Mopti, Gao, et Tombouctou, mais pas de Kidal."  
  It and the below are important issues, but are not addressed in the tweetsand facebook-ed statements of the Council members on the trip, much less in MINUSMA's upbeat photos of Bert Koenders and France's Gerard Araud inspecting the troops. 
   Did the Security Council, led by France and Chad, meet with leaders from Kidal or not? Especially given the dipute, below, about killings in Kidal?
  So far, the way France arranges this trips like the one to the Democratic Republic of the Congo last year, there is too little media coverage, at least online, about the trip. 
   Alongside a growing with of tweets (beginning with UKLithuaniaUS,now joined by Luxembourg, Bert Koenders and Araud inspecting the troops),, the Council members have returned to Bamako. Not yet mentioned: the UNresolved charges of gang rape by the UN peacekeepers from Chad.
  If the UN's and Security Council's stated policies on sexual violence and conflict and "Zero Tolerance" mean anything, the issue will have to be addressed, and publicly, during the two day trip.
  Back on January 16 the UN Spokesperson's Office sent Inner City Press this response, which does not answer the question of accountability. But here it is, in full:
Subject: Your question on Mali
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 3:23 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com
In response to your question about the follow-up to the allegations of sexual assault by United Nations peacekeepers in MINUSMA in September 2013, we have received the following information:
The Department of Peacekeeping Operations officially notified the Government of Chad of these allegations in late September. The Government of Chad officially responded, saying that it would take responsibility for the investigations. The Government of Chad has further advised the Department of Peacekeeping Operations that it has completed the national investigation, and the United Nations awaits advice on the outcome of the investigations and follow-up accountability measures as appropriate.
  The UN is waiting for "advice" -- but will it ever make it public? How else can the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy be assessed?
  On January 17, Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it. From the UN's transcriptvideo here and embedded below:
Inner City Press: On Mali, I wanted to thank you for this written answer you gave yesterday afternoon that Mali has said that its completed its investigation of the alleged rape in Mali by the Chadian troops. And it said that the UN awaits advice on the outcome of the investigation. And what I wanted to know is whether… what part of that is going to be made public, given both the human rights due diligence policy, etcetera? I appreciate you saying that the investigation is finished, but, has… did they clear the soldiers? Were the soldiers found guilty? Where does it stand?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: As we emailed to you, the Mission does await advice on the outcome of the proceedings. We know that there have been proceedings regarding the case. You know this is a case regarding sexual assault and so, we await further information from that. We’ll try to make public what we can of the information that we receive.
Inner City Press: So, they literally just told you that it’s complete, but…no indication on what was done? I guess I wonder when --
Acting Deputy Spokesperson: The information I have in the email that was sent to you is the information we have. If we have any further updates, we’ll share it with you at that point.
  Two weeks later, nothing. So what will members of the Security Council ask, find and make public?

  One of the UN's other too-few criticisms of military action in north Mail, the shooting into a crowd of protesters in Kidal on November 28, was disputed in the Security Council on January 16.
  In a statement prepared like a defense attorney, trying raise reasonable doubt, Mali's Permanent Representative Sekou Kasse said that the UN Mission MINUSMA elements closest to the shooting were 400 meters away, precluding them from "objective" testimony. 
  The argument made was one must wait for the ballistic analysis ordered by the Malian government itself. Will that be credible? Shouldn't the Council, or less "invested" Council members, inquire into this during the two day visit?
 Again, similarly, can statements by the French Mission to the UN, about military action in its former colony Mali and related topics, be believed? If so, does that require disbelieving the UN itself, whose reports are different?
  In the run-up to the UN Security Council's January 16 meeting on Mali, both France and the UN Mission MINUSMA filed reports. It's worth comparing their accounts of the same incidents, for example on October 23, 2013 in Tessalit.
France gave a Polyanna report emphasizing its good works and downplaying death:
"On 23 October 2013, in response to an attack on a Chadian post in Tessalit by a commando made up of three armed terrorist groups using a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, the Operation Serval Liaison and Support Detachment assigned to the Chadian battalion assisted MINUSMA by conducting a patrol with a Mirage 2000D jet and sending a CASA 'Nurse' medical evacuation aircraft. The end result was that six wounded Chadians were evacuated and the remaining explosives were neutralized."
  The UN by contrast recounts seven deaths including five civilians (one child) and two peacekeepers:
"On 23 October, four individuals drove and detonated a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device into a MINUSMA checkpoint in Tessalit. Seven people were killed, including four adult civilians, a six-year-old boy and two MINUSMA peacekeepers."
  This type of disparities in reporting - misleading - would and should be delved into into during the two day Council trip. How and where will these disparities be explained?
  One might say, ask at the Security Council stakeout. But in mid JanuaryFrench Permanent Representative Gerard Araud used the stakeout to rail against publication of a New York Police Department document concerning a French diplomat -- contrasting with the case of Indian diplomat Khobragade -- an NYPD document on which Araud's French Mission to the UN had declined to comment, responding only with threats that publication would a "hostile act."
 While continuing to pursue that, particularly given developments in the Khobragade case, delving into the French report, and the roles of UN Peacekeeping, MINUSMA and their respective leadership(s), should be done - including by the Council during their two days "on the ground." Watch this site.

 
  

In Mali, When UNSC Met in Mopti, MaliActu Reports Kidal UNrepresented After Killings. And Gang Rapes?


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 2 -- When UN Security Council members visited Mopti, not all the way into the north but closer to it than Bamako, the stated goal was to meet with leaders from the north of the country.

  But MaliActu, a publication on which the government in Bamako has previously cracked down and threatenedreports that Kidal was norepresented in the meeting: "Les émissaires de l’ONU ont rencontré les représentants de la société civile -chefs religieux ou traditionnels, fonctionnaires- de Mopti, Gao, et Tombouctou, mais pas de Kidal."  

  It and the below are important issues, but are not addressed in the tweets and facebook-ed statements of the Council members on the trip, much less in MINUSMA's upbeat photos of Bert Koenders and France's Gerard Araud inspecting the troops. 

   Did the Security Council, led by France and Chad, meet with leaders from Kidal or not? Especially given the dipute, below, about killings in Kidal?
  So far, the way France arranges this trips like the one to the Democratic Republic of the Congo last year, there is too little media coverage, at least online, about the trip. 
   Alongside a growing with of tweets (beginning with UKLithuaniaUS,now joined by Luxembourg, Bert Koenders and Araud inspecting the troops),, the Council members have returned to Bamako. Not yet mentioned: the UNresolved charges of gang rape by the UN peacekeepers from Chad.
  If the UN's and Security Council's stated policies on sexual violence and conflict and "Zero Tolerance" mean anything, the issue will have to be addressed, and publicly, during the two day trip.
  Back on January 16 the UN Spokesperson's Office sent Inner City Press this response, which does not answer the question of accountability. But here it is, in full:
Subject: Your question on Mali
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 3:23 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com
In response to your question about the follow-up to the allegations of sexual assault by United Nations peacekeepers in MINUSMA in September 2013, we have received the following information:
The Department of Peacekeeping Operations officially notified the Government of Chad of these allegations in late September. The Government of Chad officially responded, saying that it would take responsibility for the investigations. The Government of Chad has further advised the Department of Peacekeeping Operations that it has completed the national investigation, and the United Nations awaits advice on the outcome of the investigations and follow-up accountability measures as appropriate.
  The UN is waiting for "advice" -- but will it ever make it public? How else can the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy be assessed?
  On January 17, Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it. From the UN's transcriptvideo here and embedded below:
Inner City Press: On Mali, I wanted to thank you for this written answer you gave yesterday afternoon that Mali has said that its completed its investigation of the alleged rape in Mali by the Chadian troops. And it said that the UN awaits advice on the outcome of the investigation. And what I wanted to know is whether… what part of that is going to be made public, given both the human rights due diligence policy, etcetera? I appreciate you saying that the investigation is finished, but, has… did they clear the soldiers? Were the soldiers found guilty? Where does it stand?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: As we emailed to you, the Mission does await advice on the outcome of the proceedings. We know that there have been proceedings regarding the case. You know this is a case regarding sexual assault and so, we await further information from that. We’ll try to make public what we can of the information that we receive.
Inner City Press: So, they literally just told you that it’s complete, but…no indication on what was done? I guess I wonder when --
Acting Deputy Spokesperson: The information I have in the email that was sent to you is the information we have. If we have any further updates, we’ll share it with you at that point.
  Two weeks later, nothing. So what will members of the Security Council ask, find and make public?

  One of the UN's other too-few criticisms of military action in north Mail, the shooting into a crowd of protesters in Kidal on November 28, was disputed in the Security Council on January 16.
  In a statement prepared like a defense attorney, trying raise reasonable doubt, Mali's Permanent Representative Sekou Kasse said that the UN Mission MINUSMA elements closest to the shooting were 400 meters away, precluding them from "objective" testimony. 
  The argument made was one must wait for the ballistic analysis ordered by the Malian government itself. Will that be credible? Shouldn't the Council, or less "invested" Council members, inquire into this during the two day visit?
 Again, similarly, can statements by the French Mission to the UN, about military action in its former colony Mali and related topics, be believed? If so, does that require disbelieving the UN itself, whose reports are different?
  In the run-up to the UN Security Council's January 16 meeting on Mali, both France and the UN Mission MINUSMA filed reports. It's worth comparing their accounts of the same incidents, for example on October 23, 2013 in Tessalit.
France gave a Polyanna report emphasizing its good works and downplaying death:
"On 23 October 2013, in response to an attack on a Chadian post in Tessalit by a commando made up of three armed terrorist groups using a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, the Operation Serval Liaison and Support Detachment assigned to the Chadian battalion assisted MINUSMA by conducting a patrol with a Mirage 2000D jet and sending a CASA 'Nurse' medical evacuation aircraft. The end result was that six wounded Chadians were evacuated and the remaining explosives were neutralized."
  The UN by contrast recounts seven deaths including five civilians (one child) and two peacekeepers:
"On 23 October, four individuals drove and detonated a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device into a MINUSMA checkpoint in Tessalit. Seven people were killed, including four adult civilians, a six-year-old boy and two MINUSMA peacekeepers."
  This type of disparities in reporting - misleading - would and should be delved into into during the two day Council trip. How and where will these disparities be explained?
  One might say, ask at the Security Council stakeout. But in mid JanuaryFrench Permanent Representative Gerard Araud used the stakeout to rail against publication of a New York Police Department document concerning a French diplomat -- contrasting with the case of Indian diplomat Khobragade -- an NYPD document on which Araud's French Mission to the UN had declined to comment, responding only with threats that publication would a "hostile act."
 While continuing to pursue that, particularly given developments in the Khobragade case, delving into the French report, and the roles of UN Peacekeeping, MINUSMA and their respective leadership(s), should be done - including by the Council during their two days "on the ground." Watch this site.

 
  

In Mali, UNSC Went to Mopti But Not Further North: Anything on Kidal Killings, Gang Rapes by Peacekeepers? RFI Calls Araud "Nuanced But Clear"


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 2 -- The UN's Mali mission promoted the visit of members of the Security Council to Mopti, not all the way into the north but closer to it than Bamako. In closed door meetings in New York with the UN Department of Safety and Security, which Inner City Press upon request chose not to report on, a visit further north was discouraged. So what will be accomplished?


   Alongside a growing with of tweets (beginning with UKLithuaniaUS,now joined by Luxembourg, Bert Koenders and Araud inspecting the troops),, the Council members have returned to Bamako. Not yet mentioned: the UNresolved charges of gang rape by the UN peacekeepers from Chad.
  If the UN's and Security Council's stated policies on sexual violence and conflict and "Zero Tolerance" mean anything, the issue will have to be addressed, and publicly, during the two day trip.
  Back on January 16 the UN Spokesperson's Office sent Inner City Press this response, which does not answer the question of accountability. But here it is, in full:
Subject: Your question on Mali
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 3:23 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com
In response to your question about the follow-up to the allegations of sexual assault by United Nations peacekeepers in MINUSMA in September 2013, we have received the following information:
The Department of Peacekeeping Operations officially notified the Government of Chad of these allegations in late September. The Government of Chad officially responded, saying that it would take responsibility for the investigations. The Government of Chad has further advised the Department of Peacekeeping Operations that it has completed the national investigation, and the United Nations awaits advice on the outcome of the investigations and follow-up accountability measures as appropriate.
  The UN is waiting for "advice" -- but will it ever make it public? How else can the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy be assessed?
  On January 17, Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it. From the UN's transcriptvideo here and embedded below:
Inner City Press: On Mali, I wanted to thank you for this written answer you gave yesterday afternoon that Mali has said that its completed its investigation of the alleged rape in Mali by the Chadian troops. And it said that the UN awaits advice on the outcome of the investigation. And what I wanted to know is whether… what part of that is going to be made public, given both the human rights due diligence policy, etcetera? I appreciate you saying that the investigation is finished, but, has… did they clear the soldiers? Were the soldiers found guilty? Where does it stand?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: As we emailed to you, the Mission does await advice on the outcome of the proceedings. We know that there have been proceedings regarding the case. You know this is a case regarding sexual assault and so, we await further information from that. We’ll try to make public what we can of the information that we receive.
Inner City Press: So, they literally just told you that it’s complete, but…no indication on what was done? I guess I wonder when --
Acting Deputy Spokesperson: The information I have in the email that was sent to you is the information we have. If we have any further updates, we’ll share it with you at that point.
  Two weeks later, nothing. So what will members of the Security Council ask, find and make public?

  One of the UN's other too-few criticisms of military action in north Mail, the shooting into a crowd of protesters in Kidal on November 28, was disputed in the Security Council on January 16.
  In a statement prepared like a defense attorney, trying raise reasonable doubt, Mali's Permanent Representative Sekou Kasse said that the UN Mission MINUSMA elements closest to the shooting were 400 meters away, precluding them from "objective" testimony. 
  The argument made was one must wait for the ballistic analysis ordered by the Malian government itself. Will that be credible? Shouldn't the Council, or less "invested" Council members, inquire into this during the two day visit?
 Again, similarly, can statements by the French Mission to the UN, about military action in its former colony Mali and related topics, be believed? If so, does that require disbelieving the UN itself, whose reports are different?
  In the run-up to the UN Security Council's January 16 meeting on Mali, both France and the UN Mission MINUSMA filed reports. It's worth comparing their accounts of the same incidents, for example on October 23, 2013 in Tessalit.
France gave a Polyanna report emphasizing its good works and downplaying death:
"On 23 October 2013, in response to an attack on a Chadian post in Tessalit by a commando made up of three armed terrorist groups using a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, the Operation Serval Liaison and Support Detachment assigned to the Chadian battalion assisted MINUSMA by conducting a patrol with a Mirage 2000D jet and sending a CASA 'Nurse' medical evacuation aircraft. The end result was that six wounded Chadians were evacuated and the remaining explosives were neutralized."
  The UN by contrast recounts seven deaths including five civilians (one child) and two peacekeepers:
"On 23 October, four individuals drove and detonated a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device into a MINUSMA checkpoint in Tessalit. Seven people were killed, including four adult civilians, a six-year-old boy and two MINUSMA peacekeepers."
  This type of disparities in reporting - misleading - would and should be delved into into during the two day Council trip. How and where will these disparities be explained?
  One might say, ask at the Security Council stakeout. But in mid JanuaryFrench Permanent Representative Gerard Araud used the stakeout to rail against publication of a New York Police Department document concerning a French diplomat -- contrasting with the case of Indian diplomat Khobragade -- an NYPD document on which Araud's French Mission to the UN had declined to comment, responding only with threats that publication would a "hostile act."
 While continuing to pursue that, particularly given developments in the Khobragade case, delving into the French report, and the roles of UN Peacekeeping, MINUSMA and their respective leadership(s), should be done - including by the Council during their two days "on the ground." Watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

On Casualties in Mali, France Points at Resolution 2085 It Says It's Not Under, Applauding Ban Ki-moon to Deploy?



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 22 -- After the Mali meetings of the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Gerard Araud about civilian casualties, about French bombings halting humanitarian aid in Gao, Konna and Mopti, and about executions by France's allies in the Malian Army, which includes coup leader Amadou Sanogo.

  Araud's response was that France negotiated Security Council resolution 2085, which includes some human rights language. But on his way into the Council in the morning, when Inner City Press asked when this resolution would be implemented, 
Araud replied that France is not operating under Resolution 2085.

  After quoting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon "applauding" France's intervention (while only "encouraging" ECOWAS and the African Union), Araud said France is urging Ban to quickly deploy monitors in Mali.

  But what of those already executed by the Malian Army?

  During the Security Council meeting, after a number of former French colonies praised Operation Serval, it was said that 6000 troops might become part of AFISMA. Chad's Ambassador told Inner City Press his country's 2000 would not necessarily all be part of AFISMA. So how many are?

  Inner City Press asked Araud about the critiques of France's intervention leveled by Egypt and Turkey, among others. Araud replied only on the first, saying that President Morsi is coming to Paris. Well, Gaddafi went to Paris before him, and we see how that worked out. Watch this site.