Showing posts with label serval. Show all posts
Showing posts with label serval. Show all posts

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Amid UN Rape Talk, Ladsous Leaves UNSC, UN Women No Comment, Serval Questions



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 10 -- Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 On March 4 at 11 am Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report on "Special measures for protection from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse" came out from under embargo and Inner City Press immediately published this review.

Ban's response is inadequate; tellingly, it is not the boss of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who has on camera linked the rapes to R&R, who is presenting or pitching the response, but lower profile Atul Khare.

On March 10, Ban presented his report to the UN Security Council, followed by Council members' speeches. Ladsous attended - refusing Inner City Press' question about Code Blue's critique on the way in -- and left even as China was speaking.

 Later at the March 10 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked the director of UN Women Phumzile Mlambo, not for the first time, for her response to Ladsous having publicly linked the rapes to R&R. She replied that she remembered the Press question, but hadn't been able to "corroborate" it.

  "Watch your Twitter feed," Inner City Press said, and send her (and Brazil's Permanent Representative Patriota) the video link.

  Spain in the debate said that countries should have six months to take action. So how long has French taken on the Sangaris rapes? Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric for his view. He said the French process is ongoing. For how long?

  We'll have more on the question of whether the draft Security Council resolution should also address Sangaris, and for example the French Force Licorne in Cote d'Ivoire. Inner City Press asked Brazil's Patriota if the issue should be in the General Assembly as well. He said yes, citing Jose Ramos Horta -- who has chimed in to the UN against its ouster of Inner City Press, so far without it being reversed. Now we can say: Ban knows. Personally.

On March 4 at the 11:15 am press conference -- tellingly, the UN Correspondents Association wasn't present - Inner City Press asked Khare why it wasn't Ladsous presenting, why Ban Ki-moon noted without criticism a mere nine day suspension for sexual exploitation, why sexual abuse of a 14 year old was classified by the UN as "transactional"?

 Khare did not explain Ladsous' absence, nor answer if Ladsous was the unnamed UN official who pre-spun Reuters and a few others.

He did not directly say that Reuters broke the embargo - he said to ask DPI about that , which is funny in that DPI threw Inner City Press out of the UN for trying to cover an event in this same UN Press Briefing Room, while collaborating with Reuters - but added he was surprised to see the advance story. Video here.

There is no accountability at the top - or in the field. The March 4 report in Paragraph 20 presents as legitimate a nine day suspension for sexual exploitation, and undefined "administrative sanctions" for sexual exploitation that led to a "Peacekeeper baby." This is shameful.

  Zeid firing whistleblower Kompass was asking about by France 24 - but not Ladsous.

 As to the Central African Republic, where the UN covered up French Sangaris troops child rapes and then fired the whistleblower -- not mentioned in the report -- the UN blamed the victims, saying the country is poor, women and girls are for sale: a more diplomatic entree into what Ladsous came out and said on September 11, 2015, linking rapes to R&R.

 Combine this with an Inner City Press question Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric refused to answer - how could the UN log in sexual abuse of a 14 year old, statutory rape, as "transactional" sex -- and the scam of Ban's response becomes clear.

 Perhaps because the product is so worthless, the attempt to sell and spin it was extensive.

  Since December Inner City Press has asked at noon briefings when Ban Ki-moon's response to the Deschamps report would be released, including asking about member state dissatisfaction with the response, and Ladsous.  "March," Ban's two spokesman said.

 On Wednesday Inner City Press learned that not the official responsible for the rapes, Herve Ladsous, but lower profile Atul Khare had shot a UN TV "interview" about the response. Now, in similar propaganda fashion, an UNnamed UN official has poured the spin on Reuters and the old "small group of reporters" -- that is, those who never reported that Ladsous, on camera, linked the rapes to R&R. This is the UN Corruption Association.
 
  Inner City Press on March 3 asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, video hereUN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about DPKO.  I've seen a story in which an unnamed UN peacekeeping official has, I guess, previewed what Mr. Khare is going to say on Friday, and he talks about possible court-martials and even DNA testing.  And I guess… first, I wanted to ask, who was he?  And the reason I ask is, if you're talking about name and shame, why would DPKO be presenting its information anonymously?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Matthew, the background briefings that are provided are background briefings.  You know that we have background briefings.  You've attended them.  And I will abide by the rules of them.

Inner City Press:  Did Mr. Atul Khare conduct already, on Wednesday of this week, a sit-down interview with UNTV?  And, if so, when will it be released?  And why would… is this actually a publicity campaign to promote belated response to the rapes in the CAR [Central African Republic]?  Or can we see the video now?  Is it under embargo?  I would like to know what the rules of that.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Different UN officials do, in fact, talk to UNTV, and that's part of what we do in order to actually communicate the work of the United Nations.  There's nothing untoward about that.  And it will air at some point fairly soon, I believe.  But, ultimately, it becomes public when it does.  You'll be able to see it on the website, as anyone else.

  But, even as to the report which the UN insisted was under embargo until 11 am on March 4, when Reuters nevertheless published a weak story about it on March 3, with no mention of Ladsous, the UN did nothing.

  Given the UN's no due process move to on February 19 expel Inner City Press from the UN for merely trying to cover an event in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29, petition here, Inner City Press strictly complied with the embargo although obtaining the report through other channels was easy.

 Reuters doesn't have to worry about the UN throwing it out - it does (some in) the UN's dirty work. We'll have more on this as well.

  Even from within DPKO there is disgust at the response, as dodging or not implement many of the recommendations. More on that when the UN belatedly comes out from behind its self-pleasuring curtain of its own media, and insider scribes. One final note: the Reuters bureau chief at the March 1 press conference by Angola on its Program of work loudly cut off another reporter - not this one -- as if owning the UN.
  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  In the email chain Inner City Press exclusively published, middle management at the UN noted that the majority of sexual abuse in CAR has been committed by the battalions from the DRC and the Republic of Congo. And so Inner City Press posed these questions to UN spokespeople in both New York and the CAR:

"This is a request for your comment on, and any update on, the sexual abuse and exploitation cases in the Feb 11, 2016 emails now here

Also, what will be done with the Republic of Congo and DR Congo contingents? We are interested in if the UN and DPKO can, as currently be configured, be reformed.What is the status of the sexual abuse and exploitation cases that have been listed, including in the UN Press Briefing Room?"

  The response received by Inner City Press on Saturday afternoon in New York was from Bangui-based MINUSCA spokesman Vladimir Monteiro:

"Regarding your questions on DRC and Congo, here is Minusca's position:

"On DRC contingent, a decision to repatriate them has already been taken. It will be completed without delay by the end of the month. It is just a matter of planning it properly.

"On the 120 troops from Congo, they have been cantoned in Berberati to permit investigations by national investigators before their repatriation to their country  which will occur on 20 February 2016. For further details on this matter please contact HQ."

  But of course Inner City Press has already contacted "HQ" or UN Headquarters, including for example Ismini Palla of Ladsous' DPKO, who gave Agence France Presse the response to questions Inner City Press has publicly posed to UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to the DPKO spokesman Nick Birnback, also cc-ed.

  So where ARE the updates on the cases the UN's Diane Corner listed in the UN Briefing Room? Why was it reported in early January that the DRC contingent had "been dismissed" when, in mid February, they are still in place? What is the status of the Burundian contingent in CAR? Follow up questions have been submitted to UN officials and spokespeople in CAR and headquarters in New York.

  Well placed sources tell Inner City Press these two countries' soldiers have been in the UN MINUSCA mission nearly entirely due to Ladsous and, more outrageously, the / his French government due to its political relations with the Republic of Congo and DRC.

  Ladsous, as Inner City Press has reported, told Burundi's Vice President that he is "pragmatic" about human rights; even on camera, Ladsous linked the rapes to "R&R," click here for video.

  While Ladsous' DPKO and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson announced that the DRC contingent would be pulled out of Bambari and CAR in late Janaury, Inner City Press is informed this never happened: they are still there.

  Ladsous' DPKO, and now the UN Spokesperson's Office, are engaged in misleading the press and public, and doling out what information they provide to only the friendliest media.

 For recent example, Inner City Press for week has reported on and asked about the repatriation from CAR of Burundian troops charged with abuse during the crackdown on opponents of Pierre Nkurunziza's third term. Even after Inner City Press obtained and published on February 9 proof of three repatriations, all UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press is that he would seek an update.

  Simarily, Ladsous' lead spokesman Nick Birnback told Inner City Press DPKO would have something to say about the particular Burundian officers in CAR Inner City Press asked him about.

  Then Ladsous' spokespeople including Ismini Palla gave their limited confirmations to Reuters and Agence France Presse, who published it without credit or context. (Neither media reported on Ladsous linking rape to R&R - nor did AP.)

 In a February email by UN official Anthony Banbury, soon to leave the UN after some heartfelt tears of outrage at peacekeepers' rapes, it is said:

"We have a pack of predatory criminals and rapists, preying on young girls,
under the banner of the United Nations. How can we stand by? In my view that battalion should be ordered to cease operations today, same with the RoC battalion, and be confined to camp and guarded full time so they cannot continue to abuse children. While we would pay a short-term price in terms of operations, we would gain so much in terms of the integrity and reputation of the UN, in the CAR and internationally, and we would almost certainly prevent more rapes of minor girls. We simply cannot sustain the argument that the benefit these troops are bringing to the UN and PoC is greater than the harm they are doing."

  What will the UN do? What will France, with new foreign minister Jean Marc Ayrault, do? How long can Ladsous - and the Congolese contingents - remain in place?


 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript hereVideo here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A hereDidn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

Saturday, May 16, 2015

In Bamako, Ladsous Berates Malians For Not Thanking France, Central African Republic Rape Questions UNanswered


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 16 -- 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.  
   After a May 16 press conference in Bamako, Ladsous said 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 ruling reinstating 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. Some say, he can run but he can't hide.
 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.


 
  

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

On Kidal, UN Security Council Presidency Tells Inner City Press No Talk If Mali Army Notified UN or Serval in Advance: Of Colonial Dysfunction


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 28 -- After the Mali consultations of the UN Security Council on May 28, the Council's South Korea presidency for May, through its deputy ambassador, came and read "elements to the press" on UN Television.

  Inner City Press, the only press there, asked if there had been any discussion of whether the Malian Army told the UN's MINUSMA mission or the French Serval force before its operations in Kidal. Video here.

  "I don't think so," the South Korean diplomat replied. Elements to the press, indeed. 

  The goals seems to have been to provide support to envoy Bert Koenders, even amid protests of him in Mali. By the time of the read-out, even France's deputy ambassador was gone. 



In a sign of the dysfunction, from Bamako Jeune Afrique says president Ibrahim Boubacar Keita asks how France can ask him to negotiate with the MNLA which killed eight functionaries - analogizing these to France's Claude Érignac, assassinated in Corsica in 1998. Click here for Jeune Afrique.

  On May 28, France's (outgoing) Permanent Representative to the UN Gerard Araud was not present for the Mali meeting, leaving it up to his deputy Alexis Lamek. Araud, who is slated to leave in July, was said to be on vacation.
Background: Back on May 20, Araud arrived just before 5 pm to circulate a draft press statement of France's position, for the Council to adopt. 
   It wasn't immediately accepted, if nothing else to keep up appearances. While a few cosmetic changes were being made, Araud came to a very controlled stakeout: he did not take Press questions about Mali calling the MNLA the sole aggressors, and "narco-terrorists."
   Then Inner City Press went further: France is accused by many in southern Mali of having paradoxically sided with the MNLA, if only to oppose Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, which France calls AQMI, and affiliates.
  And that, sources say, is mostly about defending French Areva's uranium interests in Niger. That is, France's colonialism is not even to the benefit of its proxies in Bamako -- it is purely economic. And in Niger, Areva pays cheap with the government. So it doesn't benefit Africa at all. It is, after all, FrancAfrique.
  This is part of why Araud will not take Press questions. During his last Council presidency in December, he grew progressively more shrill, notably when asked about France angling to get paid by other UN member states to run airfields in northern Mali.
  Later he threatened to sue Inner City Press, for reporting an incident fully documented by the New York Police Department, on which Inner City Press had given Araud's mission the chance to comment before public. But under Araud, France's Mission to the UN did not want to comment -- it wanted to censor. So Araud, not having commented, threatened to sue.
  Since then, Araud and his spokesman Frederic Jung have taken on the habit of Herve Ladsous, French deputy ambassador during the Rwanda genocide in 1994 -- try to keep the UN microphone away from the Press.
   Araud's previous spokesman told Inner City Press to be sure to distinguish Ladsous, who wouldn't answer, from Araud who would. But now they are indistinguishable. And if only in light of the French government's claims about freedom of the press, they should both go. And not only to DC.
  As the Free UN Coalition for Access has noted, later on May 20 like here, as Araud enters his final days as France's Ambassador to the UN he has, on April 15 for example, attacked a longtime Lebanese correspondent telling him, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." Click here for that.
  With that hanging in the air, Araud found it easier to deal with"interlocutors" on Twitter, for example on Mali, here. But May 20 at the UN, he did not address or follow the International Monetary Fund in questioning Ibrahim Boubacar Keita's purchase of a new Boeing 737 jet for $40 million. So what did the UN peacekeeping mission, Bert Koenders and Herve Ladous, know and when did they know it?
   None of this is answered in the ham-handed UNSC press statement issued at 10 pm on May 20, of which Inner City Press publishes the full text:
Security Council press statement on Mali, 20 May 2014
The members of the Security Council strongly condemned the violent clashes in Kidal on 17 and 18 May in the context of the Malian Prime Minister’s visit in Kidal, which resulted in the death of Malian Defense and Security forces personnel, as well as eight civilians, including six government officials. They expressed their deepest condolences to their families as well as to the Government of Mali.
The members of the Security Council strongly condemned the unacceptable seizure by force of administrative buildings, including the Governorate, the taking of hostages by armed groups, notably MNLA, as well as the attacks on the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA). They called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of armed groups from the Governorate building and for their return to their previous positions in the framework of the cantonment process.
The members of the Security Council insisted on the need for those responsible for these actions to be identified and held accountable. They underlined that these actions undermine efforts towards peace and security in northern Mali, particularly in the region of Kidal, and constitute a grave violation of Security Council resolution 2100 (2013), which calls on all rebel armed groups to put aside their arms and cease hostilities immediately, and of the Ouagadougou Preliminary Agreement of 18 June 2013.
The members of the Security Council called on all parties to act with restraint and refrain from any further violence that could threaten civilians. They reiterated their support for the restoration of the authority of the Malian State over its entire territory, including in Kidal. They further reiterated that only a credible and inclusive negotiation process can bring long-term peace and stability throughout the country, respecting the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Mali. They called for the resumption as soon as possible of the cantonment process and of sincere peace talks between the Malian government and the armed groups signatories and adherent to the Ouagadougou Preliminary Agreement.
The members of the Security Council reiterated their full support to MINUSMA in the implementation of its mandate and the French forces acting in support of the Mission.
  So, don't worry about the government in Bamako? Nor IBK's jet?
   As Inner City Press reported last week, despite not having required Security Council approval, Ladsous has been soliciting drones or "unarmed unmanned aerial vehicles" for Mali. Inner City Press has twiceasked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric to explain the solicitation without approval, but no answer has been given.
  Despite speeches by Annick Girardin, the French secretary of state for development, what did France's outgoing ambassador to the UN Gerard Araud do or say about these issues during the Security Council trip to Mali that he led?
  Actually, France has stealthily lined up to get paid by other UN member states for "air field services" in northern Mali through a letter of assist regarding which Araud refused to answer Press questions in December (then stopped answering Press questions altogether). So as one wag put it, France could get paid to service Air IBK -- if IBK ever visited and negotiated in northern Mali.
   Back in January regarding gang rape charges against UN peacekeepers in Mali the UN told Inner City Press, "the Government of Chad has further advised the Department of Peacekeeping Operations that it has completed the national investigation."
  And so on April 23 Inner City Press put the question to the UN's Mali envoy Bert Koenders. More than three months after the DPKO told Inner City Press the investigation was completed, Koenders said it will only be finished in "two or three weeks." Video here, from Minute 3:39.
   Even though by his account the investigation is not finished, he said "we have found very little evidence of sexual violence by Chadian troups... at first glance some of the accusations have not bee proven." 
   While Koenders unlike Ladsous at least purported to respond to this question, and one about Dutch attack helicopters bound for Mali, there is a lack of clarity. Beyond the "completed" investigation by Chad, is there another, UN investigation? Are there preliminary findings based on which Koenders said what he did? As with the rapes in Minova in the Democratic Republic of the Congo by DPKO's partners in the Congolese Army, we will continue to pursue this issue.
  Inner City Press also asked about the five Dutch helicopter's Mali's foreign minister Abdulaye Diop had told it about earlier in the morning. Koenders said, "We welcome contribution of Dutch government," specifying three Apache attack helicopters in May, and two transport helicopters in September or October. 
  Koenders cited all information fusion, being the ears and eyes on extremist groups. Earlier, Inner City Press asked Foreign Minister Diop if such information will be shared with his government, or only within MINUSMA and its troop contributing countries. Diop said he didn't know. So this, too, will require clarification
  As an aside, later on April 23 the UN's envoy to Somalia Nicholas Kay complained of the lack of helicopters from the AMISOM mission. It left one wondering about how the UN is run: did the Netherlands give the copters to Mali because one of its nationals is the UN's envoy there? We hope to have more on this.
  On April 23 when Inner City Press asked Malian foreign minister Diop for an update on dialogue in Kidal, and on the stated investigation of the shooting of civilian demonstrators there, he replied that he is too new in the position to answer on the probe. He said there is a new chief negotiator for the armed groups and what he called, in a Nixonian phrase, the "silent majority." Where did the last ten weeks go?
  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. Inner City Press asked Mali's foreign minister on April 23. Watch this site.

 
  

Saturday, May 17, 2014

Failures of Herve Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping Belatedly Linked to Ladsous by RTL & AFP, Even with Mali, Ukraine Copters, Minova & CAR Left Out, Au Revoir?


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 17 -- UN Peacekeeping underHerve Ladsous has allowed civilians to be killed with no reaction. 

   But when some of this litany of failure of his Department of Peacekeeping Operations was publicly presented to the UN Fifth (Budget) Committee on May 16, it was typed up without even mentioning the person responsible, Ladsous, by a wire demonstrably engaged in censorship.

   This was noted; now a French report of RTL "avec AFP"which belatedly DOES mention Ladsous: but only to type his defensive quotes. Still, when even the French wire which has tried to get the investigative Press thrown out for its critical coverage of Ladsous links him to his failures, it could belatedly be the beginning of the end.  


  Today's French account emphasizes that the UN report does not criticize Ladsous' missions in Mali (begun by the French Serval force initially without Security Council approval), nor in Central African Republic -- where the French Sangaris force initially disarmed the Muslim ex Seleka leaving Muslim civilians "vulnerable" in the UN's Navi Pillay's understated analysis.
   But it easily could have: in Mali, UN Peacekeepers stood by as their "partners" in the Malian army shot unarmed protesters by an airport in North Mali, where France is now in line to get paid by other UN member states to provide "air field services."
   And Ladsous' scribes have yet to link him to or question him about his refusal to implement the UN's supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy and cut support to the Congolese Army's 41st and 391st Battalions after only two soldiers were convicted of the 130 rapes at Minova in November 2012.
  That is why this coverage is accelerating: the person put in charge by an ostensibly public organization of over 100,000 people with guns is so unaccountable as to outright refuse to answer critical press questions, for example in April about the Hutu FDLR, here.
  In any other public organization, or private sector company, such a "leader" would be relieved of responsibility. How has the UN fallen this low? The same can be asked of the UN refusing to accept its responsibility for UN Peacekeeping bringing cholera to Haiti.
  And why even just this month has there been no explanation of Ladsous procuring drones for Mali without the required approvals -- Inner City Press has asked three times -- or for Kyiv using inside Ukraine "UN" marked helicopters (Inner City Press has asked four times, more here)?
  Even with these omissions, consider from the report these since Ladsous took over the Department of Peacekeeping Operations in 2011:
August - September 2012: Attacks on civilians by armed group in Katoyi, North Kivu (MONUSCO) Killed: >112. Action under Ladsous? No. After: Human rights investigations launched
4 January 2013 Intercommunal fighting over disputed access to gold mine (UNAMID) Killed: 100 Action under Ladsous? No. After: Government officials transported to area to “defuse tensions”...
8 February 2013 Attack on community in Wangar, Jonglei State by armed elements from rival community (UNMISS). Killed: >100. Action under Ladsous? No. After: Investigation launched. Communities and national authorities actively engaged to “prevent retaliation.”
3-6 April 2013 Intercommunal fighting in parts of Central and Southern Darfur (UNAMID) Killed: >100. Action under Ladsous? No. Aftter: Inter-agency assessment mission protected,,.
July 2013 Intercommunal violence in several locations in Pibor County (UNMISS) Killed: >328 Action under Ladsous? No. After: Investigation launched....
22-30 July 2013 Intercommunal fighting in Central Darfur (UNAMID) Killed: 150 Action under Ladsous? No. After: Humanitarian aid to displaced civilians facilitated
8-22 August 2013 Intercommunal fighting in Eastern Darfur (UNAMID) Killed: 500-600 Action under Ladsous? No. After: “Technical and logistical support” provided...
  And this is not even including the more recently failures in South Sudan, and rapes by Ladsous' partners in the Congolese Army in Minova, and subsequent impunity.Ladsous refused to answer Press questions on any of this. Why is he still in his post? #Ladsous2014. Watch this site.

 
  

Monday, February 3, 2014

In Mali, UN Mission Runs French PR Without Questions, Araud Silent on Kidal Killings, UN Peacekeepers' Gang Rapes


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 3 -- That the Malian Presidency proudly links to a Radio France Internationale story praising the French ambassador as "at once very nuance and very clear" is one thing.

  Now the UN Peacekeeping mission in Mali MINUSMA has edited and posted a video of Ambassador Araud, with all questions edited out. Click here. Thus Araud is able to speak about "inspecting" the UN force, without anything about oversight of the French Serval force the UN belated authorized.

  (Will the 7 p.m. press conference at MINUSMA headquarters in Bamako be live-streamed? One would think with the money spent that the UN could do it. But will they?)
  Likewise, Araud speaks of meeting with the armed groups of the north without saying anything about Kidal.
   It's one thing that the Security Council members 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.