On South Sudan, UN Says It Wants Uganda "Phased Withdrawal," Told Kiir? Tells Inner City Press of Bentiu Landmines

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 20 -- On Ugandan troops in South Sudan, the day after the US State Department toldInner City Press "it's time for those forces to begin a phased withdrawal," the UN through outgoing spokesperson Martin Nesirky said the same: Yes, it's time for the Ugandans to leave.

   Citing a photograph of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni on a tank on the South Sudan border before flying to Juba, Inner City Press asked if UN envoy Hilde Johnson, historically close with the SPLA of Salva Kiir, has conveyed this position to Kiir.

   I imagine so, Nesirky said then added that he will check. Later his Office provided an update to Inner City Press, not on this issue but two previously asked about:

Subject: Your questions on South Sudan
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:46 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

On your question from the Tuesday briefing on Bentiu, the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) reports that the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) personnel are working in Bentiu and other parts of Unity State to clear landmines and unexploded ordnance. There is no evidence of any use of cluster bombs in Bentiu or in any part of Unity State.

On your question about cluster bombs, UNMAS has evidence that cluster bombs were used along the Juba-Bor road, but cannot determine at this time who used them.

  On UN Mine Action Service, we anticipate having more.

  On February 19 when the State Department's deputy spokesperson Marie Harf held a press briefing by phone from the Iran P5+1 talks in Vienna on February 19, Inner City Press asked her for the US' position on the Ugandan army remaining, and about the reports of cluster bombs.Transcript below.

  Harf replied that the call for "the redeployment or phased withdrawal of foreign forces" from South Sudan" was tied to the cessation of hostilities agreement that had been signed in Addis Ababa. 

   That agreement is widely described as in tatters, or no longer relevant. Harf said "we have recognized the role the Ugandan forces have played."

  Still Harf said the US position remains they should "begin" phased withdrawal: "it’s time for those forces to begin a phased withdrawal." She said she'd seen the cluster bombs reports and would look into what the US is doing. Ambassador Booth, she said, remains in Addis Ababa.

  On February 14 a number of non-governmental organizations including the International Crisis Group and the International Rescue Committee wrote to Secretary of State Kerry, as well as to the Office of Management and Budget, requesting "an explicit FY’15 budget request for a UN, or UN supported, peacekeeping mission in CAR – either under the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account or under the Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) account with language calling for assessed expenses of the CAR mission to be paid out of PKO."

  Harf emphasized that the US has airlifted Burundian and Rwanda troops to the CAR, and is "developing target sanctions" as one option.  She said she wasn't yet aware of the letter -- again, she was in Vienna -- but would check if it has been received, and what the response is. Watch this site.

Update: here is the US State Department's transcript:

MS. HARF: Yep. Our next question is from Inner City Press, from Matthew Russell Lee. Go ahead.

Inner City Press: Great. Thanks a lot. This is on South Sudan and also Central African Republic. On South Sudan, I know that the State Department back in – I mean, it was February 8th – had called for the redeployment or progressive withdrawal of the Ugandan forces there. So they pretty much rejected that, and I wanted to know if there’s been any follow-up by the U.S.

And also, just relatedly, there was a letter from like 26 NGOs – International Crisis Group, IRC, and others – to Secretary Kerry asking for reengagement in South Sudan, but specifically asking for the U.S. to favor a UN peacekeeping mission in Central African Republic and to include it in its budget request for 2015. So I don’t – is there any reaction to that letter? What’s the U.S. thinking on engagement in the Central African Republic? Thanks.

MS. HARF: Yep. So let me start with South Sudan. So when we talked about withdrawal of foreign forces from South Sudan, that was really, as I’m sure you know, consistent with language in the cessation of hostilities agreement that both parties signed last month. We’re urging the redeployment or phased withdrawal of foreign forces invited by either side.

Our concern, obviously, has been primarily focused on ensuring the implementation of the agreement. We have recognized the role that Ugandan forces have played in helping defend critical infrastructure in Juba, on one of the main roads. But we do believe it’s time for those forces to begin a phased withdrawal – again, consistent with the cessation of hostilities agreement – and more broadly speaking, think it’s critical that all countries in the region play a positive role in pressing the parties to resolve their disputes peacefully, and that any regionalization of the conflict could have very serious consequences.

In terms of where that process stands, I’m happy to check with our team and with Ambassador Booth on the ground to see what the latest is. Again, we’ve said that there have been on both sides in South Sudan violations of the cessation of hostilities, and we know there is still, quite frankly, a lot of work to be done there. So if there’s more to share, I’m happy to check with our team and do so.

In terms of the Central African Republic, I am not actually familiar with that letter that was sent to Secretary Kerry. I’m happy to check in with our folks and see if we have indeed received it, and what – I’m sure we’ll respond, but what that response might look like. We have, of course, been deeply concerned by the continued interreligious violence in the CAR, and call now for the urgent deployment of additional MISCA troops and police to support the French, the EU, and the MISCA efforts. We think at this point this is a critical step that must be taken immediately to stem the violence, which is, of course, so important.

We’ve been supporting in a number of ways, including airlifting Burundian and Rwandan troops to Bangui, and we’ll continue to transport, equip, and train additional troops that are identified. We are also developing targeted sanctions against those who further destabilize the situation, or encourage or abet the violence. That’s something we’re looking at right now. Nothing to announce, but that’s certainly one policy option we’re developing.

Inner City Press: Great. Thanks a lot. Just on – the letter, I think, was to the Secretary and also to OMB, and it was dated February 14th.

Just one last thing on South Sudan, if you don’t mind, it was this report – the UN, in fact, said that they found cluster bombs on the road between Juba and Bor, and there’s sort of – what I’m wondering is, this is – the U.S. is raising it as a concern, and the different types of ordnance elsewhere, but is this on the U.S.’s radar screen? Is there – who’s going to determine who used them? Some people are saying that they could only have been dropped from the air, so it kind of narrows the people that could have done it. I’m wondering, are you aware of that, and is the U.S. concerned or going to follow up?

MS. HARF: Yeah, I’ve seen those reports. Let me check with our folks and see what the latest is on that. Obviously, we would be concerned about that, suffice to say, but I just want to make sure I have all the details before I respond further.

Inner City Press: Great. Thanks.

MS. HARF: Thanks, Matthew.

   

UN Mine Action Lacking in Myanmar, UN Scruples Lacking in Sri Lanka

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 4, updated -- While the UN talked Mine Awareness on Thursday, a country for which it has a full time envoy, Vijay Nambiar to Myanmar, has very little Action on Mines.

  Inner City Press asked a UN panel about Myanmar, and about UNDP turning over mine action to the Sri Lanka army, depicted in the UN's own reports as engaged in war crimes.Video here from Minute 14:34.

  The UN's Dmitry Titov, now on the Rule of Law, gave the historical view on Myanmar, saying the UN has been “trying to engage Myanmar” but “so far, has not seen considerable response.”

  UN Mine Action's Paul Heslop tried to put a more positive gloss on it, while passing the issue to UNDP: “There is engagement with the government with regard to setting up Mine Action Program,” it is at an “early stage” with “UNDP taking the lead.”

They passed the microphone, if not the buck, to Timothy Horner of UNDP, who said there is a “lot of confusion on presence of mines in Myanmar.

  On Sri Lanka, ignoring the war crimes aspect, he said that UNDP works on mines in 23 countries, has been up to 40. “It's all about capacity,” and said, and handing over to governments.

He acknowledged that “Sri Lanka hasn't signed the treaties,” but said it is responsible for the safety and security of its citizens.

  And how about those killed in the “Blood Bath on the Beach”? Don't expect to hear about this from UNDP. Or really from the UN, anymore. This has been a low point of Ban Ki-moon's time as UN Secretary General. Watch this site.

Update: Later on Thursday was an event about landmines featuring UN Peacekeeping's stonewalling chief Herve Ladsous, who has refused to answer Inner City Press questions about accepting Shavendra Silva of Sri Lanka as an adviser, about safeguards not to spread cholera as in Haiti, about 126 rapes in Minova by his partners in the Congolese Army. The MC was Stephane Dujarric from DPI, which lets Ladsous spin on its UN Radio. Tick tock, tick tock.#Ladsous2013.

At UN, Senior Advisory Group Standoff on Broken Equipment & Deployment, Ladsous Silent on Shavendra Silva

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- When UN Peacekeeping's so-called Senior Advisory Group was appointed, the inclusion of Shavendra Silva, a Sri Lankan military figure depicted in the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's own report as engaged in war crimes, was first exposed and covered by Inner City Press.

  Ban told Inner City Press, Silva's inclusion is a decision of member states. His chief of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous refused to answer Inner City Press questions about it.

  Now in the endgame of the SAG, there are at least three issues. And April 3, diplomats met until 8 pm about them, including UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant, French Deputy PR Martin Briens, Pakistan's DPR and others.

  The SAG recommended setting troop rotations at every 12 months. 

  But many Latin American countries say their constitutions do not allow more than six months; India is said to share this position.

  The longer deployments would save the UN, or Ban Ki-moon as SAG-ers put it, $21 million.

  The SAG also proposed that if a country deploys troops but malfunctioning equipment, they should not be paid for personnel. Surprisingly, this would save $170 million according to SAG sources.

  After a dispute about the survey mechanism, the proposed increased troop compensation would be $80 million.

  And so even now on April 3 in the UN's North Lawn building, Permanent Representatives and Deputies were dueling about how to jibe these three. If the cost savings, of longer deployments say, are foregone, how to pay the increased compensation to the troops, without going back to recalcitrant taxpayers for more money?

  Earlier on April 3, Inner City Press sought to ask Ladsous a question. While others also leaving the Security Council, such as DPA's Jeffrey Feltman and DFS' Ameerah Haq, were willing to answer, Ladsous was not. This is a pattern.

  UN Budget Committee chair Miguel Berger of Germany was on the scene on April 3. He remarked to Inner City Press, again you are the only one covering it. He talked up a de-mining event on April 4, which stonewalling Herve Ladsous is slated to also attend. Click here for notice of event on the site of the Free UN Coalition for Access. Watch this site.

On Landmines, UN Defends TNC of Libya as on Reprisal, No SOFA in Abyei?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 1 -- When the UN held a press conference Tuesday about landmine usage in Libya, one expected them to at least mention that some of the use was by the rebels or Transitional National Council.

But when Inner City Press asked about the documented usage by rebels of Belgian made PRB-M3 anti-vehicle mines on the side of the main road into Ajdabiya, the UN's Program Manager for the Joint Mine Action Coordination Team in Libya Max Dyck quickly defended the TNC. Video here from Minute 8:15.

He urged to "take it into context, saying it was "done early in conflict, in March." (Actually, it was filmed as late as April 17, 2011). Dyck continued, "This issue's been addressed with the NTC... That was the only incidence of landmine use by the NTC revolutionaries."

When Inner City Press tried to ask a follow up question, the Deputy Spokesman did not allow it (while allowing the next correspondent to follow up). Since there were virtually no other questioners, Inner City Press was then able to ask Dyck about his tone: did it mean that to work with the NTC, the UN had to praise it? Video here, from Minute 12:01.

Dyck did not answer, rather the Acting Director of the United Nations Mine Action Service, Justin Brady did, saying that the UN raised it to the NTC as soon as they became aware, and that the NTC attributed it to "local commanders."

One wonders if this is a predictor of what the UN will do, or not do, in looking into the reprisal killings by NTC forces in Libya: 53 bound bodies in Sirte, a whole village chased away.

(c) MRLee
UNMAS' Dyck & Brady: where have you gone, Maxwell Curley?

These were questions Inner City Press put to Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky on October 31:

Inner City Press: all of the people have been chased out of a town called Tawerghaand... 53 bound bodies of Qadhafi supporters presumably were found in a hotel in Sirte. So what’s the response in terms of accountability for what would pretty clearly be war crimes?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, as you know — two things really — first of all, the Security Council resolution on this point is very clear. And that’s speaking directly to the Libyan authorities, namely that they were expressing grave concern about continuing reports of reprisals, arbitrary detentions, wrongful imprisonment and extrajudicial executions. And as you will also remember from last week, there was a statement from the Commission of Inquiry on Libya that urges the National Transitional Council and indeed future interim authorities to undertaken independent, impartial, transparent investigations into all allegations of violations of the rights of detainees in their custody and if they deem it necessary, recommends — meaning the Commission of Inquiry — that they seek the support of the interntional community. So I think you can see that there is a body of opinion out there that says that the Libyan authorities will need to investigate all cases of alleged abuse, reprisals and that is precisely what the National Transitional Council has undertaken to do and the interntional community will watch that very closely.

Inner City Press: I just wanted to know, sort of what the role of the UNSMIL Mission would be, particularly in the case of these Tawergha people, they are not dead or at least yet, they are in the desert and they can’t return to their town. Is there some effort being made by Mr. Martin or UNSMIL to actually act on these still pending situations?

Spokesperson: I’d have to check precisely on that. As I think I mentioned last week, there are human rights officers within the Mission, and so let me check to see what I can get for you on that.

A full day later no answers had been provided, and Nesirky canceled the November 1 noon briefing.

While the Mine Action Service does some good work, it seemed Tuesday to go out of its way to praise the government of Sudan, blaming all land mines in the country on "non state actors."

Sudan blocked even the medical evacuation of four UNISFA peacekeepers injured by a mine, four of whom ended up bleeding out and dying.

But when Inner City Press asked if any Status of Forces Agreement or other safeguard was no in place to evacuate mine removal personally, Brady said to ask the "Office of Military Affairs." Video here, from Minute 17:55.

Footnote: Inner City Press asked about Syria's use of landmine on its border with Lebanon. Brady said Syria is a sovereign country and not a party to the convention. He said it ill-serves the country, but to ask the Permanent Mission of Syria. Video here, from Minute 15.

So landmine questions are referred by the Mine Action Service to other parts of the UN and to Permanent Missions, while the Mine Action Service takes it upon itself to case the case for the TNC, even as reprisals continue. Still, some good work is done. Watch this site.