In DRC
UN Only
Supports Army,
As On Minova
Rapes, HRW Soft
on Ladsous
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 29 --
After the UN
repeatedly
said Congolese
President
Joseph Kabila
would sign
with the UN a
Joint
Directive for
military
operations
against the
FDLR, and a
week after the
UN's Herve
Ladsous
refused to
answer Press
questions about
it, the UN put
this out:
"'MONUSCO
will provide
full support
to the FARDC,
both
operationally
and
logistically,'
declared
Martin Kobler,
Special
Representative
of the UN
Secretary-General
in the DRC.
FARDC Chief of
Army Staff,
General Etumba
announced the
launch of
military
operations
against the
FDLR on
Thursday 29
January 2015
in Beni,
during a press
conference, in
the presence
of MONUSCO
Force
Commander,
General Dos
Santos Cruz.
Prior to this
meeting, the
Chief of
MONUSCO,
Martin Kobler
finalized the
details of the
cooperation
between the
FARDC and
MONUSCO with
General
Etumba."
So was the
joint
declaration
signed, and if
not, why not?
UN Peacekeeping
providing
"full support
to the FARDC"
has a bad
record - under
Herve Ladsous,
full support
continued to
two FARDC
units involved
in the mass
rape of over
100 -- or "at
least 76" --
women and girls
in Minova in
November 2012.
Today's
Human Rights
Watch report
says
"A
year after the
mass rape of
at least 76
women and
girls by
soldiers in
and around
Minova,
Congo’s
Military
Operational
Court opened a
trial on
November 20,
2013, for 39
soldiers,
including five
high-ranking
officers, on
charges of war
crimes and
other
offenses. On
May 5, the
verdict was
announced,
with only two
low-ranking
soldiers
convicted of
rape."
But, typically
soft on the
UN, HRW does
not mention
the UN's
claimed Human
Rights Due
Diligence
Policy much
less its
underminer-in-chief
Herve Ladsous.
(By
contrast, even
the
International
Peace
Institute reports
that "After
[MONUSCO SRSG]
Kobler
referred to
the UN’s
stated Human
Rights
Due Diligence
Policy, Inner
City Press
asked him if
any UN support
was withdrawn
over the DRC
Army’s 130
rapes in
Minova and
only two
convictions.Kobler’s
answer did not
mention any
aid
suspended.”)
On
January 22
Ladsous made a
speech about
freedom of the
press in the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo to
the UN
Security
Council, and
made excuses
for not acting
to
“neutralize”
the Hutu FDLR
rebels as the
UN did the
largely Tutsi
M23.
Then
Ladsous came
to the
Security
Council
stakeout,
ostensibly to
take
questions.
Inner City
Press asked,
“On the
neutralization
of the FDLR,
what is the
hold up?”
Ladsous said
"I don't
respond to
your
questions,
Mister." Video
here and
embedded
below.
Then Ladsous
turned and
gave the
question to
Reuters. When
that back and
forth was
over, Inner
City Press
asked if any
of the
countries in
the UN's Force
Intervention
Brigade are
well than
willing to
attack the
FDLR, as
senior
diplomats at
the UN have
told Inner
City Press.
Ladsous
refused to
answer this
question, and
gestured that
Ban Ki-moon's
envoy to the
DRC Martin
Kobler,
standing
behind Ladsous
at the
stakeout,
shouldn't
answer it
either.
Reuters took
or was given
another
question,
distancing the
FDLR from
genocide.
Finally Inner
City Press
asked both men
what if
anything UN
Peacekeeping
has done as
the Kabila
government has
frozen the
accounts of
the Panzi
hospital for
rape
victims.
Ladsous waved
this off --
for months he
waved
off Press
questions
about mass
rape in Minova
by his
partners in
the Congolese
Army, video
here --
and walked
away with this
spokesman.
(One
can only
imagine the
advise this
“communications
professional”
is giving
Ladsous.
Perhaps he can
help Ladsous
address his
history with
Hutu groups as
evidence in this memo.
These are
Press
questions.)
Kobler to his
credit told
Inner City
Press he would
come back and
answer, and he
did, albeit
only some, and
off camera.
That will be
another story.
Because the
story here is,
how can a
person in
charge of UN
Peacekeeping
be allowed to
refuse
particular
media's
questions in
this way?
While, in
classic UN
fashion,
giving a
speech about
freedom of the
press,
elsewhere? The
weakness of
current UN
leadership
comes to mind.
But as many
ask, WHY does
Ladsous refuse
to answer
Inner City
Press? While
he has refused
to answer
that, too, it
began when
Inner City
Press reported
that Ladsous
was not even
France's first
choice for the
position -
Jerome
Bonnafont was.
Tellingly, an
Agence France
Presse member
of the
Executive
Committee of
the so-called
UN
Correspondents
Association complained
about this
Inner City
Press story,
and soon the
Executive
Committee of
UNCA, under
then and now
president
Giampaolo
Pioli, made
more complaint
about that
story, and another
about Sri
Lanka,
demanding it
be removed
from the
Internet.
Inner City
Press quit
UNCA and
co-founded the
Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
which demands
that all UN
Under
Secretaries
General answer
questions.
UNCA, for
course, has
said nothing
about Ladsous'
refusal. It is
the UN's
Censorship
Alliance.
More on this
-- including
video -- to
follow.
, 
