UN
Won't Tell ICP
Whom It
Supports on
FDLR, If
Minova Rape
Units Involved
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 2 --
The UN has
been
dissembling
about its role
in the
Congolese
Army's stated
attempt to
"neutralize"
the
FDLR.
Inner City
Press on
January 30
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
Inner
City Press:
Since it's UN
Social Media
Day, MONUSCO
46 minutes ago
said
that —
I'll say it in
French: Les
operations
militaires
contre les
#FDLR, lancées
hier jeudi,
seront
dirigées et
planifiées
conjointement
par la
#MONUSCO et
les
FARDC.
So unless I'm
misunderstanding
this, they're
claiming that
it's a joint
operation,
“conjointement”,
on their
Twitter
feed. I
wanted to
know, why
would they be
doing that,
given what
you've just
said?
Spokesman:
I think
without going
into a deep
analysis of
French and
English, which
you obviously
are able to do
and I couldn't
try to keep up
with you, I
think it is a
different
characterization
maybe, a
different use
of words, but
I think the
point is that
it's an
FARDC-led
operation with
the support of
the UN.
On February 2,
Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric more
specifically,
video
here,
Inner
City Press: On
the DRC, I
wanted to ask
you about the
action against
the FDLR
[Democratic
Forces for the
Liberation of
Rwanda], if
you can be a
little more
specific on
what the UN's
MONUSCO
[United
Nations
Organization
Stabilization
Mission in the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo] and
its Force
Intervention
Brigade's role
are.
Have they
fired any
shots?
And is the
human rights
due diligence
policy in
place?
And how does
it relate to
support being
given to the
units of the
FARDC [Armed
Forces of the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo] who
are
firing?
And do these
units include
the 391st and
41st
battalions
that were
engaged in the
rapes in
Minova?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
The
operational
questions as
to what
operations are
taking place,
I think if
they're
answered, will
be answered by
MONUSCO.
If they're
ongoing
military
operations,
they will make
the decision
of what is
announced and
what is not
announced.
In terms of
MONUSCO, its
support will
be in strict
compliance
with the UN's
human rights
due diligence
policy, and as
you know, the
policy
requires that
the UN ensures
that its
support to
non-UN
security
forces will
not contribute
to grave human
rights
violations.
The policy is
being
implemented by
MONUSCO in
close
collaboration,
obviously,
with the
national
authorities.
And you know,
if… I will
find out on
the specific
units, but if
problems do
arise because
of past
issues, either
related to the
records of
units or
commanders,
there are
substantial
grounds to
believe that,
you know,
either the
commanders or
units, there
are risks of
human rights
violations —
support to
those units is
withheld
unless
adequate
mitigating
measures can
be put in
place.
Inner City
Press:
And is Bruno
Mandevu, he's
been named as
a
commander.
Is that a
problem for
the UN?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Obviously, if
there are
commanders
that are…
where we have
issues then we
are in
discussions
with the DRC
authorities to
see how… you
know, how they
can address
the concerns
that we
have.
But overall,
the operation
is being done
within the
framework of
our human
rights due
diligence
policy.
That's called
NOT answering
a question,
about whom the
UN is
supporting.
"The
U.N.
peacekeeping
mission in
Congo
threatened in
2013 to
withdraw
support for
two Congolese
battalions
accused of
involvement in
the mass rape.
The mission
decided to
keep working
with the
battalions
after 12
senior
officers,
including the
commanders and
deputy
commanders,
were suspended
and about a
dozen soldiers
were charged
over the rapes
in Minova."
This is
propaganda --
only two lower
ranking
soldiers were
convicted. The
Reuters
implication is
that Ladsous'
DPKO is tough
on human
rights: false.
On #DRC,
UN Spox says
it's NOT a
joint
operation. But
@MONUSCO
says “dirigées
conjointement
par #MONUSCO
et les #FARDC.”
On January
22
Ladsous made a
speech about
freedom of the
press in the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo
Thursday to
the US
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, the
same trolling
correspondent.
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.
(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.