On 89
Boys in S.
Sudan, ICP
Asks &
Brown Blames
Terrorist War
Lord
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, March
18 -- When
Gordon Brown
held a press
conference in
the UN
on March
18 his first
line was “It
has been one
month since
the kidnapping
of 89 South
Sudanese boys
from their
classrooms to
train them as
child
soldiers.”
Inner City
Press has
previously
asked the UN
why it was so
slow to report
that
abduction, and
reluctant to
acknowledge
that the
abductors are
linked with
the Salva Kiir
/ SPLA
government in
Juba. So Inner
City Press
asked Gordon
Brown about
this, video
here.
Brown cut in
and replied
that the
abductor is a
“war lord” and
that the
connection
with the
government is
just something
Inner City
Press was
speculating
about. (This
despite the
government in
Juba summoning
SPLA Maj-Gen.
Johnson Olony
about the
abduction.)
Brown went out
to say that
the “terrorist
group” -- the
SPLA? -- had
cynically
offered to let
the boys
return to sit
exams, then
return to
being child
soldiers.
Despite the
material in
the public
record about
the abductor's
connection to
the South
Sudan
government the
UN talks and
works with, Reuters
took Brown's
answer to
Inner City
Press and
reported or retyped
it at face
value without
analysis under
the headline
“South Sudan
warlord offers
abducted boys
sit exams.”
This is how
Reuters
mindlessly -
or cynically -
supports the
UN, from Herve
Ladsous
covering up
rapes in
Minova in the
DR Congo and Tabit
in Darfur,
to in this
case
channeling
Gordon Brown
about South
Sudan. Brown
also called
Olony's SPLA a
“terrorist
group” --
we'll have
more on this.
On
March 3 after
the UN
Security
Council voted
unanimously to
create a South
Sudan
sanctions
committee and
Panel of
Experts, Inner
City Press
asked the
country's
Permanent
Representative
Francis Deng
about the
vote, and
about children
abducted to
become
soldiers,
allegedly by a
government-aligned
militia.
Deng replied
that sanctions
rarely help
and that the
reasons the US
had waited
still applied.
Inner City
Press asked if
Deng thought
the Security
Council should
have waited
until its
meets with the
African Union
Peace and
Security
Council on
March 12. Deng
replied that
the Council
talks about
coordinating
with and even
deferring to
regional
bodies and
Africa, but
then doesn't.
On child
soldiers, Deng
said that
their
abduction
violates the
country's
cultural
traditions.
We'll have
more on this.
On
February 27
after UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric read
out a vague
summary of the
UN's
investigation
into the
deadly downing
of one of its
helicopters in
South Sudan
last August,
Inner City
Press asked
for specifics:
Inner
City Press:
you said that
they were
unable to
determine who
did it, that
it came from
an area
between In
Opposition and
the
Government.
But there was
this audiotape
of Peter Gadet
threatening
the UN to
shoot down
helicopters
that was… you
know, days
before it was
shot
down.
So, can you
say or find
out whether
these Board of
Inquiry people
listened to
the audio and
whether they
found it not
credible or…
why it's not
part of the
report?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
They had all
the
information
that was
available to
them. As
a general
point, a
threat is a
threat.
I think what
they were
looking at is
for hard
evidence to
figure out who
had shot the
helicopter,
they were not
able to come
in with any
conclusive
information.
Inner City
Press: Do they
use a
different
standard of
proof than
even a court
because
usually like
it seems like
--
Spokesman:
A Board of
Inquiry tries
to establish
what
happened.
Obviously,
they looked at
the helicopter
and all the
information
they
had.
That's the
conclusion
they came up
with.
But why?
Beyond Gadet,
the
International
Crisis Group,
for example,
implies that
the government
itself shot
the copter
down:
"an
UNMISS
helicopter was
shot down on
26 August,
killing three.
Although the
results of its
investigation
have not been
released,
initial
reports
suggest this
was done from
territory
controlled by
the government
and by a
weapons system
know to be in
the hands of
the government
[n.
100:
Crisis Group
interviews, UN
officials,
Nairobi,
November 2014;
defence and
security
adviser,
Nairobi,
December
2014.]"
For UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous to
remain silent
is consistent
with its
approach to
the Tabit
rapes in
Darfur, the
Minova rapes
in November
2012 by the DR
Congo Army,
and the
shooting at
unarmed
protesters in
Haiti (to say
nothing of the
killing by
cholera
there.)
On an abuse in
South Sudan on
which the UN
was slow and
partial in
reporting,
Inner City
Press on
February 24
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
first about
South
Sudan.
There was this
very kind of
high-profile
kidnapping of
dozens of
children, and
what I really
wanted to ask
you about is,
although it
was initially
said it was
unclear who
did it, there
are now
reports that
the militia
that is
responsible
for it is
basically part
of the army of
South
Sudan.
And I wanted
to know what
Ellen Løj or
the human
rights
component of
UNMISS, what
they say about
those
allegations
that seem to
be serious?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
We’ve seen
increased
reports of
kidnapping of
children and
forced
enrollment
into units,
whether it’s
the report you
stated which
our colleagues
at UNICEF have
flagged for
us, or other
reports, and I
know it’s
something that
is of concern
to all of us
here. It
is being
looked at both
by the Mission
and by
different
departments
here.
But it’s
obviously a
big
concern.
We have worked
very hard to
ensure that
children are
freed from
such activity,
and we will
continue do
so.
Inner
City
Press:
But do you
expect the UN
system to say
who is
responsible?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I know they’re
looking into
these — we’ve
seen these
reports.
We’re looking
into them.
Now
Radio Tamazuj
reports on
this, citing
Inner City
Press'
questions
under the
headline, "UN
refuses to
name abductors
of 1000+ men
and children
in South
Sudan."
The full draft
we published,
in the public
interest,
above. Reuters
typically said
they
"obtained" it
but did not
publish it; Voice of
America
said they saw
it, and
mechanically
quoted HRW
on Russia and
China, with
nothing about
the view of
the African
and Latin
American
members of the
Security
Council. Watch
this site.
, 
