By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 31 --
UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous on
December 30
criticized
South Sudan
for putting
"caveats" on
which
countries'
peacekeepers
would be
acceptable to
come in.
An hour later,
African
sources
exclusively
told Inner
City Press
that South
Sudan is well
within its
rights to
reject
Morocco, which
is not an
African Union
members due to
its
"occupation of
Western
Sahara," in
the AU view. Click
here for
Inner City
Press' exclusive
December 30
report.
Now more
sources from
the Continent,
and from
Europe, have
chimed in,
noting not
only did
Morocco
publicly
oppose having
any human
rights
monitoring
function for
Ladsous'
MINURSO
peacekeeping
mission in
Western
Sahara, but
also they said
had resisted
the inclusion
in MINURSO of
peacekeepers
from Spain.
The question
arises, why is
Ladsous given
this history
so publicly
putting
pressure on
South Sudan,
"for Morocco,"
to waive any
objections
when his DPKO
has allowed
other
countries to
prevail with
such
objections?
Even if the
question of
human rights
monitoring in
MINURSO is
distinguished
as a
"political
question," is
it only the
members of the
Security
Council which
have a right
to make
political
decisions?
Ladsous
on December 30
said "we will
not look
pleasantly" if
there are, "as
there seem to
have been,
some caveats"
about which
countries'
troops South
Sudan would
accept as
peacekeepers.
"There
should be no
objection to
anyone coming
in," Ladsous
intoned,
before telling
Inner City
Press, "I do
not answer
you, Mister."
Video
here and
embedded
below.
Inner
City Press
then set out
to find which
countries
South Sudan
was objecting
to -- which is
its sovereign
right, as a
number of
other nations'
diplomats
pointed out,
speaking
exclusively to
Inner City
Press about
this and which
countries.
Morocco
is
an ally of
France,
Ladsous'
country which
he represented
on the UN
Security
Council as
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
in 1994 during
the Rwanda
genocide.
But
Morocco is NOT
a member of
the African
Union, which
South Sudan
is, because of
the issue of
Western
Sahara. South
Sudan
recognizes
Western Sahara
-- and
therefore has
a right not to
want Moroccan
troops in its
country.
Although
the
UN sent 73
Bangladeshi
peacekeepers
to South Sudan
from a formed
police unit in
the Democratic
Republic of
the Congo,
South Sudanese
sources tell
Inner City
Press they had
a problem with
Bangladesh's
battalions in
the past,
mentioning
Western
Equatoria
around 2005,
"under Jan
Pronk" then
envoy to Sudan
and what is
now South
Sudan.
The
problems
included
allegations of
sexual abuse
and
exploitation,
statutory
rape, and lack
of
accountability.
If UN
Peacekeeping
under Ladsous
continues to
allow this --
witness the
lack of
updates on the
alleged gang
rapes by
Chadian
peacekeepers
in MINUSMA in
Mali -- why
should South
Sudan put up
no resistance
to such
deployments?
Ladsous
continues to
say he does
not answer
Press
questions.
South
Sudan is more
than willing
to take
peacekeepers
from, for
example,
"Nigeria or
Zimbabwe," or
Togo
which like
Morocco,
Pakistan,
Guatemala and
Azerbaijan is
leaving the
Security
Council after
two years on
December 31.
(Inner City
Press photo
of Team Togo's
December 30
goodbye at the
stakeout,
here.)
So
why, some
wonder, would
Ladsous be
pushing back
so publicly,
for Morocco?
They call it
FrancAfrique.
Watch this
site.
Footnote:
Anyway,
Morocco is
slated to send
500 "UN
guards" to
Central
African Republic,
see Inner
City Press' exclusive
story here.
, 
