By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 6 --
On South
Sudan, the US,
UK and Norway
had expressed
hopes before
the January 29
talks
involving
Salva Kiir and
Riek Machar.
But on
February 6,
this Troika
issued the
following
statement:
"The members
of the Troika
are profoundly
disappointed
by South
Sudan’s
leaders’
failure to
reach a
comprehensive
peace deal at
recent talks.
After the last
round of
Intergovernmental
Authority on
Development
(IGAD)-led
peace talks
ended in only
a partial
agreement, the
Troika
expresses its
disappointment
that South
Sudan’s
leaders failed
to achieve
significant
progress
toward a peace
agreement.
"Over a year
since the
conflict began
millions
remain
displaced,
thousands are
dead and the
country is in
ruins despite
the
commendable
efforts of
IGAD and its
mediation team
to achieve a
peace
agreement.
Ignoring the
untold
suffering of
their people,
South Sudan’s
leaders have
refused to
make the
necessary
compromises to
reach a peace
agreement for
the people of
South Sudan
who deserve
and expect
nothing
less. We
call on the
parties to
fully respect
the Cessation
of Hostilities
agreement of
January 23,
2014, and
avoid all
further
violence.
We urge the
parties return
to
negotiations
on February
19, 2015
prepared to
compromise to
achieve a
peace
agreement by
March 5, 2015
and form a
transitional
government by
July 1, 2015.
"The Troika
believes that
the
publication of
the Commission
of Inquiry’s
findings and
its
recommendations
on
accountability
are necessary
to ensure that
such violence
against
civilians
cannot be
undertaken
with
impunity."
So when will
this be released?
Will it be?
The US also
announced that
its Assistant
Secretary for
the Bureau of
Population,
Refugees, and
Migration Anne
C. Richard
will travel to
Kenya from
February 9 to
11 for the
“High-Level
Event on the
Humanitarian
Crisis in
South Sudan
and its Impact
in the Region."
Back
on January 23,
the US, UK and
Norway today
-- one month
after US
President
Barack Obama
declared South
Sudan
ineligible for
continuing
benefits under
the African
Growth and
Opportunities
Act --
issued the
following
statement:
"The
members of the
Troika (the
United States,
the United
Kingdom, and
Norway) are
gravely
concerned with
the continued
lack of
progress in
the South
Sudan peace
negotiations.
"We commend
the
Intergovernmental
Authority on
Development
(IGAD) and the
IGAD Special
Envoys for
their
steadfast
commitment to
the peace
process, and
welcome the
strong message
from People’s
Republic of
China Foreign
Minister Wang
Yi calling on
the parties to
make
peace.
We recall
IGAD’s
determination,
as articulated
in its summit
communiqué of
January 31,
2014, to
inclusive
negotiations
toward an
agreement that
addresses
necessary
reforms to the
security
sector and
economic
governance,
creates
institutions
for justice
and
accountability,
catalyzes a
revived
permanent
constitutional
process, and
forms a
transitional
government
leading to
credible
elections.
"IGAD has made
every effort
to realize
these goals
despite
obstruction
from both the
government of
South Sudan
and the Sudan
People’s
Liberation
Movement – In
Opposition
(SPLM-IO).
We are deeply
disappointed
in the
continued
unwillingness
of either
party to make
the
compromises
needed to
achieve a
viable peace
agreement.
Over the past
two months,
statements by
both parties
have suggested
they have
distanced
themselves
from previous
commitments,
and violations
of the
cessation of
hostilities
agreement have
continued.
We call on
both parties
to recommit to
negotiate with
a spirit of
urgency and
compromise,
refrain from
all further
military
action
immediately
and form a
Transitional
Government of
National
Unity.
"We look
forward to
guidance from
the African
Union Peace
and Security
Council,
convened on
the margins of
the African
Union Summit
in January, on
how the report
of the AU
Commission of
Inquiry will
be used to
support the
peace process
and inform the
development of
mechanisms for
accountability
and
reconciliation
in South
Sudan.
"Furthermore,
we reiterate
our
determination
to address the
grave
humanitarian
situation in
South
Sudan.
Today, over a
year after the
beginning of
the conflict,
nearly 2
million South
Sudanese have
been
displaced,
over 100,000
are under the
direct
protection of
the UN Mission
in South
Sudan, and the
country
remains at
risk of a food
security
crisis.
Along with
other
international
donors, we
will continue
to stand with
the people of
South Sudan
who are
needlessly
suffering as a
result of this
conflict.
"We recognize
the recent
agreement in
Arusha,
Tanzania to
reconcile the
SPLM and
encourage the
parties to use
the upcoming
IGAD summit of
29 January to
secure peace
for the people
of South
Sudan.
In the face of
this
deplorable
humanitarian
crisis, there
can be no
excuse for
further delay
in
negotiations
or for
continued
violence."
Back on
December 23,
one year into
the new civil
conflict in
South Sudan,
US President Barack
Obama on
December 23
issued a
statement
declaring the
country, along
with The
Gambia,
ineligible for
continuing
benefits under
the African
Growth and
Opportunities
Act, starting
January 1,
2015:
"4. In
Proclamation
8921 of
December 20,
2012, I
designated the
Republic of
South Sudan
(South Sudan)
as a
beneficiary
sub-Saharan
African
country for
purposes of
section
506A(a)(1) of
the 1974 Act.
In
Proclamation
7657 of March
28, 2003, the
President
designated the
Republic of
The Gambia
(The Gambia)
as a
beneficiary
sub-Saharan
African
country for
purposes of
section
506A(a)(1) of
the 1974 Act.
"5. Section
506A(a)(3) of
the 1974 Act
(19 U.S.C.
2466a(a)(3)),
authorizes the
President to
terminate the
designation of
a country as a
beneficiary
sub-Saharan
African
country for
purposes of
section 506A,
if he
determines
that the
country is not
making
continual
progress in
meeting the
requirements
described in
section
506A(a)(1) of
the 1974 Act.
"6. Pursuant
to section
506A(a)(3) of
the 1974 Act,
I have
determined
that South
Sudan and The
Gambia are not
making
continual
progress in
meeting the
requirements
described in
section
506A(a)(1) of
the 1974 Act.
Accordingly, I
have decided
to terminate
the
designation of
South Sudan
and The Gambia
as beneficiary
sub-Saharan
African
countries for
purposes of
section 506A
of the 1974
Act, effective
on January 1,
2015."
Ouch.
When
the UN's
Deputy
Emergency
Relief
Coordinator
Kyung-wha Kang
took questions
about South
Sudan on
December 4,
Inner City
Press asked
her about
Juba's role in
restricting
humanitarian
flights, in
challenging
the flow of
funds from
Oslo to aid
groups.
Kyung-wha Kang
acknowledged
some
restrictions
and some talk
that the
SPLA-Juba has
a right to
control the
funds
committed to
in Oslo.
After the
briefing Inner
City Press
provided her
office with
such a report
and was
told it might
be better to
asked the UN
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations.
But that is
dubious, given
that its chief
Herve
Ladsous on
the same
December 4
would not
answer a
simple
question about
the UNAMID
mission
covering up
rapes in
Darfur. YouTube
video here.
Still,
Kyung-wha Kang
is better in
that she
answers
questions and
seems
genuinely
interested in
hearing where
the UN could
do better.
This makes reports that
the top job in
OCHA could go
to a FOC -
Friend of
Cameron -
Andrew Lansley
all the more
troubling.
Inner City
Press and the
Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
which push for
transparency,
are on this.
Watch this
site.
Back
on October 22
after the UN's
envoy to South
Sudan Ellen
Loj spoke to
the Security
Council on
October 22,
she came to
take questions
from the
media.
Inner City
Press asked
Loj to explain
two separate
lines from her
statement to
the Council,
and one thing
that was not
mentioned: the
deadly downing
of a UN
helicopter on
August 26,
allegedly
after the UN
was told by
rebel Peter
Gadet that it
would be shot
down.
The first line
Inner City
Press asked
about was
Loj's
statement that
"UNMISS is
looking into
ways to
support the
efforts of
national
authorities to
end the
violence."
Inner City
Press asked,
would the UN
provide the
Salva Kiir /
SPLA forces
military
support?
Loj asked to
be shown the
line, coming
out from
behind the UN
microphone
stand to take
a copy of her
own statement
from Inner
City Press. Video here. Finally she
said this
might involve
UNMISS
conducting its
own street
patrols -- why
would that be
"supporting
the national
authorities"
as opposed to
the
opposition,
where it
controls the
streets -- or
setting up a
rape-help desk
in police
stations.
When Inner
City Press
sought to
remind Loj of
the second
line it has
asked about,
two national
staffers
"detained"
since August,
the moderator
attempted to
move the
questioning
on. Loj still
replied that
the UN doesn't
know who has
these two
national staff
members
detained.
On the
helicopter,
Loj said that
a UN Board of
Inquiry was in
South Sudan
last week and
she doesn't
know the
outcome. The
helicopter was
shot down on
August 26, and
transcripts of
taped called
between Gadet
and UN
officials have
emerged. We'll
have more on
this.
(A Voice of
America scribe
tried to take
the first
question, and
then after a
softball
question made
social banter
with Loj to
the side of
the stakeout.)
Back on
October 20
when Sexual
Violence in
Conflict
expert Zainab
Bangura
spoke about
South Sudan,
Inner City
Press asked of
her meeting
with Riek
Machar and
whether she
thinks he
controls Peter
Gadet, under
sanctions by
the US and
suspected of
shooting down
a UN
helicopter. Video here.
Bangura called
her talks with
Machar
"decent"
including
"very detailed
information on
where he is in
command."
Apparently,
Machar is
responsible or
accepts
responsibility
for Gadet. But
where are the
results of the
helicopter
probe? Another
UN cover-up?
Inner
City Press
also asked
Bangura of the
130 rapes in
Minova by the
DR Congo Army
in November
2012, after
which only two
soldiers have
been convicted
while UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous
continues
supporting the
rapist units.
Bangura said
she couldn't
speak to that
part of the
UN, and linked
the lack of
justice for
Minova to the
government's
delay in
investigating.
Video
here. But
doesn't the
government,
and Ladsous'
DPKO and
MONUSCO, know
which DRC Army
units were in
Minova during
the rapes, and
who was in
charge of
them? Impunity
continues.
While South
Sudan
President
Salva Kiir was
in New York,
he did not
attend the
UN's “High
Level” event
about his
country on
September 25.
A
Senior US
State
Department
Official,
speaking on
background,
said that
“there was a
lot of
disappointment
expressed in
the meeting
that Salva
Kiir who is
here in New
York did not
attend the
meeting. He
sent his
Minister of
Foreign
Affairs and
some of his
ministers to
the meeting
and several of
the attendees
made a point
of noting that
Salva Kiir was
not at the
meeting.”
Inner
City Press
asked the
Senior State
Department
Official if
the US know
who was behind
the recent
shooting down
of a UN
helicopter, if
it could
confirm that
forces under
the control of
Peter Gadet,
already under
US sanctions,
did it.
The US
official said
“we know that
the UN is
investigating
it, we are
waiting for
the results of
that
investigation.
Gadet has been
put on the
sanctions list
even before
that
happened.”
The
official
called the
shoot-down
“evidence of
how difficult
it is to work
in South
Sudan,” and
added that
South Sudan's
foreign
minister had
said the
government is
committed to
not blocking
NGOs and the
UN from
providing aid.
“We have to
hold them to
that
commitment,”
the official
concluded,
“people are
suffering.”
Background:
back
on May
6, 2014, when
the US imposed
sanctions on
Gadet,
Inner City
Press asked:
MODERATOR:
Great.
Thank you. Our
next question
is from the
other Matt
Lee, Matthew
Russell Lee of
Inner City
Press. Go
ahead.
QUESTION:
Great.
Thanks a lot,
[Moderator]. I
wanted to ask,
there was a –
it was said
that in
Security
Council
consultations
at the UN that
senior
government
officials were
named in a
radio
broadcast
prior to the
attacks in Bor
on the UN
compound in
killing the
civilians. I
just wonder if
you can say
are these
people – is
that the case?
Do you know
the names of
people that
sort of called
for that
attack, and in
which case,
why aren’t
they on this
list?
And I
also – this
might for
Senior
Administration
Official
Number Two.
Secretary
Kerry was
talking about
a legitimate
force to help
make peace.
And I just
wanted to
know, is the
UN – is the
U.S. thinking
of that as
part of UNMISS
mission or as
the IGAD
force? And if
so, would it
require a
Security
Council
approval?
Thanks.
SENIOR
ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIAL ONE:
On the first,
I mean, we
typically do
not comment on
actors against
whom we are –
we have not
yet – we have
not yet acted,
a clunky way
of saying we
don’t comment
on those who
are not part
of our
designation.
But anyone who
is
contributing
to the
violence,
whether that’s
by directing
violence,
whether that’s
by funding it,
fueling it,
contributing
arms, can be a
subject of
designation in
the future.
And I’ll leave
it to my State
Department
colleague to
answer the
second
question.
SENIOR
ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIAL TWO:
Yeah. On the
question about
the regional
force and on
UNMISS, we –
it is
something that
conversations
and
discussions
are ongoing
between
countries of
IGAD, with New
York, with
ourselves and
others on how
best to create
this
additional
force presence
that we are
working very
much with
UNMISS and see
this as part
of the same
effort. But we
do think it’s
very important
that the
regional
forces are
able to join
this effort in
larger numbers
and appreciate
the efforts
of,
particularly,
the
governments of
Ethiopia and
Kenya, who are
leading the
mediation and
who are
seeking to
work with
UNMISS in this
regard.