In
S.
Kordofan, UN Says It Can't Move, No Comment on Sudan
Currency War
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
July 18 -- Amid reports of worsening violence in Southern
Kordofan, not only at the UN peacekeepers there preparing to leave:
even while still there, they “cannot move” even if they see war
crimes committed in front of them, the UN told Inner City Press on
Monday.
Last
week
outgoing UN Peacekeeping chief Alain Le Roy told Inner City Press
that while they cannot patrol or use force, if the peacekeepers saw
something happen in front of them, they would respond “as
humanitarians.”
But
Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky on Monday disagreed
when Inner City Press asked for confirmation of Le Roy's statement.
“They cannot move,” Nesirky said, “whether you like it or not
or whether we like it or not, the United Nations does not have a
mandate to operate there.”
If
UN personnel
present in a war zone are told by the Secretary General's spokesman
that they “cannot move,” what does it mean to repeatedly say
“never again”? We'll see.
Beyond
saying its
peackeepers “cannot move” in Southern Kordofan, the UN didn't
even have a comment on North Sudan declaring itself ready for a
currency war with South Sudan, refusing to redeem billions in
Sudanese pounds circulating in the South.
Inner City
Press asked for
comment, from envoy Haile Menkerios or new envoy to South Sudan Hilde
Johnson, but Nesirky said the UN has nothing to say.
So
what is the UN's
role in and on Sudan? From the UN's July 18 noon briefing
transcript:
Inner
City
Press: In South Kordofan, I understand that a lot of it rides on
the Security Council mandate, but there have been over the weekend
more and more reporting of bombing, and of surrendering Nuba
soldiers. And so,have any of the existing peacekeepers left the
area? Are they there? What are they doing? What does the UN say
about events in the last 48 hours in South Kordofan?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, I think the answer remains the same as last week. Whether you
like it or not or whether we like it or not, the United
Nations does not have a mandate to operate there. It is something
that, clearly, we had wished to be otherwise. And the
Secretary-General made very clear that there should not be any vacuum
or gap in our ability to monitor what is happening. But that is the
case. That is the case. And as for the presence of the troops, the
peacekeeping troops there, they are in the process of moving out as
they are required to do under this liquidation resolution. But they
have not yet fully withdrawn. That’s where we are.
Inner
City
Press: [inaudible -- per the UN]
Spokesperson:
I think it’s very important here to look at the reality. The
reality is that the Security Council passed a resolution. The
reality is that the Government of Sudan did not allow the mission to
continue. Did we want it to be otherwise? Yes, we did. That’s
why the Secretary-General went to Khartoum. It’s regrettable that
we do not have the ability to do what needs to be done.
Inner
City
Press: Is it Alain Le Roy, when at the stakeout, he’d said
they have no mandate to use force or to patrol, but if they witness
things, they will respond as humanitarians. So, have they witnessed
anything? Have they responded? He seemed to say that they wouldn’t
just sit entirely idly by, that there was some sort of baseline--
Spokesperson:
Well, they are not in a position to do that, they are not in a
position to move. They are not in a position to move, and that’s
the reality. That’s the reality at the moment, okay.
Inner
City
Press: this just less, less physical violence, but there is this
idea of a currency war that South Sudan is creating its new currency
and so North Sudan has said it is going to create a new currency and
won’t redeem any of the Sudanese pounds that are in circulation in
South Sudan. I am just… one, I am wondering if the UN has any
comment, and two is, is this the kind of issue that Menkerios would
work on or who is there? It seems to be…
Spokesperson:
No, I don’t think we have any comment on that at the moment. If
that changes, I’ll let you know.
Inner
City Press
later sent the question to the spokespeople of the International
Monetary Fund, which is ostensibly a part of the UN system:
“We've
seen the IMF Survey stating on South Sudan that 'the parties have not
yet agreed on what will happen with the Sudanese pounds that are
currently circulating in the South.' But the deputy governor of the
Central Bank of Sudan, Badr al-Deen Mahmood, has said the north is
ready for a 'currency war.' Central Bank governor Mohamed Kheir
al-Zubeir say said: 'We do not want to buy [the old currency]. We
want them to surrender it to us because it is valueless.'
This
is
a request for the IMF's view of this 'currency war.'
The IMF
has a
briefing later this week. Watch this site.
* * *
As
UN
Council
Can't Agree on Kordofan Statement, UNclear Who's Still
There
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
July
15, updated at end -- After UN humanitarian chief Valerie Amos
gave a
closed door briefing about Southern Kordofan to the Security Council,
the
New
York representative of the Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights Ivan Simonovic came to present the issue to the
press.
Inner
City
Press
asked Simonovic who in the UN system, or which unit, was being able
to report from Southern Kordofan, and what he and his Office made of
allegation that UN peacekeepers, even before their mandate expired on
July 9, didn't do enough to protect civilians in Kordofan.
Simonovic
said
that
reporting is difficult because on July 9 “we lost our mandate
[and] our presence.”
It
was not clear
who Simonovic meant when he said “we.” The Amos-headed UN Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs? Or are all
representatives of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights attached to the UN Mission in Sudan, which ended on July 9?
Simonovic
indicated
that
they were tied to the Mission. One wonders if they
tried to negotiate with Omar al Bashir's government before then to be
able to stay. If not, why not? Simonovic took two questions from
Inner City Press -- he dodged the question of inaction by Egyptian
peacekeepers, perhaps because his Office is entirely aligned with the
Department of Peacekeeping Operations -- and then he left.
It
is important
that the UN be clear on what
expired on July 9. On
July 13 Inner
City Press asked
UN
spokesman
Martin Nesirky about the bombing in
Kordofan:
Inner
City
Press:
There
are these reports of continued bombing in Kadugli
and South Kordofan. It says the UN
has reported, I guess to BBC,
that these bombs are falling. One, can you confirm that? And two,
this would seem to indicate that the UN is at least in a position to
report what they hear or see. I am just trying to figure out what
the UN presence in Kordofan is going to be between now and the end of
August. Is there going to be some kind of at least visual
observation and reporting?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well,
it
depends on what you mean by the UN, Matthew,
because there is a UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) which is now being
liquidated, because that’s what has to happen. And there are other
members of the UN family, so to speak, who would also presumably be
in the area, too. That’s the first point. The second is that I
would need to check with my colleagues to see whether they have any
further information on the bombings that you have referred to. But
we’ve made clear, I have made clear from here, that the UN Mission
in Sudan is in now the phase of winding down. It no longer has a
mandate to operate. It’s not what we wanted, but it is a fact. And so,
therefore, it is not possible for the Mission — the
previous Mission — to be active in patrolling and so on. I would
need to find out if these reports are correct and where they emanate
from.
Inner
City
Press:
There are these reports of continued bombing in Kadugli
and South Kordofan. It says the UN has reported, I guess to BBC,
that these bombs are falling. One, can you confirm that? And two,
this would seem to indicate that the UN is at least in a position to
report what they hear or see. I am just trying to figure out what
the UN presence in Kordofan is going to be between now and the end of
August. Is there going to be some kind of at least visual
observation and reporting?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well,
it depends on what you mean by the UN, Matthew,
because there is a UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) which is now being
liquidated, because that’s what has to happen. And there are other
members of the UN family, so to speak, who would also presumably be
in the area, too. That’s the first point. The second is that I
would need to check with my colleagues to see whether they have any
further information on the bombings that you have referred to. But
we’ve made clear, I have made clear from here, that the UN Mission
in Sudan is in now the phase of winding down. It no longer has a
mandate to operate. It’s not what we wanted, but it is a fact. And so,
therefore, it is not possible for the Mission — the
previous Mission — to be active in patrolling and so on. I would
need to find out if these reports are correct and where they emanate
from.
Two
full days
later, Nesirky had not provide any information in this regard. Now
Simonovic has said that the human rights monitoring in Southern
Kordofan was so aligned with UN peacekeeping that “we lost our
mandate and presence.”
Later
on
Friday
Security Council president Peter Wittig came and read out some
“elements to the press” summarizing the Council's discussion. A
real Press Statement could not be agreed on.
Inner
City
Press
asked if the satellite photographs reportedly of mass graves had been
discussed. Wittig replied that Amos had used different sources.
Later, Amos
released a statement with this sentence in which the word
“grave” appears three times: “We do not know whether there is
any truth to the grave allegations of extra-judicial killings, mass
graves and other grave violations in South Kordofan.”
Inner
City
Press
asked Wittig why this wasn't even a Press Statement, and wouldn't go
on the Council's web site. We thought speed was important, Wittig
said. But what is being accomplished? Who is even trying?
Upate of 5:56 pm --
sources in the negotiations says that "some delegations" wanted to list
the specific allegation (though not including the satellite photos),
and others wanted to "welcome" OHCHR's intention to issue a report in
the future -- both were blocked, or could not be agreed by 2pm. Hence
the mere "elements to the press." Watch this
site.
* * *
, 
in