On
Inaction
in Abyei,
Ban's UN Says
It Was "Not
Mandated" to
Oppose
Sudan Army:
Rwanda Redux?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 20 --
Despite the
UN's claims to
have learned
from its
peacekeepers'
shameful
inaction in
Rwanda and
Srebenica,
things have
hit a new low
at the UN of
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon and
his
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations,
which he put
under Herve
Ladsous,
the fourth
Frenchman in a
row in the
position.
Inner
City Press
on Tuesday
asked Ban's
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
about the UN's
inaction in
Abyei, both in
light of an
Amnesty
International
report
that
"peacekeepers
from the UN
Mission in the
Sudan (UNMIS)
were
stationed in
Abyei during
the May
violence but
failed to take
any
'meaningful
action' and a
previous,
perhaps even
more damning
because
internal UN
Development
Program
report.
"'Former
UNMIS
personnel told
Amnesty
International
that a
decision was
made
not to
militarily
engage with
the Sudan
Armed Forces
(SAF) because
SAF was better
equipped,'
Amnesty said.
AFP* was
unable to
reach UN
officials who
could respond
to the
allegations."
When
Inner City
Press asked
Nesirky about
this quote,
that "a
decision was
made
not to
militarily
engage with
the Sudan
Armed Forces
because SAF
was
better
equipped,"
Nesirky did
not deny it.
Rather,
Nesirky
twice said
"that Mission
was not
mandated to
oppose forces
of the state."
Video
here, from
Minute 14:52.
The
UN mission in
Rwanda in 1994
was under
Chapter 6 of
the UN
Charter, but
UN
peacekeepers'
inaction is
still said to
be a source of
shame to at
least some UN
officials.
Inner City
Press began to
asked Nesirky,
"Didn't UNMIS
have a
protection of
civilians
mandate" --
but Nesirky
tried to turn
to one of the
handful of
other
questioners
in the
briefing room.
Video
here, from
Minute 15:18.
Inner
City Press
protested that
it was a
serious
question, on
which it had
the same
right to
follow up as
Nesirky had
earlier
granted
questions
about
Camp Ashraf in
Iraqand Deputy
Secretary
General Asha
Rose Migiro's
visit to sign
the book of
condolences
for Kim
Jong-Il at the
mission
of the
Democratic
People's
Republic of
Korea.
Reiterating
the
unanswered
query
concerning the
UN's and
UNMIS' duty to
try to
protect
civilians,
Inner City
Press
explicitly
asked about
the UNDP
report of May
22, 2010
stating that
"The Force
Commander
[Major
General Moses
Bisong Obi]
advised that
they saw the
SAF build-up
and
attack coming
but they were
unable to stop
it. There had
however been
assurance by
SAF that UN
would not be
targeted."
Inner
City Press
asked, when
did Obi know
what the
Sudanese Armed
Forces were
going to
attack? Who
provided the
"assurances"
to him?
Video
here, from
Minute 15:49.
(c) UN Photo
Omar al Bashir
with Ban,
Mission's
mandate,
response and
learning not
shown
Nesirky
merely
repeated that
UNMIS "was not
mandated to
oppose forces
of
the state."
Never
again?
Hardly.
Footnotes:
In
the quote
above, that
AFP (Agence
France Presse)
"was unable
to reach UN
officials who
could respond
to the
allegations"
seems strange,
given that the
UN Department
of
Peacekeeping
Operations is
being run by
the fourth
Frenchman in a
row, Herve
Ladsous.
As noted,
the
French mission
to the UN did
not even know,
the day
of the
announcement,
that Ban
was appointing
Ladsous
and not
younger fellow
Frenchman
Jerome
Bonnafont.
When Inner
City Press
reported this,
the
French
mission used a
French media
outlet -- AFP
-- to harass
Inner
City Press for
more than a
month.
Notwithstanding
France's
role during
the Rwanda
genocide (and
Ladsous'
defense of it
while serving
as France's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
in the
Security
Council in
1994),
what would
France have to
say to the
position that
UNMIS "was not
mandated to
oppose the
forces of
the Sudanese
state"? Watch
this site.
, 
