On
Slow UN
Response in S.
Sudan,
US Rice Slow
to Criticize,
Vietor
UNclear,
Reforms
Uncertain
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 17,
updated below
-- The day
after UN
Under
Secretary
General
Susana
Malcorra
acknowledged
to Inner City
Press that the
UNMISS
mission
in South Sudan
had been
unable to
transport to
Jonglei state
"lethal assets
to dissuade"
the ongoing
bloodshed
there,
Inner City
Press asked US
Ambassador
Susan Rice
what she
thought of
the Russian
helicopters
not flying,
and the UN's
actions.
Rice
answered more
cagily than
usual,
directing
Inner City
Press to ask
the
Russian
Mission and
DPKO [UN
Peacekeeping]
about the
reasons
for not
flying,
thanking
Russian for
its previous
service in
North
Sudan, and
saying that
the Security
Council is
working to
ensure
UNMISS has the
air assets it
needs. But
how?
Inner
City Press
understands
that in
exchange for
filling in for
the Russian
helicopters,
the
Bangladeshi
unit in the DR
Congo wants to
have at
least a one
year contract,
rather than
the much
shorter period
the UN
has put on the
table.
The Ethiopian
helicopters at
UNISFA in
Abyei
wanted to be
based in Juba,
not in the
more primitive
conditions in,
for example,
Wau.
Rice
and the US
Mission were
appropriately
quick to
criticize UN
peacekeepers
in the
DR Congo who
failed to
recognize or
respond to
mass rape in
Walikale.
Here, perhaps
because as
the Russians
complain the
US blocked a
Security
Council
statement in
November 2011
about attacks
in South
Sudan on
Russian pilots,
Rice has not
unleashed the
type of
criticism
used in the DR
Congo.
Another
explanation is
that since the
incident
does not
reflect well
on US ally
South Sudan,
the less said
the
better.
The
entire helicopter
incident,
first reported
by Inner City
Press, has
brought up the
need for
reforms,
starting with
arrangements
for
"inter-mission
cooperation"
that can be
put into place
while a
bloodbath like
in Jonglei is
actually
taking
place, and not
after.
(c) UN Photo
Rice &
Russia
Churkin,
blocked
statement
&
helicopters
not shown
The Security
Council
members want
the power to
control the
size of each
Mission; the
troop and
equipment
contributing
countries want
to know where
they will
serve, and
under
what terms.
But
how can the UN
and the
Security
Council's
mission
pretend to be
ready to
protect
civilians if
they allow
helicopter
contracts to
lapse, go
weeks with
no helicopter
coverage, and
then are still
unable to
mobilize even
nearby
helicopter
assets, being
paid by the
UN, to come
and transport
"lethal assets
to dissuade"
attacks on
civilians?
Watch
this site.
Footnote:
Inner
City Press
three times
asked the US
Mission to the
UN's
spokesmen for
Rice's or the
Mission's
comments on
the UN's
response
in Jonglei,
without
response. Nor
was the
spokesman
going to
permit
it at
Tuesday's
stakeout on
Sudan. Rice to
her credit
pointed and
took the
question.
Update:
Seven
hours after
Ambassador
Rice's
stakeout, the
administration
sent
this out:
Statement
from
NSC Spokesman
Tommy Vietor
on Violence in
South Sudan
...We
also
note the
mandate of the
UN Mission in
South Sudan
(UNMISS) with
respect to
conflict
prevention and
civilian
protection,
and call upon
the South
Sudanese
government and
the UN to
continue
working
closely
together on
this vitally
important
mission. We
further call
upon the
UN to provide
any additional
support that
is needed by
UNMISS to
carry out its
responsibilities
in South
Sudan.
So
the UN is
reminded it's
supposed to
protect
civilians? And
the UN is
supposed
to provide
helicopters,
belatedly?
We'll have
more on this.
, 
