On
UN Drones, HRW
After Refusing
to State
Position Comes
Out in Favor
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 13 --
With the UN
and its head
of
Peacekeeping
Herve Ladsous
proposing
using drones
but refusing
to answer who
would get the
video and
information
feed, Inner
City Press
twice last
week asked
Human Rights
Watch and its
director Ken
Roth for HRW's
position on
the UN using
drones.
HRW,
which
previously
answered Inner
City Press'
question about
its payment
of "transport
fees" to
people willing
to testify
against the
M23 rebels
in Eastern
Congo, this
time did not
answer.
The
drone
question, as
before, was
sent by e-mail
on January 9
and then
January 10 to
HRW's UN
director, to
its press
office and to
Roth (and to another
HRW official)
"Still
waiting for
HRW response
to the Press
question below
for HRW's
position on
the proposed
used of drones
or UAVs, in
MONUSCO and/or
elsewhere.
Please advise.
Also, renewed
request for
disclosure of
at least the
TOPICS of
HRW's / Ken
Roth's
meeting(s)
with Ban
Ki-moon and/or
Herve Ladsous
(if ever), and
the dates of
such meetings.
On deadline."
The
latter
question arose
when HRW
refused to
provide the
public with
even a summary
of the issues
HRW and Roth
raised to UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon in
a meeting on
Ban's
schedule.
It seems clear
HRW and Roth
must tell
their (big)
donors what
they raise to
the UN. Why
not the
public?
But
that may be
part of the
issue here:
under Roth and
his current UN
director, HRW
has gone so
"pro UN" that
it may not
want to openly
criticize a UN
proposal --
for the same
reason HRW
gave to Inner
City Press for
refusing
to summarize
the topics
Roth raised to
Ban: to
maintain
"access."
In its
silence on
drones, HRW
was ignoring a
major UN
issue, and the
questions
raised
on January 8
by at least
five members
of the
Security
Council
including
Guatemala,
including who
would get the
information,
compliance
with
International
Civil Aviation
Organization
rules, and how
the
procurement
would be done
(several C-34
members told
Inner City
Press they
suspect
Ladsous has
French
military
contactor
Thales in
mind).
HRW's
strange
silence on UN
drones also
seems to have
a second
explanation.
Roth and HRW
are "all in"
with criticism
of Rwanda for
supporting the
M23 rebels in
the Congo. So
much so that
HRW has had
nothing to say
about the
Congolese
Army's 126
rapes in
Minova in late
November, and
the UN's
and DPKO's
Ladsous
inaction on
their supposed
Human Rights
Due Diligence
Policy.
Human
Rights Watch
silent on the
non-implementation
by the UN of a
Human Rights
Policy? To
some, this was
proof that HRW has
lost its way
under Roth.
To
others, the
definitive
proof came on
January 11
when Ken Roth
tweeted,
regarding the
UN's UAV
proposal,
"Surveillance
drones don't
shoot people.
They watch
forces that do
the shooting
(or supply
them). Why
would Rwanda
object?"
So
there IS a HRW
position, it
appears: in
favor of the
UN using
drones. Watch
this site.
, 
