In DRC, Kerry Says Thinks Kabila Has Plan to End FDLR, Won't Say When
Inner City Press - 4 May 2014
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 4, more background here -- After US Secretary of
State John Kerry met with Congolese president Joseph Kabila, he said
he thought Kabila has a timeline to belatedly go after and neutralize
the Hutu FDLR militia. But, he said, it would be inappropriate for him
to talk about it.
Kabila's government, and therefore UN Peacekeeping led by Herve
Ladsous, has continued to say it would neutralize the FDLR after this
was done to the M23. But then the ADF-NALU came first, and the
commander of the Force Intervention Brigade went back to Tanzania.
Excuses have been made about the FDLR being differently configured
than the M23, about the drones Ladsous pushed through for the UN in
the Congo being less useful with the FDLR than the M23. Ladsous has
repeatedly refused to answer Press questions about the FLDR, just as
he refused to answer questions about the November 2012 mass rapes in
Minova by Kabila's army. So: when?
Here in fairness is Kerry's lengthy statement on the FDLR, and a
possible third term for Kabila (full US transcript here)
With respect to the election process, the constitution, and the FDLR,
we want to see the process of providing stability and completing the
task of disarming the armed groups in the east completed. So that
includes not just the completion of the efforts with the ADF, but also
obviously, indeed making sure that the FDLR is held accountable and
that the initiative with respect to them will commence.
The president - we did discuss it. The president made it clear that he
intends to do that, and I think that there is a schedule. I don't want
to discuss it because I think it would be inappropriate to do so. But
the answer is the president gave his word that that is not just on the
agenda, but that he has a specific process in mind and timing.
And with respect to the constitutional process, we talked about the
election. I believe the president's legacy is a legacy that is very
important for the country, and that he has an opportunity, which he
understands, to be able to put the country on a continued path of
democracy. And I believe it is clear to him that the United States of
America feels very strongly, as do other people, that the
constitutional process needs to be respected and adhered to. That's
how you strengthen a country.
I have no doubt that President Kabila's legacy will be defined by the
progress he has made in the - particularly the last year in addressing
the security issues of the east, the economic issues of the country.
And he's a young man with an enormous amount of time to be able to
continue to contribute to his country. And I'm quite confident that he
will weigh all of those issues as he makes a decision about the
future.
But clearly, the United States of America believes that a country is
strengthened, that people have respect for their nation and their
government, when a constitutional process is properly implemented and
upheld by that government. And we obviously believe - we're a country
with term limits. We live by them. We had several hundred years of
transformation under that process, and we encourage other countries to
adhere to their constitution.
We note that the "third term" issue exists as well in Burundi, on
which Inner City Press has been reported, most recently here. We'll
have more on that.
Back in March after the UN's Democratic Republic of the Congo
mission MONUSCO was extended one year, with a reference to the 1994
"genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, during which Hutu and others
who opposed the genocide were also killed," it was UN Security Council
pen-holder Gerard Araud of France who came first to speak to the
media.
While Araud has resisted Press questions following articles
comparing the treatment of a French diplomat to a more recent Indian
case, on March 28 he answered two Press questions, in his way. So we
note it.
As soon as Araud finished his prepared remarks, apparently written
by his spokesperson Frederic Jung, Inner City Press asked of something
Rwanda Permanent Representative Gasana said, calling on the Security
Council to ensure accountability in implementation of the mandate --
to neutralize the Hutu FDLR.
Inner City Press asked Araud how the Council - on which France is a
Permanent member - would ensure this, and why after the M23, the
Mission went after the ADF before the Hutu FDLR.
Araud answered dismissively, but he answered, calling it a military
and not a political question. Many would disagree if the sequencing of
targeting the Hutu FDLR is not political, but it is an answer, and we
report it.
After that, the Reuters bureau chief was called on by Jung to ask
about Ukraine and North Korea. On the former, no mention was made of
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting with the leader of the Svoboda
Party, adjudged as both racist and anti-Semitic. Perhaps as Svodoba
tried to ban the video of it beating a TV executive, these findings
too can be banned.
To the side, the former Reuters bureau chief was observed by a member
of the Free UN Coalition for Access cackling happily that Araud had
been dismissive of Inner City Press' first question - this same scribe
began the March 27 nearly empty press conference about the ICTR by
asking leadingly about its fights with Paul Kagame. But no questions
on MONUSCO?
As a second question to Araud, Inner City Press asked a simple one,
about the genocide language in the new resolution (which Inner City
Press put online after the vote, before the UN or French mission did,
here.)
Araud said, correctly, that it is the same language as in January's
Resolution 2136. Inner City Press reported on that process in
January:
When the Democratic Republic of the Congo sanctions resolution was
adopted by the UN Security Council, 15-0, Rwanda's Permanent
Representative Gasana emerged from the Council chamber. Inner City
Press asked him about his DRC counterpart's comment that Gasana was
educated in the Congo.
Video here and embedded below.
Gasana laughed and said he was born in Burundi. He mused that the
Congolese might want to adopt him. Then he turned to go.
Wire services Reuters and Agence France-Presse pursued him to the
esclator, where Reuters UN bureau chief asked Gasana about Rwanda
being accused of supporting the M23. Gasana replied that the DRC has
other problems, for example in Katanga. He said Rwanda is a scapegoat
for the DRC's wider problems.
Reuters insisted that the Group of Experts report had been welcomed
by the Security Council resolution. "Because they need that," Gasana
replied. "This is the raison d'etre of the Security Council."
Nothing was asked there about the fight in the Council on how to
described the 1994 genocide and the compromise language in the
resolution. AFP's outgoing scribe was there, but asked nothing. Nor
when the DRC Permanent Representative spoke minutes later at the UNTV
stakeout, in French.
This is how the UN works.
An hour later at the UN's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked the
UN's acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for an update on any
accountability for the mass rapes in Minova by units of the Congolese
Army the UN supports, and if UN Peacekeeping, led by Herve Ladsous, is
investigating links between the Congolese Army and the FDLR militia.
On this, Haq said to look at the Council's resolutions.
Video here.
In the January 30 resolution, the language compromised on is "the
1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, during which Hutu and
others who opposed the genocide were also killed."
Sources exclusively told Inner City Press that the United States
resisted calling it a genocide against the Tutsi of Rwanda, even
saying that there is a US policy against referring to it in this way.
Inner City Press has asked the US Mission to the UN for an
explanation. It was said one might be forthcoming after the vote.
Where would such a US policy be written down? It seemed strange,
particularly during a time of Holocaust events at the UN, from one
about Hungary to another about Albania.
On January 29, Inner City Press asked a US Council diplomat, who
said spokespeople would be asked. Inner City Press was told to wait
for the language to be final, then, for the vote.
In the Council's January 29 debate, the representative of the DRC
spoke about Rwanda and the M23 rebels. Rwanda's Deputy Permanent
Representative replied with a series of questions: was it Rwanda who
killed Lumumba? Was Rwanda responsible for Mobutu? Who hosted and
failed to separate the genocidaires from Rwanda in 1994?
This continued on January 30 after the vote. Rwanda Permanent
Representative Gasana said UN Peacekeeping should investigate links
between the DRC Army and the FDLR.
The DRC representative asked to be given specifics about links
between his country's army the FARDC and the FDLR militia. The
resolution voted on provides:
"Noting with deep concern reports indicating FARDC collaboration with
the FDLR at a local level, recalling that the FDLR is a group under
United Nations sanctions whose leaders and members inchide
perpetrators of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, during
which Hutu and others who opposed the genocide were also killed, and
have continued to promote and commit ethnically based and other
killings in Rwanda and in the DRC, and stressing the importance of
permanently addressing this threat"
As Inner City Press exclusively put online last June, some of these
links were even specified in the UN Group of Experts report, for
example:
"107. The Group interviewed 10 FARDC soldiers in Tongo, in North Kivu,
who reported that FARDC and FDLR regularly meet and exchange
operational information. These same sources stated that FARDC soldiers
supplied ammunition to the FDLR. Col. Faida Fidel Kamulete, the
commander of FARDC 2nd battalion of 601st Regiment based at Tongo,
denied such collaboration, but declared to the Group that FARDC and
FDLR do not fight each other."
Going further back, it is impossible not to note, particularly given
the lack of explanation or transparency, that US Permanent
Representative Samantha Power began her 2001 article "Bystanders to
Genocide" in the Atlantic with this sentence: "In the course of a
hundred days in 1994 the Hutu government of Rwanda and its extremist
allies very nearly succeeded in exterminating the country's Tutsi
minority."
Given that, why would the US Mission be saying it had a policy of
describing the genocide as being against the Tutsi minority? Inner
City Press asked again: Since I'm told that the US has said that there
is a government position not to say the 1994 genocide was against the
Tutsis, can you say what that policy is? Why does it exist? Does it
apply to other genocides or atrocities?
As noted, Inner City Press also has pending with the US State
Department a number of requests, including a Freedom of Information
Act request regarding the Administration's Atrocities Prevention
Board.
A Rwandan diplomat told Inner City Press these were Hutu killed not
because of their ethnicity but because they opposed the genocide
against the Tutsi. "This is a precedent," the diplomat said. Watch
this site.
* * *
These reports are usually also available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here for Sept 26, 2011 New Yorker on Inner City Press at UN
Click for BloggingHeads.tv re Libya, Sri Lanka, UN Corruption
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are
available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2014 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
http://www.google.ca/gwt/x?gl=CA&source=s&u=http://www.innercitypress.com/drc1kerryfdlr050414.html&hl=en-CA&ei=p2iOU92zK8fCmgfH7YCAAQ&wsc=vb&ct=np&whp=3161
--
SIBOMANA Jean Bosco
Google+: https://plus.google.com/110493390983174363421/posts
YouTube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9B4024D0AE764F3D
http://www.youtube.com/user/sibomanaxyz999
***Online Time:15H30-20H30, heure de Montréal.***Fuseau horaire domestique:
heure normale de la côte Est des Etats-Unis et Canada (GMT-05:00)***
Posted by: Jean Bosco Sibomana <sibomanaxyz999@gmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
.To post a message: RwandaLibre@yahoogroups.com; .To join: RwandaLibre-subscribe@yahoogroups.com; .To unsubscribe from this group,send an email to:
RwandaLibre-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
_____________________________________________________
More news: http://www.amakurunamateka.com ; http://www.ikangurambaga.com ; http://rwandalibre.blogspot.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-SVP, considérer environnement avant toute impression de cet e-mail ou les pièces jointes.
======
-Please consider the environment before printing this email or any attachments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsors:
http://www.rencontressansfrontieres.com
http://www.intimitesafricaines.com
http://www.foraha.net
-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.