By Sudarsan Raghavan, The Washington Post
POSTED: 01/04/14, 8:50 PM EST |
NAIROBI The United Nations has dispatched a record number of peacekeepers
in Africa in recent years, deploying soldiers to trouble spots such as the
Central African Republic and South Sudan. Yet the blue helmets and
thousands of other soldiers sent by African regional groups have failed to
prevent fresh spasms of violence.
The peacekeeping forces have cost billions of dollars, largely paid by the
United States and European nations. But they have been hobbled by weak
mandates and a shortage of manpower and equipment. Some critics also say
Washington, its allies and U.N. officials are at fault in the peacekeeping
failures, for not following through with enough political pressure to
prevent crises.
The political and diplomatic elements of the international response to most
Africa conflicts have been slow and ineffective, said John Prendergast, a
longtime Sudan and South Sudan activist with the Enough Project, a human
rights group. That, he said, has put more pressure on peacekeeping missions
to fulfill objectives for which they are totally unprepared.
In South Sudan, a power struggle that U.S. and U.N. officials were aware of
for more than a year has now sparked an ethnic and political conflict that
has killed hundreds, raising fears of a potential civil war.
On Friday, the warring sides held their first round of peace talks in
neighboring Ethiopia, but the conflict showed no signs of abating. The U.S.
State Department evacuated more of its embassy staff from the South Sudanese
capital, Juba. Meanwhile, the rebel forces, which recently seized the
strategic town of Bor, remained in a standoff with government troops,
raising concerns that battles could flare up at any moment.
Already, nearly 200,000 people have been displaced by the fighting.
Frustration with the peacekeepers is rife. Ibrahim Muhammed, 30, fled the
volatile Sudanese region of Darfur a year ago and arrived in South Sudan
searching for a better future. Today, he languishes inside a U.N.
peacekeeping base in the war-ravaged South Sudanese town of Malakal, living
in a tent made of blankets.
The U.N. peacekeepers have not been able to stop the violence in Darfur,
and so I came here, said Muhammed, a shopkeeper, in an interview last
weekend in Malakal. But in South Sudan now, the situation is similar to
Darfur. It is tribe against tribe. The peacekeepers wont be able to stop
the attacks.
Toby Lanzer, a senior U.N. official in South Sudan, conceded there are
limitations to what peacekeeping forces can accomplish in trouble spots. In
many situations, including South Sudan and the Central African Republic,
U.N. and African forces lack resources and a sufficient number of soldiers,
he added.
Theres always a temptation when people hear of 5,000 or 10,000
peacekeepers for them to think that they can do an awful lot of good, and
they can, said Lanzer, the deputy special representative for the U.N.
mission in South Sudan. But what they cannot do is stabilize a situation in
a whole country that is erupting into violence.
***
There are now more U.N. peacekeepers in Africa than at any time in history
roughly twice as many as in the early 1990s.
As of the end of November, more than 70 percent of the 98,267 U.N.
peacekeepers deployed globally were in sub-Saharan Africa, according to J.
Peter Pham, executive director of the Atlantic Councils Africa Center.
U.N. forces have often been limited by mandates that only allow them to
fight in self-defense. Shortly before genocidal attacks erupted in Rwanda in
1994, for example, U.N. peacekeepers learned that arms were being imported
illegally by an ethnic Hutu militia. But senior U.N. officials ordered the
peacekeepers not to seize the weapons because it was outside the scope of
their mandate, their commander, Brig. Romeo Dallaire, later recounted in a
book.
More than two years ago, the U.N. mission in South Sudan was authorized to
have up to 7,500 military personnel and police. But it was unable to stop
the ethnic and political bloodletting that had been occurring since the
country won independence from Sudan in 2011. In January 2012, the U.N.
mission was heavily criticized by victims and community leaders for doing
little to stop a wave of tribal killings in Jonglei State, the same region
that is now a battle zone.
It was only after violence quickly spread across South Sudan in mid-December
that the U.N. Security Council unanimously voted to nearly double the force
to a little more than 14,000. But the peacekeepers mandate is framed in
terms of development, as if the problems of South Sudan were merely due to
the lack of material aid, as opposed to rooted in deeper conflicts, Pham
said.
While one has to be realistic and acknowledge that the U.N. and the
African Union are not panaceas and not every conflict can be foreseen, much
less prevented one should also ask what the purpose of deploying some
7,000 troops from more than 60 countries to South Sudan at the cost of close
to $1 billion a year is, if they are not keeping the peace, said Pham.
But others say that if the peacekeepers were not deployed, there would have
been more chaos and deaths in South Sudan, the Central African Republic and
in other nations where poverty, poor governance and corruption have fueled
violence.
I think one can legitimately criticize peacekeeping operations for not
doing enough, said E.J. Hogendoorn, deputy Africa director for the
International Crisis Group, an independent organization that tries to
prevent conflicts. But without the physical intervention of either U.N. or
African peacekeepers, those conflicts could oftentimes have escalated much
more.
Lanzer, the U.N. official, said that the U.N. forces have helped keep most
of South Sudan relatively stable, noting that much of the chaos and violence
is unfolding in four of the countrys 10 states. The U.N. mission, he added,
is fulfilling its primary mandate to protect civilians, noting that tens of
thousands have sought refuge inside U.N. peacekeeping bases.
Weve stepped up to the plate and done the very best we could, he added.
African peacekeeping troops not under the U.N. banner often have even less
equipment, training and resources. Yet, they are increasingly being called
upon to help contain crises around the continent.
In northern Mali, an African force comprised of soldiers from neighboring
countries deployed too late to prevent Islamist radicals including Al
Qaidas West and North African affiliate from carrying out widespread
atrocities against civilians.
In the Central African Republic, African Union peacekeepers have been unable
to stop the brutalities committed by Muslim Seleka rebels and Christian
militias in the sectarian conflict. Soldiers from Chad, a Muslim nation that
is part of the peacekeeping force, have been accused of supporting the
Muslim rebels.
Even with increased engagement in peace operations, questions remain about
the quality and capability of African troops, Comfort Ero, the Africa
director for the International Crisis Group, wrote in a blog on the groups
website last month.
In both Mali and the Central African Republic, or CAR, hundreds of soldiers
from France, the former colonial power, were sent to defuse the crisis after
African peacekeeping forces failed to do so.
Still, when resources, training and a strong mandate are provided to African
peacekeepers, there have been some successes. The African force in Somalia,
led by Uganda and Burundi and backed by the United States and its allies, is
credited with driving out the al Qaida-linked al-Shabab militia from major
cities, though Somalia remains far from stable.
In the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the U.N. mission has been widely
criticized as unable to protect civilians, the recent deployment of a rapid
reaction U.N. combat brigade with a strong mandate helped defeat the M23
rebels.
The crisis in South Sudan, though, threatens to weaken other peacekeeping
missions in Africa. Last months U.N. resolution allows troops from other
trouble spots such as Sudan, Liberia, Ivory Coast and Congo to be
temporarily redeployed to bolster the U.N. mission in South Sudan.
Even with thousands of peacekeepers, a key reason for the strife in South
Sudan is a refusal by the United States, European and African powers who
played a key role in creating the independent nation to acknowledge its
political divides and hold its leaders accountable, said analysts. For more
than a year, there were clear signs of a deep split within the ruling party,
pitting President Salva Kiir against his former vice president, Riek Machar.
Now, both mens loyalists within the army threaten to propel the country
into more violence and tragedy.
In South Sudan, there could have been a bigger international diplomatic
push to address the deepening schism within South Sudans ruling party when
it began to implode in the summer, said Prendergast. A U.N. mission alone
cannot usually address these scenarios, so the countries with leverage need
to show up in a major way and work to prevent potential conflagration. This
didnt happen in South Sudan, and the result is obvious.
Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni and Dr. Kiiza Besigye Uganda is in anarchy"
Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni na Dk. Kiiza Besigye Uganda ni katika machafuko"
_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet
UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
