Gazing in the Congo (DRC): the dark heart of Africa (2006-2017)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

In any case, the problem is that the UN has no enforcement authority over these troops--that remains in national hands....

Rex, do you have any insights?

---

You've hit the nail on the head--with PKOs, the military contingents remain under national command authority, and the most the UN can do is ask that they be sent home (hopefully to face discipline, but often not).

With UN civilian personnel, there are at least administrative disciplinary measures that can be taken (up to and including firing them), although it seems very rare that this ever happens.

The issue has become particularly problematic with regard to issues of sexual abuse, as I'm sure you know--hence the adoption of a "zero tolerance" policy. With military peacekeeping personnel, however, still requires that troop contributing countries cooperate.

According to the UN:

Quote:

---

Between January 2004 and November 2006, 319 peacekeeping personnel in all missions had been investigated, resulting in the summary dismissal of 18 civilians and the repatriation on disciplinary grounds of 17 police and 144 military personnel.

---

I haven't seen more recent statistics--nor does it say what happened to the non-civilian personnel when they got home..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

Stan,

Never forget our friends from the 700 Club and their Op Blessing facade.

---

Now Tom, Pat paid back nearly 400K and besides, those birds were deemed unsuitable for humanitarian airlift :wry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

In any case, the problem is that the UN has no enforcement authority over these troops--that remains in national hands. The Nigerian contingent in UNAMIR 2 in 1995 had a soldier murder a local--in the UN compound--and the contingent commander helped cover it up. They were sent home at the insistence of the new Rwandan government; my friend the RPA G3 did the investigation.
Tom

---

I reckon I expected more (perhaps too much) from India's contingents, although Rex's stats for a two-year period are certainly reasonable considering the large scale missions.

I was however by no means surprised by the former Zairians trading fake gold for ammo and airlift in the bush. :D

I remain blissfully skeptical :eek:

Great pic, Stan. I wish I had a pic of the M113 chicken coop that the Ghanians in UNAMIR2 had at a roadblock.

Sometimes--not always and never when it comes to sunglasses, gold chains, and taped magazines--appearances are decieviing. The scraggiest battalion in UNAMIR 2 was the Ethiopian battalion they came with small arms (AKs) a couple of magazines and not much else. They lived rough, ate rough, solicited local woman for labor and entertainment--which they paid for. And they had the most stable sector in the mission even though it was at least number 2 in threat.

They came with a national ROE which equated to "don't ask for permission and don't ask for more support, either.' That meant when some ex-FAR or Interahamwe scum bag crossed into their sector, they shot 'em. When their was cross border fire, they returned better than they took.

They at first drove the Force Commander MG Tousignant to distraction until he saw that they were getting the job done. Their base camp looked more like an African version of a Mexican bandit camp. They did not clean up well for parades.

The RPA loved them. The Ethiopians had all been rebels too.

Best

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

Great pic, Stan. I wish I had a pic of the M113 chicken coop that the Ghanians in UNAMIR2 had at a roadblock.

Sometimes--not always and never when it comes to sunglasses, gold chains, and taped magazines--appearances are decieviing. The scraggiest battalion in UNAMIR 2 was the Ethiopian battalion they came with small arms (AKs) a couple of magazines and not much else. They lived rough, ate rough, solicited local woman for labor and entertainment--which they paid for. And they had the most stable sector in the mission even though it was at least number 2 in threat.

They came with a national ROE which equated to "don't ask for permission and don't ask for more support, either.' That meant when some ex-FAR or Interahamwe scum bag crossed into their sector, they shot 'em. When their was cross border fire, they returned better than they took.

They at first drove the Force Commander MG Tousignant to distraction until he saw that they were getting the job done. Their base camp looked more like an African version of a Mexican bandit camp. They did not clean up well for parades.

The RPA loved them. The Ethiopians had all been rebels too.

Best

Tom

---

Hope to dig up that pic for you, Tom. There's indeed plenty of praise for Ghana's peacekeeping missions in Africa.

Quote:

---

The examples are not hard to find. When the going was tough in Rwanda in 1994, the Ghanaian contingent, under Brig. Henry Anyidoho, offered the much-needed protection to the people at their peril and within the dire constraints at the time. Annan, speaking in Accra recently during a photo exhibition to mark the 40th anniversary of Ghana's peacekeeping, confirms the heroism of Ghanaian peacekeepers who, he said, have distinguished themselves by their courage and professionalism.

---

Much more at the link...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan

Hope to dig up that pic for you, Tom. There's indeed plenty of praise for Ghana's peacekeeping missions in Africa.



Much more at the link...

---

Henry was indeed one of the good guys. We started off fairly cool but the relationship warmed up when he understood I was not playing games. I know Dallaire thought a lot of him as he did of the Ghanians in general.

but the Ghanians always looked sharp--even with their 113 chicken coop. And they were very much wedded to a formal chain of command. The Ethiopians were more like Oddball's tankers in Kelly's Heroes. They always looked ragged but they got the job done.

Best

Tom

And here we go again...

Government forces and rebel troops are rearming and recruiting for conflict in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo...

Quote:

---

US and European Union officials are warning the situation is increasingly tense despite a January peace deal.

One source said six plane-loads of arms and ammunition had been flown into Goma by the government in the last 10 days.

Recruiting

It now appears that General Nkunda is not just touring his area and strengthening his defences.

---

in Rwanda's Genocide.

Quote:

---

Earlier this year France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner denied French responsibility in connection with the genocide, but said political errors had been made.

---

And here they go again:

Quote:

---

A justice ministry report said France was aware of preparations for the genocide and helped train the ethnic Hutu militia perpetrators.

Among those named in the report were the late former president, Francois Mitterrand, and two former prime ministers, Dominique de Villepin and Edouard Balladur.

Also named was former Foreign Minister Alain Juppe.

The French foreign ministry told the BBC it would only respond to the fresh allegations after reading the report, which was released on Tuesday afternoon.

---

I think you have missed the important bit in the article....

Diversion tactic?

It certainly raises questions about Rwanda's motivation in taking this step.
The public reason given is a search for justice.
As Rwanda's Minister of Justice Tharcisse Karugarama put it to the BBC, those responsible for the Jewish Holocaust are still being hunted down decades after World War II, so why should we rest while the people behind the genocide are still at large?
But other reasons have spurred Rwanda to take this step.
Chief among them has been an iron determination to keep the world's attention focused on the genocide, rather than on the role of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the force that took power in 1994, bringing President Paul Kagame to power.
In recent years uncomfortable questions have been raised about the war crimes the RPF are alleged to have committed during and after 1994.
While stressing there can be no equation between genocide and war crimes, Alison Des Forges of Human Rights Watch says RPF leaders do have a case to answer.
"Their victims also deserve justice," she says.
The case against the RPF:
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was mandated to look at all crimes committed in 1994, yet with their mandate supposed to run out by the end of this year they have so far failed to indict any members of the RPF.
In 2006 a French judge, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, issued arrest warrants against nine of President Paul Kagame's senior officials, alleging their complicity in the murder of the late Rwandan President, Juvenal Habyarimana, in April 1994 - the event that sparked off the genocide.
And in February 2008 a Spanish judge, Fernando Andreu, issued international arrest warrants against 40 senior Rwandan officials for crimes allegedly committed in the 1990s.
Painful questions
There is also a political dimension.
Since the RPF took power, relations with France have been distinctly cool.
President Kagame and his closest associates come from a group of English-speaking Tutsi refugees who grew up in Uganda.
The country has moved away from the French sphere of influence in Africa and towards the Anglophone bloc.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now an adviser of President Kagame, and former American President Bill Clinton is a close friend.
Rwanda believes it does not need France and feels free to raise painful questions about Paris's role in the genocide.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...ca/7544267.stm

Published: 2008/08/05 22:12:22 GMT

© BBC MMVIII


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7544267.stm

No I don't think he has missed it at all.

We are quite well aware of Alison Des Forges at HRW. The same holds true concerning the French judge who issued those most dubious charges.

Also aware of the Spanish charges, again dubious.

No one including me --or Paul Kagame--claims that the RPA was innocent of revenge killings in 1994 into 1998. The issue has always been a question of whether government policy supported such killings. From my perspective on the ground from 1994 into 1996 it did not. From the perspective of my successor Rick Orth and my 2nd Ambassador Robert Gribbin it did not. Like me Bob has writtten a book on his time there

As for political agenda, France's political agenda in supporting the previous regime before during and after the genocide is a matter of record and my own personal experience.

Try looking at French historian Gerard Prunier's work on the issue as well as Linda Melvern , Andrew Wallis, and Stephen Kinzer.

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

I think you have missed the important bit in the article....

Diversion tactic?

It certainly raises questions about Rwanda's motivation in taking this step.
The public reason given is a search for justice.
As Rwanda's Minister of Justice Tharcisse Karugarama put it to the BBC, those responsible for the Jewish Holocaust are still being hunted down decades after World War II, so why should we rest while the people behind the genocide are still at large?
But other reasons have spurred Rwanda to take this step.
Chief among them has been an iron determination to keep the world's attention focused on the genocide, rather than on the role of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the force that took power in 1994, bringing President Paul Kagame to power.
In recent years uncomfortable questions have been raised about the war crimes the RPF are alleged to have committed during and after 1994.
While stressing there can be no equation between genocide and war crimes, Alison Des Forges of Human Rights Watch says RPF leaders do have a case to answer.
"Their victims also deserve justice," she says.
The case against the RPF:
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was mandated to look at all crimes committed in 1994, yet with their mandate supposed to run out by the end of this year they have so far failed to indict any members of the RPF.
In 2006 a French judge, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, issued arrest warrants against nine of President Paul Kagame's senior officials, alleging their complicity in the murder of the late Rwandan President, Juvenal Habyarimana, in April 1994 - the event that sparked off the genocide.
And in February 2008 a Spanish judge, Fernando Andreu, issued international arrest warrants against 40 senior Rwandan officials for crimes allegedly committed in the 1990s.
Painful questions
There is also a political dimension.
Since the RPF took power, relations with France have been distinctly cool.
President Kagame and his closest associates come from a group of English-speaking Tutsi refugees who grew up in Uganda.
The country has moved away from the French sphere of influence in Africa and towards the Anglophone bloc.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now an adviser of President Kagame, and former American President Bill Clinton is a close friend.
Rwanda believes it does not need France and feels free to raise painful questions about Paris's role in the genocide.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...ca/7544267.stm

Published: 2008/08/05 22:12:22 GMT

© BBC MMVIII


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7544267.stm

---

With all due respect, I must admit that I take ANY of your comment related to France or french people with a ton of salt.

Having used the "search" function of the forum with the key words "France" or "french", I have noticed your very strong and permanent bias against my country and/or fellow countrymen. It leads me not to give any credit to your sources and allegations.

It is probably normal considering the french were at some point the sponsors of the enemies of your champion Paul Kagame.

Or, to cut a long story short:

http://nancyetroland.free.fr/private...00jpg-515h.jpg

To sum it all up, considering the high quality of the forum, I find your anti-french crusade fairly tiresome and completely out of date.

Let me just remind everyone at this point that personal attacks are not tolerated on this forum. Period.

Wagram, Tom Odom's comments on French activities in Africa are based on his personal experiences in that region. If you choose to dispute his experiences, please do so with concrete examples of where he might be in error, not by claiming that he's on an "anti-French crusade."

Quote:

---

Wagram: With all due respect, I must admit that I take ANY of your comment related to France or french people with a ton of salt.

Having used the "search" function of the forum with the key words "France" or "french", I have noticed your very strong and permanent bias against my country and/or fellow countrymen. It leads me not to give any credit to your sources and allegations.

---

Ignorance is a lack of knowledge.

Stupidity is an inability or a refusal to learn.

The sources I suggested can help with the first condition.

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

To sum it all up, considering the high quality of the forum, I find your anti-french crusade fairly tiresome and completely out of date.

---

He's got something against Canadian bears too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rex Brynen

He's got something against Canadian bears too.

---

I love bears....

I wanna put one on my floor...:D

j'ai oublié comment parler français !

Greetings Wagram.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

I think you have missed the important bit in the article....

---

That, I seriously doubt.

I tell you what: I'll base my ignorance on over a decade in that region, if you'll back your words with just a hint of your background in the French military, and/or that region.

Your reply is optional...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

Diversion tactic?

It certainly raises questions about Rwanda's motivation in taking this step.
The public reason given is a search for justice.

As Rwanda's Minister of Justice Tharcisse Karugarama put it to the BBC, those responsible for the Jewish Holocaust are still being hunted down decades after World War II, so why should we rest while the people behind the genocide are still at large?

But other reasons have spurred Rwanda to take this step.
Chief among them has been an iron determination to keep the world's attention focused on the genocide, rather than on the role of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the force that took power in 1994, bringing President Paul Kagame to power.

---

Ya know, I wished like most, that the world's attention remained focused on the genocide. Sadly, it did not.

Tom and I are unlikely to ever forget our experiences in Zaire and Rwanda, and, I sincerely doubt any living Rwandan will either... ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

In recent years uncomfortable questions have been raised about the war crimes the RPF are alleged to have committed during and after 1994.
While stressing there can be no equation between genocide and war crimes, Alison Des Forges of Human Rights Watch says RPF leaders do have a case to answer.
"Their victims also deserve justice," she says.

---

If we are to now classify the Rwandan genocide as a mere matter of being uncomfortable tied to deserved justice, then there's little reason to continue dialog herein. Furthermore, I have little respect for people who recite poetry from the comforts of their living rooms in front of the TV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wagram

Painful questions
There is also a political dimension.
Since the RPF took power, relations with France have been distinctly cool.
President Kagame and his closest associates come from a group of English-speaking Tutsi refugees who grew up in Uganda.
The country has moved away from the French sphere of influence in Africa and towards the Anglophone bloc.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now an adviser of President Kagame, and former American President Bill Clinton is a close friend.
Rwanda believes it does not need France and feels free to raise painful questions about Paris's role in the genocide.

---

There is and has always been painfully political dimensions, and relations with the French in that region have been a sore point of contention. That, however, does not permit condoning the act of genocide (and later supporting individuals involved).

something about french protestations, obfuscation and posturing that rings a rather hollow note.

Then again they did sail some ships some 233 years ago, since then ehhhh not so much

But at a former job I worked with a fair number of African exchange students (mostly from Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Botswana) over a period of several years. To a man they had a strong dislike for the French...moreso than any other national group. That was something I always found rather interesting. Note that I am NOT an old Africa hand, do not play one on TV, and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I just always found it interesting that of all the national groups that had mucked about in Africa it was the French who my particular students remembered and disliked.

Hey Bill !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Blair

But at a former job I worked with a fair number of African exchange students (mostly from Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Botswana) over a period of several years. To a man they had a strong dislike for the French...moreso than any other national group. That was something I always found rather interesting. Note that I am NOT an old Africa hand, do not play one on TV, and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I just always found it interesting that of all the national groups that had mucked about in Africa it was the French who my particular students remembered and disliked.

---

From the mid to late 80s I taught and also prepared African soldiers from 7 countries to attend professional military courses in CONUS. I think it's important to note that while they had a strong dislike for French, they were quick to blame France's relations with its former colonies, and her discretion and discrimination in dealing with African states.

I've personally observed France's foreign policy role and some of her (mid-80s) Socialist government foreign policy in French-speaking Africa. To put it mildly, several instances of contradictions in French policy took place daily at both their embassy and military training sites.

One of the very reasons I decided to learn Lingala (in addition to French) early on (something like learning Russian instead of Estonian while living in Estonia). The time spent opened doors and made my job far easier...

... then came Tom :D.

We may be ugly Americans, but the French have raised the bar in Sub-Sahara.

On the subject of Kagame, it has been interesting to note the inherent racism that gets applied in the judgements--often well meaning--folks on either side of the aisle (the aisle being those who support what he is doing and those who are against it). Many assume that he cannot dio what he is doing because he is African and all Africans are supposed to be corrupt.

I ran into the same bias when it came to explaining that Kagame's army could take Zaire anytime it wanted to. I found it amusing in 1998 when the Wash post called me looking for a story. They wanted me to "confirm" that US military training had enabled the RPA to take Zaire. I laughed at the reporter and told her "the Boys" as they call themselves were quite capable of doing what they had done without US assistance. The same thinking puts too much stock in his brief stay at Fort Leavenworth; the US Army can hardly claim credit for Paul Kagame's military genius.

Kagame makes folks uncomfortable because he is not asking for help with conditions. He had rather have investments in his country than foreign assistance. He has great distrust of NGOs and the IO development community because he has seen them become self-perpetuating entities. When I dealt with him and his senior officers, they asked for training first. When it came to material, they looked for basics: transport and communications. He did not want a long shopping list of equipment; he didn't want anything that came with strings or a note to be called in later.

He angers folks like Human Rights Watch because he does not do what they want him to do. He may select a course that allows some compromise. Or as he sometimes does, he sets his mind and that's it--usually. He also is politely blunt. He does not do the African political two step. Often the most important things Kagame says are what he does not say. It infuriates many who cannot hear a refusal without it being said.

Kagame is all about self-sufficiency and serious behavior. read Kinzer's book about his crackdown on government officials with their Mercedes. He had the police stop them at traffic lights and then they impounded their cars--the cars were sold and the money put back in the budget. He has forbidden any members of his famlly to serve in the government. The quickest way to be purged from the government is to attract his attention via corruption.

As much as Kagame dislikes French policy in Africa and in particular in Rwanda, he is not about to become the lead in expanding Anglophone Africa. That charge was a favorite of the French in the 1990s. Nor is Kagame about to become a newer version of Mobutu. To paint him as a proxy of the US means simply you have never met him. I believe that Museveni assumed that he would be able to use the Rwandans when he wanted to; it took open fighting between Ugandan and Rwandan forces in the Congo to end that illusion.

Now this is not to say, Paul Kagame is a saint. He is driven in his single mindedness and so far he has managed to adhere to a strngent code of behavior. He is ruthless in his determination to keep Rwanda moving and a large part of that means controlling the tensions that are never very far beneath the surface. Those tensions come from both sides and he is in the middle. It is a pressure cooker. I am in the camp that says the situation demands a firm hand and Kagame doing better than 99.99% of the rest of the population could or would do. I don't agree with the characterization of him as a dictator; his leadership is drawn from communal consent within the RPF.

So far he has done well. I hope that he continues to do so.

Tom