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

[Stan]

I read about the leaked report at this blog, but I haven't seen it on any of the secured sites I frequent. But then, most of the sites I work with probably couldn't find the DRC on a map

Yes, well... The bird is here to be eaten in the end

But tell me, Did you, or Tom, put your hands on the last report from the Human Rights Commission fom the UN on the war crimes in DRC between 96 and 2003 ?

Apparently, sometimes, even for wolfs time are tuff.
I'll be happy to get a copy, could not find it in open sources yet.

[Rex Brynen]

U.N. Congo Report Offers New View on Genocide
By HOWARD W. FRENCH
New York Times
Published: August 27, 2010

A forthcoming United Nations report on 10 years of extraordinary violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo bluntly challenges the conventional history of events there after the 1994 Rwandan genocide, charging that invading troops from Rwanda and their rebel allies killed tens of thousands of members of the Hutu ethnic group, including many civilians.

Killings in Congo and Rwanda have led to long inquiries.
The 545-page report on 600 of the country’s most serious reported atrocities raises the question of whether Rwanda could be found guilty of genocide against Hutu during the war in neighboring Congo, but says international courts would need to rule on individual cases.

...

While Rwanda and Congolese rebel forces have always claimed that they attacked Hutu militias who were sheltered among civilians, the United Nations report documents deliberate reprisal attacks on civilians.

The report says that the apparently systematic nature of the massacres “suggests that the numerous deaths cannot be attributed to the hazards of war or seen as equating to collateral damage.” It continues, “The majority of the victims were children, women, elderly people and the sick, who were often undernourished and posed no threat to the attacking forces.”

The existence of the United Nations document, titled Democratic Republic of Congo, 1993-2003, was first reported by the French daily newspaper Le Monde. But participants in the drafting of the report have described its progress and difficulties over a period of seven months to The New York Times, which obtained the most recent version of the report.

...

The release of the report appears to have been delayed in part over fears of the reaction of the Rwandan government, which has long enjoyed strong diplomatic support from the United States and Britain. There is concern in the United Nations that Rwanda might end its participation in peacekeeping operations in retaliation for the report.

...

[M-A Lagrange]

The release of the report appears to have been delayed in part over fears of the reaction of the Rwandan government, which has long enjoyed strong diplomatic support from the United States and Britain. There is concern in the United Nations that Rwanda might end its participation in peacekeeping operations in retaliation for the report.

Not sure that would be such a bad thing. We cannot have 2 weights for such things as genocides. What ever your contribution is, the political challenge of replacing you (and please not by zimbabwean soldiers...) cannot compete with the gravity of the crime.

[JMA]

Not sure that would be such a bad thing. We cannot have 2 weights for such things as genocides. What ever your contribution is, the political challenge of replacing you (and please not by zimbabwean soldiers...) cannot compete with the gravity of the crime.

When the (Zimbabwean) Gukurahundi genocide took place in the early 80's the Brits (Margret *#@*# Thatcher) let it slide, then the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides saw Bill #@*#@ Clinton frozen in indecision after the "Black Hawk Down" debacle just sit on his hands.

Did anyone think a deterrent with regard to mass murder/rape and genocide had been established? I suggest the thugs of the world thought "see they got away with it then so can I".

Now we read that some gutless bureaucrats at the UN delay the publication of the report based on a concern about upsetting the (alleged) perpetrator.

When was the last time we had significant political leader with balls?

[Dayuhan]

When was the last time we had significant political leader with balls?

When was the last time we had the political will to support intervention in Africa? Political leaders in a democracy are accountable to their constituents, not to their testicles, or to anyone's perception of the greatest good of humankind. For better or for worse, voters in the US and Europe aren't willing to see their governments commit large scale resources to interventions in Africa. It's not a question of balls, it's a question of popular support, and it just isn't there.

[Rex Brynen]

There hasn't been much activity on the Air Combat Information Group website lately (a great resource on some of the lesser-known modern air wars)... but a few days ago, this update popped up:

Zaire/DR Congo 1980 - 2001

The last 15 years of the civil war in Congo have seen quite some use of air power as well - frequently at an unexpectedly (and largely unknown) high level. Considering the size of the country and the number of involved fractions, as well as the complexity of this conflict however, this is not surprising. This exclusive report was prepared on the basis of years of intensive research, which enabled the authors to privde very in-depth information about composition and operations of involved air forces, but also about the general conduct of this war.

To my non-expert eyes, well worth a read for those interested in the conflict.

[Colin Robinson]

Probably anyone who's interested has already seen that the UN Mapping Report has been leaked on Scribd.com, but just in case:-

http://www.scribd.com/doc/38549929/U...ed-Aug-27-2010

Cheers