The UN fails because of making wrong and costly choices

In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and a majority of other signatories. The main purpose for the United Nations (U.N.) is to resolve issues between countries through diplomacy before countries resort to military force and before conflicts escalate. Unfortunately, the U.N. has consistently failed in this goal and shows no sign of changing soon. It is often said that prevention is better than cure, but UN prefers dealing with the after effects of war than preventing war. U.N. peacekeepers in Rwanda (UNAMIR) stood by as genocidaires slaughtered more than one million Tutsis. In Bosnia, the U.N. declared safe areas for Muslims but did nothing to secure them, letting the Serbs slaughter thousands in Srebrenica. There are several resolutions that were adopted by the UN calling for the disarmament of Interahamwe/ ex-FAR. What is perturbing is that these criminal rebel groups are busy raping women in DRC in the presence of MONUSCO. The UN will find it easy to establish a special tribunal for the rape cases than preventing those rapes. If these rebel groups who are responsible for those atrocities are disarmed, who will rape the innocent Congolese? The UN has always prescribed the wrong medicine. It has never accomplished any peace keeping mission, not because there are no resources, but the political will at the helm is not there. UN is nowadays seen by many as an employment institution, especially of legal officers who always push for tribunals in developing countries. Most of these tribunals are created in developing countries even though it is known that most grave human rights violations are committed by the untouchable powerful nations. It is even frustrating that justice delivered by those tribunals is at very slow pace, and as the saying goes; justice delayed is justice denied, more so, at the expense of unimaginable budgets while the victims of conflicts are starving. Regarding the Mapping Report on the DRC, Rwanda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Louise Mushikiwabo, says it is a “moral and intellectual failure—as well as an insult to history. The report contains flawed methodology and applies the lowest imaginable evidentiary standard that barely meets journalistic requirements”. Allegations of serious offences must be supported by evidence beyond any doubt. The ongoing media and public debates, in Rwanda and beyond, points out that the report was concocted by people either ignorant about the Genocide against the Tutsi, or wanting to exonerate its perpetrators by implying “the double genocide theory”. The manipulation of UN processes by organizations and individuals, both inside and outside the UN for purposes of rewriting Rwandan history — improperly apportioning blame for the Genocide that occurred in Rwanda — cannot be taken lightly. According to the report, Ugandan forces are accused of torturing civilians, Rwandan troops are blamed for systematically hunting down refugees, Angolan forces are said to have raped women and looted hospitals, Zimbabwean planes carried out indiscriminate air raids, and Chadian troops burned homes. It is as if these countries were in DRC for such mentioned alleged atrocities, yet the report doesn’t mention the reasons behind interventions by every country mentioned in the report. Rwanda in particular, went to then Zaire as a matter of survival. The perpetrators had made deep incursions into Rwanda to complete the Genocide agenda. Did the UN stop them? Have the mapping report officials even bothered to indicate the loss of human life and property as a result of the presence of Interahamwe/ ex- FAR in Zaire and now DRC? Has any mention been made of Zone Turquoise in the Mapping Report? It is said in the report that prosecution will be possible, if proven in a court of law, but what is strange is that human rights groups and others always opposed to Rwanda are calling for prosecution of Rwandans basing on the flawed report. Which justice is this that is based on hearsay and rumours? Rwandans can sense that this report is deliberate attempt to undermine the efforts undertaken so far in unity and reconciliation by the government. They have resolved to dismiss that report in totality and this was shown by recent mass demonstrations by the Rwandan Diaspora and by protest notes from the government of Rwanda addressed to the UN. Rwanda and DRC governments decided to work together for the good of the two countries and the UN should be happy about the positive trend in the region, but instead the opposite is being displayed by the UN and the media. Rwandans had thought that UN appreciated the role played by Rwanda in terms of peace keeping, but it seems the UN has no interest in saving human life but only wants to appear briefly in troubled areas and then withdraw as it happened in Rwanda. Rwandan soldiers who have now been labelled “genocidaires” in the report will find themselves in an awkward position because the people of Darfur might not trust them anymore. In other words, the UN is likely to sabotage the UNAMID mission in DARFUR and elsewhere Rwanda troops are serving. The UN should be held accountable for any consequences as result of the report. Ends