Link to web article here.
For those who have been in war zones, whether as combatants, observers, innocent victims, or reporters, there is nothing as distressing as finding yourself in a situation where life, either your own or that of a colleague, is in danger and yet you can do nothing about it.
Those who have not had the misfortune of finding themselves in such unenviable situations would be advised to watch several films on the 1994 genocide in Rwanda — Sometimes in April, Hotel Rwanda,and Shoot the Dogs. (I think such films should be turned into novels and made compulsory set books in all secondary schools in Africa. In fact, a book like Left to Tell by Immaculée Ilibagiza should be a must read for everyone on the planet.)
There is no worse horror than finding oneself face to face with death and feeling helpless despite being surrounded by soldiers who are supposed to protect you.
This happened in Rwanda during the genocide as the United Nations peacekeepers watched. The world declared that this would never be allowed to happen again.
And that could explain why UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s decision to dismiss the force commander of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (Unmiss) received praise from some quarters.
DAMNING REPORT
Lt-Gen Johnson Mogoa Kimani Ondieki’s dismissal was prompted by a damning report that questioned his leadership of the mission, especially after aid workers and UN staff “were subjected to and witnessed gross human rights violations, including murder, intimidation, sexual violence, and acts amounting to torture perpetrated by armed government soldiers”.
And here lies the catch. Just who is to blame for the inaction of peacekeeping troops in war zones? For individual soldiers and their commanders on a peacekeeping mission, it is a balancing act between the express procedure that comes with the mandate of these missions and the spontaneous decision that the soldiers have to make in the unpredictable circumstances in war zones.
According to the code of conduct for UN peacekeeping missions, the troops are under obligation to “respect local laws, customs and practices, treat host country inhabitants with respect, courtesy and consideration and act with impartiality, integrity and tact”.
The peacekeepers are not allowed to open fire on combatants lest they be accused of taking sides. It is, therefore, difficult to establish negligence where a peacekeeping soldier obeys his mission’s mandate.
How and why the investigation on the conduct of Unmiss recommended the dismissal of Lt Gen Ondieki is not one I am qualified to challenge. There are, however, some issues of diplomacy and good faith that were obviously sidestepped or totally ignored in the manner the dismissal was handled.
SENIOR OFFICER
Lt-Gen Ondieki is a senior officer in the Kenyan army. Kenya has a long and admirable history in UN peacekeeping missions. Its troops have served in areas of conflict in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere with impressive results.
No one can overemphasise the reputations of such men as Lt-General Daniel Ishmael Opande (rtd) and Lt-Gen Leonard Muriuki Ngondi (rtd) and their performances in peace missions on the continent. Or erase the name of Lt-Gen (rtd) Lazaro Sumbeiywo from global history, especially his role in bringing into existence South Sudan.
With such a history, the least Mr Ban could have done, as a show of courtesy, was contact Kenya’s president and quietly apprise him of the situation before publicly reprimanding Gen Ondieki.
From the Kenyan head of State’s reaction, it is apparent that this was not done. Therefore, President Uhuru Kenyatta’s decision to pull the country’s troops from the South Sudan mission was justified.