Dallaire & Rwanda against the world
After two days of reading about the United Nations and the Rwanda genocide I can't helpt but write another entry about the United Nations. It's always easy to cast blame. It's always easy to look back and see what should have been done. I believe, as many others, that the UN acted poorly before, during and after the genocide of 1994. However, we have to remember to look at the events from the viewpoint of the time. Not the viewpoint of today. If look with today's eyes it should be to learn. To see what lessons has come out of it. But in criticisin whom are we to just claim that the UN is to blame? I read this amazing book by Michael Barnett today. Eyewitness to a genocide : the United Nations and Rwanda. It was about why the UN did what it did. And why it is important to remember that in 1993 and -94 the UN staff did not know what was going to happen. They were not aware of what was about to take place in Rwanda. What people always, always, forget when they claim that something is the fault of the UN, or that the UN is not functioning, is that the UN is not a government. The UN is only what the member states make of it. And unfortunately the states of the world tend to fall back to power politics. To them, often, it's a matter of self-interest and personal gain. Like with France and the US during the Rwanda genocide. France had personal interest in the crisis. They had since long connections with the Rwandan government. They even supported the military and covered up the human rights violations going on within the country. Thus, when the genocide started the French did nothing. And the US did nothing. They had the memory of Somalia fresh in their minds and were not going to risk more soldiers to yet another African conflict.
What confuses me, and confused Dallaire (the leader of the UN peacekeeping force UNAMIR in Rwanda) was that these powerful countries had no will what so ever to help in protect the civilians of Rwanda. Mainly the Tutsi population since they had been marked by the Hutu power. However, these powerful states did manage to evacuate their own people without any problems. And they told Dallaire that this should be his main priority. Evacuating the 'people of the West'.
And then, when the Tutsi rebels managed to fight back and the Hutu's were being murdered. THEN the French set out an operation named Operation Turquoise. And this to help the Hutu's that have been displaced and no longer have homes. But still doing nothing for the 1 million Tutsi refugees.
The US decided to get involved when the conflict entered Zaire. That's when the conflict suddenly might affect their own interests.
I don't know. To me it seems like while the UN did do mistakes throughout this whole catastrophe. They are nothing compared to what France and the US did. Together with Belgium while Belgium was still a colonial power they created, spured on, and then ignored the problem.
How can that be the fault of the UN? If these countries are running the UN. If these countries have seats in the Security Council. The US and France holding veto power and Rwanda had a non-permanent seat. How then does anyone expect the UN to work? They need these countries support. They cannot act on their own accord. That is not how the UN is structured. Not how it is supposed to work. Maybe that's what we need.. I don't know. But I think it is very naïvely of people to just blame the UN. It's a very ignorant view.
I believe in the UN. I believe in their work. I don't believe their free from faults. Far from it. There's alot that can be done. But at the same time, and I know I keep coming back to this, if the member states don't want the UN to change, it won't. The UN is nothing more than what the members make of it. Atleast not when it comes to peacekeeping and Security Council issues. Which are the issues that people connect the UN with the strongest. To many that's the only thing the UN does, or so it seems to me. What a wrong assumption...
I'm sorry for yet another entry on the UN. But it seems like a point that is worth making over and over again. Maybe one day people will start to understand. Maybe one day they will stop claiming thing without having all the facts. Then they are free to believe whatever they want! They might hate or love the UN. I don't care. As long as they know all the facts.
What confuses me, and confused Dallaire (the leader of the UN peacekeeping force UNAMIR in Rwanda) was that these powerful countries had no will what so ever to help in protect the civilians of Rwanda. Mainly the Tutsi population since they had been marked by the Hutu power. However, these powerful states did manage to evacuate their own people without any problems. And they told Dallaire that this should be his main priority. Evacuating the 'people of the West'.
And then, when the Tutsi rebels managed to fight back and the Hutu's were being murdered. THEN the French set out an operation named Operation Turquoise. And this to help the Hutu's that have been displaced and no longer have homes. But still doing nothing for the 1 million Tutsi refugees.
The US decided to get involved when the conflict entered Zaire. That's when the conflict suddenly might affect their own interests.
I don't know. To me it seems like while the UN did do mistakes throughout this whole catastrophe. They are nothing compared to what France and the US did. Together with Belgium while Belgium was still a colonial power they created, spured on, and then ignored the problem.
How can that be the fault of the UN? If these countries are running the UN. If these countries have seats in the Security Council. The US and France holding veto power and Rwanda had a non-permanent seat. How then does anyone expect the UN to work? They need these countries support. They cannot act on their own accord. That is not how the UN is structured. Not how it is supposed to work. Maybe that's what we need.. I don't know. But I think it is very naïvely of people to just blame the UN. It's a very ignorant view.
I believe in the UN. I believe in their work. I don't believe their free from faults. Far from it. There's alot that can be done. But at the same time, and I know I keep coming back to this, if the member states don't want the UN to change, it won't. The UN is nothing more than what the members make of it. Atleast not when it comes to peacekeeping and Security Council issues. Which are the issues that people connect the UN with the strongest. To many that's the only thing the UN does, or so it seems to me. What a wrong assumption...
I'm sorry for yet another entry on the UN. But it seems like a point that is worth making over and over again. Maybe one day people will start to understand. Maybe one day they will stop claiming thing without having all the facts. Then they are free to believe whatever they want! They might hate or love the UN. I don't care. As long as they know all the facts.
The UN is so much more than you know
Today during my seminar for my European Politics module we were comparing the EU to other international institutions, such as the UN. A person in my class came with the statement that the UN is deadlocked due to the Security Council and therefore is very ineffective in different situations. My teacher, whom is very good by the way, reminded this person that he was only refering to 'high security' issues. My techer went on to saying that one has to remember the so-called 'low security' issues as well. I really, really like this comment cause I always get very frustrated when someone makes the general claim that "the UN isn't working." Do they know what the UN is? What it does? Or does their knowledge about the UN stop when issues regarding anything else than what the media reports on is discussed? What everyone hear's is that the Security Council is deadlocked due to the veto by the permanent five (US, UK, France, Russia, China). Do this people know that the UN serves as an umbrella organization for so many smaller ones? Do they know how much time and effort people around the world put into small local organization that promotes the UN and world issues? Are they forgetting about UNICEF? Or the World Food Program?
I just get very annoyed when people make generalisations like that without considering everything the UN does. The enormous job that is being undertaken by them and the thousands of volunteers that are working every day to help make the world a better place. How condescending isn't it to those to say that "the UN doesn't work?" I agree that the Security Council is not working to its full potential, but if you criticise, then come up with a better solution! What would you have instead? Exactly.. Didn't think so.
And just so you know, this new world is scaring me. A world where companies act as police, where governments want to monitor everything we do on the internet, where certain states wants to keep record of other states populations travelling. What happened? When did we all become so suspicious and stopped trusting eachother?
I just get very annoyed when people make generalisations like that without considering everything the UN does. The enormous job that is being undertaken by them and the thousands of volunteers that are working every day to help make the world a better place. How condescending isn't it to those to say that "the UN doesn't work?" I agree that the Security Council is not working to its full potential, but if you criticise, then come up with a better solution! What would you have instead? Exactly.. Didn't think so.
And just so you know, this new world is scaring me. A world where companies act as police, where governments want to monitor everything we do on the internet, where certain states wants to keep record of other states populations travelling. What happened? When did we all become so suspicious and stopped trusting eachother?
