With Euorpeans having money trouble - rich Nigeria signs MoU with UNDP to place 37 Nigerians as Junior Professional Officers (JPOs) in UN System

Click here for this in full @World Stage News: http://www.worldstagegroup.com/worldstagenew/index.php?active=news&newscid=6504&catid=2


Abuja (WorldStage Newsonline)-- The Federal Government of Nigeria and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), that will see 37 Nigerians engaged in Junior Professional  Officers Programme (JPOP) spread across the UN system.
 
The programme is expected to kick off next month. Nigeria will be the first African country and the 20th contributor to the Junior Professional Officers Programme.

Nigeria is the fifth contributor to the United Nations peacekeeping mission with about 6000 Nigerians currently on peacekeeping.

The successful candidates, whose salaries will be borne by the government of Nigeria, will be exposed to development assistance training opportunities that will cover different areas of human endeavours.
The Secretary to the Government of Federation, Senator Anyim Pius Anyim, who signed on behalf of the government, said the JPOP is another significant milestone in actualizing President Goodluck Jonathan's major aspect of the transformation agenda.

GAP report: - “Tipping the Scales: Is the United Nations Justice System Promoting Accountability in the Peacekeeping Missions or Undermining It?”

Click here to read this @ G.A.P - Whistleblower.org:  http://www.whistleblower.org/program-areas/gap-reports/tipping-the-scales

This GAP report analyzes the impact of the United Nations internal justice system on accountability practices in the UN peacekeeping missions. The GAP report, “Tipping the Scales: Is the United Nations Justice System Promoting Accountability in the Peacekeeping Missions or Undermining It?” is based on a review of two years of UN Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) and UN Appeals Tribunal (UNAT) judgments, and 36 interviews with key UN personnel, external attorneys and whistleblowers from eight different peacekeeping missions.

"Virtually every person in a UN peacekeeping mission whom we spoke with raised disturbing concerns about fundamental shortcomings in the UN’s accountability mechanisms," said GAP International Officer Shelley Walden, one of the report's authors. "Most stated that they were afraid to speak-up about misconduct, and whistleblowers who did told us that they were subjected to intense retaliation as a result.”

A copy of the report's Executive Summary can be downloaded here.
A copy of the full report can be downloaded here.
Read the Press Release here.

Annexes to the report can be downloaded here:

• Annex I: Problems with the New Justice System (As Identified by Respondents)
• Annex II: What’s Working Well in the New Justice System & Recommendations for Improving It (As Identified by Respondents)         
• Annex III: Problems That Respondents Raised Regarding Whistleblowing
• Annex IV: Issues Connected To Discipline of Those Who Engaged In Misconduct in the Field & Suggestions for Addressing Misconduct in Peacekeeping Missions (As Identified by Respondents)         
• Annex V: Methodology
• Annex VI: UN Dispute Tribunal Judgment Chart from July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2011 (each year has a separate tab)
• Annex VII: UN Appeals Tribunal Judgment Chart from July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2011
• Annex VIII: UN Administrative Tribunal Judgment Chart from July 1, 2007 – December 31, 2009

Even leftist media like CNN think the United Nations have lost their mandate.

Has U.N. lost its peacekeeping mandate?

By Brian Klein, Special to CNN

Editor’s note: Brian P. Klein is an economic consultant and former U.S. diplomat. The views expressed are his own.

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS ON CNN's GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE

Now that Kofi Annan has stepped down from his position as U.N. Arab League Envoy to Syria and peacekeeping troops are being removed from the country one has to wonder – does the United Nations have any role to play in conflict resolution?

The reality is that the Annan Plan, which supported an interim government to shepherd Syria into a post-dictatorship future, was doomed from the start. Bashar al-Assad was to unilaterally step down in the middle of ongoing hostilities while his forces held the momentum against a popular uprising.
Al-Assad of course played the statesman, met with U.N. officials and allowed troops to enter Syria. No one was fooled for long. His military began an all-out assault soon after Annan’s plane took off. Helicopter gunships and fighter jets strafed cities as civilian casualties mounted. Nearly $17 million was authorized for the 150 military observers and 105 civilians. While a paltry sum considering the more than $7 billion peacekeeping budget, that money could have funded, for example, 2,400 water projects for creating wells to bring safe drinking water to over a million people in need.

Instead, United Nations’ efforts lengthened by weeks if not months a concerted move by regional powers to openly oppose Syria’s indiscriminate attacks on its citizenry.  The General Assembly then voted to censure its own Security Council for failing to do more.

The absurdity of the U.N. divided against itself is compounded by the poor track record of stopping violence. Despite the main charter of the U.N. beginning with lofty ideals to “take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression…” the supra-national force has never been a realistic fighting military. It lacks the command, control, intelligence and weaponry to stop war once it has begun.

With the world economy tilting dangerously towards stagnation, U.N. budgets will inevitably be forced to shrink. The world body would therefore be well advised to focus on its humanitarian strengths and less on the intractable, hard-scrabble world of armed conflict.

This isn’t the first time that poorly conceived efforts failed to turn aggression into peaceful resolution. In the 1990’s, U.N. forces were withdrawn in the face of overwhelming evidence of Rwandan genocidal atrocities. In Kosovo, it took then President Bill Clinton committing U.S. forces to protect a Muslim minority from being massacred by their neighbors.

These days, violence still flares in the Democratic Republic of the Congo despite a U.N. presence dating back to July 2010 that now numbers over 23,000 personnel (including 19,000 in uniform) and a budget of $1.4 billion. To keep the peace in Darfur, Sudan (17,000 military) and newly created South Sudan (over 5,500) the U.N. is spending nearly $2.5 billion. And with all those forces in place, tens of thousands still flee fighting as the humanitarian situation continues to worsen. Doctors Without Borders highlighted in an August report the ongoing health crisis in Batil Camp, South Sudan with diarrhea causing 90 percent of deaths and malnourishment rates in those under two years-old hitting 44 percent. Of all the tragedies of war, these are imminently solvable problems, and yet too many continue to die because of misallocated priorities and resources.

Security Council resolutions, sanctions and other tools of the diplomatic trade do very little to change the on-the-ground reality of war. Arms continue flowing across porous borders despite calls for embargoes. While world leaders make grand speeches defending their non-intervention or the inalienable rights of humanity in the green marbled U.N. headquarters, countries continue to act with or without U.N. sanction. Spending on “political affairs” and “overall policymaking, direction and coordination” accounts for nearly 40 percent of the United Nations’ current $5.1 billion operating budget. Peacekeeping operations total another $7 billion for 2012-2013.

Yet where the United Nations excels, in disaster relief, health initiatives, education, and support for refugees, programs remain woefully underfunded often requiring public appeals with Hollywood A-listers to bolster their sagging budgets. Few would argue against feeding a malnourished child on the verge of starvation with Angelina Jolie passing out the collections tin. Many would argue for weeks and at considerable expense, mincing words in watered-down, grand sounding political statements on the inherent value of peace.

Certainly, peacekeeping has done some good, but the disproportionate amount spent on these efforts, with such poor results overall and over such a long period of time, need re-examination. A U.N. force has maintained a presence in the Western Sahara since 1994 and has been “stabilizing” Haiti for the past 8 years, costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

It is incumbent on major donors like the U.S., Japan and the U.K., which collectively fund nearly half of annual peacekeeping efforts, to weigh in heavily on reform. Direct the limited amount of resources to programs that make a difference and stop relying on antiquated dreams of stateless noble actors bequeathing peace from above. Build on peace from the ground up instead.

Brian P. Klein is a freelance writer and macroeconomic/geopolitical strategist.

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS ON CNN's GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE 

UN 6th Cmtt: Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission

Recommendation of the Sixth Committee

8. The Sixth Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft resolution:

Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission

The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolution 59/281 of 29 March 2005, in which it endorsed the recommendation of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations that the Secretary-General make available to the United Nations membership a comprehensive report on the issue of sexual exploitation and abuse in United Nations peacekeeping operations,1

Recalling also that the Secretary-General, on 24 March 2005, transmitted to the President of the General Assembly a report of his Adviser concerning sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations peacekeeping personnel,2

Recalling further its resolution 59/300 of 22 June 2005, in which it endorsed the recommendation of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations that a group of legal experts be established to provide advice on the best way to proceed so as to ensure that the original intent of the Charter of the United Nations can be achieved, namely that United Nations staff and experts on mission would never be effectively exempt from the consequences of criminal acts committed at their duty station, nor unjustly penalized, without due process,3

Recognizing the valuable contribution of United Nations officials and experts on mission towards the fulfilment of the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Reaffirming the need to promote and ensure respect for the principles and rules of international law,

Reaffirming also that the present resolution is without prejudice to the privileges and immunities of United Nations officials and experts on mission and the United Nations under international law,

Reaffirming further the obligation of United Nations officials and experts on mission to respect the national laws of the host State, as well as the right of the host State to exercise, where applicable, its criminal jurisdiction, in accordance with the relevant rules of international law and agreements governing operations of United Nations missions,

Deeply concerned by reports of criminal conduct, and conscious that such conduct, if not investigated and, as appropriate, prosecuted, would create the negative impression that United Nations officials and experts on mission operate with impunity,

Reaffirming the need to ensure that all United Nations officials and experts on mission function in a manner that preserves the image, credibility, impartiality and integrity of the United Nations,

Emphasizing that crimes committed by such persons are unacceptable and have a detrimental effect on the fulfilment of the mandate of the United Nations, in particular with respect to the relations between the United Nations and the local population in the host country,

Conscious of the importance of protecting the rights of victims of criminal conduct, as well as of ensuring adequate protection for witnesses, and recalling the adoption of its resolution 62/214 of 21 December 2007 on the United Nations Comprehensive Strategy on Assistance and Support to Victims of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by United Nations Staff and Related Personnel,

Emphasizing the need to enhance international cooperation to ensure the criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission,

Recalling its resolution 61/29 of 4 December 2006, by which it established the Ad Hoc Committee on criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission,

Having considered at its previous sessions the report of the Group of Legal Experts established by the Secretary-General pursuant to its resolution 59/3004 and the reports of the Ad Hoc Committee,5 as well as the note by the Secretariat6 and the reports of the Secretary-General7 on criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission,

Recalling its resolutions 62/63 of 6 December 2007, 63/119 of 11 December 2008, 64/110 of 16 December 2009 and 65/20 of 6 December 2010,

Recalling also its decision that, bearing in mind its resolutions 62/63 and 63/119, the consideration of the report of the Group of Legal Experts, in particular its legal aspects, taking into account the views of Member States and the information contained in the note by the Secretariat, shall be continued during its sixty-seventh session in the framework of a working group of the Sixth Committee,

Convinced of the continuing need for the United Nations and its Member States to urgently take strong and effective steps to ensure the criminal accountability of United

Nations officials and experts on mission in the interest of justice,

1. Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General;8

2. Strongly urges States to take all appropriate measures to ensure that crimes by United Nations officials and experts on mission do not go unpunished and that the perpetrators of such crimes are brought to justice, without prejudice to the privileges and immunities of such persons and the United Nations under international law, and in accordance with international human rights standards, including due process;

3. Strongly urges all States to consider establishing, to the extent that they have not yet done so, jurisdiction over crimes, particularly those of a serious nature, as known in their existing domestic criminal laws, committed by their nationals while serving as United Nations officials or experts on mission, at least where the conduct as defined in the law of the State establishing jurisdiction also constitutes a crime under the laws of the host State;

4. Encourages all States to cooperate with each other and with the United Nations in the exchange of information and in facilitating the conduct of investigations and, as appropriate, the prosecution of United Nations officials and experts on mission who are alleged to have committed crimes of a serious nature, in accordance with their domestic law and applicable United Nations rules and regulations, fully respecting due process rights, as well as to consider strengthening the capacities of their national authorities to investigate and prosecute such crimes;

5. Also encourages all States:

(a) To afford each other assistance in connection with criminal investigations or criminal or extradition proceedings in respect of crimes of a serious nature committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission, including assistance in obtaining evidence at their disposal, in accordance with their domestic law or any treaties or other arrangements on extradition and mutual legal assistance that may exist between them;

(b) In accordance with their domestic law, to explore ways and means of facilitating the possible use of information and material obtained from the United Nations for purposes of criminal proceedings initiated in their territory for the prosecution of crimes of a serious nature committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission, bearing in mind due process considerations;

(c) In accordance with their domestic law, to provide effective protection for victims of, witnesses to and others who provide information in relation to crimes of a serious nature alleged to have been committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission and to facilitate access of victims to victim assistance programmes, without prejudice to the rights of the alleged offender, including those relating to due process;

(d) In accordance with their domestic law, to explore ways and means of responding adequately to requests by host States for support and assistance in order to enhance their capacity to conduct effective investigations in respect of crimes of a serious nature alleged to have been committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission;

6. Requests the Secretariat to continue to ensure that requests to Member States seeking personnel to serve as experts on mission make States aware of the expectation that persons who serve in that capacity should meet high standards in their conduct and behaviour and be aware that certain conduct may amount to a crime for which they may be held accountable;

7. Urges the Secretary-General to continue to take such other practical measures as are within his authority to strengthen existing training on United Nations standards of conduct, including through predeployment and in-mission induction training for United Nations officials and experts on mission;

8. Reiterates its decision that, bearing in mind its resolutions 62/63 and 63/119, the consideration of the report of the Group of Legal Experts, in particular its legal aspects,4 taking into account the views of Member States and the information contained in the note by the Secretariat,6 shall be continued during its sixty-seventh session in the framework of a working group of the Sixth Committee, and, for that purpose, invites further comments from Member States on that report, including on the question of future action;

9. Requests the Secretary-General to bring credible allegations that reveal that a crime may have been committed by United Nations officials or experts on mission to the attention of the States against whose nationals such allegations are made and to request from those States an indication of the status of their efforts to investigate and, as appropriate, prosecute crimes of a serious nature, as well as the types of appropriate assistance that States may wish to receive from the Secretariat for the purposes of such investigations and prosecutions;

10. Urges States to provide to the Secretary-General at the appropriate time information on their handling of the credible allegations brought to their attention by the Secretary-General in accordance with paragraph 9 above;

11. Requests the United Nations, when its investigations into allegations suggest that crimes of a serious nature may have been committed by United Nations officials or experts on mission, to consider any appropriate measures that may facilitate the possible use of information and material for purposes of criminal proceedings initiated by States, bearing in mind due process considerations;

12. Encourages the United Nations, when allegations against United Nations officials or experts on mission are determined by a United Nations administrative investigation to be unfounded, to take appropriate measures, in the interests of the Organization, to restore the credibility and the reputation of such officials and experts on mission;

13. Urges the United Nations to continue cooperating with States exercising jurisdiction in order to provide them, within the framework of the relevant rules of international law and agreements governing activities of the United Nations, with information and material for purposes of criminal proceedings initiated by States;

14. Emphasizes that the United Nations, in accordance with the applicable rules of the Organization, should take no action that would retaliate against or intimidate United Nations officials and experts on mission who report allegations concerning crimes of a serious nature committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission;

15. Takes note with appreciation of the information provided by Governments in response to its resolutions 62/63, 63/119, 64/110 and 65/20, and urges Governments to continue taking the measures necessary for the implementation of those resolutions, including their provisions addressing the establishment of jurisdiction over crimes, particularly those of a serious nature, as known in their existing domestic criminal laws, committed by their nationals while serving as United Nations officials or experts on mission, as well as cooperation among States, and to provide specific details thereon, in particular with respect to paragraph 3 of the present resolution, in the information provided to the Secretary- General;

16. Reiterates its request to the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session on the implementation of the present resolution, in particular with respect to paragraphs 3, 5, 8 and 9 above, as well as any practical problems in its implementation, on the basis of information received from Governments and the Secretariat;

17. Requests the Secretary-General to include in his report information on the number and types of credible allegations and any actions taken by the United Nations and its Member States regarding crimes of a serious nature committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission, including information on efforts made to ensure the completeness of incident reporting;

18. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its sixty-seventh session the item entitled “Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission”.

U.S. and Europe fight over cuts in peacekeeping

undpwatch undpwatch

@UN #SusanRice of @USUN and Europe fight over cuts in #peacekeeping undpwatch.blogspot.com How can US afford to pay@Roslehtinen

By Colum Lynch @ Turtlebay.ForeignPolicy.com

Is austerity making the world a more dangerous place? Republican hawks are making the case that the Obama administration's planned Pentagon cuts are making the world safe for bad guys, and now European governments are looking at their defense expenditures as well -- and they're targeting the blue helmets budget line, particularly in peacekeeping missions favored by the United States.

Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, fended off a push last month by European governments to press to consider cuts next year in U.N.-backed peacekeeping mission in Liberia, which costs upwards of $525 million a year, more than Liberia's $459 million annual national budget. Rice has also resisted calls from other European governments, like Britain and France, to consider deeper cuts in U.N. peacekeeping missions in Haiti and in Sudan.

France and Britain are required to pay, respectively, 7.5 percent and 8.16 percent of all U.N. peacekeeping costs.

U.S. officials say that peacekeeping missions must be adequately funded to ensure their success, and that European governments, who each pay a far smaller share of the U.N. peacekeeping budget, are in some instances motivated by a desire to shift funding to their own "pet" missions, not the commitment to fiscal discipline that they claim.

"There is no country that has a greater interest in the economies, effectiveness, and efficiencies of U.N. peacekeeping missions [than the United States]. We pay 27 percent of the bill while the Europeans pay a smaller percentage," Rice said in an interview with Turtle Bay. "For them to be holier than thou is a bit rich, to say the least."

"We want missions to succeed at maximum efficiency and minimum cost," she said, noting that the United States has already agreed to send thousands of U.N. peacekeepers from Haiti and Liberia back home. "We are all feeling the strain.... But we are not going to sacrifice the effectiveness and success of missions by prematurely closing them or prematurely cutting them down beyond what the security situation on the ground will allow."

But while Rice is backing a prominent contribution to peacekeeping, the Obama administration is seeking cuts elsewhere at the United Nations, delivering a series of sharply critical statements about the organization's failure to tighten its belt and cut waste in these hard times.

The debate is unfolding at a time when the United States and other major donors are facing major financial crises at home, prompting their envoys to press for deeper cuts while securing support for operations of critical national interest. The U.N.'s administrative and peacekeeping budget, however, has been expanded over the past decade, and shows little sign of contracting.

"We meet at a time of severe -- and worldwide economic challenge.... Member states around the world are under financial strain," said Joseph M. Torsella, the U.S. representative for U.N. Management and Reform, in a Sept. 29 speech calling for more belt-tightening before the U.N.'s main budget committee. "That is the simple reality we face, all of us: in a time of scarce resources, the United Nations cannot afford business as usual. But that unfortunately, is exactly what is represented in this budget."

The United Nations currently has about 120,000 peacekeepers serving around the world at a cost of more than $8 billion, with about 27 percent of that amount paid by the United States. Indeed, those costs don't even include a series of expensive "special political missions" in Afghanistan($200 million), Iraq ($200 million) and now in Libya ($10 million in start-up costs) that are favored by the United States. (The U.S. pays only about 22 percent of the costs for these missions.)

The missions in Afghanistan and Iraq are unpopular, however, among developing nations, who say the United States, Britain, and France get a discount because the operations are funded through the U.N.' regular budget. (Under a highly complex set of U.N. budget rules, the five permanent members of the Security Council -- the United States, China, Russia, France, and Britain -- have to pay a premium on peacekeeping missions, because of their special role in establishing them.) But now budget strains are bringing the United States and its allies at the U.N. into conflict, as competition for scarce resources increases. And even more draconian budget cuts may be coming.

"We're gearing up for a big -- cross-the-system-wide -- fight over the budget, and the peacekeeping stuff will be part of that," said Bruce Jones, the director of NYU's Center on International Cooperation. "There will be a decreasing budget one way or another [because of the] financial crisis. Nobody has any money left."

France, which oversees the U.N. mission in Ivory Coast, has been engaged in a running competition with the United States over resources.

In a cost-cutting effort, the U.N. Security Council decided six years ago to pass a resolution requiring the United Nations to share peacekeeping personnel and equipment among the three West African missions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Ivory Coast. The deal has led to enormous friction between the United States and France, which has sought periodically to borrow for use in the Ivory Coast three Ukrainian-piloted attack helicopters, which are based in Liberia.

The arrangement has not always gone smoothly.

In 2006, the United Nations made a request for a battalion of Liberia-based peacekeepers, plus a team of 140 police officers, to assist the U.N. mission in Ivory Coast, which had come under attack by forces close to then President Laurent Gbagbo. They only secured the support of a much smaller company of peacekeepers.

The United States allowed the Liberian-based helicopters to be used in a French-led military offensive that toppled Gbagbo's government earlier this year, after he refused to accept defeat in U.N-certified elections. But U.N. diplomats say the United States still dragged its feet. "This time took a couple of weeks longer than it should have," said a council diplomat.

A senior U.S. official said that French complaints about American stinginess are a "bit galling," given that the United States has allowed the French to use the helicopters for the better part of a year, and only demanded them backas Liberia headed towards a landmark second presidential election. "We have been very flexible," the official said. "The French took the view that these were their helicopters.

The United States has long historical links to Liberia, which was settled by freed American slaves. And Washington has resisted a European push for further U.N. troop reductions in the U.N. mission in Liberia, which stands at more than 7,000 international blue helmets, down from more than 15,000 in 2006. In September, Rice blocked an amendment by the Security Council's four European governments -- Britain, France, Germany and Portugal -- to consider carrying out a review of the costly U.N. peacekeeping mission in Liberia, with a view to trimming costs.

"We are not ready to predetermine Security Council actions on so important a matter as UNMIL's drawdown, given uncertainties surrounding the election and tensions in the region," Rice told the council after the vote, expressing hope she could consider cuts next year. "Now is not the moment to impose rigid timelines on UNMIL."

The U.S. refusal to wait for a review of the mission's mandate infuriated European delegations, who took a veiled swipe at the Americans in their explanations of the vote. "We are disappointed that Resolution 2008 did not take up amendments that a number of Security Council members put forward" to review the authorized military and troop strength in Liberia by May 30, 2012," said Britain's U.N. ambassador Mark Lyall Grant, "We do not expect any peacekeeping mission to be exempt from regular review by this council."

The tone has been sharp. Earlier this year, Lyall Grant also raised concerns about a decision to authorize and fund the deployment of 4,500 Ethiopian peacekeepers to Abyei, disputed territory that straddles the borders of Sudan and South Sudan.

"Why do we need so many troops?" Lyall Grant asked in a closed-door session of the Security Council, according to two diplomats who were in the room. It only required 10,000 British colonial soldiers, he quipped, to administer India. An Indian envoy responded that Britain had not been engaged in a state building effort.

British officials maintain that their concern is not limited to costs, but to the wisdom of maintaining large foreign peacekeeping missions in countries that are no longer at war, and no longer need foreign military assistance. Haiti, for example may be economically distressed and still recovering from the devastating 2010 earthquake, but it is not at war and still hosts some 12,000 U.N. peacekeepers. Britain believes its time to bring the blue helmets home.

"There are worrying reports that many ordinary Haitians increasingly see MINUSTAH as an occupying force," said Philip Parham, Britain's deputy U.N. ambassador. "We believe the continued presence of large number of troops is counter-productive and police officers, whether from UNPOL, or ideally the Haitian National Police, would be seen as a more sensitive and low-key presence on Haiti's streets."

The United Nations, backed by the United States, plans to reduce the size of the force in Haiti to about 8,000 troops, but will maintain a robust peacekeeping force to fill the vacuum left by a national police force that is incapable of taking full responsibility for security. Jeffrey DeLaurentis, the U.S. ambassador for special political affairs at the United Nations, insisted that the peacekeepers remain with "strong rules of engagement...to deal with a stable but fragile security situation in Haiti. The United Sates believes that any determination of the future size of MINUSTAH forces must be based on security conditions on the ground."

The United States has long had interests in the fate of Haiti, an island nation located some 700 miles southeast of the coast of Florida. The country has sent large numbers of immigrants to the United States, particularly during periods of violence and political instability. Britain, on the other hand, has few vital national security interests in Haiti.

Rice was even blunter. If the British don't think a peacekeeping force is appropriate for Haiti, they "shouldn't have voted to authorize it in the first place, because the nature of it hasn't changed. The Haitian people and the Haitian government are not asking for it to leave now."

Follow me on Twitter @columlynch

MINUSTAH Peacekeepers Charged With Sexual Abuse in Haiti, Again – Ban Ki-moon Remains Silent, Once Again-Added COMMENTARY By Haitian-Truth

By Matthew Russell Lee @ INNER CITY PRESS

UNITED NATIONS, August 17 — In Haiti, UN peacekeepers from Uruguay are accused of having sex with children in their base, and taking nude photos of the children to show other soldiers, according to the Comité de recherches pour le développement et l’organisation de Port-salut.

These allegations, revealed by www.haitian-truth.org, were published in the Haitian press six days ago — ironically the day that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon sent a letter to the director of The Whistleblower, about sex trafficking by UN peacekeepers in Bosnia.

This was described as Ban confronting a sordid chapter of the UN’s history, but Ban has apparently not confronted alleged misdeed under his watch and responsibility. The UN in New York, in the six days after the allegations were made in Haiti, said nothing about them.

Inner City Press on August 17, the day after the UN had canceled its normal noon briefing, asked Ban’s acting deputy spokesman about the allegations against the Uruguayan UN peacekeepers in Port-Salut.

Haq said, “MINUSTAH is in fact looking into this allegation, to see if there is any credibility to it. If there are any facts… we will share them.”

While some doubt that the UN would “share facts” about wrongdoing by its peacekeepers, given for example that the UN just airbrushed out from its final report allegations of inaction by Egyptian peacekeepers in Southern Kordofan. But even if the UN did report back on the allegations in Haiti, the UN does not state what happens to individual peacekeepers, by name or even nationality. The statement “any facts… we will share them” must be seen in that light.

Footnote: Speaking of seeing, Ban’s August 11 letter says he watched The Whistleblower with his senior advisers. Meanwhile, he has received but not watched the film Killing Fields of Sri Lanka, which along with addressing rape as a tool of war critiques Ban’s UN’s performance.

It’s worth nothing that dozens of Sri Lankan soldiers were repatriated from the UN mission in Haiti charged with sexual abuse, but the UN has never reported any accountability in Sri Lanka. Ban, Haq said, is “working from his home” this week; this was offered as a reason to cancel regular noon briefings, on August 16 and prospectively August 18 and beyond. And so it goes at (Ban’s) UN

_________________________________________________________________

COMMENT: HAITIAN-TRUTH.ORG

The UN has been involved in all sorts of crimes, since it was inflicted upon the Haitian people years ago. We have seen their involvement in the cocaine trade…..members of MINUSTAH have been involved in kidnapping…members of MINUSTAH have opened brothels using young Haitian boys and girls…and members of MINUSTAH have raped those who would not cooperate for a few pennies or a plate of rice and beans.

The most recent incident involves the Uruguayan detachment at Port Salut. Their conduct, if performed in the United States, would see them locked up for 10 – 20 years. Unfortunately, the poor of Haiti must tolerate the humiliations brought to them by the intellectually superior South Americans, supervised by the Korean moron Ban Ki Moon. Of course I am joking about the intellectually superior as I view a bunch of Spanish speaking peasants with assault rifles.

If they tried this in Ireland the gentle folk would cut the offenders’ balls off with bolt cutters.

We were inflicted by a team from Sri Lanka that imprisoned and sexually assaulted numbers of young women. When there were complaints, the officers and 100 men were sent home. To add insult to injury, the returning criminals were treated as heroes.

Martelly must move forward with his revival of the Forces Armees d’Haiti and take steps to eliminate the MINUSTAH from our land.

This entry was posted on August 18, 2011 at 1:49 pm and is filed under Crime/Corruption, Earthquake/CHOLERA. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

Pricey Peacekeeping: Ban Gets Blasted for Billion-Dollar Mismanagement

A U.N. report charges Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's office with repeated failure to police its soaring blue-helmet budget — though Ban says he's doing fine.

Frustration is rising fast at the United Nations over Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's inability to police the organization's huge and fast-growing peacekeeping budget, which looks sure to exceed $8.4 billion this year.

That budget, which covers the period from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011, is still under intense debate, especially among the 37 of 192 countries at the U.N. that pick up virtually all of the peacekeeping tab. By far the biggest contributor is the U.S., whose share this year amounts to 27.17 percent of the total, or nearly $2.3 billion. Others include Japan, Germany and Britain.

The issue is not only how much money is being spent, but how the U.N. is spending it. Donor countries are expressing, in undiplomatic terms, their concern at the way Ban's Secretariat has handled the huge peacekeeping enterprise in the past. And so is Ban's independent Board of Auditors.

A report issued just weeks ago by one of the General Assembly's main budget oversight committees, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), and obtained by Fox News, takes Ban harshly to task. The 11-page document was labeled for general distribution, but only went to selected members of a working group attached to the "special committee on peacekeeping operations," which began to meet on April 4 and is still in session.

The report keys in on the U.N.'s peacekeeping performance in the 2008-2009 budget year — when peacekeeping cost only $7.1 billion — and cites, among other things:

• the U.N.'s mismanagement of huge amounts of peacekeeping property at various sites around the world, including "inaccurate" and "unreliable" record-keeping, and "high stock levels" of property that "will result in waste, deterioration and obsolescence as well as possible loss due to theft";
• procedures that excluded "reputable vendors" from its procurement procedures at various missions in Africa;
• "widespread" irregularities in procurement in "many" peacekeeping operations, including in contract awards and monitoring of vendor performance;
• over-budgeting of expensive air transport resources;
• major gaps in Ban's methods of measuring and improving his top officials' performance of their duties to manage peacekeeping better.

Moreover, the report charges that Ban's lack of effective management has become a disturbing habit.

In the U.N.'s customarily congested language, the report says the ACABQ "continues to be concerned" with the U.N. Secretariat's "persistent non-compliance" in implementing Board of Auditors recommendations to improve the situation, and adds that it is "of great concern" to the committee that "effective remedies have not been applied."

Chief among those remedies, the report makes clear, is making U.N. managers more accountable for their actions — or in many cases, inactions, "at Headquarters and in the [peacekeeping] missions."

The sheer scope of the U.N.'s expanding peacekeeping operations is a major part of the challenge. The Board of Auditors' report covers 14 of 16 current U.N. peacekeeping operations and notes — not for the first time — that a mammoth overhaul of the U.N.'s computerized management and accounting systems, known as an enterprise resource planning system (ERP) is far behind schedule, and will not be ready until 2014, at the earliest.

Specifically, the committee notes that "there was no documentary evidence to fully substantiate the actual performance at the United Nations Operation in Cote d'Ivoire (UNOCI)," and that a similar fogginess surrounded the remaining U.N. mission in Kosovo.

The committee also emphasized that the Board of Auditors had complained for three years running about "significant discrepancies" between the U.N. records for "expendable and non-expendable property at various missions" — meaning that the organization could not really account for the huge amounts of goods it had — or did not have — on hand.

The problems of "deficiencies in the monitoring of the inventory" also applied to the main U.N. logistical base for peacekeeping in Brindisi, Italy, where supplies seemed to languish despite the rapid growth in missions that ostensibly needed them.

The same gap between supply and demand occurred in peacekeeping aviation budgets, where the committee and the auditors noted that the U.N. seemed to budget for many more hours of air transport time than its records showed it used. In other words, expensively-contracted aircraft and helicopters were often just sitting around.

Other "irregularities" were also noted, including a $5.3 million overpayment to a vendor in Darfur, and another $3.3 million worth of equipment that was delivered but not used due to various bureaucratic snafus.

In terms of managing peacekeeping personnel, the committee also found the U.N. wanting. Vacancy rates for needed personnel ranged as high as 35 percent, or nearly twice what the organization was supposed to accept — which in turn raised the potential stress on existing staff.

The solution to all this, the committee concluded, was that that Ban and his officials should actually implement the measures that auditors had long suggested for rectifying the problems, especially holding management feet to the fire when required.

The fact that it hadn't happened so far, the report concludes, was an indication of "weaknesses in administration at all levels of management."

Click here to read the committee report.

Not surprisingly, Ban has taken considerable exception to those conclusions, in a 55-page companion document responding to the auditors' comments, also obtained by Fox News, that offered his own assessment of how well the U.N. Secretariat had done in accepting its auditors' recommendations.

Among other things, Ban noted that his administration "has achieved significant improvements in ensuring that the indicators of achievement and outputs ... are formulated as specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time-bound."

In other words, he and his officials were doing as well as could be expected in measuring their accomplishments. Ban added that consideration also had to be given to the political climate where peacekeeping missions operated, which often limited outcomes.

On issues such as the use of expensive aircraft, Ban pointed to his administration's rebuttal in the auditors' own report, to the effect that "forecasts could not be exact owing to the nature of emergency situations. It was preferable to have sufficient capability on the ground than to be faced with a shortage when a crisis occurred." (But Ban's Administration also admitted that in the case of peacekeeping in Darfur, at least, it was cutting its planned use of aircraft in the future by nearly 50 percent.)

Ban also pointed out that even the auditors felt that his administration had done better this time than in the previous year — by lifting the rate of implementation of audit recommendations from 32 percent to 40 percent, as of March 2010. The rate was even better for those deemed of the "highest priority." Still others, he declared, were "in progress" or had target dates set for completion.

Click here to read Ban's response to the auditors.

However, Ban's rebuttal also said that there was no target set at all for 11 of the auditors' highest priority recommendations.
His rebuttal did not mention what those recommendations were.

George Russell is executive editor of Fox News.