PDA

View Full Version : UN Says Congolese Troops Raped, Pillaged



LaoSexMachine
11-11-2008, 08:38 PM
UN Says Congolese Troops Raped, Pillaged

UN says army troops have raped women, pillaged villages as they retreat in eastern Congo

By ANITA POWELL

The Associated Press

GOMA, Congo


Hundreds of Congolese soldiers rampaged through several villages in eastern Congo, raping women and pillaging homes as they pulled back ahead of a feared rebel advance, the U.N. reported Tuesday.
U.N. peacekeeping spokesman Col. Jean-Paul Dietrich said the army troops had reportedly raped civilians near the town of Kanyabayonga in violent attacks that began overnight that lasted into Tuesday morning.
Kanyabayonga is 60 miles (100 kilometers) north of the provincial capital, Goma.
Dietrich said 700 to 800 Congolese soldiers then fled Kanyabayonga and went on a rampage through several villages to the north.
"They looted vehicles, they looted some houses," Dietrich said by telephone from Kinshasa, the national capital.
A rare nighttime gunbattle erupted late Tuesday between rebels and the army just north of Goma, and the U.N. said it was trying to get the warring sides to move further apart. Mortars were also used during the nearly one-hour fight near Kibati, Dietrich said.
Kibati is six miles (10 kilometers) north of Goma and home to 75,000 people who have been repeatedly forced to flee fighting.
"There is a big tension because there are so many people there and it's so close to Goma," Dietrich said.
In New York, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called Tuesday for an immediate cease-fire so aid workers could urgently help "at least 100,000 refugees" cut off in rebel-held areas north of Goma.
"Because of the ongoing fighting, these people have received virtually no assistance. Their situation has grown increasingly desperate," Ban said.
The U.N. chief also said he was "very concerned by reports of targeted killings of civilians, looting and rape."
Ban said about 3,000 more U.N. peacekeeping soldiers and police were urgently needed to bolster the 17,000-strong U.N. force in Congo that has been unable to stop the fighting or halt the rebel advance.
The U.N. Security Council was meeting Tuesday to take up Ban's request.
Aid workers were trying to gain access to the towns of Rutshuru and Kiwanja, both 10 miles (16 kilometers) south of Kanyabayonga in rebel-held territory, where they expected the need for food was urgent.
In normal times, the two towns have a combined population of more than 150,000. But aid workers said they have no idea how many people are there now. At least 250,000 people have been displaced by 10 weeks of fighting between army troops and rebels led by renegade general Laurent Nkunda.
A rebel spokesman said any aid workers who wanted to help civilians trapped on rebel-held territory would be safe.
"If there are NGOs who want to come to Rutshuru, they are welcome to come," rebel spokesman Bertrand Bisimwa said.
Congo's armed forces are notoriously ill-disciplined soldiers, historically better at looting than standing their ground. In recent days, some have been seen manning checkpoints drunk.
Dietrich said the U.N. flew helicopters over the ravaged area Tuesday, carried out foot patrols, and initiated an investigation into the violence with the Congolese army.
The fighting in eastern Congo is fueled by ethnic hatred left over from the 1994 slaughter of at least 500,000 Tutsis in neighboring Rwanda. Nkunda says he is fighting to protect minority Tutsis from Rwandan Hutu militants who participated in the genocide before escaping to Congo.
A U.N. mission sent to Kiwanja, about 50 miles north of Goma, to investigate reports of civilian massacres there. It visited 11 burial sites that witnesses said contained 26 bodies of combatants and civilians, Ban's spokeswoman, Michele Montas, said.
New York-based Human Rights Watch said at least 50 civilians were killed there, mostly by rebels.
Closer to Goma, the situation for displaced refugees was dire.
"I haven't eaten properly in three weeks," said Teoneste Dies, 22. He fled his home three weeks ago with his wife and three children, surviving on whatever potatoes they could scrounge.
On Tuesday, he waited with thousands of others for food aid from the International Committee of the Red Cross.
In Kibati, about 70,000 people are living in makeshift camps. A long line snaked through town Tuesday morning as villagers picked up oil, maize flour, salt and beans.
Men were attempting to till a nearby field littered with volcanic rocks from an eruption in 2006.
"Normally they never try to plant there," said Abdallah Togola, an aid worker. "It's a big indication of how urgent the situation is."
Desire Burunga, 48, fled to Kibati with his four wives and twelve children in September, when fighting threatened his town of Kibumba.
"We used to live together and have no problem," said Burunga, a former county clerk. "After the affair in Rwanda, everyone has problems. Everyone is now aggressive after Rwanda."
Relief officials say they have recorded at least 90 cholera cases around Goma since Friday. Seven more were admitted to a clinic in Kibati on Monday night.
The World Health Organization said Tuesday it fears a cholera epidemic could break out if the fighting continues and people continue to live in makeshift camps without proper sanitation. At least 1,000 cases of cholera have been detected since the start of October.


http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=6226950

Blue_0
11-11-2008, 11:01 PM
I wonder if the rebels were actually guilty of the summary executions in the villiages they took over. They claim they are not, but the news reports in their terroratory did point out it sure looked that way.


Then again it is Africa. It is entirely possible both factions are pure nasty.

SoSo
11-11-2008, 11:12 PM
Some have regarded Nkunda's Tutsi rebels as the villains in this conflict, and Kabila's government army as the "right" side, because the latter's regime was elected while the rebels are operating without legitimacy. But the sad truth is that neither side really deserves outside support. Africans nations that have involved themselves in the Congolese civil war have done so out of ethnic kinship to one faction or another, or because their leaders have economic interests they want to protect.
From the bottom of my heart, I mourn the soldiers from the various African countries, who have been killed or maimed for no cause other than to make Kabila, Mugabe, Njoma or Nkunda rich, or, rather, richer, while their subjects endure terrible poverty.
And I can't help but feel the UN peacekeepers are there in service to a doomed mission. It's hard to read these stories coming out of the Congo, but I still do, I don't know why. There doesn't seem to be any solution.
Maybe the Congo is just too vast, and too ethnically diverse, to ever endure as a single nation. But what if the UN were to end the civil war by granting Laurent Nkunda his little fiefdom to rule? It seems that this would only embolden other mutineers and would-be warlords, to seize whatever resource-rich territory they can grab. This could lead to the dissolution of many countries in Africa.
Most worrisome of all, neighboring countries seem to be once again contemplating invading the Congo, to offer their "assistance". Let's hope they stay out of it, this time. Mugabe's Zimbabwe, in particular, is nearly falling apart as it is, even without involving itself in a foreign war.

aimforthemedic
11-12-2008, 12:08 AM
This article has the most misleading title ever. Maybe it should read: Congolese soldiers raped and pillaged villagers....

Carib
11-12-2008, 03:13 PM
The U.N. makes me sick to my stomach, raping & pillaging in the Congo, who would've thought that. The U.N. needs to harden the hell up and step up its ROE's.

Connaught Ranger
11-12-2008, 03:23 PM
The U.N. makes me sick to my stomach, raping & pillaging in the Congo, who would've thought that. The U.N. needs to harden the hell up and step up its ROE's.

Another comment from an Africa expert,:roll:

The U.N. is not there in the role as a world police force,

it cannot be in every location, at all times, 24 / 7

and you know it.

Are any of your countrymen involved in the UN Mission,

Do you even know the size of the UN Mission in the Congo

as comparable to the sq. km of the country?

17,000 looks like a big number, but when spread out over the territory

they a spread very thin.

The Congolese Army is solely responsible for these atrocities,

and therefore their officers are responsible for the actions of their men.

Connaught Ranger.

Bulletproof
11-12-2008, 03:54 PM
The U.N. makes me sick to my stomach, raping & pillaging in the Congo, who would've thought that. The U.N. needs to harden the hell up and step up its ROE's.

It's hard to operate when you don't have the money, every country is supposed to give (if I remember correctly) 1% of their GDP and there's not a lot of countries who's doing it.

XShipRider
11-12-2008, 06:39 PM
It wasn't so long ago that UN peacekeepers were alleged to have commited similar acts (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7420798.stm). Obvious difference, scale and the fact the UN tries to police their own.


A UN spokesman, Nick Birnback, said that it was impossible to ensure "zero incidents" within an organisation that has up to 200,000 personnel serving around the world.

As for the retreating Congolese, it demonstrates the "troops" are nothing more than a well armed gang with like ideals.

Bia
11-12-2008, 06:54 PM
For like half a second my mind saw...

"UN Says Condoleezza Troops Raped, Pillaged "


<-- Duh Me

Mousepad
11-13-2008, 02:57 AM
Found an interesting read on situation

http://exiledonline.com/nkunda-is-nkool/#more-1768

afreu
11-13-2008, 12:19 PM
What I don't get in this conflict is why the Congolese government is backing Hutu militias.

Didn't Rwanda and Congolese Tutsi rebels help Kabila to defeat the Hutu militias and remove Mobutu in 97? Now Nkunda claims he's only defending the Tutsi minority against assaults by Hutu militia. And doesn't the present official Congolese army consist of the same guys who were allied with Rwanda and Tutsis in 97? If that's case why would they now defend Hutus instead of cracking down on their militias?

SoSo
11-13-2008, 01:52 PM
Found an interesting read on situation

http://exiledonline.com/nkunda-is-nkool/#more-1768[/quote]

This article was very interesting. I also read a diatribe, in the government-controlled Zimbabwe Herald, about how evil Laurent Nkunda is, how he is a tool of the Western imperialists, blah blah blah, etc. It's starting to make me think maybe this "rebel" general has been misunderstood. Anybody the BBC and Robert Mugabe hate so much can't be all bad.

afreu
11-13-2008, 05:24 PM
There are reports from other journalists (for example from German ZDF) who spoke to people in the area conquered by Nkunda's rebels, confirming that rebels committed atrocities. They might be better trained and better equiped than the Congolese military but I doubt they can claim the moral high ground in this conflict.

budgie
11-13-2008, 09:08 PM
What I don't get in this conflict is why the Congolese government is backing Hutu militias.

Didn't Rwanda and Congolese Tutsi rebels help Kabila to defeat the Hutu militias and remove Mobutu in 97? Now Nkunda claims he's only defending the Tutsi minority against assaults by Hutu militia. And doesn't the present official Congolese army consist of the same guys who were allied with Rwanda and Tutsis in 97? If that's case why would they now defend Hutus instead of cracking down on their militias?

Basically as warlords come and go so do alleigences. The Congolese army might be a govt force but its generals are in it for the same thing everyone else is: diamonds, rare earths, metals and other precious resources mined in the area. Until these countries have functioning democracies with militaries that are true servants of their own people, there will continue to be warring factions, rebel movements and competing warlords in the guise of uniformed officers.

chino65
11-13-2008, 11:39 PM
(I'm generalising but...) In ancient times, China had always been fragmented and they fought each other continuously or sporadically for centuries. Civilians got massacred, raped, pillaged, famines... The misery then, was no less than what Congo is going through now.

In the end for China, as we now know, a strong state dominated and China actually became united and strong. And peaceful. The only fighting thereafter was against external threats.

...

But, imaging if there was a UN then, and they keep interfering and propping up the weaker Chinese states with their "peacekeeping".

It would actually prolong the misery because once the UN leaves, fighting will flare up again. A century of warfare may become two.

I know it is very hard to draw a clear line between what humanitarian actions UN should take and what it should abstain from.

...

But...

Why should the independence of every "nation" be guaranteed when it is clear some peoples have no ability for successful and civilized self-governance? Nations die throughout history. It's only natural. Help them once, twice... but if they can't get it together, leave it be.

...

Another more recent historical example is Vietnam. In the 60's to the 70's North/South duked it out big time and finally, the weak puppet South Vietnam fell and Vietnam is finally at peace!

The horrendously corrupt South government was no better than the North government so it really didn't matter who won. But the stronger one dominated, and that's the law of nature. French and American intervention actually prolonged the conflict, suffering and destruction.

(I don't dismiss the brave sacrifice of all the foreign troops who fought and died in VN. I am just talking about the politics.)

Vietnam now is on its way to be the next big developing country, land of opportunity etc in Asia.

...

I am no drawing any conclusions for Congo, since I do not know the situation. But I am saying that though intervening and stopping the fighting may sound very "PC", it may do them no good in the long run. They need to sort it out and if folks have to die, they have to die.

afreu
11-14-2008, 04:23 AM
I am no drawing any conclusions for Congo, since I do not know the situation. But I am saying that though intervening and stopping the fighting may sound very "PC", it may do them no good in the long run. They need to sort it out and if folks have to die, they have to die.


Letting them sort it out on the battlefield won't work in this case because of the numerous interests involved. Every neighbouring nation chose one side of the conflict and their intervention will guarantee that none of the Congolese faction will gain the upper hand.