A New Direction For The UN?

Something interesting is happening at the United Nations. No, really. In March the Security Council passed resolution 2098 which substantially altered the nature of MONUSCO- the body’s largest and most expensive peacekeeping force. 

 Up until now, MONUSCO has been concerned primarily with protecting the civilian population of the Democratic Republic of the Congo from bands of rebel forces, but soon three infantry battalions, an artillery battalion and a special force and reconnaissance company will aim to neutralise the insurgents- principally the marauding M23 group.

Two factors precipitated the shift. First, the M23 has been gaining ground. The UN has talked about ‘waves of conflict’ sweeping East, further decreasing the Government’s control. Second, these forays have made MONUSCO look ineffective. Last winter, without firing a shot, the blue helmets ceded the city of Goma to the rebels. Unfortunately, this was not the mission’s first set back: in the past they have been accused of failing to protect civilians from atrocities. Thus, the beefed up mandate can be interpreted as an attempt to rescue MONUSCO’s reputation. 

Will it work? Well, there have already been teething problems. Although a quarter of the offensive troops are in place, bureaucratic wrangling and logistical issues have held up the rest. Announced in March, it is now estimated that it will be autumn before the ‘intervention brigade’ becomes fully operational. 

The delay gives M23 more time to prepare. Speaking to The Guardian last month, rebel Colonel Vianney Kazarama sounded bullish: ‘They will not know the terrain, our tactics, not even the local languages. It will take them weeks to organise. If they attack we will respond very quickly and with full force."

Yet, while it is clear that the UN has a job to, there is reason to be optimistic. Well armed and properly trained troops- the force will be composed of men primarily from Tanzania, Malawi, India, Uruguay and South Africa- should be able to take the fight to the M23. More, the presence of African forces increases the pressure on Rwanda to keep its nose clean. Last winter a UN report suggested that Kigali’s defence minister, General James Kabarebe, is in ultimate control of the M23. President Paul Kagame has called such accusations ‘ridiculous’, but he perhaps protests too much. 

The other consideration is the internal state of the rebels. In March, former M23 leader General Bosco Ntaganda surprisingly turned up at the US embassy in Rwanda and handed himself in. Now on trial at the international criminal court, General Ntaganda- known widely as The Terminator- raises some interesting questions: foremost among them what (or rather who) caused him to flee?

Fractures within the rebel group would boost the MONUSCO’s cause, even if the situation within the Congo remains grim. The Goma debacle of late last year no doubt triggered the tactical change—but no one expects the MONUSCO forces to have it easy.

How, for instance, would the UN respond if M23 targeted not the new, shiny ‘intervention brigade’, but the pre-existing peacekeeping forces? Would they close down the humanitarian mission, arm those troops or redouble efforts elsewhere? Things could get very complicated, very quickly. 

More broadly, the mission represents something of a litmus test for the UN. Previously, as with the overthrow of Gaddafi last spring, even when the Security Council has approved action the fighting has been outsourced to others. This time things are different. If the mission proves successful (it must be said that what constitutes success in such a war torn country remains unclear) then perhaps similar ventures will follow in its wake. On the other hand, failure would invite further questions regarding the purpose and effectiveness of the modern UN. 

The stakes, therefore, are high. Not only for the people of the Congo but for the Security Council as well. It will be interesting to see how the situation plays out.