
“All the peacekeeping missions which have been established after 1992 are complex, multidimensional operations involving military, civilian police and civilian components. Their mandates are also very broad, covering a broad range of issues from traditional peacekeeping, to civilian protection to post-agreement peacebuilding” (International Policy Group, P: 14, 2016).
We have read, seen pictures and footage of the atrocities that happen in July 2016 in Juba as the SPLM/A and SPLM/A-IO went from each other in the stirring conflict in South Sudan, where the two leaders President Salva Kiir and Dr. Riek Machar has gone back to battlefield instead of dialogue. This happen as the Transitional Government of National Unity (TGNU) we’re about to be set-up and the peace-agreement we’re to be honoured by both parties.
Than the skirmishes and battles in the capital started, some of the action happens near the UN House of Juba and the Camp-site of Internally Displaced People together with the looting of the UN World Food Programme there as well. This was all evidence of the lacking management of the Kenyan Military Officer, but now there a report countering that argument for the sacking. It is worth dropping the knowledge to see if the Kenyan Government had it right to feel unjustifiable sacked from his position. The man that had to fall on his sword was Lt. Gen. Johnson Ondieki.
Ban Ki Moon decision:
“The decision by the Secretary General was argued to have been made based on an independent investigative report conducted by the Danish Major-General Patrick Cammaert on the violence that had occurred in Juba from July 8 to 25 2016. However, after a careful investigation of the situation that surrounded the conflict, the independent report and its recommendations, and the systematic problems in the UNMISS framework, it is evident that the firing of Lieut-Gen Ondieki was not only unorthodox and a blatant violation of UN procedures, powers and processes, but was also an expedient political decision by the Secretary-General to turn the Kenyan soldier into a sacrificial lamb in order to appease and ward off pressures from some Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council, mainly the United States of America and Britain” (International Policy Group, P: 12, 2016).
“Independent investigations into the Juba conflict have revealed a clear cover-up, with the USA mishandling the safety of its citizens and agents by not offering the proper protection when requested, leading to the violation in the Terrain compound. This investigative report on the circumstances leading to the removal and replacement of Lieut-Gen Ondieki as UNMSS force commander relied on a comprehensive review of official and non-official documents from the United Nations available on its website, UN documents on rules of engagement and procedures governing the code of conduct and dismissal procedures were consulted” (International Policy Group, P: 13, 2016).

Key Strategic lacking will to act on Commands:
“A UN investigation on the attack showed that it took UN peacekeepers more than 12 hours to intervene, despite being next to the camp. Moreover, the investigation found that the Indian contingent refused to deploy troops or heavy armor to the area of fighting to defend civilians; the Ethiopians slept through the entire incident; while the Rwandan contingent insisted on written approval before acting. Finally, it is only the Rwandan contingent that responded to the violence and protected civilians. The investigation committee recommended several changes to the mission. Whether the UN or UNMISS implemented the recommendations is remains unclear: What is clear is that no action was taken against the Force Commander, the SRSG, or any other senior mission staff” (International Policy Group, P: 17 ,2016).
“Pressure from the UNP5, especially members from USA and UK, made the SG to make the decision without taking into consideration the investigations or recommendations made. The evidence, points to a clear gross violation and misconduct by the Secretary General’s decision, which was not only discriminatory against Lieut-Gen Ondieki, but was also an expedient political decision violating UN procedures and regulations” (International Policy Group, P: 21 ,2016).
“Lieut-Gen Ondieki had no direct control of deployment or response of the troops who were in the areas, according the UNMISS commanding framework. According to the rules of engagement, Lieut-Gen Ondieki could only send an order to the lead commanders who were in Juba, but they did not accept it. Therefore, Ban Ki-moon’s dismissal of Lieut- Gen Ondieki is not only an error in judgment, it is also unjust discrimination and a gross violation of his rights” (International Policy Group, P: 23 ,2016).
Recommendations:
“UN Reformed to Ensure Effectiveness: UN Missions in Africa need to be reformed because without fundamental restructuring, particularly to counter UNMISS structural and systemic dysfunction, similar crises are very likely to recur. These reforms are therefore a critical consideration that must feature in future UN mandated missions in Africa.
AMISS – African Mission in Southern Sudan: An Africa Mission in Southern Sudan should be formed to replace UNMISS. A UN and AU-mandated Africa Mission in Southern Sudan (AMISS) may be the best mechanism for peace operations today. Such a mechanism will be more responsive and better anticipate emerging trends and solutions therein and in line with the African Union’s maxim of “African solutions to African Problems” (International Policy Group, P: 38, 2016)
It seems that Lt. Gen. Ondieki we’re picked out because of lose procedures between the different nations and their brigades in the UNMISS operation in the Republic of South Sudan. Is also questionable that the Danish leader Løj pulls itself out before the internal investigations before the Military Leadership are investigated; therefore the blame fall all on the Kenyan Lt.Gen. Ondieki get the blame, instead on the one that we’re on the top who was Løj at the time. Secondly that the leadership of the battalions we’re not reacting to the command and will of the general to get in line when the skirmishes between the South Sudanese forces happen in July.
We are allowed to question Ban Ki Moons reason for the sacking that he didn’t follow procedure and didn’t do a thorough decision when he made arrangement for termination of the contract of Lt. Gen. Ondieki, he we’re even offered a trip to New York for orientation, as he was new in his leadership role in the UMISS in June, so it wasn’t like he had a long time to settle before the battles started again between the South Sudanese forces.
The procedures should have been in place and it seems to be easy to put the blame on the Kenyan General instead of trying to swallow pride and says that the UNMISS needs amends that even been asked for since 2011. Peace.
Reference:
International Policy Group – ‘Children of a lesser God – Report of the investigation into the power politics behind the removal of the Kenyan Force Commander of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) – November 2016














