“Edited Video by Human Rights Watch, 2016”.
Tag: UN
Press Release – Burundi: Government Investigations Ignore State Abuses (13.04.2016)

Independent International Inquiry Needed
NEW YORK, United States of America, April 13, 2016 – The findings of a Burundian commission of inquiry into allegations of extrajudicial executions by members of the security forces on December 11, 2015, in the capital, Bujumbura, are misleading and biased, Human Rights Watch said today. This is one of several official inquiries that have failed to properly investigate security force abuses or hold those responsible to account.
The inquiry focused on reports of abuses during the most deadly operation by the Burundian security forces since the country’s crisis began in April. Human Rights Watch found that police and military shot dead scores of people in Nyakabiga and Musaga neighborhoods, apparently in retaliation for opposition attacks on four military installations, and for heavy shooting at security forces by gunmen in these neighborhoods.
“This is the latest in a series of commissions of inquiry in Burundi that has ignored widespread abuses by the security forces,” said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “These inquiries have covered up state abuses and have not led to justice.”
The Prosecutor General, Valentin Bagorikunda, set up an inquiry into the December 11 events on December 17, 2015. Summarizing the inquiry’s main conclusions on March 10, 2016, he did not mention killings or abuses of Bujumbura residents by the security forces. He claimed that those killed on December 11 were armed “combatants” wearing police or military uniforms.
Since 2010, there have been at least seven commissions of inquiry into allegations of killings and other abuses. Most of them have denied or downplayed serious abuses by state agents.
Human Rights Watch documented the killings of December 11 in detail and found no indications that the victims had participated in the attacks on the military installations. Some victims were found lying side by side, face down, and appeared to have been shot in the back or the head. Others survived with serious injuries. The security forces also carried out large-scale arbitrary arrests in both neighborhoods.
In March, two United Nations special rapporteurs and one from the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights visited Burundi to investigate human rights abuses at the request of the UN Human Rights Council. They plan to return in June and send a small team of human rights monitors to be based in the country.
Presenting their interim report to the Human Rights Council on March 22, Christof Heyns, UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, said: “The overt violence of last year seems to have subsided. At the same time covert violence, for example, in the form of disappearances, seems to have increased… There are some in [the Burundian] government who seem to be open to change. Others, however, are in denial anything is wrong.”
Given the Burundian justice system’s inability or unwillingness to conduct credible and thorough investigations, an independent, international commission of inquiry is needed to establish the truth about the grave abuses in Burundi in the past year and support the efforts of the special rapporteurs, Human Rights Watch said.
An international commission with expertise in criminal and forensic investigations would conduct in-depth inquiries with a view to establishing individual responsibility for the most serious crimes. It would probe deeper into these crimes, complementing the work of UN and African Union human rights observers in Burundi as well as the Human Rights Council’s initiatives.
Burundian government officials have repeatedly claimed there is peace and security throughout the country, despite the fact that several hundred people have been killed over the past year and many others arbitrarily arrested, tortured or disappeared. The minister of human rights, social affairs and gender, Martin Nivyabandi, told the Human Rights Council in Geneva on March 22 that, “the situation is normalizing” and that, “Burundi today couldn’t be a land where impunity reigns.”
“Contrary to the minister’s statement, impunity has been at the heart of Burundi’s political system for years and is one of the principal causes of the current human rights crisis,” Bekele said.
Serious new abuses were reported throughout March and early April. Scores of people have been arrested and others taken away to unknown destinations by the police or intelligence services. Ruling party officials, police, and members of the ruling party youth league known as Imbonerakure arrested at least 16 members of the opposition party National Liberation Forces (FNL) at a bar in Kirundo province on March 12. The police spokesman, Pierre Nkurikiye, claimed they were conducting a political meeting without authorization.
Armed opposition groups have also been responsible for abuses. Unidentified men killed two ruling party officials in Bururi and Makamba provinces on March 15.
Since early 2016, the intelligence services have intensified surveillance of human rights activists, journalists, and other perceived critics, making it even more difficult to document and expose abuses and putting the few activists who remain at even greater risk.
Tensions were heightened on March 22, after an unidentified gunman shot dead Lt. Col. Darius Ikurakure, a military commander reportedly involved in many abuses, at the army headquarters in Bujumbura. Later that day, residents of Bujumbura reported that security forces arrested several people. That night, another military officer, Major Didier Muhimpundu, was killed in Bujumbura. An opposition group, the Republican Forces of Burundi (Forces républicaines du Burundi, FOREBU), later claimed responsibility for Ikurakure’s death.
“The government’s claims that Burundi is calm and that security is improving aren’t true,” Bekele said. “The recent killing of the military officials has heightened tensions, and many people are being arrested or simply go missing.”
Press Release – DR Congo: concerns for thousands of people who fled violence in Mpati area, North Kivu (13.04.2016)

GENEVA, Switzerland, April 13, 2016 – The top United Nations humanitarian official in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has voiced concern over the fate of more than 35,000 people who, in the past three weeks, have fled the area of Mpati, in the Masisi Territory of North Kivu province, following clashes between the Congolese army and armed groups.
Since 27 March five sites for internally displaced persons (IDP) have been emptied, forcing thousands to seek safety in surrounding villages. Although some who fled the fighting have started to return, the situation remains volatile and of great concern.
“The past days have been difficult for those IDPs forced to leave the sites, prevented by the clashing forces from returning to those sites, and unable to get the humanitarian assistance that they need. I am deeply concerned by the situation,” the Humanitarian Coordinator in DR Congo, Dr Mamadou Diallo, said today.
Access to the area has been difficult, notably because of the clashes. However, since 4 April, a number of humanitarian organizations have reached the area to evaluate the needs of the affected people. The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), mandated to coordinate the humanitarian response, is leading a mission to the area of Mpati.
Rein Paulsen, Head of OCHA in DRC, reiterates the importance of unhindered access to areas of need. “Access is paramount to our work, it is vital for humanitarian partners to reach the people in need,” Mr. Paulsen said.
Violence in North Kivu, affecting both civilians and aid organizations, has been rising since late 2014 resulting in renewed displacement. The renewed displacement is taking place amid a shrinking of humanitarian funding while needs remain great. During the current military operations in Mpati area, there have been threats of forced site closures, a concerning issue for humanitarian actors which has been the subject of high-level engagement, including by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon during a recent mission to DRC. The threat of forced site closures is particularly concerning as the humanitarian community and authorities in North Kivu have agreed on a strategy to draw down the number of sites in North Kivu.
The Humanitarian Coordinator has been advocating to ensure that any site closure respects internationally agreed standards regarding IDPs. In a high-level forum held on 05 April in Kinshasa, the Humanitarian Coordinator stressed again that while DRC has the right to close IDP sites, the role of the humanitarian community is to ensure that such closures “are in line with DRC’s obligations under international humanitarian law”. He added that the humanitarian community is ready to work closely with the Congolese authorities in identifying and implementing durable solutions to the problem of displacement in Eastern DRC.
“Such solutions must be anchored in the Kampala Convention,” the Humanitarian Coordinator said today in reference to the African Union Convention on the Protection of Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa to which DRC is party.
North Kivu has about 781,000 IDPs, of whom 30 per cent are in one of the 53 displacement sites. There are seven IDP sites in the Mpati area hosting more than 45,000 people.
Hvorfor ministre bør høre og ta til seg vitenskap; ikke klippe og lime etter eget befinnende; en Minister skal tjene sitt departement og borgerne, ikke sin egne ideologiske oppfatning eller parti; da kan ministeren gå tilbake til Stortingsbenken!

Det har den siste tiden gått en storm rundt Statsråd eller Minister Lishaug etter sine holdninger og bruk av vitenskap. Jeg skal ikke fokusere på henne direkte fordi jeg vil ikke bruke min tid på politikere som ikke ser mennesker, men som bare ser problemer. Det er derfor jeg vil ikke ta saken som omhandler Minister Sandberg som ikke har brukt vitenskaplige resultater rundt lakseproduksjonen.
Et departement som har en statsråd eller minister skal innenfor sitt fagfelt og sin del av statsforvaltningen tjene folket med de tjenester og lovverk som gjør dette til en “usynlig” del av hverdagen. Ettersom regelverket og lovverket til departementet skal revideres og gjøres nyttig for samfunnet idag. Derfor når en reviderer lovverk og statsapparatet, eller byråkratiet, så må dette skje sakte og rolig, fordi alle grunnlag og alle aktører som er involvert skal få sitt innspill inn for å gjøre best mulig avgjørelse for departementet og statsråden. Dette gjøres også ved å ha eksterne rådgivere, forskere og konsulenter.

At en skal helhetsvurderinger da gjelder det å utføre dette med aktsomhet og sikkerhet. En statsråd kan sin egne politiske mening og sin egen ideologisk tankegang. Dette har alle personer rett til å ha, men som Minister og Statsråd gjør at at de valg en tar, er større enn en selv. Om statsråden vil ha en brødskjeve med brunost og makrell-i-tomat, så er det greit, det er statsrådens eget personlig valg om hva statsråden synes er best. Men, om statsråden skal velge å ratifisere sofistikert regelverk fra den Europeiske Union (EU) eller de Forente Nasjoner (UN) så må dette bli gjort i sammenheng med gjeldene regelverk, grunnlov og også med støtte fra Stortinget. Statsråden kan ikke bare sette igang uten å spørre en sjel. Det handler om etiske og rammene rundt å være en minister. Personen kunne velge pålegg på skjeva uten å spørre, men om du skal forandre departementet så trenger enn rådføring og grunnlag for alternativet som blir brukt.
Et departement og minister er ikke der for en egen fortjeneste. Selv om Ministeren kan gjøre det for ens karrière, grunnen til at en er en del av statsapparatet skal også være for å tjene staten og representere folket. Dette gjør at de valg som gjøres som minister og representant i Stortinget, bør ikke være bare en ideologisk eller parti-politisk avgjørelse, men i tanken for at det skal være for å forbedre Norge. Det samme er det for Departementet som en Minister eller Statsråd styrer.
Å lede ett departement er ikke som å være i private næringsliv. For i det private næringsliv gjelder det å bruke reguleringer, næringsgrunnlag og skape mer profitt for butikken/kjeden eller konsernet. Når en leder i næringslivet tar avgjørelser for å levere best mulig for sine aksjeeiere og for å tjene mer penger på forretningene som blir gjort.
Det en gjør når man leder ett departement er å tjene denne og skape bedre muligheter, lede til en bedre stat og for alle borgere av denne staten. Departementet er der for å gjøre det enten bedre å drive industri og skape forutsetninger for at industrien skal skape flere jobber og bedre produkter enn de produsere i Danmark og Sverige. Det vil være som en minister for Næringslivet ikke ser til at det har vært vitenskaplig grunnlag for bruken av Stevia i drikkevarer eller mat istedenfor sukker. Hvis det var rapporter og forskning som sa at Stevia var mer kreftfremkallende enn sigaretter. Da hadde man forventet at Ministeren for Næringsmiddel departementet og Helse Ministeren hadde gjort noe for å stoppe bruken av Stevia av produkter og import av produkter som inneholder Stevia. Da ville vi gått tilbake til bruke sukker og andre lignende søtnings-middel istedenfor Stevia. Jeg sier ikke at Stevia er Kreftfremkallende, dette er bare et eksempel, nøkkelordene er “hvis det var”.
Det er dette vi forventer av våres departement og Minister som vi har. At de bruker vitenskapelige fakta og rapporter for å bedre statsapparatet, lytte til direktorater og andre aktører som jobber ved de fagfelt som det angår. Samtidig ikke bruke sin første og beste argument eller vurdering for å gjøre arbeidsdagen for ministeren lettere. Fordi å være minister eller statsråd skal ikke være en enkel jobb.
En Statsråd skal både representere departementet, være en representant for folket og også for sitt parti. Det er mange hatter og ett hode. Til tider vil det være vanskelig å vite hvilken som gjelder for den rollen en minister har. Det som er essensen for valg som en statsråd skal ta, er at den skal tas etter råd og etter redegjørelse før en tar en beslutting. Det skal ikke tas like lett som middagen, skal vi ha torsk eller laks i kveld? Den skal tas med tanke på alle aktører, borgere og gjeldene lovverk for den avgjørelsen som gjøres. Det skal ikke være en hurtig og kjapt valg. Fordi da kan svekke lovverket, svekke reguleringsgrunnlaget for staten og for de det angår.

For om en Minister skal ta ett valg og reformere eller gjøre noe nytt. Så bør det kunne bevises at det vil skape resultat eller være der for bedre statsforvaltningen. Det er akkurat som jeg er tvilende til at kommune sammenslåingene eller regions sammensettingen virkelig vil være en god økonomisk grunnlag for. Siden det vil kutte veldig få jobber og skape nye konsulent jobber i mellom tiden, fordi å skape nye grenser, nye stor-kommuner og reformere inter-kommunale samarbeid vil være en gull-gruve for konsulent selskaper og andre en del andre, men vil bruke en stor pengesekk for å omgjøre strukturen som er i dag. Spesielt om en legger til tvang mellom kommuner, mulig bygging av nye kommunale bygninger som rådhus og også finne nye løsninger på kommunale råd som er satt idag. Det som ei heller ikke blir diskutert om dette er lengden mellom borgerne og kommunen. En stor-kommune vil gjøre at avstanden mellom kommunenes representanter og borgerne større, dermed også lengre fra kommunale løsninger til de det angår. Dette kan skape et vakuum mellom kommunens innbyggere og rådhuset til kommunenes folkevalgte.
Det er derfor en minister eller statsråd skal ikke bare ta valg på måfå eller konsekvent uten direkte kunne argumentere med forskning eller redegjørelse fordi om en tar feil valg. Så kan dette bli en kostbar affære som også vil være en langsiktig avgjørelse som skaper konsekvenser for borgerne. Akkurat som NAV reformen der en gjorde om statsforvaltningen og tok Aetat, Trygdeetaten og Kommunale Sosialtjenesten inn i en enhet NAV. Det har sakte, men sikkert gått bedre, men i lang tid så det ut som en dårlig reform for de fleste borgere. Man kan fortsatt sette i tvil om det bedret tjenestene for borgerne. Det er derfor vi må ha statsråder som bruker skikkelig grunnlag og gjerne vitenskaplig begrunnet, da vil også reguleringen, loven og reformen som statsråden vil da kanskje ta; vil være bedre for både statsforvaltningen og for statsråden. Siden den vil da gi et bedre tilbud, et bedre samfunn og staten vil da kunne være der for borgerne og ikke for politikerne.
Det en statsråd ikke skal gjøre er å bruke bare sitt eget befinnende og sin egne ideologi. Da kan statsråden eller ministeren gå tilbake til stortingsbenken å være i opposisjon, siden som minister skal en være en akseptabel og leder for ett rådførende organ. Der en skal levere til borgerne innenfor fagfeltet. Hvis en statsråd eller departementet ikke skal lytte til fagfolk eller forskere, så kan en likeså legge ned departementene.

I og med at man legger ned departementene så trenger en ikke lenger heller å ha redegjørelse, komiteer som er satt for å skape grunnlag for lovforslag, man trenger heller ikke rapporter som skaper et annet grunnlag for avgjørelsen som blir tatt. Man kan også legge til side prosedyrer og regelverk, siden man da er helt fri til å ta avgjørelser uten å tenke konsekvenser eller det som egentlig gjelder allerede. Det er slik en kan begynne å tenke om vitenskap og rapporter ikke skal tas inn i grunnlaget for det statsråden gjør.
Vi vil ikke ha et samfunn der de som representerer oss, ikke gjør et grundig forarbeid og har brukt de andre kloke hodene og hendene inn i avgjørelsene som blir gjort. Da bygger man hus på sandgrunn istedenfor på fjell. Det kan ende med at sanden får huset til synke veldig fort, mens huset på fjell vil stå i vær og vind.
Så jeg håper at våres ministere og statsråder tar til seg all kunnskap. Slik at de kan ta best mulig avgjørelse for sine reguleringer, lover og sine reformer. Ikke bare politiske ideologiske grunnlag, men også være det en Minister eller statsråd som i følge latin etymologi betyr å ‘tjener’. Da vil de si å tjene noe, og dette gjelder å tjene departementet og folket, ikke sin egen karrière. Da en skal tenke på å valgt inn i neste valg, men å gjøre reformer og lover som skal gjelde for neste generasjon av borgere. Peace.
Don Museveni says “I would never accept these foreigners to give me orders about Uganda”; Time to cut the direct donor assistance to the government budget of Uganda and after that let Don Museveni eat alone!

“I wouldn’t ask these foreigners, but I would never accept these foreigners to give me orders about Uganda. Or about anything in the world! They got their own countries to run. Let them go and run them. Uganda is ours. Nobody gives us orders here” – President Museveni at Kololo Independence Grounds Speech while celebrating the “Double Victory” on 9th April 2016.
Now that it is not long ago he told the world that Uganda was his playground and he could shot and kill opposition because they had no place in his country. From the same man and leader comes this. Let me ask the international community to react to violent behavior and the aggression this President shows his own county.
The racketeering of the NRM and their Executive has to stop at one point. That can happen when the funds dry up and the ammunition does come with the next boat. The American should stop with their alliance and their UPDF trainings. The Americans should do as they did with the MCC in Tanzania; suspend the projects and direct-donor aid to budget funding of the Ugandan Government.

The French should stop supporting the Government projects in Northern Uganda and cut their loans as they have promised to effect directly the RDC and the other loyal cronies of Northern Uganda. This does so the Capos of the Don get their monies and keeps eating. While the Japanese should stop supporting infrastructure projects together with the Chinese Foreign Ministry, while the CNOOC should terminate their contract with the Uganda Government. Total Oil firm of the French should suspend their operation until the government accept their blood-money. The Same with Heritage Oil for Britain so the UK Gov. should disband their direct government support and take away the incentive from UK to Uganda. The Norwegian Government should suspend the Oil for Development Program that have been a steady program since 2006. Because if you hurt it where it could become most important, then the Don Museveni might listen.
The European Union should to hurt the Foreign Exchange rate suspend the import of Robusta Coffee beans from Uganda, as the export of this is a major factor in the economic trade in the land-lock country. “A total of 271,941 bags of coffee valued at US$ 25.12 million were exported in February 2016 -Source UCDA report”. If you want to hit where it hurts, then you take away the foreign exchange and the foreign exports. This here could really hurt the government that does not want to have any interference or questions about their rule.
If the Donors and giving aid, would suspend or cut the services for the Peacekeepers, the same reaction that the Dutch did with the Burundian Peacekeepers in the AMISOM in Somalia. The same could be done by the American Government and EU as they are the major benefactors for the economic spending ground and facilitators for it.

It is not like I am for neo-colonialism, but when a totalitarian and gangster like Don Museveni complains about the US Mission questioning his oppressive behavior and European Union saying their opinion on the display of character showed during the Election and announcement of the results. Then it seems like he does not need any-more international legitimacy for his rule. Only their money and aid when it comes in handy too fuel money to a private plane, refurnishing the State Houses, buying new cars and more estates. Especially considering in FY 2013/2014 the donor assistance of the total budget was 21 % of it. Therefore the USAID, World Bank, IMF, DFID, European Commission, Irish Aid, NORAD and the other contributors should suspend that for the coming financial year of FY 2016/2017. To not hurt the citizens do this instead!
They should support the IDP camps and refugee camps in the Ugandan country through United Nations programs and organizations, build stronger relationship with NGOs in Uganda and forge good governance programs instead of supporting a government who is carrying out rigged election and embezzlement of government funds and international aid. Therefore progressive use of the tax-payers money from the Western Hemisphere, and if that is not working then, use it instead on local infrastructure projects to their own tax-payers.

Especially when a specialized report on Donor Aid to Ugandan Government says this:
“Budget support has not helped much in relation to cross sectoral dialogue. Some improvement was realized in education sector as dialogue with Ministry of Local Government and Ministry of Public Service improved. But this has not happened for the health sector” (…)”The power relations between bilaterals and Global Health Initiatives including PEPFER, Global Fund, GAVI, Stop Malaria etc shifted in favour of the latter who had no experience in the development of the budget support process and completely ignored to an apparent ineffectiveness” (…)”Budget support resulted in a greater commitment and quality of dialogue on PFM issues, especially after 2007 with the launch of FINMAP and JBSF. The influence of performance measures on sector dialogue declined from 2011/12, as the link with releases became less clear” (Joint Evaluation of Budget Support to Uganda – Final Report – 2015, P: 132).
This here proves the values of the Donor-Funding and the Budget Support from the International community to the Ugandan Government and the NRM-Regime. The NRM mafia under Don Museveni who says that the Ugandan authority do not want to have internal interference and foreign people questioning his playground. Therefore the authority and the Don want to rest things into peace he lets the people end up resting in peace. As he takes the Army and Police to detain the ones it needs and use draconian laws to oppress his own people.

Therefore with also the fraudulent election to keep the NRM mafia in order and also silence the opposition; as it even did yesterday the 9th March 2016 with the Military Police taking over the Nakivubo Settlement Primary School so the “Victory Celebration” that was supposed to be held there with Lord Mayor Lukwago and FDC Leader Besigye. This happen while the Crime Preventers, NRM Diehards and the new MPs we’re celebrating at Kololo Independence Grounds while costing the 1, 5 billion shillings. The racket also carries to pay their own and let the kingpin eat the money alone. As he has done since 1986 and the donor have continued to fund the budget support and give Don Museveni money to do his bidding.
Therefore I ask the governments to question if they want to deliver more money the NRM Mafia who uses monies to the army and police, squander away State House money on funding his campaign and also rumors of AMISOM contingent. There are certain numbers on his spending on military is staggering over the years. In between 2011 and end of term 2016 the taxpayers and donor-funding the total Shs. 6.617 trillion to the Army, Police and Intelligence Agencies. Of this in MPS in February 2015 into the portfolio of sophisticated military equipment there was the extended use of Shs. 470 billion, alone that year.

So with that knowledge and knowing the international donors should consider some reactions as he does not accept any interference not internal and not external. The Playground might be for the moment him, the Don Museveni has spoken of killing demonstrating citizens and opposition. The harassment of the ones that question the power of the kingpin!
That is when the international donors in the powers of US Mission in Kampala and their Amb. Malac recently; and also when the European Union does state the fact that the election was not free and fair. Therefore the Don Museveni feels betrayed as this has been loyal men who have given money to his government and not question his power or rule. Because they needed him to do their dirty-laundry and also have a steady ally in the East Africa; as the US have a relationship with Ethiopia and also Kenya, but have a longer engagement with the Ugandan Government, and now accepting the harassment of opposition as a price for some form of stability.

While the other donor-funding is not questioning other than expressing some have cut funding over the $12 Million that was going to Northern Uganda Development Fund (NUDF) in the 2012, that went lost to through the Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi. Also the Anti-Gay Bill had their reactions from UK, Norway and Dutch who cut parts of their aid. So now it is the time again, as the oppression, election fraud and the man who want to be the Don and acts like the Don of Uganda. The Godfather of Uganda has spoken. He does not want to be inference. So since he does not wish to have interference the international donors and bilateral organizations should offer him a hand with that.
The International donors and bilateral organizations should certainly suspend their direct budget support to the Ugandan Government. As they don’t wish to have any interference and can handle it all on their own. The money should instead spend on the Multi-National Organizations working in Uganda, as the OCHA, UNICEF and WFP as they will submit and carry out quick resolved matters in Internal Displaced Camps and around the borders through their projects. Since that will not have any other government questioning their actions, then the other governments should not help to fund their actions. Simple rhetorical assessment that banish the 20 % power of the funds that Don Museveni has at his disposal and use; when outsiders are such a pain, then the pain should leave Don Museveni alone and not support him.

So the Donors and Bilateral organizations should cut their aid and give less power to Don Museveni and his NRM Mafia who spends and eats alone; while his government does not have money to build health care, roads, schools or the other necessities in the Ugandan Society. But not with Foreign tax-payers money, when they get used on the expensive cars, lavish lifestyle, foreign health care and private planes for the Godfather. There is time to take action as the gangster will act as Don and not as a Statesman. Henceforth, when a player does not want question, but accept your money and not accountable for them; and when the player squander the money and expect to get away with it. Then the Player should lose the ability to get the money from you. The Don Museveni have already had long enough time to deliver and used enough of donor-funds without showing progress. Time to cross out the donor-funding to direct budget support; then Don Museveni does not need to be questioned. As the international community will not have put a stake and being stakeholders for certain parts of the budget. But when they step away, then Don Museveni can be the kingpin and the gangster he want to be in military fatigue and do as he want in his playground, without opposition who should just stay home; and also without foreigners questioning him. Then he can rule alone with the capos, underbosses and then be grand Don Museveni. Peace.
The UN Secretary-General message on the International Day of Reflection on the Genocide in Rwanda (07.04.2016)

Burundian Ambassador Jean Bosco Bareza Speaks Out on Burundi Crisis (Youtube-Clip)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UonkokbxnlA
“The United Nations Security Council has unanimously backed a resolution that lays the groundwork for deploying a UN police presence in Burundi to help calm the violence in the troubled nation. The resolution tasks UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon with drawing up within 15 days a list of options for the proposed police force, in consultation with the Burundian government and the African Union. NBS’s Solomon Serwanjja spoke to the Burundian ambassador to Uganda, Jean Bosco Bareza about his government’s reaction to the possible deployment of the UN police in Bujjumbura” (NTV Uganda, 2016).
Burundi: “Actions speak louder than words” – Tom Malinowski (Youtube-Clip)
“In a press conference issued on this Saturday morning by Tom Malinowski, an assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor concerning his visit in Burundi where he met with different officials, Tom declared his position about the procrastination of the government to execute their” (Iwacu Web TV, 2016).
Burundian UN Security Council Resolution 2279; a good deed, but will it make a difference?

As the unrest and crisis in Burundi continues even if they have Peacekeepers in Central African Republic and Somalia. The Opposition and the Government still keeps on with killings and oppressive behavior from the Government Armed Forces from the Police and the Army. The Opposition even tries to do plots to take down people of higher rankings as they have even attacked and gone after ministers and army generals. That is why the United Nation Security Council on the 1st of April 2016 finally have come to resolution on the conflict as the Inclusive Inter-Burundian Dialogue that have been stalled after the Ugandan President Museveni was out of the picture. There since been little or no-talks between the powerful actors in the country.

Even with stories of counter-insurgencies from Rwanda and trained militias to topple the President Nkurunziza shows the viability and how the positions are played at the moment. But here are the most specific and most important parts of the UN resolution 2279 (2016) of the Security Council:
“Stressing the primary responsibility of the Government of Burundi for ensuring security in its territory and protecting its population with respect for the rule of law, human rights and international humanitarian law, as applicable” (…)”Urges the Government of Burundi and all parties to reject any kind of violence and condemn any public statement inciting violence or hatred and demands that all sides in Burundi refrain from any action that would threaten peace and stability in the country” (…)”Urges the Government of Burundi to respect, protect and guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, in line with the country’s international obligations, to adhere to the rule of law, to bring to justice and hold accountable all those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law or violations and abuses of human rights, as applicable, including sexual violence and violations against children” (…)”Welcomes the steps made by the Government of Burundi to withdraw some media bans, cancel some arrest warrants and release a significant number of detainees, and urges the Government of Burundi to urgently fulfil the remaining commitments announced by the Government of Burundi on 23 February 2016 and to extend such measures to other media outlets and political detainees” (…)”Welcomes the consent of the Burundian authorities to increase to 200 the number of human rights observers (100) and military experts (100) of the AU, calls for their full and speedy deployment in Burundi, notes that 30 human rights observers and 15 military observers have been deployed so far, and urges the Government of Burundi and other concerned stakeholders to provide them with full cooperation in order to facilitate the implementation of their mandate” (…)”Calls on States in the region to contribute to a solution to the crisis in Burundi, and to refrain from supporting the activities of armed movements in any way, and recalls in this regard commitments of the States in the region under the Framework Agreement on the Peace, Security and Cooperation for the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the region and the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees” (UN Resolution 2279, 2016).
Most of this is expected from the United Nation Security Council and their values and the wishes of security of the people of Burundi; which is the reason for why the resolution occurs. The issue I have with it, is not that the Resolution finally get Blue-Helmets on the ground and they are supposed to help to gain peace. But when you see the amount of people, experts and military men from the Peacekeepers it is very little. As little as it seems to be a gimmick and then the world society “we did something” but initially that something was very little.

And the Burundian Government will sure make sure their mandate is minor or small so they can conduct their affairs as much as they please only to formally do the implementation that are into the standards of the signed statues and the agreements done to international laws. So they don’t have grievances with anybody or anyone from the United Nation or the International donors to the Burundian Regime.
That the UN Peacekeepers will have the total of 100 Military Experts as Peacekeepers, that is a tiny base; they will not have the mandate or structure to do much in Burundi. It is more than the 15 Military Experts that are there now, so it is as adjustment. The Human Rights Monitoring will not be able to force anything, but to report to the UN and AU on the matters and issues on the ground. For me what is important is to remember the dire state that was in Rwanda before 1994. As this is similar and also had a Peacekeeping mission. But looking at the similarities when coming to the mission; the Burundian Peacekeepers can’t do much about nothing.

Important dates and issues with Rwandan Peacekeeping Mission:
“On 22 June 1993, the Security Council, by its resolution 846 (1993), authorized the establishment of UNOMUR on the Uganda side of the common border, for an initial period of six months, subject to review every six months. The Council decided that the verification would focus primarily on transit or transport, by roads or tracks which could accommodate vehicles, of lethal weapons and ammunition across the border, as well as any other material which could be of military use” (…)”As requested by resolution 846 (1993), the United Nations undertook consultations with the Government of Uganda with a view to concluding a status of mission agreement for UNOMUR. The agreement was finalized and entered into force on 16 August 1993. This opened the way to deployment of an advance party which arrived in the mission area on 18 August. UNOMUR established its headquarters in Kabale, Uganda, about 20 kilometres north of the border with Rwanda. By the end of September 1993, the Mission had reached its authorized strength of 81 military observers and was fully operational” (…)”. Reporting to the Security Council on 15 December 1993 on the activities of the Mission, the Secretary-General noted that UNOMUR was “a factor of stability in the area and that it was playing a useful role as a confidence-building mechanism”. Upon his recommendation, the Council, by its resolution 891 (1993) of 20 December 1993, extended UNOMUR’s mandate by six months. The Council expressed its appreciation to the Government of Uganda for its cooperation and support for UNOMUR and also underlined the importance of a cooperative attitude on the part of the civilian and military authorities in the mission area” (UNOMOR Background).
We all who followed the Situation in the Rwandan Genocide knew what happened after this and that the mission of United Nations Peacekeepers was not incapable of doing anything with the dire situation in Rwanda that was already in 1993 and what escalated in 1994. Those 81 Military Observers did not have the manpower or the mandate to sufficiently do anything in the country.
As we are today in April 2016, 12 years after 1994, in the neighbor country of Burundi who also have history of civil war and violence, that ended in the Arusha Peace Accord of 2000 and gave way to over a decade of peace. Still, it was not sufficient or enough.

So the 15 Military Experts or Observers cannot deal with anything especially since their mandate is not yet there; as the negotiations with the Burundian government are under way, the Burundian government wants as little or no meddling in their internal affairs; and with that in mind they have stifled the ability to have international peacekeepers in the country. Even if the UN Mission in Burundi with their 100 Peacekeepers, how much more power will they compared to the counterparts in Rwanda in 1993-1994? I doubt the Burundian Government will give up sovereignty and let them play national Police and Army over them. As they have Army Forces in Peacekeeping mission themselves in Somalia and Central African Republic.
Burundian President Nkurunziza said this in late December 2015: “Everybody should respect the borders of Burundi. If the troops are in violation of this decision, they will have attacked Burundi, and each Burundian must stand up to fight them” (…)”The country will have been attacked, and we will fight them” (…)”You cannot send troops to a country if the United Nations Security Council has not accepted it… the UN resolution says the international community should respect the independence of Burundi” (Daily Monitor, 2015).
Now yesterday the new Resolution said they would extend the Military Experts (Observers) which counters the words and arguments used by the President in December 2015. That an Resolution from the United Nation would change the matter, even the resolution is so vague and non-descriptive as it even in dialogue with the Burundian Government:
“…urges the Government of Burundi and other concerned stakeholders to provide them with full cooperation in order to facilitate the implementation of their mandate” (UN Resolution 2279, 2016).

This gives way to Burundian Government to do as they see fit in their sovereign territory while the Peacekeeping mission of United Nations will have little power or mandate to address, because we already knows that President Nkurunziza have little interest in having a powerful mandate to the United Nations Peacekeeping mission as he already wanted to attack the African Union planned Peacekeeping mission in the Country.
The 100 people of the UN Peacekeeping mission will in this state, and with this sort of arrangement and resolution gives lots of responsibility towards the Burundian Government, and will certainly not made in way that is adjusted to the concerns of the United Nation Security Council.
This resolution gives little or no direct mandate to the United Nations Mission and gives way for negotiations for the Burundian Government. Therefore the start of it is flawed and leaves possibilities of being a minor sting of pride for President Nkurunziza; as much as it was for President Juvénal Habyarimana of Rwanda in 1993; to have a peacekeeping mission in his country. But if it has limited power or even reach, and with little manpower as it have, the worry for the Burundian government not necessary have to be there. Because the United Nation Mission can’t or doesn’t have the ability to stop anything; just peeping and monitoring at best; as much as the Human Rights workers that are parts of the Mission. The Military experts will be lame ducks, while waiting for a secure mandate. A mandate that the Government of Burundi not wanting to give them, as that will take away their sovereignity as a state and nation. Peace.
Reference:
Daily Monitor – ‘Nkurunziza warns he would fight AU peacekeepers’ (30.12.2015) link: http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/World/Nkurunziza-warns-fight-AU-peacekeepers-/-/688340/3015170/-/k7p15vz/-/index.html
United Nation – ‘Uganda-Rwanda-UNOMOR Background’
Press Statement: Increased displacement out of South Sudan into Sudan fuelled by food insecurity

This is a summary of what was said by UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards – to whom quoted text may be attributed – at the press briefing, on 29 March 2016, at the Palais des Nations in Geneva.
UNHCR is concerned by the increasing number of South Sudanese fleeing into Sudan because of increased food insecurity caused by the ongoing conflict and deteriorating economic conditions. Heightened food insecurity and growing unrest in parts of South Sudan, especially in the north-western States of Northern Bahr El Ghazal and Warrap, have resulted in the flight of some 38,000 people into East and South Darfur since end of January. UNHCR fears the situation could quickly worsen as the nutrition situation in Upper Nile, Warrap, and Northern Bahr Ghazal grows increasingly serious.
The Government of Sudan’s Humanitarian Aid Commission reported the arrival of 2,328 South Sudanese in El Meiram and 2,520 in Kharasana, in West Kordofan State. These new arrivals, which may be under-counted, have reached Sudan in poor health, many having risked their lives en route. They need humanitarian help including food, water, basic relief items, SGBV prevention and response as well as family reunification. UNHCR led a mission to El Meiram on 20 and 21 March to assess the level and nature of the needs. In East Darfur, an average of 500 South Sudanese – or 100 households – have been arriving per day, rising to over 150 households last week, with a total of 35,234 as of 23 March, and more are expected in the coming days.

They have mostly settled in Khor Omer IDP camp, with smaller numbers arriving in the villages of Adila, Bahr Alara, Asalaya, Abu Karinka and Abu Jabra. The situation is desperate with most new arrivals having travelled up to 4 weeks before reaching Khor Omer, carrying few personal belongings and in need of urgent humanitarian assistance. UNHCR will coordinate, along with OCHA, the overall humanitarian response, which focuses on the areas of protection, public health and nutrition, sanitation, basic relief items, SGBV prevention and response as well as child protection. UNHCR is also advocating for direct access to East Darfur to support the response.
In South Darfur, over 2000 new arrivals were registered in Beliel Camp. Many of them arrived with no identification documents and are in need of humanitarian assistance, in particular food and hygiene items such as soap and jerry cans. Many children have been separated from their families. UNHCR led an inter-agency needs assessment mission last week to determine the needs of both the new arrivals and the host communities, which are over-stretched as each household is hosting an additional 25 to 35 people. The assessment indicates that refugees have faced insecurity en route to Sudan, are now living in overcrowded conditions with many of them being sick and in need of medical attention.

The conflict that erupted in South Sudan in December 2013 has produced one of the world’s largest humanitarian emergencies with 2.3 million people forced to flee their homes, 678,000 of these across borders as refugees and 1.69 million displaced inside the country. Growing food insecurity and ongoing conflict are causing more and more South Sudanese to flee – either across borders or inside the country. They are among 2.8 million people across South Sudan officially classified as facing a ‘crisis’ or ’emergency’ of food insecurity, according to Fewsnet, the global body mandated to monitor such situations.
With the number of South Sudanese fleeing their country increasing rapidly, UNHCR is extremely worried that the 2016 South Sudan Regional Refugee Response Plan (RRRP) that covers the refugee programmes in the neighbouring countries, run by UNHCR and 39 partners, is only funded at 3 per cent. This leaves many lifesaving activities such as the provision of clean water, sanitation and health services, food and shelter severely underfunded.

