FOLLOW UP TO OIOS INVESTIGATION ON MONUC

UNCLAS STATE 045476

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL UNSC KPKO CG
SUBJECT: FOLLOW UP TO OIOS INVESTIGATION ON MONUC
PEACEKEEPERS AND PURPORTED UN COVER UP



1. This is an action request. Department requests USUN and
Embassy Kinshasa to discuss with appropriate UN officials
what follow up action the UN has taken with India and
Pakistan to the findings of Office of Internal Oversight
Services (OIOS) investigations that individuals in the Indian
and Pakistani contingents of the UN Peacekeeping Mission in
the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC) were involved in
gold smuggling and the supply of weapons or ammunition to
militia members, and to discuss if such activity continues in
the present. USUN and Embassy Kinshasa are also requested to
inquire about claims that the UN has been discouraged from
pursuing inquiries for political reasons, particularly for
fear of alienating India and Pakistan, two of the largest
troop contributing countries to UN peacekeeping operations.
See paragraph 2 for background. Refer to paragraph 3 for
suggested discussion elements.


2. Background:

In May 2007, MONUC announced that the OIOS would conduct an
investigation into possible trafficking in gold and arms by
peacekeepers deployed in 2005 in Ituri, in the northeast of
the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The announcement
came after a report by the British Broadcasting Corporation
(BBC),which indicated that peacekeepers in Pakistan,s
contingent were engaged in trafficking with the Nationalist
Integrationist Front (FNI) militia, one of five armed groups
active in Ituri. The BBC alleged that the trafficking began
in 2005, and cited witnesses who described secret
negotiations between Pakistani blue helmets and FNI militia
commanders known as &Kung-fu8 and &Dragon8 in the town of
Mongbwalu. The OIOS investigation concluded that one officer
had been responsible for dealing in gold, allowing traders to
use UN aircraft to fly into town, putting them up at the UN
base and taking them around town. However, the UN declared
that &in the absence of corroborative evidence,8 its
investigators &could not substantiate the allegation8 that
Pakistani peacekeepers supplied weapons or ammunition to the
militia.
Upon inquiries in mid-March from the Department on follow up
action to the findings of the investigation, the Department
of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) stated that the OIOS report
had been given to the Government of Pakistan. DPKO further
stated that it had sent two letters to Pakistan asking for
information on any action taken, but Pakistan had not
formally replied.
In its latest report aired on April 28, the BBC said
Indian soldiers were also implicated in the trafficking. The
18-month BBC investigation for its program Panorama found
evidence that:
-Pakistani peacekeepers in the eastern town of Mongbwalu were
involved in the illegal trade in gold with the FNI militia,
providing them with weapons to guard the perimeter of the
mines.
-Indian peacekeepers operating around the town of Goma had
direct dealings with the militia responsible for Rwandan
genocide, now living in eastern DRC.
-The Indians traded gold, bought drugs from the militias, and
flew a UN helicopter into the Virunga National Park, where
they exchanged ammunition for ivory.
The BBC report also quoted UN sources saying they had been
discouraged from pursuing an investigation for political
reasons. High level UN officials, including DPKO Under
Secretary General Jean Marie Guehenno, Special Representative

SIPDIS
of the Secretary General for MONUC Alan Doss, Deputy
Spokeswoman for the Secretary General Maria Okabe, and OIOS
head Inga Britt Ahlenius, have defended the organization
against these charges, and have emphasized that whole
countries, contingents should not be &smeared8 on the
basis of individuals, actions. Additionally, Pakistan has
said that it has no means of influencing the UN, and that
there is no evidence that its troops were involved in an
illegal gold trade or re-arming militia. Likewise, the
Indian Army emphasized that an investigation by OIOS had
revealed that all by one of the allegations were based on
hearsay or were not backed by credible evidence.


3. Begin suggested discussion elements:

-Ask what follow up actions have been taken by the UN in
response to the conclusions of the OIOS investigations.

-Ask UN officials if they are aware of any follow up actions
taken by Pakistan or India in response to the conclusions of
the OIOS investigations.

-Note that the Department had been informed by DPKO in
mid-March that the UN had sent two letters to the Government
of Pakistan requesting information on any action it had taken
in response to the findings of the OIOS report, but at that
time Pakistan had not formally responded. Ask whether
Pakistan has since responded to the UN,s inquiries.

-Emphasize that we strongly agree with the UN that entire
contingents should not be smeared on the basis of
individuals, actions, but ask if any formal action was ever
taken by the Governments of Pakistan or India against the
individuals implicated in the OIOS report.

- Ask how the OIOS concluded that there was not sufficient
corroborative evidence to substantiate the allegation that
Pakistani peacekeepers supplied weapons or ammunition to
militia.

-Ask if there will be a formal investigation on the
allegations that Pakistani and Indian peacekeepers in the DRC
had direct dealings with militia, and who purportedly traded
gold, bought drugs, and exchanged ammunition for ivory.

-Discuss whether or not troop contributing countries,
specifically India and Pakistan, have taken measures to
discourage a thorough investigation of the allegations
against its peacekeepers deployed in MONUC.

End suggested discussion elements.


4. Department requests response by Tuesday, May 6.
RICE