Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


Un About To Fight It's First War In Congo

Recommended Posts


AFRICAN economies are rising steadily, but in the Democratic Republic of Congo life for many is as bad as ever. Armed men rape and plunder with impunity. Rebel groups terrorise vast stretches of land rich in minerals and agricultural potential. Millions have died as a result. And for years the outside world has done little more than shrug. Its main effort—a 14-year-old UN peacekeeping mission—has failed to end “Africa’s world war”, which started as an ethnic conflict sparked by the genocide next door in Rwanda before descending into murderous anarchy farther afield.


This is the first time that the UN will send its own troops into battle. In the past the Security Council has authorised the use of “all necessary force” but has delegated the fighting to posses from willing nations. In the Korean war the Americans were in command. In Afghanistan and Libya NATO took charge. In Congo, however, the UN itself will be responsible for artillery fire, helicopter gunships—and the inevitable casualties. Should the UN really be doing this?

The starting point ought to be extreme caution. Getting “blue helmets” to knock out one side in a civil war in the name of the rest of the world could taint the entire machinery of global peacekeeping. The UN’s neutrality is a valued asset. Risking it can be justified only as a last resort and when a mission enjoys broad international approval.

Congo fits that description. No powerful nation has been prepared to take the job on independently; not even those keen to intervene in the bloody quagmire of Syria are tempted to send troops to Congo, no matter how prolonged and grotesque its people’s nightmare may be. Mindful of this, the Security Council authorised the new force unanimously—a high bar to clear. This was not a sneaky power grab by an unaccountable bureaucracy or a warmongering few. Approval followed months of patient and sincere diplomacy. Even normally reluctant powers like China and Russia voted yes.

Rape in DR Congo: A 'weapon of war'

Why does sexual violence go largely unpunished in the country and should the UN hold the perpetrators accountable?

So the UN is possible about to embark on it's "first" war, although it's possible it might force both side to the negotiating table to avoid the escalation.

However should the neutrality of the UN be sacrificed and troops deployed in the manner, I'd like to think the UN is acting to stop the savagery and rape but as it's been shown in the past the UN isn't above sex trafficking and prostitution so UN troops in the area may not stop the rapes and they may actively take part.

Is the UN about to go too far by going to war?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we leave the UN now then?

I bet Switzerland regrets joining it in 2002, and should now hold another referendum as their concern at joining was that they would lose their neutrality. Well that's gone now as they have found themselves signed up to a war.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm. Liberal interventionism. I'm not at all surprised to see it endorsed by the neocon world-improvers at the Economist . Lot of potential mineral wealth to be liberated in the Congo.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd leave it to Tintin and Captain Haddock! :blink:

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 239 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?

      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.