Has the UN peacekeeping mission in DR Congo failed? | DW News
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 авг 2024
- For nearly three decades Eastern Congo has been marred by insecurity with frequent outbreaks of violence caused by armed groups. Last year more than 2,000 civilians were killed in attacks by these rebels. The Democratic Republic of Congo is home to the UN's largest peacekeeping mission yet a violent insurgency in the country shows no signs of abating. There are said to be over 100 armed groups in the region and experts say the deadliest among them is the Islamist group ADF - short for Allied Democratic Forces.
The UN's MONUSCO mission which has been on the ground since 2010 has deployed over 17,000 peacekeeping troops in the region but as our DW team found, the mission has not brought peace or security to people there.
Subscribe: www.youtube.co...
For more news go to: www.dw.com/en/
Follow DW on social media:
►Facebook: / deutschewellenews
►Twitter: / dwnews
►Instagram: / dwnews
Für Videos in deutscher Sprache besuchen Sie: / dwdeutsch
#DRCongo #UN #Peacekeeping
Please blur the face of the person who don't want to be recognised
I don't think the insurgents have television or internet though.
@@alimohammad1934 they are active on social media as well. Based on our assumption, we should not risk a life
It depends on what the situation would look like without UN troops.
Pretty much the same, but not quite as many rape victims.
@@Thor.Jorgensen there are also reports of blue helmets involved in rapes :(
@@pedros.3399 Yeah, that's what I meant.
Where ever the UN peacekeepers go they end up raping locals instead of protecting them.
They have succeeded, I would argue, considering that the flow minerals has been continuous and even increased over the years they've been there. Clearly, the UN wouldn't have allowed them that long if it weren't a self-sustaining project.
I think you are right bro
Fair point, but find it difficult to say "mission accomplished" if the locals don't feel safe being... well... locals.
Lay down your arms. Peace is SWEET. Peace, love and unity brings joy in our society. Together We Stand
Who should lay down the arms?
This guy is reading a script
They have failed for decades and just continue their highly recommended missionary work of doing absolutely nothing. It's all play and nothing serious behind these peace keeping missions. Africa should take the lead in peace keeping missions,of course other countries are welcome to assist if they want. But history has all the answers as why nothing is improving. Politics is a big part,but more African efforts is definitely the way forward.
Like the efforts of the ADF? They argue the exact same way
Sharing, Justice and Peace for All.
They aren't there to keep the peace in the first place
Why do people waste time sending peacekeepers anywhere where is generally no peace to begin with
That mission was and is a total failure millions of wasted money the militias are even targeting ambassadors now
People in the comments complain about UN, but everyone is silent on "shhhhh...let's not offend a particular group of ideologues".
I can't help but feel, if this were being carried out by developed countries instead of DRC neighbours who insist they are best suited to lead this security mission, that DRC would be in a different, better position right now.
Well, or at least the ones that weren't actively involved in attempts to destabilize the country in the first place. Had such high hopes for this task force - the people of the DRC deserved better.
You haven't learned the first and second Congolese wars? The bloodiest wars were all neighbours were responsible of so much bloodshed? LMAOOOOOOOOOO
But this ego and power humanity be down to earth
lol, every UN peacekeeping mission has failed, and yes even in congo.
Arm them. Train them both man & woman. Give them the ability to protect their homes and to fight a holding action giving their gov forces time to come to their aid.
Without this preparation they are sitting ducks. That means an easy target.
the American way of arming militias
(would be effective but even more weapons make it even easier for seperatists to fight against the goverment)
@@thifmaster1466 No sir. Arming a man & a woman so they can protect their families.
Agree
@@joescott58 you should know their culture first. Because it is typical for them to obey their tribal leader, or local chief than politicians. Because like Afghanistan it could backfire.
@@joescott58 Yes but that has to be done very carefully or eslse people will use the guns you gave them agains you
(stinger in Afghanistan AK´s etc)
If they are still going to fight even though the un is there what else can be done pull out the troops and leave them to it does any soldier want to die for that situation
the UN and failure, name a more iconic udo
6:00 this guy is just reading a script.. lies
What's the difference between someone just reminding his lines he set up before an interview and just reading them? Same thing. The latter is at least honest enough to show he is actually reading.
Not having a script doesn't change a thing.
@@PuddingXXL You make a good point, the fact that he’s reading doesn’t mean anything wrong in itself.. I went back and listened to him, what he says is actually true
Send Germany instead of UN
their planes would crash before they even start the motors
special ability of the Bundeswehr
THEY HAVE SO MUCH MONEY THEY SHOULD HELP POOR POWER HAS MADE THEM 😈
UN is not doing there jobs properly UN should leave DRC
Most soldier join UN peace keeper for money I don't blame them the people who run UN doesn't care actually
The UN don't own or directly finance the peacekeeping force. They are the armies of other member states who volunteered to send their troops in to help.
So, no it doesn't work like you are describing
@@tjmarx Yeah but the UN pays them to send armies
@@axel665 Untrue again.
Whilst volunteer countries can be reimbursed for certain costs under particular conditions, they are NOT paid to be there nor do the available reimbursements come anywhere close to covering costs.
Volunteer countries are in fact volunteers. Their taxpayers fund the mission, that's why it's open for countries to agree to help.
Further, one could not join say the Ugandan army and have any kind of certainties about being pooled into the peacekeeping forces as opposed to being deployed domestically or elsewhere.
One would also have to meet the requirements of joining the Ugandan army, which for starters requires you to be Ugandan.
There is no way to just put your hand up and say "I want to join the peacekeeping force" nor are they paid differently that others in the same military.
It just doesn't work that way
@@tjmarx Yeah they a 're soldier from regular army where do you think UN get soldiers the soldiers are paid by UN
@@axel665 No.
How are you not getting this?
Again, the UN do not have their own military, nor do they pay any military. As outlined in the UN Charter all countries participating in peacekeeping missions do so on a voluntary basis without payment.
Uganda provide peacekeeping forces to DRC. Those soldiers are paid by Uganda. Uganda is not paid by the UN to do it.
The Ugandan military is occupying DRC at the request* of DRC and with the legal authority of the UN. That's the only reason they're called UN peacekeepers, because their legal authority to occupy the territory comes from a UNSC resolution.
Your comment is completely and utterly wrong
😅😅
😅😅