At one-sided UN briefing, UK Is focused on expressing present concern, not past responsibility
More than a month after Kenya’s disputed election, which has led to violence and at least 800 dead, the UN Security Council finally had a meeting on the matter, albeit behind closed doors. The meeting was triggered, or in UN-speak legitimated, by a request from the Kibaki government, in the form of an “aide memoire” which states that “Honorable Mwai Kibaki was declared the duly elected President… the election results reflected the will of the people.” These are, of course, positions contested in the real world. But in the UN, where only those hold power in a country can speak, often only one side of a story is heard.
Afterwards the only Ambassador who chose to come speak before the cameras was Britain’s Sir John Sawers. He said “at this stage we are focused on expressing our concern” and noted that one of his “ministers, Mark Malloch Brown was there last weekend.” That visit led Uganda’s Monitor to report on the “cycles of killing and revenge linked to land and wealth disputes tied to British colonial policy that politicians have revived during most of Kenya’s elections. ‘What is alarming about the last few days is that there are evidently hidden hands organizing it now. Militias are appearing ... the targeting is very specific,’ Britain’s Africa minister Mark Malloch Brown said on a visit to Kenya.”
Looming over the debate on Kenya if not the country itself is the UN Security Council’s and its members’ shameful history of inaction during the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. We cannot allow things to get out of control, more than one Ambassador said by rote on Wednesday. But the analogy goes beyond far away violence seeming to fall on ethnic lines, to the two countries’ histories of colonization. As Richard Dowden of the UK’s Royal African Society put it, “the Kikuyu are the largest ethnic group in Kenya and the one that benefited most from colonialism, via education and employment. Some Kikuyu fought back against the British seizure of their lands. When Kenya’s first president, Jomo Kenyatta, demanded ‘independence now,’ Britain tried to form an alliance of other ethnic groups in opposition. The plan failed, and sowed the seeds of mistrust between Kenya’s peoples.”
As told by Dowden, this parallel’s Belgium’s use in Rwanda of the Tutsi, then veered over to support of the Hutu. The UK, it seems, would dispute this analogy, and portray itself, as on Myanmar, as the most caring Western country. Similarly, while the UN states that it could only investigate the assassination in Pakistan of Benazir Bhutto if Musharraf requests it, the UK provides what many view as a fig leaf, with its team from Scotland Yard.
On Tuesday, Inner City Press asked the two spokesmen of the UK Mission to the UN in writing for a description of Mark Malloch Brown’s role, itinerary and outcome(s) in Kenya, and to obtain comment on this from Ambassador Sawers. There was not response, while Sawers made himself available to select journalists behind closed doors. Did questions of colonialism and, dare we say, hypocrisy arise? We’ll never know—or, by the UK Mission’s logic, even if we’re told by attendees, we are not to report it. “At this stage we are focused on expressing our concern.” Watch this site.
Inner City Press
Next entry: US threatens to intervene in post-poll violence
Previous entry: U.N. council deplores Kenya violence, backs Annan