I have received apologies from Deputies Carey, Gregory and Quinn and from Senator O'Rourke. Members who were present at our meeting on 8 July will recall that a presentation was made by the Congolese Irish Partnership in respect of the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It was subsequently agreed to invite officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs to discuss the matter and to provide an outline of the measures being taken to support the aims of the Congolese Irish Partnership. I welcome David Cooney, political director, Pat Kelly, Africa director, and Damien Boyle from the Department. I must inform our guests that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses attending before the committee. I call David Cooney.
Presentation by Department of Foreign Affairs.
Mr. David Cooney
I have prepared a statement for the committee but I am in the hands of members as to whether reading it into the record will provide the best use of our time.
We would normally have a presentation or a mini-presentation from the witness or witnesses, followed by dialogue and questions.
Mr. Cooney
In that event, I will read the prepared statement.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before the committee today to discuss the current political and human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The conflict in the DRC which erupted in 1998 and which has, at various times, seen the armies of the DRC's neighbours deployed within its territory, has understandably been described as Africa's world war. Violence, death and destruction have been widespread. The death toll cannot be accurately assessed, but the estimates of 3.5 million put forward at your meeting in July reflect the enormous scale of the suffering which has taken place.
Regrettably, suffering is nothing new to the people of the Congo. Their history, certainly during the past century and a half, has been one of misrule and exploitation, by both colonial and Congolese administrations. The scale of their misfortune may have fluctuated over the decades but the fact is that the country's not inconsiderable human and material resources have never been harnessed to the benefit of the Congolese people themselves. Ms Shole of the Congolese-Irish Partnership who appeared before the sub-committee in July is correct in saying the Congo is not a poor country. Its people should not be poor, but circumstances have made them so.
The DRC is an exceptional country in many ways. Its territory is vast — 28 times the size of the island of Ireland, with a road system which barely exists and, where it does, is usually badly degraded. It is inhabited by many different peoples, a number of whom are closely related to the peoples of neighbouring countries. Regional and ethnic tensions are strong.
Even if long-term peace can be established and an elected government installed which will govern in the interests of the Congolese people, the DRC will still face enormous challenges. As of now, however, there is still some way to go before peace or an elected government can be taken for granted. While it is 15 months since the Transitional National Government provided for in the 2002 and 2003 Sun City peace accords was established, recent events, particularly the assault and capture of the town of Bukavu in eastern DRC by rebel forces last June and the horrific massacre of 160 Congolese Banyamulenge — related to the Tutsis of Rwanda — refugees in Gatumba, Burundi, on 13 August 2004, have highlighted the underlying fragility of the peace processes in both the DRC and Burundi.
Any attempt at analysing the reasons for the current difficulties in the DRC will invariably come back to a number of basic facts. First, the recent conflict in the DRC arose not only from internal rivalries, but is also bound up with the ethnic conflicts in its small, but densely populated, eastern neighbours, Rwanda and Burundi. Uganda has also felt its interests threatened by the conflict on its borders and Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia also intervened militarily in the DRC and had troops stationed there for some time in support of the Kabila government in Kinshasa. Notwithstanding the efforts of the international community and periodic meetings, there continues to be insufficient trust among the countries involved. This is particularly so as regards the Kinshasa-based Transitional National Government of the DRC led by Joseph Kabila and Rwanda.
A second characteristic of the current situation is the continuing tension between the Congolese parties and factions themselves. This is manifested in the lack of political will to fully implement the transition process, as agreed in the Sun City peace accords. There is a fear on the part of many of these groups that the power and control they built up during the war will be lost through the ballot box.
The European Union, along with other international actors, has repeatedly urged greater progress in proceeding with essential tasks of the transition such as disarmament and demobilisation of former combatants, establishment of an integrated national army and police force, effective exercise of state authority throughout the entire DRC, and enactment of necessary legislation, including a new constitution, to ensure national elections scheduled for 2005 can proceed. While progress has been made in certain of these areas, the pace of implementation needs to be greatly accelerated if the transition is to be completed and the target of national elections in 2005 met.
The underlying fragility of the political situation in the DRC, with continuing instability in eastern DRC due to weak state institutions and armed groups that continue to operate, has had a correspondingly detrimental effect on human rights in the country. Serious human rights violations continue to occur in certain parts of the DRC, particularly in places such as Ituri and North and South Kivu that remain affected by conflict. It is often difficult to obtain an accurate picture of what is happening and who exactly has carried out the abuses. Regrettably, those engaged in these incidents or interested in exploiting them for propaganda purposes are more than ready to distort the facts or to pressurise local people to lie to those who are sent to investigate atrocities.
For example, members of the Twa people from Ituri district have recently retracted charges of cannibalism made in 2003 against the former rebel group headed by Vice President Jean-Pierre Bemba, claiming that they had been asked by the Kinshasa government to lie to investigators. These claims, which may be false, were accepted in good faith by the UN at the time and are currently being investigated by the International Criminal Court.
Similarly, on 1 September, the UN reported eyewitnesses blaming the Congolese based Mayi-Mayi militias and Rwandan Hutu ex-FAR and Interahamwe militias for the assault on Gatumba camp in Burundi. A week later, the respected NGO, Human Rights Watch, issued a report based on its own investigation contradicting this story and blaming the Burundian rebel group, the FNL. The truth can be elusive in the Great Lakes region. What does appear to be accepted by all sides is that 152 civilian refugees — Tutsis from the DRC — were killed in the attack.
There is no doubt that more needs to be done by all involved to tackle impunity and to ensure those responsible for human rights violations are brought to account. The Transitional National Government has a particular responsibility in this regard. Unfortunately, there has been insufficient progress in establishing an effective national justice system or an integrated national police force, both of which are essential in bringing to justice human rights violators.
In the meantime, the UN peacekeeping mission in the DRC, MONUC, is playing a valuable role in monitoring and reporting on those human rights violations which are occurring. Ireland, together with its European Union partners and the rest of the international community, has been active in seeking to address this serious situation. There has been considerable effort on the part of the international community over a number of years in seeking to bring about an end to conflict. There is a strong determination to help ensure that the transition process in the DRC succeeds.
Ireland strove to keep the peace process in the DRC at the forefront of the EU agenda during our recent Presidency of the EU. The situation was discussed at the European Council in June while the General Affairs and External Relations Council the same month adopted major conclusions on support for the peace and transition process in the Great Lakes region. EU involvement was paramount in defusing the crisis which erupted in eastern DRC in early June, with the EU, under the Irish Presidency, taking the lead internationally in condemning the capture of the town of Bukavu by rebel forces and urging a peaceful resolution to the crisis. The action of the Belgian Government in pushing for a consideration of an EU operation in the area was also a factor in persuading the rebel groups to withdraw.
The Irish Presidency also utilised to the full the good offices of the EU Special Representative for the Great Lakes region, Aldo Ajello, who travelled extensively in the region at our request and maintained regular contact with all the leading players, including President Kabila and other regional leaders. Most recently, EU involvement was important in successfully persuading one of the four parties, the RCD-Goma, to the Transitional National Government in Kinshasa to resume its participation in the government after it had temporarily withdrawn.
The Irish Presidency was also active in ensuring international attention remained focused on the need for improvement in the human rights situation in the DRC. It pursued an initiative at this year's session of the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva aimed at securing agreement with the African members of the commission on a consensus resolution concerning the human rights situation in the DRC. Ireland succeeded in doing this with the adoption by consensus of a resolution condemning the ongoing human rights violations occurring in eastern DRC and maintaining the pressure on the Transitional National Government in Kinshasa to do more to tackle the problem of impunity. The resolution also provided for appointment of an independent UN expert to continue monitoring and reporting on the human rights situation. This independent expert, Mr. Titinga Frederic Pacere of Burkina Faso, has been appointed and will present an interim progress report and recommendations to the forthcoming UN General Assembly session.
The EU is continuing to provide support in many other areas crucial to the success of the transition process. The European Commission and member states are among the major donors financing the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration, DDR, process in the DRC. The EU has also taken the lead in establishing an integrated police unit in Kinshasa, which will provide vital training as well as assist with rehabilitation of the training infrastructure. Ireland has contributed €75,000 towards the costs of establishment of the integrated police unit.
The EU is also committed to supporting the electoral process in the DRC, with the Commission having pledged to provide €85 million towards the estimated overall costs of $300 million. Ireland is also likely to make a contribution in support of the electoral process. I should also mention the major contribution the EU made through the deployment of the EU-led Operation Artemis in June 2003 — that is a military operation — which successfully helped restore the situation in Bunia and the Ituri district following the widespread violence in that region, thereby allowing a reinforced MONUC, the UN mission, to return.
The humanitarian situation in the DRC remains serious, with recent events in the eastern part of the country having added to the estimated 2.2 million people displaced as a result of the ongoing tensions and conflict in that region. Ireland continues to provide substantial humanitarian assistance to the DRC, with more than €7 million in emergency and recovery humanitarian aid provided to the people of the DRC since 2000. Irish Government funding to the DRC to date is approaching €3.5 million, including humanitarian assistance of €1.6 million, mainly on the provision of primary health care.
The role of the United Nations and of its mission in the DRC, MONUC, continues to be crucial in support of the transition process. Events such as the capture of the town of Bukavu in the eastern DRC by rebel forces last June have highlighted the challenges that MONUC faces in implementing its extensive mandate with a force of fewer than 12,000 personnel in a country the size of western Europe.
Secretary General Annan has recently submitted detailed proposals to the UN Security Council on how MONUC's resources and strength might be bolstered and its mandate adjusted to focus more on essential political tasks, such as the restoration of security through the creation of integrated forces and acceleration of disarmament, adoption of necessary legislation and the holding of credible national elections. The Security Council is currently considering the Secretary General's proposals that provide for an effective doubling of MONUC's strength and it is likely that an interim reinforcement of the mission, perhaps through provision of an additional two battalions — approximately 3,000 troops — will shortly be sanctioned. That will depend on discussions in the coming weeks.
There is little doubt of the need for making additional resources available to MONUC at this stage and also clarifying its mandate so as to enable this mission to more effectively support the transition. The European Union is already co-operating closely with the UN in order to determine what additional support the EU can provide to assist MONUC and facilitate in the implementation of its mandate. Foreign Ministers discussed this in Brussels on Monday, following which the Council issued conclusions. However, internal consideration of what can be done continues. Such assistance can take a number of forms, including financial, training and intelligence-sharing. It will obviously be for individual member states to decide whether they can provide additional military personnel, in the event that they are so requested by the UN Secretary General.
The regional dimension to conflict in the Great Lakes is, of course, key to both understanding and endeavouring to resolve the problems of that region. The members of the committee will be aware of suspicion of the continuing involvement of Rwanda and Uganda, either directly or indirectly, in the tension and conflict that continues to affect the eastern DRC. Some evidence certainly points towards continuing efforts by Rwanda and Uganda to influence events there. In particular, a report released last July by a UN expert group investigating the arms embargo against militias in the eastern DRC refers to Rwandan support for dissident military leaders in that region.
The same report also called on the Ugandan Government to investigate allegations of "localised complicity or involvement of Ugandan authorities and agents in certain border areas" and to adopt a less accommodating attitude towards some of the armed groups based in Ituri. The Rwandan Government, for its part, has denied any involvement in or support for the dissident groups that seized Bukavu last June while Uganda also refutes any claims that it supports armed groups based in Ituri. It is also the case that both Rwanda and Uganda appear to be complying with their obligations under the Pretoria and Luanda agreements respectively and that, whatever about some limited incursions that may have occurred in the past, there is no hard evidence at present of any direct Rwandan or Ugandan military involvement in the eastern DRC. I emphasise direct involvement.
The importance of promoting trust and of getting the DRC, Rwanda, Uganda and other countries in the region to work harder to improve and develop their bilateral relations cannot be over-emphasised. This is a message the international community, including the EU, have continually reiterated and urged. It is encouraging to note that this message appears to be getting through and there are indications of growing willingness on the part of countries in the Great Lakes region to work together to resolve their differences.
The decision by the leader of the RCD-Goma, one of the four parties to the Transitional National Government in Kinshasa and that with closest links to Rwanda, to resume participation in the government following a temporary withdrawal was a very positive development and suggests that the realisation that there is no alternative to the transition process is beginning to be accepted. The 26 August agreement in Kampala between the DRC, Rwanda and Uganda to co-operate in disarming armed groups within their territories over the next 12 months was also encouraging.
This follows the 25 June agreement between Presidents Kabila and Kagame in Abuja to establish a border joint verification mechanism between the DRC and Rwanda. The DRC has also separately agreed with Uganda to establish a similar border verification mechanism on its border. The modalities of both mechanisms are currently being worked out and it is to be hoped they will begin operating shortly.
Further confidence building measures, which the international community should encourage include the exchange of ambassadors between the DRC and Rwanda and regular meetings between the leaders of the region. Efforts are under way to convene a mini-summit of the Presidents of the DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda in the margins of the forthcoming UN General Assembly, which begins next week, and this also offers the potential of contributing to a lessening of tensions.
The proposed international conference on peace, security, democracy and development in the Great Lakes region is probably the most important confidence building measure under way at present, and one that Ireland and its EU partners strongly supports. This conference, which is being organised under the auspices of the UN and the African Union, is intended to bring together the leaders of the DRC and most of its neighbours in order to try to agree some form of regional security pact that might underpin peace and development within the region. The initial summit of the conference is due to take place in Dar-es-Salaam next November, with a second, follow-up summit next June. The first of three planned regional preparatory meetings to help plan for the conference took place in Bujumbura, Burundi last week.
The Great Lakes conference is an initiative that has been a long time in the making but whose occurrence next November could not be more timely or crucial. It is vital that the leaders of the Great Lakes region sit down and come to some basic agreement among themselves as to how their countries can live and work with each other in peace and without recourse to conflict. The first priority of the conference must be peace and security and how to end the perennial conflict that has affected the region. Ultimately, they must move on to agree on how they can share and make best use of the many resources that exist in the region since, clearly, such differences over resources have been a major contributory factor to the conflict in the Great Lakes.
Ireland strongly supports the holding of the Great Lakes conference and is contributing €200,000 to the UNDP-managed trust fund set up to assist with meeting the costs of the conference. We are also participating actively in the Group of Friends of the Great Lakes region that brings together donor nations, international agencies and the countries of the region to support and provide input to the conference process. As a member of the Group of Friends, Ireland will enjoy special partner status at the conference that will enable us and other members of the Group of Friends to participate in proceedings. The EU, through Special Representative Ajello, is also playing a major role in preparations for the conference and has been very active in trying to ensure as broad participation as possible by countries of the region in the conference.
One further positive development is the decision last June by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to launch an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the DRC. It is encouraging to note that this investigation is being undertaken at the specific request of the Transitional National Government in Kinshasa and is both a welcome demonstration of renewed commitment on the DRC's part to improving its human rights situation as well as a warning to those who may have been involved in serious human rights violations in the DRC, or who may yet be involved in serious human rights violations, that they cannot expect immunity for their crimes.
The overall message I wish to impart to the sub-committee is that while there are many issues of concern regarding the political and human rights situation in the DRC, there are also cautious grounds for optimism. The realisation appears to be taking hold among the parties in the DRC that there is no alternative to successful implementation of the transition arrangements if peace is to finally take hold in their country. Political support for the holding of the Great Lakes conference is also growing and progress is being made as regards the necessary preparations.
Ireland, in conjunction with our EU and international partners, will continue to offer support for the work of the transition process. With the necessary political will and international support, the transition process can be successfully completed to allow national elections in the DRC to proceed at some stage in 2005, notwithstanding the daunting challenge of organising elections in a country of its size. It is also only through the establishment of effective national institutions in the DRC, as provided for through the transition, and the extension of state authority throughout the entire territory of the country, that a real improvement can be brought about in the human rights situation in the DRC. We therefore owe it to the people of the DRC and of the Great Lakes region to ensure that the transition process succeeds and this will continue to motivate Ireland's relations with the DRC as we go forward.
I would be happy to answer any questions members may have.
I thank Mr. Cooney for his comprehensive contribution. The situation in the DRC is appalling with some 3.5 million people dead and almost 3 million others displaced in a country facing all sorts of turmoil. It is good Mr. Cooney finished on a note of optimism and that the Irish Government is making all possible international efforts to try to progress the transition arrangements.
I thank Mr. Cooney for his presentation. I would also like to put on record my appreciation of the Department's assistance a number of years ago when a young man from my constituency went missing in Uganda for approximately five months. The young man was suffering serious mental illness at the time and it was only through the concerted efforts of the Department of Foreign Affairs and advertisements on radio that he was found.
The conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo has been ongoing since the 1960s when we first sent troops there. In terms of the integration of the national army and the demilitarisation of particular areas, what will be the essential difference between it and the presidential guard which will be reviewed by Parliament and the Supreme Court? What status or strength will the presidential guard have vis-à-vis that of the national force?
Why is much of the trouble concentrated in the eastern region? Is it because there is wealth in that area? Is it possible the UN could supervise that area? Mr. Cooney mentioned there are some 12,000 soldiers there. That is a small number of soldiers in an area greater than western Europe and to which even the addition of another two battalions would be insignificant. From what countries are the soldiers drawn?
Perhaps when replying to Deputy Davern, Mr. Cooney might elaborate on the matter of insufficient progress in establishing a national judicial system or an integrated national police force.
Mr. Cooney
In terms of the loss of life and displacement of people in the region, I can only emphasise that the situation there is truly appalling. Unfortunately, the lack of any type of Government authority makes it hard to establish how many people have died. I would not quibble with the figure of 3.5 million because there are no statistics to counter it. It may be less but the statistics in that regard are horrendous.
An issue of particular concern to the sub-committee is that of the appalling human rights abuses perpetrated against people on all sides. What is particularly appalling is the almost systematic use of rape as a means of abusing or destabilising local communities. This truly awful situation is, as the Deputy rightly said, taking place in a country which has never known periods of good governance.
I thank Deputy Davern for his kind remarks as regards the situation which arose in Uganda. I will relay them to our consulate services. Fortunately, we have good people on the ground in Uganda and have good relations with the authorities there. One of the problems for us in terms of the DRC is that we are not present on the ground. The country is so vast and communications are so poor that even if one was present in Kinshasa one would not have any real impact on the ground in the eastern part of the country.
Deputy Davern asked about the integration of the national army. We circulated earlier the most recent special report of the Secretary General which details the issues in depth. The military integration is not going as well or as fast as it should. The idea is to integrate rebel groups previously opposing the Kabila regime with the former Congolese Government forces and to create a new army, FADRC. While many units of the main rebel groups are involved in the process of integration, albeit slowly, many others, particularly small local militias, mostly from the Ituri district, were not party to the Sun City agreement and bringing them in is a slow process.
The Mayi-Mayi militias are also involved. These are kinds of Congolese nationalist militias situated in the east and south of the country. The process is slow. Even where regional commanders have been appointed, it appears former rebel groups continue to exercise control over their former members. Political trust is not sufficiently developed for the rebel groups to sever links with their previous forces. We have not yet passed the point of no return where former leaders have accepted that conflict might not break out.
The presidential guard is a political force and, as the name suggests, its members have to be vetted in terms of their loyalty to the President. Members will recall that members of the presidential guard staged a coup at the time of the attack on Bukavu. The reality, although this is not realised, is that President Kabila does not necessarily enjoy universal support, even in the areas that are under Congolese Government control. In Kinshasa in particular there is considerable support for what are regarded as the political parties that did not have rebel groupings. There are also many elements who were part of President Mobutu's army. Therefore President Kabila's situation is by no means physically secure.
I cannot give precise numbers off the top of my head as to the size of the presidential guard but the army was used to put down its rebellion. I cannot emphasise enough what a fraught and divided situation exists among the factions of the transitional government. It cannot be assumed that simply because Joseph Kabila has been in the role and recognised as president of the DRC for many years that he has universal support. One of the difficulties is that all factions in the transitional national government are quite worried about the prospect of elections because they are by no means sure that they will win substantial support when the elections take place. Obviously, for one reason or another those who are currently in positions of power are concerned at the prospect of giving it up.
This issue is dealt with in more depth in the Secretary General's report. One of the key steps that must be taken is the establishment of a supreme defence council. This has not yet been done because the factions cannot reach agreement. I was optimistic in my report in that matters are certainly better than they were. We are moving in the right direction. However, many significant steps still need to be taken. While the international community is active and can do a lot, the political will and willingness to compromise and share among the Congolese factions will be the key to whether this can turn into a benign scenario.
The Deputy asked why there is so much trouble in the eastern region. The two main focuses of trouble in the east are in the Kivus, north and south, which border Rwanda and Burundi where, by and large, the trouble stems — and this was at the heart of the conflict — from the presence there of substantial numbers of ethnic Tutsis related to the Tutsis in Rwanda and Burundi. Effectively, after the genocide in Rwanda when President Kagame's forces — these were the Tutsi exiles — invaded Rwanda from Uganda and drove out the forces that had been responsible for the genocide in Rwanda, those forces then turned on the Tutsis living in the Congo, who also had been deprived of Congolese citizenship by the Mobutu government, and started to attack them. That is what initially led to the Rwandan intervention in the DRC.
This situation has still not been resolved. The RCD-Goma, which is one of the parties involved in the transitional national government, draws its strength from the Banyamulenge who were the Rwandaphone Tutsis living in the Congo. When any conflict erupts, for instance the fighting in Bukavu — and just over the past two days there has been another eruption of fighting with the government forces trying to push the rebel groups out of the country — this tends to lead to tit-for-tat killings and rape, etc. Unfortunately, there were incidents in June where even Banyamulenge officers who had reintegrated into the army were murdered by their colleagues when violence erupted. This is obviously a disincentive to them to get involved.
Among the Kivus the problem is essentially ethnic. One of the provisions of the agreements on which the transitional government is based, for example, is a citizenship law which ensures that the Banyamulenge — that is those related to the Tutsis — living in the Congo will have Congolese citizenship. However, even that agreement has not gone through and there have been attempts to unpick it and slow it down. Of course there is no doubt that what has happened subsequently is that some of these groups have gained control of material resources in the region. Therefore, on top of this ethnic situation we have exploitation of mineral resources in the hands of certain groupings.
The other flashpoint is the Ituri district which is further north in Orientale province and borders Uganda. The situation there also has roots in ethnic conflict, mainly between the Hema and Lemu tribes. At various times colonial authorities and subsequently the Mobutu government and even the Ugandans intervened and tended to back one tribe over the other and so there is conflict. Again, this has moved on despite the appalling atrocities that have been carried out there, verging on attempts to wipe out tribes. Now there is almost an agreement to live together on the part of the various militias on the basis of exploiting the mineral resources in different areas and there is a kind of share-out in the area. These militias are now looking to get a bit of the action in the transitional government situation because as they were much smaller scale militias they were excluded.
Ethnic tension is at the heart of conflicts in both regions. Foreign intervention is also part of the conflict but now in both areas is partly sustained by the fact that the various militias are doing quite well out of the exploitation locally of mineral resources
The capital solution may conquer.
Mr. Cooney
This is the problem — trying to get these people to give up the exploitation of these resources. It may be that the only way it will be possible is by allowing them to come into the political system. This has happened with the larger rebel groupings but has not happened with the smaller ones. The more people allowed in, the smaller one's portion of the pie. There is no doubt that politics in the Congo, as in much of Africa, is tied up with what people can get out of it. Just like local politicians here might be expected to look after their constituency and people and bring back something for the constituency, there is an expectation because of the tribal and extended family base of life in much of the area that politicians in Africa will do pretty much the same. However, this expectation does not tend to be trammelled by the same standards as it does here. It is whatever one can get one's hand on and people are not necessarily criticised in the way they would be if this happened in western Europe.
I assure Mr. Cooney it is not merely an African situation.
The Chairman appears to be trying to widen this discussion.
Or the Chairman of the Committee on Members' Interests of Dáil Éireann.
Mr. Cooney
I do not wish to go on at any great length. My colleague has just pointed out that the arrangement for the integration of these militias, known as DCR — the disarmament and community reintegration, or reinsertion, plan — kicked off on 1 September in Ituri. However, I saw a report this morning indicating that on the first day the seven people brought in for integration were children. Those who were identified as children were brought in. The adults who turned up did so without any weapons. The policy is not to bring in soldiers arriving without weapons, as they could be anybody simply looking for free board and lodgings. It will take time and the militias are waiting to see how it goes. It is also linked to a desire to get a share of the political action.
One of the members referred to numbers of soldiers. In his report in August, the Secretary General sought to almost double the size of MUNOC. There is a widespread feeling that MUNOC needs to be reinforced. It cannot do the job many people expect it to do. Given the numbers it has, the gap between the level of expectation of what MUNOC should do and can do is enormous. The Secretary General has proposed a radical and ambitious plan to double the size to approximately 23,600 troops. The increase in the police force is from somewhat more than 100 to approximately 550.
This matter is being considered by the Security Council. From the initial reaction, we understand that the plan may be too ambitious for the members of the Security Council. The MUNOC mission already costs $750 million per year and a number of the members of the Security Council are concerned about the enormous cost of the mission. The United States has a particular problem in that it has a budget limit for spending on peacekeeping and would require congressional approval to exceed that amount.
France has made a proposal to immediately increase the contingent in the east of the country by two battalions. This is seen as an interim measure and there is an appetite to return. Whether the Secretary General will get the 13,000 troops he seeks is open to doubt. There is a feeling that MUNOC needs to be reinforced by at least double the number in the initial French proposal. This matter will not be resolved immediately. The MUNOC mandate needs to be renewed at the end of this month. The best people can hope can for is this additional 3,000 troops. People certainly want to see more troops, particularly in the east, and to get the right kind of troops to allow for rapid response so that when violence erupts, MUNOC can intervene more robustly than it has been able to do.
One of the problems alluded to earlier is the quality of the troops. The troops are mainly drawn from developing countries such as Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Morocco. Uruguay had troops there, although it probably does not qualify as a developing country. The Secretary General has made it clear that he needs the right kinds of troops and certainly he wants to see some of them coming from developed countries. The EU is considering what we can do. The Belgians have proposed that NATO might get involved and supply troops. However, developed countries have shown a marked reluctance to get involved in difficult peacekeeping missions in Africa.
As members know, Ireland is involved in Liberia and Swedish troops also operate there. However, that is the exception rather than the rule. The EU is considering ideas not only in terms of troops but also in terms of equipment. To deploy rapidly they need better equipment, particularly helicopters, including attack helicopters. This would enable them to deal with these militias because MUNOC's record in confronting challenges on the ground has not always been successful.
I wish to ask about the elections scheduled to take place in 2005. On the basis that sufficient progress will be made in the transitional phase to bring about these elections, what type of political choice or political structures will be offered to the people? Will the election offer choice as we know it or will it be an artificial measure?
Mr. Cooney
That is a very good question. Before the arrangements can be made to hold the election, it will be necessary to introduce a post-transitional constitution, which has yet to be agreed. As yet no agreement exists on the political system to be put in place, which is the first task. There are three elements in this progress to elections and permanent government. First, the Parliament and transitional Government need to adopt a constitution which will lead to a legislative election and finally a presidential election. It would be in the tradition of the DRC to have a presidential system. This is more than likely with, I assume, a number of vice-presidents to ensure that everyone gets involved.
The intention is that it will be a multi-party system. One of the big problems in the DRC is that a multiplicity of parties exists. It is not only here that the split is the first item on the agenda of political parties. Partly because of the way that politics works in that part of the world, only party leaders get to control the destination of the benefits of power. Multiplicity of parties is one of the great problems, as it is in Burundi. I have no doubt that the people of the DRC will have a very wide choice of parties. However, at this stage I do not know what, if any, threshold will be placed on participation in Parliament.
Will the proposal be for parliamentary elections in addition to a presidential election?
Mr. Cooney
The expectation and provision at this time is that the constitution will be adopted first. Legislative elections will then take place followed by the presidential election.
I wish to address my next question to the Africa director, Mr. Pat Kelly. I note what was said about the African Union and its role at the Great Lakes conference. How well is the African Union working? Is it beginning to make political sense and is it now presenting some political purpose?
The African Union is a very bold enterprise. It has made quite a good start to its operations. It is very much involved in what is happening in Darfur in Sudan. It has deployed a monitoring mission there, which is making a major contribution to stabilising the situation in Darfur. It has also deployed a protection force to protect the monitors in Darfur. The EU is co-operating very closely with the AU and a very good working relationship is developing. While as an organisation the African Union is still quite weak, it has very decisive leadership at the most senior levels. It has deployed missions elsewhere, including one to Burundi, which made an important contribution and has now been succeeded by a UN peacekeeping mission. Ireland provided support for the African Union mission in Burundi which was deployed up to June. There have been suggestions that it may deploy in Somalia where there has been political progress. There are moves to install a new parliament and government. The AU may assist the peace process in Somalia but it is early days. It is taking responsibility for conflict situations in Africa. The AU's Peace and Security Council, which is based in Addis Ababa, began operations last May. Its 15 elected members monitor the ongoing political and human rights situations throughout the continent. They take initiatives when situations of conflict arise.
European countries feel that the African Union is an important organisation which should be supported and co-operated with. We should certainly do so. It has the potential to put in place African-led initiatives to deal with situations of conflict on the continent and to promote African solutions to such problems. Ultimately, such solutions are those most likely to succeed and endure.
As we have detained the delegation for almost an hour, I propose to bring the business of the sub-committee to a conclusion if there are no further points to be made. I thank the delegation for its comprehensive presentation and for answering the sub-committee's questions. From what we have heard, we can be consoled that there is a very proactive perspective on this issue. The boat is being pushed out at Government, European and UN levels to try to bring a degree of progress to what has been a long and drawn-out saga. I hope we will begin to see the fruits of that work over the next 12 months.
I thank the three members of the delegation for attending this meeting. If further queries come to our attention or members wish to pursue certain issues, we will contact our guests again.
The sub-committee went into private session at 3.35 p.m and adjourned at 3.45 p.m. sine die.