BURUNDI: U.N. Moves Slowly on Standby Peacekeepers

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Mar 4 1996 (IPS) - The United Nations has edged away from any immediate action to place international troops on alert in case Burundi’s political and ethnic crisis worsens.

The U.N. Security Council is this week expected to vote on a resolution seeking more forceful international action in Burundi, but the draft document does not mention a standby force, Council President Legwaila Legwaila of Botswana told IPS.

Instead, the draft only encourages U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali “to continue his consultations…on contingency planning” in case Burundi’s tense political truce deteriorates.

The draft resolution also fails to mention the possibility that any parties deemed to encourage violence in Burundi could be hit with U.N. sanctions, including travel restrictions.

Human Rights Watch/Africa had also called for an embargo on all arms transfers.

The human rights body said an arms embargo should continue in Burundi until the army there has tried officers for civilian massacres and taken steps to identify all armed forces and to curb ” the illegal behaviour of…ethnically based paramilitary forces”.

But the draft resolution does not call for any arms embargo against Burundi or any armed groups or leaders in the country.

“They don’t take this seriously,” one African diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said of the Security Council. “This (proposed resolution) is just the same as the last one.”

The only concrete new measures to forestall future violence between Burundi’s Hutu majority and Tutsi minority in the Council draft are steps to consider setting up a U.N.-operated radio station in Burundi. In recent months, both Hutu and Tutsi politicians have been accused of using radio broadcasts to incite ethnic hatred, U.N. officials warn.

The lack of momentum towards U.N. peacekeeping has upset many diplomats here, including Africans who contend that Burundi is on the verge of exploding in a manner similar to the 1994 massacres in neighbouring Rwanda. As many as one million Rwandans are believed to have been killed in a planned genocide against Tutsis and Hutu moderates at that time.

Boutros-Ghali has noted that Burundi is currently more peaceful than it has been for several months, with both major governing parties — the Hutu Front for Democracy in Burundi (FRODEBU) and the Tutsi Union for National Progress (UPRONA) — keeping the peace.

But the Tutsi-dominated Army has driven most Hutus from the capital, Bujumbura, while Hutu extremist groups continue to attack Tutsis in the countryside. Dozens of attacks are reported weekly, in the worst violence since some 50,000 people died after a failed 1993 coup attempt killed the country’s first elected president, Melchior Ndadaye of FRODEBU.

Boutros-Ghali, worried that the fragile FRODEBU-UPRONA truce might collapse, has for the past eight months urged the Security Council to authorise U.N. troops to be ready to enter Burundi if matters worsen.

But the Council has resisted authorising such a force, even though the United States recently has declared interest in setting up standby peacekeepers.

The central problem, one U.S. diplomat told IPS on condition of anonymity, is that few nations are willing to deal with the immense costs of standby troops.

“They cost about three times as much as regular troops to maintain,” he said. He noted that the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division, which is on standby constantly, incurs expenses both from maintaining facilities it needs for potential combat and for using other facilities while it is inactive.

For example, he said, the troops need to have prepared all the weapons and supplies — from fully fueled airplanes to stocks of food — that they would need if they are called to action. But while they wait, they also require other supplies so that their standby equipment does not become depleted.

The picture for U.N. peacekeepers is further complicated by the United Nations’ budget crisis, which has led the world body to cut back its missions, most recently in Haiti. U.N. officials have suggested that one way they may limit costs is to avoid paying the standby troops until they actually are deployed.

As a result, many nations initially interested in providing forces for standby use are drawing away from an arrangement under which they would shoulder the heavy costs until the troops are needed.

Another idea for the United Nations to dispatch a small number of U.N. Guards to protect humanitarian workers should fighting break out in Burundi has also failed to garner interest.

To add to the lack of interest, UPRONA and the Tutsi-led Army have both warned against any large-scale U.N. intervention in Burundi, which those parties feel could upset the current truce.

Many diplomats here now worry that momentum is slipping away, with little concrete activity going on in Burundi itself. Burundi, U.S. Ambassador Madeleine Albright warned, is “on the verge of the abyss.”