http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=23948

Gun Control: Does the UN Protect Women’s Rights?

Written by Howard Nemerov
Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Gun control activists said on Monday the world was awash in small arms, fueling violence, and called for global cooperation and stricter limits on the trade.

A human rights report by a consortium of groups highlighted the impact of guns on the lives of women, saying they were often the “silent victims” of the small arms trade.

“Given that they are almost never the buyers, owners or users of small arms, (women) suffer disproportionately from armed violence,” said Denise Searle of Amnesty International, one of the groups releasing the report.

“Where guns are available, more women are likely to be killed.”[1]

            In order to implement their policies globally, gun control activists promote the idea that more guns means increased victimization of women. This runs counter to established crime trends showing that women in countries instituting gun bans suffered increasing rates of rape while rape decreased in the U.S., where guns are available.[2]^,[3] But giving the benefit of the doubt, let’s see how women fared when United Nations peacekeeping forces controlled war zones throughout the world, and where, according to U.N. belief, civilian disarmament makes people safer.

             It is curious that Amnesty International––which in the above quote identifies itself as a global protector of women––also drew attention to U.N. peacekeeping forces’ abuse of women. One article began: “The presence of peacekeepers in Kosovo is fuelling the sexual exploitation of women and encouraging trafficking, according to Amnesty International.”[4] Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen was quoted:

"Women and girls as young as 11 are being sold into sexual slavery in Kosovo and international peacekeepers are not only failing to stop it, they are actively fuelling this despicable trade by themselves paying for sex from trafficked women."[5]  

          One interviewee said: “I was forced by the boss to serve international soldiers and police officers.” The article notes that U.N. troops are “immune from prosecution in Kosovo” and that those who were dismissed have “escaped any criminal proceedings in their home countries.”[6] Allen concurred:

"The international community in Kosovo is now adding insult to injury by securing immunity from prosecution for its personnel and apparently hushing up their shameful part in the abuse of trafficked women and girls."[7]

          U.N. “Peacekeeping” in Congo

          In January 2005, the Associate Press reported “U.N. peacekeepers in Congo sexually abused and exploited women and girls, some as young as 13.” The United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services (IOS) investigated, releasing a report that found: “Peacekeepers regularly had sex with Congolese women and girls, usually in exchange for food or small sums of money.” The IOS reported:

·        “sexual activities continued even while the investigation was going on”

·        the “investigation did not act as a deterrent for some of the troops.”

·        “On several occasions, the commanders of these contingents either failed to provide the requested information or assistance or actively interfered with the investigation.”[8]

           In March 2005, a series of articles highlighted continuing sexual exploitation by U.N. peacekeepers. One article reported: “the United Nations’ top representative in the Congo, is set to resign in the wake of a sexual misconduct scandal involving U.N. peacekeepers.” His resignation was the result of findings that indicated a pattern of long-standing violations that had not been addressed:

"U.N. peacekeeping missions, including those in Cambodia, Bosnia and several African countries, have been dogged by sexual abuse scandals since the early 1990s. But few U.N. peacekeepers, who are shielded from prosecution by military agreements, have faced legal action for sex crimes."[9]

        Again, there is mention of the issue of peacekeeper immunity to prosecution. The U.N. reportedly was forcing out a high-level bureaucrat to “send a signal that senior U.N. officials will be held accountable for not cracking down on misconduct by U.N. personnel under their watch.”  It is difficult to under understand how an issue like sexual assault can be controlled when the perpetrators know they will suffer no consequences. Firing a high-level official thus becomes no more than a publicity stunt to convince the public that “something is being done about it.”

         Another article reported:

“Five years ago, more than 10,000 peacekeepers working for the United Nations came to the Democratic Republic of Congo to help end a six-nation war. But reports of sexual abuse of local women and girls began soon after they arrived from Morocco, South Africa, Australia, India and Europe.

“In January, the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services released a report claiming peacekeepers regularly had sex with the Congolese women and girls in exchange for food or small sums of money.”[10]

         The article cited six confirmed cases where under-age girls were raped by U.N. peacekeepers and quoted a number of witnesses to other incidents. One U.N. official said these “issues are relatively new.” Considering that armed males have been forcing themselves upon women for millennia as part of a program of conquest, it strains credibility to think that the issue of rape by the only armed force among a disarmed female population is “relatively new.”

        Another article noted the lack of police protection by U.N. peacekeepers:

“Militiamen and renegade soldiers have raped and beaten tens of thousands of women and young girls in eastern Congo, and nearly all the crimes have gone unpunished by the country's broken judicial system, an international human rights group said Monday.”[11]

       The article cited Human Rights Watch and the World Health Organization as two of its sources, and agreed with Amnesty International that U.N. peacekeepers contributed to the problem:

“Warring ethnic Hema and Lendu militia continue to terrorize Bunia — kicking down doors in the night and snatching girls in the fields — despite the presence of thousands of U.N. peacekeepers based there.

“Peacekeepers in Bunia have also been accused of raping young girls living in the town's sprawling camp for those displaced by fighting, or trading sweets and pocket change for sex.”[12]

     This issue goes far beyond the incidents themselves, as peacekeepers also forced additional children (via unwanted pregnancies) and health issues onto an already stressed economy and health care system. In the Congo alone, there are an “estimated hundreds of mixed-race children abandoned by U.N. workers at the end of their 6-month tours of duty.” One victim said: “There is no help from the U.N. They just make women pregnant and leave. They never take care of their kids.” Another victim “contracted the AIDS virus from a peacekeeper, and has since passed it on to her husband and child.” The victim’s husband said: “I know the United Nations is here to support us, but it’s unbelievable for me to see a thing like this. The one that came to support us is the one that took our ladies, who come to take everything.” The HIV infections are the result of the fact that “current U.N. policy does not require peacekeepers to be tested for HIV before, during or after their deployments.”[13]

     Meanwhile, an estimated 24 children were dying each day––a rate of 8,760 per year––in two Congolese refugee camps, where an estimated 4 million died during the five-year intertribal war that ended in 2002.[14]

     U.N. “Peacekeeping” in Haiti

     Another article reported that in Haiti, “rape is becoming a common tool of oppression,” and U.N. peacekeepers did nothing:

“Women and young girls are raped because their father or another relative is a member of Lavalas or is targeted (by the political opposition). They are raped as a form of punishment. The victims do not feel they can go to the police for help with their problems because in many areas the people who victimized them are the ones running the show; they are the ones patrolling the streets as if they are police, committing crimes with impunity under the eyes of the UN.”[15]

      Not only were the U.N. peacekeepers not protecting women, they were also accused of participating in the depredations of women:

“United Nations soldiers have also been accused of participating in sexual attacks. Damian Onses-Cardona, spokesperson for the U.N. mission in Haiti, announced this week that they are “very urgently” investigating a case in which Pakistani soldiers were accused of raping a 23-year-old woman at a banana plantation in the northern town of Gonaives.”[16]

       U.N. “Peacekeeping” in East Timor

       In East Timor, Jordanian peacekeepers were involved in “a series of horrific sex crimes involving children living in the war-battered Oecussi enclave.” But statutory rape was not all they committed: “Children were not the only victims - in early 2001, two Jordanians were evacuated home with injured penises after attempting sexual intercourse with goats.”[17] Perhaps the worst part of the episode was that “the U.N. mission in East Timor…did its best to keep the matter hushed up” and that the “U.N. military command at the time was only too happy to oblige.”[18]

       The U.N. response was to issue a report “on how to hold accountable peacekeepers accused of sexual abuse and other violations in strife-torn parts of the world.”[19] Kofi Annan was reported to be “coming down on it hard.” Unfortunately, one military officer, with considerable experience supporting U.N. peacekeeping missions in Haiti, Sierra Leone and the Republic of Congo, had a more cautionary note to sound regarding the possibility of enforcing any rules against peacekeepers:

“It gets down to accountability and, the U.N. being an international body without sovereignty unto itself … It can’t prosecute acts of heinous crimes of personnel and soldiers given to it by member states. If you [allow the U.N. to prosecute international personnel], then you supersede laws of the international nations … how much sovereignty does a state want to give up to the United Nations? And the answer is, not much.”[20]                         

      U.N. Rules of Sovereignty Protect Criminals

      One reporter was in Sierra Leone as a legal aid worker in the summer of 2003. He reported:

“Sex crimes are only one especially disturbing symptom of a culture of abuse that exists in the United Nations precisely because the United Nations and its staff lack accountability.

“This lack of accountability is the central blemish on today's United Nations, and it lies behind most of the recent headlines. Whether taking advantage of a malnourished refugee or of a lucrative oil-for-food contract, the temptation is there, the act is easy and the risk of punishment is nil.”[21]

      He corroborated that “U.N. leaders had simply not expended any effort beyond lip service to carry out [Kofi Annan’s expressly ordered] zero tolerance policy.” He found “injustices” reached far beyond sexual depredations. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) embezzled food and funds.

“Utterly arbitrary judicial systems in the camps subjected refugees to violent physical punishment or months in prison for trivial offenses – all at the whim of officials and in the absence of any sort of hearing.”[22]

      The “risk to these staff members is low in U.N. refugee camps, because peacekeepers engaged in criminal acts are immune from local prosecution.” Injured parties would have to “travel to the peacekeeper’s home country” in order to pursue justice. Considering their economic situations, such travel is essentially impossible. In cases where the U.N. worker is from a country with an “unresponsive legal system,” even pleading one’s case is pointless. The author concludes:

“After the 2002 report documented sexual abuse, Annan's steely resolve led to exactly zero criminal prosecutions of U.N. officials for sexual abuse. I expect little difference now that refugee camp conditions have returned to the headlines. As before, Annan has delivered vague statements but prosecuted no one. It appears that the status quo reigns and that those perpetrating all sorts of abuses in refugee camps may continue undisturbed. The United Nations is a vital institution that needs a housecleaning.”[23]

      How Some Women Protected Themselves

      Now consider the contrasting experience with women in Liberia. Some were abused, and some were not. The reason some were not is most instructive.

     The first report states: “U.N. peacekeepers sexually abused and exploited local women and girls in Liberia.” The allegations ranged from “the exchange of goods, money or services for sex to the sexual exploitation of minors.” Repeating a now-familiar refrain, the article noted: “Currently, U.N. troops and employees accused of wrongdoing are sent home to be dealt with by their own government but are often never punished.”[24]

     During the African conflicts, the general rule was that women had to either buy their lives with sexual services or become camp followers and prostitutes in order to survive:

“In other African conflicts, like Uganda and Congo, women have participated in rebel movements, but usually in supporting roles. They cook, clean, and often sleep with soldiers––not always by choice.”[25]  

      Counter to the stories of exploitation by both locals and U.N. peacekeepers, a number of women in Liberia found that by arming themselves and uniting into combat units, they were able to protect their personal sovereignty during that country’s civil war:

“Black Diamond, 22, says she joined the rebel forces after being gang-raped by the notoriously ill-disciplined and unpaid forces loyal to former President Charles Taylor in the northern Lofa county in 1999.

“ ‘There were many reasons, but that was the key one. It made me want to fight the man who caused all that, because if you are a good leader you can't behave like that,’ she is quoted as saying by Reuters news agency.

“Many of Black Diamond's female comrades have similar tales…”[26]

     Not only are the women able to move about in relative security––considering this is a war zone––they were respected as fighters as well. Most importantly, they had the means to defend the honor of their fighting comrades as well as other female victims:

“Liberia's Health Minister Peter Coleman has met many women fighters during the 14 years of warfare and says they are prized by their senior commanders.

“ ‘They don’t get drunk and they take their mission very seriously,’ he said.

“ ‘I saw a woman shoot another officer because he raped a woman.’”[27]

     Reflecting rape trends in countries instituting civilian disarmament, it appears one answer to the problem of exploitation, maiming, and murder of women would be to arm them. It is curious that Amnesty International does not consider this option, preferring to tell women what their choices will be, even though all these well-meaning human rights organizations won’t be there to save the women when the very people assigned to protect them instead act like a conquering horde.

     Conclusion

     It is very curious that the United Nations will not abrogate nationally sovereignty to prosecute a rapist but expects the United States to surrender sovereignty on Constitutional rights, especially considering the enormous body of evidence that the United Nations’ program of civilian disarmament only benefits those still armed.

     These case studies show that rather than being safer when civilians are disarmed, women are far more at risk of not only murder, but being forced to endure what amounts to a living death. The U.N.’s atrocious record of not protecting women’s rights is demonstrated in their lack of concern or accountability as its representatives perpetrate heinous war crimes. Applying the gun controllers’ criteria from the beginning of this article: Where U.N. peacekeepers are present, more women are likely to be killed, raped, enslaved, and generally lose their right to life.

     Endnotes

About the Writer: Howard Nemerov began doing his own research into gun control when he recognized that the media was full of distortions and half truths. He publishes with ChronWatch and other sites, and is a frequent guest on NRA News. He is currently working on his first book, "Gun Control: Fear or Fact," which deconstructs and explains the gun control agenda and its arguments, debunking each one with a statistic-rich analysis. This is the handbook for when you want to talk to others about gun control . Howard receives e-mail at HNemerov [at symbol] netvista.net.