PRESS CONFERENCE BY DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO

Press Briefing

PRESS CONFERENCE BY DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO

The Security Council should have condemned the fighting between two aggressor countries on the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo rather than merely issuing a statement to the press, Andre Kapanga, that country's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, said at a Headquarters press conference this afternoon.

Responding to a correspondent's question, Mr. Kapanga said that of the three types of actions the Council could have taken - - a statement to the press, a presidential statement or adopting a resolution -- it had taken the minimum option available. People were dying in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Council's response had shown the seriousness with which it was treating the problem.

In a statement before taking questions, Mr. Kapanga recalled how he had written to the Security Council a year ago, informing its members that his country was a victim of aggression by neighbouring Rwanda and Uganda. He had requested the Council to condemn the aggression, order an immediate ceasefire and order an immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Rwandese and Ugandan troops from Congolese territory.

The Council, he went on, had responded by issuing ambiguous and very timid presidential statements which had, in the Congolese view, encouraged the aggressors to pursue their aggression. Only after the two countries had openly acknowledged their presence on the Democratic Republic of the Congo's territory had the Council been forced to adopt a resolution, characterized by some as timid since it failed to openly acknowledge the aggression.

He said that what had at first been qualified as a war to protect ethnic minorities in Rwanda had become a war the excuse for which was security concerns once it had become clear that the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo had no motive to carry out genocide against any ethnic group.

Throughout the year, the Congolese people had seen their human rights violated, he said. Thousands of Congolese, mostly women and children, had been slaughtered by Ugandan and Rwandan soldiers at Kasika, Makobola, Kamituga, Ngweshe, Burinyi, Kabare, Samba, Kavumu, Magunga, Aketi and other towns. What had previously been described as a war triggered by security concerns had clearly been proven to be a war for the control of the diamonds, gold, timber and other natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo by both Rwanda and Uganda.

He said that fighting in Kisangani, the Democratic Republic of the Congo's third largest town, had resulted in the killing of more than 50 civilians by Rwandan and Ugandan forces. The fighting had "busted" an anti-polio vaccination campaign initiated by the United Nations.

Mr. Kapanga said that yesterday he had once again sent a letter to the Security Council, asking its members to urgently meet and condemn the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by Rwandan and Ugandan soldiers against the citizens of Kisangani; condemn the interruption of the national immunization programme; adopt sanctions against Rwanda and Uganda for the systematic pillaging of Congolese natural resources; demand an immediate halt to the fighting between the two invading forces; and demand their immediate withdrawal from Congolese territory.

In addition, he said, the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo had requested the Council to ask both Rwanda and Uganda to respect the signatures that their Heads of State had affixed to the Lusaka accord of 10 July 1999 and to expedite the signing of that agreement by the Congolese Rally for Democracy and the Congolese Liberation Movement.

Once again, the Permanent Representative said, the Security Council had come up with yet another statement to the press which was absolutely inappropriate to the crisis. It was the Council's task to maintain peace and security throughout the world, Africa included. In the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Council was obviously shying away from its responsibilities.

Asked why the Council was not paying enough attention to the problems in his country, Mr. Kapanga said some would say Africa did not count because it was not in the interests of some Powers. That was why the Council was shying away from its responsibilities to the continent.

A correspondent wanted to know whether the Ambassador thought race played a role in the current responses to Africa. Mr. Kapanga said he could not say that it was a question of race, but it could well be one of the variables that Members had in their minds when they did not act in that part of the world.

Noting that there had been appeals for foreign aid and that not one foreign dollar had been pledged, a correspondent wanted to know if race was also an issue in that respect. Mr. Kapanga said it was a possibility but he was not sure. What was taking place, however, was a clear case of double standards. In the case of Kosovo, a province that was almost 260 times smaller than the Democratic Republic of the Congo, "you saw the kind of resources that were poured in". More than 30,000 soldiers were sent into Kosovo in a very short period of time.

In the province, all told, a disaster had been adjudged because more than 700,000 people were suffering without shelter, Mr. Kapanga went on to say. In the case of his country, however, more than 1 million civilians -- mostly women and children -- had no shelter or food and were also suffering. "Yet you do not see the kind of mobilization that you saw for Kosovo", he noted. "You are led to wonder why there is this reaction in one instance and not in another. You look for reasons and maybe race is one them", he remarked.

When asked whether he saw any outside Power supporting Rwanda and Uganda, Mr. Kapanga said he did not want to point fingers at specific countries and would like to make his remarks in general terms. There were, however, some countries that backed both Rwanda and Uganda. Without the backing of certain States, Rwanda would not be engaged in things it was doing now.

Rwanda had invaded the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mr. Kapanga told correspondents. That was a clear case of invasion and aggression. Yet there was absolutely no reaction from the body that was in charge of world peace and security. If that body did not do anything, it was simply because it was aware of the fact that Rwanda had the backing of some very powerful countries. Essentially, that backing was also motivating Rwanda's actions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

A correspondent wanted to know whether the Lusaka accord was dead. Mr. Kapanga said, "We have made a commitment to respect the accord. We have not attacked but we have been attacked and we have not done anything negative. We will continue to abide by that agreement". He said it was now up to Rwanda and Uganda to sign the agreement; that way there would be peace and security in the region.

Noting that Rwanda and Uganda were fighting each other right now, a correspondent asked the Ambassador to describe the health of the accord. Mr. Kapanga said that he was not currently in a position to make any judgement of any value. "We have to wait and see what is going to happen over the next few days." Since there is a ceasefire between the two countries, let us hope that ceasefire is a good omen", he added.

A correspondent wanted to know how confident Mr. Kapanga was about the forces on the ground, observing the ceasefire announcement by Rwanda and Uganda. The fighting was not just over strategy, as many members of the press had been saying, stressed Mr. Kapanga. It was over the control of the resources in the area. His country had stated that from the beginning of the war. The invasion of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was not over the possibility of a genocide taking place or the security concerns of both Rwanda and Uganda.

"We knew all along", Mr. Kapanga continued, "that the fighting was over the control of the wealth of natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo". That was the real reason for the fighting. If the United Nations was at all serious, that issue had to be addressed head on, and not go through statements that urge and demand. "We have to condemn and take action to put an end to this aggression", he stressed.

When asked who was purchasing the diamonds and gold that were coming out of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mr. Kapanga said purchases were being made all over the place -- Europe, the United States and other places. A correspondent noted that, at the moment, there were no sanctions in place to stop the purchase of gold and diamonds. Mr. Kapanga said as far as his country was concerned, there was not one single sanction in place. There had not even been a condemnation of what was happening in his country.

In a veiled manner, Mr. Kapanga went on to say, Council resolution 1234 (1999) had stated that yes, the Democratic Republic of the Congo had been the victim of aggression, and it spoke about uninvited forces. That was the only instance where there was any statement that showed that the Congo had been the recipient of aggression. Apart from that, there was nothing.

A correspondent asked whether the Organization of African Unity (OAU) was doing anything in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, given the lack of United Nations and Security Council interest. Mr. Kapanga said that for Africa to solve its own problems it would require resources. The OAU did not have such resources. If someone was really serious about the OAU doing something positive, they would have to think twice.

Responding to question about regional organizations being more involved, Mr. Kapanga cited the cases of Liberia and Sierra Leone where the Economic Community of West African States' Monitoring Observer Group (ECOMOG) decided to get involved. The Group provided the human resources -- all that was needed was the material resources to implement the ceasefire and to push the belligerents to get along. The resources were never received. That was why there were still problems in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau and in other countries.

In the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, continued Mr. Kapanga, "we all know that some African countries are willing to send soldiers who can maintain peace and security in the country". There was an urgent appeal made by the Secretariat to finance the 90 observers -- military liaison officers. Up until today, there was still a struggle to find the funds to send those 90 people. In Lusaka, the Zambian Government had sent a note to the United Nations asking for resources for the joint military commission that was created, based on the Lusaka agreement.

Mr. Kapanga went on to say an urgent appeal was made last week to Members of the United Nations for resources to help Zambia put in place the Joint Military Commission, to buy cars, pays for faxes and pay for the personnel that would be part of the Commission. There were no resources. That was the problem facing the OAU and Africa. "If we do not have resources we cannot do anything, despite the strong desire we have to maintain peace on our own in Africa."

Asked to comment on the view by the Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Sergio Vieira de Mello, that the issue in Africa was not racial, Mr. Kapanga asked why it was that it took less than a month to pour tremendous resources into Kosovo? Why was it that more than $5 billion had been spent on Bosnia and Herzegovina and pennies in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Sudan? "The list goes on, and all I can do is ask those questions", he remarked.

When asked what type of sanctions were being called for, Mr. Kapanaga said that if Uganda and Rwanda were in a position to continue the war, it was because they were receiving financial assistance from somewhere. That money was being used to purchase guns that were used against the Congolese people --"what we are saying is stop providing financial assistance to them and provide it only when they are serious about implementing the Lusaka accord". Ensuring that no weapons were sold to those two countries was also another possibility. Those were two of the key actions that could bring about peace in a very quick fashion.

In response to another question, he said that human rights in Africa were only considered when the interests of certain countries or regions were at stake.

* *** *