Rwanda: U.S. Specialist
/- Why did the U.S. State Department want to withdraw all UNAMIR forces from Rwanda?
- Do you agree that peacekeepers should be withdrawn from a location if there is risk to their lives? Why or why not?
SUBJECT: TALKING POINTS ON UNAMIR WITHDRAWAL [...]
1. CONFIDENTIAL – ENTIRE TEXT.
2. THIS IS AN ACTION CABLE - SEE BELOW.
3. Department has given careful consideration to the draft resolution (Ref A) and the views of other Security Council (UNSC) members regarding the status and future of the current UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda.
The political and humanitarian reasons put forth for retention of UNAMIR elements in Rwanda have been taken into account fully in our determination of the appropriate international response to developments in Rwanda since passage of UNSC Resolution 909 on April 5.
4. Department has considered the prospect of additional widescale conflict and violence in Rwanda, and the threat that the relative immunity afforded to remaining foreign civilian and military personnel will end on April 15.
Taking these factors into account department believes that there is insufficient justification to retain a UN peacekeeping presence in Rwanda and that the international community must give highest priority to full, orderly withdrawal of all UNAMIR personnel as soon as possible.
5. Cognizant that full withdrawal may not be able to be implemented prior to the end of the current deadline set by the RPF, we believe that UN negotiators should focus their efforts on ensuring that the withdrawal of UNAMIR personnel is not impeded and that the warring Rwandan parties refrain from attacking or threatening these personnel. We also believe that UNAMIR should take steps to ensure the safety of Rwandan civilians under its protection, consistent with its mandate and provided that the safety of UNAMIR personnel is not jeopardized.
Action Requested
6. Drawing on the foregoing, [U.S. Mission to the UN] is instructed to inform NSC colleagues that the United States believes that the first priority of the Security Council is to instruct the Secretary General to implement an orderly withdrawal of all/all UNAMIR forces from Rwanda, taking the necessary steps to ensure that the warring parties in Rwanda respect the safety of UNAMIR and other foreign civilian and military personnel until such time as their evacuation has been completed. Mission is also instructed to make clear to other UNSC members that the United States does not believe that a Security Council resolution is necessary to implement this withdrawal (the [Secretary-General] has authority to order this withdrawal under the circumstances) and that we will oppose any effort at this time to preserve a UNAMIR presence in Rwanda.
7. Mission they drawn the following points in presenting the U.S.position:
– The United States shares the shock and outrage of the international community over the events in Rwanda in recent days.
– We condemn unequivocally the renewed fighting and widespread violence, and the attacks on international peacekeepers, foreign civilians, and innocent Rwandan citizens.
– The Rwandan armed parties must bear full responsibility for the tragic situation, and continued violence and instability, and their country.
– In the current environment in Rwanda, there is no role for a United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
– Those nations that contributed troops to UNAMIR have acted responsibly and to their utmost ability, and have exerted commendable efforts to provide humanitarian protection to foreign, as well as Rwandan, civilians.
– Those forces that participated in UNAMIR are to be commended for their efforts in a hostile and threatening environment.
– We endorse the decision of UNAMIR contributors to withdraw their forces from Rwanda for their safety, hoping that such withdrawal will be carried out in an orderly manner and that measures will be taken to obtain commitments from the Rwandan parties to respect the safety of Rwandan and foreign citizens after the UN personnel have withdrawn.
– We do not believe that the warring parties in Rwanda are likely to respect UNAMIR’s mandate nor, in the present environment, are they capable of adequately ensuring the safety of UN peacekeeping personnel in Rwanda.
– There may be a role for the UN to play in facilitating negotiations among the warring parties but that is a role for a representative of the Secretary General, not for UNAMIR. We are willing to support and encourage a political initiative by the Secretary General to promote reconciliation among the parties.
– Experience suggests that any serious negotiations among the parties will take place outside Rwanda; therefore, UN security forces will not be required.
– Our opposition to retaining a UNAMIR presence in Rwanda is firm. It is based on our conviction that the Security Council has an obligation to ensure the peacekeeping operations are viable, but they are capable of fulfilling their mandates, and that UN peacekeeping personnel are not placed or retained, knowingly, in an untenable situation.
– United States hopes that the parties in Rwanda, with the assistance of mediators from the international community as appropriate, we'll be able to end the violence in their country, move toward reconciliation, and begin a process that will lead to a durable peace.
– When the parties demonstrate that they are willing and able to work in the interests of the Rwandan people toward a lasting resolution of their conflict, we will be willing to reconsider whether a renewed role for UNAMIR when peacekeeping can facilitate and build a lasting peace in their country.
– Until that time, however, priority must be given to ensuring the safe withdrawal of UN peacekeepers and other international personnel and civilians in danger in Rwanda. To attempt to sustain a peacekeeping operation in the present environment would only undermine the Security Council's responsibilities for international peacekeeping. [....]
CONFIDENTIAL
<<END OF DOCUMENT>>