It's also about what MONUC is. In addition to 3,000 extra troops, Doss persuaded the U.N. Security Council to expand MONUC's mandate to allow it to target the commercial drivers of the war: the trade in Congo's minerals, like gold, and the world's largest reserves of coltan, which is needed to make components for cell phones. He continues to argue for an even more muscular approach to enforcing peace. "When we make these statements, when we claim the responsibility to protect, we have to be careful that we have the means to match our mandate," he says. "You don't go to war with blue helmets and white tanks."
Talk of war is a long way from traditional peacekeeping. But it is a direct consequence of the open-ended nature of R2P, and it raises troubling questions. Where does the responsibility to protect end? Does it mean fighting a national army? Does it mean supplanting a national government? Does it mean accepting the large losses that would inevitably accompany intervention in Somalia--the site of the world's worst humanitarian crisis--or in totalitarian states like Burma? Doss insists there are limits to what he proposes. "We assist the national process. We do not replace it," he says. "We're not an army of occupation." But introducing a foreign combat force into Congo would cast doubt on whether such declarations are sincere.
Definitely thought-provoking. Some of my patients come from across the border, severely malnourished, or having been subjected to dangerous traditional treatments. Where does our responsibility to them begin, and end?
No comments:
Post a Comment