By James Lawler, for Fox News
FOX should note it can’t report with certainty on developments within the Security Council. After all, the Council did a brilliant Chairman Mao impersonation and ejected all independent observers for most of the proceedings. However, one thing’s certain – there’s no certainty on the Security Council’s position over Kenya’s sudden occupation of the Jubaland territory in Somalia.
The build-up wasn’t good. Outside chambers, the Rwandan delegate warned FOX that many delegates neither wanted to criticise nor condemn the Kenyan action. The Russian delegate claimed that there was “a general state of confusion” with negotiations. The American delegate couldn’t even say whether the Kenyan occupation was temporary or permanent. FOX knows fear of commitment, but this was something else.
The intergovernmental muddle came to a head in a special press conference held by the Council just before the close of debate. Most delegates supported a human-rights monitoring body in Jubaland – except Rwanda, who feared only deploying said force would allow ethnic cleansing to occur.
Russia claimed that there would be sanctions or punitive measures employed against Kenya; straight after, Morocco claimed the Council had supported withdrawing military support and African Union sanctions. Indeed, Morocco has put forward a resolution proposing punitive sanctions – which is not signed by Russia, China, or many states at all. This reporter is of the opinion that, like with the Iraq War, the Kenyan seizure of Jubaland will ultimately be for the better of its population. Readers’ mustn’t forget that to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs – or Somalis. However, this lack of any consensus by the Security Council makes us feel very, well… insecure.