Foreign Affairs Committee on May 4th, 2010

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Deng. Thank you for this report that I read on North Kivu.

I have a first question. If we were to translate in other words part of what you are saying, here is what we would have. You said that we need a diagnosis, that we cannot intervene and that perhaps we cannot even help a country if we do not understand the violence happening there. This is evidenced by the many points that you have given us here, for our examination. So we need to start by understanding, is that right?

[Dr. Francis Deng]

Yes, I entirely agree with you, and that's why I emphasize that instead of seeing this as a horrible problem out there that we are afraid to touch, we bring it down and see it as a crisis of management of diversities, a crisis of management of differences, whether these differences are ethnic or religious and otherwise, and then address them at the root. I do think that the overemphasis on fighting terrorism, valid as it is--there's no question that you need do deal with terrorism--overlooks the root causes of problems in a particular country and in the long run does not help the cause.

This is why, as I said earlier, we have a framework of analyses that the AU is adopting now to be part of their early warning mechanism. It looks at eight sets of factors, beginning with the existence of identity groups that are in conflict, a history of discrimination, and a certain capacity to prevent or to stop genocide, and goes on to certain triggering factors, such as the military or the presence of armed groups, and then on to certain conditions that trigger violence--for instance, elections.

All of this, which we developed in partnership and collaboration with many other experts in this field, to me can be a mirror in which the countries can look at themselves and see where they are performing well, where they are not performing so well, and where they need to do better.

I also think it is important to look at not just problem countries or countries of concern, but also models of success. One of the reasons I keep referring to your country is that I think you have a model that can be very useful for others to emulate in managing their differences, and that early prevention is a creative and constructive approach that is less divisive than when we go to the point of having to discuss intervention.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

The situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is shocking. In fact, I don't know who could tell… You would know. There are several genocidal situations in the DRC. There are a number of minority groups that are violently attacked by various factions. There are foreign countries that have intervened for economic reasons, for political reasons. How can we intervene in that country?

[Dr. Francis Deng]

I think we already have all the three pillars at work in the Congo. We have a government that lacks the capacity, but of course is charged with its national duty. We have an international community that is helping the government. And we have a force that by UN standards has a very strong mandate to protect civilians. And we know that women and children are among the most victimized civilians.

So far, all these three pillars working together are not improving the situation. That's because I do believe we have to shift from dealing with the armed groups, trying to disarm them... While protection of civilians is critically important, we need to shift towards a peace process, a peace process that will bring in all the countries of the region that have a stake.

Now, instead of this, two...in terms of more countries that are overpopulated, open up regional arrangements that will bring all the countries of the region into the picture to create regional peace, security, and stability. The regional approach is effective because countries feel they are in the same boat. They are faced with the same problems; they have to work together to help one another. For instance, ECOWAS has been relatively successful in doing that for the countries of west Africa.

I've just come from Guinea and had discussions in Ghana and Guinea. I was supposed to go to Nigeria. There is a willingness there to work with the international community and to work with my mandate for early prevention. There is already a process going on in the Great Lakes region that also needs support. The thing about these regional initiatives, as we have seen in Darfur with the AU forces, is that there may be the will but the capacity is lacking. And support for the capacity of these countries to be able to do what is in their own regional interest is critically important.

Support can come in a wide variety of forms. We need to get the situation right. If I go into a country using my framework of analysis and I come back and say that the core of the problem is poverty, is resource-sharing, is human rights violations, has to do with political exclusion...

We see what happened in Kenya, where, in the end, despite the elections determining a winner and a loser, they had to come to a government of national unity. The same is being done in Zimbabwe. We have to transcend the feeling that democracy simply means elections with a winner and a loser. In the western context, there is respectful opposition for a minority. Being in or being out does not mean you gain or lose everything. But we tend to see elections these days as being democracy, when that is only a small part of what democracy should be about.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move over to Mr. Goldring, and then Mr. Van Kesteren.

You have seven minutes, please.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'll be sharing my time with my colleague.

Mr. Deng, I believe one of the most basic elements of a civil society is respect for its people, particularly respect for its women and children. We saw earlier in another meeting some appalling statistics of some 1,100 women and girls who are raped every month. Over the period of 10 to 12 years, that could well be up to 1.5 million.

Being former military myself, and understanding that it's an elected government there now and that some of these rapes are being conducted even by their own militia, their own policing, and given that there is a United Nations force in there of 20,000 people, I find it unbelievable that the situation is still continuing. And it's perhaps one of the reasons our good General Leslie either didn't see fit to take on the duty or he had other things he had to do.

I would like to know your opinion on why progress has not been made on that issue. I would think that it's a failure of all militaries everywhere. It's an issue that perhaps...and maybe it would be interesting to know your viewpoint on whether any punishments are being meted for that crime, whether the bar of deterrence is too low on it, or whether it's a cultural acceptance within the regions.

[Dr. Francis Deng]

Well, I might begin with the very last statement you just made about cultural acceptance.

I have to tell you, as someone who has studied my traditional society extensively, the rules of warfare in traditional society were very stringent. There are many who would say that they are not any less than international humanitarian standards today. You could not have children before the age of maturity, when you would be initiated as a warrior, which would probably mean 18 and over. You could not involve children in war. You cannot kill children. You cannot kill women. Even a person who has left the battlefield--

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

We're talking about the rapes.

[Dr. Francis Deng]

--should not be touched.

I think it's important for our societies to really dig into what our culture says in order to reinforce universal standards with traditional cultural variance, which I consider to be critically important in sustaining a society that is rooted.

Now, why are we failing? The question there is, again, we are putting emphasis on military responses to a situation that massively also needs, as I said before, a shift towards peace.

Now, MONUC is as mandated as any UN force to protect civilians, and they are doing the best they can, even exposing themselves sometimes to danger in the protection of civilians. But clearly it is proving that it's not adequate, it's not enough. We are not able to do what needs to be done. That's why I think that we should intensify the peace process and bring an end to the conflict in a comprehensive way.

Many of the armed groups that are there, you could label them, and you'd be right in labelling them, as terrorists. But even LRA, which is known to be a terrorist organization... Northern Uganda had problems that needed to be addressed and from which LRA originated. You go to the Tutsi refugees in DRC, people are afraid to go back because they committed genocide, and they are apprehensive that if they go back they may be victims of it. That applies to Tutsi organizations who feel that they have to protect themselves because of the history of genocide in the whole region.

We have to have a comprehensive approach that involves the countries of the region. It is ongoing, efforts are being made, but I do believe they also need support from the international community.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'll ask this very quickly. I don't have much time.

Mr. Deng, thank you for coming.

You talked about the history, you talked about the Cold War. The result of Sudan basically is that struggle. There's a new player--not necessarily a new player, but becoming very visible on the African scene--and that's China.

China has a different approach. They offer stability in the way of infrastructure, the sorts of things that emerging nations probably will warm up to more quickly than perhaps democracy and some of the things that we offer in the United Nations.

Are you concerned about China? For instance, I understand that in the Sudan, the north and the south... At this point, the north is offering 100-year leases on areas...in southern Sudan to the Chinese. Are you concerned about that? Are you concerned about where that will lead to in future conflicts and possibly new horrors that we haven't experienced yet?

[Dr. Francis Deng]

To answer your question, let me just give a brief historical background.

I co-chaired a task force in Washington that was to develop a U.S. Sudan policy for the incoming administration, which turned out to be the Bush administration. When we started, most people were saying that Sudan was not of national interest to the United States, that the only interest was its involvement with terrorism and destabilization of the countries in the region, and the humanitarian agenda. I was the only Sudanese or non-American on the task force, chairing.

My position was that Sudan is a country that brings together southern Africa and northern Africa, two sets of civilizations and cultures and races. It could be a conciliatory meeting point or a point of confrontation, which would have ripple effects into the Middle East and into the southern part. Sudan is involved in terrorism because they believe that the west is supporting the south in the war. They're linking with like-minded people--the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Sudan is destabilizing the neighbourhood, again because they think black African countries are supporting the south.

The humanitarian agenda, the humanitarian crisis, is a result of the war. Let us make peace the top priority. The United States, as a global power that has interests all over the world, cannot afford to be disinterested on the grounds that it doesn't have a narrow national interest. It has to have an interest implicit in its leadership and the responsibilities of leadership.

Now, it's not just the United States. There are many countries of the world that play a leadership role. Your country is one. You have the U.K., Norway. They've all played a major role in bringing peace to Sudan, and indeed ending the war in the south ended all these other evils that are associated with it.

I believe Darfur is a case of good intentions leading to not-so-good results. Had we taken Darfur as the latest in a series of conflicts that started in the south and moved to the north, we would have probably engaged constructively in bringing an end to the conflict. China, as a major power that is becoming more and more global, has to recognize that the leadership role has obligations that go along with its interests and become more involved with other countries that have already been engaging in bringing peace to that region. I think the responsibilities of leadership are being made apparent to China.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

We're going to finish up with Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to our guest.

First, to clarify a point that was made by my colleague Mr. Goldring, I believe it wasn't General Leslie who decided not to go. The way the structure of governance goes, it would be the government that decides that--quite rightly--and not the general. We wouldn't want that system to be put into place. And we really haven't met the 20,000 complement for the peacekeeping forces in Congo.

That said, Dr. Deng, I was very interested in your comments around the three-pillared approach, and I welcome them. You didn't mention it, but it has been mentioned before that the case of Iraq set back the whole notion of R2P. Sadly, someone--a world leader who's no longer in power--used it as a premise for involving themselves in Iraq. I can see why some would be concerned about that. If that were the use of R2P--as a doctrine to intervene, in the case of Iraq--it would cause concern to me as well as to people who worked on that.

With regard to your point about emphasizing the other two pillars, I'll go back to the DRC. When you look at the regional actors, when you look at the capacity that is required, it would be interesting to hear from you on the areas where we, if we were willing to support...in the DRC, since you've been there and have written a report. And I'm referring to specific areas beyond the military. We'll put that aside, because that's a separate...we were asked to, and we provided an answer on that. But what other areas can we help out with in the DRC with regard to those other two pillars?

[Dr. Francis Deng]

Thank you.

Again, my sense is that in all of these, whether we're talking about the first two pillars or talking about prevention in the broad sense that I'm talking about it, there are many things that can be done in supporting either countries or the regions to build the capacity for the sort of peace processes that I'm talking about. Already the Great Lakes region is organizing itself. There are very specific needs that I think need to be met in order to enhance its capacity to be effective.

I do believe that if we diagnose problems in a country, whether they are political, economic, social, or what have you, there are resources that countries like yours can bring to bear to the situation. They aren't always material. It could be advice. It could be political. I talked before about sharing experiences, sharing models of what works, and doing so comprehensively. I think the Great Lakes region is torn apart by problems that are solvable, and the resources themselves have been a major source of division, which could be a source of coming together.

You mentioned Iraq. I tell my African colleagues in the UN system that we exaggerate here the intervention from the outside. Unless your national interests are so strong, as I'm sure the United States decided was the case in Iraq...or, perhaps as a result of what happened in Somalia, the United States was reticent to get involved in Rwanda. What happened in Rwanda made the United States become more involved in Kosovo, and perhaps also because of other interests there. Unless that is the case, intervention is not a popular concept.

I think we misplace it when we put it on top as a matter of concern, when indeed, for many of these countries, if it's anything at all, it is the lack of interest rather than the threat of intervention that is important. But this is not to say then that you disengage, because I don't think isolationism in the world of today is an option. I think what is needed is a more considered, constructive, productive engagement with the regions and with the countries of the region to bring about the desired objectives.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Dr. Deng, for being here.

Ms. Whitty, thank you for joining us.

I realize that you're going to be involved with this over the next few years. By all means, if you're back in Canada again, I'm sure this committee would love to have an update on how you're making out. When you have a chance to be back, please let us know and we can work on the schedule. We'd love to have you.

[Dr. Francis Deng]

Thank you very much for having me. I appreciate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thanks.

With that, we'll dismiss the meeting.

The meeting is adjourned.