The answer your second question is undoubtedly "yes." Promising a peacekeeping mission -- then not being able to deliver -- would be worse than not authorizing one at all. It would be worse for the credibility of the UN Security Council and UN peacekeeping, and it would be much worse for the people of Somalia. My colleagues, Patrick Duplat and Erin Weir, visited Somalia last month and concluded that: "A Security Council mandate that amounts to no more than a symbolic gesture would be one more betrayal in two de­cades of missed opportunities and broken promises." Their mission report and related briefing materials also hint towards answers to your first question: Can we take it as a given that a mission to Somalia would be as slow to generate forces as UNAMID, and if so, does that mean we should abandon the whole premise of a UN Peacekeeping mission to Somalia?

The title and contents of their report -- Proceed with Caution -- suggest that there is an urgent need to proceed, indeed to move forward vigorously with peacemaking processes that deliver substantive results before trying to deploy UN peacekeepers. Positive results from political negations will not come quickly or easily because of the peacemakers' assumption that the Transitional Federal Institutions constitute a viable, legitimate basis upon which to build a government in Somalia -- while many Somalis interviewed by the RI team view the TFG as an illegitimate body propped up by an occupying power (Ethiopia).

I don't think that the idea of a UN peacekeeping mission to Somalia should be abandoned altogether, but I do think that there is indeed a need to proceed with extreme caution -- despite the horrendous suffering of ordinary Somali people and the natural humanitarian impulse to do "something." Again, the Brahimi report (and a couple of decades of bitter experience) point clearly to the limits of what can be accomplished by UN peacekeepers -- and to some basic preconditions for their deployment in the first place. The 14 March 2008 Report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Somalia also specifies a number of minimal requirements that should be met before Council authorizes an integrated UN mission for Somalia. The most important are viable agreements on political power-sharing, legalization of the economy, laying-down of arms and monitoring of heavy weapons, respect for human rights, facilitation of humanitarian assistance, and development of governing institutions at the central and local levels. The Secretary-General adds that the majority of the parties should state their agreement to the deployment of an integrated United Nations peacekeeping operation and commitment to support the implementation of its mandate.

The last condition will obviously no be met before there is real political compromise and accommodation, and if there are no solid agreements in place, then no member state is likely to step forward and volunteer troops and police towards the recommended total of 28,500 uniformed peacekeepers. Even with the requisite agreements in place, force generation will not be easy. Under his best case scenario, the S-G warns that contingents deploying to Somalia will require protection from an array of direct and indirect fire weapons and IEDs, and that troop contributors would have to come up with armored vehicles, electronic IED countermeasures, EOD capabilities, air reconnaissance assets, well-equipped medical facilities and "a robust quick reaction force to extricate force elements if required." In addition, the envisaged concept of operations requires transport and attack helicopters and a range of other mission enablers that are as scarce as hens' teeth, if Darfur is anything to go by.

In short, if UN peacekeeping is to survive a second major test in Somalia, there is a very obvious need to heed past lessons and the S-G's advice, to take a hard look at present realities, and to observe at least the one Brahimi recommendation I mentioned last week: "The Security Council should leave in draft form resolutions authorizing missions with sizeable troop levels until such time as the Secretary-General has firm commitments of troops and other critical mission support elements, including peace-building elements, from Member States." These he won't get, of course, unless there are credible political agreements in place and broad consent among the parties to UN deployment -- if not a peace to keep.

Mark makes an interesting point---that the proposed mission to Somalia may be the straw that breaks the camels back. Still, it seems as if we are inching ever closer to the authorization of a large peacekeeping force there. My question is this: Can we take it as a given that a mission to Somalia would be as slow to generate forces as UNAMID, and if so, does that mean we should abandon the whole premise of a UN Peacekeeping mission to Somalia? Another way of putting this is: Is promising a peacekeeping mission--then not being able to deliver--a worse outcome than not authorizing the mission in the first place?

It seems I was being a bit sanguine yesterday when I wrote, "The Council will likely recommend the Secretary General appoint a Special Representative to monitor the harassment of Mugabe's political opponents and, eventually, help mediate a transition of power." In fact, the Council was divided over what to do about the situation in Zimbabwe, giving Mugabe's a brief diplomatic victory. South Africa banded with China and Russia to block a American and British proposals to send a special representative.

Still, as I pointed out at the time, the fact that the opposition was invited to address the Security Council while South Africa was president of the Council is a step forward. Further, the official MDC spin on the meeting does not seem to far off. As an MDC official told Reuters, "the mere fact that the matter was brought forward to the UN Security Council is testimony to the fact that there is a crisis which cannot and should not escape the international community's eye and attention." A baby step, perhaps, but we are at least moving in the right direction.

>>Georgia - Russia has accused Georgia of amassing 1,500 soldiers in the upper Kodori gorge and threatened to retaliate if Georgia uses force in Abkhazi. Russia also stated that it is increasing its force levels in Abkhazi and South Ossetia. Georgia denies that it is building up troops and called the Russian action a pure provocation. EU foreign policy minister Javier Solana urged restraint during a meeting with Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. Russia has kept a peacekeeping force in Abkhazia and South Ossetia since the 1990s, when the regions broke away from Tbilisi and formed links with Moscow. There are around 2,000 Russians posted in Abkhazia and about 1,000 in South Ossetia.

>>India - President Ahmadenijad met with India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh yesterday in an attempt to seal a $7.6 billion pipeline deal, under the strenuous objection of the U.S. The pipeline would be completed by 2012 and would initially transport 60 million cubic meters of gas a day to Pakistan and India. The U.S. had suggested that India instead use Ahmadenijad's visit to press Iran to stop nuclear enrichment. India responded that it didn't need any "guidance" in bilateral relations.

>>Turkey - Turkey's parliament has approved legislation that softens penalties the EU has criticized for limiting free speech. Since 2003, Article 301 of the penal code has been used to prosecute hundreds, including Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk, for "insulting Turkishness." Critics contend that the softening didn't go far enough; insulting the Turkish nation still carries a two-year penalty.

• "The Terminator" Goes to Jail
• Interview: Katrin Verclas on using mobile technology for social change
• Feeding the Hungry
• Is South Africa Finally Abandoning Mugabe?

Africa

• Congo - Rebuilding lives in DR Congo
• Zimbabwe - Police free Zimbabwean activists
• Zimbabwe - U.N. council pressed to send mission to Zimbabwe
• Zimbabwe - Security Council Voices Reluctance to Act on Zimbabwe
• Mauritania - Mauritania captures five al Qaeda suspects: source
• Kenya - Kenya cabinet cash shortfall
• Somalia - Civilians gunned down in Somalia

Americas

• U.S. - Bush takes moderate stance on gas tax moratorium
• Cuba - Raul Castro consolidates power in Cuba
• U.S. - 2,400 US marines attack Afghan drug town
• Brazil - New species found in Brazil
• Colombia - Colombian opposition calls for Uribe bribery probe
• Venezuela - Life Stalls in Venezuela as Power Shuts Off
• U.S. - Lawyer Urges Canada to Try a Citizen Held by U.S. Forces
• Mexico - Government Accepts Talks With Guerrillas Who Bombed Pipelines
• Colombia - Police 'kill Colombian drug lord'
• Mexico - For Many, Control of State-Run Pemex Is About National Pride

Asia

• Philippines - Philippines Bans Kidney Transplants for Foreigners
• Vietnam - Chinese cheer Olympic torch in peaceful Vietnam relay
• China - China 'may lease foreign fields'
• China - French retailer set for May Day protests
• China - China marks 100 days to Games
• China - Chinese policeman killed in Tibetan unrest: Xinhua
• Timor - Surrender in East Timor
• Cambodia - Soaring Food Prices Imperil Meals for Poor in Cambodia
• North Korea - North Korea heading towards famine: report
• Hong Kong - Torch Arrives in Hong Kong After Activists Are Deported
• Thailand - Myanmar's Suu Kyi detention is "OK," says Thai PM
• China - China tries to calm fears over virus outbreak

Europe

• Italy - Cries of 'Duce! Duce!' salute Rome's new mayor
• France - France Still Divided Over Lessons of 1968 Unrest
• Serbia - Trial of Chief of Milosevic's Secret Police Begins

Middle East

• Iraq - 'Militants killed' in Iraq battle
• Yemen - Shia rebel clashes in north Yemen
• Israel - Palestinian groups want truce to include West Bank
• Iraq - Ministers accused of ignoring evidence of abuse in Iraq
• Iran - Iranian president tries to seal India pipeline
• Syria - Bush Says Syria Nuclear Disclosure Intended to Prod North Korea and Iran
• Turkey - Turkey reforms controversial law
• Yemen - Blast near Yemen Italian embassy

Move over, Arnold -- there's a new "Terminator" in town. And this one's not heading to the gubernatorial halls of Sacramento, but to the courtrooms of The Hague.

A Congolese warlord known as "the Terminator" is being sought for prosecution, the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague has revealed.

The arrest warrant for Bosco Ntaganda, was issued in 2006 but not made public and he is still at large.

He is accused of conscripting children under 15 to fight in hostilities in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo between July 2002 and December 2003.

Interestingly, the ICC said it had not publicized its arrest warrant for Ntaganda earlier because this may have "hindered the court's investigations." This illustrates an important dynamic in the Court's work -- and one that we have previously highlighted in reference to Uganda. Simply put, the ICC is better able to achieve its mission of bringing justice and accountability to a region when peace has already been secured. Whereas northern Uganda fell agonizingly short of a landmark peace deal, a ceasefire in eastern Congo was signed in January. Even as this peace still needs to be consolidated, now seems to be the time to begin the process of bringing to justice those who inflicted such untold misery on the innocents of eastern Congo.

Interview with Katrin Verclas, co-founder of MobileActive.org and co-author of Wireless Technology for Social Change: Trends in Mobile Use by NGOs

What are the major findings of the publication?

We found that there's a lot of activity. Lots of organizations are beginning to use mobiles for social change are are realizing the potential of mobile technology. We're really just seeing the tip of the iceberg. Right now, mobile phones are still primarily being used for staff coordination as opposed to an actual tool for advancing civil society work. However, we found that there is a huge awareness in the NGO community about the potential for doing so and quite a number of pilot projects probing that potential.

Why is the report structured the way it is, with an emphasis on areas of work, as opposed to platforms used, method of interaction, etc.? Does this speak to your target audience?

We really have two target audiences here, NGOs and the larger decision-making community. To unlock the potential of mobile technology, donors, multi-laterals, NGOs, the academic community, carriers, governments, and value-added tech firms all have to be at the table. Otherwise, we're just not going to see it, particularly when we talk about scaling up the projects. This is really a call to action.

You found in this study that most programs still exist in pilot form. How much of this do you think is due to short-lived excitement about a new tool in the fight for social change? How will groups keep these projects from flaming out? Is scaling up simply a matter of more resources?

The three main barriers are cost, training and knowledge, and building usable open-source applications -- for instance those that work on low-end handsets that are required to do certain types of data collection. A lot of these projects are able to succeed because carriers are providing free air time. Scaling those projects up is often not smart economically. We've found a couple of projects, in particular one in Mexico that offers peer support in rural areas for individuals with HIV/AIDS and the WFP work with Iraqi refugees in Syria, that were so successful that the carrier just couldn't continue to support it.

Which of those is the biggest barrier?

Personally, I think they all work in tandem. NGOs always say lack of resources is a problem. We constantly hear that cost is a factor. For larger organizations sometimes it's really just simply a matter of reallocating resources and justifying the costs. For instance, in the health sector, there is a tremendous amount of resources that have been allocated. But, if you look at the scale of mobile technology being used for patient management and data collection, its pitiful. In some ways, it's harrowing. There should be a consortium that works together on this. There is a clear potential for scaling projects, particularly in remote regions, where there are very few physicians and a high reliance on lay workers. Sometimes this is a hard sell. In a world of limited resources, why should we be funding technology when we could be funding drugs. The other two barriers are equally as challenging to surmount. Even understanding the question -- Do you need mobile technology? -- requires a certain amount of knowledge.

Don't you feel that it's ironic that groups pushing the use of mobile technology for social change have a poor track record of sharing information with each other? How can we deal with that difficulty?

This is certainly a huge problem; we have a lot of great ideas out there that never scale, or that go unnoticed. I think that providing this connectivity is primarily the role of intermediaries. This is not necessarily the role of NGOs doing the actual work, dealing with specific constituencies and allocating extremely limited resources for cash. Should a small microfinance NGO in India really be expected to know what a health data project in Mexico is up to, and what technologies they're using? Innovation by definition happens in silos, focused on a potential problem that is often very localized.

This is not a phenomenon limited to mobile applications used for social change. You have the same issue in the commercial sector. What we really need are channels to connect those silos. That's the explicit mission of the tiny NGO I run. We are convening a conference in the fall in South Africa, which will be the largest to date and will include mutlilaterals, donors, carriers, users, etc. We're going to have an in-depth discussion about what is possible and what isn't. We're going to start to build communities of practice. This sort of information sharing requires nurturing. There is a lot of innovation going on; the question is whether we can mix it up and find a way to share knowledge.

MobileActive is just a small part of this. Should there be others engaged in similar ways? Absolutely. Should more attention be paid to this issue in the donor community? Absolutely. It will take evangelizing, publications like this one, prodding. Movements don't emerge out of nowhere. The Vodafone Group Foundation and the United Nations Foundation have put support behind this and that's very encouraging. It certainly gives credibility to the process.

"There needs to be a focus on the benefits of a given system rather that the technology per se." This is an interesting statement considering the fact that the focus of the publication is mobile technology. Can you discuss what is meant here and perhaps give me a couple of case studies that demonstrate how this has been done effectively?

The goal of this publication is to look at mobile technology from the point of view of the user. We're not delving into how the technology works. If we can't sell the end benefit, we fail to make the point. The interesting thing about mobile is that this is a technology that is already being widely used and is widely understood. This is not a device that is foreign, unlike computers for a lot of people. They already understand the benefit. They've already swallowed that fact, gotten past that barrier. So, what's left to do is sell the benefit for a particular mission. Some programs have been successful in this regard.

For example, look at the program that pairs PDAs with nurse practitioners working in rural areas. A lot of these nurses have a lack of access to professional education. The goal is to provide that education based on the best knowledge available and to provide it in a way that is readable and condensed. There was a great idea developed about how to get these nurses to read the information. Turns out they were interested in news from the nearby city -- gossip, fashion, etc. One project combined the professional education with this news. With any medicine, you've got to give a little sugar pill to make it sweeter. This required the group working on the project to change the way they did business, which is never easy.

There is another great example in India, where small groups of women have formed "lending circles" to lend money to each other -- like microfinance, but outside of institutions. The key component here is trust, so record keeping is a big issue, especially because many of these individuals are semi-literate or illiterate. But, in a humid, termite-ridden environment, paper record keeping is a problem. So, one program developed a system through which the amount owed or paid is delineated on a standardized sheet with bar codes. The person keys the number into the phone and then scans the bar code. There is a backend where it is sent and can be retrieved at any point. It is designed to be absolutely intuitive, and because it has a clear benefit, it increases the level of trust. The technology is not innovative per se, it's rather the way we view user interaction.

The Secretary General urged donors to fund a UN appeal as first step in tackling global food crisis. From the UN News Center:

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called on donors to urgently provide the $755 million in emergency funds needed for the United Nations to feed millions of hungry people worldwide, as the first of a series of measures to tackle the global food crisis.

"The [27 heads of UN Agencies] call upon the international community and, in particular, developed countries to urgently and fully fund the emergency requirement of $755 million for the World Food Programme and honour outstanding pledges," said Mr. Ban, standing alongside WFP Executive Director Josette Sheeran and other leaders of UN bodies on the frontline in dealing with food security.

So far, of the WFP's initial appeal of $2.1 billion only $900 million has been received. Unless developed countries pony up, many people will starve.

Did Mugabe alienate his oldest international ally? Today, for the first time in a very long while, the situation in Zimbabwe is set to be discussed in the Security Council. The opposition MDC, which won last month's elections, will address the council to air their grievances. The Council will likely recommend the Secretary General appoint a Special Representative to monitor the harassment of Mugabe's political opponents and, eventually, help mediate a transition of power. Why is this so significant? South Africa, traditionally Mugabe's strongest international supporter, is presiding over the Security Council this month. As Council president, South Africa has a leading role in setting the schedule of the Council--and in the past has strongly resisted bringing the situation in Zimbabwe before the Council.

According to South Africa based-writer Geoff Hill, South Africa's shifting attitude on Mugabe can be partly explained by the fact that SA President Thabo Mbeki is a lame duck and that incoming President Jacob Zuma is calling the shots. More broadly, though, there seems to be a recognition that Mugabe's time is up. As Hill notes, African states recognize that Mugabe has been mortally wounded and are treating MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai as if he is the next president of Zimbabwe -- hence the MDC's invitation to address the Council today.

>>China - China has sentenced 17 protesters who participated in the March 10 riots in Tibet and surrounding provinces. Sentences ranged from three years to life. Soi'nam Norbu, a 20-year-old driver accused of burning vehicles, throwing stones at government property, and assaulting firemen, and Basang, a monk accused of leading 10 people in destroying a local government office, looting 11 shops, and attacking police, were both given life sentences. All of the monks who followed Basang got over 15 years.

>>Zimbabwe - Zimbabwe's rival opposition factions, which had split in 2005, have reunited and could now claim a majority in parliament. The combined opposition will now hold 109 seats in parliament to ZANU-PF's 97. Meanwhile, the nation still waits, a month in, for the results of the presidential vote. Verification is set to begin today, with final results expected in a week.

>>Cuba - With the exception of three people charged with terrorism, Raul Castro has commuted all death sentences to prison terms of 30 years. Castro was quick to note that the death penalty still exists in Cuban penal code. In Cuba, the death penalty is carried out by firing squad. Last March, Cuba signed two central UN human rights agreements, which Fidel Castro had long opposed.

>>European Union - The European Union today ironed out a pact with Serbia, but failed to reach an agreement to restart stalled partnership negotiations with Russia. Lithuania still hasn't seen assurances on Russian energy, judicial cooperation, and a softer foreign policy with regard to former Soviet states. The pact with Serbia holds a caveat; EU states will not ratify the pact, nor will Serbia receive any benefits, until all EU states are convinced that Serbia is doing its due diligence with regard to war crimes suspects.

• Kai Eide Being Courted in Washington DC
• Reasons for UNAMID's Failure
• UN Plaza: Can We Blame Global Food Prices on Speculators?

Africa

• Somalia - Somalia piracy resolution introduced at U.N.
• Mozambique - Mozambique police 'kill at will'
• Congo - UN defends DR Congo probe
• Zimbabwe - Opposition reunites in Zimbabwe
• Kenya - Mungiki sect leader is shot dead
• Zimbabwe - Zimbabwe Opposition Reunites
• Kenya - Raises for Striking Jail Guards
• Zimbabwe - Zimbabwe health minister accused as terror campaign reaches hospital wards
• Zimbabwe - Tense Zimbabwe awaits presidential vote result
• Zimbabwe - Power-sharing call for Zimbabwe
• Congo - ICC seeks Congo's 'Terminator'

Americas

• Venezuela - Missteps as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez backs farming
• Cuba - Cuba's Raul Castro commutes most death sentences
• Haiti - Top Haitian lawmakers voice support for new leader

Asia

• China - China restarts trains on disaster line
• Hong Kong - Torch Nears, Posing Test of Autonomy in Hong Kong
• Malaysia - New Parliament Sworn In
• Vietnam - U.S. Allegations Prompt Vietnam to Halt Adoption Program
• China - For Chinese Athletes, Western-Style Perks
• Vietnam - Olympic torch arrives in Vietnam
• China - China jails 17 over Tibet riots
• Timor - 12 East Timor Rebels Suspected in Attacks Surrender

Europe

• Spain - Spain rejects Peron extradition
• Italy - Rome votes for right-wing mayor
• Poland - Poland's delicate balance of risk and reward; or how to have your cake and eat it
• Serbia - EU states seek to end divisions on Russia and Serbia
• Serbia - EU says to sign Serbia pact on Tuesday

Middle East

• Israel - Palestinian mother and 4 children killed in Gaza carnage
• Iraq - Tariq Aziz due on trial in Iraq
• Iraq - US troops killed in Iraq clashes
• Iran - Gas pipeline tops Iran-India agenda
• Israel - Israeli PM voices regret over death of Gaza family

Visiting Washington a little over a month into his new job as the Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Afghanistan, Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide -- whose candidacy only emerged after renowned British negotiator Paddy Ashdown's was shot down by the Afghan government -- is being received with wide open arms here in the U.S. After speaking at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace today -- where he cited the confidence that the "highest authorities of the U.S. administration" have in him -- Eide will be meeting with the top levels of the U.S. foreign policy brass: Secretary of State Rice, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and even President Bush.

The red carpet being rolled out for Eide is indicative of the importance that the administration has recognized in an increased role for the United Nations in Afghanistan. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Zalmay Khalilzad testified to this importance himself, in a New York Times op-ed last month, in which he praised the nomination of Eide and outlined the roles that the UN should be fulfilling in Afghanistan.

The expanded responsibilities that Khalilzad envisioned for the UN in Afghanistan line up closely with those identified by Eide: coordinating civilian and military efforts, ensuring that resources for aid are spent effectively and with appropriate oversight, combating corruption in the Afghan government, and strengthening the country's police and justice systems. Eide has consistently emphasized that international involvement in Afghanistan must be seen not solely through a military lens, but as a broader political project; while he expressed confidence that the U.S. has increasingly adopted this perspective, it remains crucial for the U.S. to see beyond the military situation of the country.

The U.S. will also need to back up its warm reception for Mr. Eide with concrete support for the UN mission that he leads. For the administration to saddle Eide with increasing responsibilities, yet fail to provide the necessary resources, would be both hypocritical and counterproductive. To demonstrate its commitment to the UN's role in Afghanistan, the U.S. Congress should begin by approving the $53 million in the FY 2008 supplemental funding bill designated to fund the UN's political missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and could follow by paying up on its long-standing back dues to the UN regular budget, out of which missions like the one in Afghanistan are funded.

If we accept the fact that UNAMID is a failure, then we need to ask a number of questions as to why. Questions that produce answers that go beyond the obvious point that mandates are too convoluted and that peacekeeping is overstretched, and that produce useful lessons -- for example, for the Security Council as it continues to consider authorizing a UN mission for Somalia.

I will touch on some of these, but first want to make the point that failure implies blame. Should Rodolphe Adada and General Martin Agwai be blamed for UNAMID failure? Obviously not at this point; they cannot be expected to deliver effectively on an ambitious mandate with only a third of their authorized peacekeepers on the ground. UNAMID points not so much to mission failure, but rather to a failure to deploy: To a failed force generation process; to failures in analysis and decision-making -- not in El Fasher, but in New York City; and to the failure of UN member states to pony up what they promised.

A number of reasons for UNAMID's failure to deploy that have been bandied about over the past months, often together with apportionment of blame. Council and DPKO blame Khartoum for its obstructionism, Khartoum blames DPKO for not getting its act and its mission assets together, and DPKO blames member states for not proving helicopters and other mission enablers -- and for pledging troop contingents that are not up to standard and that lack means of sustainment in the field. There is plenty of blaming being done, and there are plenty of excuses being made. However, the biggest failure is arguably that of the Security Council, especially, to implement a number of fundamental recommendations that were made years ago -- and a failure of DPKO to insist to Council that these should be heeded.

I refer of course to the August 2000 Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations, better known as the Brahimi Report. This report, which Bill Durch played a big role in producing, is the most definitive study of peacekeeping "lessons learned" ever produced, and contains the most practical and sensible recommendations ever made about how to improve peacekeeping. Many of the Brahimi recommendations have been ignored in the process of standing up UNAMID. However the following two that have obvious explanatory value for the failure to deploy the full mission in Darfur (within 90 days, according to Brahimi standards):

• The Security Council and the Secretariat must be able to win the confidence of troop contributors that the strategy and concept of operations for a new mission are sound and that they will be sending troops and police to serve under a competent mission with effective leadership.
• The Security Council should leave in draft form resolutions authorizing missions with sizable troop levels until such time as the Secretary-General has firm commitments of troops and other critical mission support elements, including peace-building elements, from Member States.

Peacekeeping is overstretched, but I do not think it is broken. There are too many missions currently deployed that are doing a good job. But the camel's back must have a breaking point, and authorizing a mission in Somalia while ignoring past lessons and sound recommendations may well be the last straw.

In this segment, Matthew Lee speculates that speculators have had a hand in the rapid increase in food prices. Mathew explains:

>>Zimbabwe - Partial results from the recount of the vote in the parliamentary election, released over the weekend, confirm that President Mugabe's ZANU-PF party has lost control of parliament. Results from 18 of 23 constituencies have been retabulated and confirmed with no seats changing hands. Mugabe will now have to choose whether to appoint an opposition cabinet or attempt to run the country on presidential orders instead of parliamentary legislation. Representatives from Mugabe and opposition leadership will be invited to verify results from the presidential election today, prior to their release. It is possible that opposition leader Tsvangirai has won outright and will avoid a runoff but not likely.

>>Afghanistan - Suspected Taliban insurgents executed a well-coordinated, but unsuccessful assassination attempt against President Karzai during the Afghan national day military parade on Sunday. Three were killed in the attack -- a tribal chief, a member of parliament, and a 10-year-old boy. Afghan security forces, which the government has pressed as a replacement for foreign troops guarding Kabul, prepared for weeks in advance of the event. The Taliban, claiming to have received help from within the security forces, worked in two teams, one working a mortar and the other guns, which were fired into the V.I.P stands.

>>Olympics - On Sunday the Olympic torch traveled to North and South Korea. In South Korea, it was greeted by protesters seeking better treatment for North Korean refugees in China and thousands of young pro-China demonstrators who subsequently attacked the others with rocks and steel pipes. Two North Korean refugees attempted to light themselves on fire in protest. North Korea on the other hand, was the least contentious stop on the torch's world tour. Tens of thousands of North Koreans waving flags lined the 12-mile route. Meanwhile Chinese authorities are locking down Lhasa in advance of the torch's visit.

• For Somalia, Trouble By Land and By Sea -
• A Building Made of States -
• Harold Pollack Says, "Send a Net, Save a Life" -
• Getting an Education for Afghan Girls -
• Bad Moon Rising Over Northern Uganda -

Africa

• Kenya - Deadline for Kenya prison strike
• Morocco - Arrests over Morocco factory fire
• Zimbabwe - Partial recount endorses Mugabe party defeat
• Tanzania - World Bank backs anti-Aids experiment
• Congo - UN peacekeepers 'traded gold and guns with Congolese rebels'

Americas

• Cuba - Raul Castro raises state pension
• Mexico - 13 Shot Dead in Mexico in Drug Traffickers' Clash
• Haiti - Haiti's President Picks Candidate for Premier

Asia

• Iran - Iran discusses "serious" nuclear ideas with Russia
• Ukraine - Ukraine helicopter crash kills 19
• Korea - N Korean crowds hail torch relay
• Japan - Japan PM's party in poll defeat
• Pakistan - Iranian president visits Pakistan
• Afghanistan - Karzai unhurt after parade attack
• Indonesia - Indonesian Mosque Attacked by Hardliners
• Korea - North Korean Officer Defects to South
• Korea - Olympic Torch Protesters Attacked in South Korea
• Philippines - Philippines Introduces Cash Subsidies and Cheaper Rice for the Poor
• Vietnam - Rice harvest shortages forecast troubled times ahead
• China - Lockdown in Lhasa as Olympic torch heads for the roof of the world

Europe

• Switzerland - UN meeting to address food crisis
• Serbia - Negotiations Put Europeans Closer to Pact With Serbia
• Austria - Austria: sedate town is stunned by news

Middle East

• Iran - Iran's conservatives win run-off
• Iraq - US and Iraq claim 38 militants killed in clashes
• Israel - Israeli attack kills four children of Palestinian family

As if the violence on the ground in Somalia were not enough -- thousands of civilians have been forced to flee after renewed clashes in the capital, Mogadishu, recently -- the coast of the country is facing increasing danger from -- yep, you guessed it -- pirates.

These are no fanciful swashbucklers, though. The pirates have recently captured various European cargo ships, luxury yachts, and fishing boats, holding their crews and passengers hostage for one goal -- money. The attacks on the high seas, then, are not merely a re-enactment of the ancient art of piracy; rather, they are deeply connected to the instability and suffering that have long run rampant on the mainland.

Many of the pirates are formerly struggling fishermen fed up with the country's situation -- a fact that they did not hide from their captives. The BBC reports:

They frequently took the trouble to tell us that they hadn't had a proper government for about 17 years, that there were no government agencies and, as a result, they were obliged to rob to survive," says Captain Darch [of a captured Danish vessel].

Worse, though, these are not merely a few isolated fisherfolk looking to make a buck (or a euro) by, shall we say, expanding their business. Forces on land with the potential to further destabilize Somalia's conflict have noticed that this piracy could provide them with a reliable source of funding.

"Businessmen and former fighters for the Somali warlords moved in when they saw how lucrative it could be. The pirates and their backers tend to split the ransom money 50-50," [BBC reporter Mohamed Olad Hassan] says.

The UN is addressing both of these problems, fortunately. The Security Council is drafting a resolution to allow countries to pursue pirates into Somalian waters, and Spain -- one of whose ships was recently captured -- has pushed for creating a UN anti-piracy force. To deal with the persistent violence on land, the Secretary-General's Special Representative in Somali, Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, has pledged that the UN will continue to work to bring the various warring factions together for peace talks.

In an interview with Campus Progress, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Samantha Power asks a very pertinent question -- and provides an impressively on-the-mark answer that bears repetition:

What is the United Nations? The United Nations is going to reflect the priorities of those 192 [member] countries. We've got to get some number of those countries to take 21st century challenges seriously. Then you'll see the United Nations as an organization follow suit.

It won't work to start by saying, "Oh, the United Nations needs to take failing states, repression, and genocide seriously." That's like saying a building needs to take certain things seriously. The United Nations will start taking those thing seriously when the member states within it reallocate resources appropriately.

One of those member states, of course -- and the one best positioned to provide resources for the UN's ambitious endeavors -- is the United States. Yet the U.S., instead of providing the support that would help the UN achieve its goals, deeply underfunds the world body and even chastises it for not taking stronger action on crises like Darfur.

If you haven't read Power's new book yet -- which, as she describes it, is about not just the United Nations, but about how citizens and governments address complicated global challenges -- then I strongly urge you to check it out.

Over at the Huffington Post, the University if Chicago health care economist Harold Pollack gets into the spirit of World Malaria Day.

One of the few brights spots these days is that millions of Americans finally realize the importance of global health. Today is world Malaria Day. If you're reading this, you probably already know that this is a huge killer, particularly of kids in sub-Saharan Africa. I was hoping to party with Brad and Angelina to celebrate the occasion. That probably won't happen since my daughter has soccer.

Instead, to honor the occasion I am buying bednets for some African kids. You should too. These cost maybe $7 each, and are among the most gloriously cost-effective things you can ever do to save lives and improve health. The charity link is [here.]

This is a great organization.

Oh, buy buy a mosquito net in honor of your actual or hoped-for significant other. The UN Foundation will send him/her a cool email. Your love object wil receive this missive, and believe you are way cooler than you actually are.

As my wife will attest, it works for me. You can see my picture. So this must be working.

Don't sell yourself short, Harold! And thanks for plugging Nothing But Nets.

Send a Net, Save a Life.

Determining the success of a peace operation implies a longitudinal evaluation of where a country such as Cambodia or Mozambique or Sierra Leone is today. It involves a focus not just on the security dimension, but also on aspects of democracy, governance, economy and development.

On the other hand, the multi-functionality of contemporary peace operations and the perceived need to incorporate peace-building aspects as early as possible in the mission, means that longer-term concerns are also pertinent to attempts to determine success in a particular peace operation.

However, mission complexity and the integration of many elements -- from disarmament to civilian protection and the promotion of gender equity, human rights, and democracy -- into the mandate of a single mission also provides a ready excuse for short-term failures. Where interventions are conceived as multifaceted and multi-agency affairs, culpability becomes blurred, as does the ability to actually to learn from failure. Obviously, long-term outcomes matter, but so do short-term outcomes (like saving the lives of 800,000 Rwandans). When tens of thousands of people have been killed and many more are likely to be killed, the challenge of creating a functioning democracy is not really the burning issue.

It is easier to determine failures if one concentrates on the mandate of a single element of the mission - the force, which is also the largest and most expensive, and which has since 1999 had a common task in all
missions: To protect civilians under imminent threat of violence, etc. In terms of ongoing missions, then, it is easy to point to UNAMID as a big failure in terms of its delivery of secure environment for the host population and for other mission elements and humanitarian actors.

MONUC also does not measure up well, given the massive displacement and gross human rights abuses that have continued in the east for more than a year after the mission oversaw national and provincial elections.

However, such judgments are incredibly simplistic and harsh, given the lack of support for bringing UNAMID up to strength and the incredible progress MONUC made since it was launched as a small observer mission back in 1999, with a mandate to help end "Africa's first world war." It is easier and fairer to point to short-term success stories like UNMIL in Liberia. UNMIL was blessed with a relatively huge force, and was established in the wake of intense ECOWAS engagement that included some very robust operations in the '90s. This should not detract from the fact that UNMIL has provided Liberians with the foundations for creating a peaceful future and that the mission has been essential to broader regional stability. Going further back, Mozambique is clearly a much happier place than it was a decade ago - but it is difficult to assess exactly how essential OMUMOZ was to this transition.

In short, I do not think it is fair or constructive to judge entire missions as successes or failures. All missions have had some very dedicated and courageous people on board, and several have had visionary and committed senior leaders. All have arguably done way more good than harm. Africa is certainly much better off than it would have been without UN peacekeeping engagement.

Via UN News Centre:

Although over 6 million children returned to Afghanistan's classrooms a month ago at the start of a new school year, United Nations agencies said today that half of the war-torn country's young people are excluded from receiving an education, the bulk of them girls.

This is the case even though the enrolment of girls, who were barred from going to school under the repressive Taliban regime, has increased significantly in the past five years, according to the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF).

'We still have 1.2 million girls of school age who do not have access to schools,' said Catherine Mbengue, UNICEF Country Representative in Afghanistan. 'We have a lot of work to do to make sure all conditions are met so that schools are friendly to girls.'

UN agencies have been working with the government to build new schools, conduct teacher trainings (particularly female teachers), and talking to communities about the importance of education in attempts to fill this huge gap.

This week is actually Global Action Week for Education. Their "Education for All" goal has a large focus specifically on education for girls, whom are effected disproportionately throughout the world.

Just a few weeks ago, a peace deal between the brutal Lords Resistance Army and the government of Uganda was as close as ever to being sealed. The peace process failed, though, when LRA leader Joseph Kony refused to attend the signing ceremony. Now, according to the invaluable Institute for War and Peace Reporting, the Lords Resistance Army is once again gearing up for another fight.

IWPR reports that over the last few weeks, the Lord's Resistance Army has kidnapped hundreds of children in the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan and transported them to military training facilities in lawless eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. The LRA, is it seems, is once again committed to war, not peace. To make matters worse, the article suggests (and I've heard experts speculate as well) that the government of Sudan is backing the LRA in an effort to destabilize Southern Sudan, which holds a referendum on independence in 2009.

In an interview with The East African Enough analyst Julia Spiegel -- who just spent a month observing the peace talks in the small border town of Ri-Kwangba -- explains what can be done to reign in Kony. The interview is not available online, but a portion is extracted after the jump.

What do you think should be done to Kony in order to salvage the talks?

First, a concerted effort must be made by the Ugandan government and key international players to press Kony to make a choice about his future. He can either sign the peace deal and begin assembling his LRA forces in Ri-Kwangba; agree to a third country asylum arrangement representing exile or banishment
from northern Uganda as a consequence for his crimes, thus removing himself from the battlefield and giving peace a real chance; or walk away from the agreement and formalize his status as a regional warlord, which will trigger a regional manhunt that will leave him on the run for the rest of his life.

But ultimately, he must feel a cost for his failure to meet deadlines and uphold agreements; he has continually rejected carrots and has faced no real sticks. As a result, Kony has been able to gain time, money and medicine out of these peace efforts without making any real commitments or deliverables. Now Kony must be forced to make a choice. But this requires an effective communication channel to be made between the government, the international community and Kony himself. If he rejects these negotiation attempts in the next few months, then it will be clear that all peaceful options for resolving this conflict will have been exhausted, and thus the international community should, with regional states and UN peacekeeping missions in neighboring countries, rapidly develop a containment and apprehension strategy focused on capturing Kony and the other LRA leader's indicted by the International Criminal Court.

(Image viaDismal World)