DR Congo: Conflict's Survivors Have Been Through Hell, Says UN Aid Chief
26 June 2025
Speaking from the Goma region, whose main city was overrun by Rwanda-backed M23 rebels in January, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher explained that people had suffered 'decades of trauma'.
The last few months have been 'particularly horrific for so many', he added, referring to the lawless fall-out from heavy fighting this year between the rebel fighters and the regular DRC army that has been linked to serious human rights abuses, including potential war crimes.
'Most striking today and yesterday has been the stories of sexual violence, and sitting with women who tell horrific stories which are too horrific for me to tell here and who are trying to find the courage to rebuild their lives,' the UN relief chief said.
' We're there providing that support to them, trying to help them rebuild, but they have been through hell.'
Peace call
All those newly displaced by the M23 rebel advance are in addition to thefive million people already living in displacement campsin eastern DRC. Today, more than 20 million people need relief assistance. ' They are desperate for this conflict to end, ' Mr. Fletcher continued.
A day after NATO Member States agreed to a five per cent increase in funding for their collective defence, investment in the humanitarian work of the UN and its partners is at rock bottom.
In DRC, a full 70 per cent of UN aid programmes was historically funded by the United States – 'amazing generosity over decades' – Mr. Fletcher noted. But today 'we're seeing most of that disappearing', he insisted, forcing the humanitarian community to make 'brutal choices, life-and-death choices' about who receives help.
'For these women - the survivors of sexual violence, for the kids who told me they needed water, for the communities that told me they needed shelter, medicine, these cuts are real right now and people are dying because of the cuts,' the top UN official explained.
Aid teams haven't stopped
Despite the difficulties linked to the protracted nature of the conflict in DRC and the massive needs, UN aid teams and their partners are 'working hard to get access to those communities,' Mr. Fletcher insisted - 'trying to get the airport back open, trying to get roads open, trying to unblock checkpoints that are impeding our aid from getting through'.
In an attempt to square the circle of the steadily diminishing amount of aid funding provided globally, Mr. Fletcher recently announced a 'hyper-prioritized' plan to save 114 million lives this year. But that is dependent on receiving the necessary funding. ' All we're asking for to do that is one per cent of what the world spent on defence last year,' he continued.
After visiting and connecting with communities impacted time and again by the fighting, the top UN official insisted that they should not be forgotten. 'They are the frontlines of the humanitarian effort,' he said.
Communities on front line
'I suppose the glimmer of hope in all of this is, yes, we can work in that more efficient and prioritized way and will do that; but also, the communities here who are - basically – they've come through so much and they are determined to support each other.'
And despite rising antipathy in some countries towards international cooperation including the work and peace-promoting efforts of the United Nations, Mr. Fletcher insisted that reasons for optimism remain.
'I really strongly believe there is a movement out there that will back this work, that will support this work,' he told UN News. 'We've got to find them. We've got to enlist them, and we've got to show them that we can deliver for them.
'And, you know, I have not given up on human kindness and human solidarity. I have not given up on the UN Charter for a second. And this work is at the heart of it.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
35 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Why Trump needs the world to believe Iran's nuclear program is 'obliterated'
onpicture id="4K59BMS_AFP__20250624__63KL9ZG__v1__HighRes__UsPoliticsNatoSummitTrumpDepart_jpg" crop="16x10" layout="full"] US President Donald Trump. Analysis - There are two reasons why US President Donald Trump needs the world to believe his adamant claims that Iran's nuclear program has been obliterated. First, his entire presidency is set up to reflect glory on his own strongman persona, fuelling a narrative of courageous, unique and infallible leadership. Information that contradicts the myth is not welcome. Second, any evidence that Iran retains the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons or to restart its program after daring US bombing raids would raise an uncomfortable question: should the United States use military action again to try to finish the job and meet any future advances in Iran's capabilities with more strikes? This would potentially open a years-long period of quasi-war with Iran for which Trump has no appetite; raise the risks of a wider conflict; and anger his MAGA base. Trump and his top lieutenants are conjuring amped-up outrage and slamming the media for reporting an initial, "low confidence" assessment by the Defence Intelligence Agency that US attacks on three of Iran's facilities failed to destroy the core components of its nuclear program and likely only set it back by months. Trump redoubled his efforts in a news conference at the NATO summit to portray the raid as "very, very successful." He added, "It was called obliteration. No other military on Earth could have done it." Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth launched a theatrical outburst against CNN and The New York Times after they reported on the assessment. Such outlets "try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons to try to hurt President Trump or our country, they don't care what the troops think", Hegseth said, showing the performative zeal that prompted the president to lift him from Fox News to head the Pentagon. The White House highlighted an assessment from Israel's military chief of staff Wednesday that Iran's nuclear program suffered "systemic" damage and was set back years, and CIA director John Ratcliffe said in a statement that the agency had evidence it had been "severely damaged." But these statements, while suggesting Iran has suffered a serious blow, do not yet fully support Trump's expansive claims. The president's tactics were familiar. He is going global with his strategy of creating his own narratives whether or not there is yet evidence to prove them. He showed how successful this could be with his false claims of election fraud in 2020. If the world believes that Iran's nuclear program is destroyed and all sources suggesting otherwise are discredited, Trump has a rationale for taking no further action. Everything that involves intelligence is, by definition, opaque. And lasting judgements, from technical or human sources, on how far the US set back Iran's nuclear program could take months. It's also not possible to know whether the administration does have more information on the aftermath of the strikes that it is not releasing for operational reasons. A more judicious initial White House response to the raids might have avoided the current controversy. But its frantic spin was inevitable, since Trump declared while B-2 bombers were still aloft that Saturday's mission was a total, overwhelming success. Any contrary evidence would mean an embarrassing reversal and challenge his ego and credibility. But the hyper-emotional response to honest questioning over whether Iran's nuclear program has truly been wiped out makes the White House look defensive, raising doubts about its truthfulness. And it is distracting from aspects of the mission for which Trump can claim credit - a flawless round-the-world bombing raid with no US casualties and his effective pressure on Israel and Iran to stop fighting as well as his success in not being pulled into a longer war. Growing controversy over Iran also overshadowed an undeniable achievement by Trump at the summit in the Netherlands in getting a commitment from member states to spend 5% of GDP on defence by 2035. The target will be hard to reach. But no other president came close to achieving anything similar. The White House only has itself to blame. Its failure to properly explain to Americans why Trump's administration suddenly came to believe Iran was weeks away from building a nuclear weapon created suspicion over its motives. Its failure to inform some top Democrats that the B-2 bombing mission was underway needlessly politicised an issue on which Trump could expect substantial support across the aisle. The administration then postponed Capitol Hill briefings on the strikes until Thursday. It's unclear whether those sessions will be productive. Trump's intelligence chiefs rushed to bolster his claims on Wednesday. Ratcliffe's statement said the CIA had obtained "a body of credible evidence" that Iran's nuclear program had been "severely damaged". This included intelligence from a "reliable source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years," Ratcliffe said. His comments fell short, however, of Trump's claims of obliteration. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard posted on X that "new intelligence" showed that Iran's nuclear facilities had been "destroyed". None of the pushback offered evidence that would allow Americans to make up their own minds. It did nothing to back up Trump's claim in the Hague Wednesday that Iran had not moved any of its stock of enriched uranium before the raids. Nor did it address whether Iran maintains secret facilities that it could use to race toward a bomb. The administration looks like it's trying to obscure difficult questions. Contrary to what Hegseth claimed, it is not unpatriotic to report information confirmed by administration officials questioning the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program. And no one is attacking the pilots of the B-2 bombers who undertook the hazardous multi-hour mission. The tone of media coverage of their efforts has been marked by marvelling rather than criticism. The issue is whether the bunker-busting bombs, used in action for the first time, really did penetrate the Fordow nuclear facility, buried under hundreds of feet of rock and cement, and destroy centrifuges that spin uranium. And it's about whether Trump is truly fulfilling his duties as president if he ignores any evidence the objectives were not fully met. The administration's wild reaction to the preliminary, low-confidence Pentagon intelligence report creates another dangerous possibility - that it's pressuring the intelligence community to tailor intelligence to meet its political needs. This corrosive trend has been disastrous to US national security in the past. Such behaviour is a major concern with huge national security implications under a president who has trashed the US intelligence community and appointed officials to lead it who share his politicized views. Future intelligence reports - which could take months to conduct - might well conclude that Iran's nuclear program has been destroyed or set back far from the point of approaching a weapon. If they don't, Trump has a huge political and diplomatic problem. Now that the United States has taken military action alongside Israel in an attempt to eradicate Iran's nuclear program, he has created a standard for himself. If credible evidence emerges that Iran has salvaged aspects of its program, either centrifuges or stocks of enriched uranium, as has been reported, the president - or Israel - will come under pressure to take new action to stop it. The International Atomic Energy Agency has said it's possible that Iran moved uranium, which is easily portable, before US and Israeli raids. Future US action against Iran could create the conditions for the prolonged war or deeper low-level conflict in the Middle East that Trump has sworn to avoid, and that would threaten to create a new fracture in his "Make America Great Again" political base. There is a precedent for such prolonged and expensive engagements. After the 1991 Gulf War, the US-led coalition maintained no-fly zones in Iraq to protect the Kurdish minority in the north and Shiites in the south and to contain Saddam Hussein's military for more than a decade. Uncertainty over the fate of Iran's nuclear program could also complicate efforts to reach a diplomatic solution with the Islamic Republic. Trump said at the NATO summit on Wednesday that US and Iranian negotiators would meet next week. Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff told CNBC on Wednesday that his boss was looking for a "comprehensive peace agreement" with Iran that would go beyond the nuclear question. It would be an extraordinary breakthrough after 45 years of antagonism. If Trump could end the US estrangement with the Islamic Republic - perhaps after breaking the foundation of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's power with military action - he could rightfully claim a major legacy achievement. "I think that they are ready; that is my strong sense," said Witkoff. Yet such hopes are dependent on developments in the opaque Iranian system; political forces that the US cannot control; and extremist elements, including in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, that have a lot to lose in terms of prestige and economic power if the regime changes or falls. Some experts believe that Iran will respond to the US and Israel assault by reasoning that it is even more imperative to develop a nuclear bomb to ensure the regime's survival. And if Tehran rejects cooperation with the IAEA and its inspectors, it might be able to evade outside monitoring. Trump, however, played down expectations for a lasting agreement with Iran on Wednesday. "We may sign an agreement. I don't know. To me, I don't think it's that necessary. I mean, they had a war. They fought, and now, they're going back to their world. I don't care if I have an agreement or not," the president said. He implied that a statement by Iran not to seek nuclear weapons would undercut his own claim that their program was obliterated. The complete truth may not be known for months. But it would be a deep irony if, 20 years after a war provoked by cherry-picked intelligence on a weapons of mass destruction program that did not exist, another White House tweaked intelligence to misrepresent a program in Iran that was active. - CNN
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
No known intelligence that Iran moved uranium: Hegseth
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says he was unaware of any intelligence suggesting Iran had moved any of its highly enriched uranium to shield it from US strikes on Iran's nuclear programme during the weekend. US military bombers carried out strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities early on Sunday (local time) using more than a dozen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs. The results of the strikes are being closely watched to see how far they may have set back Iran's nuclear programme. "I'm not aware of any intelligence that I've reviewed that says things were not where they were supposed to be, moved or otherwise," Hegseth told an often fiery news conference. US President Donald Trump, who watched the exchange with reporters, echoed his defense secretary, saying it would have taken too long to remove anything. "The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of (the) facility," Trump wrote on his social media platform, without providing evidence. Several experts have cautioned that Iran likely moved a stockpile of near weapons-grade highly enriched uranium out of the deeply buried Fordow site before the strikes, and could be hiding it in locations unknown to Israel, the US and UN nuclear inspectors. They noted satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies showing "unusual activity" at Fordow on Thursday and Friday, with a long line of vehicles waiting outside an entrance to the facility. A senior Iranian source told Reuters on Sunday most of the 60% highly enriched uranium had been moved to an undisclosed location before the attack. WHEREABOUTS OF URANIUM The Financial Times, citing European intelligence assessments, reported that Iran's highly enriched uranium stockpile remains largely intact since it was not concentrated at Fordow. Hegseth's comments denying such claims came at the news briefing where he also accused journalists of downplaying the success of the US strikes following a leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency suggesting they may have only set back Iran by months. He said the assessment was "low confidence", and, citing comments from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, said it had been overtaken by intelligence showing Iran's nuclear programme was severely damaged and would take years to rebuild. Ratcliffe, Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and General Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, held a classified briefing on the strikes on Thursday for all 100 members of the US Senate. Tulsi Gabbard, who normally would conduct such briefings as director of national intelligence, was not scheduled to participate. Trump said last week that she was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence Iran was building a nuclear weapon. The Senate briefing had been scheduled for Tuesday, but was postponed. Senators are expected to vote this week on a resolution that would require congressional approval for strikes against Iran, although the measure is not expected to be enacted. At the Pentagon news conference, Hegseth described the strikes as "historically successful." His comments came after Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday Iran would respond to any future US attack by striking American military bases in the Middle East. Khamenei claimed victory after 12 days of war, and promised Iran would not surrender despite Trump's calls. MEDIA 'HATRED' During the news conference, Hegseth criticised the media, without evidence, for having an anti-Trump bias. "It's in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump because you want him not to be successful so bad," Hegseth said. "There are so many aspects of what our brave men and women did that ... because of the hatred of this press corps, are undermined," he said. Trump praised Hegseth's news conference as: "One of the greatest, most professional, and most 'confirming' News Conferences I have ever seen!" On X, Hegseth thanked Trump for his praise. During the press conference, Caine, the top US general largely stuck to technical details, outlining the history of the bunker-busting bombs used. Caine showed a video testing the bombs on a bunker like the ones struck on Sunday. Caine declined to provide his own assessment of the strike and deferred to the intelligence community. He denied being under any pressure to change his assessment to present a more optimistic view of the US strikes. He also said he would not change his assessment due to politics. Uniformed military officials are supposed to remain apolitical and provide their best military advice. "I've never been pressured by the president or the secretary to do anything other than tell them exactly what I'm thinking, and that's exactly what I've done," he said.
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
DR Congo: Conflict's Survivors Have Been Through Hell, Says UN Aid Chief
26 June 2025 Speaking from the Goma region, whose main city was overrun by Rwanda-backed M23 rebels in January, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher explained that people had suffered 'decades of trauma'. The last few months have been 'particularly horrific for so many', he added, referring to the lawless fall-out from heavy fighting this year between the rebel fighters and the regular DRC army that has been linked to serious human rights abuses, including potential war crimes. 'Most striking today and yesterday has been the stories of sexual violence, and sitting with women who tell horrific stories which are too horrific for me to tell here and who are trying to find the courage to rebuild their lives,' the UN relief chief said. ' We're there providing that support to them, trying to help them rebuild, but they have been through hell.' Peace call All those newly displaced by the M23 rebel advance are in addition to thefive million people already living in displacement campsin eastern DRC. Today, more than 20 million people need relief assistance. ' They are desperate for this conflict to end, ' Mr. Fletcher continued. A day after NATO Member States agreed to a five per cent increase in funding for their collective defence, investment in the humanitarian work of the UN and its partners is at rock bottom. In DRC, a full 70 per cent of UN aid programmes was historically funded by the United States – 'amazing generosity over decades' – Mr. Fletcher noted. But today 'we're seeing most of that disappearing', he insisted, forcing the humanitarian community to make 'brutal choices, life-and-death choices' about who receives help. 'For these women - the survivors of sexual violence, for the kids who told me they needed water, for the communities that told me they needed shelter, medicine, these cuts are real right now and people are dying because of the cuts,' the top UN official explained. Aid teams haven't stopped Despite the difficulties linked to the protracted nature of the conflict in DRC and the massive needs, UN aid teams and their partners are 'working hard to get access to those communities,' Mr. Fletcher insisted - 'trying to get the airport back open, trying to get roads open, trying to unblock checkpoints that are impeding our aid from getting through'. In an attempt to square the circle of the steadily diminishing amount of aid funding provided globally, Mr. Fletcher recently announced a 'hyper-prioritized' plan to save 114 million lives this year. But that is dependent on receiving the necessary funding. ' All we're asking for to do that is one per cent of what the world spent on defence last year,' he continued. After visiting and connecting with communities impacted time and again by the fighting, the top UN official insisted that they should not be forgotten. 'They are the frontlines of the humanitarian effort,' he said. Communities on front line 'I suppose the glimmer of hope in all of this is, yes, we can work in that more efficient and prioritized way and will do that; but also, the communities here who are - basically – they've come through so much and they are determined to support each other.' And despite rising antipathy in some countries towards international cooperation including the work and peace-promoting efforts of the United Nations, Mr. Fletcher insisted that reasons for optimism remain. 'I really strongly believe there is a movement out there that will back this work, that will support this work,' he told UN News. 'We've got to find them. We've got to enlist them, and we've got to show them that we can deliver for them. 'And, you know, I have not given up on human kindness and human solidarity. I have not given up on the UN Charter for a second. And this work is at the heart of it.'
