Inner City Press welcomes readers' comments or critiques.
December 31, 2012
As UN Squeezes Press Out, Gives Space to NYT Which "Never" Comes
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, December 27 -- The UN, which preaches for rule of law all over the world, says that media organizations must come to its headquarters at least three days a week to be given office space and resident correspondent status.
But as Inner City Press raised to the UN on December 27 during the UN's meeting announcing the layout of media space in the refurbished headquarters, the New York Times has not used or even entered its UN office since at least October.
For
more than a year, the New York Times has failed to
comply with the three days a week rule. So why it is
being assigned its own office, while other media
have been told to leave?
A check by Inner City
Press on December 26 found months' old fliers
sticking out under the door of the New York Times'
office, Room L-231. A long time correspondent
concurred, "the Times is never here any more." UNTV
archived video bears this out. Only the UN, applying
a double standard it won't admit to, is in denial.
This
obvious double standard is emblematic of the UN. As
regards media accreditation, 2012 saw an attempt
to "review the accreditation" of Inner City
Press, filed
by Voice of America which said it had the support
of Reuters and Agence
France-Presse.
All three are
members of the UN
Correspondents Association's executive
committee, which on December 19 extended
its term in office, to continue unchange, even
nominating its successors.
Even after the New York Civil Liberties Union asked the UN what rules applied to accreditation, and if Inner City Press was being challenged based on the content of its publications -- which among other things question the performance of Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row atop UN Peacekeeping -- the UN never responded with a set of rules.
The UN, it seems, is all about who you know. How else to explain some freelancers being granted accreditation, and others being kept outside?
After its experience in 2012, including on December 18 seeing Ladsous' Peacekeeping spokesman attempt to seize the UN TV microphone so that Inner City Press could not ask a question about UN inaction on the Congolese Army rapes in Minova, Inner City Press and others have founded the Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA.
FUNCA
has so far raised to the UN, for action, the
appropriateness of Ladsous seizing the microphone
and refusing to answer questions, the double
standards in accreditation and now in the assignment
of space, using the New York Times as the example.
In full
disclosure, while Inner City Press for FUNCA on
December 27 raised cases of an Egyptian journalist
on the now-longer waiting list for a space, and a
photographer forced through the metal detectors,
Inner City Press is depicted sharing space with an
Asian news service, which is fine. Advocacy should
be for those who need it.
Under this UNCA's
executive committee's watch, media space at the UN
is being reduced by 40%. After this loss, rather
than look at which media actually come to cover the
UN, favoritism is the rule. The UNCA executive
committee members have been well taken care of (by
themselves).
Voice of
America is depicted with its own office with four
seats, as is Agence France-Presse (which tried to
coax or coach the UN into describing its criteria as
something other than favoritism).
Photographers and
staff of AFP and Reuters, no matter how infrequently
they come to the UN, are given White passes to allow
them in without metal detectors, while smaller media
who are denied space must pass through metal
detectors and experience other barriers to coverage.
In the floor plan, there is not only an UNCA Club --
there is an UNCA office, and even an UNCA Pantry.
Why would the UN need to brand its kitchenette with
its company union? What's going on here?
There is not enough coverage of the UN -- on December 24, Inner City Press was the only media organization in front of the General Assembly covering its meeting on the UN's $5.4 billion budget. The answer is to allow in more people, and to treat them fairly. Watch this site.
December 24, 2012
Refusing Rape Qs, Ladsous Has Mic Removed from Press as UNCA Watches
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, December 18 -- Top UN Peacekeeper Herve
Ladsous hit a new low on Tuesday, directing his
spokesman to physically remove the microphone so
that Press questions about the UN's knowledge of 126
rapes by Congolese forces in Minova could not be
recorded. Video
here.
Afterward staff said in 13 years at the UN, they had never seen anything like it. Inner City Press was told that it, or the Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, should file a complaint.
The larger questions are why has Ladsous refused to answer questions about these rapes, by the Congolese army that the UN works with, on November 27, December 7 and now December 18?
On November 27, Inner City Press asked about rapes at Minova, which the UN then downplayed as being 22. Ladsous refused to answer, then summoned favored correspondents, including one from Agence France-Presse who re-appeared on December 18, out into the hall for a private briefing. Video here.
On December 7, after the UN had been forced by questions to up its estimate of the rapes to 70, Ladsous refused four times to answer a simple Inner City Press questions about Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, which would preclude Ladsous' MONUSCO mission from working with these Congolese Army units. Video here.
Ladsous refused to answer. Since then, a profile of his stonewalling and abuse of UN Peacekeeping for the political interests of his native France has been published by Billet d'Afrique, here.
On December 18, with the UN having just had to increase the count of rapes up to 126, it seemed inconceivable that Ladsous would not offer at least some answer.
Two journalists were notified by Ladsous' office and appeared at the stakeout, including Tim Witcher of AFP who as an executive committee member of the UN Correspondents Association on May 25, 2012 signed a letter against Inner City Press, following a September 2011 a dispute about reporting on Ladsous.
When Ladsous came out, these and Inner City Press went to the UN Television stakeout, where only the day before Inner City Press had asked another UN official, Valerie Amos, about the rapes in Minova. Since she does not run MONUSCO, she said she would have to look into it. Video here, from Minute 17:10.
But once at the microphone on December 18, Ladsous directed his spokesman Andre-Michel Essoungou to pick up the UNTV microphone and move it away from Inner City Press. The UNTV cameraman told him to put it back, that he had no right to touch it.
Then Essoungou tried to use the boom microphone himself, even offering coaching on (non rape) questions that could be asked.
Four
times, when there was a lull, Inner City Press asked
about the rapes in Minova, which FARDC units were
involved. Ladsous never answered, finally walking
away.
Inner City Press was told it or FUNCA should file a complaint. Tim Witcher left - UNCA, which used to but no longer defends journalists' rights, is preparing a $250 a plane dinner-dance for December 19, honoring not a journalist but Arnold Schwartzenegger.
It is worth nothing that it was only after the May 25, 2012 letter by five including Witcher, Lou Charbonneau of Reuters and Margaret Basheer of Voice of America -- these three went into the hall with Ladsous on November 27, video here -- did Ladsous decide he would no longer answer Inner City Press' questions.
These questions have included his MINUSTAH mission's introduction of cholera into Haiti and why he has General Shavendra Silva of the Sri Lankan Army, depicted in the UN's own report as engaged in war crimes, as an adviser, now also inspecting Ladsous' Lebanon mission UNIFIL.
This
same UNCA, back in September 2011, allowed Silva to
screen a war crimes denial film in the Dag
Hammarskjold Library Auditorium, the fallout
from which was reported by the Sri Lanka Campaign
here.
In June 2012, Voice of America stating in writing it
had the support of "colleagues" at Reuters
and AFP
asked
the UN to "review" the accreditation of Inner City
Press. Letter here.
The two other May 25, 2012 signers and UNCA Executive Committee members are, notably, receiving UNCA monetary prizes on December 19.
Ladsous and UNCA deserve each other, and flock together, in the hall. Video here. But shouldn't the UN be at least a bit better than this? The Free UN Coalition for Access will be pursuing this. Watch this site.
At UNCA, of Lyall Grant & Rice, Sri Lanka & Expulsion Links, Schwarzenegger Prized
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, December 19 -- As Ambassador Susan Rice entered Cipriani's on 42nd Street Wednesday night, Cipriani's security told a couple also trying to enter to wait, "Susan Rice is going in."
"Are
you joking?" retorted UK Ambassador Mark Lyall
Grant. As he went in, the Cipriani's security
guard said, "You don't have to touch me."
Inner City Press video here.
Embedded below.
Inside,
the UN Correspondents Association was holding a $250
a plate dinner and giving an award to Arnold
Schwarzenegger.
Inner City Press, which in full disclosure has been questioning UNCA since it screened in the UN a Sri Lanka government film denying war crimes, treated this UNCA Ball as a news event, standing in front of Cipriani's and asking questions.
To a question about Arnold Schwartzenegger as a UN role model, is it appropriate, many entrants laughed and asked to go off the record. The majority then said No, it is not appropriate.
German
Permanent Representative Peter Wittig, who to his
credit did not ask to go off the record, said
diplomatically "I don't know him well enough."
Another Security Council Permanent Representative was more emphatic, saying, "No, it's totally inappropriate, UNCA is a joke, come inside and I'll tell you more over a scotch."
But Inner City Press did not accompany him in. After Inner City Press reported on the Sri Lanka propaganda film, and that Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona had in the past paid rent for a luxury apartment to UNCA's president, a process began to try to expel Inner City Press from UNCA, to whose Executive Committee Inner City Press had been elected.
Then on June
20, 2012, after UNCA Executive Committee
member Margaret Besheer told her employer (and US
government agency) Voice of America that her colleagues
from Reuters and Agence
France-Presse supported her, VOA
asked the UN to "review the accreditation" of
Inner City Press. Click
here to view VOA's letter to the UN.
After
Inner City Press obtained related documents under
the US Freedom of Information Law, these three and
other UNCA executive committee members did not
respond to requests to explain or comment on the
documents.
(Nor have they answered two requests to know the agenda of their December 21 general meeting, or what they propose to vote on, even as they purported to remain in office past the December 31 expiration specified in the UNCA Constitution.)
So is their UNCA a freedom of the press organization? Why did they choose Arnold Schwarzenegger to receive their award? Why did they award prizes to their own Executive Committee members, two of whose media organizations have purchased full page advertisements in the UNCA Ball publication?
These questions were not answered. Outside, a habitue recounted how at the previous night's Cipriani event, for the Humane Society featuring Mike Bloomberg, a woman incongruously walked in wearing a fur coat. The crowd stopped talking; she left.
Meanwhile
Sri Lanka's Ambassador Palitha Kohona went in to the
UNCA Ball -- without answering Inner City Press'
question.
If his deputy General Shavendra Silva of the Sri Lankan Army, depicted in the UN's own report engaged in war crimes, showed up, wouldn't it be similar to the lady in the fur coat? Except there would be no reaction. This is UNCA.
Press
freedom must and will be better defended at the UN
in 2013.
At a press conference earlier on Wednesday, Inner City Press on behalf of the newly launched Free UN Coalition for Access -- yes, FUNCA -- asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to ensure that his Under Secretaries General hold press conferences and answer questions without discrimination or censorship.
This was a reference to USG Herve Ladsous of UN Peacekeeping, who has repeatedly refused to answer Press questions, about Silva, cholera in Haiti and most recently the Congolese Army rapes in Minova.
Inner City Press' reporting on Ladsous gave rise to a process within UNCA, initiated by Tim Witcher of Agence France-Presse (on one of whose boards Ladsous once served, in another conflict of interest), to censure Inner City Press.
On
Wednesday night, Inner City Press did not witness
Ladsous entering the UNCA Ball, but his spokesman
Kieran Dwyer did go in. Shouldn't this be seen like
the lady in the fur coat going into the Humane
Society ball?
But this is 2012's UNCA -- those engaged not only in
war crimes but also censorship are invited and
celebrated. But did they pay $250 for their tickets?
Ban
Ki-moon himself graciously invited Inner City
Press to enter. In truth, it was cold outside. But
it was from there that Inner City Press watched the
spoof "BanFall" film produced by CNN's Richard Roth.
And yes, not left
on the cutting room floor but broadcast was a
segment in which Inner City Press says "UNCA, you'll
never take me alive," on the roof of the very same
Dag Hammarskjold Library where UNCA screened the Sri
Lanka war crimes denial film, with commentary from
only Kohona and Shavendra Silva.
It is full circle, and it is enough. 2013 will be different. Watch this site.
December 17, 2012
UN Elections Scams from DRC, Pension to UNCA, Banning Democracy
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, December 15 -- What is it about
election scams and the UN? On December 14, Inner
City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky about today's
Egyptian constitutional referendum.
Closer to home, Inner City Press asked Nesirky about the UN Correspondents Association violating their own constitution and purporting to remain in office after January 1, having ignored the December 15 deadline to hold an election.
Nesirky
was dismissive -- see
transcript here -- and hadn't even been
asked yet about the UN's questionable role
during the last two elections in the Democratic
Republic of Congo.
Today there UN beneficiary Joseph Kabila gave a speech entirely taking for granted more UN collaboration with his army, which committed mass rapes in Minova which the UN's Herve Ladsous refuses to answer questions about.
Meanwhile
it emerged on Friday that even the UN's own
election for its Pension board has been
extended, mis-run according to staff by previous
vote player Bibi Khan.
So the UN can't correctly hold its own elections, and enables scam elections in the Congo.
Even on an absolutely clear violation in not holding an election by the deadline by its Media Access Guidelines partner, UNCA, the UN refuses to take action or comment, calling a blatant legal violation a personal matter.
Here's from UNCA's Constitution, Article 3, Section 3:
"The members of the Executive Committee shall assume their duties on the first day of January following the election and shall hold office until the last day of December of the year. Elections of the Executive committee shall be held between November 15 and December 15."
This is simple, and is one of the only acts this Executive Committee is required to do (the $250 a plate reception for Arnold Schwarzenegger they've set for December 19 is entirely voluntary.)
But on December 14, the day before the election had to be held, this UNCA Executive Committee simply announced that it would not hold the election before the end of the year.
There
is an obvious legal problem: they have no powers
after January 1, they have no power to run an
election after January 1. They are, in essence,
trying to stay in power unconstitutionally. And
their partner the UN refuses to comment.
UNCA's
president or figurehead, when asked
directly to about violating the terms of UNCA's
constitution, had no response.
It
has been suggested to Inner City Press that what
brings these together is an implicit claim of
powerlessness: the UN can do nothing, and UNCA
does little.
But UNCA could and should do things, like make
sure that UN officials like Herve Ladsous cannot
openly refuse to answer questions about how to
avoid bringing cholera to new countries, and to
not work with units of the Congolese army guilty
of mass rape.
Instead, top UNCA officials follow
Ladsous into the hallway for private
briefings, video here.
These three -- Voice of America, supported by
Reuters and Agence France-Presse -- urged
the UN to dis-accredit and expel Inner
City Press, and met with still un-named UN
officials in furtherance of their plan.
Since
their UNCA attacks rather than defends
investigative journalism, the beta Free UN
Coalition for Access, FUNCA, has been
launched, online
and in action, Friday here
then here.
The
UNCA executive committee announced a purported
general meeting for Friday, December 21 at 4 pm,
but didn't even say what the agenda is, nor what
they propose to be voted on.
This microcosm of lawlessness takes place right in the UN, with an entity Ban Ki-moon spoke before on December 12 (more on this anon), and will party with on December 19 along with, yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Other
such events celebrate actually investigative
journalists not affiliated with or buying
advertisements from the prize-giver. For example
the CPJ event recently at the Waldorff, which
Inner City Press covered as a journalist.
This UNCA is quite different: prizes to
Schwarzenegger and its own Executive Committee
members, no provision for press coverage. Is it
any wonder? Watch this site.
On Sri Lanka, UN Review to 2Q 2013, Any Silva Visit Screening & Kilinochchi Qs
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, December 13, updated -- A week ago,
Inner City Press asked
the UN what it would do in the face of the
troubling report on its actions and inaction
in Sri Lanka, penned by sometime UN
official Charles Petrie.
The UN answered that Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson would lead a team to review the report.
Today, the UN announced a bit more: that Eliasson has asked UN departments, funds and programs to nominate people to participate in the review, and that the review is due in the second quarter of 2013.
Inner City Press immediately asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky if any UN specialized agencies would be involved, for example the IMF (which stands accused of lending into increased military spending by the Rajapaksa government, even after 2009).
Nesirky reiterated, only funds and programs, and not agencies like the IMF.
Inner
City Press asked how it was that the Department
of Peacekeeping Operations allowed General
Shavendra Silva of the Sri Lankan Army,
showing up in the UN's report as engaged in war
crimes, to
"inspect" its troops in the UNIFIL mission
in Lebanon.
Doesn't DPKO have some type of review?
Nesirky
said he would ask DPKO. The chief of DPKO Herve
Ladsous has refused to answer any Press
questions, including about Silva as a
"Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations" and
other human
rights issues, see recent video here. How
about Silva as a UN troop inspector?
The lack of
standards in the UN was exemplied by a Shavendra
Silva appearance in September 2011, complaints
about which started
a series of anti-Press moves profiled
by the UK based Sri Lanka Campaign, here.
Months later this has led to a new move in the
UN: the Free
UN Coalition for Access.
After a troubling report forwarded by the SlC, Inner City Press asked Nesirky about at least 20 women brought into a military wing of a Kilinochchi hospital and not allowed visits.
For the record, the SLC recites
Of the women recently recruited to the 6th Brigade of the Sri Lankan Army (SLA), 20 were admitted to the Kilinochchi district hospital on December 11, 2012 between 11.00 pm and 12.30 am.
They had recently been trained in Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu districts
They were brought from Navam Arivu Koodam located in a village called Krishnapuram. Killinochi West
Upon arrival at the hospital, some of the women were unconscious.
They were immediately isolated from the other patients and subsequently detained in a small room in the hospital’s northern section.
The northern section of the hospital is not accessible to the public; it is used exclusively by army personnel.
Shortly after the group of women was admitted, a large group of army personnel (male and female) gathered at the hospital.
Only SLA doctors and nurses are looking after these female patients.
Nesirky
said that the Eliasson review is separate, but
that the UN maintains a presence in Sri Lanka.
So do THEY have anything to say about the
Kilinochchi hospital? Watch this site.
Update of 6:30 pm -- Here was Thursday's evening's UN answer to Inner City Press' noon question, note the last line:
From: UN Spokesperson
- Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM
Subject: Your question at the noon briefing - a
reminder
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com
The Spokesperson later said that Major General Shavendra Silva was part of the Military-Police Advisors Community (MPAC) delegation visiting the United Nations Interim Force Mission in Lebanon from 28 Nov - 4 Dec 2012. The official MPAC programme included briefings and visits to UN positions. The MPAC is a group comprising permanent missions' military attaches and police advisors, and the UN had no authority over the group of visitors that included Gen. Silva.
"Had no authority?" The UN has no say over who visits and inspects its peacekeepers? Watch this site.
December 10, 2012FOIA Appeal Shows UNCA Tried to Throw Press Out of UN, So FUNCA
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, December 6 -- For four months, Inner City Press has not published one additional word about the United Nations Correspondents Association, even after the organization's treasurer Margaret Besheer had US government Voice of America (on behalf of her and so-far unnamed others) meet with and ask the UN to "review" Inner City Press' accreditation to enter and cover the UN.
Documents
obtained this week under a Freedom of
Information Act appeal prove that Besheer wrote
that her Reuters
and Agence France Presse colleagues, Lou
Charbonneau and Tim Witcher, supported ousting
Inner City Press from the UN.
Only this week did the overseer
of Voice of America, the Broadcasting Board of
Governors, finally rule on
Inner City Press' FOIA appeal, and release
additional documents.
The ruling
on the appeal, which can be challenged in a
Federal District Court, is here; some of
the improperly withheld but now released
documents are here
and here
and here
and here.
The newly released documents show that Voice of
America was given a Congressional
heads-up that "the work of VOA
correspondent on this peer review panel at the
UN, it has the potential to kick up a storm up
here. For my part, I think it's terrible
judgment on the part of your correspondent to
participate." Click here
to view that newly released document.
Even the
VoA official who later made the request to the UN to
"review" Inner City Press' accreditation stated
in writing, it has now been revealed,
"Puzzling that Margaret would take up against a
reporter who would... be aggressively questioning UN
officials and would call on him to write more
positive stories about the UN."
But then
Voice
of America was told that AFP was ready to join the
attempt to throw Inner City Press out of the UN and
that "I think Reuters
is up for sending a letter too." Click here
to view that newly released document.
When
Inner City Press complained to Voice of America,
including that it was and is unconstitutional to
spend US government money to seek to eject a
journalist for what he or she writes, the internal
VOA memo was "All: Please disregard and do not
reply to any email from Matthew Lee or Inner City
Press, no matter how insistent."
This is how a US government agency responded to a
petition for redress of grievances? It was and is
actionable. And in that connection, more documents
have been requested and are expected.
Given these and other anti-press freedom moves by this UNCA Executive Committee, its legitimacy is and will be challenged, including by a new FUNCA: the Free United Nations Coalition for Access, being launched in beta here.
To quickly recap: in
September 2011, UNCA's outgoing president Giampaolo
Piolo threatened that if an article about
him was not removed from the Internet, he would
get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. He
invoked an archaic provision of the UNCA
constitution; the resulting letter of
denunciation has remained posted on UNCA's
glassed-in bulletin board for six months. What
kind of correspondents' association is this?
Eight month ago,
Pioli's handpicked successor Louis Charboneau of
Reuters, after telling Inner City Press in an
UNCA meeting that it is too critical of the
French mission to the UN, filed a stealth
complaint with the UN's Media Accreditation
and Liaison Unit over a merely verbal
disagreement. (An UNCA "examiner" then
filed a similar specious complaint with UN
Security, which was released under FOIA; it was
dismissed as frivolous by UN Security. But there
was no reason for any similar verbal exchanges.)
Then on June 20, Besheer had Voice of America formally asked the UN, on behalf of her and "others," to review the accreditation status of the UN of Inner City Press.
Inner City Press immediately filed a Freedom of Information Act request, including to learn the identity of these unnamed others. Pioli and Charbonneau then asked Inner City Press to withdraw the FOIA request, while threatening to go forward with a Kafka-esque "Board of Examination" report and trial against Inner City Press for what it had said and written.
The
BBG, on which Hillary Clinton has a seat,
initially denied and then after appeal granted
Inner City Press "expedited treatment" of its
FOIA request.
This came after the New York Civil Liberties Union wrote to the UN citing Voice of America's complaint against Inner City Press and demanding the the UN have content neutral rules for accreditation.
The first round of documents arrived on August 7, and Inner City Press wrote a short piece that day, linking to some of the documents. Then it appealed the withholdings and redactions, and requested additional documents.
Then
as noted this week the BBG finally ruled on
Inner City Press' appeal, and release additional
documents. Again, the ruling
on the appeal, which can be challenged in a
Federal District Court, is here; some of
the improperly withheld but now released
documents are here
and here
and here
and here.
The entire UNCA Executive Committee has been
asked, twice in writing, to respond to and
explain earlier documents which already were
"evidence of certain wire services' support for
and involvement in the request by US agency
Voice of America for 'review' of UN
accreditation. The documents also state that
UNCA is 'now discussing with UN officials (very
quietly)' just that."
Inner City Press submitted to each UNCA
Executive Committee members three of the
documents obtained under FOIA "for your
response" -- but received none.
UNCA under Pioli,
Charbonneau, Besheer and others such as Tim
Witcher of Agence France Presse has devolved
into a club for self-protection and censorship.
Witcher tried to censor Inner City Press'
reporting on the French Mission and its last
minute nominee for UN Peacekeeping chief, Herve
Ladsous.
On September 18, Ladsous who has sought to bootstrap on UNCA's witchhunt to not answer Press questions about UN Peacekeeping, refused to answer Inner City Press' question about his DPKO helping recruit militias in the Congo and turned to Witcher, who said, "Thank you, sir."
More recently on November 27, when Inner City Press asked Ladsous about raped committed by his MONUSCO's partners in the Congolese Army in Minovia, Ladsous refused to answer and then summoned a handful of hand-picked journalists into the hall, including Besheer, Charbonneau and Witcher. See video here. These are leaders of the UNCA Executive Committee; this is what they have turned UNCA into.
And now on December 19, their UNCA will celebrate none other than Arnold Schwarzenegger. Why?
Because
repeated UNCA meetings to demand
censorship, even of photographs that Inner
City Press ran, came to take up more and
more time, Inner City Press sought to put
the ugliness into the past by unilaterally
ceasing to write about it.
But now, with UNCA "leadership" sneaking around with Ladsous and the new documents released, action must be taken, including by the new Free United Nations Coalition for Access, being launched in beta here.
First up: how can the UN delegate administration of passes to cover the UN General Debate in the North Lawn building to UNCA, an organization which now has demonstrably sought to get Press expelled from the UN and claims it is separate from the UN?
Relatedly,
why is this UNCA given special rights to
ask the first question at press
conferences, and to be the "pool" at other
UN events? In fact, a small group of
Western wire services masquerade as UNCA,
as took place when Ban Ki-moon met Syria
envoy Lakhdar Brahimi.
Inner City Press asked the UN MALU, who said Reuters and AFP asked and were given access, in a role that is (wrongly) supposed to be for UNCA. More recently, longtime UN-based photographers were barred.
The UN and this UNCA cannot have it both ways, and we and FUNCA will be pursuing this. Watch this site.
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, December 7 -- The UN claims to have a Human
Rights Due Diligence Policy under which it will not
work with or support military units or personnel who
engage in abuses like rape.
But Department of Peacekeeping Operations chief Herve Ladsous four times on Friday refused to answer a simple question: which Congolese Army units were in Minova during the 70+ rapes, and what's being done to ensure the UN does not work with them?
See video here, and below, at Minute 0:22, 0:40, 1:34 and 1:49.
Ladsous
was at the UN Television stakeout ostensibly to
answer questions about the Congo. After on
November 27 refusing questions about the rapes in
Minova, earlier
video here, Ladsous on Decmeber 7 conceded
rapes there, by the Congolese security forces.
But he would not answer the key UN question: what meaning does the supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, announced by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, have?
Afterward
a range of diplomats from Security Council members
and Troops Contributing Countries told Inner City
Press Ladsous' stonewalling and choosing friendly
questioners is making them look bad. One used
the old saw, "A fish rots from the head."
Yesterday the UN
Secretariat confirmed to Inner City Press that Ladsous'
DPKO now allows Sri Lanka General Shavendra Silva,
whose troops were depicted engaged in war crimes
in the UN's own report, to "inspect" Ladsous'
peacekeepers in Lebanon.
Ladsous refused
to answer Inner City Press' question about Silva.
Yes, a fish rots from the head.
Previously on November 30, the military adviser of a a major TCC told Inner City Press Ladsous is the worst DPKO chief "ever," much worse than his predecessor Alain Le Roy.
Le
Roy was the third Frenchman in a row to head DPKO,
but at least he was vetted. Ladsous as it turned out
was rejected as a candidate by previous Secretary
General Kofi Annan, a senior Annan aide has
described to Inner City Press.
And this
time, he was a last minute, no-check fill in for
Jerome Bonnafont, who bragged in India that he had
the post. Clearly, this is no way to choose senior
UN officials. But this UN is so out of control, it
seems, no one can stop it.
Ladsous began
refusing to answer Press questions in late May,
right after and latching onto other
anti-press moves in the UN. These moves are
related, and due to the vacuum of leadership will
be confronted in 2013.
On December 7,
while refusing four times the Press question on the
rapes at Minova and his Department's role and follow
up, Ladsous and his spokesman directed the UN
microphone to other questioners -- two of whom
retreated to the hallway with Ladsous on November
27, video
here -- and took questions not about the
Congo.
Ladsous was asked about Northern Mali, on
which while in Paris he said nothing could be done
under September 2013. When Inner City Press asked
Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky on whose behalf
Ladsous was speaking, since the Security Council has
not decided that, and some members think that too
slow. Inner City Press asked if there was a
transcript. But none has been provided.
Ladsous also took a question about Syria -- anything
but the Congo and his failure and cover up there, it
seemed -- and repeated the answer in French and
English, without including what
he said in Paris about Salafists. And he was
not asked. This is how this UN works, or doesn't.
At Friday's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey questions about the supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy (that he counldn't answer without DPKO, which has not been answering these questions), and if Ladsous would evenhandedly take questions, including on Minova.
"Mr Ladsous manages his own stakeout," Del Buey replied. But isn't there some absolute minimum that is expected of a UN official, given how much they get paid, taxfree?
The briefing itself saw TCCs disagree with some others on the mandate of MONUSCO. Ladsous is in no position to show leadership, and isn't, sources say. And so civilians suffer, under this UN. Watch this site.
December 3, 2012 On Rapes in Minova,
Ladsous Calls Situation Fluid, Won't Say Which
Units, Policy Question Dodged
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 30 -- When top UN Peacekeeper Herve Ladsous took questions Friday across First Avenue from the UN, he said apparently without irony that the MONUSCO mission has done a good job in Eastern Congo in the last two weeks.
Inner City Press asked Ladsous about two specific places in the Kivus: Pinga, on which Ladsous previously refused to answer a Press question, and Minova where at least 22 women were raped after the Congolese Army retreated from Sake.
Since the UN, specifically Ladsous' Department of Peacekeeping Operations, says it has a Human Rights Due Diligence Policy under which it will not work with or support rights abusers, Inner City Press asked Ladsous whether the Congolese Army units at issue will be named.
Ladsous dodged the question - better than refusing it, as he did before - saying that the situation was "fluid." He said that Policy will be complied with.
But when Inner City Press asked again the unanswered question, whether the units of the Congolese Army or FARDC in Minova at the time will be named, Ladsous did not answer at all.
As
Ladsous continued, including to say that he has no
problem with the media, his spokesman seem to
indicate that more information may be available.
We hope it is, and await it, having two days ago emailed three of Ladsous spokespeople, and the two spokespeople of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon whom they copied, these questions on Minova:
"On Minova, (a) which FARDC units were present in Minova when the 21 rapes took place? (b) What was MONUSCO's presence in Minova during this time? (c) What and where are the "appropriate processes" through which DPKO will report? Are any of them public, so that compliance with the Human Rights Due Diligence Policy can be assessed?"
As soon as these questions are answered, we will report the answers in full. Until then, we will keep asking.
Inner City Press had to leave Friday's event, after several more statements, to continue to cover the Security Council debate on Women, Peace and Security. Ladsous spoke there, with no mention on Minova or abuses by the Congo forces that MONUSCO works with.
Nor did no respond on the reports, including in TIME Magazine, that Mai Mai Cheka rebels decapitated civilians in Pinga and the MONUSCO peacekeepers there did nothing.
The event, entitled
"Telling the Peacekeeping Story Better," was held
across First Avenue at the International Peace
Institute, on whose Syria program Inner City Press
also recently reported / tweeted.
The program of
theStorytelling on Peacekeeping event is or
will soon be here -- several of the other panelists
and participants
spoke movingly, for example about winning
over a BBC reporter to the UN's work in Sierra
Leone by actually explaning and answering
questions about it -- and video should be available
shortly (though UN Peacekeeping's link
to it
wasn't working at press time.) We may have more on
all this. Watch this site.
On Palestine, US Pressure Gets Pacific Abstentions, Scorn at Slovenia, ICC Games
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS, November 29, updated
Nov 30 -- When finally the UN resolution on
Palestine as an Observer State came to a vote, it
passed with 138 in favor, 41 abstentions and only
nine against.
Inner City Press had predicted ten negative votes, even days before the vote. But things change.
Ultimately the negative nine were the US, Palau, Micronesia, Marshall Islands. Panama, Nauru, Canada, Israel and the Czech Republic. Sources in the EU tell Inner City Press that the Czechs were flirting with abstention, but fell back to no.
There were 138 votes in
favor, and 41 abstentions. List here.
A
well placed European Permanent Representative,
speaking exclusively to Inner City Press, expressed
particular scorn for Slovenia, which after almost
voting Yes, ending up abstaining.
He told Inner City Press the Slovenian mission at the UN in New York pushed for a Yes vote, but couldn't get the capital to agree. And not having an Ambassador here, he said, was a problem.
US pressure didn't get
even ten "no" votes. But many Pacific Island states
abstained. And, it was noted, Liberia did not show
up. But neither did Ukraine, nor Madagascar. Two of
these three accounted for small gap between
Palestinian Mission's internal projection of 140,
and the final 138 Yes votes.
After
the vote, Inner City Press asked UK Ambassador Mark
Lyall Grant about his statement about abstaining
because he could not get assurances such as
Palestine not rushing to the International Criminal
Court.
Doesn't this cheapen the ICC and make it look like a political chip to be played?
Lyall Grant gamely answered that the assurances sought were in order to permit the peace process.
Inner
City Press asked the Ambassador of Sudan, which
introduced Palestine's resolution as this month's
head of the Arab Group and whose president Omar al
Bashir is under ICC indictment for genocide, about
the UK's position.
He replied that it is strange that a country that is a member of the ICC would ask another not to take a case there.
Indonesia's Foreign Minister, when asked by Inner City Press if the blockage of Palestine from UN membership by the US veto in the Security Council militates for reform said, the rules are the rules. But for how long? One wanted to ask him about the Rohingya in Myanmar. Next time.
When
Palestine's Rial Malki came to speak, Inner City
Press asked him about the ICC. He said that if
Israel doesn't continue with settlements and
aggression, then Palestine won't go to the ICC. And
if they do? Watch this site.
One wag joked that
perhaps Hamas, for Gaza, could go to ICC.
November 26, 2012
In DRC, UN Spun Failure As Allowing Monitoring, Then Silent on Minova
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 25, updated -- The inaction of UN peacekeepers under Herve Ladsous as M23 took over Goma and then Sake is one of the biggest UN failures in some time.
A member of the UN's C-34, to which Ladsous first proposed drones in March of this year, has analogized it to previous UN breakdowns, such as in Srebrenica (not to say as in Congo's neighbor Rwanda in 1994).
While the numbers in Srebrenica, which some put at 7000, were higher the structure is the same: the UN says it will protect a place, people gather and remain -- then the UN does nothing when the place is attacked. Here, the UN ended up saying it was better it did not fight. Better for whom?
The UN also said that by not fighting, it could remain and "keep records." But how? And for whom?
After Herve Ladsous refused again on November 21 to answer any Press questions, including "would MONUSCO defend Bukavu" and about the protests against the UN, Inner City Press on November 23 submitted simple questions in writing to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's three top spokesmen.
They forwarded the Congo questions to Ladsous spokesman Kieran Dwyer, who had been the one to tell UN personnel to make sure not to give the microphone to Inner City Press, to instead search for a friendly question "en Francais."
Dwyer, who by that and other acts appeared to become something other than a spokesman, emailed a response to basic questions, I am looking into that, before 4 on November 23.
A
day and a half later, despite major developments and
more UN failure on the ground, and the statement
issued by a meeting of the International Conference
of the Great Lakes Region, neither Dwyer or the
other UN spokespeople have provide any of the
promised responses to the questions.
One awaits as of 11 am on Sunday at the UN in New York even any comment on the ICGLR plans, on which Inner City Press asked the three top UN spokespeople for UN "comments and plans on the roles assigned to it by what was announced."
Surprising in light of
its failure, the UN's MONUSCO mission, which did
nothing as the M23 took over Goma, was assigned the
task of standing between the new territory taken by
M23 and the city of Goma, which the statement says
M23 should leave - except, paradoxically, for its
airport. So far, a full 24 hours after the
communique, the UN has had no response.
And now DRC President Joseph Kabila has said
there will only be talks with M23 if they leave Goma
first.
On November 23, Inner City Press asked the UN to "please describe any and all of MONUSCO's interaction with or support of elements of the Mai Mai or NYATURA so far this year."
On November 23, Ladsous' Kieran Dwyer replied, "I am looking into this." In the 43 hours since, no information has been provided. But it is widely reported that NYATURA fought alongside the Congolese army in Sake; and that the Congolese army when it retreated to Minova robbed people's houses and stores and committed rapes.
And
so questions have had to be asked, on the morning of
November 24, of the Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights, including that "in Minova, there
have apparently been rapes and looting by FARDC
units as they retreated. Has anyone from OHCHR
visited Minova?" No far, nothing.
What was that again, about a benefit of not fighting being the ability to keep records?
The UN has refused even to provide its records of its own damages. Inner City Press also asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to "please specify all damage or injury to UN system staff, facilities or property in the Democratic Republic of Congo since November 20, including but not limited to in Bukavu, Bunia, Goma, Kinshasa and Kisingani."
More than three hours later, all Dwyer responded with was, "I am looking into this." And as with the question above about Mai Mai and NYATURA, no information was provided in the 43 hours since.
How could the Department of Peacekeeping Operations purport to have no answer to this? UN buildings have been set aflame, rocks thrown at cars, mortars reportedly fired at the MONUSCO base in Monigi. But after 43 hours, no information at all was provided.
Back on November 21, it was Kieran Dwyer who for Ladsous asked UN personnel to not give Inner City Press the microphone as its question "would MONUSCO protect Bukavu" was asked.
Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's three spokespeople to "please state the Secretariat's position on its Department of Peacekeeping Operations' spokespeople directing staff of the UN Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit and UN Television / audio to hold the Security Council stakeout microphone away from Inner City Press, most recently by spokesman Kieran Dwyer on November 21."
This
question was paradoxically referred to Dwyer
himself, and he did not purport to answer it or even
claim "I am looking into it."
There was another, entirely factual question about Herve Ladsous, including his role during and public (and private) communications about, the Rwanda genocide in 1994, to which Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office has replied only that "We do not comment on recruitment processes." We'll have more on this.
Meanwhile, Ladsous' Department of Peacekeeping Operations is issuing short statements about the "background" and mandate of MONUSCO. When a Tweeter with three followers asked online why the UN and its humanitarian chief Valerie Amos didn't respond as in Somalia, with AMISOM, the UN Peacekeeping account replied with MONUSCO's mandate.
But
when asked
by a more active Tweeter with hundreds of
followers why Ladsous does not resign after his
failures, here, there was no response from UN
Peacekeeping. And so others online answered the
question themselves. Who will be held accountable?
Watch this site.
Update: more than 24
hours after the ICGLR communique, and still without
any responses from Ladsous' DPKO, the UN put out a
statement in which Ban Ki-moon "calls on the M23 to
immediately lay down their arms in accordance with
the agreements reached in Kampala, and comply with
the immediate withdrawal of their forces from Goma"
and "is also determined to ensure that the United
Nations presence in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo be adjusted to respond to the evolving
challenges in line with relevant Security Council
resolutions on the Democratic Republic of the
Congo."
So why did the UN, evne under its mandate, do
nothing in Goma, and why does it not answer since?
After Gaza Deal, Israel Talks Iran, Rice Opposes Observer State Status
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 21 -- For a week on Gaza, the Security Council met behind closed doors. Finally on Wednesday after the ceasefire was announced in Cairo, the Council agreed on a Press Statement.
After President Hardeep Singh Puri read it out, Inner City Press asked him about the delay, and what role if any he thought the Council had in the reaching of the ceasefire. He said it was not yet time for assessments, but at least "we got an outcome."
But what outcome? Inner City Press asked Israel's Deputy Permanent Representative Waxman is the deal means ships to Gaza will no longer be intercepted, but only inspected. He answered that the week showed the volume of weapons Iran is getting into Gaza.
When Moroccan Ambassador Loulichki, who represented the Arab Group throughout the week, came out Inner City Press asked him what impact he thought the week would have on the November 29 voting on Palestine's resolution to upgrade to Observer State status at the UN.
Loulichki said that it should be kept separate, that the position of regional groups remains the same. Earlier in the day Hardeep Singh Puri, this time representing the IBSA grouping of India, Brazil and South Africa, read out a statement on Gaza that included support for the Palestine move for Observer State status.
When US Ambassador Susan Rice came out, and after she gave a well-prepared answer to a question on her TV appearances on the attack on Benghazi, Inner City Press asked her about Palestine's application:
Inner City Press: I'm going to ask you a Gaza question although I definitely respect the right of people to ask a follow up to that [Benghazi]. I just wanted to ask you one-on Palestine, the controversy here at the UN about Palestine seeking observer state status. You heard Ambassador Loulichki say there's no relation between the fighting in Gaza and the vote, and Israel obviously said states should think again. The U.S. opposes the vote, but what effect do you think this week of fighting-do you agree that this shows that the Palestinian Authority has no control over Gaza? Should it make fewer states vote in favor of Palestine becoming a state observer at the UN?
Ambassador Rice: Well, I'll let other states comment on how they see the Palestinian bid for observer state status in the General Assembly. From the United States' point of view, we've been very clear. Our goal remains a negotiated, two-state solution. A Jewish democratic state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, viable Palestinian state. The only way to accomplish that in the real world is through direct negotiations, and we continue to urge the parties to come back to the table and to resume those direct negotiations. We view unilateral steps, including the bid for upgraded status to statehood-observer state status at the General Assembly-to be counterproductive and not take us closer to that goal, and, therefore, we strongly oppose it.
We'll be here on November 29, and until and after then. Watch this site.
November 12, 2012
At UN, States Get Palestine Resolution for Observer State Status, Vote "Near Future"
By
Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, November 8 -- Two days after the US elections, Palestine's Observer Mission to the UN on Thursday sent to UN member states its draft resolution to upgrade its status in the General Assembly.
Inner City Press has obtained a copy of Palestine's draft resolution, and puts it online here.
After recalling and stressing many things, the resolution would grant Observer State status, and hope that the Security Council grant full status.
In the interim, Palestine has had win and losses in getting seated in UN bodies, as Inner City Press has reported, from the Arms Trade Treaty through the Law of the Sea to Geographical Names.
Now, Palestine has written to member states:
Attached please find note verbal MI.274/12 regarding a draft resolution on the enhancement of the status of Palestine in the United Nations General Assembly to be considered by the Assembly at a date to be announced in the near future
Best Regards,
Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations
How will the US (and EU and others) respond? Watch this site.At UN on Genocide, Burying Sri Lanka Report, Rwanda's French Connection
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, November 7 -- It was a snowy Wednesday
evening when the UN held a screening and panel
discussion entitled "The Holocaust by Bullets:
Uncovering the Reality of Genocide."
The event was sponsored by the French Mission to the UN; the short but moving films were on Holocaust killings of Jews in Ukraine and of Roma.
After the first film, UN official Gillian Kitley told the snow-limited audience that the UN's now combined Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect advises Secretary General Ban Ki-moon of development in which mass killing may become possible.
Inner City Press asked Ms. Kitley, what happened with Sri Lanka in 2008 and 2009, when the UN pulled its workers out of northern Sri Lanka, then concealed and denied casualty figures -- Inner City Press got and published a leaked OCHA count of over 2000 civilians killed in a short period -- and then didn't even call for a ceasefire.
Ms. Kitley replied, "I understand there's been a very thorough investigation" into the UN's actions and inaction in Sri Lanka during that period, and that she'd be very interested to see it. But what about the public, to try to ensure that the UN does a better job in future cases?
Inner City Press asked Ms. Kitley to have her Office and Adama Dieng, the Under Secretary General for Genocide Prevention (USG for R2P Ed Luck appears to have rather quietly left for an academic job in San Diego) inquire and urge Ban Ki-moon to make the so-called Petrie report on the UN in Sri Lanka public.
Ms. Kitley did not answer the plea, and the event moved on. Video here, from Minute 1:03:11.
Alongside the Holocaust, Rwanda in 1994 was repeatedly mentioned (though France's role in supporting the genocidal government, including in the Security Council where current UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous was then France's Deputy Permanant Representative) -- and Syria was mentioned, by Ms. Kitley.
Earlier on Wednesday Inner City Press was told by a Sri Lankan diplomat that its close coverage, for example of its recent Universal Periodic Review (#UPRLKA) is not fair, in that it took the richer UK 30 years to deal with its "Irish troubles." We report this in fairness; duly noted. But it is also worth comparing responses to events in Syria and Sri Lanka. We'll have more on this.
November 5, 2012
On Somalia, With EU &
US "Too Cheap" for Naval Component, Amendments?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 1 -- At the UN on Somalia, it's war. Not on Al Shabaab, but about the Kenyan naval component of the AMISOM mission.
In the UN Security Council, African sources in and beyond the Council say, European members and now the United States are "too cheap" to pay for the Kenyan naval assets they "used" to take and hold Kismayo.
The AMISOM mandate was
set to expire on October 31. In a rare
session outside of Security Council chambers,
with a short
text "put in blue" by UN staff working from their
homes, the Council agreed to roll over the
mandate for a mere seven days. Click
here for Inner City Press in-person coveage of
that meeting and vote.
But, sources say, there is a move to put a longer resolution into blue -- without including the "naval component" of AMISOM.
The non-Europeans are incensed; there is talk of amendments "from the floor of the Council" to put the naval issue forward.
This
follow-the-money issue is alongside another, about
an exemption to allow the sale of charcoal built up
in Kismayo. But to reduce this story to
"paternalist" EU and US only caring about the
welfare of Somalia -- can they buy weapons, can they
sell charcoal -- would be misleading.
As several African diplomats put it to Inner City Press on Thursday, "the Europeans are just cheap." Watch this site.
October 29, 2012
As UNSC Speaks on Ceasefire But Not Terrorism, Al Qaeda OK in Some Places?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 24 -- After envoy Lakhdar Brahimi told the UN Security Council by video to await an official Eid ceasefire response from the Syrian government tomorrow, the Council agreed on a press statement directed particularly at the government, as the stronger party.
After the statement was read out, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin was asked of the reported rejection in advance of the ceasefire by the Al Nusra Front, which claimed credit for deadly bombings in, among other places, Aleppo in an attack the Council condemned in a statement.
Churkin said those with influence should speak with such groups. Inner City Press asked Churkin about his other draft Council statement on "Terrorism in Damascus," which the Council did not agree to.
Churkin
said there is a trend of not denouncing some acts of
terrorism. He said some find attacks by Al Qaeda OK
in some places but not in others: there is, "say that Al Qaeda cannot
do certain things in one place but is welcome to do
them in another place."
Minutes
later, Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar
Ja'afari told the press, "There will be an official
statement tomorrow" - that is, the day before the
Eid holiday begins. Watch this site.
Footnote: Inner City
Press exclusively
reported on and put online a list Syrian Mission
filed with the Security Council of 108 "foreign
nationals" arrested in Syria. Click here
for that.
Wednesday the Mission said nothing had been
done on the list; it filed a letter about the
killing of some 25 civilians in Douma, in an area it
says there is no government army presence. Don't
expect a press statement any time soon.
On Sri Lanka, Heyns on 40,000 Dead and Video Half-Shown in UN, UPR
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 25 -- The UN system's Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions has inevitably dealt with Sri Lanka for some years, given the mandate.
Inner City Press on October 25 asked Christof Heyns what he has done, to follow up on his predecessor Philip Alston's work on video footage of executions, and otherwise. Video here, from Minute 32:25.
Alston
deemed the executions video authentic, in a session
in the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Auditorium. Heyns on
Thursday told Inner City Press that he followed up
on new video which came out after he took up the
mandate in 2010, and subsequently appeared "in the
Channel 4 documentary."
That was never shown in the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Auditorium, while the government's purported rebuttal to it was.
Heyns said, "in the meantime as you know the Secretary General's panel reported that up to 40,000 people were killed in the last days of the war." This is a figure that whenever used, push-back and vitriol results. But that's what Heyns said. Video here, from Minute 37:45.
While there is a so-called Universal Periodic Review coming up at the Human Rights Council in Geneva with a mere 72 seconds per speaker, Heyns looked forward to "next March, 2013" when the "High Commissioner needs to report back. The issue is again on the table."
Heyns said that this year's HRC resolution "requests Sri Lanka to engage with special procedures on a road map dealing with reconciliation and dealing with the past."
Earlier on October 25 Inner City Press asked the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief Heiner Bielefeldt about Sri Lanka. He said there are "religious elements" to conflicts and spoke of "national mythologies," seeing "the Other as acting in the interest of a colonial power." He said the UN should "have witnesses planted in those areas." He mentioned the UPR, without mentioning it's only 72 seconds per speaker. Video here, from Minute 32:54.
While it may be unlikely that Bielefeldt will visit Sri Lanka, Heyns said "I am willing to go, the same applies to other mandates as well." He said "the reconsideration next March is important." He called Sri Lanka's "one of the largest reported killings in the world in recent times" that has yet to be "sufficiently dealt with."
But with Ban Ki-moon's view of accountability, as not requiring punishment of anyone, what will the UN do? For now, it looks like the report prepared by Charles Petrie as he set sail to Myanmar will be buried. Watch this site.
October 22, 2012
Defending Drones at UN, Koh Says Transparency Is Aided by US on HRC, 2d Term Promises
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 19 -- When Harold Koh came to the UN on Friday to pitch the US' candidacy for a second term on the Human Rights Council, his opening statement did not mention an issue with which he has become associated: drones.
Nor did the moderator's question to him -- Koh was asked what the US would do on its HRC campaign pledge about torture. While important, this seemed a softball focused on the previous Bush administration. (An ACLU question extended it to what the Obama administration will do to hold accountable those who tortured in the past.)
There were only ten minutes left when Inner City Press was able to ask Koh to "address drones, on which there's been controversy at the Human Rights Council and elsewhere, whether their use complies with human rights law. Would the US support a special session or inquiry into the use of drones to commit executions?"
When it was Koh's turn to answer -- he was moved up in the queue -- he cited to his own speech "in March 2010, echoed by John Brennan at the Wilson Center....The point is, all killing is regrettable [but] not all killing is illegal."
He said that killings by drone "in the course of armed conflict or in self defense is consistent with international law." He cited Al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated forces" -- presumably including Al Shabab in Somalia and forces in norther Mali or Azawad -- and said it is "not illegal to target an individual who is leader of an opposing force."
What about a 16-year old who is not a leader? What about "collateral damage"?
These weren't answered. Rather, Koh said he thought he questions were "ask[ed] in friendly way." He closed with the pitch that it would easier to work on the issue and get "transparency" if the US remains on the Human Rights Council. And then he left.
Inner City Press had also asked, "if the others running [for the Human Rights Council had] a interest in having drones addressed at the Council, the use of drones in Pakistan, Yemen and other countries."
But the other candidates present did not address this in their answers after the question. Germany's Permanent Representative Peter Wittig answered a question about vote-trading by saying that Permanent members of the Security Council don't have to engage in it, but others do. Estonia and Montenegro addressed this and other points, but not drones.
Argentina acknowledged that the Latin slate is "clean" -- three candidates for three seats -- just as it ran unopposed the day before for a two-year seat on the Security Council.
Ireland's closing statement concerned the "style" it brings; the moderator's Irish question about about food security." Sweden focused on Internet freedom -- the country hosts, for example, sites that Russia argues are subject to UN Security Council sanctions.
Greece spoke about the difficulty of being besieged by immigrants. There were echoes of the previous Romney - Obama debate, to which Koh jokingly referred. But drones are no joke. Watch this site.
October 15, 2012
On Sri Lanka, UN's 4 Month Report Not Done in Year, Petrie on to Myanmar
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 12 -- The UN's acts and omissions during the killing of thousands of civilians in Sri Lanka in 2009 has given rise to criticism, to which Secretary General Ban Ki-moon responded in September 2011 by saying UN official Thoraya Obaid would investigate and issue a report in four months time.
Nine months later, no report was issued and Inner City Press asked why not. Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky said for the first time that Obaid had not been able to do the report, but that Charles Petrie was not on the case and would issue a report shortly.
That hasn't happened either, and Inner City Press has since learned that Petrie has another job, with the Norway government funded Myanmar Peace Support Initiative (MPSI), which is also controversial.
But it's made Inner City Press wonder: how can Petrie do two jobs at once? How he work for the UN and, essentially, for the Norwegian government at the same time, in seeming violation of Article 100 of the UN Charter? And where is the report on the UN in Sri Lanka?
On October 11, Inner City Press asked Nesirky:
Inner City Press: I had asked about this report that was supposed to be now done by Charles Petrie into the UN’s performance in Sri Lanka in 2009. And I went back and looked at it. It seemed like it was supposed to be finished in August and you had said that when it is finished it will be up to the Secretary-General whether to make it public or not. One, so I want to know the status now that we are in October. But also, I didn’t know this, but Mr. Petrie has another job, which is to be the head of the Myanmar peace support initiative, Norwegian. Did he do this at the same time? Was this a full-time position? Has he finished the report and what is going to happen with the report?
Spokesperson Nesirky: The work with that Norwegian organization has absolutely nothing to do with the United Nations. It is the work that is being carried out on the report and continues to be carried out is obviously entirely separate and is not a full-time role. So I think that covers that. The first part of your question, yes, it is still in the works, and when it is ready, it will be ready, but it is still in the works.
Inner City Press: Okay. So it hasn’t been finished and given to the Secretary-General?
Spokesperson Nesirky: Not yet. It has not been given to the Secretary-General at this point, yeah.
If the long delayed report has not been given to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, then mustn't it still be with Charles Petrie? But where IS Charles Petrie? He is being quoted at the director of the Myanmar Peace Support Initiative (MPSI).
On October 12, Inner City Press asked Nesirky again: what is the UN's view of the Myanmar Peace Support Initiative, and how can Petrie work there and for the UN at the same time?
Nesirky
said he has answered the question yesterday -- see
transcript above -- so Inner City Press followed up
and asked what is Petrie's status with the UN, and
about Article 100 of the UN Charter, essentially
requiring serving only one master.
Nesirky insisted he had answer the question, and that if he has anything more he will provide it. We'll see. Watch this site.
October 8, 2012
As France Spins 2-Step on Mali, ECOWAS Frustration, What of Algeria and Chad?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 4 -- When Thursday's Mali consultations of the UN Security Council broken up near 5 pm, French Ambassador Gerard Araud emerged and confirmed that France would circulate a draft resolution shortly (in a day or two) but NOT yet to deploy ECOWAS forces.
Why the delay? Araud twice said, we've been waiting for some time for details from ECOWAS. He said the resolution might specify, deliver the delays in 30 days or as soon as possible.
Inner City Press asked Araud, what about Mali neighbors which are not members of ECOWAS, like Mauritania and Algeria?
Araud replied that any and all countries are invited to be involved. He mentioned the European Union, then circled back to Chad.
But again, what about Algeria? The country has long opposed interventions, especially involving former colonialism France. While pretending not to take the lead or play any special role on Mali, it was Araud who came to the stakeout; it is France which is drafting.
Then again, MUJAO in Northern Mali last month executed an Algerian diplomat. Araud said that there is unanimity in the Council on Mali, and afterward Cote d'Ivoire Ambassador Bamba, who was not allowed in the meeting, emphasized to the press that at the Sahel meeting at the UN during General Debate week, there was a strong political demand a resolution authorizing force.
But what about the neighbors, which are not members of ECOWAS? Watch this site.
October 1, 2012
At UNGA's Surreal Stakeout, Swiss Small 5 Lost in Translation, Morocco Runs
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, September 25 -- Even penned in cavernous Conference Room 1 during a badly administered first day of the UN General Debate, opportunities that seem potentially newsworthy crop up unexpected.
Between scheduled "media availability" stakeouts by Julia Gillard of Australia and Guatemala's president, Switzerland's president Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf appeared on UN Television speaking at the stakeout microphone.
After
first her answers were in German. But then an
Australian journalist asked if Europeans would vote,
in the current
Security Council seat race, for Luxembourg and
Finland rather than Australia.
She declined this question, but half-answered the next one, about Obama or Romney. She said they would be the same on banks, that she has a preference but will not say it.
As she responded to a question about sanctions on Iran, Inner City Press ran from the Media Center along a corridor of blue painted barricades to the stakeout and asked a Swiss question: does the "Small Five" effort to reform the Security Council's working methods survive its withdrawal earlier this year?
To be diplomatic, it seems the question was misheard. She answered "2022," apparently that Switzerland is running for a Security Council seat in a decade's time. She called it a "one year term," when the terms are for two years.
Afterward
a spokesman told Inner City Press, "you can't use
that." If agreed in advance, Inner City Press always
respects that.
But in this case, the comments were already broadcast on UN Television. And this comes shortly after hoopla about Switzerland's ten years in the UN -- click here for decade's review by Inner City Press. For the record, Inner City Press has had praise for the Swiss Mission to the UN and related community. But answers to questions on UN TV are for use.
Minutes
later the foreign
minister of Morocco Saad-Eddine El Othmani
appeared. Inner City Press has previously filmed
Q&A
with him, and this time ran to the stakeout as
for Switzerland's president.
But
this time a signal was given and the media
availability abruptly called to a close. There are
questions. Hey, it might have been a softball about
Morocco's position on a UN envoy for the Sahel.
Maybe --watch this site.
* * *
As Wittig Takes Abyei
Question Ladsous Refused, DPKO Tries Edit UNTV
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, September 28 -- The dispute between Sudan
and South Sudan about Abyei has been the subject of
UN talk and spending at least since the time of the
defunct Peacekeeping mission UNMIS.
But on
September 27, when Inner City Press asked "on Abyei, what is the
UN's role?" the chief of the UN
Department of Peacekeeping Operations Herve Ladsous
refused to answer.
On September 28, after belatedly obtaining a response to the same question from outgoing Security Council president Peter Wittig, Inner City Press learned that Ladsous' DPKO had hit a new low.
DPKO asked to get even Inner City Press' question about Abyei removed from the UN webcast archived video. That is the strategy: to censor or modify the UN's video production to make it appear that no question was even asked. A new low.
But here, even if this new low for the UN is achieved by Ladsous and (at least) three spokespeople he has debased is successful, is YouTube video of that Abyei question stakeout. Video here.
And German Ambassador Wittig, while seeking to focus on the congratulatory aspect of the UNSC Press Statement he read out, said that the Security Council will meet again about Sudan and South Sudan, and Abyei, and get a briefing from envoy Haile Menkerios. Apparently, the bi-weekly meetings on the Sudans will continue.
But what of
Ladsous and his refusal to answer Press questions
about his job, and then attempts to get even the
questions censored or edited out of the UN's webcast
video? Who is hurting the UN's credibility?
On Thursday evening, Ladsous' spokeswoman told the UNTV boom microphone operator not to give the mic to Inner City Press, and tried to convince the two other correspondents present to ask questions. But there were no other questions. Ladsous walked away from the microphone as Inner City Press asked the Abyei question. Now DPKO has asked to have the question edited out.
Ladsous is hitting a new low. Beginning in late May, after Inner City Press ran an exclusive article about Ladsous' proposal behind closed doors that DPKO use drones, Ladsous had refused to answer any Inner City Press questions, no matter how simple.
Inner City Press asked Ladsous why his Department flew Congolese military officials to a meeting to recruit the Mai Mai militia to fight another group, the M23. Ladsous refused to answer.
But on Sudan and South
Sudan, on which the member states which pay Ladsous'
tax-free salary have spent billions, after millions
of people have been killed, Ladsous' refusal to
answer the basic question -- "on Abyei, what is the
UN's role?" -- is particularly troubling.
By contrast, at the very same stakeout area
earlier on the same day, Inner City Press questions
were taken and answered by the foreign ministers of
Jordan and Italy, Australia and the
Netherlands. But Ladsous, ostensibly an international
public servant, won't answer.
September 24, 2012 -- for UNGA week coverage, click here.
As Ban Ki-moon Meets UAE & Arab League, Roed-Larsen at Both, Ladsous UAE
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, September 21 -- As this Fall's UN General Assembly begins, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and different members of his team met back to back Friday with the United Arab Emirates' foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan then with an Arab League delegation led by Nabil Elaraby.
Inner City Press covered both as photo-ops, being confined between the two in a holding room with an Egyptian videographer in the office of Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson. Questions arose about Ban's different line-ups for the two meetings.
Ban's
uncommunicative top Peacekeeper Herve Ladsous, the
fourth Frenchman in a row to hold the post, attended
the meeting with the UAE but not with the Arab
League.
Since the UAE is hardly big in UN Peacekeeping, one thought the rationale would be to talk about Syria. But Ladsous was absent from the more Syria-focused Arab League meeting.
Terje
Roed-Larsen, whose mandate under Security Council
resolution 1559 Syria has repeatedly sought to reign
in, was present for both meetings.
Ban's top lawyer
Patricia O'Brien, also uncommunicative in that she
has repeatedly refused requests to do a press
conference or take questions, arrived for the Arab
League meeting, of which Inner City Press made a 3-minute video,
on YouTube here.
The head of the UN Department of Political Affairs, former US State Department official Jeffrey Feltman, was understandably present for both meetings. The UAE foreign minister called out to him, "Jeff, I just sent you a text message," which Feltman acknowledged receiving. For Iran - LOL?
Here was Ban's spokesperson's office's read-out of the UAE meeting:
"They discussed several regional issues including Syria, and the Middle East Peace Process. The Secretary-General thanked Sheikh Abdullah for hosting the UN presence in the UAE and welcomed the newly established UNOCHA Gulf Office. He also noted the important role the UAE is playing in humanitarian financing through its Office for the Coordination of Foreign Aid."
So that's why the UN's
top humanitarian Valerie Amos was there. But why was
Ladsous at the UAE meeting? Watch this site.
Update of 6:36 pm -- the UN spokesperson has put out this read out of the Arab League meeting:
They discussed first and foremost the situation in Syria, with its political impasse, widespread human rights abuses, and growing humanitarian crisis.
They expressed serious concern about the question of Palestine, the lack of progress in peace negotiations, and the alarming economic situation as well as the absence of hope in the occupied Palestinian territory.
Finally, they discussed the rioting that recently erupted following the posting of the irresponsible and provocative video on the Prophet Mohammed, which they condemned, while deploring the violence that ensued.
But what about France Banning even peaceful protests? Click here for that.
September 17, 2012
After Benghazi Killings,
US Proposed Criticizing Denigration of Religion,
France Said No: Likes Denigrating
By Matthew Russell Lee,
Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, September 14, updated below -- Two days after the UN Security Council issued a press statement on the "Attacks against U.S. Diplomatic Personnel" in Libya, Inner City Press has learned of a telling back-and-forth in the Council prior to adoption of the statement.
The US Mission to the UN
proposed the initial draft, which included a phrase
against the denigration of religion, Inner City
Press has exclusively been informed, then
France opposed inclusion of that phrase, arguing
among other things that the French constitution is
secular.
While this action too will have its reaction -- three Council members paraphrased French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud that he likes and takes pride in the freedom to denigrate religion, and two called this outrageous -- the Council Press Statement was issued on September 12 without anything on denigration of religion.
It is newsworthy, Council members emphasize to Inner City Press, both that this US Mission to the UN proposed the phrase criticizing denigration of religion, and that France -- where the Sarkozy-era spats about religious jewelry and even halal butchers are apparently not over -- opposed it.
"There
are other statements coming," a Security Council
member told Inner City Press at 4 pm on Friday.
Watch this site.
Update of 7 pm -- Council members
tell Inner City Press there IS another press
statement under the silence procedure, about the
attacks on embassies in Sudan.
Meanwhile the US had Vice President Biden call
Sudanese Vice President Taha. President Omar
al-Bashir, of course, has been indicted by the
International Criminal Court for genocide. But that
didn't
stop Ban Ki-moon from greeting, if not meeting,
Bashir. Priorities...
As 3 More Afghan Audits Leak, UNAMA Deputy Says UN Should Disclose Risk
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, September 14 -- Exposing a series of audits
of the Law & Order Trust Fund for
Afghanistan over
the past 11 weeks, Inner City Press has
received a few responses from the UN Development
Program but no direct comment on the exclusively
published leaked audits.
On Friday, Inner City Press asked the UN's Afghanistan deputy Michael Keating about them. Video here, from Minute 11:07.
Keating said "we need to be more explicit in acknowledging... the risks that are inevitably there with a program of this size and complexity and not try to hide those risks."
But as donors threaten to stop funding LOTFA, a question is whether disclosing the risks would be enough, or whether some of the corruption like double payments and "missing assets" would have to curtailed.
Today Inner City Press exclusively publishes three more audits. In "Observation 19," the auditors drily note:
"During the course of our physical verification of assets, we noted that some of the assets, which were appearing in Statement of Assets, were not physically present."
This diplomatic "not physically present" phrase, if accepted, would have a good future on all manner of criminal defense.
In Observation 18, the auditors state that "during the course of our audit we noted certain instances where purchase orders were not raised in respect of procurement of goods," including over $300,000 for the purchase of Toyota vehicles.
Observation 17 "note[s] instances where evidences of required approvals by Special Procurement Commission were not available with the contracts" and "recommends that the provisions of the Afghanistan Procurement Law should be complied" with. Ya don't say.
Beyond this UN system corruption, there is a more serious debate about the proposed spending on constructing a new electoral roll -- would it be done fairly for all groups and how much would it cost.
But with this clear example of UN corruption not yet addressed, and with UNDP declining to directly address the audits, the questioning of the UN's role(s) in Afghanistan inevitably takes place in the aura of these, shall we say, irregularities.
Inner City Press had been informed by sources in Afghanistan that Keating, after working for the Africa Progress Panel with Robert Rubin, among others, on its board, got the post with the support of Tony Blair (Blair also works for JP Morgan Chase and ostensibly for the UN on Palestine) -- and that he is now leaving the Afghanistan Deputy post. So Inner City Press asked. Video here, from minute 17:22.
Keating confirmed that he is leaving, saying it is after two years in the post, calling leaving "absolutely normal." Watch this site.
September 10, 2012
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, September 5 -- UNICEF on
August 31 and September 2 offered Syria casualty
figures -- 1600 killed in a week -- that it
refused to explain, but which went out all
over the world.
The figures were in fact derived, Inner City Press persisted and on September 3 learned, from the media itself.
At UN headquarters
on
September 5, Inner City Press asked
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin
Nesirky about it:
Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, I think you need to ask UNICEF precisely on their sourcing. Let me simply say that it’s obvious that the United Nations does not have the kind of presence on the ground that would be needed if it would be possible at all to establish accurate figures. I think that’s obvious to everybody. It’s also obvious that there are many people who are monitoring what’s happening inside Syria and are providing figures which obviously need to be treated with appropriate caution. I think you are absolutely right that the figures are high. We heard the Secretary-General and Mr. [Lakhdar] Brahimi say this in the General Assembly just yesterday. The tragedy is that those numbers continue to climb, and yet it’s almost got to the point where it does not create the waves in the media that it should do, because it has become almost grotesquely commonplace. And that’s what the focus should be on. That’s where we need to focus our efforts to try to stem the bloodshed and move things onto a political track.
To some, even
inside UNICEF, it also seems important that the
numbers announced by the UN be credible, or at least
that their sourcing be disclosed as the same time
they are announced. The worst is the mis-direction
in which UNICEF engaged, saying "call OCHA" when
they weren't OCHA's numbers at all.
After UNICEF's Patrick McCormick was quoted that "at least 1,600 people were killed in Syria last week" and Reuters said he was "citing a U.N. document," Inner City Press early on September 2 asked McCormick, which document? And how was the data collected?
McCormick
replied to Inner City Press, "call OCHA" -- the UN's
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
This seemed
strange anyway: in
2009 OCHA refused to release very specific
casualty figures -- 2,683 -- it had
collected in Sri Lanka.
At the time, the UN told Inner City Press it is not in the business of counting the dead -- Inner City Press thought and thinks the UN should at least do this, where it can. But in a credible and transparent way.
In this case,
Inner City Press' initial
questioning was picked up by the UK Guardian,
as was the
above-quoted OCHA response.
Still UNICEF's number
continues to proliferate. Voice
of America at 2 pm on September 2 dutifully quoted
McCormick on the numbers for UNICEF, headed by
Anthony Lake. Click
here for Washington Post; UNICEF's one-week
1600 death count has since been in, among others,
Canada's big newspapers, GlobalPost, IBT, Slate, the
Huffington Post, the Daily
Beast - and in the UN's host city, New York
Post and New York Daily News.
Since then, the
Jamaica Observer, VOA-affiliated
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, San
Francisco Chronicle, Pittsburgh Post Gazette,
Detroit Free Press, South China Morning Post, and
more.
More doubts should have been raised: in Syria in 2012, the UN's mission has left after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous said that even observers in armored cars can't get around. How would OCHA have collected figures of the type it refused to release in Sri Lanka in 2009, and why would it (well, UNICEF) release them about Syria in 2012?
Despite OCHA's belated response to Inner City Press after UNICEF's, in context, deception play, will this be like the Inner City Press exposed but never corrected claim that new UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi is a "Nobel Peace laureate"? Click here for that. And watch this site.
As Feltman Jogs Into US Mission, Need for UN FOIA, & Schedules Online
By Matthew Russell Lee, View
UNITED NATIONS, September 5 -- The UN claims to be transparent, but it has no Freedom of Information law. So its steps toward transparency are small and random.
Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon has a "public" schedule, but for
example his recent encounter with Sudan's Omar al
Bashir, indicted by the International Criminal Court
for genocide, was not disclosed.
When Inner City Press asked about it, it was called a mere handshake. But Sudan issued a read-out of four issues covered.
Ban's new Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson also has a public online schedule. But recently Inner City Press was told that a visiting foreign minister had met with Eliasson -- and it never appeared on his schedule.
Wednesday morning Inner City Press happened to see Ban's new chief of the Department of Political Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman, jogging into the US Mission to the UN on 45th Street. It seemed noteworthy, since most missions come to meet Feltman in his UN office.
When Inner City Press asked, it was informally told that Feltman goes out to meet with other missions beyond the US, his native country whose State Department he served until earlier this year. Inner City Press asked, which ones? But that, seemingly as a matter of policy, is not public.
Under Eliasson, the UN DSG position has a political component, which Inner City Press compared to that of Feltman. Why does one make his schedule public, and the other not? Why isn't the schedule of top UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, resistant to Press questions, put online?
Both
Under Secretaries General, we have noted, made
themselves present at a sculpture exhibition opening
Tuesday night at the UN, along with Ban Ki-moon and
ambassadors including that of North Korea.
Ban, Feltman, Ladsous and other USGs will retreat to
Torino this weekend. Increased transparency should
be in their agenda.
Inner City Press asked on Wednesday, why doesn't Feltman put his schedule online, at least as DSG Eliasson does? We need to keep some secrets was the affable but unsatisfactory answer. Secrets on behalf of whom?
It is time for a UN Freedom of Information Act, which Inner City Press has long asked for. In the interim, Feltman should consider putting his schedule online. Watch this site.
September 3, 2012
On Syria, UNICEF's 1600
Death Count Came From Media, Not OCHA
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, September 3 -- On Syria, the UN announces
to the media death figures which are derived, Inner
City Press has
learned, from the media itself.
Then these are
circularly sourced to "UN documents" and given more
weight than they should be.
UNICEF on
August 31 and September 2 offered Syria casualty
figures it refused to explain, but which went
out all over the world.
After UNICEF's Patrick McCormick was quoted that "at least 1,600 people were killed in Syria last week" and Reuters said he was "citing a U.N. document," Inner City Press early on September 2 asked McCormick, which document? And how was the data collected?
McCormick
replied to Inner City Press, "call OCHA" -- the UN's
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
After three
separate inquiries with OCHA, and McCormick refusing
to respond to follow-up questions, Inner City Press
has just been informed by OCHA's spokesman in Geneva
that
"The estimated figure of 1,600 persons was arrived at from UNICEF's own internal monitoring of different media sources. The figure does not come from OCHA."
The key
phrase here is "media sources" -- UNICEF took the
number from news reports, despite the adjective
"different" and the reference to "internal
monitoring OF media sources." Essentially, UNICEF
reads reports on the Internet.
But where
do these news reports come from?
Increasingly,
Western wire services take their casualty figures
from "non-governmental organizations" or, more
accurately, "activists." Sometimes, at least,
the sourcing is disclosed as such.
But by laundering the activists
figures through the UN system, as UNICEF has done,
the figures take on the veneer of objectivity.
Reuters'
report said that McCormick has "citing a UN
document."
Inner City
Press repeatedly checked, and fourd on OCHA's
ReliefWeb site a UNICEF report stating that "a
record death toll of 1,600 persons was reported."
So it appeared even then that UNICEF's McCormick was
quoting a UNICEF report.
But, tellingly,
UNICEF's spokesman McCormick could or would not
explain UNICEF's own numbers. Why
else pass the buck to OCHA?
This seemed
strange anyway: in
2009 OCHA refused to release very specific
casualty figures -- 2,683 -- it had
collected in Sri Lanka.
At the time, the UN told Inner City Press it is not in the business of counting the dead -- Inner City Press thought and thinks the UN should at least do this, where it can. But in a credible and transparent way.
Inner City Press
immediately on September 2 did try to contact OCHA.
But OCHA's lead spokesperson is away, as was one of
the two referred-to replacements. The other did not
initially respond. Nor did McCormick, to follow-ups.
Inner City Press asked OCHA:
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you on a Sunday, but when I asked UNICEF for the source of its figure of 1,600 killed last week in Syria, I was told to "call OCHA." I checked ReliefWeb and found a UNICEF report where it's stated "A record death toll of 1,600 persons was reported."
Press question on deadline, I'm sorry to say, since this figure is going out all over the world: reported by whom? Where do the figures come from? Does the figure cited include military deaths? Deaths among armed groups?
Seems important to answer this, especially since the UN system in other contexts has said it does not have access (in Syria at least since UNSMIS left) and / or does not count the dead (I was told this regarding Sri Lanka in 2009 -- I thought and think that UN should at least do this, where it can. But in a credible and transparent way.
Does OCHA has casualty
figures beyond the above-quoted (but unsourced)
UNICEF report?
The next day, OCHA replied:
Subject: Re: I was told
to "call OCHA" about UNICEF's statement of 1,600
killed in Syria last week: reported by whom? Thanks
From: Jens Laerke [at] un.org
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 4:48 AM
Dear Matthew
At a media briefing in Geneva last Friday, a UNICEF spokesperson gave an estimated figure for the number of deaths in Syria over the previous week.
The estimated figure of 1,600 persons was arrived at from UNICEF's own internal monitoring of different media sources.
The figure does not come from OCHA.
Hope this helps, Best regards
Jens Laerke, Spokesperson & Public Information Officer OCHA Geneva
Inner
City Press' initial
questioning was picked up by the UK Guardian,
as was the
above-quoted OCHA response.
Still
UNICEF's number continues to proliferate. Voice
of America at 2 pm on September 2 dutifully quoted
McCormick on the numbers for UNICEF, headed by
Anthony Lake. Click
here for Washington Post; UNICEF's one-week
1600 death count has since been in, among others,
Canada's big newspapers, GlobalPost, IBT, Slate, the
Huffington Post, the Daily Beast - and in the UN's
host city, New York Post and New York Daily News.
Since then, the Jamaica Observer, VOA-affiliated Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, San Francisco Chronicle, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Detroit Free Press, South China Morning Post, and more.
More doubts should have been raised: in Syria in 2012, the UN's mission has left after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous said that even observers in armored cars can't get around. How would OCHA have collected figures of the type it refused to release in Sri Lanka in 2009, and why would it (well, UNICEF) release them about Syria in 2012?
Despite
OCHA's belated response to Inner City Press after
UNICEF's, in context, deception play, will this be
like the Inner City Press exposed
but never corrected claim
that new UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi is a "Nobel
Peace laureate"? Click here for that. And
watch this site.
Rwanda's Mushikiwabo Says UN Looks for Excuses, Hege is Ideologically Bankrupt
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 29 -- The day after a Rwandan delegation sharply criticized the UN's Democratic Republic of the Congo sanctions Group of Experts and its coordinator Steve Hege, Rwanda's Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo said that Hege and his report are "ideologically bankrupt." Video here.
Inner
City Press asked Minister Mushikiwabo four
questions after her closed door meeting
interacting with the UN Security Council.
While she did
not answer if the Rwandan government believes that
Hege (and his Group of Experts colleague Marie
Plamadiala from Moldova) met with Jean Marie
Micombero, she called Hege's "ideological leanings
troubling."
She said, "for anybody who is sympathetic to the
genocidal militia FDLR, which is proven through
his writings, to be the man who is at the head of
this Group of Experts is just an aberration... We
have signaled our concern to the appointing
authorities and we will wait to see what the
reaction is. But I will find it deeply troubling
that the Security Council could not look into how
this man was appointed"
Hege spoke to the DRC Sanctions Committee on August 28. Inner City Press previously first pointed to two articles he published in 2009 about the FDLR -- one was taken down quickly off Scribd after Inner City Press linked to it. We continue to await an explanation of this. The UN told Inner City Press it vetted Hege.
Last time she was at the UN, Mushikiwabo was critical of the performance of the UN mission in the Congo, MONUSCO. On August 29, Inner City Press asked her specifically about MONUSCO chief Roger Meece, and the Mission's admitted flying of Congolese officials to try to recruit Mai Mai militia to fight the M23.
Mushikiwabo
said that, while failing in their missions,
MONUSCO and some in the Congolese army FARDC are
looking to "find excuses."
She said much the same when Inner City Press asked how the M23 rebellion should be addressed, saying solutions should come from within the DRC, not by blaming the neighbors.
Inner City Press asked of media reports that the SADC has offered to send troops along the DRC - Rwanda border. Mushikiwabo said she is not aware of such an offer, but rather since four SADC members are also members of the Great Lakes groups ICGGLR, then SADC -- of which the Congo is a member -- could offers support and advice.
On August 28, it was Patrick Karuretwa, Defense & Security Adviser to Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who told Inner City Press regarding Hege that "a line that has been crossed by the coordinator of the Group of Experts. We expect any member to have views, baggage, but here a line has been crossed. You [pointed to] two of his articles.... in one of them he said the international community is souring on Rwanda. We say he's been given the tools to do precisely that."
There
are other questions for Hege, ranging for alleged
radio intercepts to claiming the presence of one
Jack (or "Jacques") Nziza on the Congolese border
when Rwanda says there are more than 100 alibi
witnesses, including diplomats.
August 27, 2012
On Eve of Return to NY at 81, Brahimi's Jordan & Anti-Election Links Eyed
By Matthew Russell Lee, 1 in
a series
UNITED NATIONS, August 22 -- With Lakhdar Brahimi on his way to the UN in New York, already some bad-mouthing of him has started. The opposition's critique is not only of his statement that it's too early for him to say that Assad must go, but is more fundamental.
"Wasn't he part of annulling the Islamists' electoral victory in Algeria?" one source pointedly asked.
Another pointed out Brahimi's
connection by daughter's marriage high into
Jordan's royal family.
Inner
City Press, which has
pointed out that contrary to wire
and then other
reports Brahimi
is NOT a "Nobel Peace laureate" was itself
corrected, for having said Brahimi is 78.
"He's 81," a source said, noting that in 2004
Brahimi presented himself in Iran as being 73
years old. Once this is confirmed, as the Nobel
Foundation confirmed to Inner City Press
that Brahimi
is NOT a Nobel Peace laureate, we will have
more.
So
why did
Brahimi take the job? One source said, "These guys
just can't stand to give up power, even if it is
only the UN kind of power."
It was predicted Brahimi will try for a smaller team than Annan, perhaps keeping on Ahmad Fawzi and trying to place three or four people in Damascus. That, like after his meeting with Francois Hollande, he will now present himself as in the "listening mode."
And that it is late, too late, for a mediated solution. "This will be decided," a well placed UN source said, "on the ground."
The problem is that there are many, many armed groups in the opposition, he said. There's an Al Qaeda-like movement; there's the Muslim Brotherhood, supported by Egypt and Qatar. And then there are 200 groups, who control areas here and there and will not bow down to any Syrian outside. So even if a deal is cut, "these guys won't stop."
"This
will be a failure for the UN," the UN source
concluded. "It will be seen as weak and
ineffectual. Ban Ki-moon is trying to avoid the
fall-out by appointing one high profile envoy
after another, and letting them take the heat."
The source paused and then marveled, "It's
actually pretty smart."
These are some
views; there are others. Watch this site.
UN Confirms Flying DRC Officials to Meet Mai Mai, Says Didn't Know Topic
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 24 -- The UN flew Congolese government officials to meet with a Mai Mai militia leader, Janvier Karairi, who afterward said "they came to ask me to form an alliance with the army to fight M23" mutineers.
On August 23, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky, "given the history of criticism [by] the UN [of] many of the Mai Mai factions, is it true that the UN is assisting the Government of the Congo to recruit these militias to fight another militia?"
Nesirky first referred the question to the Department of Peacekeeping Operations -- whose chief Herve Ladsous has twice said on camera he will not answer any Inner City Press questions -- then on August 24 offered an amazing answer.
Nesirky confirmed that the UN Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo "provided transporation and security" for the Congolese officials to meet with Javier and the Mai Mai, but said that MONUSCO is "not aware of any initiative to recruit Mai Mai."
So what did the UN think the meeting with militia leader Javier was about? Especially AFTER Javier said publicly that it was a request that what he says are his 4000 fights to take up arms against M23?
Inner City Press asked Nesirky this, quoting Javier that "they came to ask me to form an alliance with the army to fight M23." Video here, from Minute 12:15.
Nesirky repeated that MONUSCO did not know what the meeting was about. But why then did they fly Congolese government officials to the meeting? What type of meeting WOULDN'T the UN fly government officials to?
Nesirky said, "ask the DRC." But it is a UN question. How can the UN ask anyone to be accountable, when it is not? We'll have more on this, which again highlight how the UN has lost its way in the Congo.
After
nearly being thrown out of the country by
President Joseph Kabila, the price for staying in
has been to slavishly support the government and
its often undisciplined army, the FARDC.
As previously noted, DPKO chief Herve Ladsous has said openly, twice on camera, that he will not answer any Inner City Press questions. Video here, at Minute 28:10. And Ladsous spokesman Kieran Dwyer reiterated this in writing, and on camera. Video here, Minute 6:50.
But this is a question that should be answered: how can the UN be playing a role, even a transportation and facilitation and "security" role, in recruit a militia that the UN itself has been highly critical of?
In Sudan, the UN provided free helicopter flights to Ahmed Harun, indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, click here for one of Inner City Press' exposes on this.
This
year, Ban
Ki-moon and Ladsous accepted as a Senior Adviser
on Peacekeeping Operations the Sri Lankan
general Shavendra Silva, whose battalion is
depicted in Ban's own Panel of Experts report as
engaged in war crimes.
Ladsous specifically refused to answer a question about Silva - this was the first time Ladsous said, "I will not answer questions" from Inner City Press. Video here, at Minute 28:10
But in the Congo, the UN is going "hands on," flying Congolese officials to meetings with a militia leader who says the meeting was to recruit him and his 4000 fighters to join the bloody fight with the M23? How much lower can DPKO go, under Ladsous? How much more unaccountable can this UN become? Watch this site.
August 20, 2012 Brahimi Is Not a Nobel
Laureate, Nobel Foundation Tells ICP, Who
Corrects?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 19 -- Two days after Lakhdar Brahimi was named Joint Special Representative on Syria and a wire service called him "a Nobel Peace Laureate," and a day after Inner City Press twice questioned this designation, the Nobel Foundation has told Inner City Press that Brahimi "has not been awarded a Nobel Prize and should therefore not be referred to as a Nobel Laureate."
The Nobel Foundation's public releations manager Annika Pontikis also said that, until Inner City Press' question, no one had asked her this question.
So
the initial
wire story wasn't fact checked -- in fact,
that Brahimi is not a Nobel laureate is clear from
a simple
search of the Nobel web site -- and those
who ran it did not check either.
The "Brahimi as Nobel Peace laureate" phrase continued to proliferate, from Reuters to SABC, Malta Today, Euronews, Ghana Broadcasting Corporation, Eyewitness News, Channel 4
Nor did any of these respond to inquiries, nor apparently run any correction.
As
Inner City Press has previously asked without
answer, how are
these things supposed to work?
There is the
media, then there is the source or subject. Should
Brahimi, personally involved in his public
relations machine, have reached out to correct the
inaccurate description of himself receiving a
prize he never received?
Inner City Press before
and just after Brahimi
took the job wrote that it would be a form of "Nobel
Prize lottery" for him - if anything good happens, he
might be in line for the Nobel Peace Prize; if not,
expectations are low.
Further lowering expectations, Brahimi did phone interviews: first with French state media France 24, telling them that the UN only cares about helping the Syrian people.
On
August 18 Brahimi called Reuters, which then wrote
for yet
another time that Brahami is "a Nobel
Peace laureate."
Finally, Inner
City Press asked the Nobel Foundation "whether
former UN official (and incoming Syria envoy)
Lakhdar Brahimi was or is a Nobel Peace laureate"
and "if others have asked you this." The reply:
From: Annika Pontikis
[at] nobel.se
Date: Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 1:26 PM
Subject: SV: Is Lakhdar Brahimi a Nobel Peace
laureate?
To: Matthew R. Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Dear Matthew Lee,
As you probably know the United Nations, as an organization, has been awarded the Nobel Prize. This, however, does not mean that persons affiliated to the UN can call themselves Nobel Laureates.
The person referred to below has not been awarded a Nobel Prize and should therefore not be referred to as a Nobel Laureate.
I have not received this question from others.
Kind regards,
Annika Pontikis
As Inner
City Press wrote
before this answer, a "Nobel was given in
1988 to UN Peacekeeping, but if that makes Brahimi
a Nobel laureate many others can claim that same
prize. So why the designation? We'll
wait and see." And now we see. What next?
Watch this site.
At UN, Tale of 12
Twitter Feeds, Missions Tweet Stakeouts, Facebook
Start-Ups
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 15 -- It was by Twitter alone that the French Mission to the UN announced two press stakeouts last Friday by its Permanent Representative to the UN. Not surprisingly, the turnout was low -- in fact, only Inner City Press at the second of the two stakeouts, on Mali.
So it seems timely, especially in this mid-August lull, to review some UN Mission's twitter accounts, and wonder how long it will be until all 193 UN members -- and Palestine and the Holy See -- establish their twitter feeds.
Beyond its many spokespeople, the US Mission to the UN maintains @USUN, the most recent tweets of which involve Ambassador Susan Rice's time representing President Barack Obama as the closing of the London Olympics.
The UK Mission to the UK tweets frequently on @UKUN_NewYork, for example yesterday about Ali Saleh supporters' assault on the Yemeni Defense Ministry, about which the UN at its noon briefing said it was not even aware.
On the Latin tip, @GuatemalaONU while serving in the Security Council last tweeted about its vote for the Syria resolution in the General Assembly on August 3. This even is its affable expert greeted Inner City Press on her way into the GRULAC Third Committee meeting about the rights of the child.
The
Syria GA vote is @NorwayUN's second most recent
tweet, superseded by an announcement of the
sheathing of the Empire State Building in Norway's
colors for its participation in the Olympics.
One wondered: couldn't many other countries get that as well? Former Permanent Representative of Norway Morten Wetland, a tweeter himself, has gone back to work at First House, from which one hopes he'll tweet. Robert Mood began but stopped.
Going Germanic, @GermanyUN's last tweet is about a meeting on, what else, the future of the Euro.
Targets of Security Council sanctions can have their twitter too, although @EritreaUN's only tweet so far this year involves their cycling team.
While not a member state, though sometimes said to seek to speak like one, the @EUatUN has announced it is moving this month from its offices on 41st Street -- but the new address, on Third Avenue, didn't fit in the tweet, ran over its the EU's page on Facebook. (Inner City Press, with voluteer help, is just starting Beta dabbling in Facebook, here: http://www.facebook.com/innercitypress
Poland's @PLinUN covered Beyonce in the GA, as did Inner City Press. @SwedenUN did indigenous. @PalauUN promises sub-tweets, with Ambassador Stuart J. Beck notated as SJB.
South Africa's @SAMissionNY hasn't tweeted since February, but when it did it was about Palestine.
Italy's @ItMissionUNNY does a lot of re-tweeting, but had an exclusive last month about Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson at the UN Staff College in Turin.
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon himself is often (mis) represented by @secgen, which merely takes his daily public schedule and puts it online, even if the events are canceled or don't fit into 140 characters. And so it goes, with the UN and social media.
We will have more on this. Watch this site - and pitch us your feeds!
August 13, 2012
On Syria, ICP Puts
Ban's Letter Online, No Answer on Brahimi &
Feltman
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, August 10 -- More than a week after the Syria report of top UN Peacekeeper Herve Ladsous, who seems to have gone missing, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on August 10 turned in a bilingual update to the UN Security Council. Inner City Press is putting it online before 10 pm, here.
Meanwhile amid reports that long time UN official Lakhdar Brahimi is to be named to replace Kofi Annan as envoy to Syria, Inner City Press at 11 am Friday witnessed the entry of Syrian Permanent Representative to the UN Bashar Ja'afari to meet with UN political chief Jeffrey Feltman. A well placed source exclusive told Inner City Press: Brahimi will be discussed.
And so at Friday UN noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey
Inner City Press; I was just in the North Lawn and I was told that Mr. Jeffrey Feltman of DPA [Department of Political Affairs] is meeting…I saw Bashar Ja’afari go in. I’m told that the topic is Mr. Brahimi. So my question to you is: because Martin Nesirky was willing to say that there are consultations with the permanent members of the Security Council about such an appointment, is Syria and its permanent representative, will they be conferred with prior to an announcement, whoever the name is?
Deputy Spokesperson Del Buey: I will have to check on that. I don’t know exactly who the consultation list is comprised of.
Nine hours later, no response. But a well place Gulf source tells Inner City Press Brahimi is the Arab League's nominee, and will a more anti-Assad mandate than Kofi Annan had or acted under.
It is still time to speed through some of Brahimi's positions. The US, Hillary Clinton in particular, opposed General Douglas Lute favoring Brahimi over Holbrooke on Afghanistan in 2010.
Brahimi also said, in a 2008 interview, that Europe is a political midget.
Brahimi
to
his credit in March 2009 wrote, of Sri Lanka,
"being a spectator when 150,000 thousand people
are trapped in a death zone is not an
option."
That is, sadly,
what the UN did, and now even has as a
Peacekeeping adviser to Ban Ki-moon and Herve
Ladsous one of the generals responsible for the
killing, even according to Ban's own experts'
report: Shavendra Silva.
Brahimi is on the Advisory
Council of the Sri Lanka Campaign, which of
attacks on Inner City Press wrote this,
about those who "played straight into the hands of
the Government of Sri Lanka's attempts to silence
its critics."
So which Brahimi would
it be? Watch this site.
Reuters & AFP Sought Ouster from UN of Inner City Press, US Records Show
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, August 8 -- When the US government broadcaster Voice of America asked the UN on June 20 to "review" the accreditation status of Inner City Press, the UN Correspondents Association's president Giampaolo Pioli and first vice president Louis Charbonneau of Reuters claimed they had nothing to do with the request.
On June 30, however, the two demanded that Inner City Press withdraw a Freedom of Information Act request it had filed for records related to VOA's complaint, or face a release of a one-sided UNCA report and a subsequent show trial seeking to vote Inner City Press out.
Inner City Press did not withdraw the FOIA request. It stopped writing about the dispute until now, on August 8, when some 800 pages of documents requested under FOIA were released, while at least 150 pages have been withheld. (An appeal is being prepared).
Even on first review, the documents show that Reuters and Agence France Presse, among others, were part of the campaign to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. They conferred with "UN officials," yet to be named; Reuters conferred with the US Mission to the UN.
On June
18 at 12:40 pm, VOA's Margaret Besheer e-mailed
her editor Steve Redisch that "My Reuters
colleague just told me his people are
probably going to go the same route - to
press UN to pull Mr. Lee's UN accreditation."
Click
here for that e-mail, released August 7 under
FOIA.
The "Reuters colleague" is UNCA president in waiting Lou Charbonneau, who expressed outrage at Inner City Press complaining of his byline on unauthorized uncredited use of Inner City Press exclusive reporting, then said he has a policy of not crediting Inner City Press.
When
Besheer, Charbonneau and others -- the names
have been redacted -- received a complaint
about their censorship campaign that was send to
Capitol Hill and to the US Mission to the UN, Besheer
recounts that Charbonneau "asked the US Mission"
about the complaint. Click
here that e-mail, including a threat that
Reuters would sue Inner City Press.
Reuters'
threats came after Inner City Press several times
requested a copy of the company's policy for
crediting the exclusives for other, smaller media
from four Reuters officials: Stephen J. Adler,
Editor in Chief; Greg McCune, Ethics &
Training; Walden Siew, Top News Editor; and Paul
Ingrassia, Deputy Editor in Chief.
Reuters never
responded, but rather sought to "press the UN to
pull" Inner City Press' accrediation, along with
Agence France Presse.
Charbonneau shakes -- on what? -- with Ban
Ki-moon, (c) Luiz Rampelotto
As to Agence France Presse, on June 18 at 12:58 pm, Besheer wrote to VOA's lawyers that
"My AFP colleague asks if they could possibly get the tenor of our letter so they can stay on message and ask In the same way. Their legal dept is in France, so It would be their regional director in Washington contacting UN on their behalf."
The
"AFP colleague" is Timothy
Witcher who previously sought to use the UNCA
bureaucracy to admonish Inner City Press for
an accurate article concerning the French Mission
to the UN and Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman
in a row to head UN Peacekeeping.
They couldn't
stop Inner City Press from reporting, so they
sought to get it thrown out of the UN.
On June
11, citing Bloomberg News, Besheer wrote that
"UNCA now discussing with UN officials (very
quietly) next steps... They will have to
step up and do their part -and pull his
accreditation. It is my understanding that UN
legal dept is now involved." Click
here to view this troubling e-mail,
regarding which we will have more.
Who were
these UN officials discussing quietly with the UN
Correspondents Association the planned ouster from
the UN of Inner City Press?
The documents
produced include a response
to VOA's Redisch from UN official Stephane
Dujarric, formerly the spokesman for Kofi
Annan, referring to Redisch's emailed complaint
against Inner City Press of the previous day,
stating "Dear
Steve, thank you for your email. I will call you
later this week. Click
here.
But also on June 21, the records also show, once Inner City Press obtained and published the (first) complaint on the same day it was filed, VOA received nearly immediate inquiries from Capitol Hill about its attack on freedom of the Press and in particular Inner City Press' investigative journalism at the UN.
On
the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which
ostensibly oversees VOA, demands were made for
copies of Besheer's and her editor Steve Redisch's
e-mails.
In one e-mail, Redisch wonders how the requesters on the Hill would like Inner City Press if it were covering the Senate.
At the UN, the official to whom the request to "review" Inner City Press was directed, Dujarric, first denounced Inner City Press for obtaining and publishing the request, then ultimately begrudgingly granted Inner City Press a shorter extension of credentials than in previous years, while leaving the VOA threat pending.
Dujarric's
incoming boss Peter Launsky- Tieffenthal has been
asked by the New
York Civil Liberties Union to describe the UN's
process for accrediting journalists, with
specific reference to Voice of America's
complaint against Inner City Press. Click
here for that.
The UN and UNCA both claim to be unrelated, as
regards accrediation. But not only is this UNCA a
party to the UN's Media Access Guidelines - the
records released today should the submission of
UNCA supposedly internal documents to VOA in
support of its complaint to try to get Inner City
Press expelled by and from the UN. We will have
more on this.
Perhaps most unseemly for the UN, at the heart of the dispute is an attempt by UNCA president Giampaolo Pioli to get removed from the Internet a factually accurate September 21, 2011 Inner City Press story that Pioli in the past rented one of his 12 Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, then the chief of the UN Treaty Section.
In
September 2011 Pioli without first checking with
elected UNCA Executive Committee members like
Inner City Press granted the request of his former
tenant Kohona, now Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the
UN, to screen a Sri Lankan government propaganda
film denying the very 2009 war crimes that UN
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was forced to
commission a report about.
Pioli behind UNCA banner, Kohona & Silva not
shown, (c) Luiz Rampelotto
At
the screening
Pioli granted, Kohona was joined by General
Shavendra Silva, reportedly responsible for
4500 deaths in May 2009, who is now on Ban's
Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations.
Ladsous has refused to answer Inner City Press questions
on this, or anything
else.
On June
1, Lynne Weil wrote to three Voice of America
officials that UNCA was"moving to expel a
member whose apparent aggressiveness in interviewing a UN
official prompted a UNCA investigation."
E-mail
here, emphasis supplied.
Pioli told Inner City Press to take the story down, or he would get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.
The
Voice of America documents released today under
FOIA make plain that the basis for trying to throw
Inner City Press out of the UN was entirely what
it wrote or in one case said.
Inner City
Press commented to Besheer that some on Capitol
Hill might question the use of taxpayer money to
try to throw an investigative reporter out of the
UN. Besheer trumped up this remark as a "threat"
-- which VOA has since described as such in the
course of the resulting inquiry (on which we'll
have more soon.)
That there would be Congressional interest turned out to be accurate, and within days of the June 20 complaint, VOA's lawyers were preparing a draft memo for the BBG Governors which include, among others, Dana Perino and Hillary Clinton.
Then
it was decided that "less is more." There follow a
slew of heavily redacted pages. Inner City Press
is preparing a FOIA appeal of these withholdings,
and will continue to report on the documents.
Besheer in front of UNCA logo, taxpayer $ not
show, (c) Luiz Rampelloto
Questions include is it legitimate not only for a US government broadcaster like VOA but global wire services like Reuters and Agence France Presse (which derives over 40% of its income from French government "subscriptions") to meet secretly with UN officials conspiring to get a smaller, investigative web site thrown out of the UN? Watch this site.
August 6, 2012
On Syria, As Russia Nixes Ahtisaari, India On Abstention, Strange Rights of Reply
By Matthew Russell Lee, Partial exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- When the UN General Assembly reconvened for speeches after the Saudi resolution on Syria was adopted with 133 in favor, 31 abstaining and 12 against, Inner City Press asked Russian Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin what his country thought of Maarti Ahtisaari as a replacement for Kofi Annan as envoy to Syria.
"No, no, he is in deep retirement," Churkin told Inner City Press. Russia clashed with Ahtisaari over his position on Kosovo.
Inner City Press asked Indian Permanent Representative Hardeep Singh Puri about his country's abstention. He indicated that if the "welcoming" of the Arab League's resolution had instead been "noting," India might have voted yes. He also, in the GA Hall, condemned terrorism in Syria.
India's abstention allowed the argument, made to Inner City Press at the beginning of the afternoon's session, that more the half of the world's population did not support the Saudi resolution.
Inner City Press asked the Saudi Permanent Representative about this and he said, Then they could change the way we vote. India's Hardeep Singh Puri added, we believe in One Country, One Vote.
Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari indicated that this couldn't be an Arab League resolution, since two Arab countries had not supported it. Beyond Syria's negative vote, Algeria abstained.
Inner City Press was asked via Twitter why Yemen sponsored the resolution but then did not vote. The answer is that Yemen is behind in due and not allowed to vote, despite being pointed to as one of the UN's few "successes" this year.
Tanzania also abstained, explaining it was due to resolution's lack of focus on "external forces."
Argentina, whose opposition to the stronger version of the draft had an impact as exclusively reported by Inner City Press, voted yes but said afterward the resolution does NOT in any way authorize force to protect civilians. Thou dost protest too much?
Similarly, Nigeria said it does NOT support the Arab League's July 22 decisions or telling the Syrian opposition to unify. But Nigeria voted yes.
New Zealand said that it "joins China" in regretting Kofi Annan quitting. Why China? Well, New Zealand will be running for a UN Security Council seat in a year. That's often what these speeches are about.
Canada opined that "Annan" Six Point Plan is dead. But like Russia's Churkin said of the UNSMIS mission, it could just be renamed.
Libya's Ibrahim Dabbashi -- many are unclear if he or Shalgam is the Permanent Representative -- called on the General Assembly to do two things it can't -- impose sanctions and make referrals to the International Criminal Court -- and one thing it could do: try to strip credentials, as happened also for Laurent Gbagbo's Cote d'Ivoire.
At the end there were Right to Reply statements. Iran trashed the "Zionist Regime." Germany spoke, but did not reply on Syria's statement about its sale of nuclear submarines to Israel.
The EU deputy representative spoke, but did not reply to critique of EU sanctions. Afterward he told Inner City Press that under the current resolution, the EU does not HAVE a right to reply. That might be a problem.
Bahrain replied that the forces in its borders "are from Al Jazeera." One wag mused, well that clears it up. And then the debate ended. We will have more on this -- watch this site.
At UN, Broken Elevators, Hot Offices, No Drinking Water After Capital Master Plan
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, August 2 -- Returns to the UN Headquarters tower have been less than smooth, after a rehabilitation which Inner City Press showed featured massive cost overruns. UN staff have exclusively complained to Inner City Press of getting stuck in the "renovated" elevators, about uncontrollable window blinds which leaves the offices overheated, and now about a lack of drinking water.
According to staff, after bad-tasting water was repeatedly noted, the UN shut down the system and ordered bottled water to be trucked in and taken upstairs. All this while yet more staff are slated to move in this coming weekend.
"Where did all the money go?" a staff member demanded to know. "Two billion dollars for this?"
The UN's Fifth (budget) Committee, now slated to be taken over by a Sri Lankan diplomat named in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report on war crimes in that country, has until now raised numerous questions about cost overruns in the Capital Master Plan, run by American Michael Adlerstein.
The US quietly let the UN keep tens of millions of dollars in so-called Tax Equalization Funds, but for securing the Conference Rooms over the East River. But no drinkable water? Watch this site.
July 30, 2012 On Syria, Mood Has
Changed, UN Front-Runner, Rwanda Like Exit?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, July 27 -- Norwegian General Robert Mood, after having declined to renew his contract to head the observer mission in Syria which is being dismantled by UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, made this observation, dateline Oslo:
"In my opinion it is only a matter of time before a regime that is using such heavy military power and disproportional violence against the civilian population is going to fall."
While prefaced with "in my opinion," the verdict within an hour was getting big play in Western media, akin to an endorsement late in a political campaign.
But one wonders: did the UN say this about, for example, Sri Lanka's Rajapaksa government's use of even heavier military power killing 40,000 civilians, nearly all of them Tamils, in northern Sri Lanka in May 2009?
The answer is, No. And the reasons, we posit, is because the UN did not think the government would fall. The UN in this view is like a casual sports fan coming to loudly root for the team it thinks is about to win.
And in the nitty-gritty decision making of Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping, the goal seems to be not doing what is possible to protect civilians but rather to get out of the way, or look the other way, and let this overthrow take place.
Even as the UN Security Council debated two competing draft resolutions to extended the mission in Syria UNSMIS, the UN under Ladsous had three planes deployed in Beirut, ready to pull all UN observers out.
Some
ask: how is this different from the UN's pull out
from Rwanda, which the UN has had to live down and
apologize for since 1994?
As Inner City Press has
noted before, Ladsous in 1994 was France's
Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN,
supporting the murderous Hutu government in the
Security Council. Noting this historical
fact and others has led Ladsous
to refuse all questions from Inner City
Press.
And coming full circle, in his analogy how does Mood, the Oslo Oracle, compare with General Romeo Dallaire? We will continue on this. Watch this site.
July 23, 2012
To Extend Syria Mission, West Drops Troops to Barracks Condition
By Matthew Russell Lee, Partial exclusive
UNITED NATIONS,
July 20 -- In order to avoid a second day of vetoes,
the European sponsors of Friday's Syria mission
resolution made a significant change to their draft.
As Inner City Press first
reported,
putting the new draft online prior to the vote, they
dropped the condition that Assad's troops should
leave cities and return to barracks. Click here
to view the final text, compared to the draft.
Also see below.
Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Susan Rice about dropping the condition of "pullback of military concentrations in and around population centers, as well as to withdraw its troops and heavy weapons from population centers to their barracks."
Rice emphasized that the US was not a
sponsor of the resolution -- in fact, as Inner City
Press first
reported, Rice on Thursday when asked if the US
wanted the UNSMIS mission extended said no --
and urged Inner City Press to "speak to the author,
who I think will be coming behind me. We frankly
prefer the text that included all of paragraph 2 [of Resolution 2043], but we were able to
accept the draft that was voted today."
The UK's Mark Lyall Grant was next, and to his and his spokesman's credit took the question. Lyall Grant said Syria must comply with all aspects of the Six Point Plan, including "paragraph two which as you rightly say... including return of troops to the barracks."
He said "some Members
of the Council argued that we were setting the bar too
high for a possible extension of UNSMIS, so we decided
to focus that condition on the one posed a direct
threat to the Security of the mission."
Germany's Peter Wittig followed, and also took the Press question, unlike previously. He said, we had consultations this morning, so we tried our best to come together. That was a change in the spirit of compromise to get everybody behind the draft.
Inner City Press asked China's Permanent Representative Li Baodong about the change. He said, there are a lot of new developments, we want to see Kofi Annan's mediation continue.
When Russia's Vitaly Churkin came out, Inner City Press asked him about Thursday's statement by US President Obama's spokesman Jay Carney that the Annan plan "failed thus far, yes. And the failure of the Security Council to support this resolution means that it can't go forward."
Churkin disagreed, saying "Kofi Annan continues his work, the key ingredient is to try to put together a dialogue between the government and the opposition."
Churkin was told that he'd said "this extension gives Kofi Annan a chance," and was asked if "the new meeting of Friends of Syria might disrupt this process." Churkin scoffed, let's not make a rigid linkage between Kofi Annan and the monitoring mission.
Later Inner City Press asked Churkin specifically about what was deleted from the UK draft, and why. He smiled and said, "Matthew, the Security Council holds closed consultations to keep some secrets. You want us to give you all the secrets about the work of the Security Council. Then we could invite you... to answer all your questions." Well, why not?
From the outside it seems that faced
with the threat of a second day of vetoes, and with
the prospect of the UN and Security Council become
even more irrelevant to the Syrian crisis, the
European agreed to this change, and the US went along,
while calling it 30 days to pull out. So the can is
kicked down the road; there will be more Security
Council fights around Ban Ki-moon's 15 day report, and
whether to extend further in 30 days. Watch this site.
Here is
the modified draft approved on July 20, 2012:
Commending the efforts of the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS),
1.Decides to renew the mandate of UNSMIS for a final period of 30 days, taking into consideration the Secretary-General’s recommendations to reconfigure the Mission, and taking into consideration the operational implications of the increasingly dangerous security situation in Syria;
2.Calls upon the parties to assure the safety of UNSMIS personnel without prejudice to its freedom of movement and access, and stresses that the primary responsibility in this regard lies with the Syrian authorities;
3.Expresses its willingness to renew the mandate of UNSMIS thereafter only in the event that the Secretary-General reports and the Security Council confirms the cessation of the use of heavy weapons and a reduction in the level of violence sufficient to allow UNSMIS to implement its mandate;
4.Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council on the implementation of this resolution within 15 days;
5.Decides to remain seized of the matter.
Dropped is the reference to "full implementation of paragraph 2 of resolution 2043."As Ladsous Justifies Refusing Press Qs, Stonewalls on Mercenaries & DRC Killings
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, July 20 -- Can it be legitimate for a UN official paid hundreds of thousands of dollar a year, tax free, to refuse to any and all questions from a UN accredited journalist based solely on the journalist's critical coverage?
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous have taken this position for eight weeks now. Yesterday the position was reiterated, and requested answers not provided.
Ladsous' spokesman Kieran Dwyer on July 19 wrote that Inner City Press' written coverage of "Ladsous since he took up his position have made it impossible to have a professional engagement with Inner City Press on the substance of peacekeeping work."
A question is, whose lack of "professionalism" was on display on June 17, when at a stakeout on UN Television Inner City Press asked Ladsous for his response to Spain cutting its troop contribution to the UN Mission in Lebanon in half, and if his Mission in the Congo had as reported killed civilians.
Ladsous refused to answer either question, and Dwyer quotes himself as saying, "we are on the record as not answering your questions due to your personal attacks." Video here, Minute 6:50.
Ladsous began this strategy of explicitly conditioning answering or even taking question on getting positive -- and we and others posit, as yet unmerited -- coverage on May 29 in a televised press conference, and has continued it off camera since.
Can critical coverage of the job performance of a international civil servant be called the type of "personal attack" that justifies refusing to answer questions about job (and Department) performance?
Dwyer writes that his on-camera July 17 refusal to answer was "in line with Under-Secretary-General Ladsous’s response to your noon briefing question of 29 May, when he said 'I will start answering your questions when you stop insulting me and spreading malicious and insulting insinuations.'"
Again, can the publication of reviews of DPKO's performance under Ladsous, and his plans for example for the use of drones which several member states have criticized as not having enough safeguards be construed as "malicious and insulting insinuations"?
By contrast, at the same stakeout position where Ladsous and Dwyer on July 17 refused to answer basic questions about the UNIFIL and MONUSCO missions, on July 20 Ambassadors Rice, Lyall Grant, Wittig, Li and Churkin all took and answered questions from Inner City Press.
Diplomats employed by their own nations -- in these cases the US, UK, Germany, China and Russia, respectively -- might more easily say they can openly refuse to answer particular journalists' or media's questions.
But Ladsous is paid by the UN, that is,
by global taxpayers. He claims that he does not work
for France.
So on what basis does he refuse to do what Ambassadors Rice, Lyall Grant, Wittig, Li and Churkin do? (It might be worth noting that of all the Ambassadors who spoke at the Security Council stakeout in the past two days the only one who, through his spokesman, refused to take any question from Inner City Press was French Ambassador Gerard Araud.)
After receiving Dwyer's justification
for his and Ladsous' refusal to answer questions,
which was copied to Ban Ki-moon's two top spokesmen,
Inner City Press replied that it is "opposed to
conditioning answering or even taking questions on the
content of press coverage" and "will continue to ask
questions, including about DPKO and its missions, and
to report on the responses, or lack of responses."
Inner City Press then after
Thursday's Security Council meeting asked four
questions of DPKO, and two of Ban Ki-moon's
Secretariat, none of which have been answered or even
acknowledged by mid-Friday afternoon:
I
would still on Syria like a description of USG
Ladsous' role in the June 15 notification to the
Security Council that UNSMIS has limited its mobile
operations in Syria as of 18:00 hours local that day,
see http://www.innercitypress.com/icp1syriadpko061512.pdf
and an explanation of the steps taken since the S-G
(and presumably USG Ladsous) received UNSMIS' report
on Houla, where in the UN he referred it and why it
has not even now been provided to the Security
Council, according to several Council members.
Also from today, I'd like an answer how SRSG Martin Kobler's stakeout statement that UNAMI does not use private military (or security) contractors other than for dogs comports with these two budget lines:
HART SECURITY
LIMITED CYP
Training, other
$437,444
11AMI-20387 UNAMI
HART SECURITY
LIMITED CYP
AMI/CON/2011/041 Provision
of Security Awareness Induction Training Training (SAIT)
for UNAMI 1-Aug-11 31-Jul-12
$1,143,682 UNAMI
This last seems to runs through July 31, 2012 - still in force.
I am also requesting to be informed whenever MONUSCO finishes its review of the effects of its use of helicopter gunships / missiles in North Kivu.
Those
were:
No noon
briefing questions were taken on Thursday, and there
was no noon briefing at all on Friday -- the point
here is that there might have been time to answer at
least one of these questions. But at least as to
Ladsous, there is a stated "on the record" policy of
not answering Press questions. Is that
legitimate?
As Inner
City Press wrote on July 18, we'll pursue this --
and, we hope, answers to the questions Ladsous refused
to answer or even take, on top of the unanswered
questions about DPKO introducing cholera into Haiti,
and Ban and Ladsous having as a Senior Adviser on
Peacekeeping Operations an alleged war criminal, Sri
Lankan general Shavendra Silva.
Notably Ladsous did take Press questions earlier in May, and what he fastened on between then and May 29 is mysterious and / or troubling. Watch this site
July 16, 2012
At UN, Still No Answer to NYCLU on Accreditation Rules, 48 Hours Notice
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS,
July 11 -- One week ago today, the New York Civil
Liberties Union wrote to UN officials asking for a
public explanation of their standards for revoking
media accreditation.
NYCLU's request was explicitly
triggered by Voice
of America's executive editor Steve Redisch's June
20 request to the UN's Stephane Dujarric, on behalf
of VoA's Margaret Besheer and unnamed "others," to
"review" the accreditation status of Inner City
Press. (While the Broadcast Board of Governors has
sought delay, Inner City Press' Freedom of Information
Act request to determine among other things the
identity of these "others" is proceeding.)
On July 6, Inner City Press asked the
Office of the Spokesperson for Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon for their response to NYCLU's request. In the
five days since there has been no response at all.
But on July 11, Ban's lead spokesman Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press, "I'm going to have another word with Stephane Dujarric about this" -- apparently because he didn't like how Inner City Press asked a question about Western Sahara.
This shows the lack of awareness by the UN, at least by the Secretary General's lead spokesman, that there is a problem turning a disagreement about press questions or coverage into complaints to the UN's media accreditation officials.
Now Inner City Press has become acutely aware of another sample problem of UN media accreditation, the case of a journalist covering the UN for 17 years on issues ranging from disarmament and develoment to the indigenous who has now been told, with only 48 hours notice, to either produce a new letter of accreditation or give up not only his cubicle office space but also his accreditation.
Inner City Press interviewed the
journalist at issue on Wednesday night and was shocked
by the lack of notice, and by the lack of support he
received from the Correspondents Association, whose
president merely advised him to "get another letter."
The reality is that other reporters at the UN,
including non UNCA members, have been given far longer
to regularize their status, after a former employer
either disavowed them or went bankrupt. It's as the
NYCLA has asked: what ARE the rules?
If there are other unstated reasons for this "purge," some raised behind the scenes by Xinhua and the Correspondents Association's president against one of his own members, they should be disclosed and a response allowed -- that's what the NYCLU letter and applicable case law requires. Watch this site.
July 9, 2012
After NYCLU Writes to UN,
UNCA Files Bogus Report With Government, "Judge" With
DSS, New Lows at UN
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, July 5, updated -- Tuesday afternoon the New York Civil Liberties Union put out a press release questioning US government agency Voice of America's complaint to the UN to review the accreditation of Inner City Press.
Three hours later someone in the UN Correspondents Association filed a copy of the bogus report commissioned by UNCA President Giampaolo Piolo and his Big Media puppet masters / Hamptons house guests with government authorities to try to get them to act against Inner City Press.
The report is marked "confidential," and as announced by Pioli's Secretary Barbara Plett of BBC on Tuesday afternoon, is only for "UNCA members in good standing." So one of them is responsible for the (anonymous) retransmission to government authorities.
Was this the goal of the report all along?
In fact, Inner City Press at 4 pm on Thursday went to UNCA's office and asked how seeing the report worked. The office worker, seemingly paid by Pioli himself (as reported, he is renting out a Hamptons mansion for $90,000 a month) fumbled around and was unable to find the copy of the report she was in charge of. How to listen to the UNCA audio recording of the Executive Committee's Kafka-esque July 3 meeting was also unclear.
Inner City Press' request to see the "information available on request" cited in the report, ignored by the Board of Examination chair William M. Reilly and the two remaining Examiners, was conveyed to Pioli through his Secretary, so far without response.
Simultaneously, one of Pioli's three "Board of
Examination" members, Ali Barada of An-Nahar,
filed a complaint against Inner City Press with the
"Special Investigations Unit" of the UN Department of
Safety and Security.
The only
basis? What Inner City Press said when Barada bragged
that he immediately deleted without opening Inner City
Press' email requesting to see the "information
available on request" listed in the report Barada
signed off on - and which was then sent anonymously to
the government against Inner City Press.
In fact,
while all Inner City Press responded with was a run of
the mill host country insult, Barada cited his
involvement with a "terrorist" group, as a reason
Inner City Press shouldn't express its opinion.
This gang gets more and more anonymous, just as the supposedly "for UNCA members only" June 14 letter got posted as an anonymous "Mundo111" comment on a story about UNCA anti-Press campaign on the Guardian.co.uk.
Barada's
complaint is similar to one
by Louis Charbonneau of Reuters, copied
to Pioli, his Treasurer Margaret Besheer of the
aforementioned VOA and AFP's Tim Witcher,
claiming that Inner City Press saying "you
disgust me" when Charbonneau tried to organize a
session to oust Inner City Press without informing it
the WORST
thing Charbonneau has seen in 20 years of reporting.
Really?
Charbonneau's complaint was to the Department of Public Information, but now the NYCLU has written there. So Barada's complaint, also only about speech, is directed to the Department of Safety and Security. Once out on First Avenue and west, the NYPD would laugh at a complaint about such speech.
But ironically, while the First Amendment stops on First Avenue, pathetic attempts to file complaints about mere speech and get the Press ejected are even entertained here east of First Avenue, in the Alice in Wonderland that Ban Ki-moon's UN has become. Watch this site.
July 2, 2012
On Syria, As Clinton Claims Text Ousts Assad, Lavrov Laughs
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 30 -- When six hours late Kofi Annan emerged from the Action Group on Syria to speak, his key line to the press when asked if Bashar Assad will end 2012 in power or at the International Criminal court was that he'd left his crystal ball at home.
The real news was in the back to back press conferences of Hillary Clinton and Sergey Lavrov. Clinton, who took only two questions, claimed that despite agreeing to significant Russia demanded changes to Kofi Annan's draft, Assad still couldn't remain in power under the "mutual consent" clause. She then took questions from AP and Saudi-funded Al Arabiya and moved on.
Lavrov came out and
mocked those who'd claimed they wouldn't agree
to change "even a comma," noting the major
changes Russia got.
The draft
would have "exclude[d] from government those
whose continued presence and participation would
undermine of the transition and jeopardize
stability and reconciliation." Russia got this
removed.
He focused on those funding the opposition who want a spiraling of violence, and chided those - Hillary - who blocked the presence at the Action Group of Iran.
In the crowd was General Robert Mood, who as Inner City Press exclusively reported yesterday should be leaving on July 20, as the UN Secretariat has proposed to downshift UNSMIS to a political mission.
There were a lot of UN alumni in the crowd: former Deputy Permanent Representatives of China and of the UK (Karen Pierce), as well as former UK political coordinator David Quarrey. Click here for that, and watch this site.
After Voice of America
& UNCA Seek to Oust ICP from UN, Legal Notification
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 28 -- The five Big Media representatives on the UN Correspondents Association Executive Committee who started a "Board of Examination" probe of Inner City Press a month ago claimed that was not to oust the Press from the UN.
But on June 20 the executive editor of one of the Five, Voice of America, filed a complaint with the UN seeking just that: a review of the status of Inner City Press' accreditation to the UN, based entirely on things the Press has written. Click here for full text of VOA complaint to the UN.
Eight days later, the UNCA Executive Committee & Board of Examination have received a legal letter notifying them of violations of free speech, free press and due process: click here to view.
Precipitating this letter was word that this Board of Examination would issue its report, without even having informed Inner City Press of the charges against it, on Friday, June 29, unless Inner City Press agreed to blanket apologies and even a censorship commitment not to ever write about other media organizations.
On June 21 Inner City Press told the four remaining members of the Board of Examination that this VOA complaint and challenge to its livelihood made it nearly impossible to continue discussions with UN Correspondents Association president Giampaolo Pioli about how to "clarify" the fact that he rented his apartment to Palitha Kohona, then a UN official, now Sri Lankan Ambassador to the UN.
Pioli in September 2011
granted Kohona's request to screen inside the UN a Sri
Lankan government propaganda film called "Lies Agreed
To," which purports to rebut a UK Channel 4
documentary that was NOT screened inside the UN.
On the podium were only Kohona, Pioli, and alleged war criminal Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva, who subsequently became an adviser to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on peacekeeping operations.
These are facts; the UNCA Executive Committee on June 14 issued a letter "for UNCA members only" which is now their response to the media and which claims Inner City Press never objected to the "Lies Agreed To" screening.
That is false.
Inner City Press has shown the Executive Committee and now the Board of Examination that "before the screening, Inner City Press wrote to Pioli, Charbonneau, Voice of America's Margaret Besheer and others about 'the UNCA screening of the Sri Lankan government's rebuttal to Channel 4's "Killing Fields": -- I don't remember any email asking if that screening should happen in the UN auditorium, given that the underlying Channel 4 film not not shown in the UN.'"
The circulation of an "UNCA members only" letter, with this falsehood, and the failures to explain or act on the VOA / UNCA attempt disaccredit me and deny me my livelihood, have come to the fore.
And so here is the UNCA Board of Examination's June 25 inquiry, and Inner City Press' response:
Dear Matthew, A few days ago, as chair of the Board of Examination of the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee I asked if you had any submission's for the panel. There was no response.
June 21 you responded to a verbal invitation from other board members and you met with the remaining four of us.
At the end of the 2.5 hour session you said you would give us a proposal on ending the confrontation between the Executive Committee and you. The board members left with the understanding there would be a cooling off period marked with an absence of charges and counter charges by both sides. That apparently was not the case. Are you going to submit anything more to us?
Sincerely,
William M.
Reilly, Chair
Board of Examination, UNCA
cc: board members
Inner City Press immediately responded and asked questions that have yet to be answered:
I am surprised by this message. First, on June 21 you said that given the Voice of America / Margaret Besheer written request to the UN that it review my accreditation, you understood that addressing that threat to my livelihood, which I ascribe to the UNCA Executive Committee and this process that you continue to chair, came first.
What can you tell me has been done in that regard?
I was told on Thursday to draft (or even just "think") about possible clarifications, and that I have done. I was told it was understandable I would just not submit such drafts in writing -- as I told you, a reporter was misled by the UNCA Executive Committee, based on a prior draft submission I made, that I had signed an apology.
Speaking of reporters, and VOA, I wish to bring this to your attention, and I paste it below: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/303940/time-us-take-stand-press-freedom-un-brett-d-schaefer
You say that before June 21 you asked if I "had any submission's for the panel. There was no response."
When and how are you saying your request was made? While the membership in the Board of Examination has repeatedly shifted, I have made a number of submissions, of questions that I contend must be examined, and of my right to be informed of the charges and witnesses against me, before the 10 day period can begin.
What are the charges? Who are the witnesses? And who will rule on the conflicts of interest and disqualifying pre-judgments that I have identified?
I am covering the current Security Council debate on the Protection of Civilians, at which among others Sri Lanka (which I cover) is about to speak... I request your responses in writing; I made a similar request to the UNCA Executive Committee, to which they have not responded at all. I ask that you respond in writing to the points above. Thank you in advance.
Matthew Russell Lee, Inner City Press
And so, the legal letter has been filed. Watch this site.
June 25, 2012
Voice of America Complaint to Get ICP Out of UN Violates 1st Amendment
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 21, updated -- After five Big Media members of the UN Correspondents Association on May 25 started a "Board of Examination" to investigate Inner City Press with an eye toward expelling it from UNCA, they claimed there was no intention to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN itself.
But on June 20, the executive editor of Voice of America, one of the Big Five along with Reuters, Bloomberg News, Al-Arabiya and Agence France Presse, wrote to the UN's Stephane Dujarric, supervisor of the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit, asking him to "review Mr. Lee's status as an accredited U.N. correspondent."
It is now apparent that the UNCA "Board of Examination" process has been a set-up.
Inner City Press' participation in the meetings they summoned it to, its e-mail responses to questions they sent, its urging Voice of America to comply with the First Amendment to the US Constitution, are all now being used against it, to ask the UN to review its accreditation.
In the letter, editor Steve Redisch claims VOA correspondent Margaret Besheer was harassed by e-mail. But Inner City Press never sent a single email to Margaret Besheer was wasn't part of the UNCA Executive Committee list, on which members as in a witch hunt were demanding answers from Inner City Press.
Redisch, who has never once spoken to Inner City Press, purports to complain on behalf not only of VOA's Besheer but "others" -- with whom he presumably HAS spoken. It may be that he conferred the UN's Dujarric before filing this complaint.
The "unprofessional and borderline harassing email correspondence" to Redisch "and to other senior VOA management" were, in fact, requests that VOA as a government funded media comply with the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
Beyond freedom of speech and of the press, the First Amendment protects the right to petition the government -- including this state media Voice of America -- for redress of grievances.
Already in this time of fiscal austerity, there have been calls to defund and eliminated Voice of America. As simply one example, VOA at the UN has hardly broken any news.
Inner City Press, by contrast has broken stories about Syria, Libya, the selection of US official Jeffrey Feltman to head the UN Department of Political Affairs, 14 kilos of cocaine in the UN mail room in January 2012 (a scoop taken without credit by the Big Five and others), the fight in September 2011 between the guards of Turkish president Erdogan and UN Security, and UN corruption generally.
Particularly in these
times of fiscal austerity, does it make sense -- and
is it legal -- to spend US taxpayers' dollars on a
campaign to oust from the UN an investigative
journalist who exposes waste, fraud and abuse?
Update of 12:27 pm -- At the June 21 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press after asking questions on Sudan, Syria and the UN's plans to use drones, asked about the Voice of America complaint, citing UNCA.
In the briefing room and
asking a noon briefing question, which is rare, was
UNCA President Giampaolo Pioli and compatriots.
Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky, as prepared (video
here, from Minute 16:53)
I've asked whether journalists here at the UN have a right to know when complaints are filed against them, especially by competitors. Your Office has not answered; nor has the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit nor Stephane Dujarric.
Now I've learned that Voice of America has asked Dujarric to review my accreditation at the UN, essentially for things I have written. What are my rights in this regard? What weight does the UN give to such a complaint, with no specifics, filed by a big media -- actually, at least five of them -- against a small investigative web site? What does Ban Ki-moon think of all this?
And Nesirky replied, "I don't have anything to say on this at all" and "I have nothing to say on the matter." Video here, from Minute 17:57.
Here is the text of the complaint:
Subject:
Matthew Lee
From Steve Redisch [at] VOAnews.com
To: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Cc: Kataryna Lyson, Michael Lawrence
Date: June 20, 2012
Mr.
Stephane Dujarric
Head of News &. Media Division
United Nations
300 East 42nd Street, Room 518
NY, NY, 10017
Dear Mr. Dujarric:
I am writing because it has come to my attention that a United Nations accredited journalist, Matthew Lee of the Inner City Press, has exhibited disruptive and unprofessional conduct towards Voice of America (VOA) U.N. correspondent Margaret Besheer. Over the last several weeks, Mr. Lee has also sent frequent, unprofessional and borderline harassing email correspondence to Ms. Besheer, to me and to other senior VOA management regarding the United Nations Correspondents Association's internal business matters.
Although Mr. Lee has not physically threatened Ms. Besheer, I understand she and other reporters are, to be kind, uncomfortable with his behavior and feel that he lacks proper judgment and exhibits unprofessional conduct while at the U.N.
As an experienced journalist and leader of an organization dedicated to freedom of the press, it is difficult for me to make this request of you. But I would urge you to review Mr. Lee's status as an accredited U.N. correspondent. I believe his behavior is impeding the freedom VOA's correspondent and others need in order to report what they see and know from the United Nations.
I am copying VOA/BBG's Assistant General Counsel Kataryna Lyson and Director of Security Michael Lawrence so they are aware of the situation and its serious nature. Please don't hesitate to call or email to discuss further.
Best regards,
Steve RedischVOA Executive Editor
202-203-4500
sredjsch [at] voanews.comJune 18, 2012
UN Now Says Ready to
Monitor in Syria, After Memo, Mood is Schizo?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 17 -- Two days after the UN Security Council was secretly told by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations that its Mission in Syria was limiting its mobile activities, now Mission Head Robert Mood says he's ready to monitor the release of trapped civilians in Homs and elsewhere. Which is it?
The DPKO memo to the Security Council, reported and published by Inner City Press ten hours before any other media, was followed by a YouTube press statement by Mood. Now, Mood seems to have reversed course (or gone schizophrenic, as one wag put it). This was released, minutes ago:
From: UN
Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Statement by Gen. Robert Mood, head of the
UN Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS)
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM
Statement attributable to the Head of the UN Supervision Mission in Syria, General Robert Mood
Civilians continue to be trapped by the escalating violence in Syria. In Homs, attempts to extract civilians from the line of fire over the past week have been unsuccessful.
The Parties must reconsider their position and allow women, children, the elderly and the injured to leave conflict zones, without any preconditions and ensure their safety. This requires willingness on both sides to respect and protect the human life of the Syrian people.
I call on the Parties to take immediate action to ease the pain of Syrians trapped in the violence and the UN Supervision Mission in Syria stands ready to monitor their release, once the decision is taken by the Parties.
Sausan Ghosheh Spokesperson, UNSMIS
So, again, why did Ban Ki-moon and his Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to hold that post, decide on June 15 to limit the mobility of the UN Mission in Syria, and to tell Security Council members but make no public announcement?
Such Security Council documents routinely leak, predictably to the wire services affiliated with Western permanent members of the Council. But that did not happen in this case: rather, Inner City Press obtained a copy of the notification, confirmed and published it before 10 pm New York time on June 15.
Eight hours later,
still seeing no announcement by the UN or any
Council member, Inner City Press asked
the spokespeople for UN - Arab League Joint
Special Envoy Kofi Annan then for Ban Ki-moon and
Ladsous to explain the notification, what lay
behind it (i.e. what supposedly increased violence)
and what they wanted next.
What explains the delay? And who made the decision?
One working theory is that Ladsous, the head of DPKO whose notification it is, made the decision on behalf of his native France, for which he was an operative in the foreign ministry as recently as arranging Michele Aliot-Marie's flights on planes owned by cronies of Tunisian dictator Ben Ali.
In this theory, though there was little INCREASED violence to point to, Ladsous and France wanted to raise the stakes for General Robert Mood's already scheduled visit to New York and the Security Council, to put it in the context of UNSMIS being OVER, no longer improvable.
Otherwise, Mood
should have given his public statement when the
decision to limit his Mission was made, to obviate
the risk of a Security Council leak on Friday.
Such a leak did take
place, but not in the most predictable way.
Or, some wonder, did though Western-member aligned
wire services know of the decision and not report
it?
And why, now, has
Mood reversed course?
Notably, the UN representatives of Reuters, Agence France Presse, (US) Voice of America and Bloomberg are four of five signers of a letter seeking to investigate and expel Inner City Press. We'll have more on this.
Ignoring
Syria Scoops, Pioli's UNCA Tries to Pick 2 More
Hanging Judges
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 17 -- As Press inquiries continued Sunday into the UN's leaked notice Friday that its Syria mission was limiting its "mobile activities," the UN Correspondents Association Executive Committee and President Giapaolo Pioli was engaged in trying to replace the second resigning member of the "Board of Examination" they established to investigate Inner City Press with an eye toward expelling it.
The first of Pioli's
five Examiners to resign was unilaterally replaced on
June 15. By whom? By a close friend of a disgruntedly
former UN reporter who recently resurrected a
complaint about Press reporting of French mission
briefings by Sarkozy Permanent Representative Gerard
Araud.
His offer of testimony is implicitly connected to an attempt to get another UN reporting job and return to New York. In the Wild West, now on the far East Side of Manhattan, this is called a hanging judge.
But, tellingly, on June 15 a second examiner resigned, concluding that a mediated solution has become unlikely. Pioli has demanded a blanket apology for Inner City Press' factual reporting that Pioli rented his apartment to Palitha Kohona, now the Sri Lankan ambassador whose request to screen a war crimes denial film Pioli granted without consulting other Executive Committee members including Inner City Press.
In order to tone down the
death threats from Sri Lankan extremists triggered by
the UNCA proceeding, Inner City Press offered a
balanced clarification.
But Pioli has demanded, among other things, that Inner City Press "guarantee that [any] future coverage of the UN" not even mention "other UN correspondents" - including, of course, him. This is censorship.
But even on Sunday, amid questions raised by Inner City Press' world exclusive of the Syria shut down notice to the Security Council by the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, led by the fourth Frenchman in a row Herve Ladsous, Pioli and this five big media entourage continued to try to push forward with their Board of Examination.
Now the second resignee is proposed to be replaced by an individual who has already expressed a view of the outcome of the case. No jury would include such a person; nor should this UNCA Board of Examination, already a charade and kangaroo court. The individual has been informed of the threats triggered by the Board Pioli's asked him to join as a hanging judge. Now what?
If it goes forward -- and
under the most basic principles of protecting
journalists, which UNCA's Constitution claims it does
-- then the Examiners should be journalism ethics
professors. Let them judge what the problem is:
truthful reporting, or a journalist renting his
apartment to people he purports to cover.
Or, as in the case of Pioli, also making campaign contributions to a politician he writes about for the Poligrafici Editoriale Group and its Quotidiano Nazionale, La Nazione, Il Resto de Carlino, Il Giorno and, yes, Quotidiano.net?
And we are still
waiting for a response to formal
question put to Pioli's hand-picked chairman,
about conflicts and junkets, beyond his one-line
answer that he worked for UPI for fifty years.
Watch this site.
UN Uses UNCA to Ban Free Press, Hypocrisy Like Haiti, Astroturf like Darfur
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 9 -- The UN too often preaches one thing but does another. It preaches accountability, then covers up its proven role in introducing cholera into Haiti.
At a different level, it criticizes governments for dictating with which groups they will negotiate -- for example these days in Syria -- while the UN in New York undermines free press by only negotiating such things as physical access and conditions for reporting with the one entity it has chosen, the UN Correspondents Association.
The UN has "Media Guidelines," and claims these are legitimate because they were negotiated with "the media." But by "the media" the UN actually only means "UNCA."
This is similar to
the way the Sudanese government created then
negotiated with the Liberty & Justice
Movement in Darfur, thereby marginalize the
actual opposition.
LJM was founded and is headed, as Inner City Press exposed, by a former UN staff member who for a time was a UN-paid Darfur "rebel." LJM has been dubbed "Astroturf," a synthetic grassless sports surface: fake grassroots.
The UN's Media Guidelines, formally the "Guidelines on Media Access at United Nations Headquarters," say they are an agreement involving the "Office of the Spokesperson of the Secretary-General" (Ban Ki-moon) and "the United Nations Correspondents Association."
How can the UN's media access guidelines be dictated by an agreement with UNCA, which does not represent (or defend) all journalists at the UN?
This is particularly problematic because anyone deemed, without due process, to have violated these UNCA-agreed guidelines will face "withdrawal of their accreditation."
As previously exposed, a stealth allegation of violation was filed with MALU by Louis Charbonneau, UNCA's First Vice President. Charbonneau is the bureau chief of Reuters which on May 21 made unauthorized uncredited use of Inner City Press' March 28 exclusive story that US official Jeffrey Feltman will come work at the UN.
So big media can use the UN-legitimated UNCA to seek to expel smaller media which beats them on stories. Then the UN's MALU does not even inform the small media (in this case Inner City Press) that the complaint has been filed. Due process? Not at the UN.
As simply another example, the UN / UNCA rules agreed with UNCA state that "No cameras or photographers will be allowed in the cordoned off area by the stairs." But some are allowed, and others not.
Likewise, those on
the UNCA Executive Committee have been allowed
by the UN to make decisions, fraught with
conflicts of interest and payback, on which
media get offices, big offices, studios.
UNCA Executive Committee members have spend much time ensuring themselves big spaces, mostly furthering their own interests and not even those of the other "general" UNCA members, much less non-UNCA members.
Then there is the
question of accreditation of bloggers, which
Inner City Press has fought for since arriving
to cover the UN.
The President of UNCA Giampioli Pioli first proposed agreeing with the UN on a rule that would not include bloggers, then would confine them to a footnote, and impose on them a different standard than is applicable to other media.
In light of the special status the UN accords to UNCA, legally, UNCA's acts can be attributable to the UN.
(An aside on law: on June 8 UNCA's Pioli announced he was "suspending" Inner City Press, an act for which there is no provision in the UNCA Constitution. But he did it, and this is the organization the UN exclusively negotiates the rights of all journalists with.)
So, for example, when the UNCA Executive Committee proceeds with a witch hunt and kangaroo court against Inner City Press, and the process is amplified and turned into threats by Sri Lankan government media and Sinhalese extremists around the world, including in New York -- all of this is attributable to Ban Ki-moon's UN.
This is particularly true because the UN Secretariat, its Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit, senior advisers to Ban and others have all seen this witch hunt developing, have formally been given copies of the Sri Lanka newspaper articles, and have done nothing.
Apparently, they like it.
When UNCA President Giampaolo Pioli on June 8 for the upteenth time threatened to sue and bankrupt small media Inner City Press if it did not take down its reporting that Pioli accepted rent money from Palitha Kohona, the UN official who is now, through another revolving door, Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative to the UN -- this too might be attributed to Ban Ki-moon's UN, if not to the Sri Lankan government.
There are other connections. When Inner City Press tried to cover the meetings of Ban Ki-moon's Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations to see if alleged war criminal Sri Lankan government Shavendra Silva was still attending, Ban's MALU told Inner City Press No, citing a meeting with UNCA.
It's all very convenient. But in fact, the acts of UNCA are attributable in these ways and many others to the UN. Watch this site.
June 4, 2012
As UNCA Pushes
Anti-Press Move, Sri Lanka Says ICP Faces Jail
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 3 -- As UN Correspondents Association officials Giampaolo Pioli and Lou Charbonneau of Reuters have proceeded against Inner City Press, they were told that could their campaign set anti media freedom precedents.
Now, it has. Today a major
pro-government newspaper in Sri Lanka, the Sunday
Observer, quotes with approval the indictment
drafted by Reuters' Charbonneau against Inner
City Press.
The newspaper says that "if the allegations against Lee are proven, the UN headquarters will be made out of bounds for him. If the harassment charges are proven he could face a jail term of up to six years." Click here to view the full article.
Pioli, assisted by Reuters' Charbonneau and other corporate media which have used without credit Inner City Press' exclusive stories about the UN then retaliated when Inner City Press complained, has pursued a public witch hunt against Inner City Press. Click here for sample UNCA minutes released only tonight from behind Reuters' firewall.
This has included mass e-mailing out the "charge letter" quoted by the pro-government Sunday Observer. The letter was signed by Charbonneau, Flavia Krause-Jackson of Bloomberg, Talal Al-Haj of Al-Arabia, Margaret Besheer of Voice of America and Timothy Witcher of Agence France Presse.
Witcher, at the behest of the French Mission to the UN, began the push against Inner City Press for its reporting on French UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, who has accepted Sri Lankan general (and alleged war criminal) Shavendra Silva as a Senior Adviser.
Despite France's claim to support press freedom, not only has its Mission to UN sought to eject Inner City Press and even (unsuccessfully) to have it temporarily arrested. Now, the campaign they have pushed has created an environment in which political enemies can call for the Press to be jailed for six full years.
Al-Arabiya is funded and controlled by Saudi Arabia, so its increasing involvement in this anti free Press campaign is perhaps not surprising. But that Voice of America, using US taxpayer dollars, would be one of five leaders of an anti Press campaign triggering such a threat is, we hear, becoming a matter of concern to some on Capitol Hill.
Matthew Winkler of
Bloomberg News has yet to respond to submitted
questions the propriety of his UN bureau chief's
involvement. As noted, there has been no response to
two rounds of e-mails to Reuters "Ethics &
Training" chief Greg McCune, Top News Editor Walden
Siew, deputy editor Paul Ingrassia and big cheese
Stephen J. Adler.
The only Reuters response
on this has been Reuters UN bureau chief Lou
Charbonneau saying on June 1, before he voted to
investigate Inner City Press and sent out the
selective minutes, "you are a bad person."
At Voice of America, before
this executives David Ensor, Sonja Pace, David Jones
and Steve Redisch were all told of the attacks and
were asked to stop them, or least formally
disassociate VoA UN bureau chief Margaret Besheer from
these efforts resulting in governmental gloating about
the possibility of jailing the Press.
Before the publication of
the pro government Sunday Observer's report about
exclusion from the UN and jail time, Inner City Press
asked the UNCA Executive Committee to desist or at
least slow down, because it has "been the
subject of extremely negative, unfair, entirely
unfounded coverage in for example the Sri Lankan
press."
But the UNCA Executive Committee has doggedly
proceeded, going more and more public even with material
they wree told in advance, and acknoweledged, was
incomplete if not outright inaccurate.
Since the origin of these
disputes, UNCA president Giampaolo Pioli has
repeatedly demanded that Inner City Press remove from
the Internet its factual report that Pioli accepted
money for rent from Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's
Permanent Representative to the UN.
Pioli in an angry telephone call threatened to have Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, an ejection now positively viewed by pro government media in Sri Lanka.
This calls into
question not only the negligent management of Reuters,
Bloomberg, AFP, Al-Arabiya and Voice of America, but
also WHO is the source of the threats cited in the pro
Sri Lanka government Sunday Observer.
If the Pioli proposed UNCA Board of Examination goes forward even now, it should investigate all of UNCA officials' communications with Palitha Kohona and other alleged war criminal. Watch this site.
May 28, 2012
At UN, Charges Against Investigative Press Undisclosed, Scoop Stolen by Reuters
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 26 -- It seems that at the UN the publication of articles critical of powerful officials, countries or media organization can be construed as "harassment" and used as the basis to seek to expel the offending journalist.
This takes place in
the context of an
Inner City Press investigative
scoop, that US
official Jeffrey
Feltman will come
work at the UN
being stolen without
credit by Reuters
(unlike Foreign
Policy's The
Cable
which did give
credit), and a
stealth complaint of
harassment filed by
the bylined Reuters
correspondent Louis
Charbonneau, using
his position as Vice
President of the UN
Correspondents
Association.
Reuters' Charbonneau's complaint has been put online here.
After being informed in writing Friday afternoon that five UNCA Executive Committee members had referred "charges of harassment" against Inner City Press seeking to form a "board of examination" to "expel or impeach" Inner City Press, UNCA's President Giampaulo Pioli has three times refused to disclose who complained, what definition of harassment will be used, and what beyond written articles and the single verbal word "disgust" Inner City Press is charged with.
Already some other
reporters, readers
and also diplomats
have expressed
surprise that a
purported
correspondents'
association would
try to censor a
member journalist or
define critical
articles as
harassment.
By this definition, Inner City Press "harasses" Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and for example his head of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous every day: it's called investigative journalism.
One UN Correspondent, who will for now be nameless to avoid retaliation or charges against him, said
No excuse to steal an exclusive... I think UNCA should have a 'law that "expulsion" is "outlawed". There is not "expulsion" in journalism, we are not Stalin's CPSU...I find great help in reading your blog when I'm not at the UN. Especially I think our job is not "policing" other journalists but watching the UN, especially when they are not doing their job. Something that I think you are doing better than anybody else in all the press corps. I just reported two days ago your questions, crediting that you / innercitypress.com is a must read for all the UN permanent missions.
This correspondent,
like others, credits
Inner City Press
when using its
exclusives. But
Reuters' Lou
Charbonneau says he
has a POLICY of not
crediting Inner City
Press. It is unclear
how this could be
consistent with a
Reuters-wide policy.
But despite five days of requests, in the United States and then its headquarters in London, Reuters has yet to provide its policy on crediting -- or on its reporters using their positions in correspondents' associations to seek to have competitors dis-accredited.
Inner City Press wrote to UNCA President Pioli:
This is a formal request to be informed who are the five people requesting to urgently "examine" me. I am also asking to to be informed immediately of the definition you are using of "harassment" and of any and all alleged acts of "harassment" I am charged with, particularly since the last UNCA meeting on this topic in April, other than material that I have written and published as is my right under freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
After Pioli reiterated by voice mail his position that the empaneling of a "board of examination" -- which is supposed to be impartial -- will proceed the next day the UN is open, May 29, Inner City Press asked again:
Hi, at least for now I'm just requesting (and believe I have a right to) the names of those who have referred these charges of harassment against me... For your information, the complaint Lou filed with MALU and Dujarric I found outrageous; it was baseless, should not have been filed, and I should have been informed. While he says I am somehow making it hard for him and unnamed others to do their work, he was in essence trying to STOP me from doing my work, as well in my view stealing my work without credit. Please provide the requested information, thanks.
Pioli this time did reply in writing, but without providing any of the information or charges. And so a third request:
Hi. I am asking that you send me the information -- names of accusers, definitions and description of charges -- in writing by email, in part because Lou's complaint to MALU and Dujarric, cc-ed to you, appears entirely based on something I said to him. You should understand I don't want to subject myself to any more such charges, however spurious. So I ask again: send it to me in writing the names of accusers, definitions and description of charges. Past deadline.
Still, even the identities of those UNCA Executive Committee filing changes to expel Inner City Press have not been disclosed. Here's the online list of Executive Committee members. Watch this site.
May 21, 2012Amid Syria Failure, UN Demands Deletion of its Official's Name, Questions Sources
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 17 -- Amid charges from all sides that the UN's and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's activities in Syria are a failure, the UN's response on Thursday was to seek to censor press coverage of differing description of an upcoming UN trip to Damascus, then to question its sources.
As Inner City Press reported yesterday -- and modifies at the UN's request in this version -- on May 16 a Security Council Permanent Representative told the press that
"in the coming days Jean-Marie 'Guehenno and DPKO,' the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, will go to Damascus, on the political track, with it was hoped Kofi Annan to follow. Later on May 16, Inner City Press was informed that the request was made [deleted at UN's request] on the issue of the observers, not the political track."
More than 12 hours later came this from DPKO's spokesman, copying Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky:
Date: Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:46 AM
I have become aware of you[r] web article and tweets naming [individual's name included in DPKO's email, but deleted here] as planning to travel to syria along with dpko colleaugues. Your decision to publish this information in advance of a trip has created a potentially serious security situation for un personnel. I ask that you remove all such references from the inner city press website without delay, for the sake of the safety and security of un peacekeeping personnel.
For the UN to
request
post-publication
removal from the
Internet of
information, stated
on the record by a
Security Council's
Permanent
Representative,
seems to implicate
freedom of the press
issues which seem
not to be the UN's
priority under Ban
Ki-moon.
But within minutes of receiving the above, Inner City Press modified the story, removing the name and an included critique of the individual specified in DPKO's removal request, then replied that the Permanent Representative
"yesterday morning on the record stated that Jean Marie Guehenno and DPKO were going to Damascus. Subsequent reporting found that the request was for Mr. Ladsous plus three. If you have a problem with names, you need to speak to Permanent Representatives, including among the Permanent Five members of the Security Council... I'm still waiting for the promised answer beyond Entebbe of DPKO's use of private military and security firms, and for the UN casualty estimate at Pibor. Please advise. I have immediately removed references in this article to Mr. Ladsous, which seems to be your major concern."
Significantly, DPKO
did not request the
deletion of
Jean-Marie
Guehenno's name. The
name it requested
delation of it gave,
obviously, to the
Syrian government.
So from where does
the claimed danger
come?
Even with this change, the UN Peacekeeping spokesman persisted, now inquiring into what Inner City Press' "subsequent reporting" consisted of:
"Thank you for removing the name. However much of the damage has in fact been done already. I am very concerned that Inner City Press seems to wash its hands of responsibility for what it chooses to publish. By Inner City Press's own reporting, [the] Ambassador [misnamed by DPKO] did not appear to have named DPKO names. I do not know what you mean by 'subsequent reporting,' and given the lack of other reports I can only assume you mean your own decision to publish Mr [X's] name. The problem that I have is with the ramifications for UN peacekeeping personnel safety and security, and with Inner City Press's decision to publish in complete disregard for these matters. Your response below indicates a continued blithe recklessness with regard to the safety and security of UN personnel operating in highly volatile circumstances."
In fact, while Inner City Press immediately made the deletions requested by DPKO despite their seeming basis in removing a single individual from the public eye, DPKO has for six months promised to sign a Status of Forces Agreement for the peacekeepers in Abyei, four of whom bled out and died due to slow med-evac due to the lack of a SOFA. No explanation has been provided, including after another request on Thursday.
At Thursday's noon briefing, while deliberately as requested not using any individual's name, even that provided on the record by a Security Council Permanent Representative, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon spokesman Martin Nesirky to clarify if this visit to Damascus is about the political track, or only about observers.
Nesirky refused to
answer this,
cloaking the entire
question in an
invocation of safety
and accusing the
previous publication
as being
"unacceptable."
Inner City Press
said it disagrees
100% with the
attempt at
censorship of
information stated
on the record by UN
member states'
Permanent
Representatives,
then asked on the
issue of actual
safety the question
of why despite the
public statement six
months ago still no
SOFA was in place
for the peacekeepers
in Abyei. Nesirky
said when he has
something he will
say.
Notably, under
Nesirky the Office
of the Spokesperson
for the Secretary
General was thrown
out of the Security
Council and lost
previous access.
Perhaps this is why
they cannot control
what Council
Permanent
Representatives say
on the record, but
then seek to censor
the subsequent press
coverage.
The response to censorship is, in this case, a description of the attempt at censorship, while accomodating the stated but not explained pretext for the attempt at censorship. Watch this site.
May 14, 2012
On
Libya Sanctions, 5
UN SC Members Fail
to File Reports, P5
Threatens S5
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 10 -- When Libya sanctions were adopted by the UN Security Council, all 193 member states were given until June 26, 2011 to file reports on their implementation.
Now more than ten
months after the
deadline, it seems
that only
57 countries have
filed reports.
At least five
current Security
Council members are
not listed among
those who have filed
reports: Azerbaijan,
Guatemala, India,
Morocco and
Pakistan.
Resolution 1970 provided:
"25. Calls upon all Member States to report to the Committee within 120 days of the adoption of this resolution on the steps they have taken with a view to implementing effectively paragraphs 9, 10, 15 and 17 above [of resolution 1970 (2011)]."
And so all member states have been reminded:
"Accordingly, States that have not yet reported to the Committee on the steps they have taken with a view to implementing effectively the paragraphs cited above, which set out the arms embargo, the travel ban and the assets freeze, are reminded to do so no later than 26 June 2011."
And
still -- five
Council members
are not listed as
filing. The
Permanent
Representative of
one of the N or
Non-compliant Five
sheepishly told
Inner City Press
that reporting is
not that important.
Another said he
would go and find
out. A Deputy
Permanent
Representative said
"we have better
things to do."
Some wonder how the
Security Council
members can ask
other states to
follow its mandates
if they themselves
do not practice what
they preach. Another
said "as long as the
Permanent Five
members file, that's
what's important."
Outside the
Council's session on
Libya on Thursday
afternoon, Inner
City Press asked a
number of non-filers
who are not on the
Security Council to
explain themselves.
The Permanent Representatives of a sample European nation, asking that he and it not be identified, said his country is waiting for greater Council transparency on sanctions before filing reports. The reform proposals of the so-called Small Five, which Inner City Press has covered, were cited among the reasons.
Sanctions and due process are listed in Paragraph 9 of the Small Five's resolution's annex.
Inner City Press' previous report, that the resolution will be put to a vote this month, appears to remain true. Sources say that the Permanent Five members of the Council have told the Small Five that if they go forward with the resolution, the P5 will still negotiating with them.
A G4, meanwhile, loves this, and says it is "ready for the kill shot" once this happens. United for Consensus members shake their heads, bemoaning the Small Five's failure to take the time to get two-thirds support of member states, or to wait for a wider reform proposal. Watch this site.
May 7, 2012
In Myanmar, Ban Ki-Moon Praised & Partnered with Spying Company
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, May 4 --
While in Myanmar, UN
Secretary General
Ban Ki-moon held an
event with
businesses, praising
them for their
Burmese engagements.
Inner City Press asked Ban's Spokesperson, twice, which businesses were in attendance to receive Ban's thanks. After the second request a list was provided, and the delay perhaps became more understandable.
Invited and thanked was a company which has sold surveillance and spying equipment, including to Gaddafi's Libya: ZTE Corporation. See this link and Wall Street Journal of August 30, 2011.
With this company in attendance, Ban Ki-moon concluded on the 1st of May, "I wish you strength and success in your important efforts, and I very much welcome your partnership with the United Nations."
Success for this company, it seems, is selling surveillance equipment, as for example France's Amesys / Bull SA. But a spy company partnering with the UN?
Already Ban's had of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to hold the job, has proposed the UN using surveillance drones. But wiretapping?
Also in attendance and praised by Ban were, among others, SK Telecom, PTT International, Mitsubishi, GE, Total and Alcatel - Lucent.
In Tripoli as reported by the WSJ,
"on the ground floor of a six-story building here, agents working for Moammar Gadhafi sat in an open room, spying on emails and chat messages with the help of technology Libya acquired from the West. The recently abandoned room is lined with posters and English-language training manuals stamped with the name Amesys, a unit of French technology firm Bull SA, which installed the monitoring center. A warning by the door bears the Amesys logo. The sign reads: 'Help keep our classified business secret. Don't discuss classified information out of the HQ.'"
This is more than a
little ironic, given
that outgoing French
president Nicolas
Sarkozy is now
threatening to sue Mediapart
for publishing
Moussa Koussa's
letter to Bachir
Saleh. A
documentary on the
subject, including
Sarkozy adviser
Jean-David Levitte,
is scheduled for
broadcast on May 8,
two days after
Sarkozy's then
expected (and now
confirmed) electoral
loss despite his
plea to National
Front supporters.
This has led to
questions of whether
not only Alain Juppe
but at least some in
the French Mission
to the UN will also
be replaced, by
Fabius, Aubrey or
whoever. Watch
this site.
From the UN's noon briefing transcript of May 1:
Inner City Press: On Myanmar, Ban Ki-moon gave a speech with the, promoting the Global Compact. But, is there a way to get a list of the businesses he cited? He said, I am here with these businesses, many people think that most of the businesses in the country are affiliated with the, you called it a dictatorship. But, the former military Government. You may not have it, but is it possible to get a list of the businesses in attendance or certainly the ones that he was citing as, you know, the future of a non-military Myanmar?
Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey: We’ll have to check on that, Matthew.
From the UN's noon briefing transcript of May 2:
Inner City Press: were you able to get the businesses that he was referring to when he introduced the Global Compact in Myanmar. Ban's speech definitely says "the businesses here," referring to particular businesses.
Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, we’ll get that for you.
April 30, 2012
UN Admits Cluster Bombs in Sri Lanka, But Still Spin for Silva, Ban Silent
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 26 -- With news that the UN Development Program in Sri Lanka has found and confirmed via a leaked e-mail cluster sub-munitions, General Shavendra Silva as a UN Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping takes on an even more sinister hue.
As reported, Allan Poston, the technical adviser for UNDP's mine action group in Sri Lanka, wrote that "after reviewing additional photographs from the investigation teams, I have determined that there are cluster sub-munitions in the area where the children were collecting scrap metal and in the house where the accident [the death of a child] occurred. This is the first time that there has been confirmed unexploded sub-munitions found in Sri Lanka."
Sri Lanka's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Shavendra Silva, during this conflict commanded the 58th Division, depicted in Ban Ki-moon's report as engaged in war crimes. Now, cluster munition. Still, Ban Ki-moon's position remains that Silva being Ban's adviser is "up to member states."
The Sri Lankan Ministry of Defense -- and Urban Development -- on the same day as the cluster bomb revelation breathlessly reported that all 54 nations in the Asia and Pacific Group support Silva's continued service. To Inner City Press' knowledge this was not true even prior to the cluster bomb confirmation, and should be even less true now.
Earlier this month, the Permanent Representative of an Asia Group member told Inner City Press, of Silva,
"the gentleman's appearance is not welcome. They have chosen to escalate, sending public letters, casting doubt on Frechette's integrity. It becomes a big story, and member states in the end will say it's unacceptable... No one knew who Shavendra Silva was. Once you began to publish the stories, we came to know. If we had known from the beginning of course it would never have happened. If they continue to push it, there would be enough delegates in the Asia group to say 'enough.'"
Ban Ki-moon's acquiescence in accepting an alleged war criminal as his adviser becomes ever more troubling. Now Ban is on his way to Myanmar, where he and his adviser Vijay Nambiar have already given their full blessing to the still military dominated government, even as Kachin people weren't allowed to vote and face repression. What will Ban do? Watch this site.
April 23, 2012
Assad's Shabeeha Urged by Annan to Disarm & "Work With UN," More Mood?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 22 -- Kofi Annan's call to lay down weapons and "work with the UN" extends not only to Syrian governmental and opposition forces, but also to the pro-Assad shabeeha militias, Annan's spokesman Ahmad Fawzi told Inner City Press on Sunday.
Earlier in the day Annan issued a statement that "I urge all forces whether governmental, opposition or others to put down their weapons and work with the United Nations monitors."
Inner City Press wondered, and asked Fawzi, what forces with weapons are these "others," neither governmental or opposition?
Some hours later, Fawzi replied answer this (and three other question), starting that
"There are armed groups close to the government (shabeeha). Opposition and uniformed government forces do not have a monopoly on weapons."
The answer is appreciated. Still, it seems strange to also call on these militia mercenaries to "work with the UN monitors." How?
In terms of the now-approved monitoring mission's work, Inner City Press asked Fawzi, "on air assets, is the ideal / idea to use UN system aircraft from other missions?"
Fawzi replied, "The UN prefers to use its own chartered aircraft if and when possible."
Inner City Press also asked Fawzi, "what's the process for (and status of) choosing the force commander?"
Sources in Norway told Inner City Press that Robert Mood, the General who abruptly left Damascus leading Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin to call him unprofessional, appeared on Norwegian TV to say he is awaiting word from the UN and would return to Syria. What would Churkin and Russia say?
Here is what Fawzi said, in response to Inner City Press: "Force Commanders are, I believe, nominated by Member States via DPKO, and appointed by the Secretary General."
So will Norway nominate Mood? Watch this site
Here is Fawzi's response:
From:
Ahmad Fawzi
Date: Sun, Apr 22,
2012 at 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: Hi,
Press Qs on "other"
forces in corrected
statement, Friday
patrols, aircraft,
thanks
To: Matthew Russell
Lee [at]
innercitypress.com
Hi.
1) There are armed groups close to the government (shabeeha). Opposition and uniformed government forces do not have a monopoly on weapons.
2) I put the following clarification out on Friday:
"Comments by UN Observer Team Leader Col. Himmiche today were taken out of context. There is no policy not to 'work' Fridays.
Today the UN Observers were regrouping, dealing with administrative and logistical issues, liaising with the UN country team and planning for their patrol (to Homs) tomorrow."
3) Force Commanders are, I believe, nominated by Member States via DPKO, and appointed by the SG.
4) The UN prefers to use its own chartered aircraft if and when possible.
Best,
Ahmad
On April 20 Inner City Press asked US State Department Spokeperson Victoria Nuland:Inner City Press: The Moroccan colonel who’s leading the UN team there now has been quoted that he’s not going to take his team out on Fridays. He doesn’t want to be used politically. There’s a quote to that effect. And I’m just wondering, since it seems that one of the purposes of the observer mission is to allow people to protest, and that’s a big day they want to protest, what would the U.S. think of that?
MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, I haven’t seen the comments of the Moroccan lead. As I said, all of the modalities for these peacekeepers are being reviewed based on the experience of the initial group, and they have to be worked out through a new Security Council resolution, and obviously, we have to see how it goes on the ground.
Transcript here. More has been written since, about the Colonel's comments. So Inner City Press has asked Fawzi:
"do you have a comment or gloss on the Moroccan colonel saying the observers would go out on Fridays, to not be used? On Friday I asked the US State Department, particularly in light of Friday being a/the big protest day, but they hadn't yet seen the quote. Can you comment or explain the Colonel's statement?"
The question was asked answered, and immediately published here. Watch this site.
April 16, 2012On Syria, Mysteries of Mood, UK on Transition, Morocco Asked of Free Movement
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 14, updated with transcripts -- After the modified resolution on sending advance monitors passed the UN Security Council 15-0, Inner City Press put questions to the Permanent Representatives of the UK, United States, Morocco, Russia and Syria.
Inner City Press
asked US Ambassador
Rice, this month's
Council president,
about need the
approval of the
Syrian government
for the full
observer mission.
She said that
"consultations" with
Syria are required.
(Inner City Press also asked about South Sudan not pulling out of Heglig; Rice answered that the Council also called on Sudan to stop aerial bombing and that neither side has complied.)
When UK Ambassador
Lyall Grant came to
the stakeout, he
used the phrase
"political
transition." Inner
City Press asked him
if this meant Bashar
al-Assad stepping
down, if the UK
could imagine a
political transition
in which Assad
remains.
Lyall Grant said that would be hard to imagine, that under the Kofi Annan six point plan Assad is supposed to appoint someone else for political transition talks.
The resolution speaks of freedom of movement for the advance monitors. So Inner City Press asked Morocco's Permanent Representative Loulichki to square this with the recent UN reports that in Western Sahara, the MINURSO peacekeepers do not have freedom of movement, are monitored and their communications with people impaired.
Loulichki said this was entirely different, that he would address it after Syria questions. But he left the stakeout without answer the question. The Council meets about Western Sahara and MINURSO on April 17.
Russian Ambassador
Vitaly Churkin, at
the stakeout,
hearkened back to
Inner City Press'
question to
Ambassador Rice
about Syrian
government consent,
saying that of
course this is
required for a
mission under UN
Charter Chapter Six.
He chided UK Ambassador Lyall Grant for saying he couldn't imagine Assad staying in power, saying that this is dictating or trying to dictate from outside.
Inner City Press
asked Churkin about
Kofi Annan's General
Mood, who reportedly
left Damascus while
the Syrian foreign
minister and first
deputy were briefly
away.
Churkin said this happened and, stranger still, when a Russian diplomat inquired at Kofi Annan's office in Geneva when Mood would return to Syria, he was told that Mood's return "should not be anticipated." Churkin went on to say that professionalism is required and that "there are other people."
Kofi Annan's spokesman has been asked to confirm this and to explain, as well as the outstanding questions about the Kofi Annan Foundation. We will have more on this, and publish responses on receipt.
Finally, Inner City
Press asked Syrian
Ambassador Bashar
Ja'afari about Mood.
He insisted that
Syria wants Mood
back, and slammed
the European Union
for imposing
unilateral sanctions
on Syria's
electricity
minister. By 1:50
the Security Council
stakeout was empty,
the advance monitors
on their way. Watch
this site.
Update:
From the US Mission
transcript:
Inner City Press: In terms of the second resolution and sending the full team, this idea that it requires the consent of the Syrian government-at least that's what both Churkin said and that's what Syria said and under Chapter 6, it would seem to require that-how do you think that that's going to go? How do you think that-what will that mean in terms of the ability of the Syrian government to either dictate terms or block deployment?
Ambassador Rice: Well, what the resolution says is that the full monitoring mission will come after three things. One, a report by the Secretary-General; two, a sustained cessation of violence; and three, after consultation with the government of Syria. That would be the normal practice for a mission under Chapter 6 of the UN Charter. But the resolution also outlines the conditions that must be precedent for the advance team as well as the monitoring mission to effectively carry out its operations, and those are described in paragraph six.
So it will be important that the advance team get on the ground and then be able to report back as to whether that initial tranche is in effect able to operate freely and move as it must with the freedom to communicate internally as well as with the Syrian people, sufficient to fulfill its mandate. If that is indeed the case, that will provide the necessary assurances to members of the Security Council who must take a decision on authorization of the full mission.
From
the UK Mission
transcript:
Inner
City Press: When you
say political
transition, is this
to be interpreted as
meaning Bashar
al-Assad leaving
power? Is there a
political transition
you can envision
where he remains in
power in Syria?
Amb. Lyall Grant:
Kofi Annan’s plan
makes clear that
there needs to be
the start of a
political dialogue
that leads to a
political transition
and the introduction
of a democratic,
plural political
system in Syria.
Frankly, it looks to
us, the British
government, most
unlikely that that
is going to be
possible with
President Assad
still in office. But
the Kofi Annan plan
does not call for
the president to
stand down, it calls
on him to appoint an
interlocutor to
start that political
dialogue. So, by
definition, that
interlocutor would
not be Mr Assad.
On
Syria, Annan
Spokesman Tells ICP
Mood Is Out of Game,
Colonel In
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 14 -- After the UN Security Council authorized an advance team of observers for Syria in a rare Saturday meeting, Inner City Press asked Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin about envoy Kofi Annan's General Robert Mood, who reportedly left Damascus while the Syrian foreign minister and first deputy were briefly away.
Churkin said this happened and, stranger still, when a Russian diplomat inquired at Kofi Annan's office in Geneva when Mood would return to Syria, he was told that Mood's return "should not be anticipated." Churkin went on to say that professionalism is required and that "there are other people."
Inner City Press immediately wrote to Kofi Annan's spokesman Ahmad Fawzi to ask "Why did Mood leave when he did, and more importantly, why has he not gone back since? Is he going back? When? Is he going to be replaced?"
Now, this answer has been received from Fawzi:
From:
Ahmad Fawzi
Date: Sat, Apr 14,
2012 at 2:31 PM
Subject: Qs on Gen.
Mood, list of 50
violations, &
still Kofi Annan
Foundation
To: Matthew Russell
Lee [at]
innercitypress.com
Its
really very simple.
Major-General Mood
completed his
assessment mission
and came back to
Geneva to report to
the JSE, before
returning to Norway,
mission
accomplished. There
was never any
intention of him
going back. The
advance team of
observers is being
led by a Colonel.
The choice of Force
Commander for the
full observer
mission will be made
by the Secretary
General, once the
Security Council
passes a resolution
authorizing it.
This will be news to Syria, whose Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari told Inner City Press his government wants Mood to come back and keep negotiating "the protocol." Other diplomats at the UN on Saturday told Inner City Press that Mood was miffed that he wasn't accorded more pomp by the Syrian government; note that now the advance team is being led by a lower level Colonel (not named by Fawzi).
Fawzi also answered Inner City Press' question on the "fifty violations" mentioned by Syrian Ambassador Ja'afari, and again didn't answer the questions about the Kofi Annan Foundation:
"50 Violations: there will violations by both sides. This is not unusual in this situation, both sides will be testing each other. We hope the arrival of UN observers will encourage the parties to exercise restraint and embark on the political process envisioned in the 6-point plan.
"Fund-raising by the KA Foundation: again, I don't speak for the Foundation. UN activities are funded either through the regular budget, or through extra-budgetary sources. For information on the latter please go to the Controller."
But the Kofi Annan Foundation referred all questions to Fawzi. This is called a run around. But it is more responsive than the spokesperson team of Ban Ki-moon. Watch this site.
April 2, 2012
At UN, Quotes of Peacekeepers to Syria Point to DPKO Chief & His Country's PR?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 30 -- Amid complaints that Kofi Annan's mission to the Syria is meant to keep Assad in power, the UN has repeatedly refused to answer Press questions about who is part of Annan's team or whether the UN has any role in selecting or vetting them.
Now there are quotes from a self-described senior Western Security Council diplomat that the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) is sending an advance team to Syria, with an eye to shifting some 250 observers from its UN Peacekeeping Missions UNIFIL in Lebanon and UNDOF in the Golan.
Because this seems a strange way for the UN to be communicating, Inner City Press on March 30 asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey to confirm these DPKO moves, and to state whether the chief of DPKO is sharing such information with all 15 Security Council members or other the Permanent Representative of his own country, which has appointed the last four Under Secretaries General for Peacekeeping in a row.
Del Buey paused and then told Inner City Press to ask the Kofi Annan team: "There are reports that are coming from leaks or reported leaks from the Council... I believe that Mr. Annan is coordinating the efforts in Syria and I would leave it to his spokesman to comment on that. "
While Annan's
spokesman Ahmad
Fawzi has for
example been willing
to confirm
that Annan
recently gave a
six month UN
contract to Martin
Griffiths, who
resigned from his
last job in Geneva
amid an embezzlement
scandal, this is a
question about UN
DPKO and its chief,
Herve
"The Drone"
Ladsous, so named
because he had
proposed the use
of drones and even
the interception
of communications,
without specifying
if the information
collected would go
to all member
states or only his
own.
Ladsous pointedly
refuses to answer
questions about his
drone proposal, or
other questions
about peacekeeping,
in Haiti and South
Sudan.
As first reported by
Inner City Press,
when Annan conducted
meetings at the UN
with diplomats from
among others Syria,
China and Iran, he
then met with
Ladsous, the only
one of the meetings
the Press was not
allowed to
photograph.
Friday Inner City Press asked Del Buey, what is Ban Ki-moon's role in all this? Has Ban, as reported, lost control?
Del Buey said that
Ban and the Arab
League appointed
Annan, but Annan
takes it from there:
"Mr Kofi Annan is
managing, is
directing, is
responsible for the
peace process in
Syria."
Pro-Assad media, it should be noted, describe Annan as the "UN" envoy, and as Inner City Press first reported, Annan's Arab League selected deputy Nassar El-Kidwa has not been allow into Syria.
El-Kidwa is in Istanbul, meeting with the opposition and Friends of Syria. Kofi Annan, not surprisingly, has not gone: his moves are not favorably viewed by the opposition.
Intrigue and secrecy in mediation is one thing. But from a UN peacekeeping chief and his country's Permanent Representative, they may be quite another. Watch this site.
March 26, 2012
As UN Proposes Peacekeeping Surveillance, Opposition to DPKO's "Spymaster" Ladsous and His "Drones"
By
Matthew Russell Lee,
Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, March 23 -- In a recent closed door meeting of the UN's Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, the UN's top peacekeeper Herve Ladsous made proposals on "surveillance" that have stirred opposition.
The opponents say Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to be put atop the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, is moving "to use drones and communications interception," as one well-placed Troop Contributing Country's representative complained to Inner City Press.
"He can't even handle keeping South Sudan covered by helicopters," the representative said derisively. "And now he wants drones? What commercial interest is being this? And how could we be sure the information collected would stay with the UN?"
These and other C-34
members' comments
reflected a distrust
of Ladsous, who last
year replaced fellow
French bureaucrat
Alain Le Roy. Under
the two men, the UN
Peacekeeping Mission
in former French
colony Cote d'Ivoire
helped turn out and
then arrest anti
imperialist Ivorian
leader Laurent
Ggabgo.
Unlike Le Roy,
however, Ladsous
refuses to answer
even the simplest of
questions, such as
whether his DPKO now
belatedly has
military helicopters
flying in South
Sudan, or why
his mission in
Haiti has no
standing claims
commission to
handle the
complaint it
introduced cholera
to the island.
"Who would decide
who they would spy
on," the skeptic
asked, "and who
would get the
information?"
Another opined that
this would be a way
for "Western
intelligence
services" to drape
themselves in UN
blue - and immunity.
A Secretariat
staffer complained
of a proposal for
Secretary General
Ban Ki-moon to have
his own intelligence
service.
There was opposition
from within DPKO
itself. One staff
member said,
"Ladsous already
said he is not a
visionary, fine. But
now he wants to be a
spymaster?"
More sympathetic
sources describe
DPKO's first drone
idea as being in the
Congo but failing
due to heavy jungle
cover, with Ladsous'
focus now shifting
to where he has been
under fire in South
Sudan, particularly
Jonglei.
There are other
issues slowing down
the C-34 process, as
Inner City Press reported
last
Friday. (Since
then, Inner City
Press has been
inquiring into and
being contacted
about the
surveillance issue).
What's being called "Ladsous' drone" proposal is among the C-34 sticking points. It is not going anywhere soon -- but some wish Ladsous were, for the good of the UN. Watch this site.
March 19, 2012
As
Annan Briefs UN SC,
Syria's Six Point
Response Put Online
by ICP: Discussion
in Damascus Sunday
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS, March 16, updated
-- Syria
asked Kofi Annan as
Joint Special Envoy
of the UN and Arab
League to get
guarantees from
neighboring states
not to arm the
opposition, accoring
to a translation of
Syria's answer
obtained by Inner
City Press. Only
after that could
there be monitoring.
Inner City Press
obtained a copy of
the "unofficial
translation" of the
"non-paper answer of
the Syrian
government," which ICP is
now exclusively
putting online
here.
Update:
Inner City Press
asked Syrian
Ambassador Ja'afari
about the
"non-paper." He
said that this "Syrian
answer" is in the
nature of an "aide
memoire," informal,
and will all be
discussed as a
"comprehensive
political process,"
not as preconditions,
"on the technical
level" beginning
Sunday in Damascus. He
did not answer if Arab
League selected Deputy
Nasser al Kidwa can
go. Video
here, from
Minute 3:10.
In Point 2 Syria
stated:
"it
is requested from
the Special Envoy to
provide guarantees
to the Syrian
government that the
armed groups will
cease all armed
aggressions and give
up their weapons to
the dedicated
authorities in
exchange for a full
pardon.
"It
is also demanded
from the Special
Envoy that the
neighboring
countries take
necessary measures
to control the
traffic of armaments
through their
borders.
"It
will be requested
from the Special
Envoy that the
countries who have
called publicly to
finance and provide
weapons to the armed
groups to stop from
doing so.
"When the Special Envoy could provide the above-mentioned guarantees, the Syrian government can discuss with him the idea of putting in place a neutral monitoring system. Hence it seems at this stage too premature to discuss this mechanism."
The answer does
express a
willingness to
arrange another
visit of the central
prison in Allepo.
Before Kofi Annan briefed the Security Council on Friday morning, German Permanent Representative Peter Wittig stopped and told the press of increased defections of Syrian soldiers who will not kill "for a ruling family."
An
Annan press
conference which had
been expected for
Thursday in Geneva
was canceled,
replaced by
selective quotes
from former UN
communications
official Ahmed
Fawzi.
Update:
When
the Security Council
session ended Friday
morning, Inner City
Press asked Council
president Mark Lyall
Grant about the
non-paper answer. He
would not comment on
it. From the UK
transcript:
Inner City Press: this non-paper answer of Syria to Kofi Annan. It says that he will have to get guarantees from neighbouring states that the the opposition wouldn’t be armed before they could even discuss monitoring. I just want to ask you: one, have you seen the document, and two: is that your understanding of what they’ve said to Kofi Annan?
Amb. Lyall Grant: I’m not going to comment on any details, you can ask Mr Annan that question.
But no one in Geneva did ask Kofi the question. In New York, another Permanent Representative told Inner City Press that the Council members got nothing in writing.
Sources told Inner City Press that Annan had not directly conveyed to Council members Assad's first answer, but rather asked Russia to help with persuading Assad. Inner City Press obtained a copy of the "unofficial translation" of the "non-paper answer of the Syrian governemnt," which ICP is now exclusively putting online here.
March 12, 2012
UN's Pascoe Admits Failure on #Kony2012, Joins Ocampo in Praise, Ban Silent
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 9 -- While UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his spokespeople have had nothing to say about the #Kony2012 phenomenon, except to belatedly direct Inner City Press to a months-old report, on Friday Ban's outgoing Political Affairs chief Lynn Pascoe praised the video and initiative.
Inner City Press asked Pascoe to respond to critiques of the 29 minute film including that it misrepresents the conflict in Uganda and now Central Africa. Video here, from Minute 13.
But Pascoe said that the attention the video is getting will be helpful, after less than successful UN mediation with President Chissano, and ostensible coordination between UN Peacekeeping mission which as Inner City Press reports can barely do their current jobs in South Sudan and the Congo.
Pascoe said, "I watched it, I was impressed with the work that was done. I believe that one of our biggest problems with the LRA has been getting attention to it.... We've been working closely with the African Union, without great success. These are ferocious crimes that need to be finalized."
Also outgoing International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo has also praised the film -- not surprisingly, perhaps, since he is in it. What does his successor think? Watch this site.
Footnote:
Pascoe's comments
came at a press
conference on UN
guidelines for
mediators on
sexual violence.
Inner City Press
asked why the UN
team to Syria
includes no women,
but includes Congo
envoy retread Alan
Doss. "He may go
in," Pascoe said,
while playing up
women's essentially
back-office role.
The third panelest Ould Abdullah did not answer, but off camera told Inner City Press of his recent work on the Sahel. The UN's sexual violence in conflict expert Margot Wallstrom spoke more directly, saying that the UN must do better. With this, we agree.
March 5, 2012
As UK
Lyall Grant Regrets
UN Envoy Banned from
Sierra Leone, Of
Meece's Meekness,
Frechette in Breeze
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 4 -- After UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon capitulated to the government of Sierra Leone and abruptly removed UN envoy Michael von der Schulenburg from the country, some UN officials close to Ban complained to Inner City Press about "the S-G's weakness."
"What kind of message does it send," a senior Secretariat official asked Inner City Press, "when Ban sells out his own appointees at at the drop of a hat?"
On Friday, Inner City Press asked the Security Council president for March Mark Lyall Grant of the UK about Schulenburg's removal. Speaking in his national capacity because the Council won't discuss it until March 22, Lyall Grant did not directly criticize Ban, but said "the ERSG was put in a difficult position by the government of Sierra Leone.... We regret that, he left earlier than originally planned." Video here, from Minute 28:45.
Lyall Grant went on to list other recent controversies about "host country consent," for example the Democratic Republic of the Congo where, he said, the government threatened that the UN Mission should leave. He added that was "resolved." But how?
In DRC, Ban's envoy Roger Meece said almost nothing amid Joseph Kabila electoral controversy -- the blocking of opposition candidates, the torching of polling stations. While such meekness may be Meece's personality, Ban is sending the message that this is how to succeed in his UN.
Notably, Ban has refused to support in any way his own appointee as chair of the Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, Louise Frechette, when she belatedly rule inappropriate the participation of Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva, whose 58th Division is depicted in Ban's own Panel of Experts report as engaged in war crimes.
While other Permanent Representatives of Permanent Five members of the Security Council make excuses for Ban, intent only on securing top UN management positions from him, Lyall Grant has shown himself willing to speak some truth. Watch this site.
February 27, 2012
In Asia Group, Sri Lanka Says Stands Behind Silva, Group Letter Not Agreed To
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 24 -- Two days after Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva was ruled "inappropriate" to participate as the Asia-Pacific Group's representative on the UN Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, the Asia Group met Friday behind closed doors about the controversy.
For four weeks, Inner City Press has questioned the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon and diplomats from Asian countries how they could accept Silva as adviser on peacekeeping, given how he appears in Ban's own Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka, as commander of the 58th Division shelling hospitals and killing people trying to surrender.
And so
on Friday afternoon
Inner City Press
stood outside UN
Conference Room 4,
posing questions to
the Ambassadors who
went in and out of
the meeting. Then
and afterward, a
picture of the
meeting emerged and
is exclusively
reported here.
Sri
Lanka, represented
in the meeting by
Permanent
Representative
Palitha Kohona,
Deputy Permanent
Representative
Shavendra Silva and
other staff, wanted
the Asia Group to
write a letter to
SAG chairperson
Louise Frechette as
well as to Ban
Ki-moon. (Sri Lanka
may also want to
write to another
on-the-record UN
official; many
have off the record
condemned Silva's
nomination, and Ban
Ki-moon's silence.)
Kohona reportedly said, you have to draw a line or only the small and weak will be targeted. Then he said that he had told "the capital" -- Colombo, the Rajapaksa government -- and the capital determined to stand behind Ambassador Silva.
Kohona was chided for having "made representations" about solving the embarrassing standoff. But now he said that while those representations had been made, they weren't valid, only the Group could change its endorsement.
Inner City Press has
already reported
that there was no
vote on Silva, after
Sri Lanka talked
Saudi Arabia and
Nepal, and now some
say Fiji, into
withdrawing their
candidacy.
Now, Inner City Press has learned that it was "Sri Lanka" that was "endorsed by the Group" on January 19, to participate in the first meeting of the SAG, held January 19 and 20, 2012 -- this according to the Asia Group's own minutes.
Kohona has argued publicly that it was Silva who was endorsed, personally. Strangely, it was Deputy Permanent Representative Silva who negotiated with the Permanent Representative of Saudi Arabia on January 9 and 18. Still, after that, "Sri Lanka" -- not Silva -- "was endorsed by the Group."
In the closed door
meeting, Inner City
Press has learned,
Kohona asked for a
decision that the
Asia Group send a
letter to Frechette
and Ban Ki-moon.
This was not agreed to. Rather, the chair of the Group for February, Maldives, said that there was no consensus on a letter, calling the situation a "minefield to maneuver."
Fiji, which has itself chafed when former Secretary General Kofi Annan said it might not be able to keep getting paid for sending UN peacekeepers after the coup d'etat there, spoke up for Sri Lanka, saying that there should be consultations including about sending a letter.
Kohona then shifted
back and said there
was no rush, there
were "two months."
Leaving the meeting
room he told Inner
City Press, "three
months."
Silva left the
meeting room talking
with Fiji's
representative, with
whom Inner City
Press not
infrequently
converses. Silva,
too, used to speak.
As Inner City Press
has told
a Sri Lankan paper
which has asked, it was
nominating Silva to
the SAG which
stirred up the
recent news here.
Inner City Press is
reliably told that
External Affairs
minister G.L Peiris
was not in favor of
Silva's nomination,
but people above him
were. Thus we can
say: it is the
Rajapaksa brothers
themselves who have
of late put
civilians deaths in
Sri Lanka back in
the news, and
brought Sri Lanka
into some disrepute,
now going back on
representations and
seeking support
playing the "small
and weak" card.
Already, Maldives -- which suffering what is arguably its own coup d'etat during all this and was represented as chair by a junior diplomat who refused to summarize the meeting at its conclusion -- is preparing to "hand off" the issue to the Group's chair for March, the Marshall Islands. The "small and weak" indeed.
So what of the other
states in the Asia
Group? We'll have
more on this. Watch
this site.
Footnote:
numerous diplomats
told Inner City
Press it was
"outrageous," as one
of them put it, that
the Sri Lankan
Mission had asked
and gotten UN
Security to prohibit
the Press from
covering the
February 22 meeting
in 380 Madison
Avenue as it covered
Friday's meeting in
the UN North Lawn
building.
The same Sri Lankan mission personnel were present Friday but did not try. (There were no other media organization staking out the meeting, despite some belated and opportunistic pick-ups.)
Meanwhile Ban
Ki-moon's Deputy
Spokesman inserted
into Thursday
briefing transcript
a kneejerk defense
of the exclusion of
the Press, then
abuptly ended the
briefing. This is
Ban's UN. Click
here for Inner
City Press'
February 24
interview with
Ban's chief of
staff Vijay Nambiar
-- and consider how
the UN has come to
this.
February 20, 2012
On
Silva, Ambassadors
Meet With UN
Peacekeeping, Rice
Says Concerned,
Immunity Letter from
USUN Surfaces
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 17, updated -- Three weeks ago Inner City Press began asking the UN and then the US Mission to the UN how they could accept as a UN "Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations" General Shavendra Silva, whose Division 58 is repeatedly named in connection with war crimes in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka.
On February
14, Bangledesh's
Permanent
Representative
told Inner
City Press he,
India and Pakistan
were telling Sri
Lanka to "fix it."
On February 16, Pakistan's Permanent Representative confirmed this and said there was a meeting on February 17 on the topic. That meeting, of ambassadors with the two Under Secretaries General for peacekeeping, Inner City Press understands, took place Friday at 9:45 am.
At 10:30 am Friday,
Inner City Press
asked US Ambassador
Susan Rice about a letter it
found that that
Russell F. Graham,
Minister Counselor
for Host Country
Affairs at the US
Mission to the UN,
provided to Silva's
lawyers to tell a US
Federal Court that
Silva, as Sri
Lanka's Deputy
Permanent
Representative, has
diplomatic immunity.
On that basis, this
case against
Silva was dismissed.
Inner City Press is putting the
letter online,
here.
Ambassador Rice took the question, some from Inner City Press on Sudan, and said, "These are two different things. The State Department has to respond on immunity. He unfortunately or fortunately is an accredited diplomat."
Then, more generally on Silva, Rice told Inner City Press, "it's very concerning that someone with his background would be selected to serve on this advisory group. We have conveyed this to member states, as well as to the Secretariat. There are a lot of efforts underway to address [this], probably best not to be discussed publicly."
Moments later,
another Security
Council Permanent
Representative
approached Inner
City Press and said,
"on the Sri Lankan,
you have done well."
Inner City Press has
sent questions to
USGs Malcorra and
Ladsous:
"Hello.
Asking for an answer
before noon: I
understand that on
the matter of
Shavendra Silva, who
is named in the
S-G's Panel of
Experts report on
Sri Lanka as in
charge of Division
48 which is
described engaged in
war crimes,
ambassadors met with
UN Peacekeeping
today. I am
asking you directly
to confirm this, and
to state the status
of Mr. Silva on the
Senior Advisory
Group, and at this
stage, your view."
At Friday's
noon briefing,
Inner City Press asked
again, and Ban
Ki-moon's Deputy
Spokesman Eduardo Del
Buey said he had no
information, to "ask
DPKO's spokesman."
Update of
6:34 pm: DPKO's
spokesman has
written in to note
that in response to
the request for a
confirmation before
the noon briefing,
he "visited" and
sent a text message.
Noted. But the
request was clear:
confirm, which could
be done even in a
160 character text
message. The problem
here is substantive:
a UN Secretary
General and Under
Secretaries General
who "have nothing to
say" about an alleged
war criminal
-- or a commander of
a division accused
of war crimes -
advising them.
Inner City Press
reiterated, it is a
question for Ban and
his spokespeople,
including because
Ban's own High
Commissioner for Human
Rights wrote him on
this topic - as she
told Inner City Press
at the General
Assembly stakeout on
February 13 -- and
because Silva is in
Ban's own
report. We are
still awaiting an on
the record response,
which has been
re-requested from
Ban's office as well
as from USG Malcorra
and her spokesman.
Update
of 2:20 pm, Feb 17:
Inner City Press has
been sent this by the
DPKO spokesman:
"I
can confirm that
DPKO-DFS leadership
today facilitated a
meeting with some
Member States. As the
spokesperson's office
has previously said,
the selection for this
position on the
Special Advisory Group
is for the Member
States. Since the
selection has become
known to the
Secretariat, we have
actively facilitated
Member States in their
discussions to
consider this matter.
We have nothing to say
at this stage on our
views of the
membership of the
Special Advisory
Group."
What does it say
about Ban's UN that
it "has nothing to
say" about the
nomination as a
"Senior Adviser" on
Peacekeeping of a
military commander
named in Ban's own
Panel of Experts
report on Sri Lanka
as engaged in the
shelling of
hospitals and
presumptive
execution of those
seeking to
surrender?
Prior to these
developments, the
Sri Lankan Mission's
action was to send a
letter of complaint
to Inner City Press,
sending a copy to
Ban's spokesman
Martin Nesirky as
well as to some in
the UN press corps.
Inner City Press in less than 24 hours published and responded to the letter, citing only some of the many references to Silva's Division 58 in the report.
Watch this site.
February 13, 2012
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 11 -- For two weeks Inner City Press has covered the selection to the UN "Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations" of Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva, whose Division 58 is named in UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts' report on alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka.
Late on February 9,
after Inner City
Press published
brief questions and
answers with Silva,
Sri Lankan
Permanent
Representative
Palitha Kohona
and Ban
himself, the
Sri Lankan Mission
sent a letter to
Inner City Press,
with copies to Ban's
spokesman Martin
Nesirky and the
President of the UN
Correspondents'
Association.
These cc's may be as interesting as the letter itself. We publish the letter in full, here, and respond to it below.
The Sri Lankan
mission takes issue
with Inner City
Press' citation to
Ban's Panel of
Experts report,
writing that
"Ambassador Shavendra Silva pointed out during UNCA's screening of 'Lies agreed upon,' that the POE report had inaccurately represented the facts with regard to the Divisions involved. Nowhere in paragraph 73 and 90 of the Report does it make any reference to his own Division being responsible for shelling the No Zones or the PTK hospital."
The simplest rebuttal is simply to example the Panel of Experts report itself, online, which we will now quote from:
In Paragraph 62, Silva appears: "six major battalions were active in the final stages of the war, including... the 58th Division (commanded by Brigadier Shavendra Silva)." That is Silva's Division.
Here's from Paragraphs 90 through 92 of Ban's Panel of Experts report:
90. Fighting in the area intensified as part of the expressed efforts by the 55th and 58th Divisions to capture PTK by 4 February... in the week between 29 January and 4 February, PTK hospital was hit every day by MBRLs and other artillery, taking at least nine direct hits. A number of patients inside the hospital, most of them already injured, were killed, as were several staff members. Even the operating theatre was hit. Two ICRC international delegates were in the hospital when it was shelled on 4 February 2009. The shelling was coming from SLA positions.
92. The GPS coordinates of PTK hospital were well known to the SLA, and the hospital was clearly marked with emblems easily visible to UAVs. On 1 February 2009, the ICRC issued a public statement emphasizing that "[w]ounded and sick people, medical personnel and medical facilities are all protected by international humanitarian law. Under no circumstance may they be directly attacked."
That is a war crime,
and it is attributed
in Ban's Panel of
Experts report to
Silva's 58th
Division, as well as
the 55th. That, it
seems, is the Sri
Lankan mission's
defense: that war
crimes were
committed by other
Divisions (too).
Fine, then: the
reference to
Paragraph 90 should
be to 90-92, with 62
as the intro to
Silva.
Likewise, the Sri
Lankan mission crows
that a lawsuit
against Silva was
dismissed without
stating that it was
strictly on grounds
of diplomatic
immunity: that Silva
is now an Ambassador
to the UN. The decision
by Judge Oetken
concludes:
"Notwithstanding
the gravity of the
allegations made by
the plaintiffs in
this case, the
diplomatic immunity
mandated by 22
U.S.C. § 254d
precludes this Court
from considering the
merits of their
claims against
Silva, at least
while he is cloaked
with immunity as a
United Nations
representative."
On the killing of surrenderees, the Sri Lankan mission takes issue with the inference Ban's Panel of Experts draws:
2. The “White Flag” incident
170. Various reports have alleged that the political leadership of the LTTE and their dependants were executed when they surrendered to the SLA.[81] In the very final days of the war, the head of the LTTE political wing, Nadesan, and the head of the Tiger Peace Secretariat, Pulidevan, were in regular communication with various interlocutors to negotiate a surrender. They were reportedly with a group of around 300 civilians. The LTTE political leadership was initially reluctant to agree to an unconditional surrender, but as the SLA closed in on the group in their final hideout, Nadesan and Pulidevan, and possibly Colonel Ramesh, were prepared to surrender unconditionally. This intention was communicated to officials of the United Nations and of the Governments of Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as to representatives of the ICRC and others. It was also conveyed through intermediaries to Mahinda, Gotabaya and Basil Rajapaksa, former Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona and senior officers in the SLA.
171. Both President Rajapaksa and Defence Secretary Basil Rajapaksa provided assurances that their surrender would be accepted. These were conveyed by intermediaries to the LTTE leaders, who were advised to raise a white flag and walk slowly towards the army, following a particular route indicated by Basil Rajapaksa. Requests by the LTTE for a third party to be present at the point of surrender were not granted. Around 6.30 a.m. on 18 May 2009, Nadesan and Pulidevan left their hide-out to walk towards the area held by the 58th Division, accompanied by a large group, including their families. Colonel Ramesh followed behind them, with another group. Shortly afterwards, the BBC and other television stations reported that Nadesan and Pulidevan had been shot dead. Subsequently, the Government gave several different accounts of the incident. While there is little information on the circumstances of their death, the Panel believes that the LTTE leadership intended to surrender.
The (false)
assurances "conveyed
by intermediaries"
were conveyed
through Ban
Ki-moon's own chief
of staff Vijay
Nambiar, who has
declined numerous
requests from the
Press to answer
questions about his
role. Kohona, too,
the head of Sri
Lanka's mission, is
named in the
paragraphs above.
(Inner City Press
was already the
first to report that
the reference to "Defence
Secretary Basil
Rajapaksa" was an
error by the UN.)
Now it must be
stated, with all due
respect but to
provide context to
the cc's, that it is
not disputed that Kohona had a
prior financial
relationship with
the President of
UNCA; and that
Ban Ki-moon's own
chief of staff is at
least a witness to
the above-described
war crime.
What's strange is
that Inner City
Press has
previously,
including in the
Q&A after UNCA
screened in UN, without the
normal approval
process the
government's "Lies
Agreed To" as a
rebuttal to a
documentary that
was NOT screened
inside the UN,
asked Silva about
war crimes, and published all
his answers.
But only now
does the Sri Lankan
mission, by
Waruna Sri Dhanapala
the "Counselor to
Permanent
Representative"
Palitha Kohona,
write to Ban's
spokesman and UNCA,
not only the
President with whom
PR Kohona has a
previously financial
relationship, but
also other UNCA
members, who in turn
forwarded it more
widely. Is the
heat on?
On
February 10, after
received the
above-quoted letter
at 11 pm the night
before, Inner City
Press asked Ban's
spokesman Martin
Nesirky about
letters received, as
partially recorded
in the UN's
transcript:
Inner City Press: I wish I had been able to follow this up with Mr. Ladsous when asked about this selection of Shavendra Silva, who is inthe Secretary-General’s report on Sri Lanka as the head of a division, said that 'the matter is being considered further.' I wasn’t clear what that meant by the Secretariat, or by the Asia Group or by Sri Lanka. I wanted to know if you can find out what that is, and also I have been at least CCed on a number of letters that have been addressed to the Secretary-General about this issue, of taking what people seem to see as an alleged war criminal and making him an adviser, or selecting him or allowing him to be selected, and I wanted to know how many letters have you received and is it being reconsidered, where does this stand?
Spokesperson Nesirky: The Secretary-General himself told you, as you know, that this is a decision by Member States. At this point, that is the end of the story, okay.
Inner City Press: So there is no effort by the Secretariat, in any way, to speak to the Asia Group or to the country of Sri Lanka?
Spokesperson Nesirky: I also heard what Mr. Ladsous said, the Under-Secretary-General, as I was sitting right next to him..
Then, on camera, Nesirky said he would inquire into what this meant, saying clearly "and I'll check if there's anything further on that." But that is not in the UN's transcript. Watch video, here at Minute 15:58, and watch this site.February 6, 2012
Amid
Move to Switch From
Criminal Silva, Ban
Dismisses Predecessor
Criticism
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 3 -- For a week UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's office has been questioned about accepting alleged war criminal Shavendra Silva as one of Ban's Senior Advisers on Peacekeeping Operations.
While Ban's
Spokesman Martin
Nesirky has insisted
that Ban is
powerless to stop
what several member
states describe as a
travesty or a "new
low," some states
asked by Inner City
Press say
they are pushing
Sri Lanka to pull
Silva back, even
if only to replace
him with Permanent
Representative
Palitha Kohona,
who also played a
role in the White
Flag killing of
prospective
surrenderees, along
with Ban's chief of
staff Vijay Nambiar.
Acts of Shavendra Silva's battalion in 2009 are described in the UN's own Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka -- for example in paragraphs 73, 90 and 171, shelling hospitals and the killing those seeking to surrender, in which both Kohona and Nambiar played a role -- and lawsuits have been filed against Silva for war crimes. In September 2011, Inner City Press asked Silva about them, click here for that story.
Nesirky told Inner City Press to "ask the Asia group" about their vote; Inner City Press did, and found that there was no vote, Sri Lanka convinced Saudi Arabia and Nepal to stand down.
Nesirky told Inner
City Press to look
at the General
Assembly resolution,
and Inner City Press
has, finding that
nothing in the text
says that Ban has to
take whomever is
referred to him,
whatever their
record.
In fact, Susana Malcorra Ban's head of Field Support, and prospectively his new deputy replacing Asha Rose Migiro, met with member states and laid down criteria like "senior" status.
Why didn't she and Ban say, don't nominate alleged war criminals?
On February 3, after trying to let the issue settle for a bit, Inner City Press again asked Nesirky:
Inner City Press: it has to do with, again, Shavendra Silva, but also something new. There has been an open letter by Edward Mortimer, who used to be the Communications Director for Kofi Annan, saying and stating as a fact that the UN investigating itself under Thoraya Obaid has been disbanded, did not proceed. I wanted you to confirm if that’s true.
Also, the organization that Mr. Mortimer is the chair of, called the Sri Lanka Campaign, has given a quote about Silva saying that it's very surprising that the Secretary-General would accept Mr. Silva given the allegations against him of war crimes in a Secretary-General’s report that hasn’t been acted on. [Response?] You said various things before. I have actually looked at the GA resolution; it doesn’t seem to on its face say that the Secretary-General has to accept it. So I want to ask you again, given that former UN officials are saying it’s a black mark for the UN to have an alleged war criminal as an adviser on peacekeeping, what’s the thinking in the Secretariat? Is there any attempt being made to defuse this, to seek another individual from Sri Lanka, or are you simply saying we have no power, we accept it whatever the consequences?
Spokesperson Nesirky: Matthew, it is not a question of accepting or not accepting. It is a question of the Member States deciding. It is a question for the Asia group among the Member States to decide — and that was their decision. And I suggest that you take it up with them.
Inner City Press: I have, and there was no election in the Asian group, and the reason I think it’s legitimate to ask you is this is that a former UN official is saying it is surprising that Ban Ki-moon accepts this, i.e. he thinks, having had experience in the UN system, that clearly the Secretary-General, he can make calls, he can attempt... I just wanted to know, if in fact there is a switch, which may take place to Mr. Kohona, is the Secretary-General in any way involved in that or entirely [powerless]?
Spokesperson: Well, with great respect to Edward Mortimer, whom I know, he is not in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General any more. And so he cannot be privy to what may or may not take place there, at all.
So, under Ban the
Office of the
Secretary-General
has gotten so much
weaker? That was the
question, and this
so far is the
answer. We will have
more on this, and on
the Campaign.
Here are on the record quote provided on this to Inner City Press by the director of the Sri Lanka Campaign Fred Carver:
"There are very serious allegations of war crimes leveled against Silva, allegations that the Secretary-General's expert panel has recommended be investigated - something that has not yet happened. There are also incredibly serious allegations leveled against Sri Lankan members of UN peacekeeping forces - over whom Silva would have oversight. This appointment therefore does not speak well for the UN's commitment to investigating atrocities, even when the perpetrators wear blue helmets."
And, after some back and forth, by Edward Mortimer, former Annan communications director:
“It’s disgraceful that someone against whom there are strong and credible charges of war crimes should serve as Deputy Permanent Representative of his country at the UN, and even more disgraceful that the Asian Group has elected him to serve on the Secretary-General’s Special Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations – disgraceful, and insulting to the Secretary-General. I’m surprised that he puts up with it.”
That is giving Ban (too much) benefit of the doubt, and still it raises questions. Watch this site.
January 30, 2012
In
Addis, Ban Spins
"Negligence" in S.
Sudan As UN
Stonewalls, Migiro
Out
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- After charges of UN negligence in not ensuring that its Mission in South Sudan had military helicopters from mid November until the bloodshed in Pibor in Jonglei State, Ban Ki-moon on Sunday again put his spin on the issue.
He told the AU Summit in Addis Ababa
"South Sudan is twice the size of Germany, with less than 100 kilometers of paved roads. Our peacekeepers are doing all they can — with what they have. Despite severe logistical constraints, particularly air transport, the mission succeeded in saving many lives during the recent crisis in Jonglei. Yet clearly: without air assets such as helicopters, we cannot do all that we must do to protect people. Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."
Meanwhile Ban's
spokesman in New
York Martin Nesirky
after twice refusing
to say when Ban knew
that UNMISS had no
military helicopters
and when what Ban's
called his "begging"
belatedly began on
Friday
referred Inner City
Press on this to UN
Peacekeeping, "DPKO
and DFS" which he
said would provide
"the details."
And so Inner City
Press wrote to
chiefs Herve Ladsous
and Susana Malcorra
and agency
spokespeople, asking
1) when was the UN told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?
2) if different, when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?
3) when did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?
4) what does the UN say was the impact on its ability to protect civilians in Pibor of not having military helicopters?
Separately, in her January 23 video briefing, SRSG Hilde Johnson said after being told that Russian helicopters wouldn't fly, she was "subsequently" told that they would. I asked what date, she said she didn't have it with her but it would be provided. It hasn't been; I've asked about it at the UN noon briefing: can that date now be provided?
But rather than answer these questions, including for information that was already promised to the UN, DPKO's Kieran Dwyer provided more spin, entirely dodging the questions on which Ban's spokesman had publicly referring Inner City Press. Dwyer wrote:
Susana Malcorra has forwarded your email to me (copy below). I have spoken with her; she was on her way to the airport for official travel when she received it. I believe that her briefing to you on the topic of the helicopters earlier in January covered most of these issues.
Not only wass there
still no date
provided -- it's
that after Malcorra
in a "briefing" that
she asked be mostly
off the record, Ban gave a
speech entirely
passing the buck,
and the UN has since
refused to provide
the basis of what
Ban is saying: what
did Ban know, and
when did he know it?
Significantly, the
UN didn't even
mention its failure
to get military
helicopters to Pibor
until it was exposed,
by Inner City Press,
in a January
11 story.
Then, rather than
make disclosure and
say how this would
be avoided in the
future, the spinning
and stonewalling
began, and has
spread.
So less than an hour after DPKO's Dwyer's response, Inner City Press asked him, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson again:
This is not responsive to the questions asked, nor does it provide the information that Hilde Johnson said at the end of her January 23 video briefing would be provided.
-- WHEN did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?
-- when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?
In the more than 36 hours and counting since these reiterated questions were sent to DPKO, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson, not one of the questions has been answered.
Meanwhile Ban to the AU in Addis said, "our peacekeepers are doing all they can... Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."
Ban also said "I have made Africa a priority from day one" - less than a week after he belated confirmed that he is dropping Asha-Rose Migiro of Tanzania as his Deputy Secretary General, as Inner City Press first reported, likely for the aforementioned Susana Malcorra of Argentine.
Nor despite repeated public requests from the African Group has Ban appoined, as required, a full time Special Adviser on Africa.
But the claims in Addis, amid continued refusal to take and answer the simple questions about presumptive negligence in South Sudan, is becoming outrageous, and will continue to be pursued. Watch this site.
January 23, 2012
UN's Ban Knew Had No Copters in South Sudan for 6 Weeks, Now Passes the Buck
By Matthew Russell Lee, Analysis
UNITED NATIONS, January 19 -- When the bloodbath in Pibor in South Sudan began, local people blamed the UN for not arriving fast enough, and not acting to try to stop the attackers.
On January 18, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, "at the critical moment, I was reduced to begging for replacements from neighboring countries and missions. With limited resources, we tried our best."
Is this a rare candid statement, or a passing of the buck?
After asking questions and writing about the UN's slow response in Pibor as early as January 2, Inner City Press on January 11 reported that the UN had known since mid November that the Russian helicopters would not fly anymore in South Sudan.
Immediately UN
officials pushed
back, saying that it
is customary for
helicopters to fly
for the UN even
after the UN has, as
here, allowed the
Letter of Assist to
expire. But the UN
had been told that
the Russian
helicopters would
not fly.
Inner City Press
repeated asked Ban's
Office of the
Spokesperson about
this; lead spokesman
Martin Nesirky
claimed that the UN
would not be
discussing its
negotiations about
helicopters.
The representative of another large troop contributing