From Costa Rica to N. Africa, UNDP Deputy Post May Bypass Cameroon

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undp3deputy112009.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 20 -- The continental dispute about the UN Development Program's number two post, which triggered a letter from the African Group to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to hold off what they say was the impending nomination of Costa Rican Rebecca Grynspan, has taken a new turn.

After Mr. Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas on November 19 told Inner City Press that the decision has not been made yet, sources now indicate that rather than the candidate from Cameroon promoted by that country's Ambassador, the Secretariat is mulling giving the post to the Permanent Representative of a north African country, who is close with Ban's deputy chief of staff and closest advisor Kim Won-soo.

At the November 19 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked

Inner City Press: On the Secretary-General’s upcoming naming of an Associate Administrator for UNDP, can you confirm that a letter was received by the Secretariat from the African Group protesting the naming of a non-African, and also what Inner City Press has been told by a number of African ambassadors, that they feel that the post was promised to the African Group when Ms. [Helen] Clark was named and Mr. [Ad] Melkert left?

Spokesperson Michele Montas: I am not aware of this situation, and I am not aware of a letter received. Of course, I will try to get more information on it. And we haven’t had a public announcement of any appointments.

Question: Well, what of this idea that… What a number of them have said is that, given the amount of the UN’s and UNPD’s work that’s in Africa, it makes much sense to have that represented near the top of the… They have said that they think that a sort of a deal was made with them and they feel that it’s now being violated.

Spokesperson: Well, I understand their concerns, but as I said, it’s not violated yet, because we haven’t announced a person at that post yet.

The Ambassador of Cameroon told Inner City Press, on the record, that the announcement of Rebecca Grynspan to the post had been scheduled for last Friday, November 13. After the African Group's letter, this was called off.

What some call the Ban administration's "humiliation" of Africa began with the merger of the Office of the Special Advisor on Africa into another office, opposed by the African Group, and extended through the replacement as head of the UN Office in Nairobi of Anna Tibaijuka of Tanzania by Achim Steiner of Germany in an "I am in control" email that still triggers laughter inside the UN.

On the General Assembly's call that Ban re-fill the OSSA post, Inner City Press is told by source that the deputy chief of staff Kim Won-soo appeared in the budget committee and argued that the resolution was not clear, that the post did not have to be filled.

At the noon briefing on November 20, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas to confirm this. She confirmed that Mr. Kim went to the committee, but not what he said. Video here, from Minute 16:33. It seemed clear she would not confirm or deny that the Secretariat's eye has passed from Costa Rica to north Africa, bypassing Cameroon.

Meanwhile, the UNDP Associate Administrator post hangs in the balance, raising issues of regions and friendship and promises. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undp3deputy112009.html

UN Advises Leaving Guinea Strongman in Power, Realism or Cynicism?

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undpa1guinea112009.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 20 -- Guinea's strongman Moussa Dadis Camera is proposed to remain in power, by mediator Blaise Compaore. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said, in light of rapes committed by his troops, he must go. Inner City Press asked the UN about the role in the mediation, and position on Dadis Camera remaining in control. Video here, from Minute 14:38.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Michele Montas said that she would not comment on an ongoing mediation. "Of course we play a role," she said, "Mr. Bassole plays a role."

Inner City Press asked if she meant Said Djinit. "Mr. Bassole as far as I know is leading both," Ms. Montas said.

Later on November 20, a senior UN official involved in the mediation laughed at the idea that Bassole was involved. It's Djinnit, he said. (The Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General clarified this after the noon briefing). The official said that, on behalf of the UN, he had advised Compaore, "don't start with a non-starter," meaning, don't demand that Dadis Camera leave.

"There is an army behind him," the UN official said. "The army has their own interest and would just put another in." He suggested that Dadis could remain as a "cememonial" president, with all power in a prime minister.

So in this way, the UN confirms that they advise that the strongman must stay, if become undermine. Meanwhile the public (relations) position is different.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undpa1guinea112009.html

UN Finally Admits Barring NGO After GA Stakeout Speech, Cites Technicality, Precedent Not Needed

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unngo2credentials112009.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 20 -- Days after denying it had stripped the entry pass of a non governmental organization representative who spoke November 5 at the General Assembly stakeout microphone after the Assembly's vote on the Goldstone report on Gaza, the UN on November 19 reversed itself and acknowledged the action.

Inner City Press, which covered the expulsion on November 5 and later asked the UN to confirm it, on November 19 asked for the reason and precedent for the stripping of credentials. Outgoing spokesperson Michele Montas denied that speaking at the GA microphone was the reason, but could not cite any precedent for expelling an NGO for a minor entry violation.

The Wall Street Journal of November 20 chimed in on the topic, citing this reporter's work. Some wondered if the UN only confessed to the expulsion because of inquiries by the WSJ; other hearkened back to a meeting by five senior UN officials, including Ms. Montas, as which legal action against both the WSJ and Inner City Press was discussed.

The UN likes to expel its critics, then deny doing so.

From this week's transcripts on l'affaire Bayefsky:

November 16: Could you give us a status report on Anne Bayefsky, whether her credentials have been restored, or whether there is a plan to restore them or…?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: No, no. Her credentials and the credentials of her organization are not changed at this stage. She belongs to a non-governmental organization. It’s possible in the future that there could be a review, but at this stage there has been no removal of credentials from that non-governmental organization or from Ms. Bayefsky.

Then on November 18, Inner City Press asked

Inner City Press: you’d said, regarding this non-governmental organization that had the pass stripped after speaking in front of the General Assembly the day of the Goldstone Report vote. I think you said on Monday, there has been no change in the status, but I spoke to the person and they can’t get into the building. So can you explain how what you say is consistent with the person actually not having their pass, and who made the decision to remove it and what the process is to follow up on that?

Associate Spokesperson: Well, the accreditation of the NGO has not changed. That non-governmental organization is still accredited with ECOSOC [Economic and Social Council]. In terms of pass cards, I believe their passes had been taken at the time of the incident that occurred when they spoke without authorization. I believe that those were being kept so the NGO could then pick them up. So I believe the NGO can pick up those passes once more. That’s what I was informed.

Inner City Press: Okay. Because the person says they were asked to fill out a statement and if they didn’t turn it in exchange for getting the pass, then the pass was never returned. I just wanted to clear that up, since you’d said that there had been no change, that was your understanding.

Associate Spokesperson: As far as I am aware, the NGO is an accredited NGO, so it’s still entitled to have passes. Until that changes, they have accreditation through ECOSOC.

Then on November 19, Spokesperson Montas reversed course, and Inner City Press followed up:

Spokesperson Montas: We were asked about the situation of a pass card belonging to Anne Bayefsky yesterday. We have received some information from the Department of Safety and Security (DSS) about the matter, and I’d like to make the following clarification:

On Thursday, 5 November 2009, at approximately 1800 hours, Ms. Anne Bayefsky, an accredited member of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Non-Govermental Organization (NGO) Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, utilized her UNHQ-issued building pass in an unauthorized manner at the security turnstiles to grant access to Mr. Joel B. Pollak into restricted areas of the Headquarters complex. Further, Ms. Bayefsky transferred her Geneva-issued UN building pass to Mr. Pollak, in whose possession it was discovered. Based on these breaches of security protocol, both passes were retrieved. The outcome of the security inquiry will be forwarded by DSS to the Department of Economic and Social Affairs/ECOSOC for their determination as to final disposition. So I hope this clarifies what was said yesterday. We got more information today on the issue.

...Inner City Press: On the announcement or the clarification that you gave on this Bayefsky pass -- and thanks for that -- I just wanted to know two things. One is, is there no relation between this continued suspension of the pass and the person speaking at the General Assembly stakeout on 5 November? Because that seemed to trigger the incident, and…

Spokesperson: Well that was part of it. I gave you the two issues that were pending in terms of the security breach, and I already said about the intervention in front of the Security Council stakeout that it was a matter for… Whoever speaks at the stakeout has to be introduced either by a Member State or by an organization within the UN system. An NGO cannot step up unless that person is accompanied by a Member State, cannot step up to the microphone and just make a statement.

Inner City Press: No, no, I understand that, I just want to know if that’s part of the basis for the suspension of the pass or…?

Spokesperson: No, I already said what the basis was.

Inner City Press: Okay.

Spokesperson: …the introduction of someone with a pass that was hers.

Inner City Press: And has DSS ever run across a similar situation with other NGOs and not suspended their passes?

Spokesperson: Not that I know of. In every case where there is a security breach the passes are temporarily suspended until the case is fully investigated.

Inner City Press: And just one last thing on security breaches, is there any update in terms of suspensions or removal of suspensions on the -- I’m trying to think of the best way to say it -- the “chicken episode”? Because these two gentlemen were suspended.

Spokesperson: I don’t know what was done after what I told you. I can, of course, follow up on whether there were any other measures taken.

Inner City Press: Notice the name of the company wasn’t said to give them any publicity. We’ll just call them the “chicken company” for now.

Spokesperson: The “chicken company” yes, thank you so much! [Laughter]

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unngo2credentials112009.html

At UN, Yvo de Boer and Africa's Secret Climate Number, of Indian Black Carbon and Shell Games in the Niger Delta

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/uncope5offmessage112009.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 20 -- With the UN simultaneous shrinking hopes for the Copenhagen climate change meeting and telling the Press not to cover the diminshed expectations, its top negotiator Yvo de Boer on November 19 effectively set $10 billion as the ceiling for transfers to the developing world.

There is only one problem: the African Union alone is said to be looking for $67 billion annually, with a threat to walk out of Copenhagen is less is offered. Inner City Press asked de Boer is he knew of the African Union number, and if even a feigned successful conference would be possible in the Africans walked out.

De Boer said that as a UN official, he believes in bringing people together, and that any walk out would be bad. He then argued that $10 billion was only a start, not a ceiling at all. But by stating the number as an indicia of success, he effectively did that.

Inner City Press asked de Boer to comment on India's environment minister Ramesh's comment that not only will India not make binding commitments in Copenhagen on greenhouse gas emissions, it will not discuss black coal emissions at all: "Copenhagen meeting is for negotiations for cuts in GHG emission and not for black carbon emission. We would resist any move for bringing in black carbon emission for discussions. Scientific link between black carbon emission and global warming and melting of glaciers is still being studied."

At first de Boer said he hadn't seen the comment and so couldn't response. Then Inner City Press e-mailed it to him.Hours later, to his credit, de Boer responded:

Subj: Here's the Minister Ramesh / black carbon emissions quote I've asked about
From: Yvo de Boer [at] unfccc.int
To: Inner City Press
Sent: 11/19/2009 8:24:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time

The Minister correctly states that the climate negotiations do not address black carbon as it is not a greenhouse gas. However efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can also significantly lower emissions of black carbon

We'll see. Meanwhile, given the environment, some were surprised on November 18 to find Shell's Elizabeth Cheney in a UN conference room blithely praising her company's record.

Inner City Press asked about Shell's activities for example in Nigeria, specifically in the Niger Delta where Shell was accused for playing a role in the death of activist Ken Saro Wiwa, and is currently being sued before the ECOWAS court for pollution and human rights violations.

Ms. Cheney said Shell is "suffering the activities of criminal and terrorists [who] blow things up." She said, "We are not the government of Nigeria... sometimes we shut production and move out of area."

But what about pressuring those who oppose the oil drilling or distribution of revenue? "That's more detailed than we need to get into today," Ms. Cheney said. Afterwards she promised to put Inner City Press in touch with both "communications and... the leadership part of the business, there's more transparency there." If you say so...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/uncope5offmessage112009.html

Amid Reports of War Crimes, IMF Gives More Funds to Sri Lankan Government and Spins on Human Rights

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/imfhr1srilanka111909.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 18 -- The International Monetary Fund's seemingly dismissive attitude toward human rights, including labor rights and protections against ethnic cleansing and even torture, has been on display this month. Managing Director Dominique Strauss Kahn defended the IMF's disbursement of funds to the government of Sri Lanka, without any conditions or safeguards, after detailed reports of presumptive war crimes.

When Inner City Press asked IMF spokesperson Caroline Atkinson if, in light of Mr. Strauss Kahn's logic, the IMF ever considers human rights in disbursing funds or not, she laughed and called the question's "premise... a bit misleading." Video here from Minute 9:07.

From the IMF's sanitized transcript:

Inner City Press: Does the Managing Director’s November the 5th statement ‘regardless of one’s opinion of the human rights situation’ mean that the IMF never considers human rights?”

MS. ATKINSON: That’s another question where the premise is a bit misleading. The point that the Managing Director was making in his response to a letter from Human Rights Watch was—and as you know, the text of that letter talks quite directly about the Managing Director’s own feelings about the importance of human rights. And the point of that quote was that he was saying whatever you think about what rights and wrongs of what’s happening in Sri Lanka now, what is true is that an economic collapse would make lives worse for everybody. And, of course, usually the most vulnerable are most hurt by any economic collapse. So it was in that context he was explaining the reasoning behind the Fund’s economic support for Sri Lanka. Thank you all very much and have a good Thanksgiving.

In fact, even the Europe Commission in considering extending or suspending its GSP Plus favorable tariff treatment to Sri Lanka, has taken into account consideration of human rights and war crimes. By contrast, the IMF has argued against any duty to consider human rights. Even Strauss Kahn's letter refers only to "humanitarian" issues, and uses this as an argument in favor of releasing more funds.

Since March, Inner City Press has asked IMF spokespeople what safeguards if any would be attached to the loan. (Despite Inner City Press' demonstrated interest since then, the IMF did not tell it about its conference calls on disbursements to Sri Lanka, neither in July nor this month).

On July 16, the IMF's Caroline Atkinson said that the views of the international community will be taken into account. Four days later her boss Mr. Strauss Kahn issued a press release with no mention of safeguards. Now a letter, and a laugh. We will continue to follow this issue.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/imfhr1srilanka111909.html

At UN, Japan Says Each N. Korean Refugee Must Be Reviewed, Abductees Are Focus

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/dprkhr1japan111909.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 19 -- As Japan's Ambassador to the UN Yukio Takasu talked to the Press Thursday about North Korea's nuclear programs, Inner City Press asked if Japan will accept North Korean refugees, not based on a previous tie to Japan but rather on the abuse and dangers they face in their own country.

"They have to follow [our] immigration law," Ambassador Takaku replied. "The Japanese government has to examine it case by case, we can't just say that any North Korean came come."

The issue, however, is what standard Japan applies to asylum seekers. According to Human Rights Watch, Japan give primacy to those who have ties to Japan.

To the contrary, HRW insists, "North Korean refugees who arrive at Japan's borders, embassies or consulates should have their claims for asylum assessed under the provisions of the 1951 Refugees Convention and the 1967 Protocol."

After Inner City Press asked the question, at the Security Council stakeout, Ambassador Takasu said "Japan has a policy of accepting foreigners, first if they want to come to Japan, to pursue a safe and happy life." Then he referred to, without explaining, Japanese immigration law.

On the larger question, of Japan doing more about North Korea than simply nuclear and abduction issues, Takasu pointed to a resolution in the General Assembly's Third Committee, urging other countries to support it. We will have more on this.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/dprkhr1japan111909.html

UNICEF Has "No Position" on China's One Child Policy, Lucy Liu Calls It Tradition, of Stealth MOUs and Re-election Worries

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unicef1china111909.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 19 -- What is UNICEF's position on China's One Child Policy? It doesn't have one.

In the run up to a UN children's agency event featuring Lucy Liu commemorating the Convention on the Rights of the Child's twentieth anniversary, Inner City Press asked UNICEF to "please state UNICEF's / Ms. Veneman's position on China's one child policy."

Inner City Press also requested a copy of UNICEF's memorandum of understanding with the Chinese government's state media organization Xinhua, which has recently been publicizing the UN's "child protection" work.

On the eve of the event, UNICEF refused to provide a copy of the MOU with Xinhua -- it pointed instead to a press release -- and responded to Inner City Press in writing that:

"UNICEF does not work in China on either population or family planning issues.This relationship is managed by another UN agency, UNFPA, which works with China's National Population and Family Planning Commission. UNICEF works only in maternal and child health with the Ministry of Health. We are not involved in the Government's Family Planning and Population policies or programmes and as such, we have no official position on the issue."

Given UNICEF's rhetoric about its uncompromising protection of children, to hide behind UNFPA or say it takes no position on policies until it work with them seemed puzzling. Inner City Press went to UNICEF's headquarters on November 19, hoping to ask Executive Director Ann Veneman directly for her position.

Ms. Veneman was appointed by then-President George W. Bush, and many have speculated that the Obama administration may have someone else in mind for the post. If this is indeed the dynamic, how would Ms. Veneman's silence on this issue of human rights in China play?

At the press conference, at which Inner City Press despite raised hand was not called on to ask a question, Ms. Veneman and Lucy Liu were asked indirectly about the policy. An intrepid reporter from Xinhua asked about the disparity between male and female children in rural China, which is how UNICEF's relatd "State of the World's Children" report, at page 22, couched the issue.

Ms. Veneman replied that "it is not only China" but that "we need to speak out." But why then does UNICEF not have a position -- that is, why does UNICEF not speak out?

Lucy Liu, a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, said that it is important for UNICEF to respect countries' "traditions." Whether the current Chinese government's one child policy can be construed as a tradition is unclear. Ms. Liu also said that China's greater number of males may lead to sexual violence and rape, equating a "room full of men" with "endorphins." Ms. Veneman laughed, seeming uncomfortable.

The U.S. Congress recently heard testimony about China's One Child Policy. Ms. Veneman is known to micro-manage UNICEF's public communications on such topics, for example by insisting to see and personally approve any press release about countries such as Iraq or Afghanistan. In further micro management, UNICEF sources tell Inner City Press that when interviewed by her stealth partner Xinhua, Ms. Veneman gave stage direction such as to only film her from the "third button up." Xinhua, despite having at the UN several energetic or respected journalists, apparently complied.

Whether such careful management, of camera shots and policy positions, leads to a second term for Ms. Veneman at UNICEF is not yet known. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unicef1china111909.html

At UN, As Diplomat from Cameroon Is Rebuffed by UNDP, Ban Ki-moon Faces African Challenge on Agency's Deputy Post

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
www.innercitypress.com/undp2deputy111909.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 19 -- The continental battle for the number two post at the UN Development Program, on which Inner City Press reported exclusively yesterday, heated up Wednesday night when the Ambassador of Cameroon approached UNDP Administrator Helen Clark as she left early from a reception about, ironically enough, Africa.

Ambassador Michel Tommo Monthe, whose country has put forward an economist for the Associate Administrator post, later told Inner City Press that until now it has been impossible for him to meet with Ms. Clark.

The African Group, he said, last week wrote a letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, copied to Ms. Clark, demanding that the impending nomination of Rebecca Grynspan of Costa Rica not be announced.

"They are invoking gender, " Ambassador Monthe told Inner City Press. "The initial deal, when the former Associate [Ad Melkert of the Netherlands] went... the deal was an African should take the position. Now that there are strong Africans ready, they waver. The main activity of UNDP is on Africa, how do you not having someone at the senior level?"

Monthe said that Cameroon has a strong candidate, a "doctor economique" formerly the Permanent Observer of the African Union in Geneva, and director of the economics department at the African Union.

"They wanted to announce this last Friday," Ambassador Monthe recounted Inner City Press. ""We wrote a letter to Ban Ki-moon, with a copy to Helen Clark. We said, we are not going to accept it. The post can't go to the Costa Rican."

Ambassador Monthe continued, "I have been trying to meet Ms. Clark for the last three months. She didn't receive me. I said, this has to wait. I want to see you to discuss that matter."

The Ambassador of Zambia, this month's chairman of the African Group, put it this way to Inner City Press: "the duties of this person will have a lot to do with Africa,and therefore it would be advantageous to have someone from that perspective. Helen is around. [This is] absolutely a good question."

But in her months at UNDP, Helen Clark has yet to hold a press conference in UN headquarters or take questions from the Press.

Ms. Clark, who had been driven in a limousine that three blocks from UNDP's headquarters to the Olympus-sponsored African environmental photography reception held at the Japan Society, had to pass by Monthe and another sub Saharan African Ambassador on her way out of the event. Now, what will she do?

What will Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, already questioned by the African Group for merging the UN Office of the Special Adviser on Africa into another office, do? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undp2deputy111909.html

UN's Somalia Envoy Blames Web Sites for Aid Cut Off and Child Soldier Reports

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unsc6somalia111809.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 18 -- The UN's top envoy to Somalia Ahmedou Ould Abdallah was asked Wednesday by the Press about the reported suspension of U.S. aid due to diversion to the Al Shabaab rebels, and the recruitment of Somalia refugees in Kenya to come back to fight Al Shabaab. He dodged both questions by referring to the ills of online media and web sites.

When Inner City Press asked about the recruitment of fighters including child soldiers in refugee camps in Kenya, Ould Abdallah replied that Somalis have "three hundred web sites... People write and print what they want." Video here, from Minute 0:54. But the sites reporting this include the UN's own ReliefWeb.int, here.

Likewise, when Inner City Press asked about reports -- by both the Wall Street Journal and New York Times -- of the suspension or delay of U.S. aid due to diversion of World Food Program funds to Al Shabaab, Ould Abdallah said "they campaign through web sites [that] they don't don't like help" from the U.S. or WFP. He added that it is difficult to prevent diversion. Video here, from Minute 7:46.

Then Ould Abdullah turned his comments on Inner City Press itself, saying "you are very specific. You ask only controversial or difficult issues." Video here, from Minute 8. Given that the alternative is to ask bland or easy question, "that's journalism," Inner City Press replied. "It is not journalism," Ould Abdallah said.

Ould Abdallah ended his 11 minute stakeout by asking an intern, "Who are you with?" When told the name of the cable television network, Ould Abdallah directed the intern to ask a question, since "he [Inner City Press] monopolize." Video here, from Minute 9:58.

Since Ould Abdallah's spokesperson Susanna Price has refused to answer e-mailed questions about who paid for UN-spoonsored conferences and the Transitional Federal Goverment's wages and security, and about Ould Abdullah's role in a Norwegian funded, Kenyan drafts Law of the Sea filing subsquently voted down by Somalia's parliament, to ask Ould Abdallah four questions after none for many month hardly seems a monopoly.

Ould Abdallah previously called for a moratorium on the reporting of the killing of civilians by AMISOM peacekeepers in Somalia, saying that these reports only hed to more strife. When Human Rights Watch and others called for him to retract the censorship call or resign, he did neither.

Secretariat sources say Ould Abdallah was asked to apologize, but that he refused. "He called the UN's bluff," said a source. "They feel that they need him." This is what the UN has come to. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unsc6somalia111809.html

UN Council Ignores Its Own Deadline on Eritrea and Djibouti, Pascoe's Inside Moves

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unsc1eritrea111809.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 18 -- The UN Security Council's inability this year to stop bloodshed in Gaza and Sri Lanka, or to stop nuclear missile tests by North Korea, is perhaps not surprising. But when it fails to follow up on its deadlines and directives on a conflict like that between Eritrea and tiny Djibouti, one has to wonder why.

Following a military clash in mid 2008, the Security Council on January 14 passed a resolution giving Eritrea five weeks to withdraw from Djibouti's territory. Now in mid November, there has been no follow up.

An omnipresent diplomat from Djibouti, who represents the country in nearly all of the General Assembly's committee, has repeatedly told Inner City Press that the Council's inaction only emboldens Eritrea more.

Last month, he told Inner City Press that because the Council expects Djibouti to raise its issue through African Council member Uganda, Djibouti is left voiceless, as "Uganda has done nothing."

That the Council defers in such cases to the member or members from the region appeared to be confirmed by this month's Council president Thomas Mayr-Harting of Austria when Inner City Press asked this week what has happened on Eritrea and Djibouti. After referring to the fruitless "good offices" mediation efforts of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's top political official B. Lynn Pascoe of the Department of Political Affairs, Mayr-Harting said that African members have a "particular responsibility to move this dossier forward." Video here, from Minute 7:22.

Ten days ago, Inner City Press asked Uganda's UN Ambassador Ruganda to respond to this criticism. He expressed surprise, then said that "something is moving," and asked that Inner City Press hold off publishing the comment for a few days. Now, more than a few days have passed, just as more than 10 months have passed since the Council's Resolution 1804.

On November 17, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq for the status of Lynn Pascoe's mediation. From the transcript:

Inner City Press: Farhan, earlier this year in this dispute between Eritrea and Djibouti -- Lynn Pascoe, the Council considered it and then sort of deferred to DPA, sort of some kind of mediation that was being attempted. They set a deadline that’s now long expired. What is the status of DPA’s or Mr. Pascoe’s work on that issue? When is the last time he spoke to the two, and where does it stand?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: Well, Mr. Pascoe has repeatedly briefed the Security Council about the situation between Djibouti and Eritrea, so he has brought this up in their consultations. Ultimately, any further response is up to the Council, so you might want to check with them.

On November 18, as Inner City Press asked diplomats from Ethiopia and even Latin America, word was that a follow up resolution is finally being prepared. But why did five weeks before ten months? Only at the UN.

Footnote: in other UN Department of Political Affairs, after Lynn Pascoe's decision to short circuit a recruitment process for a Sanctions Branch post and move Michelle Griffin laterally into the post was protested by D1 and D2 officials, Messrs. Martinovic and Heitmann, the move has still been made, but Ms. Griffin will report directly to Pascoe, and not through Martinovic and Heitmann. The latter walks right by Inner City Press' table by the Security Council nearly every day, but has not commented on the story. We like to tell all sides...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unsc1eritrea111809.html

Land Mine Use Defended by Sri Lanka as UN Says Nothing, of "Victim Activated" IEDs

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unmas1srilanka111709.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 17 -- The UN and its Secretary General are said to be strong advocates for countries to become parties to the Mine-Ban Convention. But when it comes to Sri Lanka, which has refused to join the Convention and which states openly that it uses land mines, it is unclear what the UN is doing to urge the country to stop using mines.

The UN is paying for removal of mines laid by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Meanwhile, in a debate in the UN General Assembly's Fourth Committee on October 30, Samantha Jayasuriya of the Sri Lankan Mission argued that "for legitimate national security concerns, Sri Lanka had not become a party to the Mine-Ban Convention... Land mines were used by security forces 'always for defensive purposes' and mainly to demarcate the limits of their military installations."

This statement, more than five months after the Rajapaksa government declared final victory over the LTTE or Tamil Tigers, went uncommented on by the UN. At a press conference on November 17, Inner City Press asked Dmitry Titov of UN Peacekeeping and Maxwell Kerley, Director of the UN Mine Action Service, about Sri Lanka's statement and continued use of land mines. Video here, from Minute 35:56.

Mr. Titov replied that the Secretary General is in strong support of the Mine Ban Treaty. But when Inner City Press asked if Ban Ki-moon, in his many bilateral talks this year with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, has ever directly asked that Sri Lanka join the Mine Ban Convention, Mr. Titov passed the question to Mr. Kerley, who described UNDP's work removing LTTE mines.

With the LTTE defeated, the Sri Lankan government's justification for using land mines is gone. But it was repeated on October 30 at the UN.

In more positive land mine news, Inner City Press asked Mr. Kerley about the use of bacteria to show where mines are. Kerley said the UN is looking into technology but primarily uses dogs. He made reference to "victim activated" improvised explosive devices. Inner City Press asked why the UN distinguishes these from IEDs activated by cell phones or command wire.

Kerley's answer was the the UN "guards its impartiality" so it will be "welcome by all." IEDs are the "weapon of choice" for some, and the UN only gets involved with these weapons are no longer "in play." Video here, from Minute 45. To some, this sounded like not wanting to offend the Taliban or Al Qaeda in Iraq by targeting their "weapon of choice" -- unless, as Mr. Titov inserted, they threaten UN personnel. To some, the phrase "victim activated IED" sounds like... blaming the victim. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unmas1srilanka111709.html

As Morocco Expels Western Sahara Activist, Silence at the UN

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un1wsahara111709.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 17 -- Given the UN's role in Western Sahara, one might expect the Organization to have at least some comment when Morocco expels a noted human rights activist like Aminatou Haidar. But on November 17, Inner City Press asked both the Associate Spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon and this month's Security Council president about the expulsion, and neither had anything to say.

The UN's Farhan Haq said only, "we'll check with MINURSO," the UN Mission there. Video here, from Minute 13:05. But what of Christopher Ross, Ban Ki-moon's envoy on the issue? What of the Secretary General himself?

Austrian Ambassador Thomas Mayr-Harting, as Council president, said that "the issue has not been raised by anyone in the Council." Video here, from Minute 5:01.

Some have noted in the Obama Administration a praising of Morocco's human rights record that may have emboldened and enable the expulsion. France, of course, is a major supporter of Morocco. With South Africa off the Council, no one is raising it. One wonders what incoming Council member Nigeria's position will be.

Mayr-Harting went out to refer to "an informal meeting in Austria some time ago." But what about the imprisonment of Polisario leaders, and the expulsion of Aminatou Haidar? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1wsahara111709.html

In UN, Africa Poised to Be Denied Deputy Post at UNDP, Ambassadors Complain

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undp1deputy111709.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 17 -- A continental battle is underway in the UN system, with Africa poised to once again lose out. When New Zealand's Helen Clark was named Administrator of the UN Development Program, several African ambassadors tell Inner City Press, their understanding was that the number two job in UNDP would go to the developing world, specifically to Africa.

Now, Ms. Clark and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon are said to be near naming a Costa Rican, Rebecca Grynspan, as the UNDP Associate Administrator. "Africa is being humiliated again," a well placed source told Inner City Press on Tuesday, hearkening back to Mr. Ban's merger of the Office of the Special Advisor on Africa with an unrelated small island and landlocked states position.

Despite repeated protests from the African Group and the General Assembly, Mr. Ban has yet to reinstitute a stand alone Office of the Special Advisor on Africa. Now, in what's seen as a further insult to the continent which makes up over half of the agenda of the Security Council and most UN agencies, word is he is choosing a Latin American over, for example, a candidate from Cameroon.

Several African Ambassador were scornful of Ms. Clark's accomplishments to date at UNDP. "Name one thing that she has changed," a well placed North African source asked, adding "she is seeking advancement, even to be Secretary General if the change presents itself." Ms. Clark appears to use her UNDP post to promote herself in New Zealand. Inner City Press has repeatedly asked that Ms. Clark hold a question and answer session with the Press, but instead Ms. Clark and her long time chief of staff Heather Simpson try to micro manage media relations, even choosing which reporters they want from those wire services granted interview rights.

UNDP has still failed to rule in its investigation of nepotism in the hiring of the daughter of the UN's top Congo envoy, Alan Doss. UNDP has refused to answer questions about irregularities in its China office, and about other hirings that internal UNDP whistleblowers call nepotism.

UNDP's highest profile whistleblower, who the UN Ethics Office said should be awarded back pay for due process violations, is still in limbo, without compensation and with UNDP -- and the UN Office of Legal Affairs -- arguing that the Ethics Office's recommendation is irrelevant.

UNDP preaches about the rule of law, but several African ambassadors who approached Inner City Press say they are being cheated. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undp1deputy111709.html

UN Says Hampton in Vienna Did "Data Input" Not Iran and N. Korea, Nesirky in Wings

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unv2death111709.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 17, [updated with post-question Nesirky confirmation, below] While the UK press reports an MI6 investigation into the death at the UN in Vienna of Timothy Hampton, a British expert at the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization, in New York UN Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq on November 16 told Inner City Press Hampton's job was "data input."

But Hampton earlier this year co-authored an article that the "nuclear explosion" in North Korea on 25 May 2009 either had managed to contain its radioactive Xenon-133 signature "well above 99.9%"or, more likely, it wasn't a nuclear explosion at all. The article also shows in the article that the worldwide network of sensors on which Hampton worked gets data from Iran.

From the November 16 transcript:

Associate Spokesperson Haq: I’m told that his functions basically involved data input for the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty Organization. It was not related to Iran.

Inner City Press: I just wanted to follow up on that. I have something else, but this Mr. Hampton was co-author of articles about North Korea nuclear… I’m just wondering, when you say that he was a data-entry specialist, where did you get that from? Would that be consistent with writing…?

Associate Spokesperson: I got that information from our colleagues in the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

Inner City Press: And would that be inconsistent with him being a co-author of a scientific article about the North Korean nuclear programs?

Associate Spokesperson: That’s not necessarily inconsistent. But, in any case, the point is the work that he was doing for the CTBT Organization did not involved Iran's nuclear program.

Hampton's author's CV states, "Tim Hampton joined the CTBTO in 1998 and is part of the team maintaining and operating the IDC application software to generate and distribute products and services. Prior to that, he worked in the UK for 10 years on test-ban monitoring issues."

Since article also shows in the article that the worldwide network of sensors on which Hampton worked gets data from Iran, if anyone wanted to know all about how well any nuclear explosion in Iran could be detected, he would be a person to ask, especially if you were in Vienna at the time.

Footnote: speaking of Vienna and Korea, multiple sources tell Inner City Press that the search for the next spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon is zeroing in on Martin Nesirky, a former Reuters reporter more recently spokesman for the OSCE in Vienna. His comparative advantage? He speaks Korean.

Last week, Inner City Press reported on buzz in the top floors of the UN about some untransparent candidacies for UN Spokesperson and chief of Strategic Communications a/k/a campaign for Ban Ki-moon to get a second term: Kevin Kennedy and the Independent's U.S. editor, respectively.

The next day a senior UN communications officials confronted Inner City Press in the cafeteria and said none of it is true. Now a week later we're reporting not one but two other names, as the process nears its end game.

For spokesman, multiple sources now name Martin Nesirky -- in part because he speaks Korean, beating out not only Kennedy but another "crusty" Reuters hand. And for Strategic Communications, depending on the buy-out, Roger Cohen of the New York Times. He turned down the dual job held by Michael Myer in the past, but now with the Times laying off people right and left, the time may be right to take the buy out and move to the 38th floor then the North Lawn. Watch this site.

Updated 1 pm: This article was written, as published above, on the morning of November 17. Then pre-publication confirmation was sought from Mr. Nesirky at 11 a.m., in this email to the OSCE:

Mr. Nesirky --

I am a reporter at the UN in New York. This is a request on deadline that you confirm or deny, and comment, on reports linking you with the soon to be vacant position of Spokesperson for the Secretary General. I am very much on deadline and so will appreciate your response, no matter how cursory. Thank you in advance.

At the noon briefing, his appointment was announced:

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today appointed Martin Nesirky of the United Kingdom as the new Spokesperson for the Secretary-General. Mr. Nesirky succeeds Michele Montas of Haiti who is retiring from the Organization on 30 November 2009. The Secretary-General is grateful to Ms. Montas for her dedication and service as his Spokesperson since the beginning of his term on 1 January 2007.

Mr. Nesirky brings to this position more than 20 years of experience in journalism, media relations and international affairs. He comes to the United Nations from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna, where he has served for more than three years as Spokesperson and Head of Press and Public Information. The 56-country OSCE spans the region from Vancouver to Vladivostok and co-operates with international organizations and Mediterranean and Asian partner countries, including Afghanistan. Mr. Nesirky has also served for more than two decades as an international correspondent and editor for Reuters covering salient issues affecting international peace and security, both regional and functional, including the fall of the Berlin Wall, events in the Balkans and nuclear nonproliferation issues. He was Reuters Bureau Chief in Moscow, with responsibility for coverage of the Commonwealth of Independent States. He was also posted in Berlin, The Hague, and Seoul

Inner City Press asked Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq a series of questions -- how many were interviewed, was speaking Korean a factor, when will the new head of Strategic Communications be named -- none of which were answered. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unv2death111709.html

UN Claims "No Removal of Credential" of NGO Barred Since Stakeout Speech

By Matthew Russell Lee
|www.innercitypress.com/unngo1credentials111609.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 16 -- Eleven days after a non-governmental organization's representative had her UN identification pass taken away for speaking at the General Assembly stakeout microphone, UN Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq was asked if her credentials had been restored.

"There's been no removal of the credentials of Ms. Bayefsky or her organization," Haq claimed, on camera. Video here, from Minute 17. But a simply phone call to Ms. Bayefsky reveals that her I.D. card, required to gain access to the UN complex, has not been returned. [Click here for Inner City Press' first exclusive report of Ms. Bayefsky's ejection from the UN.]

Ms. Bayefsky told Inner City Press of that after her pass was confiscated by UN Security, she was asked to draft and sign a written statement, after which her pass would be returned to her. She spent more than two hours writing the statement, and included in it a comment by a UN Security official that "the Palestinian Observer was very upset" at what she had said at the microphone, after the Assembly's vote on the Goldstone report about Gaza.

Then, Ms. Bayefsky say, the UN through Security official Anne Hammenrudh no longer wanted her to sign or turn in the statement. Rather, she was told that the matter would be referred to the Assembly's Committee on Non Governmental Organizations, which doesn't meet until the end of January. [Click here for previous Inner City Press coverage of the Committee on NGOs.]

So while Ms. Bayefsky is, for now, barred from the UN for the rest of the year, UN Spokesperson Farhan Haq says "her credentials are not changed" and "there's been no removal of credentials."

In the very same briefing, Haq explained of the UN's removal of a poster about Chinese Web censorship from its Internet Governance Forum in Egypt that the poster was "already on the floor, face up" and that the UN "folded it, undamaged." Still, the poster and its message were removed, just like Ms. Bayefsky. Click here for that story.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unngo1credentials111609.html

UN's Velvet Glove Censorship of Poster on Great Firewall of China, "Folded, Undamaged"

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unnet1censor111609.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 16 -- After the UN in Egypt removed a poster protesting Chinese web censorship from its Internet Governance Forum, at its headquarters in New York its Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq told Inner City Press the poster was "folded up... undamaged."

Haq said solemnly, "No UN official was involved in throwing the poster on the floor." He confirmed that the UN removed the poster, but said it was "on the floor, face up" when the UN demanded its removal. Video here, from Minute 20:26.

On the other hand, a delegate at the Internet Governance Forum has been quoted that "the poster was thrown on the floor and we were told to remove it because of the reference to China and Tibet. We refused, and security guards came and removed it. The incident was witnessed by many."

A more authoritative account: "The UN officials... asked us to remove it and one of our staff placed it on the ground for us to consider what to do. That's where we had the discussion. When we refused to remove it, their security guards bundled it up and took it away."

The UN's Haq explained the incident by stating that the group which unfurled the poster about censorship had, earlier in the conference, distributed an "unauthorized" flier for a movie about Tibet. Haq said this was prohibited by the UN, because it was a "political issue not related to the Internet Governance Forum."

But isn't web censorship an issue "related to the Internet Governance Forum"?

In fact, as Inner City Press has exclusively reported, the UN in New York uses filtering software which has blocked such web sites as (China's) Anti-CNN.com, click here for that story.

The poster contained the sentence: "The first generation of internet controls consisted largely of building firewalls at key internet gateways; China's famous 'Great Firewall of China' is one of the first national Internet filtering systems."

Inner City Press, which in full disclosure has its own experience with UN attempts to censor, click here, asked the UN's Haq at Monday's noon briefing to confirm that the above-quoted poster concerned internet censorship. Four hours later, no confirmation had been provided. Watch this site.

From the November 16 UN transcript:

Inner City Press: One more about the freedom of expression question. At this Internet Governance Forum (IGF), there has been an incident in which a poster about Internet censorship in China, about what they call the “Great Firewall” was taken down by the United Nations after the complaint by an unnamed delegation. It may seem like a small thing to you, but I’m wondering, given what you just said that the Secretary-General’s focus was on freedom of expression, does he think that that type of removal is consistent with his position?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: Well, in terms of that, I do have the facts of this from our colleagues in Sharm el-Sheikh. The Internet Governance Forum secretariat approved the request by a group called the Open Net Initiative for a room on the first day of the Forum to promote a book, and a room was allocated for that purpose. Subsequently, United Nations officials were alerted to a flyer being distributed at the event promoting a film on Tibet, which was not mentioned in the original request for the room. Officials from the Forum secretariat requested the organizers not to distribute the flyer or show the film, as this was not what the room was requested for, and concerned a political issue not related to the Internet Governance Forum. The IGF secretariat requested the organizers of the event not to distribute the flyers and they agreed.

Subsequently, other delegates complained to the Forum secretariat about a large poster displayed outside the room, which again was not pre-approved for posting outside the allocated room. In response to this complaint, officials from the Forum secretariat went to the room to discuss the issue with the organizers. Officials found that the poster was already on the floor of the room lying face up. No United Nations official was involved in throwing the poster on the floor. Following repeated requests from the IGF secretariat to remove the poster from the floor, United Nations security removed it from the floor and folded it undamaged. The organizers were told that they could pick it up anytime later that evening. And so that’s where we stand on that. But, the point to reiterate on that is that the request was made to the non-governmental organization involved not to distribute the flyers and they did agree to that.

Inner City Press: From the way that you say it, do you acknowledge that the poster had to do with Internet censorship in China and not Tibet, an issue that was related presumably to Internet governance?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: These are the details that were provided by colleagues in Sharm el-Sheikh. That’s what I’ve got.

Inner City Press: Can you ask them what the poster… just to confirm that the poster was about Internet censorship?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: Sure.

But eight hours later, no confirmation (or denial) was provided. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unnet1censor111609.html

UNHCR Poised to "Bluewash" Nestle on Child Labor, Water and Infant Formula Abuse

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unhcr1nestle111509.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 15 -- The UN's refugee agency appears poised to announce a partnership with Nestle, despite a slew of concerns about the company's practices.

In only the last month at UN Headquarters in New York, Nestle has been named in connection with child labor in Cote d'Ivoire and abusive water practices.

Tellingly, it is under the rubric of "water projects" and not nutrition that UNHCR is preparing to justify what some call its "blue washing" of Nestle.

On November 13, Inner City Press asked UNHCR these questions:

Has UNHCR been in communication with Nestle about some form of partnership? Please describe and quantify, including in dollars or Euros. Is the plan to announce this partnership next week? Which day?

Has UNHCR considered such issues as (1) Nestle being named, including in a recent UN press conference, as less than a leader on the issue of child labor? (2) Nestle being alleged to violate the UN International Code of marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, violations of which have been recognized as violations of the child’s right to the highest attainable standard of health (Convention on the Rights of the Child)?

UNHCR's director of communications Melissa Fleming responded late on November 13, near midnight Geneva time, that

"Dear Matthew, This is all I have for you at this stage: We are in discussion with Nestle about cooperation on future projects that will help deliver clean water and support small scale farming initiatives for refugees."

Nestle, under fire for its participating in the UN's CEO Water Mandate as well as UN Global Compact, has a history of paying money to try to make problems go away. Previously it demanded compensation from Ethiopia for a subsidiary nationalized decades ago, then tried to diminish the backlash with a donation to UNHCR.

Campaigners note that UNICEF refuses Nestle's money due to the company's violations of the UN International Code of marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes.

Another UNHCR spokesperson put out a more detailed spin of accepting Nestle's money, "UNHCR have worked on and off with Nestle since 2003 when they funded a water project in eastern Ethiopia for refugees and local villagers. Nestle joined UNHCR's Council of Business Leaders in Jan. 2005. We are in discussions to expand a partnership on water, sanitation and livelihood development."

While UNHCR has refused to put a financial value on past and proposed payments to it from Nestle, the Ethiopia donation was reportedly in connection with the $6 million that Nestle demanded from Ethiopia. After backlash, Nestle said it would donate the money it had demanded. Oxfam refused to accept the "blood money." Then as now, UNHCR provided a bluewashing safe haven for Nestle. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unhcr1nestle111509.html

As Blair Lobbies for Wataniya, Do Kuwait and JPM Chase's Arranger Role Spell UN Conflict of Interest?

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/blair1unjpmc111309.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 13 -- When Tony Blair does business, who does he work for? He represents the Quartet, and thus the UN, on development in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. He has been paid by JPMorgan Chase as a consultant, and presumably works for them. When he acts in the West Bank for the Wataniya cell phone company, who is he working for?

The UN has repeatedly claimed that there would and could be no conflict of interest between Blair's paid position for JPMorgan Chase and his work in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. When Inner City Press asked Blair, after a meeting of the Quarter in the Conference Room 4 in UN Headquarters, about any safeguards in place for his UN and JPMorgan Chase roles, he scoffed. A Blair staffer confirmed that he continued in JPM Chase's employ.

This week, Tony Blair attended a press conference announcing the finalization of Wataniya's deal, which Blair "negotiated." At the UN noon briefing on November 11, Inner City Press asked about this last:

Inner City Press: yesterday, Tony Blair was in Ramallah, and he’s described as having negotiated on behalf of a cell phone company with the Israeli Government. There’s a whole press conference also that noted his role for the Quartet and for the UN. So I’m wondering, did he do this on behalf of the Quartet and the UN and what is the UN’s knowledge, do they have any knowledge on this business negotiating activity?

Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe: I have no knowledge of that.

Even forty six hours later, no answer has been provided. But even cursory research reveals that Blair's employer JPMorgan Chase served as a "mandated lead arranger" for the acquisition of Wataniya. Click here for the document.

So again, what safeguards are in place? Who is Tony Blair working for?

Tony Blair Associates has as a client Kuwait, and by implication its royal family, while Blair has met with the finance minister of Kuwait while representing JPMorgan Chase. Wataniya Palestine is substantially (57%) owned by investors from Qatar and... Kuwait. For the former, it's Qatar Telecom. But for the later, it's the Kuwait Investment Authority, which operates on behalf of the State of Kuwait -- Tony Blair Associates' client. So when Blair lobbies for Wataniya, who is he representing?

While awaiting the UN's answers, we note that in June 2009, "Wataniya Palestine CEO Alan Richardson recently called on Middle East envoy and former British prime minister Tony Blair to intervene on behalf of Wataniya to get the frequency released. Richardson previously has been involved in controversial cell phone projects in Iraq, with Orascom and Iraqna, contracts which the U.S. Pentagon urged the Coalition Provisional Authority to cancel.

So to the degree Tony Blair is working for Richardson, this too is problematic. But beyond the UN and Quarter, is Blair working for Kuwait? With JPMorgan Chase's documented mandate lead arranger role for the acquisition of Wataniya, there is a conflict which, it would seem, will require action. Blair is dismissive, and the UN appears cowed. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/blair1unjpmc111309.html

In Congo, UN Fails to Act on MSF as Bait Attacks, After 4 Weeks, of Holmes and Mountain

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/drc1nochamsf111309.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 13 -- In Masisi in the Congo four weeks ago, Congolese army forces attacked civilians who had gathered for vaccination by MSF Doctors without Borders. MSF subsequently put out a public statement and, the group told the Press on November 13, informed the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs both in New York and the Congo.

Still, the UN Mission in the Congo (MONUC) has neither said or done anything about the involved units of the Congolese Army. On November 13, Inner City Press asked OCHA chief John Holmes why the UN system's reaction has been so slow.

Holmes said "I saw the allegations" of MSF and have "no reason to disbelieve" them. Still, he said, "I don't know enough about what happened to comment on your specific point." But why not? Who in OHCA, or the wider UN, is responsible to acting on a group of MSF's description of atrocities by a one of MONUC's partners?

Holmes said that perhaps Ross Mountain, back from the Congo for a week and retiring that day, would address it. But on November 12 when Inner City Press asked Mountain, he said he didn't know much about it. He's only been in New York for a week. And if he doesn't know about it, who in the UN system does?

Finally Holmes said "it's easy to criticize," and that the Congolese Army might be worse if MONUC stopped working with it, leaving it "without any restraining influence." But by that logic, one might argue the UN should assist, in order to restraint, a group like the Lord's Resistance Army.

Holmes noted that Alain Le Roy "announced very quickly" that MONUC wouldn't assist some units of the Congolese Army, that MONUC "immediately" said it would withdraw support.

But that belated withdrawal is from units alleged to have killed month ago in May, unconnected with the MSF or Philip Alston allegations. Does MONUC give a six month grace period after atrocities, to continue receiving UN support? Is this what due process, or face saving, has become?

After Holmes' answer -- Mountain did not take a second bite at the apple -- the UN representative of MSF added that this was "the first time since the 1990s" when MSF concluded "our presence was used to kill people." Inner City Press has asked MSF for more information. It would seem the UN would take this seriously, four weeks after the incident and at least a week after a very public report. But apparently not.

What is wrong with MONUC? Another participant in the event, held at the International Peace Institute, put the blame on the UN's Congo envoy Alan Doss. "Things have gotten worse under Doss," Henri Boshoff of the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa told Inner City Press. But where is the accountability? To be continued.

Footnote: we would really like to write a less critical retirement piece on Ross Mountain. The November 13 press conference, at which whistleblower allegations where also blown off, did not allow for it. Nor did the November 14 IPI appearance. There is apparently at least one more UN Mountain event, at which Holmes said he will praise Mountain. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/drc1nochamsf111309.html