By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un4monte011210.html
UNITED NATIONS, January 12 -- Two weeks ago, Inner City Press reported that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon would name as his envoy to Afghanistan Staffan de Mistura, who hired Mr. Ban's son in law in Iraq. A week ago, Inner City Press asked Mr. Ban about it. Ban replied that the choice is his "prerogative."
Last Friday, U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke told Foreign Policy's The Cable that de Mistura told him he has been offered the post.
With the cat entirely out of the bag, Inner City Press on January 11 asked Mr. Ban, in his first stakeout interview in the UN's new North Lawn Conference Building, "Richard Holbrooke is being quoted as saying that you have offered the top UN post in Kabul to Staffan de Mistura. I wonder, is he right in saying that?" Video here, from Minute 15:18.
The premise of the question was, while Ban's talking points last week involved questioning why the New York Times would chime on on his prerogative, it would be more difficult to say Holbrooke was wrong.
But Ban's answer was almost identical, that "I don't think it is proper to discuss detailed matters on appointment procedures publicly." But it seems clear that Ban has offered the job to de Mistura, who in turn told Holbrooke -- to nail the job down, some say -- and Holbrooke intentionally went public.
When Ban says this is not "proper," does he mean that de Mistura should not have told Holbrooke that he's been offered the job? Since, as Inner City Press exclusively reported, Ban's choice as Darfur envoy of Ibrahim Gambari leaked because Gambari asked some UN staff to sign up to work for him in El Fasher, Ban could have told de Mistura to keep it under raps.
Or, as his comments seem to point, is Ban calling Holbrooke's public statement to The Cable improper? Previously, Ban fired Peter Galbraith, whom Holbrooke has pushed for the UN's deputy post in Kabul, for going public with his critic of Kai Eide covering up Hamid Karzai electoral fraud.
Ban can and does crack down on UN staff for speaking publicly or blowing the whistle. One wonders if Ban's implicit rebuke of Holbrooke leaves any mark at all. Ultimately, it traces back to de Mistura. But he has ingratiated himself with Ban's Turtle Bay. Between now and the conference on Afghanistan in London on January 28, what could go wrong? Watch this site.
From the UN's January 11 transcript:
Inner City Press: On Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke is being quoted as saying that you have offered the top UN post in Kabul to Staffan de Mistura. I wonder, is he right in saying that?
SG: First of all, this appointment of a new Special Representative of the Secretary-General is still under consideration. Of course, I don't think it is proper to discuss detailed matters on appointment procedures publicly, but as soon as the decision is made I will let you know. I have been discussing this matter with President [Hamid] Karzai and other concerned major parties who could be the best candidate who can really work together with all major parties to have a very harmonious and coordinated role as SRSG of the United Nations.
As we've noted, just as Hamid Karzai vetoed Paddy Ashdown for the post, he may try the same with de Mistura, even more so after Holbrooke's staged endorsement.
