By
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS,
June 23 --
Eight days
after Inner
City Press obtained
and
exclusively
published the
June 15 notice
to the UN
Security
Council
that the UN
mission in
Syria had
limited its
mobile
operations as
of
6 pm that day,
Damascus time,
the
incongruities
remain and
multiply.
At
10 pm on June
15 Inner City
Press published
the notice. At
6 am June 16
it sent
questions
to Kofi
Annan's
spokesman
Ahmad Fawzi,
then to Ban
Ki-moon
spokespeople.
Fawzi answered
that because
of the second
round (to
Ban's team),
he need not
answer, and
mission chief
General Robert
Mood would be
making an
announcement.
He wrote, "You
have already
sent these
questions to
Martin
Nesirky;
Farhan Haq;
Eduardo Del
Buey; and
Vannina
Maestracci. I
am also aware
that the
UNSMIS
Spokesperson
will issue a
statement
today."
Then
on June
18,
Inner City
Press was
told that
Mood's
Saturday
announcement
was the
official one.
But
it now appears
that when the
June 15 notice
went to the
Security
Council, it
was not
accurate, and
that Mood
didn't agree
with it,
perhaps was
even
unaware of it.
Sources
staying at
the Hotel Dama
Rose in
Damascus on
June 15 and 16
tell Inner
City Press
they saw and
even spoke to
Robert Mood on
his
way to the
lounge.
They say that
UNSMIS went
out on patrol
AFTER the
notice said
they stopped,
including "the
Moroccan"
deputy
of Mood, and
that three
vehicles
returned with
windows
smashed.
So
who then was
behind the
June 15 notice
to the
Security
Council,
exclusively
published by
Inner City
Press? Well,
the Department
of
Peacekeeping
Operations
deputy Edmond
Mulet
confirmed to
Inner City
Press that he
signed the
memo.
But
his boss,
Herve
Ladsous,
is the one who
would have
made the
decision. And
from
sources in
Damascus, it
appears that
Mood did not
agree or was
not
aware. Later
they got on
the same page.
But these
sources
maintain,
even in
communications
June 23 to
Inner City
Press, that
the patrols
did not stop
with Ladsous
said they did.
Watch this
site.
From
the
UN's
June 18 noon
briefing
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
one follow up,
because the
notice that he
sent to the
Security
Council, which
Inner
City Press
obtained and
published on
Friday, says
that it is six
o’clock local
time on Friday
they suspended
operations. It
gives
the time and
it refers
specifically
to an upsurge
in armed
conflict. So
back to this
question of,
what time
frame is he
talking about,
this increase,
because many
people look at
it and they
don’t see a
difference on
Thursday, to
days previous.
Obviously it's
a bad
situation, but
what led to
this notice to
the Security
Council that,
as of 6
o’clock Syria
time on
Friday, they
would return
to their
hotels, as
some put it?
Associate
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq: I
wouldn’t
comment about
the notice to
the Security
Council. The
official
announcement,
like I said,
was the one
that General
Mood
made on
Saturday, and
that
announcement
and the
decision,
which is
the important
part – the
decision to
suspend
patrols was in
fact
the result of
intensified
fighting. We
have been
warning about
the
impact of
intensified
fighting for
days – both
from here and
on the
ground from
Damascus. And
the basic
point was
that, after
evaluating
the
circumstances
of the
previous days
of intensified
fighting, the
decision was
taken that
since the
patrols could
not be
conducted the
way that we
intended for
them to
happen; since
the observers
could
not carry out
their tasks
without undue
risk, it was
wise at that
point to
suspend
patrols.
