By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 16, more here
-- The UN, after ousting Tarek Mitri as envoy in favor of Bernardino Leon, has been promoting its good works in Geneva and in the country. But after an ISIS affiliate in the country uploaded video of itself killing 21 Egyptian Copts, thing may be changing.
-- The UN, after ousting Tarek Mitri as envoy in favor of Bernardino Leon, has been promoting its good works in Geneva and in the country. But after an ISIS affiliate in the country uploaded video of itself killing 21 Egyptian Copts, thing may be changing.
General Sisi of Egypt, which as already supported General Haftar, said he reserves the right to response in whatever way.
On February 16, the office of the spokesperson for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement:
"The Secretary-General condemns, in the strongest terms, the killing of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya by Daesh. He deplores the targeting of people on account of their religious affiliation... The Secretary-General reaffirms that the ongoing dialogue in Libya is the best chance to help the country overcome its current crisis. Only through dialogue can Libyans build a state and institutions that are able to confront terrorism."
Any message to Sisi and General Haftar?
At the February 15 UN Security Council's meeting -- about Yemen -- nothing was said about ehte Egyptians in Libya. But hours later a Senior US State Department Official issued this:
"Secretary Kerry called Egyptian Foreign Minister Shoukry today in the aftermath of the horrific video showing the murder of twenty-one Egyptians. The Secretary offered his condolences on behalf of the American people and strongly condemned the despicable act of terror. Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Shoukry agreed to keep in close touch as Egyptians deliberated on a response."
So the US, which provides Apache helicopters, says it is in dialogue with Egypt about how it will respond.
After Kerry (but before Ban Ki-moon), the UN Security Council issued a Press Statement of condemnation:
The members of the Security Council strongly condemned the heinous and cowardly apparent murder in Libya of twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christians by an affiliate of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/ Daesh). This crime once again demonstrates the brutality of ISIL, which is responsible for thousands of crimes and abuses against people from all faiths, ethnicities and nationalities, and without regard to any basic value of humanity
The members of the Security Council expressed their deep sympathy and condolences to the family of the victims, to the Government of Egypt, as well as to the families of all victims of ISIL. The members of the Security Council reiterate their strong condemnation of the persecution of individuals and entire communities on the basis of their religion or belief.
The members of the Security Council stressed again that ISIL must be defeated and that the intolerance, violence and hatred it espouses must be stamped out. The members of the Council further emphasized that such continued acts of barbarism perpetrated by ISIL do not intimidate them but rather stiffen their resolve that there has to be a common effort amongst Governments and institutions, including those in the region most affected, to counter ISIL, Ansar Al Sharia entities, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al-Qaida, as the Council resolved in United Nations Security Council resolution 2170 (2014) and Security Council resolution 2199 (2015).
The members of the Security Council demanded the immediate, safe and unconditional release of all those who are kept hostage by ISIL, Ansar Al Sharia entities, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al-Qaida.
The members of the Security Council underlined the need to bring perpetrators of these reprehensible acts of terrorism to justice. The members of the Security Council stressed that those responsible for these killings shall be held accountable, and urged all States, in accordance with their obligations under international law and relevant Security Council resolutions, to cooperate actively with Libya, Egypt and all other relevant authorities in this regard.
The members of the Security Council further recalled that ISIL is included on the Al-Qaida Sanctions List and is thus subject to the asset freeze and arms embargo in resolution 2161 (2014) and further recalls that any individual or entity that provides financial or material support to the group, including the provision of arms or recruits, is eligible to be added to the Al-Qaida Sanctions List and subject to sanctions measures. The members of the Security Council underscored the need for full implementation of resolution 2199 (2015), adopted on February 12, to cut off ISIL’s support networks.
The members of the Security Council reaffirmed the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.
The members of the Security Council reaffirmed their full support for Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Bernardino León, and urged all parties in Libya to engage constructively with his efforts to continue an inclusive political process aimed at addressing the political and security challenges facing the country. Council members underscored that only through national unity and dialogue, with a view to finding a peaceful solution, can Libyans build their state and its institutions so as to defeat terrorism and prevent such grave crimes.
The members of the Security Council expressed their deep sympathy and condolences to the family of the victims, to the Government of Egypt, as well as to the families of all victims of ISIL. The members of the Security Council reiterate their strong condemnation of the persecution of individuals and entire communities on the basis of their religion or belief.
The members of the Security Council stressed again that ISIL must be defeated and that the intolerance, violence and hatred it espouses must be stamped out. The members of the Council further emphasized that such continued acts of barbarism perpetrated by ISIL do not intimidate them but rather stiffen their resolve that there has to be a common effort amongst Governments and institutions, including those in the region most affected, to counter ISIL, Ansar Al Sharia entities, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al-Qaida, as the Council resolved in United Nations Security Council resolution 2170 (2014) and Security Council resolution 2199 (2015).
The members of the Security Council demanded the immediate, safe and unconditional release of all those who are kept hostage by ISIL, Ansar Al Sharia entities, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al-Qaida.
The members of the Security Council underlined the need to bring perpetrators of these reprehensible acts of terrorism to justice. The members of the Security Council stressed that those responsible for these killings shall be held accountable, and urged all States, in accordance with their obligations under international law and relevant Security Council resolutions, to cooperate actively with Libya, Egypt and all other relevant authorities in this regard.
The members of the Security Council further recalled that ISIL is included on the Al-Qaida Sanctions List and is thus subject to the asset freeze and arms embargo in resolution 2161 (2014) and further recalls that any individual or entity that provides financial or material support to the group, including the provision of arms or recruits, is eligible to be added to the Al-Qaida Sanctions List and subject to sanctions measures. The members of the Security Council underscored the need for full implementation of resolution 2199 (2015), adopted on February 12, to cut off ISIL’s support networks.
The members of the Security Council reaffirmed the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.
The members of the Security Council reaffirmed their full support for Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Bernardino León, and urged all parties in Libya to engage constructively with his efforts to continue an inclusive political process aimed at addressing the political and security challenges facing the country. Council members underscored that only through national unity and dialogue, with a view to finding a peaceful solution, can Libyans build their state and its institutions so as to defeat terrorism and prevent such grave crimes.
Bernardino Leon, as Inner City Press exclusively reported, was installed as head of UNSMIL after then-head Tarek Mitri declined to make the UN mission a mere appendage of European / UK diplomacy. Is it working?
UNSMIL's former deputy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed of Mauritania has been moved to head UNMEER, the UN's Ebola mission. Sources in Yemen say Ould Cheikh Ahmed was the UN's “designated security official” when a UNICEF staffer was taken hostage while traveling to the Sana'a airport without the required (and needed) security detail. Some say Ould Cheikh Ahmed was distracted, in Yemen and later in Libya, by side business interests.
But a check of Ban Ki-moon's Public Disclosure website, where his officials are supposed to make rudimentary disclosure of the finances and outside business interests, does not even list Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed (while numerous other Deputy SRSGs are listed). His is not in the most recent database, for 2013 - and may escape any disclosure by become an Under Secretary General with a mere nine month stint at UNMEER. Then what? We'll stay on this.
When the UN Security Council met about Mali on January 6, it was Malian Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop, and not UN Peacekeeping official Herve Ladsous, who distributed his speech and came to take Press questions. (Ladsous has a policy against it, here and here.)
Inner City Press asked Diop about the Mali talks in Algiers, and about the impact of Libya. On the latter, Diop said that “in 2012 the Mali crisis started when the war started in Libya and many Malian elements who were part of the Libyan army decided to come back home with the arms and ammunition. This started the destabilization of Mali.”
Diop added, "In the southern part of Libya there is a group that has declared allegiance to the Islamic State.” (When asked to name the group he could not or would not.)
A Greek ship near Derna was bombed -- Inner City Press on January 5 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric by whom; he said the UN does not know. TheFree UN Coalition for Access has asked UN Peacekeepingwhy the speeches of Ladsous, unlike other UN officials, are not made available.
Back on November 4 when the UN Security Council met about Libya behind closed doors, the Press outside at the stakeout was repeatedly told that Leon would come and take questions at the stakeout.
This is what the replaced Tarek Mitri did, each time he briefed the Security Council. With Leon being criticized inside Libya it would seem he'd have all the more reason to speak.
But he did not. When he came out he barely broke stride -- Inner City Press took a photograph, blurred -- while saying the new Security Council Gary Quinlan of Australia would speak later. When Quinlan did, it was a bland "Press Elements."
Still the scribes churned it. At 8:15 pm Agence France Presse bragged that it had "obtained" a French-drafted request to put Ansar al-Sharia, Benghazi and Derna, on the Al Qaeda sanctions list.
"A copy of the French-led request to the Al-Qaeda sanctions committee was obtained by AFP." Wonder how...
Reuters issued a breathless report with unnamed diplomats at 8:19 pm. Both have tried to get smaller investigative Press thrown out of the UN - see documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, here andhere - and this request by Reuters to censor one of its complaints to the UN from Google's Search.
Back on August 27 amid airstrikes in Libya, when outgoing UN envoy Tarek Mitri briefed the UN Security Council, the airstrikes weren't even mentioned in his more than six page prepared text distributed by the UN.
Inside the Council chamber, improvising but only a little bit, Mitri mentioned the strikes, but not who did them. Back on August 19 and once again since, Inner City Press asked the UN if it knew anything about who was behind them:
Inner City Press: Who did the air strikes? General Haftar? What's the UN, either Mr. León or Mr. Mitri or whoever is currently in charge, what's their sense of who's doing air strikes in Tripoli?
Spokesman Dujarric: I don't… I think we reported back with the Mission yesterday, if there's anything more I'll share it with you.
Spokesman Dujarric: I don't… I think we reported back with the Mission yesterday, if there's anything more I'll share it with you.
But in the days since, the UN has said nothing. Now the Libyan Dawn group has taken over the Tripoli airport despite the airstrikes and alleged that the strikes have the involvement of Haftar's (or Hiftar's) supporters, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. What does the UN -- or now Bernardino Leon -- know and say about that? Watch this site.
On Leon: To try to counter Libya's lawless power struggle, the UN engaged in one of its own.
And unlike most of the member states that make up the UN, and most other inter-governmental organizations, this UN does not answer questions, at least not directly.
After Inner City Press repeated asked about it, including at the UN's noon briefings on August 11 and 13, on August 14 the UN said Bernardino Leon will take over as its Libya envoy on September 1.
When Inner City Press asked if that is really Leon's starting day, given that he's said he'll go to Tripoli as early as next week representing the UN, Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said Leon is merely "familiarizing" himself with the work he will be, and Mitri remains in place until September 1. Really?
Ignoring the previous questions and the power-play, wire services like Reuters merely retyped ("reported") the UN's August 14 announcement that Leon will start September 1. And now?
Back on August 1, Inner City Press exclusively reportedthat UN envoy to Libya Tarek Mitri was being "pushed out" of the post, including by UK envoy to Libya Jonathan Powell, and cited his brother Lord Powell's extensive business in Libya through Magna Holdings.
The UK mission, usually responsive, did not provide comment on written Press questions on this; at UN Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant's August 4 press conference Inner City Press asked about Powell's and Mitri's relationship, without direct answer, see here.
Then the UK's Ambassador to Libya Michael Aron hasannounced, on Twitter no less, that Mitri is out and Ban Ki-moon has installed a new UN envoy, former Zapatero diplomat Bernardino Leon Gross.
The UN, at least at its August 8 noon briefing and in emails since, has not announce anything about replacing Mitri, much less by whom.
Ban Ki-moon's office said that for August 9 and 10, "Spokesperson on call: Mr. Farhan Haq." So Inner City Press wrote to Farhan Haq, as well as to lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric:
Hello. Now that the UK Ambassador to Libya, and others, have announced that Ban Ki-moon has appointed Bernardino Leon to replace Tarek Mitri as Ban's representative to Libya, head of UNSMIL, this is a request on deadline - today - that your Office confirm that this appointment or nomination has been made.
Has the letter been sent to the Security Council?
Is Leon already confirmed?
If not, how it is appropriate that P5 countries are saying he already has the job? On deadline, today.
Given many of the ongoing Afghanistan leaks are about UN DSS and UNAMA, not UNDP, there will be further questions. But the above is on deadline for today. Thank you in advance.
But more than four hours later, by "close of business" in New York, the "spokesperson on duty" had not answered, had not even acknowledged receipt of the question.
What does it mean to be the UN's "spokesperson on duty"?
Isn't it for Ban Ki-moon to make this announcement?
