On Rwanda Genocide, Survivor's Tale of French Truck That Left, Ladsous Absent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 7 -- On the day the UN held its 21st Commemoration of the Rwanda Genocide, the French government of Francois Hollande announced it would be declassifying some documents from during and before the genocide, back to 1990. 

At the UN ceremony, this decision was the buzz among attendees. From the podium, survivor Regine King told how when in 1994 she approached a French truck in Butare, “they just left us there.”

   UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke and did use the phrase shame along with UN; he did not mention, for example, UN staffer UN staffer Callixte Mbarushimana,click here for Inner City Press on that.

   Many Permanent Representative were among the attendees, including for example those of Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Cameroon, Luxembourg, Afghanistan and many others. The UK and French deputies were in the front rows; US Ambassador Samantha Power was on the podium (speech online here.)

  Apparently not in attendance was the head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who represented France in the UN Security Council in 1994 (sample memo published here by Inner City Press.) 

   More recently, Ladsous refused for the UN to participate in action against the Hutu FDLR militia,  not granting a waiver the UN explicitly gave to fight the Lord's Resistance Army and under Ladsous opaquely gave for months after DR Congo Army rapes in Minova (video compilation of Ladsous non-answers here.)

  And on April 2, Ladsous essentially scapegoated Rwandan peacekeepers for his Department's deadly bungling in Mali, in Tabankort and Gao, which followed a similar shooting at civilians in Haiti for which Ladsous had also refused to answer. Video here, Vine here. We'll have more on this.

   

At UN, Second Set of Syria Photos Go Up, Caesar, With Warning & More Sponsors

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 9 -- Two months after the Syrian government sponsored a photo exhibition in the UN that the opposition Syrian National Coalition unsuccessfully asked the UN to cancel, on March 10 a counter-exhibition of photos depicting torture in Syrian prisons is set to open.

  On the evening before the opening, Inner City Press visited the site to find a Warning: The Following Images Are Disturbing.

  Another sign said "The content of this exhibition is solely the responsibility of the sponsoring and supporting member states, any queries should be directed to them."

  An invitation to the Press said that "The Permanent Missions of France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States and the co-sponsors the Permanent Missions of Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Kuwait, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates cordially invite you to attend the opening of the exhibit “Caesar Photos: Inside Syrian Authorities’ Prisons” on Tuesday, 10 March 2015, 6-7 pm, at the South Wall of the United Nations Conference Building."

 A separate invitation came from the Syrian National Coalition, which had tried to get the previous exhibition canceled: 

Co-Hosts: Permanent Missions of France, the State of Qatar, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States

Co-Sponsored by: Co-Hosts and the Permanent Missions of the Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the State of Kuwait, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden, United Arab Emirates

In Coordination with: Coalition for a Democratic Syria (CDS) and Syrian National Coalition

“Caesar Photos: Inside Syrian Authorities’ Prisons" exhibit displays photos of detainees from the prisons run by Syrian authorities that were taken by a defector from the Syrian army who is known by the pseudonym Caesar. 

  Back on January 7, a day when officials around the world and at the UN after the attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris spoke about the right to freedom of expression and to display unpopular views, the UN received a protest to a photo exhibit about Syria set to begin the next day, January 8.

 The Syrian National Coalition -- the moderate opposition, in Washingtonese -- wrote to UN Management official Yukio Takasu:

"It has come to my attention that on 8 – 16 January 2015 the United Nations Secretariat Building will host an exhibit for the Syrian Arab Republic Mission featuring the photographs of Syrian regime propagandist Hagop Vanesian, in an event entitled 'My Homeland.' The UN cannot in good conscience host an exhibit that callously promotes a regime that is responsible for immense death and unprecedented destruction. By doing so, the UN condones the atrocities committed by Syrian forces, and serves as a mouthpiece for Assad’s heinous war crimes."

  As set forth below, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in a contradictory way, in a private event in the clubhouse of a group that has itself engaged in censorship, spoke on January 7 about the need for freedom of expression. 

  (Whether he's raised this in his native South Korea, where a newspaper editor faces criminal charges for insulting the president, is not known; the issue was not included in Ban's long read-out of his New Years call to South Korean president Park.)

  Perhaps Ban's Secretariat won't act on the SNC complaint, which we're linking to here, because it came one day before the exhibition. Will its response be about "freedom of expression"?

  There are certainly distinctions to be made between Charlie Hebdo, the Syrian government and this photographer, and we're open to hearing all. But what does freedom of expression mean?

   

On Refugees, UN's Plumbly Speaks for Lebanon, Of Belgian Rotation Out of UNIFIL

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 12 -- When the UN's Special Coordinator for Lebanon Derek Plumbly came to take questions outside the UN Security Council on November 12, he lavished praise on Saudi Arabia's financial contribution to the Army. He said on a range of topics, it is not my decision to make, it is for the people of Lebanon.

  Inner City Press asked Plumbly about the following headline, "Plumbly Rules Out Naturalization of Syrian Refugees." If such decisions are truly for the people of Lebanon, is it for Plumbly to rule anything out, or in?

  Rather than clarify the headline, Plumbly said yes, that is his position. He said it's a matter for the people of Lebanon, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. But while he's free to note that Lebanon and some others have not wanted to sign the 1951 Refugees Convention, should Plumbly so openly say it's fine not to sign it?

  Appearing with Plumbly, at least at the beginning of his question and answer stakeout, was Australian Ambassador Gary Quinlan, president of the Security Council for November. While there were consultation in the morning on Liberia, no questions were taken on that topic. (In fairness, Quinlan has made an effort to take questions after nearly all other consultations, so we'll see.)

  Inner City Press also asked Plumbly about the withdrawal from UNIFIL of Belgium's 100 plus peacekeepers. He said they were in de-mining, and rotations are routine. But who's coming in? 

Back on July 31, in the International Monetary Fund's then just released Lebanon report the word Syria appeared no less than 59 times, blamed for nearly everything. But the report at page 6 acknowledges:

“Lebanon could not create sufficient jobs even before the Syria crisis. According to the World Bank, only some 3,800 jobs were generated per year (one for every six new entrants to the labor market) in 2005–09. Reflecting insufficient job opportunities, the unemployment rate stood at 11 percent in 2011, slightly above the MENA average of 10 percent. Like in the MENA region, unemployment was much higher among the youth -- over one third of labor force participants aged 15 - 24 are unemployed. Around half of the labor force was employed in the informal sector.”

The IMF opined, “Without a resolution in Syria, economic performance is expected to remain weak.” But what kind of resolution?

As good news, the IMF said

“Lebanon might become a commodity producer over the next decade, with petroleum set to be an important source of government revenue. Recent seismic surveys suggest that Lebanon’s oil and gas resources could be in excess of 25 trillion cubic feet (tcf). While not particularly large by international standards, this estimate still points to the potential for a substantial revenue increase for many years (though not starting before 2020 at the earliest).”

For now, on delinquent loans held by Lebanese banks, the IMF “staff called for an improvement of loan classification and restructuring rules. The increase in loans under watch and the widespread use of overdrafts warrant tighter rules guiding the classification of NPLs and the restructuring of loans, including re-aging of overdrafts and arrears” (Yesterday Inner City Press reported on Cyprus non-performing loans and the foreclosure scheme the IMF is demanding, here.)

Also on Lebanese banks, the IMF “encouraged progress on the Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) regime. A better understanding of the source of deposits and adequate identification of beneficial owners would allow more effective monitoring of transactions and strengthening of risk-based supervision—necessary to enhance the integrity of the financial sector.”

The IMF report contains as an annex a “Statement by Mr. Shaalan on behalf of the Lebanese authorities” -- of whom while there the IMF met with Prime Minister Salam, Minister of Finance Khalil, Governor of the Banque du Liban (BdL) Salame -- the IMF met with that says “Lebanon’s AML/CFT regime is in practice fully compliant with international standards, and Lebanon’s financial intelligence unit, the Special Investigation Commission, actively cooperates with its foreign counterparts.” We'll see. Watch this site.

   

With UN Mission in Mali Under Attack, Koenders Leaves To Be Dutch FM, Inner City Press Sources Say Louis Michel May Replace

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 14, video here -- Showing once again that UN positions are often just places to wait for something better to come along, Bert Koenders is leaving as UN envoy to Mali, as things deteriorate there, to become Dutch foreign minister.

  While the UN uses the slogan "Stay and Deliver" in South Sudan, that apparently does not apply to Mali, where more and more African peacekeepers are being killed. Chad even accused UN Peacekeeping as using its soldiers as, in essence, cannon fodder. But no matter - Koenders will move on, from what some see as a sinking ship.

  Inner City Press' Sahelian sources produce another European name as successor, saying "il est probable" -- the Belgian Louis Michel. Previously Michel excused himself for not even knowing the anti Internet privacy amendments submitted in his name because, he said, he was traveling in Mali. We'll have more on this.

  The new Free UN Coalition for Access would propose that the UN Secretariat seek commitments from prospective Special Representatives of the Secretary General to stay in their positions for some minimum period of time, and to not drop out when something slightly better comes along.

  Back on October 8 when UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous briefed the Security Council by video from Mali, he supported the government in Bamako's insistence on "no federalism." Then, the UN did not distribute his speech, even as it distributed what Mali said.

  Mali's foreign minister Diop said the Security Council should set up a rapid intervention force, and raised the specter of Islamic State or ISIS in northern Mali. When Diop has been at the UN, he has held stakeouts and taken Press questions. Not so Ladsous, video compilation here, UK coverage here.

  As to Ladsous, there is a history, including a recent one. When Ladsous arrived at the General Assembly stakeout on September 27 to try to do his question and answer on Mali early as he did on South Sudan, without the Press present, it didn't work. Video here., Vine here and embedded below. Ladsous blocked Inner City Press' camera with a file folder then walked away, summoning friendly media with him and canceling the public stakeout.

  On September 29, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Accessasked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it, if the UN of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon thinks it appropriate for an Under Secretary General to engage in censorship. Dujarric said he hadn't seen the video.

 It's here, and the Q&A with Dujarric is here. UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I had a couple DKPO questions. But this one is more fundamental. I wanted to know what the position of UN is on an Under-Secretary-General basically blocking a camera that’s filming from an entirely legal stakeout position which seems to be within the definition of kinda censorship. Why didn’t Mr. Ladsous in fact hold the stakeout on Mali on Saturday?

Spokesman Dujarric: I can look into it. I think there was a couple of scheduling issues. I can look into it.

Inner City Press: On tape he came up and put a file folder in front of a camera to stop it from filming.

Spokesman Duujarric: I’ll look into it. I’m not aware of the incident.

   Dujarric said there were "a couple of scheduling issues." But at least two wire services reported Ladsous' privatized spin without noting the censorship that took place right in front of them. If they censor this, what else is missing in their reports?

  In English Ladsous spun, "UN peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous told reporters later on Saturday that with the presence of French forces greatly reduced in the region, UN peacekeeping forces have to take a more dynamic stance and go in search of the attackers. 'We can't be sitting ducks,' he said."

  In French Ladsous spun, "'Je crois que c'est incontestable: les terroristes et les jihadistes, et sans doute aussi les trafiquants, ont repris du poil de la bête,' dans le nord du Mali, a déclaré Hervé Ladsous à des journalistes, jugeant 'intolérables' les attaques perpétrées contre les Casques bleus."

  Why couldn't he say this at the UNTV stakeout and take questions? What does it say about those who went to Ladsous' privatized spin-zone, which he began here, with Reuters, Voice of America and AFP? Old video here.

   As Ladsous stood at the stakeout, Inner City Press filmed as it did on September 26 when Ladsous refused to answer basic Press questions about his missions in Central African Republic and Golan. 

  Ladsous demanded, What are you going to do with this? He and a staffer tried to block the filming with file folders. Then he got UN Media Accreditation to ask Inner City Press to put down the camera and stop filming. But this is the stakeout. The Free UN Coalition for Access defends the rights to cover the UN. (The old UN Correspondents Association has partnered with Ladsous, first along with Agence France Presse and then further.)

   Ladsous and one of his "publicity" staffers tried to block the filming with file folders. Video here. Finally Ladsous walked away with his team including the Reuters correspondent who has himself engaged in censorship, telling Google to remove from Search his "for the record" complaint to UN Media Accreditation, claiming it is copyrighted. It is a strange position from a media that claims exclusive leaks. 

   After Ladsous stormed off, two of his staffers returned to say that the stakeout still might happen. But at 2:42 pm, an hour and forty-two minutes after it was supposed to happen, the UN said it was canceled - but not why.

   Before UN Peacekeeping held its September 26 meeting about the Central African Republic, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Uganda deciding not to send its troops as peacekeepers to the MINUSCA mission, under Herve Ladsous.

Dujarric said he would try to get an answer, but none was sent six hours later. So when Herve Ladsous, the fourth French chief of UN Peacekeeping in a row, came to the General Assembly stakeout past 6 pm on September 26, Inner City Press several times put the question to him: What about the Ugandans? Video here.

  Ladsous made his opening statement only in French, then ignored the Press question in English about Uganda pulling out of his peacekeeping mission, at the same time that the Philippines is pulling out of Ladsous' mission in the Golan Heights after he ordered their troops to surrender to the Al Nursa Front extremist group, which still has their UN Peacekeeping vehicles, weapons and uniforms.

Instead, Ladsous pointed at Agence France Presse, which previously on Ladsous' behalf filed complaints against Inner City Press, including through UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance. 

  The first time was when Inner City Press reported that Ladsous was by no means the first choice to replace Alain Le Roy atop peacekeeping, but was deposited into the job after the UN decided that the first choice, Jerome Bonnafont, was too flashy. So they got Ladsous.

Ladsous on September 26 proceeded to brag about new countries coming into UN Peacekeeping, singling out Sweden. Inner City Press once again asked, what about Uganda pulling out of the CAR mission, and added, what about the Filipinos pulling out of his mission in the Golan? Video here.

Ladsous as has become his practice - compilation here, UK coverage here - refused to answer and walked away with two of his aides. They looked back over their shoulders as they went up in the elevator.

How can a UN official get (over) paid but answer no critical questions? How can an official under whose watch the Darfur mission has covered up attacks on civilians, and who has ordered at least two countries' peacekeepers to surrender to terrorists, keep his job? 

  The questioning is spreading and one would think would come to a head in the upcoming review of peacekeeping, which Inner City Press has heard and reported will be headed by Louise Arbour. The new Free UN Coalition for Access asserts that UN Under Secretaries General should answer media questions, and there should be accounability. We'll see.

   

For UN Security Council Spain, Turkey & New Zealand Face Off For Two Seats, Of Smart Phone Apps & Future Races in 2016 and 2018

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 12, more here -- New Zealand, Spain and Turkey are facing off at the UN for two seats on the Security Council. Which one will be left out? 

  Two years ago it was Finland, whose Permanent Representative gave Inner City Press an inflated vote count of 165 on the eve of the election. This has become urban legend and now no one makes predictions. But there is spin.

   New Zealand is a small country, but one which can relate to outsiders like Eritrea. The last time they were on the Council, they spoke up for Rwanda. They fought a war with Turkey, which has led to a bond. Still, the Kiwis were surprised when Turkey jumped into what would have been a “clean slate” with Spain.

  There should have been no surprise: Turkey feels itself a rising power, they paid for and branded the area outside the Security Council, previously open to the press, into a “Turkish Lounge.” But how will their crackdowns inside Turkey, and now reticence to join up with Obama's coalition against ISIS play?

  For the European Union, could the live with both Western European and Other Group seats going to non-EU members? Then again, it is pointed out, the EU spans three UN regional groups: WEOG, Eastern Europe and even the Asia Pacific Group, through Cyprus. So how could the UN tell its members how to vote? The election's set for October 16.

  In the next contested WEOG race in 2016 it's slated to be Sweden, the Netherlands and Italy; in 2018 it'll be Belgium, Israel and Germany. Inner City Press -- and as regards press freedom issues, the Free UN Coalition for Access -- will be covering these and other races: Fiji and Malaysia this time; in 2016, Kenya versus Seychelles, Thailand versus Kazakhstan. In 2017, Kuwait and Yemen face off; in 2018, Maldives and Indonesia. Watch this site, and this one.

Footnote: At least since 1961, New Zealand has produced a UN Handbook. Its new one was unveiled on September 12 at the country's UN mission on Third Avenue, in hardcopy and a smart phone app. There was Chardonnay and schmoozing, a handbook-themed chocolate bar (hopefully not bad karma, after Finland's Martti bar); and previously copies of the handbook. The 1961 edition listed the UN General Assembly's “Committee for the Unification and Rehabilitation of Korea, UNCURK.” Plus ca change.

   

At UN, Saturday 7 AM Speeches After Sexual and Reproductive Rights Fights, CPD47 Turns 48 at Dawn

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 12, updated -- It was just another Friday night into Saturday morning at the UN, this time a fight over the Commission on Population and Development. Again, the culture wars: a dispute over "sexual and reproductive health" and rights. It culminated in speeches between 6 and 7 am.

  We open past 11 pm. The Permanent Representative of Kenya, this month's chair of the African Group, said there would be no sleight of hand solution. He went into Conference Room A with other Permanent Representatives, including those of Norway and then of Cameroon, who told Inner City Press that "in African we don't do Programs of Action, we do Declarations." It would be another long night.

  In Egypt's delegation again was Mervat Tallaway, of which Inner City Press previously reported when she headed ESCWA in Beirut.

  Others noted the irony that the UN Population Fund, UNFPA, is headed by Babatunde Osotimehin of Nigeria but his country is taking a different view. This split was contrasted, for example, with elsewhere in the UN system Frenchman Herve Ladsous using his post atop UN Peacekeeping to serve France. "That's not the UN," a Permanent Representative said. But for now it is.

  Meanwhile when UNFPA's Representative in Sudan was thrown out on April 7, the UN tried to say nothing. Inner City Press wrote about it, went to the noon briefing and asked, and only after that got a (non) statement from UNFPA. What's next?

  While as increasingly often in the UN there was little media coverage, Inner City Press and another reporter were told they could not enter Conference Room 1 through its front door. The Free UN Coalition for Access objected; access was gained.

During the lull several Ambassadors came to speaking about"the Burundi cable," here. Some predicted that the SRSG might be tossed out even before the UN's mandate expires at the end of the year.

  Down on the floor of Conference Room 1, a delegate noted that now CPD47 had surpassed "last year when we ended at 13 minutes after midnight." 

   And after a long and murky night in the basement of the UN, a text was in fact adopted followed by a slew of mostly angry speeches from 6 to 7 am. 

Argentina's Permanent Representative regretted that language about unilateral sanctions, debt was not retained. She was followed by speakers from Jordan and Australia, all Security Council members this year. There are not a lot of 6 am Security Council meetings. But this is another part of the UN.

   Iran, set for a big role in CPD 48, joined with Egypt and Oman in slamming the deletion of language about "foreign occupation." South Africa pointed out paragraphs on which it negotiated in it national capacity, NOT as part of the African Group.

  The US speech was surprisingly upbeat, glad for citations to sexual and reproductive health, eager for the ICPD session in General Assembly. Hungary said it does not take "reproductive rights" to include abortion. The Holy See took this further. The European Union's deputy said that principles agreed to in Cairo 20 years ago are being re-litigated now. Yes, it's Culture Wars.  

   Then UNFPA head Babatunde Osotimehin gave a wrap-up speech with empty bottle of big-name soda in front of him. Caffeine, okay. But ads?  Then the UN Population Division. But as Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access have asked before, what of Myanmar's anti-Royhinga census and reproduction policies? Speaking of reproductive issues?

   There were fast announcement of the next session, CPD 48, with Belgium chairing and some other news soon to follow. Watch this site.

   

At UN, Qatar Event on Syria Not Webcast or in UN Journal, Question on Private Funds, ISIS

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 21 -- When Qatar sponsored an event at the UN on March 21 at which a report on torture in Syria which Qatar also funded was presented, it was not listed in the UN Journal. Nor was the event broadcast on the UNTV Webcast.

  Inner City Press heard about it and asked the UN's top two spokespeople:

"there is an event in Conference Room 4 right now, sponsored by Qatar, which is no listed in today's UN Journal, nor is it on UN Webcast http://webtv.un.org/ but it appears to be being filmed. Please explain the legal status of this meeting, if there are any sponsored beyond Qatar, how it was publicized and if any request to have it webcast was made. Thanks, on deadline."

  But no answer was provided. Inner City Press ran to the event and from the back of a three quarters empty Conference Room 4 asked why the event was so stealth: not in the UN Journal, not webcast.

  The Permanent Representative of Qatar answered, saying it was a "special event" to which Qatar had invited (some) member states and groups, and (some) media. There is a UN Media Alert, but this event was not put in it.

  Perhaps it was publicized by the Gulf & Western United Nations Correspondents Association, which has twice hosted faux "UN" events by the Syria National Council or Syrian Coalition. (In both cases, the Free UN Coalition for Access suggested that the SNC hold its events in the UN briefing room, accessible to all journalists.)

  Since French Ambassador Gerard Araud, the first questioner flanked by representatives of Saudi Arabia and of Turkey which earlier in the day banned Twitter, has spoken about "fakes" and others about accountability, Inner City Press asked if the groups Al Nusra and ISIS, and those who fund them such as private individuals in Qatar alluded to at the US State Department briefing earlier in the day, could or would be held accountable.

  The SNC representative emphasized what he called links between the Assad regime and ISIS, saying it was too easy to blame the Gulf countries.

Here's from the March 21 US State Department briefing transcript:

Question: you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors. Do you also have concerns about the reasons that these countries said that they withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar? In other words, do you – if you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors, do you also have concerns about Qatar’s behavior, which – alleged behavior, let’s say – which led to these countries withdrawing their ambassadors?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know one of the issues that has been mentioned is the issue of private donations to extremists – and that’s something that some have mentioned – operating in Syria and elsewhere. It remains an important priority in our high-level discussions, and one that we also certainly raise with all states in the region, including Qatar, including the Government of Kuwait, wherever we have concerns.

After Inner City Press asked about the sponsorship of the event, a one-page "Joint Statement by the Co-Organizers" was passed out, listing among the co-organizers France, the UK, US, Belgium, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Inner City Press tweeted it. Watch this site.

   

In DC, Obama to Meet New Qatari Ambassador As Saudi Arabia, Bahrain & UAE Pull Theirs From Qatar, Belgium's Verbeke Returns

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 9 -- When US President Barack Obama receives the credential of Qatari Ambassador Mohammed Jaham al-Kuwari on March 10, it comes as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have pulled their own ambassadors from Qatar.

  At the UN, Inner City Press asked if Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had any comment on this split within the Gulf Cooperation Council, which Ban has praised for its work on Yemen. 

  The UN's answer was no. (Afterward it was explained to Inner City Press, not by the UN, that Oman and Kuwait did not withdrew, the latter because chairing the GCC and the former in order to "be independent").

But Syria, during the UN's "Children and Armed Conflict" debate on March 7, noted the split, saying in essence that Qatar is even too extreme in its foreign policy, and too meddling, for its own similar neighbors.

  Mohammed Jaham al-Kuwari was previously Qatar's ambassador to France - can you say, Sarkozy? - and was named to the post in the US in December 2013. 

 More than two months later comes the credentials ceremony, on the same same as the new ambassadors of Tunisia (Mhamed Ezzine Chelaifa), India (Subrahmanyam Jaishankar), Pakistan (Jalil Abbas Jilani), Papua New Guinea (Rupa Abraham Mulina) and Belgium's Johan Verbeke, whose short strange stint for the UN in Lebanon (and then Georgia) Inner City Press covered.

  On July 24, 2008 Inner City Press asked the UN's then spokesperson Michele Montas why Verbeke had not meaningfully deployed to Lebanon. Ms. Montas responded that "I can simply tell you that Mr. Verbeke had to go back home for personal reasons, family reasons, and that's why he was not in Lebanon."

  Inner City Press was told by well-placed Beirut sources that Mr. Verbeke faced threats to his safety, to such an extent that rather than rely on UN Security, he approached the Lebanese government and even the Hariri family. Neither could offer assurances. He stayed for a time in the Moven Pick hotel, Inner City Press is told and can now report, given his transfer to Georgia. But ultimately he left Lebanon due to lack of security.

  So at the August 1, 2008 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Montas why Verbeke was leaving, personal or safety? From the transcript

Inner City Press: "I didn't know that there was announcement today of Mr. Verbeke. Before I had asked, and you had said there was some personal issue. I don't want to get into any personal issue, but I do want to ask you, I had heard that there were some security concerns. I know that you also don't like to talk about them. Specific, not to just the mission in general, but to Mr. Verbeke himself. Either threats or that he'd sought protection from either the Lebanese Government or the Hariris, various things. Does this transfer, what is, how does it relate to whatever the personal issue was, which I don't want to know what it was? But is it because of a personal issue or is because of a safety issue? What's the basis of the transfer?"

  Ms. Montas said, "I am not aware of the details." This UN Secretariat stonewalls and becomes more marginal by the day.

  From the UN to DC - that's where the action on Ukraine is heading. Watch this site.