Sri Lanka and the UK: Too Little, Too Late, Between Libya, Somalia Journalists and Selling Weapons in the Gulf?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 17 -- Certainly the authoritarian nature of the Rajapaksa government in Sri Lanka became apparent to more people during the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. Click here for longer analysis of the CHOGM from this reporter, on Beacon Reader,focused on the UN Secretariat's silence. 

  But can it be said that the UK government, for example, was unaware of that government's slaughtering of civilians in 2009? At the UN in New York, Inner City Press repeatedly asked then Ambassador John Sawers, and when he came to the UN, foreign minister David Miliband. 

  Then as now, the UK controlled the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs; Inner City Press put the question to John Holmes (who, during Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's "victory tour" to the north in May 2009 vowed to never speak to Inner City Press again due to itreporting his on the record comments about deleting emails from Tamils.)

  And so now when David Cameron and William Hague say they are shocked and will belatedly push for an investigation of the 40,000 deaths before March, how should it be interpreted? As a Permanent Five member of the UN Security Council, the UK is in the position to have done something - and didn't -- and to do something now. Will it?

  The UK's use of its P5 seat, even on agenda items on which it "has the pen," seems politicized. It has not drafted or proposed press statements when journalists have been killed in Somalia (compare to the recent rapid statement on journalists killed in Mali). This has yet to be explained.

This weekend, it has apparently not moved for a statement on the killing of civilians in Libya, on which it also has the pen. This also has not been explained; it goes beyond, and is more recent then, the cited Bloody Sunday.

Cameron left Sri Lanka and went directly to try to sell UK attack aircraft to the United Arab Emirates; some in Bahrain find the UK comments for human rights defenders in Sri Lanka belied by the treatment of similar defenders in Bahrain.

Will Sri Lanka, or the UK, act on this before or during March? Watch this site.

   

UN Population Fund Pays PR Agency Portland Communication to Serve Up Its Praise of UN Report on Post-2015 Goals: Waste?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 30 -- This UN found a way to waste money and fool people even amid the hoopla about the release of its anti-poverty Post-2015 High Level Panel report on May 30.

Inner City Press dutifully covered the 12:30 John Podesta press conference on the report, and published on its right at the 3 pm embargo. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued statements as did many of the Panel's members and their governments.

Then just before 5 pm an e-mail came in headed "PRESS RELEASE: UN RESPONSE TO NEW REPORT BY PANEL LED BY DAVID CAMERON."

It seemed a bit strange, the UN responding to what is in a sense a UN report. The sender was not the UN or one of its agencies but rather a corporate public relations firm, Portland Communications. Their clients include Medicapital Bank, CBS and Maersk.

In this case, they were paid to put out a press release for a UN agency, the UN Population Fund or UNFPA. This agency, of course, has its own paid public relations staff, one of whom is listed on the bottom of the press release. So why pay an outside firm?

Perhaps because of this, the header is misleading. UNFPA knows or should know it cannot speak for "the UN." What if another agency -- UNDP, or the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, say -- has another view?

So why waste this money, on the UN praising itself? 

 This on the same day when the chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who has at least three spokespeople, chose for the first time not to put out a transcript of his press conference of May 29, when he outright refused to answer a question from Inner City Press about mass rape in the Congo by the UN's partners in the Congolese Army. Video here.

Instead, as if it couldn't afford to do a transcript despite the three spokespeople, DPKO used only a "summary," which did not mention Minova, the rapes, the question or that Ladsous refused to answer. Where is this UN going? Watch this site.

At UN, Cameron "Understands" A There's a Syria Question from Reuters & UNCA, Censors on Sri Lanka

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 15 -- With UK prime minister David Cameron at the UN and promoted to "do a stakeout" -- that is, take question, presumably not pre-ordinated and pre-screened -- a flock of UN correspondents left the scheduled Syria vote in the UN General Assembly and went to Cameron's stakeout.

  But once there, there was a scam. Cameron came out, read a statement and then said, I understand there is a question from UN Reuters.

   Understand how? From whom?

   Inner City Press asked the UK Mission to the UN how this came about, and now understands it was not them but "Number 10's press people."

   So did Cameron also understand what the question was going to be?

   Once called on, Reuters' Louis Charbonneau of Reuters asked a softball question about Syria, but only after branding it, saying, "On behalf of the UN Correspondents Association" -- an organization which spent most of its meetings in 2012 trying to get smaller investigative Press thrown out of the UN.

In fact, Charbonneau himself first filed a stealth complaint with the UN against Inner City Press, then Reuters supported Voice of America's formal request to get Inner City Press'accreditation "reviewed," according to documents obtained from VOA under the Freedom of Information Act. Click here for that.

Charbonneau of Reuters and UNCA, shaking with Ban Ki-moon (c) Luiz RRampelotto

  Later when asked at an on the record meeting to explain his and UNCA's role, Charbonneau refused, and told Inner City Press "the fundamental problem is your web site." Click here for audio.

At a minimum, the new Free UN Coalition for Access would say that the organizers of a stakeout at the UN -- in this case, "Number 10's press people" -- should tell correspondents in advance that they have already chosen who can ask questions. Otherwise, the independent media is being used as extras, as in a film.

  But second, what did Number 10 consider before handing this question to Reuters' UN bureau chief? We'll have more on this.

Footnote: As Inner City Press told the UK Mission, it would have asked Cameron about going to Sri Lanka for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, given its "accountability" record and Cameron's statements on accountability in Syria. 

  UNCA, it should be noted, has used anonymous social media accounts, active even on May 15 during all this, to falsely accuse Inner City Press of being funded by terrorists, triggering death threats. These are not only Ban's UN, but now Number 10's, partners?

Syrian Rebels' Human Rights Record Spun by UN OCHA's ReliefWeb and IRIN, Run By UK's Amos

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 13 -- Should the UN be collecting and distributing statements to downplay armed rebel groups' violations of international humanitarian law?

  For the Syrian rebels, recently accused of sarin gas use and including groups affiliated with Al Qaeda which behead their enemies, that is what the UN's IRIN has done today, here.

  The article or argument is entitled "'Sometimes you cannot apply the rules' - Syrian rebels and International Humanitarian Law." 

  Actually the acronym IHL is used. The article appears on the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs' "ReliefWeb" site, where what IRIN stands for it not spelled out or explained.

  The UN's OCHA is run by Baroness Valerie Amos of the United Kingdom, a country whose David Cameron government wants to arm the Syrian rebels. 

  The UK is given OCHA, just the way France has been ceded UN Peacekeeping in the form of Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to hold the post (video here), and the US had the Department of Political Affairs, two times in a row now, from Lynn Pascoe to Jeffrey Feltman.

  The UN's argument has a first quote from "a former colonel now commanding a unit of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) in the northwestern governorate of Idlib, said he sees the regime's blatant disregard for human rights as all the more reason to commit himself to international norms. 'The abuses were one of the main reasons the revolution started, so of course we should respect humanitarian laws.'"

  How nice. The UN's IRIN says that "Jabhat al-Nusra (The Front for the Support of the people of Syria)... relies on a religious scholar among its commanders who provides guidelines that all the members adhere to." These include beheadings.

  As if in an infomercial, the UN's OCHA runs this quote: "'If we distribute food supplies, we go from house to house and check who is in need,' said Raed al Aliwi, the FSA commander in Hama. 'We don't ask about people's religion or political opinion.'" The article has no byline, only three sets of initials: "gk/ha/cb."

  It is helpfully noted that "the UK is also funding a programme by two consultancy firms to train rebels using an Arabic curriculum about international humanitarian law."

The problem here, not addressed in the article, is that whatever its other aspirations, IRIN is a project of the UN.ReliefWeb is run by UN OCHA, which is run by a UK official. These are problems. Watch this site.

At UN, Ban Says Myanmar Scrutiny Should Be Reconsidered, UNSMIS Was Targeted?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 9, updated -- When the press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky about Syria Wednesday at noon, he replied that the press would hear more about this when Ban addressed the General Assembly at 3 pm.

  But there was a problem: that session was listed as closed to the media. After some back and forth described below, Ban Ki-moon came in and began about Syria. He said, "as you are aware, a bomb blast today near Deraa targeted a convoy of UN observers."

  There is another problem: other have said that the UNSMIS convoy was NOT the target; in fact, the Permanent Representative of a Permanent Member of the Security Council said that to Inner City Press moments before Ban Ki-moon came in.

  Ban continued on to say he'll create a new post, Assistant Secretary General for post 2015 development, and create a high level panel including the heads of state or government of Indonesia, Liberia and the UK, in that case David Cameron. (One wag mused Ban was lucky not to have chosen France's Nicolas Sarkozy.)

  Ban described speeches he gave in Washington, his trip to India and then Myanmar. On this last, he did not mention Good Offices envoy Vijay Nambiar by name (although Nambiar was in the room, genially sitting on the side while new chief of staff Susana Malcorra was on the podium with Ban).

  Ban said that the General Assembly may which to reconsider the 20 year old Myanmar Good Offices role. Some wondered: would the post be eliminated, as a reward to Myanmar?

  Afterward, an Asian Permanent Representative told Inner City Press that yes, the Good Offices should be eliminated "given the changes in Myanmar." Others said they hadn't understood this, or other parts, of what Ban Ki-moon had said.

  The pre-speech back and forth involved a photographer described as "doing a project with the UN's DPI" or Department of Public Information who was let in, and Inner City Press followed. Then Inner City Press was told that it could not stay. 

 

  Asked why the UN could cover itself, but wouldn't consent to outside independent coverage, it was argued that the UN-affiliated person was not "covering" the speech -- a strange distinction, or admission. Ultimately, Inner City Press was allowed to stay for the speech, but not the member states' questions and responses afterward.

  And that was yet another problem, as for example the UK wanted its Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant's response to David Cameron being named to the High Level Panel to be webcast. It was not, by the UN's choice -- similar but presumably for different reasons to when the UN cut of its web cast before Syria spokes, after Ban, Kofi Annan and the President of the General Assembly.

[Update: here is a link to Amb. Lyall Grant's statement.]

  In this case, after the session ended a source told Inner City Press that "Iran asked a good question, what has actually been accomplished in development." We hope to have more on this - watch this site.

At UN, UK's Mitchell on Lack of Ethiopian Entrepreneurs, Ogaden Constituents

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/uk1mitchell062810.html

UNITED NATIONS, June 28 -- The new UK government has cut all aid to China and Russia, while contrasting the entrepreneurial spirit of Somalis with the lack of such drive in Ethiopia. This Inner City Press gleaned in ten minutes of questioning of David Cameron's minister for International Development Andrew Mitchell on Monday, on topic ranging from North Korea to Gaza to corruption. Video here, from Minute 4:33.

Inner City Press began by asking about Mitchell's review of the UK's existing aid programs, to China and also the UN Development Program, which maintains programs in China, North Korea and Myanmar. Mitchell maintained that the “best” approach is budget support to governments, but only if you can trust them.

He said reviews of “multilateral agencies” have begun. One wonders: if the UK has cut aid to China, will it cut aid to UNDP which spend in China? Or will it earmark it aid, to only some countries?

Mitchell went out of his way to praise the governments of Ghana and Rwanda. One wonders if the latter doesn't further the UK's move to “take” Rwanda away from the Francophonie. Because the UK's own BBC over the weekend reported how Hutu refugees in Uganda are afraid to go home, based on how they are treated -- with UK aid funds?

On camera, Inner City Press finished with a question about the UN “Gender Entity,” and the controversy about Syria's language on women under occupation. Mitchell jumped right in, saying that Gaza is troubling and the lifting of restrictions is heartening.

As he left the stake out, he greeted Inner City Press and mentioned reading it. With cameras off but still on record, he explained the David Cameron left people in posts for five years, to really learn their jobs. He said he visited 38 poor countries and produced a “green paper.”

Our conclusion is, he said, that conflict is what mires people in poverty. A country with entrepreneurs is not poor.

Inner City Press mentioned the entrepreneurialism of the Somalis. Yes, Mitchell said, contrasting it with Ethiopia, where he said the “sinews” of government are good, but where “perhaps because of Ethiopian history, there is not history of entrepreneurship.”

Inner City Press asked about the Ogaden region. “I have a large Ogaden constituency near me,” Mitchel said. Then why did he so fulsomely praise the sinews of Meles Zenawi's government? Perhaps we'll get an answer. Mitchell's candor was, to paraphrase something he said, a breath of fresh air.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/uk1mitchell062810.html