As Talk of Next UN Secretary General Starts Across from the UN, ICP Asks of USG Set-Asides, Ladsous As Nadir

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 24 -- How should the next UN Secretary General be selected, to improve the Organization? That was the question on April 24 across the street from the UN at the International Peace Institution in a panel moderated by former Indian Ambassador to the UN, and former Security Council member, Hardeep Singh Puri.

   The post is said to be slated for the Eastern European Group, and the question and answer (or comment) portion was top-heavy with the Permanent Representatives of Croatia and Slovakia (also the chair of the Budget Committee) and the Deputy Permanent Representative of Estonia laying out of the positions of the ACT group, echoed by Costa Rica.

   Inner City Press asked what about improving the transparency and place of merit in the selection of Under Secretaries General? Recently UK Prime Minister David Cameron's attempt to put Andrew Lansley of National Health Service infany atop the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs was defeated as reported in detail by Inner City Press, see credits in the Telegraph and UK Channel 4.

  But, the position has stayed with the UK in the person of Stephen O'Brien (deemed better than the initial candidate by panelist Edward Mortimer).  Should USG positions be “owned” by P3 countries, like France has owned UN Peacekeeping four times in a row (following a horse-trade for Kofi Annan becoming Secretary General) and the US has held Political Affairs twice in a row?

   While Political Affairs USG Jeffrey Feltman came directly from the US State Department with the baggage that may carry, particularly in the Middle East, the most extreme example is Herve Ladsous of UN Peacekeeping,video here, Vine here.

  When asked by Inner City Press about his history and qualification adopted the position of refusing all questions from Inner City Press and having his spokespeople, at least one of whom was present at IPI on April 24, go so far as to grab the UNTV microphone to avoid questions.  Ladsous went so far as to say "I don't answer you Mister" at IPI itself, video here.

  On the overall USG question Jean Krasno of the City College of New York favored “selecting candidates for these positions on merit rather than geographical. We want the highest quality people, serving in an impartial matter.”

Natalie Samarasinghe of the UN Association of the UK said, On the USG issue, we want an SG who has the freedom to make merit based appoints. At the moment as you have seen it is very unevenly applied. We need to condemn it. That pressure is very positive.”

  Mortimer said he was among those who wrote to Ban Ki-moon (selected by the US and China, more than one attendee said, some citing John Bolton's book) about Cameron's first nominee for OCHA. He said that Press oversight is important.  Puri said a good SG would pick good USGs. We'll have more on all this.

Background: When Ban Ki-moon was selected as UN Secretary General in 2006 it was an untransparent process, with secret ballots in the Security Council.  

   On February 7, 2015, both processes were criticized by "The Elders." Appearing at the Munich Munich Security Conference, four Elders including Ban's predecessor Kofi Annan along with Gro Harlem Brundtland, Martti Ahtisaari and Graça Machel unveiled a UN reform plan.

  Beyond Security Council reform, they specifically criticized Secretary General selection process for lack of transparency and choice, and suggested a single seven year term to avoid simply trying to get re-elected.

  To replace Ban, the Elders say "we call on the General Assembly to insist that the Security Council recommend more than one candidate for appointment as the Secretary-General of the United Nations, after a timely, equitable and transparent search for the best qualified candidates, irrespective of gender or regional origin. We suggest that the next Secretary-General be appointed for a single, non-renewable term of seven years, in order to strengthen his or her independence and avoid the perception that he or she is guided by electoral concerns."

 Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access, fighting for transparency including a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, agree and believe the Elders should have gone one level down, more timely, and criticized the ownership of Under Secretary General positions by P3 Security Council members like Peacekeeping and France's Herve Ladsous, and the process to replace Valerie Amos as OCHA, here (and above).

  Even further down, the under-performance of Team Ban, including for example UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, has been enabled and concealed by what has become the UN's Censorship Alliance, formally the United Nations Correspondents Association. These forms of decay are not UNrelated.

  On November 14, 2014 this organization in decline formally announced a slate of six officers -- all without any competition at all. It was a pure rubber stamp, "yes," with the only question being turn-out. The top post was handed (back) to Giampaolo Pioli, who engaged in outright censorship while last using the position. 

  Pioli, who had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's ambassador, unilaterally granted Kohona's request to use UNCA to screen inside the UN a government film denying war crimes.

  Then Pioli demanded that reporting of these facts must be removed from the Internet (compilation of audio here) or he would use UNCA to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.  

 Voice of America, then on the UNCA Executive Board, wrote a letter to the UN asking that Inner City Press' accreditation be reviewed; a Freedom of Information Act request showed that VOA said it had the support ofAgence France Presse and Reuters (which they tried tocensor its anti-Press complaint to the UN by claiming it is copyrighted, here.)

  Now in 2015 Pioli has returned. Reuters has on the board its current correspondent as well as its retired UN bureau chief. Agence France Presse, which had been off the UNCA Executive Committee after having used it to complain about Press reporting on Herve Ladsous, wanted to return but did not make it; it was handed a seat on another board announced by UNCA.

 Only News Agency of Nigeria, which ran in 2013, did not run this time: its UN office space was taken away in 2014, ostensibly due to scarcity when UNCA is given a big room that sits empty and locked most of the time, then opens for events that could and should have occurred in the UN's Press Briefing Room, open and on UNTV. This is the UN's Censorship Alliance.

 As to the Secretary General's race, an earlier reform letter's signatories included Avaaz, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, Equality Now, FEMNET, Forum-Asia, Global Policy Forum, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, Social Watch, Third World Network, Women’s Environment and Development Organization, the World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy and the World Federation of United Nations Associations.

The new Free UN Coalition for Access, formed in response to the decline in media access and transparency generally under Ban Ki-moon, heartily agrees with the need to reform and improve the Secretary General selection process. 

 Candidates so far including Helen Clark of UNDP, who virtually never takes press questions while in New York, the headquarters of UNDP, amid untransparent layoffs, and Irina Bokova, the Director General of UNESCO, an agency which on November 3 led an event about journalists at which not a single question from a journalist was taken. There's also among others, in this SG race we will closely cover, a Latina trio, Kristalina Georgieva, Miroslav Lajcak, Kevin Rudd, Dalia Grybauskaite, Vuk Jeremic, Danilo Turk, Jan Kubis - that is, unlike the UN's Censorship Alliance, at least there is some competition. We'll have more on this.

  Ban Ki-moon, meanwhile, is appearing in polls as running for president of his native South Korea in 2017. Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson about it, who said Ban is “currently” focused on his current job. This has been repeated in South Korea, here. The UN is being used; the UN is in further decline; but there are moves afoot to stem the tide of decay. Watch this site.

   

Amid Diplomacy & Double Standards at UN, Fond Farewell to India's Deputy Permanent Representative Manjeev Singh Puri

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 13 -- Amid the chaotic whirl of the UN's diplomatic holiday party season, some farewells cannot be missed. Thursday night's for India's Deputy Permanent Representative Manjeev Singh Puri was one such event.

  There were hurdles to surmount: his goodbye meeting with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, listed for 4:40 pm, was postponed for a photo op of Ban receiving Ake Sellstrom's second Syria chemical weapons report (Ban took no questions). Manjeev said bye to Ban at 5:40; Ban but not bloggers later appeared at the Bahrain national day.

  Then, crossing Second Avenue to the Indian mission on 43rd Street, an African Permanent Representative told Inner City Press he was supposed to "go to Francophonie first" -- but decided "Manjeev is more important." Despite other actual superpower events, this priority was shared.

  Inside the Indian mission, Under Secretaries General like from the Department of Political Affairs (recounting travels in Syria before his Lebanon posting for the US government made this no longer comfortable) and other African Permanent Representatives noshed on spicy meat rolls.

  Making an appearance was Hardeep Singh Puri, heading back to India, and his successor as Permanent Representative Asoke Mukerji. Manjeev's successor, who he's been showing around the UN, was there: B.S. Bishnoi.

  Afghanistan's Zahir Tanin told Inner City Press that from his perspective, the Inter Governmental Negotiation on Security Council reform held earlier in the day had gone better than expected. 

  As Inner City Press note, it began with less the forty countries signed up, down from a previous ninety, due to dissatisfaction with President of the General Assembly John Ashe's Advisory Group of six and their recent "non-paper" supplemented by a memo from San Marino's Permanent Representative Daniele Bodini, one of Ban Ki-moon's golf partners.

Recently another Permanent Representative went to ask how he, too, could golf with Ban and was told he'd have to find out which clubs to join. That too is how the UN goes, double standards everywhere -- but with Manjeev Singh Puri going, some laughter and sharp analysis will be lost. Watch this site.

   

India's Off UNSC, Farewall to Hardeep Singh Puri, Of Big Democracy & Underdogs

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 25 – With Indian ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri set to leave his country's foreign service, after 39 years, at the end of February, among his farewells was one for the UN press corps on Monday night at the Indian mission. 

  The Mission's spokesman asked Inner City Press to say a few words; Hardeep's deputy Manjeev Singh Puri made the introduction as samosas were passed around.

  On the way to the Indian mission from the North Lawn building Inner City Press ran into two Permanent Representatives who had been to farewells for Hardeep. Both sang his praises. 

  There are many farewell receptions in UN World, but the sentiments for Hardeep are genuine.

  Here is "as prepared" -- for "as delivered," see video, here

Ever since Hardeep Singh Puri told me he was retiring from the Indian Foreign Service after 39 years service, I've been angling for an exit interview, or to try to set up a talk show called “Deep Analysis with Hardeep.” It hasn't happened yet, but when I was asked by Prakash [Gupta] to put together a few lines for this event, I got to work on my handy Aakash Two.

Hardeep served in London, in Sri Lanka in 1987, again and again in New Delhi, and a time that must have been fun in Brazil. He's a man of the BRICS, and of IBSA. So what if his predictions on Security Council reform haven't happened yet? Hope springs eternal.

Most of us, I think, got to know Hardeep during India's two years on the Security Council, especially during his presidencies of the Council in August 2011 and November of last year. During the August presidency most of his colleagues were away on holiday. Last November saw fast moves by the M23 in Eastern Congo, where India has a major peacekeeping presence.

Among the biggest troop contributing countries -- India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, for example -- Hardeep stood up to the Secretariat, on issues of pay and reimbursement, and also of peacekeeping mission's mandates. Now with India off the Council, there's approval for “peace enforcement” battalions and drones, and who know what next.

Even coming from, well, the world's largest democracy, Hardeep sides with the underdog. In the spirit, I'm seeing him off not only as Inner City Press but also for the new Free UN Coalition for Access. Others can do it under their own name. India is a land of many religions and beliefs.

And so even after he leaves, we'll need some straight talk from Hardeep. He served it up, along with this excellent food, here in the Mission. He offered to be even more honest over whiskey, and my Aakash research hints at why: in world trade negotiations, he was on a panel about alcoholic beverages. Diplomacy will take you everywhere, they say. And Hardeep, it's been a pleasure.

  As delivered, Hardeep broke in several times, to say he'd prefer a stand up comedy routine to a talk show called 'Deep Analysis with Hardeep. Inner City Press did not deliver the line about the Free UN Coalition for Access, not wanting to “brand” the reception.

  But quickly another speaker said, “on behalf of UNCA” -- why? Especially given recent events? This was followed by a heartfelt tribute from an Indian photograph (who is a FUNCA member), another Indian journalist, and Amir Dossal, who offered praise for support to the UN's Democracy Fund and monument to the memory of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.

  Hardeep said he will be staying in New York, and that he is advising his successor “Max” -- Ashoke Makuherji -- to also interact with the press. But will he do so as well? Watch this site.

UN Protection of Civilians Goes Past 10 PM, From Drones to IDPs, Double Standards Everywhere

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 12, updated – The Security Council's “Protection of Civilians” debate Tuesday started late, after a session on North Korea, and went past 10 pm, with nearly all Permanent Representatives gone. Inner City Press stayed, through Sri Lanka and the Congo, Turkey and Qatar, all the way through to Bolivia.

Early in the proceeding, France's Gerard Araud praised the UN's use of drones and called for accountability. Some wondered, what about in Cote d'Ivoire, the killings in Duekoue and of Internally Displaced People?

Russia's Vitaly Churkin also praised the UN, or at least its mission in Afghanistan, for systemically counting the number of civilians killed. This might be contrasted, as Inner City Press has, to the UN hiring non-profit Benetech in San Francisco, partially funded by the US State Department, to purport to count the dead in Syria.

Tanzania's Permanent Representative said the international community and the UN failed in Rwanda. Later on, the DR Congo spoke mostly about the M23 rebels, blaming Rwanda. Inner City Press interviewed Rwanda's foreign minister, story here.

The Netherlands' Permanent Representative spoke about accountability, too, leading some to hearken back to the role and inaction of Dutch soldiers or peacekeepings in Srebrenica.

New Zealand stressed that even when the Council is blocked, action should be taken, citing only only Syria but also Sri Lanka.

When Sri Lanka's Palitha Kohona spoke, he railed against media fabrications. Afterward Inner City Press spoke with him, with a story forthcoming (now here).

Brazil's foreign minister Patriota also did a stakeout. Inner City Press asked him about Mali -- he called for action to get under Resolution 2085 as soon as possible, with Africans in the lead -- and Guinea Bissau. On that, Patroita said harmonization and cooperation had been less than ideal, but it should be better under new envoy and Nobel Peace Prize winner Ramos Horta.

Nicaragua's speech put it plainly: Resolution 1973 was used in Libya for the assassination of a head of state.

There were outgoing Ambassadors. India's Hardeep Singh Puri, set to retire from foreign service, criticized double standards in the protection of civilians. Belgium's Permanent Representative, too, is set to retire.

But the debate ended with two rounds of replies between Azerbaijan and Armenia about Nagorno Karabakh. Syria replied to Qatar, which had railed at Assad. Turkey did that but Israel killings in Palestine, too. As he spoke, Inner City Press at the stakeout was asked about it scoop of Palestine seeking a vice chair of the Arms Trade Treaty talks. Who is trying to block it? Watch this site.

After Gaza Deal and UNSC Statement, Israel Talks Iran, Susan Rice Talk Benghazi and Opposes Observer State Status

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 21 -- For a week on Gaza, the Security Council met behind closed doors. Finally on Wednesday after the ceasefire was announced in Cairo, the Council agreed on a Press Statement.

  After President Hardeep Singh Puri read it out, Inner City Press asked him about the delay, and what role if any he thought the Council had in the reaching of the ceasefire. He said it was not yet time for assessments, but at least "we got an outcome."

  But what outcome? Inner City Press asked Israel's Deputy Permanent Representative Waxman is the deal means ships to Gaza will no longer be intercepted, but only inspected. He answered that the week showed the volume of weapons Iran is getting into Gaza.

  When Moroccan Ambassador Loulichki, who represented the Arab Group throughout the week, came out Inner City Press asked him what impact he thought the week would have on the November 29 voting on Palestine's resolution to upgrade to Observer State status at the UN.

  Loulichki said that it should be kept separate, that the position of regional groups remains the same. Earlier in the day Hardeep Singh Puri, this time representing the IBSA grouping of India, Brazil and South Africa, read out a statement on Gaza that included support for the Palestine move for Observer State status.

  When US Ambassador Susan Rice came out, and after she gave a well-prepared answer to a question on her TV appearances on the attack on Benghazi, Inner City Press asked her about Palestine's application:

Inner City Press: I'm going to ask you a Gaza question although I definitely respect the right of people to ask a follow up to that [Benghazi]. I just wanted to ask you one-on Palestine, the controversy here at the UN about Palestine seeking observer state status. You heard Ambassador Loulichki say there's no relation between the fighting in Gaza and the vote, and Israel obviously said states should think again. The U.S. opposes the vote, but what effect do you think this week of fighting-do you agree that this shows that the Palestinian Authority has no control over Gaza? Should it make fewer states vote in favor of Palestine becoming a state observer at the UN?

Ambassador Rice: Well, I'll let other states comment on how they see the Palestinian bid for observer state status in the General Assembly. From the United States' point of view, we've been very clear. Our goal remains a negotiated, two-state solution. A Jewish democratic state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, viable Palestinian state. The only way to accomplish that in the real world is through direct negotiations, and we continue to urge the parties to come back to the table and to resume those direct negotiations. We view unilateral steps, including the bid for upgraded status to statehood-observer state status at the General Assembly-to be counterproductive and not take us closer to that goal, and, therefore, we strongly oppose it.

We'll be here on November 29, and until and after then. Watch this site.

UN Security Council Silent on Gaza, Vague on Congo, As P5 Paralyze Their "Peacekeeping" Powerhouse

By Matthew Russell Lee - Sunday skeptic

UNITED NATIONS, November 18 -- The UN and its Security Council have so devolved that they can only act on relatively lower profile conflicts, in which at least one Permanent member has an interest, usually colonial, and no other Permanent member is so interested as to block.

  This was clear on Saturday, November 17. Amid worldwide news and protests about Gaza, when the UN Security Council scheduled an emergency weekend meeting, many assumed it would be about Gaza.

  But France, which requested the meeting, clarified that its subject would be the Democratic Republic of the Congo, specifically the advance of the M23 mutineers on North Kivu's capital Goma.

  Inner City Press went to cover the emergency meeting, which resulted in a press statement telling M23 to stop, and yet another refusal to answer Press questions by Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping.

  Then it was said that the Security Council would turn to Gaza, under "Any Other Business." But this meeting broke up quickly.

  Later Arab diplomats came to the Security Council, outside which Inner City Press was writing its story, but could not get in. One told Inner City Press to follow, to what turned out to be a desultory meeting of Arab Ambassadors with Security Council president for November Hardeep Singh Puri.

Outside India's Mission to the UN, Palestine's Permanent Observer Riyad Mansour told Inner City Press thatdissatisfaction had been expressed to Puri, but no Council meeting had been scheduled.

  Developments in the Congo are of course troubling -- although the UN's own involvement remains murky. Why did the UN fly Congolese officials to meet with the Mai Mai militia? 

  Did the UN know about, or even participate in, Congolese army operations which M23 says broke the month-old ceasefire?

  Inner City Press asked the head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, "Who broke the ceasefire?" But he refused to answer. 

  Ladsous was France's Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN during the Rwanda genocide in 1994, and has refused to answer Press question about how that might relate to his current position(s) on the Congo.

  The UN claims to be protecting civilians in the Congo, but fails more often than not. Last week a UN report showed that the UN failed while tens of thousands of civilians were killed in Sri Lanka in 2009. The Security Council never even had a formal meeting about that; the UN Secretariat concealed casualty figures and worse.

  A skeptic or Sunday cynic might say, if this UN failed so badly on Sri Lanka, what to expect of it on Gaza? But even where the UN does act in some fashion, as in the Congo, its head man won't even answer basic questions. These are problems. Watch this site.

On Gaza, Arab Ambassadors Convey Dissatisfaction to UNSC Prez, No Sunday SC Action Planned

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, November 17 -- At India's Mission to the UN at 6 pm on Saturday, Arab Ambassadors were to meet about Gaza with Security Council president Hardeep Singh Puri. Inner City Press went to stake it out.

After 6:45 pm, Morocco's Permanent Representative Loulichki emerged. Inner City Press asked him about the next step on Gaza, if a Sunday meeting of the Security Council should be expected.

"Not yet," Ambassador Loulickhi told Inner City Press. "We are considering all options."

Moments later, Palestine's Permanent Observer Riyad Mansour emerged with the Indian Mission with two colleagues. Inner City Press asked him the same question.

He replied that Arab League foreign minister had expressed their dissatisfaction with the Security Council's inaction, "and we conveyed that to the President." Like Loulichki, he said that all options are being considered, but not to expect a Security Council meeting on Sunday.

Across Second Avenue from the Indian mission there were protest in front of the office building housing Israel's Mission to the UN. There were television news trucks covering the protest, but not the Arab Ambassadors' meeting with the Security Council president. And so it goes at the UN. Watch this site.

On DRC, UN's Ladsous Refuses to Answer Who Broke Ceasefire, If His DPKO Defends Pinga From Mai Mai

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 17, updated -- When Herve Ladsous, the fourth French head of UN Peacekeeping in a row, emerged from the UN Security Council to speak and ostensibly answer questions about the Democratic Republic of the Congo, he refused to answer whether the DRC or M23 mutineers had broken the ceasefire.

  This was a key issue, which since Ladsous refuses to answer any Press questions even on his peacekeepers killing civilians and even UN staff, in Abyei and in Haiti, Inner City Press posed to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky on November 13.

  On November 13, Nesirky told Inner City Press, "I don’t have anything specific at the moment, but I will come back to you." 

  But he did not, perhaps because DPKO would not give any information for the Press. 

   This supposition is based on Ladsous' DPKO spokesman openly asking UN including UNTV staff on Saturday not to give the microphone to Inner City Press to ask any questions.

  But there were few others with questions. Inner City Press asked Ladsous, "Who broke the ceasefire?" He refused to answer the question, and his spokesman sought out another questioner.

   After waiting out this "Q&A," Inner City Press asked Ladsous if his peacekeepers were equally defending Pinga from attack by a non-M23 militia, the Mai Mai or Mayi-Mayi

   Ladsous' MONUSCO has actually flown DRC officials to meet Mai Mai fighters and seek to recruit them to fight M23 (the UN, not Ladsous, replied that they simply flew FARDC to the meeting, did not ask or know what it was about).

  Ladsous refused to answer about defending civilians in Pinga, despite the public money his DPKO spends ostensibly on this.

   French Ambassador Gerard Araud did take three questions from Inner City Press, but on two of them accepted by his spokesman including on Pinga and DPKO's implementation of its stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, Araud responded that he did not have the information. 

  In fairness, it is DPKO which would answer in the first instance on its Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, the substance of which is questioned.

   It was Ladsous who should have answered, but did not.

   M23 said that it was the Congolese forces that broke the ceasefire. The spin now is to focus on the after-arising fighting. This vagueness would not be allowed on other conflicts. But hey, this is the Congo, appears to be the attitude. 

  How can a UN Under Secretary General openly refuse to answer a question as simple as "who broke the ceasefire"? Or "is DPKO defending Pinga?"

   Afterward it was suggested to Inner City Press, perhaps the failures of DPKO are understandable since it is headed by a person who cannot or will not even answer simple questions like "who broke the ceasefire" and "are you defending Pinga," and instead devotes publicly funded DPKO staff time to trying to avoid such questions.

   Security Council President for November Hardeep Singh Puri of India, which has its helicopter units active in the Congo, read out a Press Statement. We reproduce it in full below.

 Earlier, another Permanent Representative on the Council told Inner City Press sarcastically, "THAT will really stop M23" -- and then told Inner City Press on "who broke the ceasefire" that Under Secretary General Ladsous would be answering. 

   Some Under Secretary General.

   To understand, Ladsous has justified not answering any Press questions by alluding to previous "insulting innuendos." For the record, Inner City Press has reported that Ladsous was France's Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN during the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. There is more, but that's enough for now. Watch this site.

Press statement on the situation in eastern DRC

The members of the Security Council express deep concern regarding the rapidly deteriorating security and humanitarian crisis in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) due to ongoing military activities of the 23 March Movement (M23).

The members of the Security Council strongly condemn the resumption of attacks by the M23 and demand their immediate cessation as well as the cessation of any further advances towards the city of Goma. The members of the Security Council demand that any and all outside support and supply of equipment to the M23,  cease immediately.

The members of the Security Council strongly condemn the continuation of grave violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law by the M23. They express their intention to apply additional targeted sanctions against the leadership of the M23 and those acting in violation of the sanctions regime and the arms embargo, and call on all Member States to submit, as a matter of urgency, listing proposals to the 1533 Committee.

The members of the Security Council express deep concern regarding the increasing number of displaced persons and refugees and call on all parties, in particular the M23,  to exercise restraint and to allow safe, timely and unhindered humanitarian access to those in need.

The members of the Security Council call on all relevant States to use their influence on the M23 to bring about an end to attacks.

The members of the Security Council reaffirm their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the DRC.

The members of the Security Council commend the active steps taken by the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO) to implement its mandate, in particular the protection of civilians, and encourage the continuation of these efforts. They emphasised that any effort to undermine MONUSCO’s ability to implement its mandate will not be tolerated,

The members of the Security Council reiterate the importance of the efforts of the ICGLR to resolve the conflict and find a durable political solution. They call on the United Nations Secretary-General to continue his good offices to facilitate enhanced dialogue between relevant parties, and to report to the Council on the evolution of the crisis in the coming days.

New York, 17 November 2012