On Western Sahara & Oil Drilling, UN Tells Inner City Press Nothing to Add to Report, Ross Will?

By Matthew Russell Lee, Upload exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, April 13 -- The UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara, MINURSO, which has yet to hold any referendum, gets reviewed this month in the UN Security Council, with the UN's ambiguous position on (not) including human rights monitoring in the mission's mandate and on exploitation of natural resources once again coming to the fore. 

  On April 10 Inner City Press obtained from multiple sources the advance copy of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report on the MINURSO mission. We published it in full here and embedded below (unlike others who try to remove things from the Internet, like here).

 On April 13, Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the report "speaks for itself;" Inner City Press asked how that applies to Paragraph 62 merely reciting Morocco's and the Frente Polisario's positions for and against oil drilling at this time. Video here.

 Dujraric said he had "nothing to add;" he also said that enovy Christopher Ross will help provide more details. On the record? 

Of “resource exploration,” the UN report says

“During the reporting period, investments in the territorial waters adjacent to Western Sahara continued to be a subject of contention between the Government of Morocco an Frente Polisario, given the long-standing status of Western Sahara. Some foreign oil companies, including Kosmos Energy, carried out oil exploration, and exploratory drilling in Western Saharan territorial waters. In a letter dated 19 March 2015 addressed to me, the Permanent Representative of Morocco stated that “Kosmos Energy’s exploration activities were preceded by wide consultations” with the local population, and “are governed by applicable international principles and standards, in particular those deriving from the Charter of the United Nations and recalled in letter S/2002/61 dated 29 January 2002 addressed to the President of the Security Council … by [the] Under Secretary -General for Legal Affairs.” Frente Polisario and Western Saharan organizations spoke out against these activities repeatedly, pointing out that they had not been consulted and that any exploitation of these resources, if found, would violate the legal opinion provided in the letter cited above. Secretary-General Abdelaziz of Frente Polisario, in a letter to me dated 26 January 2015, referred to the activities as a violation of international law.”

  Of protests, the UN report says “Moroccan security forces dispersed them quickly. On several occasions, credible reports were received about the disproportionate use of force on the part of the security forces and hostile actions on the part of the demonstrators in response.”

   Of Douste-Blazy being described as attending for the UN, the report says of the “CransMontana Forum, held an event in what it referred to as 'Dakhla, Morocco' [that] following press reports of a high-level United Nations presence, my spokesperson issued a note to correspondents indicating that my Special Advisor on Innovative Financing had attended exclusively in his private capacity and that I had not delegated him or anyone else to represent me or the United Nations.” 

  But the Forum repeated the claim in a press release, as Inner City Press reported.

   Similarly side-stepping the issue, Ban Ki-moon's report says “ I call on the Parties to continue and further enhance their cooperation with United Nations human rights mechanisms and OHCHR, including by facilitating OHCHR missions to Western Sahara and the refugee camps near Tindouf, with unrestricted access to all relevant stakeholders. These missions and other future forms of cooperation between the Parties and OHCHR and other United Nations human rights mechanisms should contribute to an independent and impartial understanding of the human rights situation in both Western Sahara and the camps, with the goal of ensuring protection of all, as well as to comprehensive and sustained implementation of international human rights standards by the Parties. Human rights do not have borders; all stakeholders are thus obliged to uphold the fundamental freedoms and human rights of all people. It is vital that all human rights protection gaps and underlying human rights issues in situations of protracted conflict be addressed.”

  We note that OHCHR recently delayed for (at least) six months an already-agreed to human rights report on Sri Lanka.

Western Sahara Report of UN's Ban Ki-moon, April 10, 2015 by Matthew Russell Lee

  Here are two more sample paragraphs of the report:

39. Both parties continue to diverge significantly in their interpretation of the MINURSO mandate. Morocco considers the mandate to be limited to ceasefire and military matters, demining and logistical support for confidence-building measures. Frente Polisario considers that the organization of a referendum for self-determination remains its central element. These opposing views have a direct impact on the credibility of the Mission vis-a-vis the parties, affecting its ability to fully implement its mandate and exercise standard peacekeeping functions. For the United Nations, the successive Security Council resolutions define the mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. Standard peacekeeping functions performed by United Nations operations throughout the world underpin effective mandate implementation, including assessments of and reporting on local conditions that may affect their operations and the political processes.

40. The perception of MINURSO and United Nations impartiality continues to be affected by the fact that MINURSO vehicles operate with Moroccan license plates west of the berm. Logistical and administrative complications also arise, since Moroccan license plates must be removed and replaced by United Nations plates when MINURSO vehicles cross east of the berm and travel outside the area of operations. Implementation of the March 2014 verbal agreement of the Moroccan authorities to gradually replace Moroccan with United Nations license plates for MINURSO vehicles, as agreed with my previous Special Representative (see S/2014/258, para. 49), has not begun; Foreign Minister Mezouar reiterated this commitment to my new Special Representative in February 2015. 

   Inner City Press on April 9 linked to Morocco's letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, here. The army of Moroccan trolls protested nonetheless, misquoting France's former ambassador (to whom the censor sucks up) and saying Morocco should sue Inner City Press. And so it goes. 

  (These trolls would, apparently, say that Ban is noting crackdown on protests and license plate games because he is funded by Algerian petro-dollars. And what of the censor?)

  Speaking of courts, there is this finding by a court in Spain: "A Spanish judge Thursday upheld genocide charges against 11 Moroccan ex-officials accused of atrocities in Western Sahara, a court ruling showed -- a penultimate step towards a possible trial. Judge Pablo Ruz upheld accusations against the 11 ex-security officials and governors of ethnically motivated torture, killings and detentions in the former Spanish colony between 1975 and 1991, the ruling said."

  On April 7, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about a letter sent to Ban by the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, which cites “ the need to provide MINURSO with a human rights mandate.” 

   Dujarric replied that he hadn't seen the letter. Video here. Inner City Press reported that Ban's chief of staff Malcorra had, in fact, seen it. When Inner City Press asked again on April 8, Dujarric said the letter was "processed"video here -- and we can verify, it was circulated. 

 (Reuters, which didn't ask and openly panders to the mission(s) most opposed to a MINURSO human rights mandate, brags it is responsible, while both trying to get other media thrown out of the UN, here and FOIA-ed herethen trying to censor that, here: laughable. As was writing that the AU letter was "seen by Reuters" after it was published online in full by another publication.)

  Inner City Press put online the Polisario's letter to Ban Ki-moon, here, in part because the UN ban Polisario from speaking at the UN Security Council stakeout while, for example, allowing current private citizen Hilary Clinton to speak there, with UNCA the UN's Censorship Alliance hand-picked for the softball first question. 

 The new Free UN Coalition for Access opposes censorship and seek to amplify the voices that are being kept away from the microphone, so puts thisonline. 

FUNCA also has put online Morocco's Foreign Minister Salaheddine Mezouar's letter, which says:

"The African Union prejudged, in a biased manner, the outcome of the political negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations, by admitting, within its membership, an entity that bas [sic] no attribute of sovereignty."

 The African Union wrote: “I would be most grateful if you could share this letter and the accompanying communiqué and report with the President of the Security Council, to be circulated as official documents of the Council, as well as with the General Assembly. Your assistance in ensuring that AU Special Envoy Joachim Chissano is given the opportunity to address the Security Council during its April 2015 meeting on Western Sahara will also be highly appreciated.”

  Inner City Press on April 7 asked Dujarric if the letter has been circulated, and for Ban Ki-moon's position including on Chissano addressing the Security Council. Video here.

  Dujarric replied, “I haven't personally seen the letter” adding that if it contains the request, “I'm sure it will be circulated in due time.” But how much time is due? And hasn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra seen the letter? What's the response? When does it go to the Security Council - and General Assembly?

   “As for people addressing the Council, that's up to the Council,” Dujarric said, though Ban has on other topics been critical of the Security Council. 

   Dujarric said that the report is in progress; when Inner City Press pointed out that Ban often touts the importance of regional organization, Dujarric said “in all files we deal with regional organization have a role to play, but in Western Sahara there is a Security Council mandate.” That's true on most of Ban Ki-moon's files. Why so hands-off on this one? Consider that UN Peacekeeping, in charge of MINURSO, is run by the fourth Frenchman in a row, Herve Ladsous, who refuses all Press questions, on human rights issues from rapes in the Congo and Darfur to killings BY peacekeepers in Mali.Video here, Vine here.  We'll have more on this.

The UN's ambiguous position on Western Sahara was exemplified last month by UN adviser Philippe Douste-Blazy attending the Crans-Montana Forum in Dakhla, Western Sahara. 

  After the UN said Douste-Blazy was there in his "personal capacity," Inner City Press on March 16 asked if Douste-Blazy and UN advisers like him are under a responsibility to make clear when they are not representing the UN.

  It "behooves" them, UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inner City Press, reiterated that while Douste-Blazy is UN adviser on "innovative financing," he has not there for the UN. Haq would not answer if Douste-Blazy had told the UN in advance, saying only that he is not required to.

  But a press release about the event says:

"The annual session of Crans Montana Forum held from 12 to 14 March 2015 in the southern city of Dakhla under the Patronage of His Majesty Mohammed VI wrapped up, Saturday night, with an award ceremony that paid tribute to international figures from different backgrounds. The 2015 Foundation Award was awarded to former President of the Republic of Estonia (2001-2006), Arnold Ruutel, former Spanish Prime Minister (2004-2011), José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations, Philippe Douste Blazy, former French Minister of Ecology and Sustainable Development (2007-2010), Jean Luis Borloo."

 So apparently Douste-Blazy accepted an award there AS a UN official. Now what?

For days, Inner City Press had been asked to find out what Douste-Blazy was doing there. Inner City Press previously exposed Douste-Blazy's waste of funds through MassiveGood, here. Then this, from the UN Spokesperson's Office:

"We have noted press reports to the effect that the United Nations is participating in the Crans-Montana Forum currently being held in Dakhla, a city in that part of Western Sahara under Moroccan control.

"The Secretary-General was invited to this Forum, but informed its President that he could not attend.  He did not delegate Mr. Philippe Douste-Blazy or anyone else to represent him or the United Nations.  Mr. Douste-Blazy, who serves as a special adviser to the Secretary-General on innovative financing, is attending exclusively in his private capacity.

"While Dakhla is described in Forum materials as a city in Morocco, the definitive status of Western Sahara is the object of a negotiating process being conducted under the auspices of the Secretary-General in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions."

  Well there's that. And this, and before that, this. Douste-Blazy is, of course, a former French government official. But how much longer should he be a UN "adviser"?

  Earlier this year after Ban spoke by phone with the King of Morocco, on February 11 Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric said:

"on the status of Christopher Ross, the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara.  I can report that he arrived in Rabat today.  Mr. Ross will hold discussions with Morocco and the Frente Polisario and with the neighboring States during this mission."

  But will Ross, the Envoy FOR Western Sahara, actually visit Laayoune? Inner City Press asked:

Inner City Press: On Mr. Ross' visit, I wanted to know whether he in fact will go to Laayoune, the main city in Western Sahara.  Maybe I missed when you read it out.

Spokesman Dujarric:  I will get you… as I said, as we get details, we'll get them to you.

Inner City Press:  If he's not, can we find out why he's not?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Sure.  

  So far, seven hours later, nothing. This is the UN and Western Sahara. Back on November 21 asked the New York spokesman for High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid for

"an update on action on the leaked cables, related to Western Sahara, involving current OHCHR official Anders Kompass and one, previously head of OHCHR's office in NY, who's just left. What steps has OHCHR taken on the cables / issues?"

  Now two months and three weeks later there has been no answer on this from the OHCHR spokesperson in New York. But we published this response from OHCHR Geneva spokesperson Rupert Colville to similar questions:

From: Rupert Colville [at] ohchr.org
Date: Friday 12 December 2014
Subj: Investigation leaked cables Western Sahara and OHCHR

The investigation is being carried out, at our request, by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) in New York, which is an operationally independent office that assists the Secretary-General in fulfilling his internal oversight responsibilities. While the investigation is under way, there is nothing else I can say on the matter.

  On January 29, Carman Lapointe the head of OIOS wrote:

"Our operating policies do not allow OIOS to provide information on whether we are investigating any matter, and so you will need to continue to consult OHCHR on this topic.

"In general terms, however, I can say that when/if we receive allegations of leaked confidential documents, we would advise that investigations into leaks of confidential documents are very challenging for OIOS to substantiate.  As you may be aware, OIOS has authority to conduct only administrative investigations, and we have very limited (and no coercive) powers.  Unless staff members involved in leaks admit or confess, or the leaks are undertaken blatantly using United Nations assets that we can examine forensically (such as by an attachment to an email from a UN computer or other device) we would have no jurisdiction to pursue further. "

  Combined with this new scandal uncovered by Inner City Press, about the sale of posts in UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, the above gives little confidence.

 Meanwhile on January 23 the UN issued this read out:

"The Secretary-General spoke with His Majesty King Mohammed VI of Morocco on Thursday, January 22.  He expressed appreciation for Morocco’s valuable support of the activities of the United Nations, particularly in peacekeeping and in a number of critical issues in Africa and the Middle East.

"On Western Sahara, the Secretary-General acknowledged Morocco’s concerns about the UN-sponsored negotiations between the Kingdom of Morocco and the Frente Polisario.  He confirmed that reports to the Council on this issue will remain objective and reflect facts.  He also reiterated that the UN Mission in Western Sahara, MINURSO, will continue to exercise its existing mandate as set forth by the Security Council.

"In response, His Majesty indicated that Morocco looks forward to moving ahead in collaboration with the United Nations and that Morocco’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations will be working with the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, Christopher Ross, to arrange his next visit to Morocco as soon as possible, as well as with the Secretary-General’s Special Representative and Head of MINURSO, Kim Bolduc, to facilitate her rapid deployment to the region."

  So how long will that take?

  The UN system often uses the pendency of an investigation as a way to wait for the “problem” to go away. As the publication Tel Quel, here, has noted, many in the media are not covering the leaks.

  Relatedly, the leaks are now being covered up or censored. Two recent uploads, about Morocco and the African Group at the UN, were put on “ filefactory.com” -- then taken down after, the site says, a complaint under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

  This is a new trend -- attempt to use copyright law to take down leaked documents. Reuters, for example, filed a “for the record” complaint with the UN trying to get Inner City Press thrown out - then, when the “for the record” complaint was leaked and published, conned Google into blocking it from Search, calling it copyrighted. Click here for that.

So that media uses or abuses copyright to censor its own “for the record” complaint filed with the UN, and does not cover these new leaks about Western Sahara, Morocco, and the UN. This is a new trend. Watch this site.

  In the above, the referenced former head of OHCHR's New York office is Senegal's Bacre Waly Ndiaye, noted Tijania Sufi. The cables reveal a deep scandal in the UN system. Now OHCHR in Geneva is saying it will not comment until an investigation, Inner City Press understands by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, is complete. But there is no indication that will be publish. This is one of the ways the UN covers up.

 There other ways, beyond Western Sahara. On rapes in DR Congo by Army units the UN support, Ladsous refused to answer Press questions for months. Video here of then and now spokesman pulling microphone away from Inner City Press. These practices are being opposed by the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

 Now on UN Peacekeeping's November 9 press release covering up mass rape in Thabit in Darfur, Ladsous has not answered any questions; UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric on November 21 told Inner City Press the UN won't comment on leaks. The Western Sahara leaks are so extensive that despite a seeming media blackout by Western wire services, they will not go away. 

While Ladsous is not the only UN official exposed by the cables, his extraordinary campaign of refusing Press questions, to the point of physically blocking Press filming (Vine here), as well as a DPKO to OHCHR connection, make him key to the case. As to MINURSO, Ladsous is blamed for the non-deployment of Bolduc. 

  Back on November 14 Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about Bolduc and an investigation of leaks in Geneva of which sources tell it. Video here.

  On November 5, Inner City Press reported on leaked cables showing among other things the UN's Ladsous undermining MINURSO on the issue of human rights, and improper service of Morocco by Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights staffers Anders Kompass and Bacre Waly Ndiaye.

    Since then, along with anonymous death threats, Inner City Press has received additional information including of a UN Office of Internal Oversight Services investigation of Anders Kompers and Bacre Waly Ndiaye.

  On November 14, Inner City Press asked the UN's Haq, per UN transcript:

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  You had a question on Western Sahara?

Inner City Press: It's a two-pronged question.  What Stéphane [Dujarric] said earlier in the week about Kim Bolduc, the new SRSG [Special Representative of the Secretary-General].  I wanted to just kind of confirm it.  In reading it, does that mean that she has never has been allowed in?  And, if so, where has she been since August?  What is the plan to resolve that?  And I also wanted to ask you about regarding the cables that I base the initial question on.  Can you confirm that OIOS [Office for Internal Oversight Services] is conducting an investigation at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on at least two staff members who apparently leaked this information to the Moroccan Government?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  On that, I cannot confirm that.  As you know, the OIOS conducts its work independently.  At some point, once they have completed their work, they apprise us [inaudible].  But I wouldn't be aware of any work that is ongoing.  Beyond that, regarding Kim Bolduc, as you know, both Christopher Ross and Kim Bolduc briefed the Security Council on 27 October.  And at that point, the Security Council reiterated its desire, first of all, to see Ambassador Ross's facilitation resume and reiterated its desire to see Kim Bolduc be able to take up her duties at the helm of MINURSO [United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara] as soon as possible.  And we look forward to the resumption of Mr. Ross's visit to the region and also to the deployment of Kim Bolduc.

Inner City Press:  But is she currently, I mean, she is the SRSG?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  She is the SRSG, but she has not been able to function with her MINURSO duties in-country.

  In-country, eh? We'll have more on this. And on this: Inner City Press is informed that while Ladsous claims to have performed as required in connection with the appointment of Bolduc, even on this he is accused of failing to do his duty, as on many other parts of his job. Video compilation here; recent Vine here.

   Document leaks from inside the UN have identified improper service of Morocco, on the question of Western Sahara, by a staffer at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Anders Kompass.

  Inner City Press has waited to report on them; the spokesperson for the High Commissioner has today said his office is aware the leaked cables, which contain the perspective of certain diplomats, and that the situation is being investigated to clarify the facts.”

  Whatever the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, now under Jordan's Prince Zeid, does about the content of the leaks, more will be required in the UN Secretariat in New York -- particularly at the top of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which runs the MINURSO mission in Western Sahara.

  The cables show that Herve Ladsous, a long-time French diplomat now the boss of DPKO and thus of MINURSO, was flacking for Morocco on the supposed quality of its human rights mechanisms. This directly undercuts the MINURSO mission, for which Ladsous is supposed to be working.

  African Union members of the Security Council, from Uganda to South Africa to Nigeria, have demanded that MINURSO have the same type of human rights monitoring mechanism as the UN Peacekeeping missions in the DR Congo, Mali and Central African Republic. 

  Now Ladsous is exposed undermining extending this to Western Sahara -- the policy of his country, France, but undercutting DPKO.

  During General Assembly debate week in September 2014, Ladsous refused to answer Press questions and ended up blocking the Press' camera, Vine here.

  This is a scandal. And since Ladsous had refused to answer Press questions, about rapes by his mission's partners in the DRC, about DPKO bringing cholera to Haiti, about under-reporting attacks on civilians and even peacekeepers in Darfur and now Central African Republic, it is time for the question to be asked. 

Update: on November 6, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this, video here.

  Immediately after the briefing, Inner City Press emailed Dujarric the cable it had asked about. Watch this site.

   

US State Department Takes Twitter Questions, But Not on Western Sahara, Haiti, Burundi, Sri Lanka / Iran, Rwanda or South Sudan: Comparisons

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 21 -- Amid press questions about Russia and Ukraine and the use of chlorine in Syria, US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki begged off on Monday afternoon, saying "tune in," she would be answered questions on Twitter.

  When she did, Psaki took -- that is, retweeted then responsed to -- 17 questions, ranging from "How to fight Russian TV propaganda when 75% of Russians + many Ukrainians believe in Putin lies?" to "Apple or Android?" (To that, the answer was "love my govt issued bberry with extra battery, but also iphone addict.")

  Two of the 17 questions were about the African continent: Tunisia and Sudan, how to access Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan. At 12%, Africa was much better represented in the Twitter Q&A than at the State Department briefings.

  Still, some timely questions went unanswered. From among the six questions Inner City Press submitted there were Western Sahara -- this is the month for the renewal, with or without a human rights monitoring mechanism, of the UN's MINURSO mission on which the US hold the pen -- Burundi, Rwanda and South Sudan:

In South Sudan, after the killings in Bentiu and Bor, what is US State Dept thinking on sanctions? On both sides?

Has Burundi asked US help to probe itself? President & his youth wing met: comment?

Is or was there a US policy against describing the Rwanda genocide as being against the Tutsi? Please explain; and

US position on rights monitoring in Western Sahara? Novelli - Kosmos April 24?

  Unpacking this last, on April 24 Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Catherine Novelli is slated to meet with Western Sahara-involved Kosmos Energy's CEO Andy Inglis and the Senior International Policy Advisor at Covington and Burling LLP, Al Larson. 

  Particularly since it seems Mr. Larson previously held Ms. Novelli's position, potentially raising revolving door issues, the purpose and a read-out of the meeting would be helpful.

  Last year the US said it was proposing a human rights monitoring mechanism for MINURSO. This year, French Ambassador Gerard Araud has vituperatively replied to human rights questions by saying French has no position, ask the US. Even YouTube from last April belies what Araud says. But should the US answer too?

  In-person at the State Department briefing on March 14, Inner City Press asked, and Psaki's deputy Marie Harf answered, a question Araud has refused to: about France's continued sale of Mistral warships to Russia, despite what France says about Crimea. This is called, double-speak.

  On April 24 there were also two legal / policy questions:

In light of Iran Ambassador-nominee visa denial, can the State Dept explain aiding immunity of Sri Lanka military man Shavendra Silva?

How is UN immunity for bringing cholera to Haiti, supported in US court filing, consistent with accountability?

  On this last, Inner City Press asked the UN's spokesperson a question, in-person, at the UN's noon briefing on April 21, not yet answered.

  Comparing the UN's to the US State Department's briefing, it's notable that in Washington many more follow up quesions are allowed. 

  Then again, the International Monetary Fund allows the journalists it accredits, like Inner City Press, to submit questions to its briefings online even if they are outside of DC. Will the State Department -- and the UN, as requested by the Free UN Coalition for Access -- move in that direction? Watch this site.

   

On Western Sahara, Of French PR Gerard Araud, UN Decolonization Committee & Kosmos Energy

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 21, more here -- In the untransparent annual UN cat and mouse process around Western Sahara, French Ambassador Gerard Araud has repeatedly been asked by usual-friend Human Rights Watch but continues denying any French role, this year or before, in blocking a human rights monitoring mechanism in the MINURSO mission. 

   This update concerns the UN Decolonization Committee, Kosmos Energy and a meeting on April 24, 2014.

   Regarding this month's Security Council process, Araud has tweeted, "I'll wait to see a real proposal before saying what we think of it." But in April 2013 he answered Inner City Press: "how to improve human rights in Western Sahara? We have always said the best way is through bilateral dialogue with Morocco." Video here and embedded below. 

  France's and for his nearly five years at the UN Araud's opposition to a human rights monitoring mechanism in Western Sahara has not been limited to closed door Security Council meetings. Covering the UN's Fourth (Decolonization) Committee in October 2011, for example, a well placed diplomat interviewed by Inner City Press cited Morocco's "arrogance" in the face of criticism by the African Union, Caricom, UNASUR and others of its actions in Western Sahara, adding "they count on France to carry their water in the Security Council."

  In that Decolonization Committee meeting there was testimony that "the Moroccan state oil company ONHYM and US-based Kosmos Energy... purchased a 30% interest in the Boujdour sub-basis within Western Sahara."

 And US-based Kosmos Energy's CEO Andy Inglis and Al Larson, Senior International Policy Advisor at the Covington and Burling LLP law firm are set to meet on April 24, 2014 with US Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Catherine Novelli. Watch this site.

  At the UN and online, Araud's spin now is to say he doesn't know what France's position on a human rights mechanism would be until, after a non-transparent process, a draft emerges from the Group of Friends on Western Sahara, which has no African members. 

  Araud has said, "I'll wait to see a real proposal before saying what we think of it. That's what is commonly called 'foreign policy'.... No country in the world takes a stance before knowing the specifics of a proposal. Is it common sense and not dodging. Real world!"

  But get real: on Apri 25, 2013 when Inner City Press asked, Araud on camera said, "how to improve human rights in Western Sahara? We have always said the best way is through bilateral dialogue with Morocco."Video here.

   Note the word "always" -- this is France's position, no human rights monitoring mechanism, just "bilateral dialogue with Morocco." So why does Araud pretend now he doesn't know what France's position is, months before he leaves the UN in July?

 Araud has claimed, "there is not, there has not been, this year or last year or previous years, any French veto threat! It is a fact."  He added, "my 'word' is simply that, contrary to your assertions, France never threatened to veto any proposal. Nothing more, nothing less."

  This stands in contrast below to 2010, when Uganda, Mexico and as now Nigeria were serving on the Council along with Araud, who is now slated to leave in July -- and to April 2011, also touched on below.

 On April 17, 2012, Inner City Press directly asked Gerard Araud about human rights and MINURSO and the then still withheld (Africa-less) "Group of Friends of Western Sahara" draft resolution.

   Araud replied, "There is still I guess one of the Friends that has problems. But I think we are close to an agreement."

  Multiple sources told Inner City Press that France, represented at that stage on the Group of Friends by its expert Mariam Diallo, had been opposing the resolution trying to ensure the MINURSO mission's "effectiveness" and, as before, human rights monitoring of the type other UN peacekeeping missions have. In terms of Araud's assessment that only "one of the Friends.. has problems," Inner City Press was told that there at least two.

 A Security Council member excluded from the Group of Friends, South Africa, said that the Friends have promised to circulate a draft "later today," whether it's agreed to by all the Friends of not. South African Permanent Representative Baso Sangqu told Inner City Press, "Our issue was that the earlier we all get involved,the better for everybody."  And this year?

  An aside on Human Rights Watch: while Ken Roth has tw-asked, HRW's representative at the UN, former of state-owned France 24, has been notably silent on the issue. His last two tweets some from April 17, one passing on a story quoting his boss Ken Roth about North Korea, then other quoting Araud -- on North Korea. (On this topic, the HRW lobbyist purported to be inside or "at" in the closed-door Arria meeting, engaged in trademark selective distribution of information.) How can HRW question UN Ambassador Araud and HRW's "UN Director" stays entirely out of it. Why?

  Back on April 18, 2011, multiple sources told Inner City Press that France opposed any MINURSO human rights monitoring mechanism, counter-proposing only cooperation with the special rapporteurs of the Human Rights Council. 

  On April 27, 2011, Inner City Press aske Araud about the High Commissioner for Human Rights' recommendation that a right monitoring mechanism be included in MINURSO. Araud replies that "Ban Ki-moon's" final report, into which the French chief of UN Peacekeeping had input, hadn't adopted the OHCHR's recommend. That is where the lobbying is -- and it is attributable to France, with refusals to answer questions playing their role.

   Araud opposed a human rights monitoring mechanism in 2010 as well:

  On April 30, 2010, six hours into Western Sahara negotiations in the Security Council, the threat to call the vote was made. There would be three abstentions against the resolution drafted by the so-called Group of Friends: Uganda, Nigeria and Mexico.

A compromise that was apparently acceptable to all 15 members, but was opposed by Morocco, would refer to UN "mechanisms" as a euphemism for human rights.

  Frente Polisario says it could live with this language, and is angry that Morocco has become on this issue the one in "P-5 Plus One." Others wondered if France only agreed to put this language to Morocco because it knew Morocco would shoot it down.

Inside the consultations, Inner City Press was informed, Austria's Ambassador wondered out loud how France, so important in forming the concept of human rights, could be so vehemently opposing the inclusion of the term in the Western Sahara resolution.

French Ambassador Araud responded angrily that no one can teach human rights lessons to France.  

 Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose -- surtout avec Araud.

  Back on on April 30, 2010 at 5:10 pm, Araud noted he should have left for Greentree for the Council's annual retreat with the Secretary General 10 minutes before. This year in 2014, the retreat is earlier in April, before the MINURSO vote. So there will be no excuses. We'll have more on this.

  This year in a multiple French farce, a wire service reporter usually of use to France, Reuters' Louis Charbonneau, has now purported to cover as news his being accused of misinformation by his often-source France. Trying to serve two of the P3 Conuncil members on this issue - and some others -- doesn't work. 

  The threat of a French veto was cited by Charbonneau as the reason for the "Group of Friends on Western Sahara" draft resolution not including a human rights monitoring mechanism.

   Based on that, Human Rights Watch's Ken Roth did what he rarely does: criticize France. 

   Then French Ambassador Gerard Araud did what he rarely does: actually respond to a critique. He tweeted, "Ken Roth your message is wrong! France has not threatened to veto anything! The negotiation has not even started... How can we veto something which is not proposed by the pen holder (which in not France)? You rely on rumors and disinformation."

    The "rumors and disinformation" are those repeated by Reuters' Lou Charbonneau, on whom the French mission often relies to get out its message.  Inner City Press asked, and asks: so who is not telling the truth?

  Meanwhile from Paris the French foreign services "social media" team issues a blog by Anne Chounet-Cambas singing its own praises, citing Williamsburg, Brooklyn and hard rock. If they are the ones staffing Araud's twitter feed, is this what they had in mind?

   This French foreign ministry social media teams map of Morocco and Western Sahara, here, has been noted -- particularly in light of France's recent statements about UN maps and Crimea. We'll have more on this.

   Obscured is all this is why "Ban Ki-moon's" report's recommendation was changed to drop the word "mechanism." UN Peacekeeping is run by Herve Ladsous, a former French diplomat during the Rwanda genocide who is the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping. This has not been mentioned by Reuters. 

     Another irony is that on April 17 after a French, US and Australia sponsored Arria formula meeting with Michael Kirby, chair of the UN Commission of Inquiry on North Korea, Kirby said threats of veto should not be allowed to bury human rights proposals. He said a formal meeting (and vote) should be called on referring North Korea to the International Criminal Court.

  But this logic apparently doesn't apply to Western Sahara, or to France as the veto-wielder.  None of this is noted, of course, in pass-through account by Reuters' Charbonneau, demonstrably engaged in censorship, here. Reuters' Charbonneau, who last time quoted French Ambassador Gerard Araud denying any role, this time didn't mention him at all.

   On April 15, Araud told another reporter, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." While UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric has been asked to convey to Araud and the French Mission the UN position that accredited correspondents should be treated with respect, here, we note that this servile wire by Araud logic is just as much an agent. 

  Araud's anti-press moves on April 15 were of course not reported by this wire -- nor on Western Sahara was the African Union position with which Nigeria's Joy Ogwu answered Inner City Press --rights mechanism needed,video here and embedded below -- in the wire's story.

  Africa is not represented in the Council's "Group of Friends on Western Sahara." Changing that is not a reform you'll hear France talking about, including prospectively at the Council's retreat with Ban Ki-moon on which we'll have more.  Nor is Africa represented or even recognized, it is increasingly clear, on this servile wire. This is how the UN works, or doesn't.

  On April 17, the day of the Security Council first formal consultation on Western Sahara, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Dujarric about a reported crack down on peaceful demonstrators in El Aaiun, then asked Ambassador Joy Ogwu of Nigeria, Council president for April, about the consultations.

   Dujarric said he had no information about the demonstration or crackdown or any letter received; when Inner City Press asked if envoy Christopher Ross would hold a question and answer stakeout, he said probably not. (None happened.) Video here.

  But Inner City Press asked the Security Council's president for April, Nigeria's Joy Ogwu, if human rights monitoring came up. She said in her national capacity she raised it, saying that a human rights monitoring mechanism should be (belatedly) put in the MINURSO mission's mandate, as it is in the mandate of other UN peacekeeping missions. Video here.

  Before the consultations, French Ambassador Gerard Araud engaged in a long discussion with Morocco's new Ambassador to the UN Omar Hilale. Inner City Press, at the stakeout, took and tweeted a few photographs -- Morocco supporters replied with Araud's anti-press phrase of April 15, that anyone they disagree with is "not a journalist;" one even called photographing from the UN stakeout "spying." 

  (That Araud was quoted by Javier Bardem that Morocco is France's "mistress" was in the air. Araud talked about suing Bardem, but has not.)

   Another replied to Inner City Press that Ambassador Ogwu shouldn't have said what she said. We're left wondering if Gerard Araud, before he leaves in July, will say in a Security Council consultation, "You're not a diplomat." And what would happen next. Here is what has been requested: that Dujarric convey to the French mission that position that accredited correspondents should be respected, before the arrival of Jacques Audibert.

  The Security Council is scheduled to vote on the MINURSO mandate on April 23, but it could go until the end of the month, when the old mandate with no right monitoring mandate expires. Watch this site.

  Back on April 16 Dujarric refused to explain, when Inner City Press asked, why Ban dropped a rights "mechanism" from the advance copy of his report. Dujarric refused to say with whom, other than Morocco's King, Ban spoke about the matter between April 10 and April 15, when a new draft without "mechanism" went on the UN's website. Video here.

  Moments later, Inner City Press asked Ambassador Joy Ogwu of Nigeria, April's Security Council president and an African Union member, about the drop of the word "mechanism." She said it will be discussed in consultations on April 17. Video here.

  On April 10, Inner City Press published what was called the advance copy of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report on Western Sahara, saying that the goal is a human rights monitoring MECHANISM, see here at Paragraph 100.

  Now, the revised report is on the UN's website, with the mechanism dropped. Click here, at Paragraph 100. Earlier on April 17, despite a slew of questions about Western Sahara coming in to French Ambassador Gerard Araud as he held a press conference on human rights, he did not answer those questions nor take any question from Inner City Press. The only critical question Araud took, perhaps by mistake, he replied to, You are not a journalist, you are an agent.  Video here.

  (Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access asked Dujarric on April 16 if this was appropriate. Video here. He said accredited correspondents should be treated with respect, but declined even when Inner City Press noted that French foreign minister Laurent Fabius did the same thing to say he will convey this "respect" position to the French Mission, or Araud's replacement Jacques Audibert, click here for that)

  On April 15, Araud called on France 24 and a Reuters reporter who quoted Araud without mentioning that Javier Barden reported Araud as calling Morocco France's mistress. (Araud talked of suing, but never did.) Nor did Reuters mention that the head of UN Peacekeeping, atop the Western Sahara mission MINURSO, is Herve Ladsous, a long-time French diplomat including at the UN during the Rwanda genocide of 1994.

  So a human rights monitoring mechanism is out, at least from Ban Ki-moon report.

   Morocco's King, after in essence threatening to end the UN mission if human rights monitoring mechanism is included, is now reportedly slated to visit Dakhla, as early as tomorrow. Click here. 

   And as the pace picks up, here is another letter going in to Security Council members, this time from humanitarian groups working in Western Sahara, here.

   This comes just after the King announced a new Ambassador to the UN, replacing (and some say blaming) Ambassador Loulichki.

   The new Ambassador will be Omar Hilale, most recently a hardliner on the human rights issue at the UN in Geneva. This comes as France is slated to replace its Ambassador Gerard Araud with Jacques Audibert in July. So for both Araud and Loulichki, this month is a last campaign against a rights monitoring mechanism.

  Araud was slated to give a press conference on April 15, ironically on human rights, on topic on which he convened a closed door meeting at 10 am on April 15, from which even some UN member states were banned.  Araud should have been expected to address these issues -- but he and his spokesman Frederic Jung did not take any question from Inner City Press, and Araud attacked the lone critical question he selected.

   Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access on the morning of April 11 put online the first advance copy of the "Report of the Secretary General on the situation concerning Western Sahara," to be issued as a document of the Security Council under the symbol S/2014/258, here.

  On April 12, the Moroccan government -- but not the UN -- issued a read out of a call by the King of Morocco to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon earlier in the day on the topic of "the Moroccan Sahara," emphasis added:

Tetouan - HM King Mohammed VI held on Saturday a phone conversation with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, says a release of the Royal office.

The talks covered latest developments and the present timetable related to the Moroccan Sahara issue, says the release. On this occasion, HM the King reiterated Morocco's constant commitment and constructive cooperation to reach a final political settlement to this regional dispute, within Moroccan sovereignty.

HM The King further drew the UN secretary General's attention to the imperative need to preserve the negotiations parameters as they were defined by the Security Council, safeguard the presence framework and modalities of the UN involvement and avoid biased approaches and risky options, the statement goes on.

Any straying from this track will be fatal for the ongoing process and holds dangers for any UN involvement in the issue. The conversation also covered HM the King's sustained actions and laudable initiatives for the stability and development of the African continent.

   Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access asked the UN:

"The Moroccan government has issued its own read-out of their King's telephone call to the Secretary General, this is a request for a UN readout of the SG's call, in light of what Inner City Press asked at the April 11 noon briefing... There are other questions outstanding, as you know, and I have others, but asking this after the Moroccan government's readout, for the UN's read-out."

    Without providing any UN read-out, Ban's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric replied, "I can confirm that the call took place."

  Inner City Press and FUNCA asked Dujarric and his deputy Farhan Haq more pointedly:

"If not the still requested UN read-out, will you comment on Morocco's statement that the "King further drew the UN secretary General's attention to the imperative [to] risky options... Any straying from this track will be fatal for the ongoing process and holds dangers for any UN involvement in the issue" -- since this seems to be a threat to try to terminate "UN involvement" in Western Sahara if an option such as a human rights monitoring mechanism were included in MINURSO, do you have any comment? And, can you state which side initiated the call, and if the advance copy of the Secretary General's report on Western Sahara which I asked about at Friday's noon briefing was discussed?"

    Ban's spokesman Dujarric an hour later replied: "No further comment."

   At noon on April 11, Inner City Press asked Dujarric who has input into Ban Ki-moon's reports, for example if not only the first but the final "Ban" report on Western Sahara will urge a human rights monitoring mechanism. Dujarric refused to explain the process, saying wait until it's over, it is not final until it is final -- not a good sign, some say. Who wrote the first report? Who is changing it? Who CAN change it? Inner City Press asked, without answer. Video here, and embedded below. UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask about the Secretary-General’s position on Western Sahara. There’s an advanced copy of the report, the Secretary-General’s report that was circulated that would be ultimately a more formal document, but it seems to say the goal is a human rights monitoring mechanism, and now there are reports that that’s going be changed. The word mechanism will drop, can you describe what the process is on reports such as this that are ascribed to the Secretary-General. Who has input into them? Once they are sent around are they final, and if they are not, who has input in this case to change them?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: All Secretary-General’s reports are ultimately signed off by the Secretary-General’s Office. Any relevant department or mission would have input into it but a report is a final report once it’s final. So I would ask you to wait a day or two until the report is issued, and then we can... you know nothing is final until it’s final.

Inner City Press: Because the consultations would be on the 17th, everything is moving, this is the month to do it. So I wanted to know, since there is a document that’s ascribed to the Secretary-General that says monitoring mechanisms, I just wanted to ask you, does Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon favour human rights monitoring mechanisms?

Spokesman Dujarric: Again, once the report is out, and it’s final, it would be the Secretary-General’s report. Until the report is out, we are not going to comment on it. And once it’s out, it is the Secretary-General’s word, so there’s really nothing to add

  That's called stonewalling in advance, that there will be nothing to add. On April 14, Dujarric not only refused Inner City Press' request for further information about Ban's call with the King: he would not explain why a UN read-out of Ban's call with the acting President of Ukraine was provided, but not with Morocco's King.

   In Paragraph 100 on Page 20 Ban's (first) report says, or said, that the goal is "a sustained, independent and impartial human rights monitoring mechanism." 

  Amid changes, a Western wire -- which has engaged in censorship at the UN, here -- quoted French Ambassador Gerard Araud that "France formally denies any interference with the UN Secretariat."
  
   This servile wire did not even mention that it can be done within the UN Secretariat, where the Department of Peacekeeping which runs MINURSO is headed by Herve Ladsous, a long time French diplomat. Nor does it mention Araud being quoted by Javier Bardem that Morocco is France's "mistress" - if only to run Araud's denial and litigation threat. We will be watching for that.

  As a part of this watchfulness, Inner City Press had published a letter just submitted to the President of the Security Council by "a number of Nordic organisations, from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden," urging the inclusion of human rights monitoring in MINURSO's mandate.

  Even former UN envoy on Western Sahara Peter van Walson has written to French president Francois Hollande urging France to stop opposing human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. 

  Also new this year is the discomfort caused by Spanish actor Javier Bardem asserting that French Ambassador Gerard Araud told him that Morocco is like France's mistress. 

  French foreign ministry spokesperson Romain Nadal has reportedly confirmed that Araud met with Bardem in 2011; Araud has said he would seek permission to sue Bardem. (There is a pattern here.) Now, Jacques Audibert is said slated to take over for Araud by July.

  So this will be Araud's last campaign opposing human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. Earlier on April 10 Araud spoke at the Security Council stakeout about Central African Republic but when Inner City Press asked about the Chadian troops there, charged by the High Commissioner for Human Rights with killing 30 civilians, Araud told Inner City Press to Ask Chad's Ambassador.

  US Ambassador Samantha Power moments later answered Inner City Press' question about the withdrawal of Chad's troops from CAR, video here.

  The April 10 advance copy of the "Report of the Secretary General on the situation concerning Western Sahara" consists of 104 paragraphs and a map.

  To begin with -- Inner City Press will have more than one report on this Report -- there is a recognition of "demostrations aimed at drawing attention to human rights concerns, socio-economic issues and political demands, including the right to self-determination. These were swiftly dispersed by Moroccan security forces. On most such occasions, there were credible reports of heavy-handedness on the part of security forces as well as violence, such as stone-throwing, on the part of the demonstrators."

  The Report says "of particular note was a demonstration that took place in Laayoune on 5 May 2013... Protesters expressed dissatisfaction that Security Council resolution 2099 (2013) did not include provisions to include human rights monitoring in MINURSO's mandate."

Will it be different this year? Watch this site.