Inner City Press Asks OIC of Refugees & Rapes in CAR, Ladsous Refused Qs, As OIC on Yemen

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 12 -- When a press conference on the Central African Republic by Cheikh Tidiane Gadio, Special Envoy of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation for CAR and Mansour Ayyad SH A Alotaibi, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait to the UN on October 12, Inner City Press went to ask about refugees being able to vote, and about slow responses to peacekeepers' rapes in CAR.

On the former, Cheikh Tidiane Gadio said that efforts are underway in refugee camps where the government dares not go to place polling places in nearby safer places. On the sexual abuse charges, he said Babacar Gaye, whom he knows, was courageous to accept be removed from his position. But what about Gaye's boss, Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to “recreation”? See below.

   After a long question from, and answer to, CAR's Permanent Representative to the UN who was in the UN press conference, an even longer or at least more impassioned answer was given to a non CAR question: rightly so, Inner City Press believes. But when Inner City Press asked a similar non CAR question, about the level of death in Yemen, Kuwait's Mansour Ayyad SH A Alotaib said he wanted to keep the press conference only about CAR. We'll have more on this.

  Three week after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous linked peacekeepers' rapes in the Central African Republic to "distraction" and R&R, and three days after Inner City Press asked French President Francois Hollande about it, Ladsous appeared for a Q&A stakeout about CAR. Video here.

  After asking CAR's foreign minister about refugees' voting rights, and getting an answer as it has throughout the UN General Assembly week, Inner City Press asked Ladsous of an update on the rapes. He gave none. In fact, he had a staffer instruct the UNTV boom microphone operator to move the mic to the other side. As he left, Inner City Press asked about his R&R comment, which in many countries could get him fired. Not at the UN, at least not yet. Vine here.

  On October 3, Ladsous' mission in CAR MINUSCA put this out:

"Unidentified armed individuals opened fire in the night of Friday 2 October 2015 on blue helmets guarding the Headquarters of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA). United Nations soldiers vigorously fired back in response to this coward act, forcing the assailants to flee riding a motorbike.

The Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in the Central African Republic, Parfait ONANGA-ANYANGA, firmly condemns this attack and reminds that it can constitute a war crime, as per relevant international conventions. He welcomes the quick and appropriate reaction of the blue helmets and encourages them to continue to remain vigilant in the daily discharge of their tasks in the service of peace.

The Special Representative invites the population to remain calm and reassures them of MINUSCA’s determination to pursue its action to protect the civilian population, support the political process with a view to restore state authority throughout the national territory.

The Chief of MINUSCA calls for an immediate halt of violence in Bangui and throughout the country so that reason can prevail and that the wide consultations of the Nation’s Forces Vives as announced by the Head of State of the Transition lead the country to a peaceful and sustainable resolution of the crisis."

  After Ladsous fled on October 1, Inner City Press asked CAR's economy minister if there was any legal proceedings against the peacekeepers accused of rape. She said yes, in CAR - then acknowledged that her government does not even have the names of the accused. What kind of legal procedure? The kind where the defendants have no name.

  Ironically, Ladsous had talked about accountability in his stakeout - but only for Africans, it seems, not the French troops of Sangaris. He'll do a stakeout on another Francophone peacekeeping mission, in Mali, later on October 1. Watch this site.

 On September 28, on the day of the UN Peacekeeping summit at the UN, Inner City Press managed to ask French President Francois Hollande about alleged rapes by French troops in the Central African Republic (CAR) and about French head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous having linked rapes to “recreation” and R&R. Video here.

  Hollande replied that when French troops are charged -- as they have been, in CAR -- France pushes for prosecutions, but also due process. Does that explain the one-year delay in the Sangaris CAR case?  The question was not taken.

  Later on September 28, Inner City Press went to cover the High Level Meeting on Peacekeeping, and found Ladsous slouched in his hair, wanly applauding pledges then glaring up at the photographers booth where Inner City Press was. Something is very wrong at the top of UN Peacekeeping - until it is addressed, the various commitments ring hollow.

A year after French President Francois Hollande tried to privatize the UN Press Briefing Room by having non-French journalists removed, his team on September 27, 2015 adopted a different strategy for the same result. At 8:40 am the UN said there would be a press conference by Hollande in just five minutes, at 8:45 am. Call it innovation.

  Apparently in his press conference, Hollande had many of the seats in the front of the UN Press Briefing Room “reserved” - because Brazil cited this as a precedent for their 11:30 am press conference by Dilma Rousseff (that's another story).  France, returning with Hollande for a session scheduled for 2:15 pm, again tried to control spaces in the front rows, as did the old UN Correspondents Association, which ejected a visiting journalist from “its” seat.

 And the question for Hollande? For Inner City Press, it would be what actions have been taken on the French soldiers alleged to have raped children in the Central African Republic. Watch this site.

Update: After Hollande came in, two people who had sat next to Inner City Press through the entire Japanese briefing from 1:30 pm got up, to give their seat to Laurent Fabuis and Royale. Then a lady approached Inner City Press, in full view of UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric, and told Inner City Press to move, she's a "minister." Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access said Non, je suis journaliste, je veux poser ma question.

Meanwhile Ban Ki-moon said Peru's President Humala regretted not being present. But he WAS present, next to Hollande. Inner City Press asked Humala about the Trans Pacific Partnership on September 27: watch this site.

Back on September 23, 2014 the entourage of French President Francois Hollande repeatedly ordered the UN accredited Press to leave the UN's Press Briefing Room.

  A briefing by Hollande had been scheduled for 11 am, then was canceled. But at 10:55 am as a previous briefing about climate change was ending, Inner City Press was told to leave the room.

  The question, On whose orders? was not answered. Instead a woman in the French delegation said the room was "reserved." 

   This is not a restaurant, Inner City Press replied, now on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, which advocates for the rights of journalists and for a Freedom of Information Act covering the UN.

  Another member of the French delegation said loudly, "They'll take away his accreditation." It was not necessarily an idle threat: the UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric had looked into the room as this happened. 

   Inner City Press said, if UN Media Accreditation -- or UN Security -- tell me to leave, I will. But not before. Video here.

  Meanwhile the representative of the old UN Correspondents Alliance meekly left; previously, UNCA did nothing when previous French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud in this room told a Lebanese reporter, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent."

  After a time, the woman from Hollande's entourage said that the chief of UN Media Accreditation, whom she made a point of saying she knows well, was not answering the phone. A French security guard told Inner City Press to leave. But this is not their role, in the UN briefing room.

  Finally the French foreign minister Laurent Fabius and the new Permanent Representative to the UN came and sat in the front room with Inner City Press and FUNCA.  Hollande appeared from the doorway Spokesman Dujarric had looked out of.

  Hollande said he had come mostly about climate change, but that a French citizen had been taken hostage in Algeria by a group linked with ISIL or "Da'ech," as he called the group. He said arms deliveries would continue; he noted the previous night's air strikes, by others, on Syria.

  Hollande said he would meet in the afternoon with the Syrian Opposition Coalition's Hadi al Bahra, who he called the only legitimate leader of Syria. Then he left without taking questions.

  The day before, UNCA hosted al Bahra (as they had his predecessor Ahmad Jarba) in the clubhouse the UN gives this group, publicized only to those which pay it dues. Given that UNCA did nothing when Araud told the Lebanese reporter "you are not a journalist, you are an agent," why didn't Hollande hold his press conference in the club of UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance?

   

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

By Matthew Russell Lee

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   

Censorship in Kuwait & Turkey Raised to UN by Free UN Coalition for Access, Spokesperson Unaware of Geerdink Case in Diyarbakir

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 6 -- Amid attacks on journalists and freedom of expression in countries all around the world, the United Nations under Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is no sanctuary, nor champion, the Free UN Coalition for Access has found. 

  Beyond stealth attempts to get the Press thrown out of the UN, there is often little but platitudes about attacks elsewhere.  FUNCA is Pressing the issue.

  On January 6, Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about attacks by Turkey on Dutch journalist Frederike Geerdink whose home in Diyarbakir was searched amid dark self-serving of terrorism.

  UN Spokesman Dujarric replied he hadn't heard of the case. Video here.

  Also on January 6, FUNCA asked UN Spokesman Dujarric about Kuwait sentencing to one year and eight months in jail Saqr Al-Hashash for insulting - Tweeting against -- the Emir. The UN's response was platitude. But FUNCA will continue. 

  When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon unveiled his “synthesis” report on the UN’s post-2015 development agenda on December 5 it said, "Press freedom and access to information, freedom of expression, assembly and association are enablers of sustainable development."

  This is hypocritical on more than one count, including that the UN Secretariat has no Freedom of Information Act or process, something that Inner City Press and now the Free UN Coalition for Access have been asking about and pushing for. 

  As with legal accountability for harm done, as by the UN bringing cholera to Haiti, how can the Ban's UN preach to member states policies that are not applied to the UN at all?

The UN's lack of accountability, from bringing cholera to Haiti to using as “peacekeepers” armies under investigation for war crimes like those of the DR Congo and Sri Lanka, is enabled by the lack of even a basic FOIA covering the UN.

Inner City Press, which has litigated FOIA cases all the way to the US Supreme Court and submitted FOI request to dozens of countries, haslong pushed for a UN Freedom of Information Act. 

  On November 7, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric point blank: why not disclose for example when Ban takes gifts like Qatar's of free private jet travel to the Middle East this year?

  Dujarric after claiming that disclosing such information, or setting up "structure" to disclose such basic information, would required General Assembly approval, said he had nothing to add. Video here. Nothing to disclose?

   As reported on September 15 by the Columbia Journalism Review, “Inner City Press... reported that Burnham’s successor, Alicia Barcena, said it would be in place by the end of 2007. But the General Assembly never agreed on the scheme, and it was quietly shelved. “There were differing views among Member States about what constituted openness,” said Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, in an email.”

  (Inner City Press asked Dujarric about the quote at the September 15, 2014, noon briefing, video here and embedded below.)

  What leadership -- citing “differing views,” the UN Secretariat gave up before it even began. CJR also quotes a rights group which won't disclose what issues it raises to Ban, and correspondents happy to get leaks and text from their Western sources. This same organization, beyond its Executive Committee trying to get the investigative Pressthrown out of the UN, withheld its Q&A with Ban Ki-moon even from its own members, here. 

  This group, the so-called United Nations Correspondents Association, has now returned its censor in chief Giampaolo Pioli to its helm, to raise toasts with Ban Ki-moon while having tried to get the investigative Press thrown out, and doing nothing for freedom of information. 

  As to freedom of association, Pioli declared to someone whose vote he was soliciting -- in an election without competition -- that no one can be a member of FUNCA and "his" UN Correspondents Association at the same time. That is, he can tell people what they can join, and how they should think. This is the UN's partner.

  In order to pursue more access to information -- and the protection of the rights of investigative journalists against such insider approaches -- Inner City Press co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

  FUNCA says it is absurd for the UN Secretariat to blame member states for its own refusal to be transparent with its own financial information. Furthermore, how can Ban's UN make claims about “we the peoples” while blaming unnamed governments for banning accountability to the peoples?

  CJR concluded, as we will for now, with this: “Inner City Press continues to advocate for a systematic freedom of information policy, but admits that there is little binding pressure journalists can put on the UN legally. 'Ultimately you end up making a moral argument, which is that more so than most governments, the UN is always pontificating about good governance and transparency,' he said. 'That’s what I find so ironic.'”

Ironic is a diplomatic way to put it. Watch this site -- and this (FUNCA) one.

   

On Kuwait, IMF Reviews Shadow Banking Without Looking Too Far into the Shadows

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 9 -- The Kuwait reports by the International Monetary Fund, which came out from under embargo at 9 am today, have a lengthy section on "shadow banking."

  But it begins by admitting that "no single definition of shadow banking exists... Shadow banking is often identified within entities that are less regulated than a traditional bank and lack a formal safety net."

   Even without a formal definition, the IMF says that "advanced countries show the largest shadow banking systems including in the US, euro area, and UK, amounting, in 2012, to around 200 percent of GDP in the US and euro area, and close to 400 percent in UK."

  The IMF continues: "for Kuwait, factors behind shadow banking growth seem to include ample liquidity and search for yields, regulatory arbitrage, and complementarities with the banking system."

  But in the main report, there's this rah-rah statement: "The authorities continue to strengthen the Anti Money Laundering/Combating of Financing of Terrorism (AML / CFT) framework, and looks forward to their continuing work with the Financial Action Task Force.... Going forward, Kuwait is expected to continue improving the effectiveness of the AML / CFT regime, and strengthening the role of the FIU."

  The IMF reports on Kuwait do not mention the word "Syria" once, much less the specifics of financial outflows to support groups there.

  Back on December 5 when the IMF issued its Article IV report on Turkey it said "the economic spillovers to Turkey from conflicts in Syria and Iraq have negatively impacted exports. The effects of tensions between Ukraine and Russia have thus far been limited, but if they were to lead to generalized risk aversion in financial markets, the impact could become significant."

   Notably, Turkey earlier this week re-announced its position that it will not recognize any break-away or break-off of Crimea from Ukraine. Turkey's policies on Syria are known.

  The IMF in its accompanying staff report offers Turkey examples from South Korea, Peru, Austria and New Zealand. But are these really analoguous? And what of the banks in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus - if it's not recognized, who's regulating them?

Back on November 13, six days after sanctions were imposed on Yemen's former president Saleh and two Houthi leaders, Inner City Press asked the International Monetary Fund, "does the IMF have any comment or response to the new government, the imposition of sanctions by the UN Security Council? What is the status of the IMF's program in Yemen?"

  Later on November 13, IMF Deputy Spokesperson William Murray told Inner City Press, "Staff is in close dialogue with the authorities, who have reaffirmed their commitment to implement their IMF-backed economic reform program. These reforms are essential to boost inclusive growth, reduce unemployment and poverty, tackle corruption, and enhance fiscal and external sustainability. The three-year economic program, which was approved on September 2, 2014, is reviewed every six months. The first review is therefore planned for the Spring of 2015."

  The authorities, of course, have to some degree kept changing. We'll stay on this.

  Reuters, on the other hand, this week ran a long "exclusive" about Yemen finance and budgets, without once mentioning the IMF.

The UN Security Council's sanctions committee on November 7 designated for asset freeze and travel bans former President Saleh and two Houthi leaders, Abd al-Khaliq al-Huthi and Abdullah Yahya al Hakim. Click here for UNSC press release.

  After that, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon put out a statement welcoming the new government but not mentioning the sanctions:

The Secretary-General welcomes today’s announcement of the formation of the new Peace and National Partnership Government in Yemen. He congratulates President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi and Prime Minister-Designate Khaled Bahah for their leadership during this process. The Secretary-General commends the parties for their pledge to accept the slate decided on by the President and Prime Minister, and to extend their unwavering support to the new government. At this uncertain and fragile time for Yemen, today’s announcement is a positive step towards political stability and peace in the country.

The Secretary-General reminds the parties of the political commitments they made in signing the Peace and National Partnership Agreement. Yemen is facing enormous challenges at present, which can only be overcome if all sides work together in the greater national interest to implement the Agreement without delay.

The United Nations looks forward to continuing its engagement with the President, the Prime Minister, the Government and all Yemenis leaders as they seek to build a new democratic Yemen that responds to the legitimate aspirations of its people.

  Back on October 31 the US State Department put out this answer to a question taken earlier that day:

Question: Do you have any reaction to reports that the Houthis have given President Hadi 10 days to form a government?

Answer: We have seen the reports that speakers at a Houthi-convened conference today announced a deadline for President Hadi to form a government in 10 days.  U.S. officials continue to support the efforts of Yemen’s political constituencies, especially President Hadi and Prime Minister Bahah, in implementing the provisions of the September 21 Peace and National Partnership Agreement, including the formation of a government.  All Yemenis, including the Houthis, have an important role to play in working peacefully to form a government that can meet the needs of the Yemeni people and continue to pursue the key steps of its political transition.

  Back on October 13 after Yemeni Prime Minster designate Ahmed Awadh Bin Mubarak was vetoed by the Houthis, on October 13 President Hadi appointed Yemen’s current UN Ambassador Khaled Mahfoodh Abdulla Bahah to the position.

 Later on October 13 after a three-hour UN Security Council meeting, brief "press elements" were read out at the stakeout once again vaguely threatening sanctions -- Inner City Press' questions including about secession of the South were not answered -- and welcoming Bahah as prime minister.

He was Minister of Oil and Minerals of Yemen from 2006 until 2008, under Ali Saleh, including being “the Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Yemen Liquefied Natural Gas Project with investments of over $4 Billion, Chairman of the Safer Exploration and Production Petroleum Company and, Chairman of the Yemen General Corporation for Oil and Gas, which includes the Aden Refinery Company, the Yemen Refinery Company, the Yemen Oil Company, the Yemen Investment Oil Company, and the Petroleum Training Center.”

  That's a whole lot of hydrocarbons. Watch this site.

 Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info

On Iraq, ICP Asks UN Envoy Mladenov of His Omission of Syria, Amos of Aid Access

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 18 -- When the UN's envoy to Iraq Nickolay Mladenov briefed the UN Security Council on November 18, he said he welcomes "the Government's efforts to explore the elements of a common political and regional security approach to combat ISIL. This has been a key feature in the discussions that Iraq's political leaders have pursued with Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE and others."

  There was one neighbor, that Iraq speaks with, not listed by Mladenov: Syria.

  Inner City Press asked Mladenov about his omission of Syria. His answer was that "the situation in Syria is quite different from all of its neighbors." Then he referred to reconciliation and development.  

  Inner City Press also asked UN humanitarian chief Valerie Amos about aid access in Anbar province, and if there are access problems in areas characterized as government controlled. She replied that while most problems are in ISIL controlled areas, there are areas controlled by pro-government militia where there are also access problems.  

  New High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid of Jordan also spoke, but more briefly, before a "working lunch." He took questions on Syria and Israel; meanwhile,Sri Lanka's foreign minister has accused him of double standards, on which it'd be good to hear a response. On the"leaks" scandal in his Office, as well. We hope to have more on this.
 
  On November 16 after a UN convoy in Baghdad was attacked, Mladenov -- already in New York, it seems -- issued a statement on the UN mission's website, and a tweet.

  On November 18 Inner City Press asked Mladenov what inquiry the UN is making into who was behind the attack, and why. He said it is not clear yet if the UN was targeted or just a "target of opportunity."

  Inner City Press back on November 16 asked Mladenov by Twitter if a statement from the UN in New York - from the Security Council or Secretary General Ban Ki-moon -- would help. 

 Mladenov replied that he had put out a statement, which is good.

  But when does the UN Security Council, and Ban, issue statements? A week ago the UN (formerly EU) envoy to Libya Bernardino Leon was targeted by a car bomb. No Security Council press statement - although one was issued later in the week when the empty embassies of Egypt and the UAE in Libya were bombed. (Now a hotel in Benghazi is being hit with air strikes, but that's another story.)

   Was there no statement about the attack on Leon at Leon's request? Was there a desire not to recognize or publicize this attack on the UN? And what of the attack now in Baghdad, where the UN suffered the Canal Hotel bombing in the past? We've asked, and we'll see.

  Back on November 9, hours after a bombing in Libya near UN envoy Bernardino Leon, which came after Libya Dawn in Tripoli called him not impartial and persona non grata, still the UN in New York had not put out any statement at all.

  Instead, UN Department of Political Affairs' new spokesman merely selectively emailed to some Western media. No statement; nothing on the UNSMIL mission's web site. To new Free UN Coalition for Access, this is a new low in UN (non) communications.

 Back on November 4 when the UN Security Council met about Libya behind closed doors, the Press outside at the stakeout was repeatedly told that Leon would come and take questions at the stakeout.

 This is what the replaced Tarek Mitri did, each time he briefed the Security Council. With Leon being criticized inside Libya it would seem he'd have all the more reason to speak.

  But he did not. When he came out he barely broke stride -- Inner City Press took a photograph, blurred -- while saying the new Security Council Gary Quinlan of Australia would speak later. When Quinlan did, it was a bland "Press Elements."

  Still the scribes churned it. At 8:15 pm Agence France Presse bragged that it had "obtained" a French-drafted request to put Ansar al-Sharia, Benghazi and Derna, on the Al Qaeda sanctions list. 

"A copy of the French-led request to the Al-Qaeda sanctions committee was obtained by AFP." Wonder how...

   Reuters issued a breathless report with unnamed diplomats at 8:19 pm. Both have tried to get smaller investigative Press thrown out of the UN - see documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, here andhere - and this request by Reuters to censor one of its complaints to the UN from Google's Search.

  Back on August 27 amid airstrikes in Libya, when outgoing UN envoy Tarek Mitri briefed the UN Security Council, the airstrikes weren't even mentioned in his more than six page prepared text distributed by the UN.

  Inside the Council chamber, improvising but only a little bit, Mitri mentioned the strikes, but not who did them. Back on August 19 and once again since, Inner City Press asked the UN if it knew anything about who was behind them:

Inner City Press: Who did the air strikes?  General Haftar?  What's the UN, either Mr. León or Mr. Mitri or whoever is currently in charge, what's their sense of who's doing air strikes in Tripoli?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I don't… I think we reported back with the Mission yesterday, if there's anything more I'll share it with you.

  But in the days since, the UN has said nothing. Now the Libyan Dawn group  has taken over the Tripoli airport despite the airstrikes and alleged that the strikes have the involvement of Haftar's (or Hiftar's) supporters, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. What does the UN -- or now Bernardino Leon -- know and say about that? Watch this site.

On Leon: To try to counter Libya's lawless power struggle, the UN engaged in one of its own. 

  And unlike most of the member states that make up the UN, and most other inter-governmental organizations, this UN does not answer questions, at least not directly.

  After Inner City Press repeated asked about it, including at the UN's noon briefings on August 11 and 13, on August 14 the UN said Bernardino Leon will take over as its Libya envoy on September 1.

  When Inner City Press asked if that is really Leon's starting day, given that he's said he'll go to Tripoli as early as next week representing the UN, Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said Leon is merely "familiarizing" himself with the work he will be, and Mitri remains in place until September 1. Really?

  Ignoring the previous questions and the power-play, wire services like Reuters merely retyped ("reported") the UN's August 14 announcement that Leon will start September 1. And now?

 Back on August 1, Inner City Press exclusively reportedthat UN envoy to Libya Tarek Mitri was being "pushed out" of the post, including by UK envoy to Libya Jonathan Powell, and cited his brother Lord Powell's extensive business in Libya through Magna Holdings.

  The UK mission, usually responsive, did not provide comment on written Press questions on this; at UN Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant's August 4 press conference Inner City Press asked about Powell's and Mitri's relationship, without direct answer, see here.

  Then the UK's Ambassador to Libya Michael Aron hasannounced, on Twitter no less,  that Mitri is out and Ban Ki-moon has installed a new UN envoy, former Zapatero diplomat Bernardino Leon Gross.

  The UN, at least at its August 8 noon briefing and in emails since, has not announce anything about replacing Mitri, much less by whom.

  Ban Ki-moon's office said that for August 9 and 10, "Spokesperson on call:  Mr. Farhan Haq." So Inner City Press wrote to Farhan Haq, as well as to lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric:

Hello. Now that the UK Ambassador to Libya, and others, have announced that Ban Ki-moon has appointed Bernardino Leon to replace Tarek Mitri as Ban's representative to Libya, head of UNSMIL, this is a request on deadline - today - that your Office confirm that this appointment or nomination has been made.

Has the letter been sent to the Security Council?

Is Leon already confirmed?

If not, how it is appropriate that P5 countries are saying he already has the job? On deadline, today.

Given many of the ongoing Afghanistan leaks are about UN DSS and UNAMA, not UNDP, there will be further questions. But the above is on deadline for today. Thank you in advance.

  But more than four hours later, by "close of business" in New York, the "spokesperson on duty" had not answered, had not even acknowledged receipt of the question.

  What does it mean to be the UN's "spokesperson on duty"?

   Isn't it for Ban Ki-moon to make this announcement? In fact, in 2011 when France had already gotten its Jerome Bonnafont in place to replace its Alain Le Roy atop UN Peacekeeping, Bonnafont's bragging about it in India, where he was French Ambassador, led to Ban rescinding the "offer."

  France countered with three time loser Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press reported each step -- including Bonnafont in July 2011 being tapped for the post, and evencongratulation cards to Bonnafont, here, and threats from AFP then the UN Correspondents Association -- and the rest is, well, a type of history (coverage in UK New Statesman, here).

  Ladsous refuses all Inner City Press questions, video compilation here; Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq on August 8, alluding to Ladsous and now UNDP, said it is because of "people skills." Or reporting?

  So Ban has accepted or done nothing to stop this P3 power grab to oust Mitri. But can "his" successor be pre-announced and Ban accept that too? 

Footnote: Inner City Press is exclusively informed that UNSMIL deputy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed also has business, literally: fisshing business. Ban and those in control of this play accept that too? Watch this site.

Background: Inner City Press on August 1 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric what UN envoy Tarek Mitri is doing; Dujarric said he was not aware but would check.

  Inner City Press had reported that Mitri, unlike the other UN international staff who relocated to Tunis, went back to his native Lebanon. Sources in the region exclusively told Inner City Press that Mitri had been hoping for a government post in Lebanon, describing him as less than committed to remaining with the UN.

   Now we can report more. These knowledgeable sources say that Mitri is being "pushed out," mostly they say by the UK's envoy to Libya, former Tony Blair aide Jonathan Powell.

  "Mitri was expected to take on a mostly support function," one source told Inner City Press. "He stood up and said no, headquarters didn't back him up and now he's being pushed out." We'll have more on this.

  It was nine days after Libya's foreign minister Mohamed Abdel Aziz at the UN Security Council stakeout told the Press his country wanted international help to protect oil fields and ports, including airports, that the US announced it had relocated its Tripoli embassy staff out of the country to Tunisia.

  Inner City Press asked, where is UN envoy to Libya Tarek Mitri? He briefed the Security Council from Beirut -- sources tell Inner City Press he has been on vacation there, and this deputy, too, was out of the country.

  Back on July 17 when Libya's foreign minister Mohamed Abdel Aziz emerged from the UN Security Council to take questions from the media, Inner City Press asked him to be more specific about what type of “support” force he is asking for.

  Mohamed Abdel Aziz replied that the request is not for a “military” force -- but then went on to say say the force should protect oil fields and ports. If that's not military, what is it?

  Inner City Press also asked Mohamed Abdel Aziz for Libya's current position on the US arresting Abu Khatallah. Compared to the complaints of others, Mohamed Abdel Aziz said that even though under international law it is unacceptable, since Libya can't protect witnesses, maybe it is okay.

  Given the current state of affairs, what is “Libya's” position?

   Watch this site.