Showing posts with label Mark Toner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Toner. Show all posts

Saturday, March 19, 2016

On Yemen, Inner City Press Asked US State Department Of Saudi Airstrikes Killing 107, UN Says 106, UNICEF 118


By Matthew Russell Lee

WASHINGTON, March 18, updated --  When Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson John Kirby about Yemen on March 15, Kirby said "we welcome the fact that there is a cessation of hostilities."
  On March 16, Inner City Press returned to the State Department and asked Kirby's deputy Mark Toner about the Saudi airstrikes in Hajjah which killed, it asked, 41 or 107 people; Toner replied in part that the US could not verify the specifics, see below.
 On March 18, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has put the civilian death toll at 106, in a statement we publish below, while noting that UNICEF in Yemen puts the figure at 118 dead including 22 children:
"In the wake of another deadly airstrike that killed some 106 civilians in a crowded village market in north-western Yemen, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein on Friday condemned the repeated failure of the Coalition forces to take effective actions to prevent the recurrence of such incidents, and to publish transparent, independent investigations into those that have already occurred.

“The carnage caused by two airstrikes on the Al Khamees market, in north-western Yemen on Tuesday was one of the deadliest incidents since the start of the conflict a year ago,” said Zeid, noting that it was the second such incident in the past three weeks. On 27 February, at least 39 civilians, including nine children, were killed, and another 33 injured, by an airstrike on the Khaleq market in a north-eastern district of Sana`a.

UN Human Rights Office staff in Yemen, who visited the site of the attack in northern Hajja Gvernorate on Wednesday and interviewed a number of eyewitnesses, said the airstrikes had completely destroyed 16 shops in the Al Khamees market, which is the primary shopping area for some 15 surrounding villages. The attack had apparently taken place during the afternoon rush hour when the market was particularly crowded.

There were 24 children among the 106 people reported dead so far. UN staff recorded the names of 96 of the victims, although a further 10 bodies were burned beyond recognition. More than 40 other people were reported to have been injured during the attack.

Since the beginning of the conflict a year ago, the UN Human Rights Office has recorded a total of just under 9,000 casualties including 3,218 civilians killed and a further 5,778 injured (from 26 March 2015 to 17 March 2016).

The UN human rights staff could find no evidence of any armed confrontation or significant military objects in the area at the time of the attack, beyond the presence of a check-point some 250 meters away from the market usually manned by a small group of policemen and Houthis.

“Looking at the figures, it would seem that the coalition is responsible for twice as many civilian casualties as all other forces put together, virtually all as a result of airstrikes,” the High Commissioner said. “They have hit markets, hospitals, clinics, schools, factories, wedding parties – and hundreds of private residences in villages, towns and cities including the capital Sana’a. Despite plenty of international demarches, these awful incidents continue to occur with unacceptable regularity. In addition, despite public promises to investigate such incidents, we have yet to see progress in any such investigations.”

“It would appear to be the case that the distinction between legitimate military targets and civilian ones -- which are protected under international law -- is at best woefully inadequate,” Zeid said. “And at worst, we are possibly looking at the commission of international crimes by members of the Coalition. There is an obligation to distinguish at all times between military targets and civilians. The Houthis and their allies have also been responsible for indiscriminate ground attacks resulting in civilian casualties, which I also condemn and which could qualify, likewise, as international crimes.”

One year on from the start of the conflict, the UN Human Rights Chief lamented the failure of the two sides to the conflict to agree a peace deal, adding he hoped that an announcement by a Coalition spokesman on Thursday that Saudi Arabia was planning to scale back major combat operations would indeed lead rapidly to a full ceasefire and peace agreement.

“I urge both sides to swallow their pride and bring this conflict to a halt,” Zeid said. “The people of Yemen have suffered enough. A very poor country is having its limited infrastructure decimated, and people are struggling desperately to survive.'"
 On March 16, Inner City Press returned and asked Kirby's deputy Mark Toner about the Saudi airstrike in Hajjah, full video here from Minute 56:28; Vine hereUS transcript here:
QUESTION: Inner City Press. I want to ask about Yemen and something about the UN.

MR TONER: Sure.

Inner City Press: On Yemen, yesterday, Mr. Kirby said that we welcome the fact that there’s a cessation of hostilities. And then, as I’m sure you know, there was a big airstrike in Haja province – some people say 41 killed --

MR TONER: Yeah.

Inner City Press: -- some say 107. What do you say to that? And related back to the genocide question, also still on Yemen, Sudan is part of the coalition. Sudan has troops in Yemen with the U.S.-supported coalition. And I’m wondering, how is that – does that – does the genocide finding as to Omar al-Bashir in Darfur have any implication for the U.S. not being part of a coalition or militarily cooperating with a government whose head of state is charged with genocide by the ICC and was found by Colin Powell to --

MR TONER: So to your first question, we’re certainly aware of the reports that civilians may have been killed or injured during a strike, I believe, near a market in Haja province. I can’t at this time – cannot verify the specifics. We remain deeply concerned by the devastating toll of the crisis in Yemen, both in terms of civilian casualties, but also, obviously, in terms of the humanitarian situation that Yemen faces. We urge all sides to comply with obligations under international humanitarian law.

Speaking to the broader peace process, as you know, Secretary Kerry was just there. I was with him over the weekend, as was poor Dave here. And we were on a trip to Saudi Arabia. But one of the things that we discussed – he discussed, rather, with both the Saudi – His Royal Highness King Salman, also the crown prince, and the deputy crown prince as well as Saudi Foreign Minister al-Jubeir – they talked about the need for a political solution to the situation in Yemen. And so we support the UN efforts to that end.

In terms of your second question, I’m actually – I just don’t know the specifics about that or what prohibits us – you’re saying why we would not have been part of this, are we prohibited from taking part in that?

Inner City Press: No, no, I guess I was saying – you were saying that there – or people were saying in this first round that there were some legal implications if you make a finding of genocide. And I don't know if those include not working with --

MR TONER: But I’m not sure whether they pertain to --

Inner City Press: -- the government who --

MR TONER: I’d have to – yeah, I can take that question. I don't know.

QUESTION: Okay. And do you know – just one other – because I think the question was taken yesterday.

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I wanted to ask about this corruption case about the UN. Today, in the Southern District of New York, the former deputy permanent representative of the Dominican Republic pled guilty and has pledged to cooperate against the former president of the General Assembly, John Ashe. I wanted to know the State Department’s position on it, and also on the Government Accountability Project. They wrote a letter – a public letter to the U.S. Mission to the UN urging them to get involved in opposing retaliation by the UN against the press that has been reporting on the corruption scandal. I think that some members of Congress are actually now – but I haven’t seen anything from the State – from the U.S. mission. So I’m wondering, is the State Department aware of the corruption case, and also separately of this GAP letter, and what’s their response to it?

MR TONER: I would imagine we’re aware. I’m not, unfortunately. I apologize we haven’t gotten back to you on that. We’ll take it.

At the March 13 press conference of US Secretary of State John Kerry and his counterparts, French Jean-Marc Ayrault, Italy's Paolo Gentiloni and the foreign minister of Germany, Yemen came up this way, from Kerry:
"We discussed Yemen, where we have agreed to work even more closely together in the next days to explore the possibilities of the political solution, and we both agree that it would be desirable to see if we can find a similar approach as we did in Syria to try to get a ceasefire. So we’re going to continue to work on that quietly, and we have a team of people who are going to continue to be working together to that effect."
Kerry mentioned it only in connection with his talks with Saudi Arabia -- no mention that the Saudis are responsible for two thirds of deaths, according even to the UN's Prince Zeid -- and Al Jazeera, cutting away, mentioned only Syria and Libya. France 24 wasn't even covering the press conference, stuck on an old show about Asia.
  Kerry spoke of medical aid in Syria; Inner City Press has been reporting -- even as the UN Secretariat ousts and harasses it -- on a developing resolution in the UN Security Council. The Saudi Ambassador said UNOCHA does not even want an aid access resolution on Yemen; the UN has not contradicted it.
  France's Ayrault spoke mechanically of support for Ban Ki-moon's envoy on Yemen. But where is he? 
On March 15, Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson John Kirby, from the US transcript:
Inner City Press: I want to ask about Yemen.  I saw the Secretary’s comments when he was in Saudi Arabia about possibility of a ceasefire similar to Syria and something about having teams on the ground working on that.  So I wanted to know – it seems like there’s talks between the Houthis and the Saudis that don’t involve Saleh or even Hadi.  It seems – what’s the U.S.’s – like, what was he referring to?  Is it – does he view direct negotiations between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia as a positive thing?  Is that the ceasefire he’s talking about?  And what’s the role of the UN envoy, who seems not to be part of those talks, and of Mr. Hadi going forward?  Is he the future president of Yemen or is he – has time passed him by?

MR KIRBY:  So there’s a lot there.  There – we still continue to support the UN special envoy and his efforts.  That’s not going to change.  And when the Secretary was in the region over the weekend, Yemen was – as he said, was a significant point of discussion with Saudi leaders.  Nothing has changed about our support for the UN special envoy and his efforts to get a political process going and move forward.  And the United States is going to remain firmly behind that effort.

He also said that we welcome reports that there is a reduction in violence between Houthis and the coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia.  We welcome the fact that there is a cessation of hostilities, quite frankly, that appears to also be holding.  That’s a good thing, because we’ve long said that there needs to be an increased effort by the international community to get humanitarian aid and assistance to so many Yemeni citizens who are in need, and that’s hard to do when there is still violence going on between both sides.

So we welcome this – that development, and we welcome the news that there are discussions between the two sides.  If those discussions can lead to a resolution of the conflict and to a continuation of the reduction of violence, that too is a healthy thing.  But it doesn’t mean that we aren’t also going to continue to support the UN track here, because we still believe that that is an important part of putting in place a sustainable governing structure, one that the Yemeni people clearly deserve going forward.  So it’s both, it’s both.  And he’s very much focused on both tracks and I think you’re going to continue to see that be the case going forward."
 On March 15, a Saudi airstrike killed at least 106 civilians in northern Yemen... 
On March 14, Inner City Press had asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric:
Inner City Press: on Yemen, there are obviously a lot of reports now that the Saudis are negotiating directly with the Houthis.  This was referred to by some degree by John Kerry in his visit to Saudi Arabia over the weekend.  Where is the envoy?  Is the envoy part of this?  Is this outside the envoy…

Spokesman:  We referred to it, as well, on Thursday or Friday where this is something that the envoy welcomes and has been encouraging for some time.
 But is he involved?
  On March 5 Inner City Press published another exclusive: UN envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed's email to UN Under Secretary General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, which contradicts what envoy Ould Cheikh Ahmed most recently told the Security Council. The email exclusively published by Inner City Press shows flexibility on the Houthi side, with the prospects of meeting in Jordan or Morocco, while the Saudis insist on sending low level representation. The email is published in full, below.
 On March 7, two days after exclusively publishing Envoy IOCA's email to Feltman, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about it. He did not deny the email, instead saying that the envoy is working hard.
 But on March 8, when lead UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric gave a read-out of whom the Envoy met in Riyahd, there were no Houthis mentioned. 
 Inner City Press then asked Dujarric of the multiply-sourced Houthi - Saudi meetings: was Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed not even involved? If he was, why were the Houthis not included in Dujarric's litany of the Envoy's meetings? Vine hereFrom the UN transcript:
Inner City Press: On Yemen, you'd said that the envoy had been in Riyadh.  Yesterday, I'd asked Farhan [Haq] about this email that the envoy had written to Jeff Feltman about his discussions with the Houthis.  And now there's a report that the Houthis are, in fact, now in Riyadh and met at some level with the Saudis.  So, since the Houthis weren't listed in your readout of interlocutors, does he have anything to do with that, or is that a track outside of mediation--

Spokesman Dujarric:  We've seen these reports.  This is something that the Special Envoy has been encouraging for quite some time.  What's your second question?
An hour later in the UN Lobby Inner City Press asked UN OCHA's Stephen O'Brien about what Saudi Arabia's ambassador said March 4, that OCHA does not want a humanitarian access UNSC resolution for Yemen.
  I hadn't seen that, O'Brien politely replied. Inner City Press encouraged him, then, to check it out - the video's on YouTube. Watch this site.
 And dissembling to the Security Council? Likewise, Inner City Press asked Haq about the Saudi Permanent Representative to the UN saying that Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, and senior leadership of Stephen O'Brien's OCHA, privately said no humanitarian access resolution by the Security Council is needed.
  Haq insisted to Inner City Press that what O'Brien said in the open session was his position. But Inner City Press pointed out, O'Brien said the "humanitarian IT equipment" the Saudis seized would be delivered to Aden by March 6 - whereas Haq on March 7 said "later this week."
  Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm or deny at least the delivery of the humanitarian IT equipment, by email since Haq's "squawks" over the press floor public address system don't reach it, with UN DPI Banning ICP from its longtime office (petition here). We'll see.
 Here is the email:
"Dear Jeff, I just completed a 2-day visit in Riyadh and wanted to give you a quick update on how things have developed since my discussions with H/Mohamed AbdelSalam last week in Muscat.
I had a private discussion with both State Minister Mussaeed Al Ayban and Abu Ali where I briefed them on the readiness of the Houthis to resume discrete face-to-face meetings with KSA representatives. While they welcomed the progress made and expressed their commitment to go ahead with this track, they also emphasized that:
i) in light of the progress the Coalition has been making on the ground and their advance toward Sanaa, the Houthis should seize this opportunity and discuss in good faith as they are in a weaker position on the ground and their options are narrowing;
ii) KSA will not consider elevating the level of their representation in the KSA-H talks, as Mohamed AbdelSalam had requested. KSA considers that the 2 representatives they are sending are at the level of Mohammed AbdelSalam and the Houthis should not expect a higher representation at this point;
iii) KSA accepted the proposal of Mohamed AbdelSalam to meet in a third country (Jordan). Mohamed Abe Assalem has suggested to me either Morocco or Jordan as the venue.
 I immediately called Mohemad AbdelSalam from Riyadh to share the outcomes of the meeting. He was going to talk to his leadership and revert to me with a confirmation. If the Houthis accept, the Houthi - KSA meeting could go ahead as early as next week, in Jordan. We of course would not participate nor be present. I have however already started coordination with the Jordan Ambassador to Yemen, as needed.
Although we still do not have an agreement for a new cessation of hostilities, we have continued to press for commitment to the De-Escalation and Coordination Committee (DCC), and a range of economic initiatives (especially in relation to the Central Bank's independence and the reactivation of the Social Welfare Fund).
In my meeting with the GoY delegation, I continued to impress upon them the importance of participation of the GoY in the DCC, and to training which we are planning to organize in Amman during the coming weeks. The UK Ambassador informed me that Foreign Minister and Head of GoY delegation AbdelMalik El Mikhalfi today had responded positively to his suggestion.
There are been positive developments on economic initiatives which I have supported as well. Foreign Minister Mikhalfi participated in the Central Bank board meeting last week in Amman together with the Minister for Finance and the CB Governor. DPM/MoFA Mikhalfi acknowledged that significance of the Governor's attendance from Sanaa and was very grateful for my personal efforts to secure his participation with the Houthis, which was seen by the GoY as an important confidence building measure. Mikhalfi agreed on the necessity of developing further economic initiatives including the support for the SWF and SFD. My office is working with the UNCT, World Bank and IMF in order to ensure a sufficient level of technical support for these proposals.
 I am now in Nouakchott for 4 days where I need to renew my G4 visa and will proceed to New York on 16 February ahead of the SC briefing. I intend to remain in NYC until 22 February in order to meet with key Member States and HQ officials. I plan to also travel to Washington DC 19 February and hold meetings there. I look forward to seeing you in New York in a few days.
Best regards, Ismail."
  The above email was sent on February 11 and contradicts what Ould Cheikh Ahmed told the Security Council; meanwhile Saudi Arabia's Ambassador to the UN told the press on March 4 that envoy IOCA does NOT want a humanitarian access resolution.
 In the UN Security Council on the Yemen sanctions resolution adopted on February 24, language was added to try to discourage the Panel of Experts from looking into the act of the Saudi-led Coalition. Concessions were made, of a kind not made for or about other countries under sanctions.
  (Inner City Press had to follow the process from outside the UN, literally, the park on 43rd Street across First Avenue, because only days after Inner City Press asked why the UN was so quiet about false claims of Iranian military equipment in a UN WFP aid ship, Inner City Press was summarily thrown out of the UN for seeking three weeks earlier to cover an event in the UN Press Briefing Room, and Banned, without due process. Petition here.)
  On March 4 in the same UN Press Briefing Room, Saudi Ambassador to the UN Abdallah Y. Al-Mouallimi held an unscheduled press conference to announce that OCHA, whose Yemen pick up the pieces campaign Saudi Arabia largely funds, does not think there's a need for a humanitarian access resolution. If true, some will say that OCHA has been bought.
 Inner City Press asked al-Mouallimi why his Yemeni counterpart had claimed to Inner City Press, on the record, that the WFP ship the Saudis seized contained "Iranian military equipment"? 
Al-Mouallimi said, among other things, the ship DID come from Iran... and the equipment wasn't on the manifest and was "hidden." 
Inner City Press asked him about cluster bomb use; he denied it and many media printed that quote, without more. Inner City Press asked him, if opposed to the UN Panel of Experts looking into the impacts of the Saudi Coalition, who should do it? This was not answered, except to again emphasize how tied the PoE is to the underlying, one-sided resolution.
 At the end, Inner City Press asked Mouallimi to encourage the Yemen / Hadi delegation to hold its press session in this same UN Press Briefing Room, and not for Gulf and Western UNCA scribes only, a spoonfed breakfast,  see below. Al-Mouallimi said he would convey the request. We'll see.
 On March 1, back in on a reduced access pass, Inner City Press asked UN OCHA official John Ging about taking "aid" money from Saudi Arabia while it blasts away at Yemen. Video here.
 Ging said these two are "ring fenced," and that the UN doesn't allow Saudi Arabia to put conditions on aid or where it is delivered.

  Inner City Press asked, what about the Saudi threat that aid workers should leave Houthi-controlled areas? Ging said the UN had pushed back.
But quietly, as was the case with the Saudi diversion of the WFP ship. Does money talk?  Apparently yes. 

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

On Yemen, Inner City Press Asks US Of Saudi Airstrikes Killing Dozens, Cessation of What?


By Matthew Russell Lee


UNITED NATIONS, March 16 --  When Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson John Kirby about Yemen on March 15, Kirby said "we welcome the fact that there is a cessation of hostilities."
 On March 16, Inner City Press returned and asked Kirby's deputy Mark Toner about the Saudi airstrike in Hajjah, full video here from Minute 56:28; Vine hereUS transcript here:
QUESTION: Inner City Press. I want to ask about Yemen and something about the UN.

MR TONER: Sure.

Inner City Press: On Yemen, yesterday, Mr. Kirby said that we welcome the fact that there’s a cessation of hostilities. And then, as I’m sure you know, there was a big airstrike in Haja province – some people say 41 killed --

MR TONER: Yeah.

Inner City Press: -- some say 107. What do you say to that? And related back to the genocide question, also still on Yemen, Sudan is part of the coalition. Sudan has troops in Yemen with the U.S.-supported coalition. And I’m wondering, how is that – does that – does the genocide finding as to Omar al-Bashir in Darfur have any implication for the U.S. not being part of a coalition or militarily cooperating with a government whose head of state is charged with genocide by the ICC and was found by Colin Powell to --

MR TONER: So to your first question, we’re certainly aware of the reports that civilians may have been killed or injured during a strike, I believe, near a market in Haja province. I can’t at this time – cannot verify the specifics. We remain deeply concerned by the devastating toll of the crisis in Yemen, both in terms of civilian casualties, but also, obviously, in terms of the humanitarian situation that Yemen faces. We urge all sides to comply with obligations under international humanitarian law.

Speaking to the broader peace process, as you know, Secretary Kerry was just there. I was with him over the weekend, as was poor Dave here. And we were on a trip to Saudi Arabia. But one of the things that we discussed – he discussed, rather, with both the Saudi – His Royal Highness King Salman, also the crown prince, and the deputy crown prince as well as Saudi Foreign Minister al-Jubeir – they talked about the need for a political solution to the situation in Yemen. And so we support the UN efforts to that end.

In terms of your second question, I’m actually – I just don’t know the specifics about that or what prohibits us – you’re saying why we would not have been part of this, are we prohibited from taking part in that?

Inner City Press: No, no, I guess I was saying – you were saying that there – or people were saying in this first round that there were some legal implications if you make a finding of genocide. And I don't know if those include not working with --

MR TONER: But I’m not sure whether they pertain to --

Inner City Press: -- the government who --

MR TONER: I’d have to – yeah, I can take that question. I don't know.

QUESTION: Okay. And do you know – just one other – because I think the question was taken yesterday.

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I wanted to ask about this corruption case about the UN. Today, in the Southern District of New York, the former deputy permanent representative of the Dominican Republic pled guilty and has pledged to cooperate against the former president of the General Assembly, John Ashe. I wanted to know the State Department’s position on it, and also on the Government Accountability Project. They wrote a letter – a public letter to the U.S. Mission to the UN urging them to get involved in opposing retaliation by the UN against the press that has been reporting on the corruption scandal. I think that some members of Congress are actually now – but I haven’t seen anything from the State – from the U.S. mission. So I’m wondering, is the State Department aware of the corruption case, and also separately of this GAP letter, and what’s their response to it?

MR TONER: I would imagine we’re aware. I’m not, unfortunately. I apologize we haven’t gotten back to you on that. We’ll take it.

At the March 13 press conference of US Secretary of State John Kerry and his counterparts, French Jean-Marc Ayrault, Italy's Paolo Gentiloni and the foreign minister of Germany, Yemen came up this way, from Kerry:
"We discussed Yemen, where we have agreed to work even more closely together in the next days to explore the possibilities of the political solution, and we both agree that it would be desirable to see if we can find a similar approach as we did in Syria to try to get a ceasefire. So we’re going to continue to work on that quietly, and we have a team of people who are going to continue to be working together to that effect."
Kerry mentioned it only in connection with his talks with Saudi Arabia -- no mention that the Saudis are responsible for two thirds of deaths, according even to the UN's Prince Zeid -- and Al Jazeera, cutting away, mentioned only Syria and Libya. France 24 wasn't even covering the press conference, stuck on an old show about Asia.
  Kerry spoke of medical aid in Syria; Inner City Press has been reporting -- even as the UN Secretariat ousts and harasses it -- on a developing resolution in the UN Security Council. The Saudi Ambassador said UNOCHA does not even want an aid access resolution on Yemen; the UN has not contradicted it.
  France's Ayrault spoke mechanically of support for Ban Ki-moon's envoy on Yemen. But where is he? 
On March 15, Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson John Kirby, from the US transcript:
Inner City Press: I want to ask about Yemen.  I saw the Secretary’s comments when he was in Saudi Arabia about possibility of a ceasefire similar to Syria and something about having teams on the ground working on that.  So I wanted to know – it seems like there’s talks between the Houthis and the Saudis that don’t involve Saleh or even Hadi.  It seems – what’s the U.S.’s – like, what was he referring to?  Is it – does he view direct negotiations between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia as a positive thing?  Is that the ceasefire he’s talking about?  And what’s the role of the UN envoy, who seems not to be part of those talks, and of Mr. Hadi going forward?  Is he the future president of Yemen or is he – has time passed him by?

MR KIRBY:  So there’s a lot there.  There – we still continue to support the UN special envoy and his efforts.  That’s not going to change.  And when the Secretary was in the region over the weekend, Yemen was – as he said, was a significant point of discussion with Saudi leaders.  Nothing has changed about our support for the UN special envoy and his efforts to get a political process going and move forward.  And the United States is going to remain firmly behind that effort.

He also said that we welcome reports that there is a reduction in violence between Houthis and the coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia.  We welcome the fact that there is a cessation of hostilities, quite frankly, that appears to also be holding.  That’s a good thing, because we’ve long said that there needs to be an increased effort by the international community to get humanitarian aid and assistance to so many Yemeni citizens who are in need, and that’s hard to do when there is still violence going on between both sides.

So we welcome this – that development, and we welcome the news that there are discussions between the two sides.  If those discussions can lead to a resolution of the conflict and to a continuation of the reduction of violence, that too is a healthy thing.  But it doesn’t mean that we aren’t also going to continue to support the UN track here, because we still believe that that is an important part of putting in place a sustainable governing structure, one that the Yemeni people clearly deserve going forward.  So it’s both, it’s both.  And he’s very much focused on both tracks and I think you’re going to continue to see that be the case going forward."
 On March 15, a Saudi airstrike killed at least 107 in northern Yemen... 
On March 14, Inner City Press had asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric:
Inner City Press: on Yemen, there are obviously a lot of reports now that the Saudis are negotiating directly with the Houthis.  This was referred to by some degree by John Kerry in his visit to Saudi Arabia over the weekend.  Where is the envoy?  Is the envoy part of this?  Is this outside the envoy…

Spokesman:  We referred to it, as well, on Thursday or Friday where this is something that the envoy welcomes and has been encouraging for some time.
 But is he involved?
  On March 5 Inner City Press published another exclusive: UN envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed's email to UN Under Secretary General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, which contradicts what envoy Ould Cheikh Ahmed most recently told the Security Council. The email exclusively published by Inner City Press shows flexibility on the Houthi side, with the prospects of meeting in Jordan or Morocco, while the Saudis insist on sending low level representation. The email is published in full, below.
 On March 7, two days after exclusively publishing Envoy IOCA's email to Feltman, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about it. He did not deny the email, instead saying that the envoy is working hard.
 But on March 8, when lead UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric gave a read-out of whom the Envoy met in Riyahd, there were no Houthis mentioned. 
 Inner City Press then asked Dujarric of the multiply-sourced Houthi - Saudi meetings: was Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed not even involved? If he was, why were the Houthis not included in Dujarric's litany of the Envoy's meetings? Vine hereFrom the UN transcript:
Inner City Press: On Yemen, you'd said that the envoy had been in Riyadh.  Yesterday, I'd asked Farhan [Haq] about this email that the envoy had written to Jeff Feltman about his discussions with the Houthis.  And now there's a report that the Houthis are, in fact, now in Riyadh and met at some level with the Saudis.  So, since the Houthis weren't listed in your readout of interlocutors, does he have anything to do with that, or is that a track outside of mediation--

Spokesman Dujarric:  We've seen these reports.  This is something that the Special Envoy has been encouraging for quite some time.  What's your second question?
An hour later in the UN Lobby Inner City Press asked UN OCHA's Stephen O'Brien about what Saudi Arabia's ambassador said March 4, that OCHA does not want a humanitarian access UNSC resolution for Yemen.
  I hadn't seen that, O'Brien politely replied. Inner City Press encouraged him, then, to check it out - the video's on YouTube. Watch this site.
 And dissembling to the Security Council? Likewise, Inner City Press asked Haq about the Saudi Permanent Representative to the UN saying that Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, and senior leadership of Stephen O'Brien's OCHA, privately said no humanitarian access resolution by the Security Council is needed.
  Haq insisted to Inner City Press that what O'Brien said in the open session was his position. But Inner City Press pointed out, O'Brien said the "humanitarian IT equipment" the Saudis seized would be delivered to Aden by March 6 - whereas Haq on March 7 said "later this week."
  Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm or deny at least the delivery of the humanitarian IT equipment, by email since Haq's "squawks" over the press floor public address system don't reach it, with UN DPI Banning ICP from its longtime office (petition here). We'll see.
 Here is the email:
"Dear Jeff, I just completed a 2-day visit in Riyadh and wanted to give you a quick update on how things have developed since my discussions with H/Mohamed AbdelSalam last week in Muscat.
I had a private discussion with both State Minister Mussaeed Al Ayban and Abu Ali where I briefed them on the readiness of the Houthis to resume discrete face-to-face meetings with KSA representatives. While they welcomed the progress made and expressed their commitment to go ahead with this track, they also emphasized that:
i) in light of the progress the Coalition has been making on the ground and their advance toward Sanaa, the Houthis should seize this opportunity and discuss in good faith as they are in a weaker position on the ground and their options are narrowing;
ii) KSA will not consider elevating the level of their representation in the KSA-H talks, as Mohamed AbdelSalam had requested. KSA considers that the 2 representatives they are sending are at the level of Mohammed AbdelSalam and the Houthis should not expect a higher representation at this point;
iii) KSA accepted the proposal of Mohamed AbdelSalam to meet in a third country (Jordan). Mohamed Abe Assalem has suggested to me either Morocco or Jordan as the venue.
 I immediately called Mohemad AbdelSalam from Riyadh to share the outcomes of the meeting. He was going to talk to his leadership and revert to me with a confirmation. If the Houthis accept, the Houthi - KSA meeting could go ahead as early as next week, in Jordan. We of course would not participate nor be present. I have however already started coordination with the Jordan Ambassador to Yemen, as needed.
Although we still do not have an agreement for a new cessation of hostilities, we have continued to press for commitment to the De-Escalation and Coordination Committee (DCC), and a range of economic initiatives (especially in relation to the Central Bank's independence and the reactivation of the Social Welfare Fund).
In my meeting with the GoY delegation, I continued to impress upon them the importance of participation of the GoY in the DCC, and to training which we are planning to organize in Amman during the coming weeks. The UK Ambassador informed me that Foreign Minister and Head of GoY delegation AbdelMalik El Mikhalfi today had responded positively to his suggestion.
There are been positive developments on economic initiatives which I have supported as well. Foreign Minister Mikhalfi participated in the Central Bank board meeting last week in Amman together with the Minister for Finance and the CB Governor. DPM/MoFA Mikhalfi acknowledged that significance of the Governor's attendance from Sanaa and was very grateful for my personal efforts to secure his participation with the Houthis, which was seen by the GoY as an important confidence building measure. Mikhalfi agreed on the necessity of developing further economic initiatives including the support for the SWF and SFD. My office is working with the UNCT, World Bank and IMF in order to ensure a sufficient level of technical support for these proposals.
 I am now in Nouakchott for 4 days where I need to renew my G4 visa and will proceed to New York on 16 February ahead of the SC briefing. I intend to remain in NYC until 22 February in order to meet with key Member States and HQ officials. I plan to also travel to Washington DC 19 February and hold meetings there. I look forward to seeing you in New York in a few days.
Best regards, Ismail."
  The above email was sent on February 11 and contradicts what Ould Cheikh Ahmed told the Security Council; meanwhile Saudi Arabia's Ambassador to the UN told the press on March 4 that envoy IOCA does NOT want a humanitarian access resolution.
 In the UN Security Council on the Yemen sanctions resolution adopted on February 24, language was added to try to discourage the Panel of Experts from looking into the act of the Saudi-led Coalition. Concessions were made, of a kind not made for or about other countries under sanctions.
  (Inner City Press had to follow the process from outside the UN, literally, the park on 43rd Street across First Avenue, because only days after Inner City Press asked why the UN was so quiet about false claims of Iranian military equipment in a UN WFP aid ship, Inner City Press was summarily thrown out of the UN for seeking three weeks earlier to cover an event in the UN Press Briefing Room, and Banned, without due process. Petition here.)
  On March 4 in the same UN Press Briefing Room, Saudi Ambassador to the UN Abdallah Y. Al-Mouallimi held an unscheduled press conference to announce that OCHA, whose Yemen pick up the pieces campaign Saudi Arabia largely funds, does not think there's a need for a humanitarian access resolution. If true, some will say that OCHA has been bought.
 Inner City Press asked al-Mouallimi why his Yemeni counterpart had claimed to Inner City Press, on the record, that the WFP ship the Saudis seized contained "Iranian military equipment"? 
Al-Mouallimi said, among other things, the ship DID come from Iran... and the equipment wasn't on the manifest and was "hidden." 
Inner City Press asked him about cluster bomb use; he denied it and many media printed that quote, without more. Inner City Press asked him, if opposed to the UN Panel of Experts looking into the impacts of the Saudi Coalition, who should do it? This was not answered, except to again emphasize how tied the PoE is to the underlying, one-sided resolution.
 At the end, Inner City Press asked Mouallimi to encourage the Yemen / Hadi delegation to hold its press session in this same UN Press Briefing Room, and not for Gulf and Western UNCA scribes only, a spoonfed breakfast,  see below. Al-Mouallimi said he would convey the request. We'll see.
 On March 1, back in on a reduced access pass, Inner City Press asked UN OCHA official John Ging about taking "aid" money from Saudi Arabia while it blasts away at Yemen. Video here.
 Ging said these two are "ring fenced," and that the UN doesn't allow Saudi Arabia to put conditions on aid or where it is delivered.

  Inner City Press asked, what about the Saudi threat that aid workers should leave Houthi-controlled areas? Ging said the UN had pushed back.
But quietly, as was the case with the Saudi diversion of the WFP ship. Does money talk?  Apparently yes. 
ICP Asked About Lorenzo's Bribery, US Cites UN Audit, Not South South News

By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow Up on Exclusives

UNITED NATIONS, March 16 -- For more than six months Inner City Press has asked the UN about its dealings with Frank Lorenzo, former Deputy Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic and head of South South News, who has now formally pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery at the UN.

 Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who had accepted a prize from Lorenzo, has yet to comment; Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric on February 9 told Inner City Press, “I'm done answering questions.” Vine here.

Inner City Press on March 15 asked US State Department spokesperson John Kirby, transcript hereVine herefull video here, from Minute 21:02:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you, there was – today – it was announced today that the deputy ambassador of the Dominican Republic, Frank Lorenzo, is set to plead guilty to bribery charges at the UN. So I wanted to ask, what’s the State Department’s view of that case? Do you view it as just a slip-up in the president of the General Assembly’s office, or is it a reflection of a wider corruption or sale of access at the UN and what the Government Accountability Project also calls retaliation against the press reporting on the case? Do you – what do you make of this case that began in October and is ongoing, the wheels are turning?

MR KIRBY: I’m going to have to take that question. I do not believe I have anything for you on that. So you’re going to have to let me get back to you.

  On the afternoon of March 16, when Inner City Press asked Kirby's deputy Mark Toner the above questions, along with questions on Yemen, Sudan and genocide, a State Department official on background answered Inner City Press:

"Rooting out fraud and corruption, and advancing accountability is a priority for the United States, and has been for many years. In addition to ongoing legal action in the Southern District of New York, we support the Secretary General’s request for an Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) audit of the interaction between the UN and the Global Sustainability Foundation and the Sun Kian Ip Group, and the use of any funds received from these entities. As this matter is under ongoing investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office, as well as by the UN and OIOS, it would be inappropriate to comment further."

  We'll have more on this - for example on what the indictment calls "NGO-1," which is South South News, and about the US and the GAP letter. Watch this site.

  On February 19 Inner City Press was ordered out of the UN, which it has covered for ten years as a Resident Correspondent with a shared office full of files, by a letter signed that day with two hours notice by Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach - who attended the September 2015 South South Awards with Lorenzo, photo here.

  On Gallach's order, and with the participation of Ban's spokesman Dujarric, Inner City Press was thrown out onto First Avenue along with its laptop, but without its passport still in its shared office, by eight UN Security guards.Audio here. On February 22, UN Security told Inner City Press it was Banned from all UN premises.

  After stories in BuzzFeed and Business Insider, Inner City Press re-entered the UN on a much reduced “non-resident correspondent” pass, Banned from covering such events as UN Security Council reform, Sri Lanka and terrorism, and the Office of the President of the General Assembly. (Inner City Press has continued, with sources, to report, for example here.)

  The harassment continued: hours after Inner City Press raised its case orally to Ban Ki-moon and his deputy, UN Security against physically ordered Inner City Press to leave the UN, at 8 pm.  Video here.

Dujarric said it is not his job to find Inner City Press a place to work. Q&A here. More and seemingly final threats were made on March 14 -- just before it emerged that Lorenzo is pleading guilty to bribery charges. Now what?

  The UN has proved itself unable to reform itself. Under Secretaries General Inner City Press contacted about Gallach's outrageous no due process order, and her failure to recuse herself, did nothing. One said, You can only speak with Gallach; another said, I don't get involved in individual cases.

On March 14, after the threats and asked about Inner City Press' detailed email about the violation of its rights as a journalist, a third USG said, Do you expect me to respond to that? Well, yes.

  The DC-based Government Accountability Project wrote to the US Mission to the UN urging them to work to get Inner City Press' resident correspondent accreditation and office restored. But US Ambassador for Management and Reform Isobel Coleman did not even respond to Inner City Press' detailed March 3 email; an oral question to Samantha Power at the UN Security Council stakeout on March 14 after the threats has gone unanswered. Vine here.

  Now what? Beyond Lorenzo's guilty plea, how will the UN be cleaned up? All retaliatory acts must be rescinded and appropriate impartial investigations launched.

The pretext Gallach used to oust Inner City Press was its attempt on January 29 to cover a meeting of the UN Correspondents Association, which took money from Lorenzo's South South News and then granted a photo op with Ban Ki-moon to the main funder, also indicted Ng Lap Seng.

The meeting was in the UN Press Briefing Room, apparently “lent” to UNCA by Ban's spokesman Dujarric, who at UNCA boss Giampaolo Pioli's request came in and told Inner City Press to leave so he could see his “f*cking kids.”

Inner City Press said it would leave the glassed in interpreter's booth from which it was live-streaming the meeting as soon as UN Security asked it to. One guard came in and said that Spokesman Dujarric wanted Inner City Press to leave, which it did, and published a story and video.

  Without once speaking to Inner City Press, Gallach used this “incident” as a pretext to throw Inner City Press out. Inner City Press has asked the UN the following questions:

Please explain the lending of the UN Press Briefing Room to Lorenzo, and that it was not listed in the days' UN Media Alert.

Please explain USG Gallach's appearance with Lorenzo at the South South Awards, which ICP reported, and that USG Gallach did not recuse herself from ordering Inner City Press' expulsion from its UN office on 2 hours' notice on February 19.

Please explain your [Dujarric's] role, on January 29 to February 19, in the expulsion of Inner City Press.

Please state who lend the UN Press Briefing Room to UNCA on Jan 29.

As a matter of UN ethics, shouldn't USG Gallach have offered me an opportunity to be heard, some due process?

As a matter of UN ethics, to whom an the UN Press Briefing Room be "lent," and by whom, on what basis, without disclosure?

Please provide your response: should staff of the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General, and staff of DPI, accept free liquor and other gift from UNCA, while giving UNCA the UN Press Briefing Room and ousting other journalist whom UNCA's leadership doesn't like?

Please state, no or yes and explain: Do staff of the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General provide advance copies of UN documents to favored journalists who are affiliated to UNCA?

And now: “This is a formal request for Ban Ki-moon's comment on the guilty plea for conspiracy to commit bribery etc by Frank Lorenzo.” Watch this site.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

On Burundi Suspending Civil Society Organizations, US State Department Calls It Step Backward, Like Media Shuttering



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 24 -- As killings in Burundi have increased, on November 12, the Security Council adopted a belated resolution on Burundi. (Inner City Press put the full text online here, and here in French.) Afterward Inner City Press asked UK Ambassador Rycroft, the President of the Council for November what steps would actually be needed to send any peacekeepers from MONUSCO in DR Congo (he said there are discussions).

Inner City Press managed to ask French Permanent Representative Francois Delattre why UN Peacekeeping keeping using and paying for Burundian troops and police in the Central African Republic (a Press question both the UK and US Ambassador Samantha Power have seen fit to respond to.) Delattre declined to answer - but more politely than his deputy had, here.

In Burundi, the Pierre Nkurunziza government has taken to suspending and freezing the bank accounts of civil society groups, not only political but even medical. On November 23 the Press asked the US State Department about Burundi's move, but its deputy spokesperson had no comment at the time or in response to that and another written question.

On November 24, State Department Deputy Spokesperson Mark Toner returned with this: "We can confirm that the government of Burundi has suspended the activities and frozen the accounts of multiple local civil society organizations in what is a clear step backward in pursuit of peace and dialogue in Burundi. We want to see an open, unfettered and comprehensive political dialogue take place there in which all voices are heard. That remains the only credible route to stability and and effort to achieve consensus and forge a peaceful path forward for Burundi's people.

"As the crisis deepens, and media outlets of course continue to be shuttered and repression of civil society is the exact opposition of what needs to happen."

Also on November 24, Inner City Press asked the UN again about the CSOs' suspensions; the UN spokesman's reply was about Ban Ki-moon's special adviser traveling to the African Union and elsewhere before returning to advise the Security Council.

On November 23, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric,video heretranscript here:

Inner City Press: in Burundi, the Government has suspended and frozen the bank accounts of a number of civil society organizations, including the one run by Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, who you’ve spoken about from this podium before.  What’s the UN’s response to basically shutting down civil society and…?

Spokesman:  I think it’s clear that every society needs a healthy civil society, needs room for civil society.  The Secretary-General has spoken out on that repeatedly.  As for Burundi, Mr. [Jamal] Benomar is arriving in Burundi today, or as we speak.  He will have meetings there, which we hope to be able to report back [to] you.  And this is part of the mandate given to the Secretariat by the Security Council to report back, which we will in due course.

Inner City Press:  And I don’t know if you’ll comment on this, but this morning, the Obama administration announced targeted sanctions on those contributing to the ongoing crisis in Burundi, unquote.  Do you think that’s a useful move?

Spokesman:  I haven’t seen that report.

  When the UN Peacebuilding Commission Burundi Configuration met on November 18 it was it was to hear from Swiss Permanent Representative Lauber about his trip to the region, including three days in Bujumbura. He described a climate of fear -- while adding that Burundians are resilient -- and of a 10 pm curfew. He quoted the World Bank that the government has cut health spending; he said he aim to return to the country in January or February. What will the situation be them?

  Burundi's Permanent Representative Shingiro responded that the problems are caused by opposition outside of the country and “the media” within. He stated that Lauber had a meeting of confident with Pierre Nkurunziza, November 11 at noon for 45 minutes. He said the specter of genocide is a “tactic of the radical opposition abroad.”

   US Deputy Permanent Representative David Pressman called out authorities' hate speech in the country, as did UK Deputy Permanent Representative Peter Wilson. When it came the turn of France, the penholder on Burundi in the Security Council, to speak, neither Permanent Representative Francois Delattre nor his Deputy Alexis Lamek was there. There are two explanations, not mutual exclusive.

  At the day's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked the UN about those trying to flee not being allowed to leave the country and, on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, about Shingiro's comment about the media. During the briefing, a statement came in from civil society on Burundi, signed by Vital Nshimirimana, naming hate speech and even the training of the ruling party's militia the Imbonerakure at Kiliba -Ondes in Eastern DRC, on which Herve Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping never acted. Plus ca change.

On November 13, the spokesperson for the Pierre Nkurunziza's government issued a response to the resolution, saying that it "toes the line" of the Government and that the problems in the country are "nothing other than poverty," here.



  On the evening of November 11, the UN Spokesperson's office announced that there would be a formal Security Council meeting on Burundi at 12:15 pm on November 12, that would be to approve the draft resolution. An unnamed official of Herve Ladsous UN Peacekeeping -- wonder who that could be -- got Reuters to retype without analysis the idea the UN would send peacekeepers from "Congo" - that would be DRC -- into Burundi.

 UNasked by Reuters, actively covered up, is that Ladsous' MONUSCO has been unable or unwilling to protect civilians in parts of the Eastern DRC, and has refused to neutralize the Hutu FDLR militia. So it would take on Pierre Nkurunziza's forces and youth wing in Burundi?

  This youth wing was allowed by MONUSCO to train in Eastern Congo; nothing was said by MONUSCO when DRC detained a Burundian journalist. None of this in the Reuters, or AFP, or even more derivative Voice of America story. But to retain this "access," these media do not report when the UN's Herve Ladsous, on camera, links peacekeeper rapes to "R&R." Video here. This is a scam. Watch this site.

  While the November 9 meeting was still ongoing, the UN announced that French Permanent Representative Francois Delattre would address the press in ten minutes. But when it happened it was the French Mission's deputy Alexis Lamek, moderated by the Mission's spokesman Thierry Caboche.

After bragging about a draft resolution French belatedly circulated, Lamek and his spokesperson twice refused to take a Press question about UN Peacekeeping still using the same Bururdian forces accused of the abuses. NewVine here. New video, with UK contrast, here.

 The French mission spokesperson, after calling on Reuters, called on Agence France Presse. Inner City Press said, please answer why Herve Ladsous - the fourth French head of UN Peacekeeping in a row - uses Burundian troops in Central African Republic, giving them extensions to bring the right equipment (the government, sources say, takes the money.)

 "Ask him," Lamek said off camera, referring to Ladsous who repeatedlyrefuses Press questions on this (and on covering up French Sangaris forces rapes in CAR.)


  Moments later when Inner City Press asked UK Deputy Ambassador Peter Wilson if the UN should keep using Burundian troops or vet them, Wilson called this a "big issues" that "needs to be looked at." Audio including Elements to the Press, here. Fast transcript by InnerCityPro.com, here:

Inner City Press asked, the UN uses Burundian peacekeepers in CAR. Is there, or could there be, some review of that?

UK Deputy Peter Wilson: "on peacekeepers, I think this is a big issue, and I think it’s something certainly that needs to be looked at in a wider context of what response we take to the events in Burundi right now. I wouldn’t urge precipitate action on that, but I think it’s one of the issues that we need collectively to consider."

 Strange then, that the penholding on Burundi and controller of UN Peacekeeping wouldn't even take the questions. The history of the Great Lakes runs deep. More recently, Inner City Press is informed is belated discussion among Security Council Permanent Five members that Ladsous is a liability, should or can he even be allowed to stay on to the end of Ban Ki-moon's term.

 On November 10, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric,video heretranscript here:

Inner City Press: I'll do Burundi first as a follow-up to that.  Yesterday at the stakeout, Peter Wilson of the UK said that the issue of continued or… or service of Burundian peacekeepers, particularly those involved in the violence in UN peacekeeping, is a big issue, is something that needs to be looked at in the wider context of the response to the events in Burundi right now.  Since… I think I've previously asked you about… my understanding is the Under-Secretary-General of Peacekeeping waived Burundi not having the right equipment twice in a row in CAR.  I wanted you to describe, if you could, what is the process, one, for vetting individuals that come out of the… what you described as a… big violence in Burundi, but also of giving these waivers.  Is this something that's done unilaterally by the Secretariat?

Spokesman:  I'm not… I can't speak to the waivers because I can't… I don't know if what you say is, in fact, a fact.

Inner City Press:  Can… can… is the meeting in September…? [Inner City Press actually referred to Ladsous' September meeting with Burundi, on which it reported.]

Spokesman:  As far as… as far as Burundian troops, they continue to serve in the Central African Republic and other missions, if I'm not mistaken.  They are rotated through the standard human rights vetting process, which involves the UN, which involves the government, which involves the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and which involves the more… the broader human rights community.

Inner City Press:  What about the issue of… there have been several complaints by the peacekeepers themselves of not getting paid leaving some in Burundi to say, in fact, this is a way in which the UN is subsidizing the Government and the very activities that Mr. Zeid was condemning yesterday?  What steps are taken to ensure that the money reaches the peacekeepers?

Spokesman:  Obviously, it is critical whether it's in the case of Burundi if it, in fact, happens or other countries that individual peacekeepers receive the monies that are owed to them.

Inner City Press:  But Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous right here in September said that he's… that he's not sure whether this money reaches soldiers.  So what steps does the UN take, particularly in a case like Burundi, where you're accusing the Government of cracking down on the people, what steps are taken?

Spokesman:  As I said, I think it's incumbent on the governments to ensure that their soldiers get paid.  Did you have another question?

 

 At the November 9 meeting, Burundi's Nyamitwe droned on by video by Bujumbura, even as Security Council President Matthew Rycroft asked him to bring it to an end. He continued speaking as the other speakers on video -- Prince Zeid, Adama Dieng, Swiss Ambassador Lauber -- squirmed, seeming like the audience to wonder if Rycroft would just cut his mic (he didn't.)

  Inner City Press immediately put online that speech, and that of Uganda's Ambassador Nduhuura and the African Union's Tete Antonio, here.

 On November 7 came reports of killings, including it was said a UN system staff member. This has been confirmed by UNDP - but only the local Buurndi office. Still from the UN, nothing. The Security Council issued a Press Statement on November 7... about Libya.

  Burundian journalist Blaise Célestin Ndihokubwayo has been arrested and sent to the Service national de renseignement (SNR). Where is UNESCO and its director, who wants to be the next UN Secretary General?

On October 23 Inner City Press asked UN Ambassador Matthew Rycroft about the status of the draft Presidential Statement in the UN Security Council. He said there are differing views, but the UK is concerned about the "threat of genocide." Video here.  On November 3, Inner City Press again put a Burundi questions to Rycroft, now President of the Security Council for November. Video herestory here.

The son of human rights defender Pierre Claver Mbonimpa has reportedly been murdered, after Pierre Nkurunziza tweeted that "No one living abroad should consider himself superior to those who stayed in Burundi, since most of them have left their families here."

 On November 6, a belated Security Council meeting on Burundi was announced -- from Paris, by French foreign ministry spokesperson Romain Nadal. Why the delay? Why announced in that way?

Later on November 6, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon (whose spokesman could not tell Inner City Press if Ban will have any representative in the Security Council's meeting on Monday) put out this statement.

 Inner City Press at the November 6 UN noon briefing asked how these concerns were consistent with Ban deferring to the Ugandan Defense Minister (for the EAC, Ban's spokesman pointed out), and asked if Ban will even have a representative briefing the UN Security Council on Monday. UNclear. Video here.

  The US' Tom Perriello, filmed at the State Department, noted the weekend deadline. But why then was the UN Security Council meeting left until after the deadline?
 
  US Ambassador Samantha Power put out this statement, here.

  Behind the continued killing, here's an issue: Inner City Press is informed that a number of Burundian civil society leaders and journalists have improperly been flagged to Interpol as if their passports had been stolen. This has made it impossible, for example, for Vital Nshimirimana to travel to a speak about the crisis in Burundi at a conference in (Ban Ki-moon's native) South Korea.

  Inner City Press on November 4 asked the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights' Ivan Simonovic and UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this.  Interpol often brags at the UN how it is useful on the issue of foreign fighters. It's Secretary General Jurgen Stock spoke before the UN Security Council on May 29, 2015. But what about when Interpol is misused by a government like Pierre Nkurunziza? What do it, the Security Council and its members do that? Watch this site.

 On November 2 Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about two speeches given in Burundi (the full text of one is below). Video hereUN transcript here:

Inner City Press: In Burundi, there was a speech by the President of the Senate [Révérien Ndikuriyo] saying that opposition neighborhoods may be razed [or raided. Some] people are calling it a genocide speech.  There's also a speech by the President, saying anyone who doesn't disarm within the next five days will be treated as an enemy of the State.  So, I'm wondering, not to overdo it, but things seem pretty serious.  I wanted to know:  what is the UN doing?

Spokesman:  "It's clear that those in position of power, whether in Government or in the opposition, have a responsibility not to incite fear or hate of any kind.  I think that's very important and that whatever security measures the Government takes fully comply with international law and respect for the right of people to freely assemble and protest."

 After Burundi was elected to the UN Human Rights Council with 162 votes on October 28, on October 31 security forces in Burundi opened fire on a funeral procession in Buringa, killing many.  These are the Burundian forces that UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous keeps in service, offering waivers while the Government keeps the payments?

  It is reported the Burundian authorities are accusing a medical NGO of offering treatment to insurgents, and are ready to attack. Frankly, the weak UN Security Council Presidential Statement which France belatedly proffered in the Council, then didn't even hold a question and answer stakeout about, is woefully insufficient, as is the UN Secretariat's response.

 Now from Burundi this speech

https://soundcloud.com/journ-burundi/reverien-ndikuriyo-le-pdt-du-senat-illegitime-promet-de-raser-des-quartiers-de-la-capitale

 On October 28, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about another threat. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: this is a tweet from the official account of Pierre Nkurunziza, President of Burundi:  "No one living abroad should consider himself superior to those who stayed in Burundi since most of them have left their families here."  So people see this as an open-source threat to retaliate against the families of those who have fled the country.  And I'm wondering…

Spokesman:  I haven't seen the tweet.  I shall look at it.

 Inner City Press showed it to him on his way out. Earlier on October 28, Burundi got 162 votes for the UN Human Rights Council, less than the other also unopposed candidates, but still enough to get on the Council. The UN Security Council had just issued a Presidential Statement, here, which gave weight to the Museveni "mediation," and which the US later "welcomed."Usually it's the penholder (France) which speaks. But not here, not on Burundi (see Ladsous, below).

  On October 28 Burundi was poised for election to the UN Human Rights Council, as one of five African Group candidates for five seats. Meanwhile on October 26, the European Union adopted the letter to President Pierre Nkurunziza that Inner City Press asked the UN about last week, here.

  Can EU members on October 28 not vote against Burundi's "Human Rights" Council candidacy at this time? And other Western NGOs coming to the UN early this week to set forth their positions, will they just phone it in with regard to Burundi? Watch this site.

 Also on October 23, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask on Burundi, just this morning the UK Ambassador said that the UK is concerned of a threat of genocide, is the word that he used, so I'm wondering under Rights Up Front what are your thoughts about Burundi and what the UN or the Secretariat can do.

SG Ban: "On this genocide issues, I hope there should be some creative investigations by the relevant experts and there should be, first of all, a clear understanding and investigations.  And if the conclusion is that there were such kind of genocide issues, then there should be accountability, justice must prevail and perpetrators must be brought to justice."

  But what is the UN Secretariat DOING about it?


  On October 16 Inner City Press asked Haq if the UN thinks the government can investigate itself. This was based on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's October 15 statement that

"The Secretary-General condemns the killing of nine civilians and two police officers in Bujumbura on 13 October... He urges Burundian authorities to undertake a rigorous and prompt investigation into the circumstances and motives behind these despicable crimes in order to ensure that their perpetrators are brought to justice."

  So can the Nkurunziza government investigate itself (as the UN purports to be investigating or "auditing" itself in the wake of corruption revelation about former Presidnet of the General Assembly John Ashe among others)? Inner City Press asked this question (video here) as well as following up on this, from October 13:

Inner City Press: the Burundi question is one that maybe you can check with DPKO [Department of Peacekeeping Operations].  Burundian human rights activists say that an officer, Jerome Ntibogora, N-t-i-b-o-g-o-r-a, who was accused of being involved in killing people in a… in a hospital after they fled from the Government, has now been deployed to MINUSMA [United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission] in Mali.  So I wanted to…

Spokesman Dujarric:  Let's see what we can find out.

  Dujarric did not come back with an answer, by this deputy when Inner City Pres asked again on October 16 said he, Ntibogora is not being deployed. We'll see - watch this site.

Amid crackdowns in Burundi by security forces, and allegations of sexual abuse by Burundian peacekeepers serving under the UN flag, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous on October 1 held a meeting with Burundian Vice President Joseph Butore.

  Inner City Press has already tweeted a photograph of the meeting, but has now received the complete UN read-out, which raises more questions about Ladsous.

   On the crackdown, Ladsous assured Butore that he has a “pragmatic approach” and is of no mind to question what happens in any country, does not involve himself in "domestic affairs."

   On the sexual abuse allegations, Ladsous spoke only in platitudes, without requiring or even inquiring into any actions taken by the Burundians on the alleged abuse.

   Even though Burundi was already given a “grace period” to bring appropriate equipment into the Central African Republic for the MINUSCA mission, they have not done so. In the meeting, according to the read-out, Butore "acknowledged" the substandard equipment.

   Butore requested, and Ladsous for now granted, yet another extension to bring the requirement equipment -- until March 2016 for light equipment, and to June 2016 for heavy equipment.



  Is this safe - even for the Burundian soldiers at issue? While speaking through press releases, Ladsous' spokespeople, far from answering questions, go so far as to direct UNTV boom microphone operators to avoid Inner City Press, even preventing the Press from asking any questions to Mali's Foreign Minister Abdulaye Diop. We'll have more on all this.