On Ukraine, IMF's Lagarde Talks With Poroshenko About Corruption

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 10 -- The International Monetary Fund's Christine Lagarde earlier this Wednesday said:

"“I am concerned about Ukraine’s slow progress in improving governance and fighting corruption, and reducing the influence of vested interests in policymaking. Without a substantial new effort to invigorate governance reforms and fight corruption, it is hard to see how the IMF-supported program can continue and be successful. Ukraine risks a return to the pattern of failed economic policies that has plagued its recent history. It is vital that Ukraine's leadership acts now to put the country back on a promising path of reform.”

  Hard to see, indeed. But later on Wednesday, Lagarde said:

"I had a constructive discussion with President Petro Poroshenko on issues raised by my press statement this morning.

“The President reassured me of his unwavering commitment to reforms, including improving governance and fighting corruption. We agreed on the principle of a roadmap of actions and priority measures to ensure prompt progress under the program, which will help keep Ukraine on a path toward robust and sustainable growth."

 Back on January 14 when the IMF last held its biweekly briefing, Inner City Press submitted a number of questions, leading with Burundi and whether the Nkurunziza government's "income" from sending troops to Somalia and Central African Republic should be disclosed in the budget.

  IMF spokesperson Gerry Rice read out Inner City Press' question then referred to the IMF's March 2015 sixth review, saying the government had committed to include the income from peacekeeping operations in the budget. Rice then said due to deterioration in the security situation, the seventh and eight reviews are not possible and the program is "off track."

  On January 14 the IMF's Rice also noted the US Congress having approved quota reform (answering that he was not aware of any new oversight this might trigger), and said that Managing Director Lagarde will hold Greece meetings in Davos. Rice declined to answer ICP's question on Nigeria, saying much has been said on the topic; a Trinidad and Tobago question remained outstanding as the embargo time expired, but Inner City press was later on January 14 told on Trinidad and Tobago, the IMF's engagement with the country is one of economic policy advice or what we call surveillance. There is no program nor any talk of that, Inner City Press was told.

  Back on December 5, 2015, Inner City Press also asked the IMF about Burundi (and Zambia), and Rice said following as to Burundi, audio here:

“In terms of the outlook in Burundi, it's effected by the decline in economic activity there and the . withdrawal of donor support. Confidence in the economy has been weakened by the political climate and adverse security developments. The growth rate in Burundi, which we had initially projected 5% in 2015, is now estimated at minus 4.1% in real terms.... In the current environment, completion of the 7th and the 8th review under our program there is not possible and as such, Burundi's program with the IMF, which is an ECF arrangement, is now off track.”

  Inner City Press had also asked, on Zambia, it is reported that the IMF “proposed a $1 billion facility which the president had turned down. A sticking point for the president was the insistence by the IMF that government commit to drastic reductions in expenditure, particularly on road construction.” What is the IMF's response?

   Rice said that no program has been “formally” requested, but that the Zambian authorities committed to “internal consultations.” Inner City Press had asked about Sri Lanka, and the same “no formal request yet” answer was given.Audio here.
 Inner City Press also asked about Malawi and, lastly, Ghana; more on this to follow.

On October 29, Inner City Press asked IMF spokesperson Rice “in Jamaica, the National Democratic Movement has blamed the IMF for the country's 'health-care system becoming a national disgrace.' What is the IMF's response?”

  Rice during the IMF's embargoed briefing read out this question, audio here, and said he does not agree, that Jamaica's 2015-16 budget includes an increase for the Ministry of Health. Audio of full answer here.

  The IMF left unanswered, for now, Inner City Press' question about Antigua and Barbuda, below; there will be more about Dominica.

 The IMF, it seems, should be more responsive: the Gleaner for example opines that “in 2014, Jamaica paid $138 million more to the IMF than it received from it. We are constantly being told Jamaica passed the IMF test. Look at the punitive primary surplus imposed on Jamaica. At 7.5%, it is way above what is being asked of any other country in the IMF program. It is 4% for Cyprus, 3% for Ireland, 3% for Greece, 3% for Portugal and a puny 1% for Ukraine. One has to wonder why Jamaica is being treated this way.”

  Here are two other questions Inner City Press submitted on October 29, still without answer:

On Antigua & Barbuda, in light of recent comments by IMF Mission Chief Arnold McIntyre, what is the IMF's view of and comment on the information in the US FBI's charge sheet and indictment of Antigua's former ambassador (and former UN PGA) John Ashe, particularly with regard to corruption in the country?

In light of the UN Special Rapporteur's report on human rights (non) compliance by the World Bank, presented this week at the UN, please summarize how the IMF considers the human rights impacts on its decisions.

  We'll have more on this.

  Back on July 8 when the International Monetary Fund released reviews and papers about the United States, complete with support of the Dodd Frank Act and mentions of anti money laundering protection Inner City Press asked about the proposal to raise the definition of Systemically Important Financial Institution from $50 billion up to $500 billion and if tight AML strictures are to blame for cutting off remittances to Somalia.

  Aditya Narain, IMF mission chief for the Financial Sector Assessment Program and deputy director, Monetary and Capital Markets department, told Inner City Press that the IMF believes such definition should give predictability, but should be based on risk and not necessarily only asset size.

  Narain told Inner City Press, "On the first one, our general belief is that supervisory approaches should be risk based, and therefore the materiality and proportionality of institutions should be taken into account for to develop supervisory frameworks. At the same time, we also recognize that it’s important to have some clear rules, regarding a unit, in this case size of institutions, because not only does it set a baseline of expectations, but it also provides a useful framework for people to anchor their expectations on. So that’s why, in a sense we would agree that it’s important to make these approaches risk based and therefore not dependent on size alone. I should add also, that our only political ideology is financial stability, for the purpose of this exercise.

  But will this be used FOR the Senator Richard Shelby draft bill?

  On remittances, Aditya Narain said it is an important question but one that the IMF is dealing with in other venues; it apparently wasn't raised to the US during this process. Why not?

 Narain told Inner City Press, "On the regulatory question, this is an issue which is being discussed in several forums where the IMF has been participating, and this is an issue not just for the US, although it has been most discussed in the context of the US, but the effects of the AML on remittances and the result, the stringent adherence to standards has led to a concern more globally that might be affecting the flow of remittances to those jurisdictions... where such remittances and the channels through which they flow are more important. We have not discussed this... there is work ongoing in the Fund, including in collaboration with other institutions like the World Bank... and we expect to be able to have more information on this in a few months time."

   In the embargoed media conference call, two questions in a row went to the Financial Times, which opined that the IMF report takes the side of the Democratic Party. The IMF disagreed. The IMF said, in writing, “As the epicenter of the global financial crisis that began in 2008, the United States passed a major law in 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act, to reform its financial system. Officials need to complete the rulemaking under the law, while parts of reform agenda face legislative proposals to water them down.”

   Central Banking asked two questions and Reuters one, on federal insurance regulation.  Watch this site.

On Ukraine's Request for DPKO, UN Official Jeffrey Feltman on March 6 Told UN Security Council, No Formal Request - But There Was a Feb 23 Letter to UNSG

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 13 -- When UN Under Secretary General Jeffrey Feltman addressed the UN Security Council about Ukraine on March 6, he told the members about 

“President Poroshenko's February 17 statement noting that Ukraine will be requesting a possible deployment of a UN-mandated peace mission to Ukraine. Subsequent to that, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Klimkin held discussions with the Secretary-General, Under Secretary General Ladsous and myself on this issue. We informed the Foreign Minister that it was a decision for the members of this Council and that the Secretariat would be guided by its decision. To date, no formal request has been received from Ukraine.”

  But on March 13, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said, of Ukrainian statement that they HAVE requested UN peacekeepers 

"there was a letter sent to the Secretary General on February 23. Our reaction to that letter is what we've been saying publicly, that the deployment of UN peace operations  requires a resolution and decision by the UN Security Council."

  So the UN didn't disclose the February 23 letter requesting peacekeepers because they wouldn't grant it, so it wasn't a "formal" request?

  Inner City Press asked Dujarric on March 13 about his statement, and Feltman's on March 6. Dujarric said he would check the dates.

  Beyond militating for a Freedom of Information Act for the UN, the Free UN Coalition for Access believes that the UN or at least its Office of the Secretary General should presumptively disclose such letters that it receives, at least unless the submitted requests confidential treatment. We'll have more on this.

    

Day Into Ukraine Ceasefire, Ban Ki-moon Says It Largely Holds, But No UN Security Council Vote

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 15 -- As the midnight ceasefire deadline approached, Ukraine's President Poroshenko broadcast from Kiev, and CNN from Mariupol, praising the Azov Battalion. 

  Some in the media seems disappointed the ceasefire wasn't immediately broken. Al Jazeera put on an analyst from the Rand Corporation prediction Russia would break it.

   Twenty two hours later -- with the UN Security Council yet to act on a draft resolution about the deal in Minsk, see below -- UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon put out this statement:

"The Secretary-General welcomes the start of a cease-fire in eastern Ukraine as agreed on 12 February under the package of measures for implementation of the Minsk accords.

"He notes that the cease-fire appears to be largely holding, giving a desperately needed respite to civilians trapped in the area and contributing to a swift and peaceful resolution of the conflict. However, the Secretary-General is seriously concerned over reports of continued instances of hostilities including in Debaltseve and reiterates his call for all parties to abide by the cease-fire without exception.

"The Secretary-General reminds all of the significance of the cease-fire, which forms the basis for the broader implementation of the Minsk accords and to restore peace and stability to Ukraine."

  At the UN Security Council on Sunday, February 15, there was a vote on Yemen, here, but not on Ukraine. Why not? Malaysia's Permanent Representative told the Press that he had proposed adding language about downed flight MH17 and was waiting for a response from Moscow. Some said this would come on Monday - also a holiday -- at 10 am. We'll see.

  Late on February 14, a Senior US State Department Official provided this read-out:

"In a conversation with FM Lavrov today, the Secretary [Kerry] underscored the importance of full implementation of the Minsk agreements, beginning with a full ceasefire at midnight tonight local time. He also expressed concern about the fierce fighting around Debaltseve, and efforts by Russia and the separatists to cut off the town in advance of the ceasefire. They also discussed negotiations in New York on a draft UNSCR welcoming  the Minsk agreements, as well as Syria."

  The Russian proposed resolution on the "Package of measures for the implementation of the Minsk agreements" is "in blue," and could be voted on Sunday, February 15 at 10 am in New York, as Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access reported on Friday, here. There is also a (GCC drafted) resolution on Yemen.

On February 13, Inner City Press asked Ukraine's Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev about the IMF deal and the border, video here.

Back on January 23 the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights spoke, belatedly, on pension and travel restrictions imposed by the authorities in Kiev.

  On January 30, Inner City Press asked Ukrainian Permanent Representative to the UN Yuriy Sergeyev about the OHCHR and UN High Commissioner for Refugees' criticisms, about Kiev's requests to the International Monetary Fund and its relationship with the Syriza party in Greece.

  Sergeyev started with this last, saying he understands Syriza has changed its position and will be visiting Kiev. Sergeyev referred to maintaining EU "solidarity." On the IMF, he said Ukraine's new Finance Minister has predicted the country will receive a new tranche from the IMF by the end of February.

  On pensions, Sergeyev said they were cut off because money cannot be delivered into zones not under government control; he said pensioners can receive their money if they leave the zone. But aren't there restrictions?

 On January 23 the OHCHR on pension and benefit payments, on which Inner City Press has reported on since November, said 

"the impact on civilians of the recent decision by the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine to restrict movement in and out of the areas controlled by armed groups. As of 21 January, people traveling to and from these areas need to obtain special passes and provide documents to justify the need to travel. These limitations are worrying, especially in light of the escalating hostilities. It adds to concerns created by the Government decision in November 2014 to discontinue providing State services in the territories controlled by armed groups. The introduction of such restrictions will likely have a severe effect on the most vulnerable groups, such as older people, mothers with children and people with disabilities who may depend heavily on social benefits. We urge Ukrainian authorities to take immediate steps to redress this situation."

  But will they? UNHCR, the UN's refugee agency, added on January 23 that

  “New security clearance procedures are put in place and specific documentation is now required to pass through checkpoints in the east of Ukraine. These new procedures apply to Ukrainian nationals, the United Nations, NGOs, national and some other international humanitarian organizations.

   “These restrictions on movements within Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the east of the country further complicates an already difficult situation for those forcibly displaced and made worse by the intensified fighting we have seen in recent days,” the UNHCR briefing notes said. “These practices restrict access to non-government controlled areas and limit the delivery of needed humanitarian assistance into the conflict zones. The Ukrainian government has reportedly adopted this resolution which entered into force yesterday (Thursday 22 January) limiting all movements in and out of the conflict zones."

   Christine Lagarde has announced that "the Ukrainian authorities have requested a multi-year arrangement with the Fund, supported by the Extended Fund Facility, to replace the existing Stand-By Arrangement."

   Back on November 12, UN Assistant Secretary General Jens Toyberg-Frandzen said, among other things, that "on November 5, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk announced that pensions would be halted to areas under rebel control."

  Inner City Press, covering the meeting from just outside the Council chamber, spoke to a range of passing diplomats and was left with this question: isn't the halting of pensions to rebel held areas a form of collective punishment?

 Once posed, with the words "accrued pensions," two defenses of the practice came in. First, that pensions in Ukraine are not accrued but are based on taxes collected and none are being collected in Donbas. Second, that trucks with pension payments were being robbed.  The word "Western Union" was bandied around.

 And so it goes at the UN.

  Last October, Ukraine was scheduled to speak at the UN about its “Committee on Information” on October 21, but as UN speeches usually go longer than allowed, its turn was postponed until October 22.

That didn't stop the “UN Radio” Russian service from reporting on the speech on October 21 as if it had in fact been given that day. As translated, UN Radio on October 21 reported

“The representative of Ukraine accused Russia of using the information strategy of the Cold War

“One of the main prerequisites of violence in Ukraine became a propaganda information. This was stated by the representative of the Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, speaking at a meeting of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly.”

  The UN's Fourth Committee did meet on October 21 - but Ukraine didn't speak. Instead it was the first speaker on the afternoon of October 22. Its speech, delivered in perfect French including the word “rigolo,” linked Russia to Joseph Goebbels.

  In reply, the Russian mission's spokesman brought up the recent Human Rights Watch report of the Ukrainian government using cluster bombs in and against Donetsk, and the lack of clarity on who called the snipers shots in Maidan Square.

  Later in the Fourth Committee meeting, Bolivia slammed “powers” who use information technology to intervene and violate privacy, bringing to mind USAID's “Cuban Twitter” and, of course, the NSA.

  Then Jordan said it was first among Arab nations to enact an Access to Information law, in 2007. The Free UN Coalition for Access has been pressing for a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, click here and here for that.

  FUNCA covers the Fourth Committee, including on Decolonization, and the Committee on Information, where at least theoretically the UN's descent into censorship could be raised and resolved. The old UN Correspondents Association, a part of this trend toward privatization of briefings and even censorship -- ordering Press articles off the Internet, getting leaked copies of their complaints to the UN's MALU banned from Google's search, here -- was nowhere to be seen. We'll have more on this.

   

Past Ukraine Ceasefire Deadline, Kerry & Lavrov Talk UN Security Council Draft and Syria - But Yemen Not Mentioned

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 14 -- As the midnight ceasefire deadline approached, Ukraine's President Poroshenko broadcast from Kiev, and CNN from Mariupol, praising the Azov Battalion. 

  Some in the media seems disappointed the ceasefire wasn't immediately broken. Al Jazeera put on an analyst from the Rand Corporation prediction Russia would break it.

  A Senior US State Department Official provided this read-out:

"In a conversation with FM Lavrov today, the Secretary [Kerry] underscored the importance of full implementation of the Minsk agreements, beginning with a full ceasefire at midnight tonight local time. He also expressed concern about the fierce fighting around Debaltseve, and efforts by Russia and the separatists to cut off the town in advance of the ceasefire. They also discussed negotiations in New York on a draft UNSCR welcoming  the Minsk agreements, as well as Syria."

  The Russian proposed resolution on the "Package of measures for the implementation of the Minsk agreements" is "in blue," and could be voted on Sunday, February 15 at 10 am in New York, as Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access reported on Friday, here. There is also a (GCC drafted) resolution on Yemen.

On February 13, Inner City Press asked Ukraine's Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev about the IMF deal and the border, video here.

Back on January 23 the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights spoke, belatedly, on pension and travel restrictions imposed by the authorities in Kiev.

  On January 30, Inner City Press asked Ukrainian Permanent Representative to the UN Yuriy Sergeyev about the OHCHR and UN High Commissioner for Refugees' criticisms, about Kiev's requests to the International Monetary Fund and its relationship with the Syriza party in Greece.

  Sergeyev started with this last, saying he understands Syriza has changed its position and will be visiting Kiev. Sergeyev referred to maintaining EU "solidarity." On the IMF, he said Ukraine's new Finance Minister has predicted the country will receive a new tranche from the IMF by the end of February.

  On pensions, Sergeyev said they were cut off because money cannot be delivered into zones not under government control; he said pensioners can receive their money if they leave the zone. But aren't there restrictions?

 On January 23 the OHCHR on pension and benefit payments, on which Inner City Press has reported on since November, said 

"the impact on civilians of the recent decision by the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine to restrict movement in and out of the areas controlled by armed groups. As of 21 January, people traveling to and from these areas need to obtain special passes and provide documents to justify the need to travel. These limitations are worrying, especially in light of the escalating hostilities. It adds to concerns created by the Government decision in November 2014 to discontinue providing State services in the territories controlled by armed groups. The introduction of such restrictions will likely have a severe effect on the most vulnerable groups, such as older people, mothers with children and people with disabilities who may depend heavily on social benefits. We urge Ukrainian authorities to take immediate steps to redress this situation."

  But will they? UNHCR, the UN's refugee agency, added on January 23 that

  “New security clearance procedures are put in place and specific documentation is now required to pass through checkpoints in the east of Ukraine. These new procedures apply to Ukrainian nationals, the United Nations, NGOs, national and some other international humanitarian organizations.

   “These restrictions on movements within Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the east of the country further complicates an already difficult situation for those forcibly displaced and made worse by the intensified fighting we have seen in recent days,” the UNHCR briefing notes said. “These practices restrict access to non-government controlled areas and limit the delivery of needed humanitarian assistance into the conflict zones. The Ukrainian government has reportedly adopted this resolution which entered into force yesterday (Thursday 22 January) limiting all movements in and out of the conflict zones."

   Christine Lagarde has announced that "the Ukrainian authorities have requested a multi-year arrangement with the Fund, supported by the Extended Fund Facility, to replace the existing Stand-By Arrangement."

   Back on November 12, UN Assistant Secretary General Jens Toyberg-Frandzen said, among other things, that "on November 5, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk announced that pensions would be halted to areas under rebel control."

  Inner City Press, covering the meeting from just outside the Council chamber, spoke to a range of passing diplomats and was left with this question: isn't the halting of pensions to rebel held areas a form of collective punishment?

 Once posed, with the words "accrued pensions," two defenses of the practice came in. First, that pensions in Ukraine are not accrued but are based on taxes collected and none are being collected in Donbas. Second, that trucks with pension payments were being robbed.  The word "Western Union" was bandied around.

 And so it goes at the UN.

  Last October, Ukraine was scheduled to speak at the UN about its “Committee on Information” on October 21, but as UN speeches usually go longer than allowed, its turn was postponed until October 22.

That didn't stop the “UN Radio” Russian service from reporting on the speech on October 21 as if it had in fact been given that day. As translated, UN Radio on October 21 reported

“The representative of Ukraine accused Russia of using the information strategy of the Cold War

“One of the main prerequisites of violence in Ukraine became a propaganda information. This was stated by the representative of the Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, speaking at a meeting of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly.”

  The UN's Fourth Committee did meet on October 21 - but Ukraine didn't speak. Instead it was the first speaker on the afternoon of October 22. Its speech, delivered in perfect French including the word “rigolo,” linked Russia to Joseph Goebbels.

  In reply, the Russian mission's spokesman brought up the recent Human Rights Watch report of the Ukrainian government using cluster bombs in and against Donetsk, and the lack of clarity on who called the snipers shots in Maidan Square.

  Later in the Fourth Committee meeting, Bolivia slammed “powers” who use information technology to intervene and violate privacy, bringing to mind USAID's “Cuban Twitter” and, of course, the NSA.

  Then Jordan said it was first among Arab nations to enact an Access to Information law, in 2007. The Free UN Coalition for Access has been pressing for a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, click here and here for that.

  FUNCA covers the Fourth Committee, including on Decolonization, and the Committee on Information, where at least theoretically the UN's descent into censorship could be raised and resolved. The old UN Correspondents Association, a part of this trend toward privatization of briefings and even censorship -- ordering Press articles off the Internet, getting leaked copies of their complaints to the UN's MALU banned from Google's search, here -- was nowhere to be seen. We'll have more on this.

   

Amid Renewed Ukraine Speeches in UN Security Council, Poroshenko Wants Multi-Year IMF Arrangement

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 21 -- In the first Ukraine meeting of the UN Security Council since last November, UN official Jeffrey Feltman said “today in Davos, President Poroshenko stated that there were over 9,000 Russia regular troops in Ukraine, an accusation that Moscow refutes.”

  He didn't mention, but the IMF did, that Poroshenko also spoke with Christine Lagarde, who then announced that "the Ukrainian authorities have requested a multi-year arrangement with the Fund, supported by the Extended Fund Facility, to replace the existing Stand-By Arrangement."

   In US President Obama's State of the Union speech on January 20, he said the US is "opposing Russian aggression, and supporting Ukraine’s democracy, and reassuring our NATO allies.. Mr. Putin’s aggression it was suggested was a masterful display of strategy and strength.  That's what I heard from some folks.  Well, today, it is America that stands strong and united with our allies, while Russia is isolated with its economy in tatters.  That’s how America leads -- not with bluster, but with persistent, steady resolve."

  Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, speaking in the Security Council on January 21, asked rhetorically "after about thirty times of discussing Ukraine here, the question arises, how much are these declarations in line with the situation in the country? Are they given just for eloquence's sake but can be thrown aside when political suitability takes precedent?”

  The January 21 session was going to be consultations, where members speak less formally (sometimes). But then it was public, just speeches. We'll have more on this.

  On the cut off of pensions, which we've covered since November, Churkin said "Kiev is doing everything so that in essence the South East is isolated. A decision has been made to move out state institutions from that, to stop budgetary expenditures including welfare and pensions.”

   Back on n November 12, UN Assistant Secretary General Jens Toyberg-Frandzen said, among other things, that "on November 5, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk announced that pensions would be halted to areas under rebel control."

  Inner City Press, covering the meeting from just outside the Council chamber, spoke to a range of passing diplomats and was left with this question: isn't the halting of pensions to rebel held areas a form of collective punishment?

 Once posed, with the words "accrued pensions," two defenses of the practice came in. First, that pensions in Ukraine are not accrued but are based on taxes collected and none are being collected in Donbas. Second, that trucks with pension payments were being robbed.  The word "Western Union" was bandied around.

 While the UN spoke about the death of children on a playground on Donetsk on Novmeber 5, they didn't say who did it. Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative Pankin said it was Ukraine's army. Later he stated that an adviser to Poroshenko said on October 24 that "the ceasefire is going to work in our favor, tank factories working around the clock." 

  Ukraine's Sergeyev mentioned this in his reply, neither confirming nor denying the quote. The meeting ended; Sergeyev headed up the escalator to be interviewed by scribes. And so it goes at the UN.

  Last month, Ukraine was scheduled to speak at the UN about its “Committee on Information” on October 21, but as UN speeches usually go longer than allowed, its turn was postponed until October 22.

That didn't stop the “UN Radio” Russian service from reporting on the speech on October 21 as if it had in fact been given that day. As translated, UN Radio on October 21 reported

“The representative of Ukraine accused Russia of using the information strategy of the Cold War

“One of the main prerequisites of violence in Ukraine became a propaganda information. This was stated by the representative of the Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, speaking at a meeting of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly.”

  The UN's Fourth Committee did meet on October 21 - but Ukraine didn't speak. Instead it was the first speaker on the afternoon of October 22. Its speech, delivered in perfect French including the word “rigolo,” linked Russia to Joseph Goebbels.

  In reply, the Russian mission's spokesman brought up the recent Human Rights Watch report of the Ukrainian government using cluster bombs in and against Donetsk, and the lack of clarity on who called the snipers shots in Maidan Square.

  Later in the Fourth Committee meeting, Bolivia slammed “powers” who use information technology to intervene and violate privacy, bringing to mind USAID's “Cuban Twitter” and, of course, the NSA.

  Then Jordan said it was first among Arab nations to enact an Access to Information law, in 2007. The Free UN Coalition for Access has been pressing for a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, click here and here for that.

  FUNCA covers the Fourth Committee, including on Decolonization, and the Committee on Information, where at least theoretically the UN's descent into censorship could be raised and resolved. The old UN Correspondents Association, a part of this trend toward privatization of briefings and even censorship -- ordering Press articles off the Internet, getting leaked copies of their complaints to the UN's MALU banned from Google's search, here -- was nowhere to be seen. We'll have more on this.

   

After Ukraine Quotes Ban Entire World For Them, UN Wan Read-Out

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 25 -- Here's how today's UN deals with Ukraine: after its President Petro Poroshenko and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke on November 25, Ukraine puts out its own read-out, including that "Ban Ki-moon assured that the entire world supported Ukraine."

  Inner City Press tweeted this quote at 6:44 pm, noting that the UN hadn't put out any read-out of the call at all, while Ban's spokesman left the UN.

 At 8:36 pm, the UN Spokesman's office put out this read-out:

"The Secretary-General spoke by telephone today to H.E. Mr. Petro Proroshenko, President of Ukraine. The Secretary-General thanked the President for his tireless efforts to find a peaceful and lasting solution to the conflict in south-east Ukraine. They discussed the severe challenges surrounding the delivery of funds and essential supplies to parts of eastern Ukraine, and the President’s efforts to find an adequate solution.

"The Secretary-General and the President agreed that the Minsk agreements provided a clear path towards peace and their implementation was essential. The Secretary-General informed the President that in continuation of his good offices he had asked Under-Secretary-General for Political Affaris Jeffrey Feltman to return to Kiev in mid-December for further consultations with the Government and key stakeholders."

   No mention of the "entire world" supporting Ukraine. And the euphemism about "delivery of funds" seems to be a reference to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk cutting off pension payments in Donbas. The UN's Ivan Simonovic spun this issue to select scribes; his office has since said that 

"Indeed a briefing on Ukraine was organised on Wednesday with a couple of journalists on the Ukraine report that was published earlier yesterday. Invitations at this briefing were sent on no scientific basis and can certainly be expanded for future occasions. 

"Indeed, following on your suggestion at yesterday's noon briefing as well as on many similar suggestions, including from other journalists, we are looking into the possibility of holding wider briefings on various human rights issues, including in the press conference room. We will keep you posted on those plans."

 But since then, no information or "postings," including to follow up questions Inner City Press on behalf of the newFree UN Coalition for Access asked. This is how today's UN is dealing with Ukraine - and much else. Watch this site.

  Back in October, Ukraine was scheduled to speak at the UN about its “Committee on Information” on October 21, but as UN speeches usually go longer than allowed, its turn was postponed until October 22.

That didn't stop the “UN Radio” Russian service from reporting on the speech on October 21 as if it had in fact been given that day. As translated, UN Radio on October 21 reported

“The representative of Ukraine accused Russia of using the information strategy of the Cold War

“One of the main prerequisites of violence in Ukraine became a propaganda information. This was stated by the representative of the Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, speaking at a meeting of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly.”

  The UN's Fourth Committee did meet on October 21 - but Ukraine didn't speak. Instead it was the first speaker on the afternoon of October 22. Its speech, delivered in perfect French including the word “rigolo,” linked Russia to Joseph Goebbels.

  In reply, the Russian mission's spokesman brought up the recent Human Rights Watch report of the Ukrainian government using cluster bombs in and against Donetsk, and the lack of clarity on who called the snipers shots in Maidan Square.

  Later in the Fourth Committee meeting, Bolivia slammed “powers” who use information technology to intervene and violate privacy, bringing to mind USAID's “Cuban Twitter” and, of course, the NSA.

  Then Jordan said it was first among Arab nations to enact an Access to Information law, in 2007. The Free UN Coalition for Access has been pressing for a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, click here and here for that.

  FUNCA covers the Fourth Committee, including on Decolonization, and the Committee on Information, where at least theoretically the UN's descent into censorship could be raised and resolved. The old UN Correspondents Association, a part of this trend toward privatization of briefings and even censorship -- ordering Press articles off the Internet, getting leaked copies of their complaints to the UN's MALU banned from Google's search, here -- was nowhere to be seen. We'll have more on this.

   

Ukraine FM Klimkin Tells Inner City Press That All Battalions Are Army or National Guard Under Control, Says Will Talk IMF

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 22 -- When Ukraine's Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin held a press conference at the UN on September 22, Inner City Press asked him about battalions in the East like Azov and Aidar, accused by Amnesty International of abuses.

  Klimkin said that all battalions are part of the army or national guard; the government had checked the Amnesty report.

  Inner City Press also asked if Ukraine will be speaking with the International Monetary Fund to modify its program. Klimkin said the program had not taken into account developments in Donetsk and Lugansk and should, now.

  He said that President Petro Poroshenko may not be the one to speak for Ukraine in the UN General Assembly, as he may need to "be on the ground." He said the soccer or football teams in Donetsky and Lugansk should remain in the Ukrainian League. (This question, he initially laughed at).

  Back on September 12, when Ukraine'sAmbassador Yuriy Sergeyev took questions Inner City Press also asked him about Amnesty International's damning report about the pro-Kyiv Aidar Battalion, and about Point 11 of the Protocol, "Economic Reconstruction of Eastern Ukraine."

  On Aidar, Sergeyev replied that the separatists had been dressing up in the pro-government militia's uniforms. Is that something that Amnesty would have entirely missed? Their report is online here.

  On economic reconstruction, Sergeyev distinguished between regions that were never with the "terrorists," those that had been liberated, and... others, presumably Donetsk and Luhansk. 

 On a second around, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about reports Ukraine is getting sophisticated weapons from a "non-NATO" country. He said there are negotiations that he couldn't get into the details of, since the counter-parties might pull out.

   In past Sergeyev briefings, for example on September 4, the first question has been claimed by UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance. On September 12, there was no UNCA representative present -- an insider briefing elsewhere about which the scribes are not supposed to report. Sergeyev was thanked by the new Free UN Coalition for Access for showing up and answering questions on-the-record, as it should be.

 In that spirit, Inner City Press put online each of the five pages of Sergeyev's opening statement, here, here, here,here and here.

   Back on September 4, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about challenges from the right to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, for example from Right Sector, AVOZ, and militia commanders like Dmytro Linko and Semen Semenchenko, who has spoken of the need “to establish our own internal command.”

  Sergeyev replied that “naturally, some generals want to be stronger.”

  So are these are generals? Despite talk in Minsk of a ceasefire, Sergeyev insisted that the “law enforcement action” would continue.

  Sergeyev began on September 4 by offering thanks to USg Jeffrey Feltman and to Valerie Amos -- but not John Ging.

  Back on August 24 when Amos visited Eastern Ukraine, her and Ging's agency OCHA put out a press releasesaying that

Amos visited an internally displacement persons' center in Krasnyi Lyman and “met women who had fled the fighting with their families.” The UN OCHA statement on Sunday said that “since March this year, around 200,000 people have fled their homes in search of safety within Ukraine and tens of thousands have fled to neighboring countries.”

  What does "tens of thousands" mean -- and why is it so different from what OCHA official John Ging told the UN Security Council on August 5? In that Council session, Ging said

“since the start of the year 168,677 Ukrainians are registered as having crossed into Russia, with nearly 60,000 of these having applied for refugee status and a further 115,952 having applied for other forms of legal stay.”
  
    Ging on August 5 acknowledged that “this is not the full picture as many Ukrainians that have fled their homes do not register with Ukrainian authorities or officially apply for assistance. The Russian authorities and UNHCR are reporting that 740,000 people have crossed the border since the start of the year.”

  While technically both 740,000 and 168,677 are made up of "tens of thousands," there is a striking disparity between what Ging told the Security Council on August 5, and the OCHA's August 24 press release on Amos' visit to Krasnyi Lyman.  What explains it?

   Back on August 24 just as an emergency but closed-door meeting of the Security Council about Ukraine began, and after the US, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued this statement:

The Secretary-General follows with deep concern reports that a Russian aid convoy has crossed the border into Ukraine without the permission of the Ukrainian authorities. While recognising the deteriorating humanitarian situation, any unilateral action has the potential of exacerbating an already dangerous situation in eastern Ukraine.

Once again, the Secretary-General urges all sides, in particular Ukraine and the Russian Federation, to continue to work together, in coordination with the international community, to ensure that humanitarian assistance reaches the most affected areas. He reiterates that all sides should continue to exercise maximum restraint and avoid escalation.

In this regard, he is encouraged by the announcement from President Petro Poroshenko that Ukraine will do everything possible to prevent more serious consequences as a result of the convoy moving into Ukrainian territory.

 How was this statement formulated? By whom? Inner City Press asked: What is the position of the UN's humanitarian chief Valerie Amos, who has elsewhere called for cross-border aid?

   At the Churkin presser, Inner City Press asked about the draft press statement Russia proposed on August 21.

 Churkin said that the “indefatigable” Lithuanian delegation “sent in amendments” that dropped references to Russia and included references to the European Union and dropped the reference to a ceasefire. Then, Churkin said, the US delegations send in amendments dropping the ceasefire and blaming the separatists.

  Inner City Press also asked about a report by CNN from Eastern Ukraine in which correspondent Diana Magney asked why Russia was sending salt if there are salt mines in Eastern Ukraine.

  Churkin said, "You can mine salt if you are not shelled.  If you are hiding in your cellars, mining salt is problematic."

   Later the Voice of America's correspondent asked about accusations that the convoy was only to support the rebels.

  "With baby food?" Churkin asked.

   "Rebels have babies too," the Voice of America correspondent said. The implication seemed to be that starving children based on the positions taken by their parents would be okay. We'll have more on this - for now, click here.

   Back on July 30 when Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the UN Yuriy Sergeyev held a UN press conference on July 30, Inner City Press asked him about the Human Right Watch report his government is using Grad rockets, killing at least 16 civilians between July 12 and 21 near Donetsk.

  Sergeyev responded first about the UN's (or Ivan Simonovic's) report, then emphasized that Russian media is saying Ukraine is using ballistic missiles.

  Inner City Press repeated the question, emphasizing it concerns Human Rights Watch's report, not the UN's, and not Russian media.  Sergeyev provided essentially the same answer.

  Here is the HRW report, online.

  Inner City Press also asked about the status of the International Monetary Fund program, after the downing of MH17. Sergeyev said Ukraine has met with the IMF's Christine Lagarde and "will" get the next tranche of the program in late August.  But won't there be an Executive Board meeting?

After Russian foreign minister and US Secretary of State John Kerry spoke by phone on July 27, the US State Department issued two read-outs, or a readout in two stages.

  The second, an "additional point" by a Senior State Department Official, was that Kerry "underlined our support for a mutual cease fire verified by the OSCE and reaffirmed our strong support for the international investigation to show the facts of MH17."

  Inner City Press on July 30 asked Sergeyev for Ukraine's position on this. Sergeyev cited as "pre-conditions" the closing of the border with Russia, and the release of all hostages.

  Procedurally, Ukraine set aside the first question at its press conference saying, "Pamela, traditionally you open our session." Using this UN Correspondents Association set-aside, Pam Falk of CBS asked about rebels mining the MH17 site. Her UNCA sidekick asked about "Russian propaganda." 

   And so it went until, fifth, the new Free UN Coalition for Access asked about HRW's report. This is how it's working, with the UN's Censorship Alliance. In this context, the Free UN Coalition for Access is against the automatic setting-aside of questions.