UN's Myanmar Special Rapporteur Announces Visit, But Rohingya Not Mentioned In Her 450-Word Press Release: UN Policy?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 5 -- The Myanmar visit of the UN's Special Rapporteur Yanghee Lee starts this week, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights announced on January 5 in a 450 word press release that did not use the word "Rohingya" or even Muslim once.

  In June 2014 a UN team visited Myanmar and did not use the word Rohingya, later telling Inner City Press this was at the government's request. Video here.

  Now Yanghee Lee says “I will pay special attention to the significant human rights concerns raised by the package of four bills on protection of race and religion, which contain provisions that do not meet international human rights standards. I am deeply concerned that if passed, these four bills will legitimize discrimination, in particular against religious and ethnic minorities, and against women."

  We'll see. Yanghee Lee will visit Rakhine State and Northern Shan State, then hold a press conference in a Yangon hotel on January 16.

  Back in June 2014, the UN's humanitarian deputy Kyung-wha Kang gave an opening press conference statement to correspondents that did not use the word "Rohingya."

 On June 17, Kang told Inner City Press that the government asked her not to use the word "Rohingya" in public -- and she agreed and did not use the word. Video here. In that, at least when asked she answered.

  Inner City Press asked Kang how this was consistent with the claim that the UN is pushing Myanmar authorities on the Rohingya -- or Rakhine? -- issue. Kang said there is a division of responsibilities, that the human rights site of the UN speaks differently that the humanitarian side. 

 In the January 5, 2015, press release of 450 words, not one of them "Rohingya"?

 And what about "Good Offices" envoy Nambiar?

From the UN's June 9 transcript:

Inner City Press: It’s been a long weekend so I have a few questions, how ever you want to do it. I wanted to ask you, now that you say Ms. Kang is going to Myanmar, local media there reports that UNICEF having used the word Rohingya, then apologized for it and committed not to use it any further. This is reported there with local authorities saying the UN will no longer use this word. And I wanted to know, is this... UN policy?

Spokesman: I don’t know. I don’t know. You should ask UNICEF, but I’ll check on my end, but I don’t know.

Question: Yes, is there a UN policy [to not use the word “Rohingya”]

Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t know.

  So he doesn't know if there's a UN policy against even using the name of the Rohingya group? 

  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 

  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?

  UNICEF on its website acknowledges then spins:

“$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”

  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 

  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?

This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:

Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?

Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.

Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.

Spokesman: Would be happy to.

Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.

Spokesman: Yes.

  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.

  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 

  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since, sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.

   

In Myanmar, US Secretary of State Kerry Did Not Use the Word "Rohingya," Just as UN Did Not In June, Admitting Burmese Authorities Said Not To

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 10 -- US Secretary of State has been in Myanmar the past few days but it seems in his many transcribed statements, including a two-question press conference, he did not say the word "Rohingya" once.

   This is particularly notable because the UN has admitted they were told by the Burmese government not to say the word. Why didn't Kerry say it?  To be fair, he twice mentioned Rakhine State in his press conference. But what group is it being targeted there?  

   Back on June 17 in New York, the UN's humanitarian deputy Kyung-wha Kang gave an opening statement to correspondents that did not use the word "Rohingya."

   Inner City Press asked Kang about Myanmar authorities bragging about UNICEF apologizing for using the term "Rohingya."  Inner City Press reported it on June 7, and on June 9 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript below.

 On June 17, Kang told Inner City Press that the government asked her not to use the word "Rohingya" in public -- and she agreed and did not use the word. Video here.

  Inner City Press asked Kang how this was consistent with the claim that the UN is pushing Myanmar authorities on the Rohingya -- or Rakhine? -- issue. Kang said there is a division of responsibilities, that the human rights site of the UN speaks differently that the humanitarian side. And what about "Good Offices" envoy Nambiar?

  Inner City Press asked about UNICEF's $87,000 a month rent to a landlord linked to the former military junta -- no comment except that rent is high in Rakhine -- and of the plight of Karen refugees in Thailand. We may have more on this.

From the UN's June 9 transcript:

Inner City Press: It’s been a long weekend so I have a few questions, how ever you want to do it. I wanted to ask you, now that you say Ms. Kang is going to Myanmar, local media there reports that UNICEF having used the word Rohingya, then apologized for it and committed not to use it any further. This is reported there with local authorities saying the UN will no longer use this word. And I wanted to know, is this... UN policy?

Spokesman Rohingya: I don’t know. I don’t know. You should ask UNICEF, but I’ll check on my end, but I don’t know.

Question: Yes, is there a UN policy [to not use the word “Rohingya”]

Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t know.

  So he doesn't know if there's a UN policy against even using the name of the Rohingya group? Nine hours and counting after the June 9 briefing, there was no answer from him. UNresponsive.

   This comes as UNICEF pays $87,000 a month to rent its office, and pay it to a landlord with links to the Than Shwe military junta.

  UNICEF has tried to explain away these $87,000 monthly payments. But to agree to censor the very name of the Rohinga minority?

  The local report says, "The head of the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef) in Myanmar, Bertrand Bainval, personally apologised for the use of the term ''Rohingya' at a June 4 press conference on Unicef’s plan to help children Myanmar’s second poorest sate, according to Rakhine State officials."

  Some human rights industry profilers on June 6 immediately praised Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tapping Jordan's Prince Zeid to replace Navi Pillay as High Commissioner on Human Rights by saying that "as a Muslim," Zeid will acting on the Rohingya issue. How about UNICEF reportly agreeing to not even use the word Rohingya?

  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 

  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?

  UNICEF on its website acknowledges then spins:

“$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”

  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 

  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?

This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:

Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?

Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.

Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.

Spokesman: Would be happy to.

Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.

Spokesman: Yes.

  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.

  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 

  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since,sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.

   

In Myanmar, UN's Kang Admits Didn't Say "Rohingya" Publicly, High Rents in Rakhine, Nambiar Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 17 -- Back from Myanmar, the UN's humanitarian deputy Kyung-wha Kang gave an opening statement to correspondents that did not use the word "Rohingya."

   Inner City Press asked Kang about Myanmar authorities bragging about UNICEF apologizing for using the term "Rohingya."  Inner City Press reported it on June 7, and on June 9 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript below.

 On June 17, Kang told Inner City Press that the government asked her not to use the word "Rohingya" in public -- and she agreed and did not use the word.

  Inner City Press asked Kang how this was consistent with the claim that the UN is pushing Myanmar authorities on the Rohingya -- or Rakhine? -- issue. Kang said there is a division of responsibilities, that the human rights site of the UN speaks differently that the humanitarian side. And what about "Good Offices" envoy Nambiar?

  Inner City Press asked about UNICEF's $87,000 a month rent to a landlord linked to the former military junta -- no comment except that rent is high in Rakhine -- and of the plight of Karen refugees in Thailand. We may have more on this.

From the UN's June 9 transcript:

Inner City Press: It’s been a long weekend so I have a few questions, how ever you want to do it. I wanted to ask you, now that you say Ms. Kang is going to Myanmar, local media there reports that UNICEF having used the word Rohingya, then apologized for it and committed not to use it any further. This is reported there with local authorities saying the UN will no longer use this word. And I wanted to know, is this... UN policy?

Spokesman Rohingya: I don’t know. I don’t know. You should ask UNICEF, but I’ll check on my end, but I don’t know.

Question: Yes, is there a UN policy [to not use the word “Rohingya”]

Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t know.

  So he doesn't know if there's a UN policy against even using the name of the Rohingya group? Nine hours and counting after the June 9 briefing, there was no answer from him. UNresponsive.

   This comes as UNICEF pays $87,000 a month to rent its office, and pay it to a landlord with links to the Than Shwe military junta.

  UNICEF has tried to explain away these $87,000 monthly payments. But to agree to censor the very name of the Rohinga minority?

  The local report says, "The head of the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef) in Myanmar, Bertrand Bainval, personally apologised for the use of the term ''Rohingya' at a June 4 press conference on Unicef’s plan to help children Myanmar’s second poorest sate, according to Rakhine State officials."

  Some human rights industry profilers on June 6 immediately praised Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tapping Jordan's Prince Zeid to replace Navi Pillay as High Commissioner on Human Rights by saying that "as a Muslim," Zeid will acting on the Rohingya issue. How about UNICEF reportly agreeing to not even use the word Rohingya?

  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 

  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?

  UNICEF on its website acknowledges then spins:

“$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”

  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 

  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?

This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:

Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?

Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.

Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.

Spokesman: Would be happy to.

Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.

Spokesman: Yes.

  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.

  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 

  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since,sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.

   

Myanmar Authorities Brag UNICEF Won't Say "Rohingya," As $87,000 Rent Paid and Spun

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 7 -- In Myanmar, now UNICEF has apologized for using the term "Rohingya," authorities have bragged. This comes as UNICEF pays $87,000 a month to rent its office, and pay it to a landlord with links to the Than Shwe military junta.

  UNICEF has tried to explain away these $87,000 monthly payments. But to agree to censor the very name of the Rohinga minority?

  The local report says, "The head of the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef) in Myanmar, Bertrand Bainval, personally apologised for the use of the term ''Rohingya' at a June 4 press conference on Unicef’s plan to help children Myanmar’s second poorest sate, according to Rakhine State officials."

  Some human rights industry profilers on June 6 immediately praised Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tapping Jordan's Prince Zeid to replace Navi Pillay as High Commissioner on Human Rights by saying that "as a Muslim," Zeid will acting on the Rohingya issue. How about UNICEF reportly agreeing to not even use the word Rohingya?

  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 

  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?

  UNICEF on its website acknowledges then spins:

“$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”

  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 

  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?

This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:

Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?

Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.

Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.

Spokesman: Would be happy to.

Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.

Spokesman: Yes.

  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.

  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 

  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since,sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.

   

In Myanmar, UN-Funded Census Bans Rohingya, UN in Denial, Violence

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 31 -- The UN appears to be in denial about the exclusionary census it has supporting in Myanmar, particularly now that the government refuses to allow any "Rohingya" answer, and violence has broken out. 

  On the violence, on March 28 Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: On the unrest in Sittwe, in Rakhine State in Myanmar. And there are various articles saying that basically the census that the UN funded and participated in, which your office previously answered a question explaining the involvement in, was largely the cause of the unrest. I wonder, what does the UN say to that and what is its own kind of risk assessment that it conducted before the census? Does it now acknowledge that the risk assessment was erroneous?

Deputy Spokesman: Well, first of all, I wouldn’t have any comment on our risk assessments. We make them based on available data at the time. You know, it’s not that they are predictive tools, they’re efforts to assess what the situation on the ground is at the current point in time. Regarding the incidents in Sittwe, you’ll have seen, we mentioned yesterday what the Humanitarian Coordinator had to say about the situation. Regarding that, following the attacks reported earlier this week on UN and non-governmental organizations premises in Sittwe, in Rakhine State, initial assessments show substantial damage to UN and NGO [non-governmental organization] property and vehicles. The humanitarian community in Myanmar remains concerned about the safety and security of aid workers, as well as constraints on access to communities in need. Despite the insecurity, the United Nations and its humanitarian partners are determined to resume aid operations and continue to consult with the Government and local authorities. So, that is what we’re trying to do in response. We don’t believe that there should be any excuse made, by the way, regarding trying to impede the work of humanitarian agencies. That needs to happen unobstructed.

  But the census does not even allow Rohingya to answer as such, according to the government, here.

   Back on January 24, Inner City Press asked the UN's Haq:

Inner City Press: another Myanmar question. There is a census coming up. It seems that the United Nations system is involved in funding and maybe even participating in it. Both Kachin and Rohingya groups have expressed a lot of concerns. One, there is no box in the census thus far to check Rohingya, meaning… implying that they are not citizens. Also, Kachin, they have other complaints. I wanted to know: is UN aware of these? What steps are they taking, and will they fund a census that many groups think makes things worse rather than better?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Well, we will look into what we are doing on that question. We need some details about that.

  It was 19 days later, on February 12, that the UN Spokesperson's Office finally sent this response:

Subject: In response to your question on the Myanmar census.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:02 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) is the focal UN agency for providing technical and programmatic assistance to the Government for the census. It says that everyone in Myanmar will be counted in the census. UNFPA is supporting the Government to ensure that the census is fully inclusive and conducted according to international standards. Respondents will be asked to identify their ethnicity, with the option of selecting one of the categories used in the 1983 census or selecting "other" and writing in the name of another group. All of the responses will be coded and tabulated.

  Compare this belated Pollyanna answer by the UN and UNFPA to what the Myanmar government Minister for Immigration and Population U Khin Yi openly says:

"They say that their race is Rohingya. When a person says that his race is “B”, because he doesn’t want to mention his race as “A”, that means that race “A” no longer exists, but the race “B” is a new race. Since race “B” is a new race, there will be questions, such as “how did the race enter (the country)?” or “are they encroaching here?” When things become radical, I worry that it could harm peace and stability...We will record what the person says. If he says “A” then we will fill the form as “A”. The result will be, like I said before, that even if that term “A” is Rohingya, we will not recognize Rohingya as one of the 135 ethnic groups in Myanmar."

So this is "fully inclusive and conducted according to international standards"? The UN is at best in denial. Watch this site.

Footnote: It appears that on-again, off-again UN official Charles Petrie is about to set sail from Myanmar. He was quoted earlier this year: "In terms of MPSI we want to make sure whatever we do adds value, and there’s a clear sense that if there isn’t we won’t continue." Watch this site.

   

UN Silent for 2 Days on 2-Child Policy for Rohingya, Nambiar on "Cordial" Kachin Talks, UN Women Odds

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 30 -- Imposing a two child policy on Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar's Rakhine State seems like something of which the UN would be immediately suspect and critical.

But not this UN, apparently. Two days after Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey if Ban or his Myanmar "Good Offices" envoy Vijay Nambiar had any comment on the policy, still there is none. There is, however, a statement about Nambiar's presence at and view of the government's Kachin talks.

On May 28 Inner City Press asked:

Inner City Press: In Myanmar, there are these talks between the Government and the Kachin rebels, it is said that Vijay Nambiar was part of it. But it wasn’t clear what his role was. There are some reports that the UN [in] Yangon wouldn’t say it. What is his role, and also, does the UN have any comment on the announced two-child policy in Rakhine State for Rohingya Muslims?

Deputy Spokesperson: We’ve seen the reports of the announcement of two or two-child policy in Rakhine State.When we have something for you, we will get it to you. And Vijay Nambiar travelled to the country over the weekend, we will update you on what he is doing as soon as we get that information.

Two days later, nothing on the outrageous two-child policy. What is the UN coming to? But there's this, on or from Nambiar (who when in New York remains one of the few Department of Political Affairs affiliated people still based in the emptying North Lawn Building) --

Subject: Your question on Vijay Nambiar.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

The Secretary-General’s Special Adviser for Myanmar, Vijay Nambiar, is attending the peace talks that began yesterday. This is the first time that such talks have taken place inside the country between the Government negotiators and Kachin Independence Organisation (KIO). The request for the presence of the UN as an observer was made by the KIO and was agreed to by the Government. The Special Adviser reports that the talks started on a cordial note, with both sides stressing their commitment to achieving peace and reconciliation in Kachin.

  There's buzz around the UN wondering what the relation might be between Nambiar and India possibly getting, on a non-interim basis, the top post at UN Women. Or will it goFinnish? Watch this site.