Showing posts with label West Ham. Show all posts
Showing posts with label West Ham. Show all posts

Sunday, September 1, 2013

UNreformed: When Ban Ki-moon Golfs With Western Allies, Shouldn't Any UN Issues Discussed Be Disclosed?


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 1, updated -- The UN's impartiality is much discussed these days, not least by the UN itself. So there were bound to be Press questions when today's New York Times quoted Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:
"I try to play golf. I do not have a membership, so I’m invited by some friends. The Korean ambassador has a membership. The ambassador of San Marino, [Alexander] Bodini, plays at Deepdale in Long Island. That’s a very good place. Another is Manhattan Woods, with the Korean ambassador."
  Because of the UN's Syria chemical weapons investigation, there was a press briefing on Sunday morning. Inner City Press asked if the UN had accepted a free plane from Germany to fly its team and samples from Damascus to The Hague (yes) then asked about Ban's golfing. Video here, from Minute 26:35.
  Specifically, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky how he'd respond to the argument this undermines the UN's or at least Ban's perceived impartiality. Nesirky said Ban also golfs with others; he gave the example of UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant (who sesupport of a particularly tough soccer team West Ham Inner City Press has previously reported.)
  That's still three Western or pro-Western golf partners. Inner City Press asked, what about North Korea? Syria? Iran? Eritrea. There was laughter. Not that it is without humor, but why? Because the named countries or ambassadors don't play golf? (Inner City Press been jokingly asked if it thinks Syria's Ja'afari even knows how to play golf. But would Ban ask?) Because of course Ban wouldn't golf with them?
  How are decisions made? Why aren't more disclosures made? This is a question that the new Free UN Coalition for Access @FUNCA_info has asked and will keep asking, as it will for the disclosure of the telephone calls Ban makes, and the schedule of his Political and Peacekeeping chiefs, Jeffrey Feltman of the US and Herve Ladsous of France.
  For US President Barack Obama, for example, the White House sends out reports that list, at least by visual observation, his golf partners.
  As to the UN, Inner City Press has asked UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant by Twitter, a medium in which he has responded to previous Inner City Press questions, if any issues were discussed on the links. 

Update of 6:30 pm - Class act that he is, Ambassador Lyall Grant did reply: "What happens on the golf course stays on the golf course. Isn't that the rule? Or is that Vegas?"


  That IS the phrase. But the point for now of asking was, if substantive talk does occur during Ban's golf outing, it is at least relevant to know if Ban golfs or try to golf with both sides of conflicts. Not only on the Korean peninsula but also, say, on the Malvinas / Falkland Islands. We appreciate the answer, but Inner City Press (or more likely as a matter of policy the Free UN Coalition for Access, @FUNCA_info) will have more on this.

 
  

On Syria, UN Spokesperson Doesn't Know if US Shared Evidence, Says Ban Ki-moon Golfs with UK Too, Not Only South Korea: Impartial?


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, September 1 -- After UN chemical weapons inspector Ake Sellstrom spoke with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday morning about Syria, Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky took questions from the press.
One of the elephants in the room was John Kerry, or at least his announcement earlier in the morning that the US' lab tests of hair and blood samples from Ghouta show the presence of sarin.
Inner City Press asked Nesirky to comment on the US moving or saying it moved so much more quickly, and if the US has shared any of this evidence with the UN. To the latter, Nesirky later said that he didn't know. (It seems strange that it wouldn't come up on Ban's call with Sellstrom, but maybe in The Hague as on the UN's internal EZTV system CNN can't be heard.)
On the former, Nesirky said the UN is unique capable of conducting an impartial investigation, clarifying that this involved chain of custody. Inner City Press asked that since the US speed also involved faster lab work, did this mean Ban found the fast-labs less than credible? Nesirky returned to his prior answer.
Gulf media questioned why, if two Syrian officers are accompanying the samples, there are not two representatives from the rebels, presumably from Team Jarba. Nesirky replied that this was what had been negotiated.
Nesirky graciously allowed Inner City Press a final question, which were two. First, about Germany providing a plane to fly the samples and team to The Hague. Yes, Nesirky said, what's the second. Actually it was related to the implication of the first: that for the UN to accept free service from some member countries might undercut its perceived impartiality.
I try to play golf. I do not have a membership, so I’m invited by some friends. The Korean ambassador has a membership. The ambassador of San Marino, [Alexander] Bodini, plays at Deepdale in Long Island. That’s a very good place. Another is Manhattan Woods, with the Korean ambassador.
Inner City Press asked Nesirky how the UN would respond to the argument this undermines the UN's or at least Ban's perceived impartiality. Nesirky said Ban also golf with others; he gave the example of the UK (presumably Mark Lyall Grant, whose support of a particularly rough soccer team West Ham Inner City Press has previously reported.)
Inner City Press asked, as to Ban's social golfing, what about North Korea? Syria? Iran? Eritrea. There was laughter. Not that it is without humor, but why? Because the named countries or ambassadors don't play golf? (Inner City Press been jokingly asked if it thinks Syria's Ja'afari even knows how to play golf. But would Ban ask?)  Because of course Ban wouldn't golf with them? How are decisions made? Why aren't more disclosures made? Watch this site.

 
  

Thursday, March 14, 2013

On Libya, UK Concerned By Isolation Law, Zeidan's Link With Sarkozy, Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund?



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 14 -- After the UN Security Council relaxed its arms embargo on Libya, even as the spread of weapons from Libya continues to reverberate from Mali to Syria, UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant came out to take questions.

  Inner City Press asked Lyall Grant what it has already posed, without yet response, to his new “#DigitalDiplomacy"(and as noted by another from way down in ChileWest Ham) twitter account: what the UK's position on the draft Isolation Law.” From the UK Mission's transcript:

Inner City Press: What does the UK think of the proposed Political Isolation Law in Libya and there’s been attacks on the media for reporting on it. Do you think it’s a good idea going forward to bar anyone that had a position in the Gaddafi government from future government service?

Mark Lyall Grant: Obviously that is an issue that we’re watching very closely. It is for the National General Congress to decide what legislation they adopt for the future political dispensation in Libya, but from our point of view, it is very important that this should be an inclusive process, and yes there should be accountability for past crimes, particularly those committed under the Gaddafi regime. But at the same time it is very important that all groups are included in the political dispensation of Libya, so it is fair to say that we do have some concerns about the Isolation Law, in as much of the text that we have seen of it.

Alright, then. Also at the Security Council on Thursday was Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan. On Tuesday he was in DC for a private lunch “co-hosted by the Business Council for International Understanding.” The invitation said he “is credited as having played a key role in persuading French President Nicolas Sarkozy to support the anti-Gaddafi forces.”

Now Sarkozy is said to be offered a $500 million hedge fund to run, by Qatar's Sovereign Wealth Fund. One wag asks: is Sarko bullish on jihad? Watch this site.