UN Silent on Armenia 1915 Genocide Commemoration, Like Its Censorship Alliance on Sri Lanka 2009, Rwanda 1994

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 23 -- In the run up to the commemoration of what Turks did to Armenians in 1915, the Pope joined those calling it genocide. But UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stopped at calling it an atrocity and there has been silence in the UN.

  Inner City Press on April 23 asked Ban's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric who from the UN will be attended the commemoration. Video here.

  He replied, Michael Moller the head of the UN Office on Geneva. But when Inner City Press asked if a copy of his remarks will be released, Dujarric replied that Moller will NOT be talking.

  Dujarric also told Inner City Press that Ban's Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide Adama Dieng will be in Yeravan - at an event he said is unrelated to the commemoration. 

This is today's UN -- Rwanda has complained how the UN deals with its genocide (the head of UN Peacekeeping remains an individual who argued for the escape of the genocidaires, Herve Ladsous). 

  On Sri Lanka, UN reviews have found the UN's actions in 2009 to be shameful. More recently the UN further delayed its report on war crimes until September; now the government says it won't do any investigation by then, only a statement on "modalities." A government film denying war crimes by Sri Lanka was screened by the UN Correspondents Association, after UNCA's president had been the landlord of Sri Lanka's ambassador.

   But will this UN, now the UN's Censorship Alliance given a big room by it, hold any event about Armenia 1915? Not yet - the main feed from UNCA is denying genocide. 

The UN agreed to name the area right outside the Security Council the "Turkish Lounge" - and to exclude journalists from it. As Inner City Press exclusively reported, when Turkey's Erdogan's guards beat up UN Security staff, Ban Ki-moon response was to apologize to Ergodan. We'll have more on all this.

   

In UNSC, Iran and Israel, Syria and Turkey Trade Replies Past 8 PM as UN Secretariat Sells UNdiplomatic Books

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 23 -- When China as president of the UN Security Council for February scheduled a debate to “Reflect on history, reaffirm the strong commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the UN,” 75 countries originally signed up to speak -- then five more came in at the end.

  After that, the debate came to a bitter in with rights of reply or "further statements" by Iran, Syria, Turkey and Israel. (Azerbaijan and Armenia had already traded shots in the regular debate).

  Israel's Ron Prosor had mock-awarded Oscars during his speech. Saudi Arabia responded with a "worst actor" award for Israel, citing the Occupation. Israel followed up calling this a march of folly of despots attacking a democracy.

  Syria said Turkey's incursion to relocate a shrine violated the UN Charter, the ostensible topic of the debate. When Turkey took the floor is was to tell Armenia that genocide is a "legitimate subject of scholarly debate," and to note that the Turkish Cypriot were able to be heard in the Security Council debate.

  Neither were many other groups, including just for example people from Western Sahara, Tamils from Sri Lanka, and others. Palestine was spoken about, but did not speak. But it was a more interesting debate that usual, in the Council.

 This didn't stop the wan UN Correspondents Association from scheduling a book-selling event during the speeches by South Africa, Algeria and Iran. Inner City Press noted it; an Italian diplomat descended to note that Sebastiano Cardi was away from UNHQ on official work (already duly noted). Italy's speech didn't mention it is running for a Security Council seat in 2017-18, while the Netherlands' did. Different approaches.

   Earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov slammed not only the occupation of Iraq, but also events in Kiev in the last year.

   Later, after the 15 Council members had all spoken, Ukraine's Pavlo Klimkin said his country is considering “requesting the United Nations to deploy a peacekeeping operation in Ukraine.”

   Klimkin was scheduled to meet with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon later on Monday. But the UN's read-out of Ban's telephone call with Klimkin on February 20 said that “on the possibility of peacekeeping mission in eastern Ukraine, the Secretary-General informed the Foreign Minister that the United Nations would stand guided by any decision the Security Council would make on this issue.”

  Lavrov's meeting with Ban had been scheduled to begin at noon, and he only came out of the elevator back onto the second floor at 12:45 pm. A forty five minute meeting with Ban? How long would Klimkin get?

  Five hours after the meeting, the UN Spokesman, involved in the book-selling event in the UN Censorship Alliance during Iran's speech, had yet to issue a read-out.

   Before Klimkin's speech, US Ambassador Samantha Power spoke not only on Ukraine and Syria but also Sudan, noting that the Security Council was silent when Sudan blocked UNAMID access to investigate the rapes in Tabit, at least for the second time. That's true. But didn't the US just lift some sanctions on Sudan?

  Power also noted, as Ban Ki-moon as opening speaker had, that the UN Charter starts “We the peoples.” Has the US tried to get a UN Freedom of Information Act, for peoples? That's what the Free UN Coalition for Access ispushing for.

China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi said some “even attempt to... whitewash past crimes of aggression.”

   While his reference seemed directed at Japan, when he came to the stakeout and said he had time for two questions, the head of UNCA -- the UN's Censorship Alliance -- bumbled through two questions without asking about this. Instead he asked, or seemed to ask, do you think Syria can transition without Assad?

   These set-aside questions, to a FOIA-exposed censor, is not consistent with press freedom.

  Ambassador Power linked UN Peacekeeping and human rights. Inner City Press has exclusively asked, in print and at the UN's noon briefing, does DPKO under Herve Ladsous use human rights abusers, for example from Bangladesh?

   Speaking of peacekeeping, Spain's Ignacio Ybanez talked about UN principles. One waited to hear of peacekeeper killed in Lebanon: will that report be made public?

 The UK's Mark Lyall Grant cited the Peace Operations Review. Will that address the sale of posts in DR Congo & Haiti? 

  Venezuela's Delcy Rodriguez said Palestine must be a full member of the UN, under international law.

   New Zealand's Murray McCully said that the UNSC agenda is jammed up with bureaucratic briefings rather than real deliberation - entirely true.  And so it goes at the UN.

   

With Australia Atop UN Security Council, Of Sanctions Experts & Trainers Iraq, Balance Questioned, Access Vowed: OzPrez Begins

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 4 -- When Australian Ambassador Gary Quinlan got the UN Security Council program of work agreed to for his month as Council president on November 4, an item was added to that afternoon's schedule at this request: Burkina Faso.

  Inner City Press, staking-out the Council meeting, heard that Burkina Faso and the ouster of Blaise Compaore would be addressed that afternoon, and reported it - but not who had requested it. Since France has “held the pen” on its other former colonies from Mali to Central African Republic, some assumed they'd made the request. But, in perhaps a good sign, it was Australia.

  After the day's UN noon briefing, Quinlan and at least three members of his team came to brief the press. Quinlan gave a more detailed than usual opening statement, far from uninteresting, and then the questions -- and to some, the problems -- began.

  The first question was set aside for the old UN Correspondents Association, a former Reuters reporter who asked about “The Ukraine.” Next came France 24, then Agence France Presse and a US state media. 

  At that point Inner City Press, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, noted that the correspondent for Al Mayadeen, with a different perspective, stood up and walked out. Was it a message?

  Seems so: the next was Associated Press and then Newsweek / Israel Radio, with questions about the Golan Heights and North Korea. Inner City Press, called on next, thanked Quinlan for FUNCA and asked that he hold Q&A stakeouts after each closed consultation. (He said, to his credit, that's the plan.)

  Inner City Press asked the legal basis for airstrikes on Syria and if international law wouldn't be better served by seeking Security Council approval. Quinlan said no member of the Council has brought it up, and that his own country is acting in Iraq under a request from that country's government, and is sending a couple hundred trainers.

Quinlan has scheduled a briefing and, he hopes, adoption of a “technical” resolution on sanctions for November 25. Inner City Press asked him about the “regime change” letter by Somalia and Eritrea Monitoring Group expert Dinesh Mahtani, which it exclusively published and which led to Mahtani's resignation. Mahtani's letter, here, referred twice to Australia.

Quinlan said the training and qualification of experts will be discussed and addressed, and that impartiality “must be a given.” We'll have more on this.

  The briefing continued with Voice of America - a second US state media, both under the US Broadcasting Board of Governors; perhaps for that reason after the former ReutersUN reporter was called on, the current stood in the back with a member of the Australian mission delegation. 

  Then, described as the last question, came Al Jazeera, saying it “heard” that Burkina Faso would be addressed in the Council and asking when). The briefing was set to end -- when there was a (polite) rebellion.

A reporter from Armenian media said she had her hand raised the whole time, and asked about Ukraine. Quinlan to his credit decided to stay and answer. Here's hoping its a harbinger of the coming Security Council month, at least in terms of accessibility to the media. Watch this site.

   

Kiir Says UN Peacekeeping Doesn't Move, Doesn't Protect, No Riek, Rights of Reply, First is Armenia and Azerbaijan

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 27 -- When South Sudan President Salva Kiir gave his speech to the UN General Assembly on September 27, he said that UN Peacekeeping seemed to believe it can protect civilians just "by presence." 

  Kiir said that's not true "if they don't move."  UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous is under fire, including by the UN's own Office of Internal Oversight Services, for not protecting civilians. In Darfur, it is charged with covering up attacks on civilians.

  But Ladsous as head of UN Peacekeeping refuses to answer Press questions on these topics, mostly recently on September 26 about the Central African Republic, video here. (On September 27, Ladsous tried to order Inner City Press to stop filming, then blocked the camera, video here.) 

   Kiir also used his speech to trash Riek Machar. Kiir said that the violence from December 2013 was "plotted by my former vice president." Machar, needless to say, had no "right of reply" in the UN General Assembly.

  On the evening of September 27, the third night of this General Debate, the first right of reply took place, between Armenia and Azerbaijan. 

   Azerbaijan said Armenia has “insolence” to talk about human rights, when it is not as developed - or endowed with hydrocarbons.

   Armenia shot back, mocking Azerbaijan for saying 1 in 8 Azerbaijanis are displaced, when it is oil rich. 

  There are some other perennials for rights of reply: Iran and UAE about islands, the comfort women issue between Japan and the Koreas, and more. This year, one would expect more.

  Kiir on September 25 when the UN and Ladsous held a "High Level" event about South Sudan did not even attend.  

   A Senior US State Department Official, speaking on background, said that “there was a lot of disappointment expressed in the meeting that Salva Kiir who is here in New York did not attend the meeting. He sent his Minister of Foreign Affairs and some of his ministers to the meeting and several of the attendees made a point of noting that Salva Kiir was not at the meeting.” 

  Inner City Press put some questions to the Senior State Department Official, on Ebola and here on South Sudan:

QUESTION: Matthew Russell Lee, Inner City Press... On South Sudan, one of the sanctioned – sanctionees, Peter Gadet, is accused of having shot down a UN helicopter. And I wanted to know, is that – the UN hasn’t really sort of confirmed that. Is the U.S. concerned about getting to the bottom of that? And who do you think did it?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We know – let me start with that first. We know that the UN is investigating and we’re waiting for the results of that investigation. But Gadet has been put on our sanctions list even before that happened. But the shooting down of the UN helicopter is evidence of how difficult it is to work in Sudan, but how committed the UN and others are to provide humanitarian assistance.

One of the commitments that came out of the meeting today with South Sudan announced by the foreign minister was that they would not stand in the way of NGOs and the UN delivering humanitarian assistance. And we have to hold them to that commitment because people are suffering.

Background: back on May 6, 2014, when the US imposed sanctions on Gadet, Inner City Press asked:

MODERATOR: Great. Thank you. Our next question is from the other Matt Lee, Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Great. Thanks a lot, [Moderator]. I wanted to ask, there was a – it was said that in Security Council consultations at the UN that senior government officials were named in a radio broadcast prior to the attacks in Bor on the UN compound in killing the civilians. I just wonder if you can say are these people – is that the case? Do you know the names of people that sort of called for that attack, and in which case, why aren’t they on this list?

And I also – this might for Senior Administration Official Number Two. Secretary Kerry was talking about a legitimate force to help make peace. And I just wanted to know, is the UN – is the U.S. thinking of that as part of UNMISS mission or as the IGAD force? And if so, would it require a Security Council approval? Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: On the first, I mean, we typically do not comment on actors against whom we are – we have not yet – we have not yet acted, a clunky way of saying we don’t comment on those who are not part of our designation. But anyone who is contributing to the violence, whether that’s by directing violence, whether that’s by funding it, fueling it, contributing arms, can be a subject of designation in the future. And I’ll leave it to my State Department colleague to answer the second question.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: Yeah. On the question about the regional force and on UNMISS, we – it is something that conversations and discussions are ongoing between countries of IGAD, with New York, with ourselves and others on how best to create this additional force presence that we are working very much with UNMISS and see this as part of the same effort. But we do think it’s very important that the regional forces are able to join this effort in larger numbers and appreciate the efforts of, particularly, the governments of Ethiopia and Kenya, who are leading the mediation and who are seeking to work with UNMISS in this regard.

   

Conflict Prevention Debate In UN Security Council Has Right to Truth and Penholder Reform Proposals, Rancor Between Azerbaijan and Armenia, No Ukraine Statement

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 21 -- The Conflict Prevention debate of the UN Security Council on August 21 ended with angry “right of reply” speeches by Azerbaijan and Armenia. In between, various non-Council members offered their diagnosis of Security Council failures.

  New Zealand, a candidate to join the Council next year, correctly noted that the drafting power of the “pen-holder” is concentrated in too few hands. (It's worse than that: often the former colonial power is allowed to draft all resolutions about “its" country.)

  At the beginning of the debate, outgoing High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay listed, as conflict in Africa, Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan. France holds the pen on CAR, DRC and Mali; Somalia and the Sudans are both shared by the UK and US.

  Ban Ki-moon began by praising the outgoing Pillay. He did not say, and it almost went unreported, that Pillay is only leaving now because Ban gave her only half of a second term.

  Ban spoke about his “Rights Up Front” initiative, which when launched was presented as a response to Ban's UN's failure in Sri Lanka in 2008 and 2009. But Ban doesn't make that link anymore. He had the vaunted “Article 99 of the UN Charter” power then, but didn't use it.

  Current Council member Chile said the resolution adopted after Ban's and Pillay's speeches should have included a reference to the “right to truth.” This brought to mind the UN's lack of truthfulness about bringing cholera to Haiti. 

  Inner City Press can report that the August 20 meeting of a slew of Latin American Ambassadors with Ban was about the UN's mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH. We'll have more on this.

  Pillay also listed Iraq, Libya, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Afghanistan and Ukraine. Canada, however, left Ukraine out of its litany of conflicts. And despite rumblings of a draft statement for a ceasefire in Ukraine under the Council's silence procedure until 4 pm, by then under the rules enforced by the UK presidency of the Council for August, all of the speakers had finished.

(This involved the UK's genial deputy Peter Wilson gaveling and asking Zimbabwe's charge d'affaires to rapidly conclude her remarks, which she did, without complaining as Syria and to some degree Iraq did after the Council's session about ISIL and al Nusra).

  Then before 4 pm the UNTV camera at the Security Council stakeout was disassembled. No Council press statement on Ukraine, no prevention of conflict. Watch this site.

  

Dueling with Predatory Hedge Funds, Argentina's Kicillof Briefs G77 at UN, Who Else, Asks Inner City Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 25 -- When Argentina's foreign minister Héctor Timerman held a press conference at the UN at 6 pm on June 25, it came after he and Economy Mininster Axel Kicillof presented Argentina's case against hedge funds to the Group of 77.  Tweeted photo here.

Inner City Press thanked the ministers on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, then asked if Elliott Management and Aurelius Capital hold stakes in other G77 members, and if the case shows the need for reform, that countries should have at least the same debt restructuring rights as corporations.

  Kicillof added, states and the people (pueblos) they represented. He said that in the G77 meeting, Peru had spoken. An attentive Inner City Press reader chimed in with a question about Ecuador, which sold bonds just this week.

  But in that case, new language tried to avoid the Argentina decision of the US Supreme Court, just as Belize and Armenia have also done on their debt. 

  Kicillof was returning to Buenos Aires after the press conference; Timerman will still be in New York for another media availability on June 26 at 1 pm. Watch this site.

   

On Ukraine, Floating No NATO or EU, Gergen Mocks Kerry's Return to Paris, Mike Rogers' Dark Armenia Talk

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 30 -- When John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov meet tonight at the Russian Ambassador's residence in Paris, is it Crimea on the table -- or Moldova?

   Russia's read-out of Putin's call to Obama raised the latter issue and was silent on the former. Much was made of this by talking heads on US Sunday morning shows.

   Perennial David Gergen mocked Kerry for turning his plane around to meet with Lavrov, asking rhetorically if this is the promised diplomatic isolation. A pair of Michaels, Hayden and Morell, mused about a commitment for Ukraine not to join NATO, or even the European Union. But what about the IMF deal?

  Soon to be former elected official Mike Rogers, headed to talk radio, went beyond dark talk of a land bridge to Moldova to speculate about Russia moving from South Ossetia to Armenia. He's running for the Republican Presidential nomination, it seems.

   On March 28 while at the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon took selective questions from the press about Ukraine (and Venezuela), the US White House issued a read-out of a call between President Barack Obama and Russia's Vladimir Putin, here.  Russia issued a different read-out, here. So how relevant is the UN?

   Later a Senior Administration Official explained,

We’re not going to get into the details, but they discussed the latest iteration of a working document that Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov have been working on to de-escalate the situation, which has been the guiding concept of our approach.

As you know, previously we discussed general elements of an off-ramp, including: international monitors, pull back of Russian forces, and direct Russia-Ukraine dialogue - supported by the international community - taking into account the Ukrainian government's openness to constitutional reform and upcoming Ukrainian elections. Throughout this process, we have been coordinating closely with the Ukrainians, including on this diplomatic proposal.

And later still:

The U.S. de-escalation proposal was fully coordinated with the Ukrainian government, and responded to points raised in a March 10 Russian paper.  We are awaiting a response from the Russians.

  Back at the UN, Ban Ki-moon mentioned the word "radical."

  It was inevitable: as Inner City Press first reported, while in Kyiv Ban met with the leader of the Svodoba Party, adjudged as both racist and anti-Semitic and most recently beating up a television executive then getting the footage censored from YouTube via a bogus Millennium Digital Copyright Actcomplaint.

  In fact, on March 27 at the UN General Assembly stakeout Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin told Inner City Press Ban's meeting was "disturbing" and that he looked forward to an explanation in the March 28 Security Council consultations. Video here. (We hope to have more on this.)

  At the March 28 noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq if Ban had known in advance that Svoboda's leader would be present, and if he would address it at the stakeout. Video here.

  Haq declined to provide anything more than the list of parties Ban met with, which was provided after Inner City Press repeatedly asked over two days.

   But when Ban came to speak after briefing the Council, the questioners chosen were AP, CBS (or, the UN's Censorship Alliance), Bloomberg and Voice of America. While noting as an aside that Voice of America tried ot get the investigative Press thrown out of Ban's UN, in a request to Ban's now-spokesman,click here, big picture, all four questioners selected by / for Ban were Western -- all US-based, in fact. Ban was not asked about the Svoboda meeting.

   Moments later, Inner City Press asked outgoing Security Council president for March Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg about Ban meeting Svoboda. She said, among other things, that You should have asked the Secretary General.

  But how? We'll have more on this.

   On March 27 when the UN General Assembly voted on a resolution rejecting the Crimea referendum, it was far from unanimous. There were 100 countries for, 11 against and fully 58 abstaining.

  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Russia Ambassador Vitaly Churkin about citation in the meeting of Kosovo as a precedent, and about UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon having met the leader of the Svoboda Party.

  Churkin took issue with a high US official claiming there was a referendum in Kosovo, and expressed concern about Ban meeting with a party deemed among other things racist and anti-Semitic.

   Inner City Press ran, before 12:10 pm, to the UN noon briefing in order to ask these and other questions. But Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq had begun and ended the briefing before 12:09. 

   This contrasts to Ban's Spokesperson's Office having, for example in October 2013, delayed the noon briefing so thata(nother) country's speech could be covered, click here for that.

  When asked on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Accesswhat the Spokesperson's Office policy is, Haq said, "You want a policy where it's all about you." We'll have more on this.

  In the GA meeting beyond Kosovo, Nicaragua cited the Honduras coup as an analogy. St. Vincent's cited Grenada, saying the positions are reversed but abstaining because the Ukraine resolution is about the principals, not the principles.

  Uruguay cited Kosovo and also the referendum carried out in the Malvinas / Falkland Islands. UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant was in the room, and tweeted at; if there's a response we'll publish.

   Earlier it was 4:25 am in New York and Washington when theInternational Monetary Fund announced its preliminary agreement for a $14 - $18 billion loan program with Ukraine. 

 Inner City Press asked the IMF to confirm or comment on reports that the Ukrainian "increase the price of natural gas for household consumers by an average of 50%" is attributable to the IMF. 

  At the IMF's 9:30 am embargoed briefing, IMF deputy spokesperson William Murray read out the question then said that the program has five components, including energy sector reform.

  He said Ukraine will reduce subsidies to the energy sector, and that current prices in Ukraine are two to three times lower than in neighboring countries. He said, as it did to other questions, that responses were given in a press conference in Kyiv.

 In New York at the UN, a General Assembly meeting started at 10 am. Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin recounted history and said radicals "called the shots" in the change of government. We've noted that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with the leader of the Svoboda party while in Kyiv.

  In Washington later on March 27 the US Congress is expected to act on a $1 billion loan guarantee to Ukraine, but not on the IMF changes the Obama administration requested. Obama Press Secretary Jay Carney issued a statement welcoming the IMF preliminary deal, concluding that "We also remain committed to providing the IMF with the resources it needs – in partnership with Congress – to provide strong support to countries like Ukraine as well as reinforcing the Fund’s governance to reflect the global economy."
  
  Two weeks ago on March 13, the day after several US Senators argued that International Monetary Fund quota reform would have to be approved by Congress to enable the IMF to meaningfully assist Ukraine, Inner City Press asked IMF spokesperson Gerry Rice if this is true. Video here, from Minute 12:05.

  Rice genially said several times that the question couldn't or wouldn't be answered while the IMF mission is “in the field” in Ukraine. He initially gave the same answer to Inner City Press' question that had nothing to do with Ukraine: is it true, as Russia reportedly argued at the most recent G-20 meeting, that quota reform could be accomplished without US approval, under some set of rule changes?

  Rice during the briefing repeated this could not be answered while the mission is in Ukraine. Later it was conveyed that the reform is not possible without US approval. The answer is appreciated: a benefit of asking in person. But Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access) hope to make the online asking of questions work better from now on. 

 And on March 27, for example, IMF deputy spokesperson William Murray read out this question from Inner City Press:

"On Zimbabwe, please confirm IMF is re-opening its office and respond to Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa saying part of the deal included cutting Zimbabwe's wage bill from 70 percent of the budget but this pledge will not be met, 'addressing it overnight would mean very drastic measures which I indicated to them (IMF) I am not prepared to take. That would mean retrenchment of civil servants.'"

  On March 27, Murray said he would not comment directly on what the Finance Minister said, but pointed to a press release we will add a link to.

  Back on March 13 in another non-Ukraine question, Inner City Press asked Rice about a book published earlier this week in Hungary, that the then-economy minister in 2011 told Goldman Sachs that the government would be going to the IMF for a program. Since much currency trading ensued, Inner City Press asked if the IMF has any rules limiting its government interlocutors from trading on or sharing insider information.Video here, from Minute 31:12.

  Rice said there are confidential provisions. But are those only for the contents of communication and not the existence of communications or negotiations? We'll see.

  

On Syria, Attacks on Latakia Port Raised To UN, Chemical Weapon Disputes, Reuters Chief Grabs the Mic

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 28 -- Outside the UN Security Council meeting on Syria on March 28, Ambassadors and the UN's humanitarian chief Valerie Amos debated attacks including on Kassab and the port of Latakia.

   Inner City Press asked Syrian Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari about Latakia and a Syrian Coalition press release saying he had threatened "to commit a massacre using chemical or conventional weapons under the pretext of protecting convoys of chemical weapons."

   Ja'afari replied that this statement lacked seriousness and said that even the chemical weapons removal ships in Latakia port had been fired at. He said he had raised the attacks on Latakia to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, his Deputy Jan Eliasson and political adviser Jeffrey Feltman as well as Disarmament chief Angela Kane.

  Since the attacks on Latakia raised in the Security Council's closed door consultations on March 26, as reported on by Inner City Press (below), Inner City Press prepared to ask March's Council president Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg about the issue. 

  Lucas nodded, awaiting the question when the Reuters bureau chief, Lou Charbonneau, shouted out from the other side of the stakeout. He insisted, "I have the microphone," even though Ambassador Lucas was the one managing the order of questions.

  Noting the absurdity -- especially in light of a complaint about "not being able to do" his work Charbonneau filed with the UN, then got blocked from Google's Search by a bogus Digital Millennium Copyright Act filing, click here to view -- Inner City Press nevertheless indicated it would resume after Reuters' demanded question.

  That one turned out to be one that Charbonneau said he intended to ask the UN's Valerie Amos. You should have, he was told.

   On Latakia, Lucas said it had come up and that there are attacks throughout Syria, citing Valerie Amos' previous answer. When Inner City Press asked Amos about attacks, specifically on the largely Armenian Kassab, Amos said there are attacks all over but some impede aid movement more than others.

   Ja'afari had said he wrote to Amos "in English" urging her to raise Kassab in her briefing, and she did.  There was no time to ask Amos of humanitarian issues elsewhere, such as the Sudans and Myanmar.  When US Ambassador Samantha Power came out and spoke, transcript to follow, question were taken only from CBS, Reuters, Fox (apparently not intended) and France 24. So it goes.

   Back on March 26 on Turkey's shoot down of a Syrian plane, Ja'afari said on March 22 he spoke with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Malcorra -- and with Jeffrey Feltman, then in Kyiv.

  Ja'afari told Inner City Press he has asked UN humanitarian chief Valerie Amos to be sure to include the attacks on "the Armenians" in Kassab in her briefing to the Council.

  Also in response, Ja'afari said that the Al Nusra Front is shelling Latakia, where chemical weapons are being taken out of Syria.

  Moments later a Security Council member exclusively told Inner City Press that Russia has proposed a statement on this shelling of Latakia.

  On the March 21 event, described below, Ja'afari told Inner City Press he complained to Malcorra, that the UN is being "corrupted by petro-dollars."

When Qatar sponsored an event at the UN on March 21 at which a report on torture in Syria which Qatar also funded was presented, it was not listed in the UN Journal. Nor was the event broadcast on the UNTV Webcast.

  Inner City Press heard about it and asked the UN's top two spokespeople:

"there is an event in Conference Room 4 right now, sponsored by Qatar, which is no listed in today's UN Journal, nor is it on UN Webcast http://webtv.un.org/ but it appears to be being filmed. Please explain the legal status of this meeting, if there are any sponsored beyond Qatar, how it was publicized and if any request to have it webcast was made. Thanks, on deadline."

  But no answer was provided. Inner City Press ran to the event and from the back of a three quarters empty Conference Room 4 asked why the event was so stealth: not in the UN Journal, not webcast.

  The Permanent Representative of Qatar answered, saying it was a "special event" to which Qatar had invited (some) member states and groups, and (some) media. There is a UN Media Alert, but this event was not put in it.

  Perhaps it was publicized by the Gulf & Western United Nations Correspondents Association, which has twice hosted faux "UN" events by the Syrian National Coalition or Syrian Coalition. (In both cases, the Free UN Coalition for Access suggested that the SNC hold its events in the UN briefing room, accessible to all journalists.)

  Since French Ambassador Gerard Araud, the first questioner flanked by representatives of Saudi Arabia and of Turkey which earlier in the day banned Twitter, has spoken about "fakes" and others about accountability, Inner City Press asked if the groups Al Nusra and ISIS, and those who fund them such as private individuals in Qatar alluded to at the US State Department briefing earlier in the day, could or would be held accountable.

  The SNC representative emphasized what he called links between the Assad regime and ISIS, saying it was too easy to blame the Gulf countries.

Here's from the March 21 US State Department briefing transcript:

Question: you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors. Do you also have concerns about the reasons that these countries said that they withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar? In other words, do you – if you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors, do you also have concerns about Qatar’s behavior, which – alleged behavior, let’s say – which led to these countries withdrawing their ambassadors?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know one of the issues that has been mentioned is the issue of private donations to extremists – and that’s something that some have mentioned – operating in Syria and elsewhere. It remains an important priority in our high-level discussions, and one that we also certainly raise with all states in the region, including Qatar, including the Government of Kuwait, wherever we have concerns.

After Inner City Press asked about the sponsorship of the event, a one-page "Joint Statement by the Co-Organizers" was passed out, listing among the co-organizers France, the UK, US, Belgium, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Inner City Press tweeted it. Watch this site.