On Ukraine at UN Security Council, Russia Makes Four Point Proposal, Here; UN Sidelined?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 11 -- Amid fighting and censorship in Eastern Ukraine, when Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin scheduled a press stakeout for 11:30 am on July 11, that seemed sure to be the topic.

  But Churkin went beyond the usual stakeout to read out a four point plan or elements for a resolution that he said had just be emailed to the Council's other 14 members. Inner City Press obtained a hard copy, the points are:

-Deep concern about the increasing number of casualties among the civilian population, including women and children, as a result of intensified combat operations as well as about the destruction of civilian infrastructure.

-Support for international proposals aimed at the settlement of the domestic crisis in Ukraine, namely the Geneva Statement of April 17 and the Berlin Joint Declaration of July 2.

-Imperative demand addressed to the Ukrainian parties to the conflict to cease violence and fully implement the provisions of the abovementioned documents.

 -Call on the OSCE to facilitate the settlement of the conflict by means of its Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine.

  Inner City Press asked Churkin about Kyiv authorities blocking Russian or even pro-Russian television channels. Churkin called it an "adamant campaign" and noted the killing of journalists, not only Russian, in the East of Ukraine.

  Moments later at the day's UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for the UN's reaction to the proposal - there was none - and about the blocking of television channels. A generic answer about freedom of expression was given. But where is the follow-up?

  Inner City Press asked Haq about the UN, particularly its Department of Political Affairs, being marginalized on Ukraine (because it was not seem as impartial, particularly after leaked telephone calls on YouTube). Haq said it is all up to the Security Council. But doesn't the UN Secretariat have some Good Offices role? Not in this case, apparently. So, where?

  On the economic front, in the International Monetary Fund's Article IV report on Russia, out from under embargo on July 1, the IMF recounts sanctions and counter-sanctions but not its own role in Ukraine including austerity conditions imposed.

   The IMF recites how the US, EU, Japan, Switzerland, and other countries “have adopted sanctions against Ukrainian and Russian individuals and entities in response to the unfolding situation in Ukraine, as well as the suspension of bilateral negotiations on a variety of topics.”

   Then, the IMF continues, “on March 20 and March 24, Russia imposed retaliatory sanctions on U.S. and Canadian government officials. Russia also passed a bill to create a national payment system insulated from foreign companies’ influence, and is considering the creation of a national rating agency.” 

  So is that a good thing? The IMF doesn't say.

   Watch this site.

   

At UN, Access Craved by Human Rights Watch, Job Obtained by Amnesty, But Who Watches the UN?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 30 -- Who watchdogs the UN on human rights, on issues from bringing cholera to Haiti to working with rapists in the Congo, and with child soldier recruiters in Mali?

  When Inner City Press asked Human Rights Watch to disclose what issues its Ken Roth was raising to UN Security General Ban Ki-moon, HRW's UN lobbyist Philippe Bolopion declined, saying that HRW wants to maintain access: "To preserve our ability to have frank discussions with UN officials and advance our advocacy goals, we don't typically communicate on the content of discussions we have with them."

  Amnesty International with its wider membership has generally been more active. But a question is raised this week by the UN hiring as a spokesperson for its Department of Political Affairs the head of Amnesty's UN advocacy office Jose Luis Diaz (whose work, for example on Sri Lanka, we have in full disclosure praised in the past).

  Under the same "anti revolving door" provision that prohibit bank regulators from going directly to work for bank, some might wonder about a person going from a job which presumably includes watchdogging the UN's own performance directly to working for the UN. 

 With all due respect the same questions arise: how long was the job being applied for? Was there any recusal?

  For the human rights "community," if there is one, these may be uncomfortable questions. A UN job may be viewed as better paying, or as offering a better opportunity to impact rather than just complain about issues. 

  But are there safeguards, when already the UN is hardly held to account? We hope to have more on this. Watch this site.

   

UN's Invitation to Eritrea for Somalia Meeting Was Revoked at IGAD's Demand, Sources Say

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, September 26, 2010 -- The Somalia meeting at the UN on September 23 featured a little noticed last minute disinvitation. The UN's Department of Political Affairs had invited Eritrea, which has at least in the past been a member of the regional group IGAD which has hosted the leaders of the Alliance to Reliberate Somalia and detractor say supports the Al Shabab rebels.

But the other IGAD members wanted Eritrea excluded. They prepared a draft Communique which criticized the UN for inviting Eritrea. To avoid the criticism, the UN unceremoniously disinvited Eritrea, just before the meeting began.

Little was said about this. In fact, the political coordinator of a Security Council member told Inner City Press he had not heard about the disinvitation, but saw Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar whispering to Eritrean Permanent Representative Araya Desta, and then his disappearance from the meeting room.

This Security Council member told Inner City Press his country thinks excluding Eritrea was a bad idea. They are a player, he says. Not having them present makes resolution less likely.

Analogy has been made, as it has with respect to most Security Council members other than the US, France and UK being willing to meet with Sudan's Omar al Bashir, to Slobodan Milosevic's participation in the Dayton peace process.

But several IGAD members told Inner City Press Eritrea is such a “spoiler” or troublemaker that it would be a “mockery” to have them present.

Uganda's Permanent Representative Rugunda confirmed to Inner City Press, let's just say, Eritrea was not present when the meeting actually happened.

Whatever one thinks of the wisdom of disinviting Eritrea, it is surprisingly how little has been said or reported about it. Hence this exclusive report, and questions which will be forthcoming. Watch this site.

UN's Kashmir Email was Drafted by DPA from its "Morning Prayers," Watered Down by Nambiar, Blamed on Haq

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 5 -- When the UN made a statement on Kashmir, then stepped away from it and blamed it on an Associate Spokesman, there was more than met the eye. Inner City Press has inquired and finds the following: the initial response on the violence in Kashmir was produced by the UN Department of Political Affairs, in what is called it “morning prayers” meeting, chaired by DPA chief Lynn Pascoe.

Then, even before the statement was released, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, a former Indian diplomat and intelligence operative, edited the statement, “watering it down” as one senior UN official puts it.

After UN Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq emailed the statement to four journalists and it was published, the Indian Mission to the UN protested. They came to meet with the UN, Mr. Nambiar, for more than two hours. Apparently, Nambiar did not fully disclose his initial role in editing the statement.

Next, the UN Spokesman Martin Nesirky stepped away from the statement, emphasizing that Ban Ki-moon never said it, and it was mere “guidance from the Secretariat,” and claiming that it had been misinterpreted. How?

On August 4, Inner City Press asked Nesirky to think it through: if he could walk away from this statement attributable to the Office of the Spokesman for the Secretary General, how can any of his future statements be taken seriously? I have said all I am going to say, Nesirky replied. Okay...

Footnote: attendees that DPA's "morning prayers" quote Pascoe, for example that "Hillary Clinton is going to Colombia, what does she think she can accomplish?" While some attendees conclude from this that Pascoe is aligned with US Republicans who appointed him, others say it establishes his "street cred" as an internaional civil servants. But is this what HRC and Obama want? Watch this site.

From the UN's August 3 noon briefing transcript:

Inner City Press: a controversy has arisen around a statement that Farhan Haq had put out, talking about Indian-occupied Kashmir and calling for restraint. And, basically, it says that the Indian Foreign Ministry or Ministry of External Affairs has taken issues with it, that your Office has clarified that the Secretary-General never made those comments. Have you seen that story, and what can you do to clarify the seeming discrepancy between the Indian Foreign Ministry and your Office?

Spokesperson Nesirky: The Spokesperson’s Office released to the media guidance which was prepared by the UN Secretariat, and that seems to have been taken out of context. This was not a statement of the Secretary-General.

Question: What was taken out of context? This was a formal statement.

Spokesperson: Let me repeat what I just said: the Spokesperson’s Office released to the media guidance which was prepared by the UN Secretariat, and it seems to have been taken out of context. This was not a statement of the Secretary-General. That’s what I have; I don’t have anything to add.

Question: But the statement said the Secretary-General calls for restraint, and is there concern about it?

Spokesperson: As I said, I don’t have anything to add to what I’ve just said.

From the UN's August 4 noon briefing transcript:

Inner City Press: Some think that the way that it was answered yesterday — it’s hard for them to take; what weight should statements by the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General be given if they’re later characterized as mere guidance and the Secretary-General didn’t mean them. For your own purposes, how do we — is this a one-off, or does this somehow change; you get a statement today about Tanzania — is that a statement of the Secretary-General, or is it mere guidance, and from who — who gave the guidance on Kashmir?

Spokesperson Nesirky: You know very well what it said [on Tanzania]: it said “a statement attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General”, and that clearly is a statement. But I don’t have anything beyond what I’ve already said on this topic. Okay?

No, not okay.

At UN, Rebellion and Retaliation in Political Affairs Unit, Pascoe's Transfer Questioned, Faces French - Obama Switch?

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undpa1filenote100809.html

UNITED NATIONS, October 8, updated Oct. 9 -- The UN Department of Political Affairs, charged with working internationally for peace, has devolved into some internal warfare. On October 8, DPA chief B. Lynn Pascoe wrote an angry "note to file" about two of his directors, who rebelled against what many of Inner City Press' sources in DPA call a flawed and even corrupt hiring process. The note to file, after DPA's response, is being published by Inner City Press here.

As Mr. Pascoe's Note to File about "Unacceptable Conduct by Messrs. Martinovic and Heitmann" has it, "a P5 level staff member in my office volunteered for the internal mobility exercise. I reviewed the Vacancy Announcement that was posted for the P5 in the Subsidiary Organs [of the Security Council] Branch, and I deemed that she was qualified for the post."

There was only one problem: public notice of this P5 post has already been published, and three candidates from outside the UN had already applied. They were told that a test would be administered to make the process competitive and merit-based. Then they were told that the examination was canceled "for technical reasons."

One of the suddenly disqualified finalists, from Germany, came to New York and demanded of Mr. Aleksandar Martinovic to know what these "technical reasons" were. Another internal candidate, already expert on sanctions, was also sidelined by Mr. Pascoe's unilateral decision to place his colleague Michele Griffin into the vacant P5 post, effective October 20, 2009.

Returning to Mr. Pascoe's disciplinary version, after he "issued a note to all DPA staff announcing the move, plus one other transfer, on 2 October, 2009" suddenly Mr. Martinovic and Horst Heitmann, the head of the Security Council Division, informed Mr. Pascoe's Special Assistant Karin Ann Gerlach that "they no longer required the post, did not need the staff member I had laterally re-assigned."

This was a protest of Mr. Pascoe's circumvention of an already begun recruitment process, sources tell Inner City Press. But rather than reconsider his actions, challenged by two respected directors in DPA, Pascoe fired off a note to their personnel files, calling it a "direct contravention of... the instructions I issued as head of the Department... unacceptable conduct for senior managers."

For the head of the UN Secretariat's main diplomatic unit to resort to managing his directors by vituperative notes to personnel files strikes some as a bad sign.

Less documented than the above but not entirely unrelated, well placed sources in the UN say that the United States is mulling taking over the Department of Peacekeeping Affairs, thereby displacing its current chief Alain Le Roy, but in exchange giving DPA to Le Roy's native France. They noted, however, that India too is making a claim to the Peacekeeping post. Watch this site.

While there is no mechanism, it appears, for a "note to the personnel file" of Mr. Pascoe, his circumvention of an already begun recruitment exercise, disregard for the protests of two long time directors, and notes to their files do not reflect well on him. Pascoe concludes, "I have asked Mr. [Haile] Menkerios to duly note this incident on both e-PAS' for the 2009/10 cycle."

Mr. Menkerios is known as Pascoe's "go-to" guy for African issues, totally sidelining Pascoe's predecessor as DPA chief Ibrahim Gambari. But with Menkerios reportedly up to replace Rodolphe Adada in Darfur, will he continue as the e-PAS hatchet man against two of his directors?

A month ago, Inner City Press posed a simple question to DPA and its spokesman, about a hiring process. It took more than three weeks to get it answered, and even then, only partially. While that story is finally in preparation, the report above, supported by two documents with Mr. Pascoe's signature, does not require any three week wait. Pascoe's note to file says "they will have an opportunity to respond in writing should they wish." So, on that or Pascoe's response, we have have more. Watch this site.

Footnote: On October 8, the day Pascoe signed the above quoted note to file, Inner City Press asked him questions on the record about both Somalia and Guinea. On the former, both on and off camera, Pascoe presented himself as unaware of the specifics of the United States' curtailment of aid to the UN World Food Program due to questions about the applicability of anti-terrorism laws to aid in the Al Shabaab controlled portions of Somalia. Video here from Minute 7:47.

On the latter, Pascoe expressed outrage about the rapes in Guinea, and said he hoped for an election, to which the UN would provide help. Video here, from Minute 11:29.

Hopefully clearer than in Afghanistan.

Then Inner City Press obtained a copy of Pascoe's note to file, which seems an equally or more accurate reflection of current DPA diplomacy.

Update of October 9, 2009: rather than the more that three weeks it took to answer a simple question about an office overseen by the Department of Political Affairs, this time DPA sent a response the next day:

Subj: in response to your blog posting of today
From: Jared Kotler [at] un.org
To: Inner City Press
Sent: 10/9/2009 12:03:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

Under USG Pascoe’s leadership, DPA is undergoing a process of strengthening and renewal which includes a mobility exercise intended to broaden the experiences of staff members, consistent with broader efforts to create a more mobile and well rounded Secretariat. The staff transfer you refer to on your blog today was taken in that context. Incidentally, you may be unaware that, as established in ST/AI/2006/3, it is entirely within the authority of a Department head to transfer staff laterally within a department. The reasons for the note to the file you refer to on you blog are well summarized therein.

Jared Kotler
Office of the Under-Secretary General
UN Department of Political Affairs

And so, we publish the note to file, here and above. The protest / refusal to go along of two long standing and respected directors in DPA remains noteworthy. Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson, who Inner City Press asked about this on October 9, said that Ban would have not comments on the specifics. The question was and is, does UN "mobility" allow for a hiring process so irregular that long time and respected directors protest it? And is the answer to fire off vituperative notes to file? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undpa1filenote100809.html

At UN, Developing Countries Demand Changes to Ban's Political Affairs Reforms

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un2dpajcc030708.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 7 -- Developing countries have taken strong exception to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's approach to political affairs, calling among other things for an increased focus on Africa and on development initiatives directed by the General Assembly, not only donor nations.

One day after the chief of Ban's Department of Political Affairs Lynn Pascoe told Inner City Press that most country don't link the proposal to reform DPA with a consonant increase in funding for development, the Joint Coordinating Committee of the Group of 77 and the Non-Aligned Movement wrote Pascoe an 11-page letter making just such a link. The March 6 letter directs Pascoe to amend his proposal by, among other things, requiring prior consent of member states before the opening of regional offices, and re-directing the requested funding boost for DPA to Africa. See Letter, obtained by Inner City Press and placed online here.

The letter requests the omission of two references to the UN Development Program, which G-77 member Ecuador this week told Inner City Press is too dominated by Northern donor countries. A deletion of the "One UN" proposal under which UNDP would gain control over other streams of funding is also requested in the letter.

On March 4, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas about opposition expressed by the Group of 77 to Pascoe's restructuring plan. Ms. Montas declined to answer, saying the question should be directed to Pascoe himself, slated to appear on March 5 to unveil a new, and now seemingly controversial, mediation support team to be administered by the Norwegian Refugee Committee. This end-run around UN rules can be seen as an attempt to avoid what the G-77 and NAM refer to in their letter as the primacy of the General Assembly.

In his March 5 press conference, Pascoe said that bypassing the GA's rules would provide desired "flexibility." When Inner City Press asked about criticism in the General Assembly of his restructuring proposal, Pascoe was dismissive, saying that after many meetings with select developing countries, most did not make any link with boosting UN development efforts. The next day, the link was made in the JCC letter requesting detailed amendments to the DPA proposal.

Sources tell Inner City Press that Pascoe, and presumably Ban Ki-moon behind him, are declining to make the requested changes. Whether they can expect approval of their already-delayed "DPA strengthening" proposal remains to be seen. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2dpajcc030708.html

At UN, Political Affairs Plan Slated to Shrink, Development Plan Missing, Along with Budget Officials

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1dpa021208.html

UNITED NATIONS, February 12 -- With much fanfare last Fall, UN management proposed to member states that 103 new hires would be needed to strengthen the Department of Political Affairs. A lengthy report was issued, but the General Assembly did not act on it in its December 21 all-night budget session. Now, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions has opined that DPA needs, at most, sixty posts, and not the proposed 103. ACABQ suggests that fully $8 million of the Secretariat's requested $21 million for DPA is not necessary.

While the deeper scuttlebutt is that the Assembly will refuse to act even on this until a similar strengthening of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs is proposed, Inner City Press on Tuesday asked Spokesperson Michele Montas for a response to the shrinking of DPA plans recommended by ACABQ. Video here; transcript here. Ms. Montas said she would look into it, and also into Inner City Press' question about reports of dozens of recent murders in Southern Sudan by the Lord's Resistance Army, a group with which the Department of Political Affairs is engaged and on which, it would seem, it should be reporting.

Later on Tuesday, a full-paragraph response arrived, also inserted into the day's UN transcript:

"The ACABQ's report (A/62/7/Add.32) on the Secretary-General's proposals for Strengthening of the Department of Political Affairs (DPA) supported the concept and rationale of the Secretary-General and recommended approval of approximately two-thirds of the resources proposed. The issue now goes to the Fifth Committee. It is the Member States who ultimately have the say over the budget, but as this discussion continues the Secretariat will continue to make the case for the full funding of the Secretary-General's proposals, which were developed based on a careful assessment of what DPA needs to carry out its mandated work. The Secretary-General remains strongly convinced that strengthening DPA is a modest investment with a potentially big payoff in that the UN will be in a better position use diplomatic means to prevent and resolve conflicts before they turn into larger and costlier tragedies."

While some UN insiders say that where DPA falters, it is more for lack of will than lack of resources -- they point not only to the UN's recent silence on the Lord's Resistance Army but also to Myanmar as the best current example -- the more concrete question is who will make the Secretariat's case?

UN Comptroller Warren Sach is said to be on vacation -- he is also said to be leaving, that's been in the air for a while -- while another high budget official, Sharon Van Buerle, is also out. The head of the Department of Management Alicia Barcena, who on February 4 candidly told Inner City Press that the glitzy event on the UN's North Lawn, which she had approved, had become inappropriate, soon after that had a broken arm from which she is recovering, away from the UN. (We wish her luck and health.) So who is running the show? And, relatedly, where is the DESA restructuring plan that developing countries have demanded? We will continue to follow this issue.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1dpa021208.html