Ali Kourani Found Guilty on Hezbollah Charges After Dubious Legal Advice at Seton Hall Will Appeal

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon

SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 16 – Ali Kourani was found guilty of material support to Hezbollah on May 16 in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.Afterward Kourani's lawyer Alexei Schacht said Kourani will appeal, focusing on the admission into evidence of statements he made to FBI agents at meeting at Seton Hall. 

  This was the subject of a suppression hearing before SDNY Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, with Schacht arguing that the statements were involuntary and based on false promises of confidentiality by the FBI agents. Kourani's lawyer at the time, Mr. Denbeaux, was affiliated with Seton Hall. It seems a mutual friend Mr. Hickman put the two together.

  Inner City Press asked Schacht if Kourani may have some recourse with regard to Denbeaux. It seems not, since that might require as a predicate that Kourani was found not guilty.

  In a conference on March 9, 2018 with Schacht and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Emil J. Bove and Amanda L. Houle, Judge Hellerstein asked Schacht, "Let's say Mr. Kourani and his lawyer had a deep conversation, the lawyer gave professional advice that Mr. Kourani can't be prosecuted and it turns out that advise was wrong. Does Mr. Kourani have a remedy other than against his lawyer?"

  Schacht replied, "He certainly has, I think, under those circumstances a valid claim of ineffective assistance of counsel."

  It is unclear if after the May 16 verdict that is the case. More on Patreon, here.

  The sentencing will be on September 27 at 11 am. Schacht explained that the Sentencing Guidelines are extremly tough in terrorism cases, with the defendant's lack of criminal history making no difference. And so, the appeal. Inner City Press will continue to follow this case.

As the US summed up its Hezbollah terrorism prosecution against Ali Kourani with photos of his passport with an SIM card taped in it, the courtroom was full. Hezbollah's yellow and green logo was emblazoned on the exhibits, many headlined "Hizballah Grooming." 

  Ali Kourani traveled to China for the IJO; he took photographs of 26 Federal Plaza and 335 Adams Street in Brooklyn. Then after one of his handlers Mohammed Shawraba was exposed as a double agent for Israel, the IJO cut Ali Kourani loose. He offered evidence to FBI agents during meetings at Seton Hall, asking in exchange that his estranged wife's family be put on the no-fly list. 

  He asked his lawyer Denbeaux to step outside and tried to make a deal. It did not work. 

From Lebanon, Kaag Briefs UNSC About #YouStink, Press Elements Emerge

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 2 --  When the UN's Special Coordinator on Lebanon Sigrid Kaag emerged on July 8 from the UN Security Council, Inner City Press asked her if there has been any progress or at least effort on the problem caused by the World Bank classifying Lebanon as a middle income country, and about torture in Roumieh prison. Video here.

  Kaag could not have known then that the #YouStink protests would grow in Lebanon to the extent that she returned to brief the Security Council, albeit by video, on September 2. 

 For this briefing or its staging, Inner City Press is told, Hezbollah trashed UN DPA chief Jeffrey Feltman, who previously covered the region for the US State Department, as still reflected each month in the Hillary Clinton email releases, and in McClatchy interview.

  Afterward the Security Council issued these Elements to the Press:

  "The members of the Security Council were briefed today by the UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Sigrid Kaag, on the situation of the camp. The members of the Security Council will continue to closely follow and monitor developments in support of the unity, sovereignty and stability of Lebanon and its people.

  "The members of the Security Council expressed their support for the government of Lebanon and Prime Minister Salam. The members of the Security Council reiterated the basis of the statement by the president of  the Security Council on March 19, 2015.

  "The need for the Parliament of Lebanon to meet and elect a president as soon as possible, in order to put an end to the constitutional instability. The members of the Security Council look forward to the high-level meeting of the international support group for Lebanon that will take place during the upcoming session of the UN General Assembly."

  One wonders what's up with UNIFIL's garbage -- particularly given its fellow UN Peacekeeping mission MINUSTAH's beyond-you-stink in Haiti, introducing cholera. But that's another story.

  Back on July 8, Kaag's reply about the World Bank was that things take time, but that she would like to see the issue discusses at the upcoming Financing for Development conference in Addis Ababa -- where as noted by the Free UN Coalition for Access some but not all of the Zone 9 Bloggers have just been released -- and that it was raised at the World Bank's and IMF's most recent meetings.

  On torture, Kaag pointed to her response when the video emerged, and said that a comprehensive response is being pushed for, citing the CAT, ombudspersons and training. Video here.

Back on March 17, Kaag said that the "UN family" stands ready to help with Lebanon's development. 

  Inner City Press asked Kaag about the use of white phosphorus by Israel, cited in Paragraph 10 of the underlying 1701 report.

    On this last, Kaag said to ask the UNIFIL spokesperson - done.

(On the killing of a Spanish UNIFIL peacekeeper, of which Inner City Press asked the Security Council's president for March, Francois Delattre of France, Delattre make a point of answering, saying that the investigation is ongoing but to check that with the UN Spokesperson - to be done).

  Kaag said on March 17 that there is a debate about the financing for development implications of "middle income" status, that Lebanon is not the only country facing humanitarian issues which faces this problem. The question remains, how will the "UN family" address it?

   “It is absurd that Lebanon has no access to World Bank grants because it is considered a middle-income country,” UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres' prepared remarks to the UN Security Council on Syria on February 26 said.

   When he delivered the remarks, he added in Jordan. So Inner City Press, when Guterres came to the Security Council stakeout after that meeting, asked him about this addition, and if he -- and UN Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator Kyung-wha Kang beside him -- would be pushing for a change at the World Bank, which is official a part of the UN “family.”

  Guterres replied that development assistance should taken into account this new world, where Lebanon and Jordan but also Chad, Niger and Cameroon with respect to Nigeria, and Ethiopia and Kenya with respect to Somalia, are the “first line of defense for global collective security.”Video here.

  Lebanon's Ambassador to the UN Nawaf Salam told Inner City Press, "This is unfortunate indeed," here.

 But what will be done? Watch this site.
   

After UNIFIL Peacekeeper Killed, Differing Reports on UN Security Council, Spanish Ambassador Roman Oyurzun Marchesi

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 28 -- After a UN Peacekeeper from Spain was killed in Lebanon, UN Peacekeeping deputy Edmond Mulet briefed the UN Security Council. Afterward, at least until 9 pm, the only output was "elements to the press," followed by Spanish Permanent Representative Roman Oyurzun Marchesi's first stakeout since joining the Security Council four weeks ago.

  Will an internal UN investigation be enough for Spain? The question was not taken or answered, yet.

  His answer that it came from the Israeli side, in response to Hezbollah, was widely reported as Spain blaming Israel. But Reuters and France 24, for example, said France asked for the meeting, when the Security Council's president said the request was from the UK.

  Reuters said Herve Ladsous would be the briefing - but he was not, rather it was Edmond Mulet.

 Mulet told the Press that a UNIFIL "Board of Inquiry" will look into the death, and that its report will be public.

  Inner City Press asked Mulet how long it would taken. Mulet said UNIFIL has been asked to expedite the Board of Inquiry.

  We note that UNlike the head of UN Peacekeeping, Herve Ladsous, who refuses to answer Press questions (most recent video here) Mulet did his job, answering factual questions about UN Peacekeeping. Maybe he should be in charge. We'll haver more on this.

   

After UNIFIL Peacekeeper Killed, US Issues Statement on Hezbollah

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 28 -- When a UN Peacekeeper from Spainwas killed in Lebanon, the spokesperson for the UN's UNIFIL meeting stopped responding to media questions. On the afternoon of January 28, the US State Department's spokesperson put this out:

"The United States strongly condemns Hezbollah’s attack today from Lebanon on Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in blatant violation of the cease fire between Lebanon and Israel and UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which called for the immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks.  We support Israel’s legitimate right to self-defense and continue to urge all parties to respect the Blue Line between Israel and Lebanon.  We urge all parties to refrain from any action that could escalate the situation.

"We are deeply concerned by reports of injuries and casualties on both sides of the Blue Line, including the reported deaths of IDF soldiers and the death of a Spanish UN peacekeeper from the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).  We extend our sincere condolences to the victims’ families.  We also stand with UNIFIL as it fulfills its important mandate to maintain peace and security along the Blue Line.

"Hezbollah continues to incite violence and instability inside Lebanon by attacking Israel and by its presence and fighting inside Syria, which violates Lebanese leaders’ agreed policy of dissociating Lebanon from foreign conflicts."

  But who killed the UN peacekeeper? And what are the UNIFIL Mission's rules of engagement? Inner City Press asked the UN Spokesperson, video here. 

And there will be a briefing by UN Peacekeeping's elusive - we're being diplomatic - chief Herve Ladsous. (Here's video of his last appearance.)

The reports from Lebanon were that Israeli Defense Forces killed the peacekeeper. This raised the stakes for, and some questions about, the United Nations.

   Recently when UN peacekeepers in northern Mali were fired at -- none killed in the incident -- UN Peacekeeping responded with air strikes from attack helicopters, killing five.  Is this only how UN Peacekeeping respond to its personnel being fired at in Africa, or only in Mali?

   Inner City Press asked the Spanish Mission to the UN if there is any UN Security Council statement being worked on. They responded, it is being worked on right now. 

  How will it address who is responsible for the killing? Killing a UN peacekeeper, the Security Council has often said, can be a war crime.

Footnote: While awaiting response to written questions Inner City Press put to the UNIFIL's top four spokespeople, for now they still compare favorably to the UN's mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH, whose spokeswoman Sophie Boutaud de la Combe has put many UN Headquarters-based media on the mission's press e-mail list, but hasrefused as to Inner City Press, which closely covers not only cholera in Haiti but also the UN peacekeepers there, as in Mali, firing at protesters.

  The Mali mission at least sends out statements; from MINUSTAH we have only silence. This is the Ladsousification of the UN -- see most recent footage of Ladsous, refusing Press questions about the DR Congo, here. We'll have more on all of this.

    

Rouhani Q&A All Nuclear & Syria, No Afghanistan, Yemen or Bahrain - But Will "He" Call?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 26 -- When Iranian president Hassan Rouhani held an hour-long press conference across the street from the UN on September 26, nearly all of the questions were about Syria and the P5+1 nuclear negotiations.

  No questions were asked or allowed about Iran's view and actions in such countries as Afghanistan, Bahrain or Yemen. The same questions were asked again and again, with some telling variations. 

 IRIB asked about the imprisonment in Iran of the Washington Post's Jason Rezaian - then quickly turned to Iran's hauled to the US. (The Free UN Coalition for Accesssays, Free 'em all.)

  On the nuclear negotiations, earlier on September 26 Inner City Press asked Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov about their status. Lavrov told Inner City Press, ““I remain cautiously optimistic. If we look at the drafting process of the text, we're very close to our goal but there are sections remaining. The devil is in the details..We still have time until Nov 24, the deadline for the negotiating teams and we'll do our best to ensure that remaining issues are resolved.”

Rouhani said, “after 12 years of up and downs, we must look toward the future and make the courageous decisions on this issue. Iran will never surrender its legal right to civil nuclear activity.”

Asked if Iran would oppose not just Sunni but also Shi'a terrorists, Rouhani shot back that Iran opposed the Shi'ite MEK. He emphasized that Hezbollah is in the parliament in Lebanon.

When AP asked if for nuclear concessions Iran would “help the US” against ISIL, Rouhani said, “You mean the US helping Iran?” He said Iran was the first to assist Iraq against ISIL.

Rouhani told one wan questioner her numbers were “propaganda.”

Richard Roth of CNN asked if Rouhani would be disappointed if this year on the way to the airport he doesn't receive a telephone call from “Him.” Rouhani said such calls are not important. But will He make the call? Watch this site.

   

Using Gaza, Syrian Coalition Says It "Disproves" Assad & Hezbollah

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 16, more here -- Amid the crisis in Gaza, the Syrian Coalition now of Hadi al-Bahra has issued this:

The War on Gaza Disproved Assad’s and Hezbollah’s “Resistance”

Mohammed Khair Banco, member of the political committee, said that “the Israeli war on Gaza has revealed Assad and Hezbollah’s lies about resisting the Israeli occupation. Hassan Nasrallah has once vowed to throw the Israeli occupation in the sea, but it was proven later that his statements were part of his plans to extend his control over the region. He has distanced himself from the war on Gaza leaving the Palestinian resistance alone against the occupation. Instead of sending his militiamen to fight against the Israeli occupation, he sent them to Syria to fight along the Assad regime, obeying orders from Iran’s Ayatollahs. Hezbollah’s efforts to win the sympathy of the Arab world, especially in Lebanon and Syria, have now failed with its inability to respond to the Israeli aggression on Gaza.” Banco also points out that Hezbollah has done nothing beyond condemning the aggression on Gaza through its media outlets, though its chief has not yet appeared on the party’s TV channel to condemn the onslaught realizing that all his previous lies have now been exposed." Furthermore, Banco lashes out on the hypocrisy of the countries that have been giving Assad unconditional support, especially Russia while, at the same time, criticizing arming Syrian rebels. Assad’s allies have been sending hundreds of tons of weapons to the Assad regime and have been financing terrorism against the Syrian people and their legitimate aspirations. They have also turned a blind eye to Assad’s use of chemical weapons against the civilians and vetoed four UN resolutions on the entry of humanitarian aid to Syria.” 

   While Jarba's was term-limited out, he endorsed his successor, having let him stand in for him at the talks in Geneva. Given Jarba's previous feting inside the UN, in a session run by France and another by the UN Correspondents Association, some wonder if Jarba will now hit the lecture circuit.

   Under Jarba, the Syrian Coalition criticized US President Obama. Coalition spokesman Louay Safi said he "regreted" Obama telling CBS  "he dismissed the idea that supplying US arms to moderate Syrian rebels would have toppled President Assad, calling it a 'fantasy.'"

  Safi said that "Obama's remarks are meant to cover up the inability of his administration to prevent the deterioration of the political and humanitarian situation in the Levant, and also to evade the growing criticism to his policies regarding the Syrian crisis."

  Now ten days later, after the Obama administration on June 26 announced it is asking Congress for $500 million for the vetted opposition -- read, Jarba's Syrian Coalition and the Free Syrian Army, still said by the UN to recruit and use child soldiers -- the Coalition said this:

"Ahmed Jakal, member of the political committee, blamed ISIS’s takeover of Abu Kamal near the Syrian-Iraqi borders on the international community’s reluctance to provide the Syrian rebels with the necessary means to curb the rise of this extremist group. 

'We have always warned of the threat posed by ISIS on Syria and the region. ISIS’s surge will not stop at Abu Kamal, as it moves on to capture more towns in Deir Ezzor province. Therefore, the international community must empower the moderate Syrian rebels to fight ISIS, which act as Assad’s proxy in the rebel-held areas.' Jakal also stresses that 'ISIS’s capture of the oil fields in eastern Syria is a tactical move in the group’s overall strategy to consolidate its newly established “caliphate,” which Iran and the Assad regime use as a scarecrow to influence the world public opinion in their favor.' 

Jakal concluded his remarks pointing out that the major powers have not yet realized that the extremist organizations are being used by regional powers to serve their political and economic interests."

  This follows a Syrian Coalition read-out:

"In a June 27 meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry,  Syrian Opposition Coalition President Ahmad al-Jarba reiterated the Syrian Opposition’s commitment to establishing a strategic partnership with the United States in the fight against terrorism and the Assad regime’s enablers of extremism... The Free Syrian Army has established an operations center in the province of Deir al-Zor to combat ISIS terrorist forces... President Jarba said that Free Syrian Army leadership is prepared to cooperate with the United States and allies to defeat ISIS. In May, President Jarba presented President Obama and Pentagon officials a proposal to enhance FSA capacity as a means to prevent ISIS from further expanding in Syria and Iraq."

  Whether Saudi-backed Jarba has been effective in Syria is highly questionable. Now he's being touted as a solution in Iraq?

Back on June 22 Jarba's Safi said: "Had the Obama administration heeded the advice of the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and his special envoy to Syria we would not have had the current situation in Syria or in the region as a whole.” 

  Is Robert Ford running for office?

  On the Iraq - Syria border, the day after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon speechified on June 20 at the Asia Society that "Syria’s neighbors should enforce a firm prohibition on the use of their land borders and airspace for arms flows and smuggling into Syria," ISIS took over a major crossing at Qaim, 200 miles west of Baghdad.

  At the UN's noon briefing on June 20, after Ban's speech, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric:

Inner City Press: I didn’t see it in his speech, but it seems like at least a large part of the Iraqi border may be controlled by ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and the Sham) or ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant).  So, in terms of realism, does this mean now absent Government control, it’s just an open flow of weapons? Is there an acknowledgement by the UN that nothing can be done in terms of weapons?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Well, I think, you know, Member States, groups that have an influence all have a responsibility to stop the flow of arms.

 Surely ISIS is listening to Ban. The Syrian Coalition of Ahmad Jarba, meanwhile, praised the speech and called for "serious" weapons. Inner City Press asked Dujarric:

Inner City Press: the Syrian Coalition of Ahmed al-Jarba has put out a statement praising the speech and saying that:  “There should be serious weapons and training for moderate opposition forces.”  And I wanted to know, just to be clear, the Secretary-General is not in favour of that, thinks this is a bad call?

Spokesman:  I think the Secretary-General could not have been clearer when he’s speaking about an arms embargo and speaking for the halt of flow of arms into Syria.

 But how clear *is* Ban Ki-moon, when he meets with Jarba?

  Now it turns out that near the Asia Society Team Ban got served with legal papers about having brought cholera to Haiti. Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq told some media -- refusing to answer the Press -- that Ban himself didn't get the papers. We'll have more on this -- and on the UN's pre-spinning of Ban's speech, reviewed here.

   How can Ban's UN be taken seriously on Syria or anything else while dodging service of legal papers for cholera in Haiti, and refusing to answer about it?

On the humanitarian front, Ban “appealed for an end to the sieges” and for “immediate unfettered humanitarian access across internal front lines and across borders.”

  Later on June 20, Dujarric's and Haq's office murkily released a UN report which tracks Ban's speech, which theUN's go-to wire service then said it had "obtained."

  A draft resolution on cross-border aid is still being negotiated in the Security Council. But on June 19, Australian ambassador Gary Quinlan told the Press there would be no vote last week. When there is, will that be news? Watch this site.

   

On Syria Resolution, UK Admits Further Steps Not Automatic, Araud's French Trifecta Leaves Hezbollah Cut UNexplained

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 22 --After the UN Security Council voted 15-0 to adopt the modified draft humanitarian resolution on Syria on February 22, Inner City Press asked UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant about his Russian counterpart Vitaly Churkin's statement that there is no "automaticity" to further steps in the event of non-compliance.

  Lyall Grant to his credit acknowledged that is true, that a separate Security Council action (which could be vetoed) would be necessary to take such further steps. But he said the compromise language that remained in the final resolution was stronger than formulations that had triggered vetoes in the past.

 Chinese Permanent Representative Liu Jieyi came out to give his country's view on the resolution; Inner City Press then asked him how the resolution applies to groups like Al Nusra and ISIS or ISIL, to Syrian communities like in Al Raqqa?  He replied that it applies to everyone.

  French Ambassador Gerard Araud spoke in French and while he did, his spokesperson Frederic Jung gesticulated at the UN (or outsourced Team People) boom microphone operator to whom to give the questions. Two of the three were in French, the other was from France 24.  Inner City Press asked, What about Hezbollah being dropped from the resolution? Araud walked off.

  The proposers of the resolution, Jordan, Australia (calling for ICC action) and Luxembourg (saying non-compliance would trigger further action) all spoke, as did US Ambassador Samantha Power. Like UK Lyall Grant, she said that the reference to (non-automatic) further steps was stronger than a formulation vetoed in the past.  But as Lyall Grant candidly acknowledged, the further steps are NOT automatic.

  From the original draft by Australia, Luxembourg and Jordan, omitted in the final resolution were references to the International Criminal Court, Hezbollah and Quds Force, an explicit reference to the threat of sanctions, and specifics on cross border aid from Turkey and Iraq.

  After the vote, but still in the Chamber, first Luxembourg then Australia praised their work -- which was refreshing from non-Permanent, elected members. Some found Australia's position at odds with how it treats asylum seekers, and for its relatedly anti-immigration position for impunity for Sri Lanka, for example. This question was not taken at the stakeout.

  To not leave them out, Nigeria referred to a proposal, highlighted by Argentina, to stop all introduction of arms into Syria. Rwanda spoke in favor of it to. But, tellingly, it did not make it in. Lithuania spoke at the stakeout, but took no questions.

Twenty hours before the UN Security Council is slated to vote on the re-drafted Syria humanitarian resolution, Inner City Press asked US State Department Marie Harf about the evolution of the draft, specifically the deletion of a reference to Hezbollah and Quds Force, and for any predictions for the rare Saturday vote.

   Harf replied that the draft is substantially the same as that first proposed by Australia, Luxembourg and Jordan -- "we didn't merge" the drafts, she said, referring to Russia's counter proposal. Transcript below. On this: "We didn’t merge the two drafts, right? We negotiated to maintain key provisions of the original resolution that we think are essential to saving lives on the ground."

  She declined to predict a 15-0 vote, but later cited the upcoming vote as a sign of working with China, in contrast to disagreeing on Tibet and President Obama meeting earlier in the day with the Dalai Lama. The State Department on February 21 designated Sarah Sewall as "US Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues.

 (Notably, former Chinese Permanent Representative to the UN Li Baodong recently criticized Australia's policies on asylum seekers, an issue Inner City Press also asked Harf about in light of the deadly riot at Australia's detention facility on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea -- more on that in a separate story.)

    On Syria it was announced on the evening of February 20 that the humanitarian resolution will be voted on at 11 am on Saturday, February 22.  What changed?

   Compare, for example, the "terrorism paragraph," #12 in Australia's (and Jordan's and Luxembourg's) first draft, and #14 now. As first drafted, it explicitly called for Hezbollah and Quds Force to immediately withdraw from Syria.

  Now the draft "in blue," to be voted on, does not mention Hizballah or Quds Force. Instead, it adds to Al-Qaeda "its affiliates and other terrorist groups;" compare to Russia's now "merged in draft," which referred to "Al-Qaeda and other terrorist and extremist groups."  The new addition of "affiliates" applies only to Al Qaeda.  This is one example, as most questioning in front of the Security Council has focused only on timing.

   In front of the Security Council on February 21, Inner City Press asked February's Council president Raimonda Murmokaite of Lithuania, if any changes were being made to the draft formally put "in blue," an archaic reference to the ink color of final drafts. She replied that the blue version is the version.

   After meeting on Syria draft resolutions on February 18, UN Security Council Ambassador exited one by one issuing one liners on projected timing for a vote.

  Russia's Vitaly Churkin, asked if there would be a vote this week, said setting timelines is not really productive.

  More than an hour later when UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant emerged, Inner City Press asked him if he thinks there will be a vote this week. Lyall Grant told Inner City Press, "I think there'll be a vote this week, I hope."

Update of Feb 19, 10:07 am: overnight, Russian foreign minister Lavrov was quoted by Interfax that the draft could be approved in days if Security Council members don't try to "politicize" the issue. Then his way into the Feb 19 "rule of law" debate, Lyall Grant said "we hope we will be in a position to vote this week." 

  Earlier in the day, Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari, who was lead negotiator at the talks in Geneva, re-appeared at the UN in New York; we'll have more on this.

  Australia's Gary Quinlan, asked if his draft with Luxembourg and Jordan is the basis of negotiation, said, Yes.

  Jordan's Prince Zeid, asked the same question, nodded and called the issues urgent.

  After US President Barack Obama met with Jordan's King Abdullah II in Rancho Mirage, California, a self-described US Senior Administration Official said "Jordan and the United States are both working together in the Security Council at present and there is an ongoing, pretty intensive negotiation over a potential humanitarian resolution in the Security Council aimed at not only condemning the atrocities, but trying to create a legal predicate for cross-border operations and cross-line operations."

  In terms of creating a "legal predicate," the Western draft resolution 

"demands that the Syrian authorities promptly facilitate rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access to people in need through the most effective ways, including across conflict lines and across borders from neighboring countries, and lift all restrictions on cross-border humanitarian access, in particular, via Turkey and Iraq, and stresses, in this regard, the particularly urgent need for the Syrian authorities to reopen the Yariba border crossing with Iraq."

  But as described below, the Russian counter-draft

"urges all parties, in particular the Syrian authorities, to promptly facilitate safe and unhindered humanitarian access to people in need, through the most effective ways, including across conflict lines and, where appropriate, across borders from neighboring countries, in accordance with the UN guiding principles of humanitarian emergency assistance."

  Could the US and its allies objec to "the UN guiding principles of humanitarian emergency assistance"? 

  In terms of the negotiations process in New York being "intensive," Inner City Press covered the February 14 session, it was at the "experts" level and the Lithuanian presidency did not provide a summary much less question and answer stakeout afterward, as the Free UN Coalition for Access requested at the beginning of the month. (China, by contrast, held nine Q&A stakeouts during its recent Security Council presidency; for Lithuania as of February 15 the number is zero.)

   The UN Spokesperson's office did not announce in advance mediator Lakhdar Brahimi's down-beat February 15 press conference in Geneva, at which no date was set for any more talks; the UN in New York is closed until February 18. Intensive?

   Russia had counter-proposed a Syria humanitarian resolution, and has also proposed a counter-terrorism Presidential Statement, Ambassador Vitaly Churkin told the press on February 13.

   Churkin said after Russia heard US statements about the rise of terrorism in Syria, the idea of the Presidential Statement arose. He said Russia's counter-draft resolution on humanitarian access also has terrorism language.

   Inside the Security Council in an otherwise nearly empty UN, humanitarian chief Valerie Amos' briefing and closed door consultations continued. Earlier on February 13, Inner City Press exclusively reported on a four page letter the Syrian mission submitted to the Security Council president, naming towns which the armed opposition -- "terrorists" -- were blockading. Click here for that.

  At the February 13 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Martin Nesirky to confirm these blockades. He replied that the UN has never denied that there are blockages from the opposition side. But if Valerie Amos won't name the opposition groups, the UN's or her critique appears to be one-sided.

  On February 10 in the US State Department briefing, deputy spokesperson Marie Harf had talked up the humanitarian resolution; she was asked why the US is supposedly deferring to the too-slow UN, after the high level humanitarian meeting in Rome.

  Churkin said on February 10 that Rome meeting has been "quite useless" and that it "departed from the original conception." On February 13 he criticized it again, contrasting it to what he called Russia's practical approach. He said the Russian embassy in Damascus was involved in the deal(s) to get aid into Homs. 

   US State Department deputy spokesperson Marie Harf on February 13 insisted that the US supports the Australian - Luxembourg - Jordan draft. But what about the Russian submission, now on counter-terrorism? 

  From Geneva, France 24 reported wanly on the Brahimi talks; in New York, it asked Churkin if a vote should be expect before the Olympics are over. He said, there is no connection.

  Neither France 24, nor other ostensibly Syria-focused media have done much follow up, but on January 29 Inner City Press first published quotes from the UN's report on Syria Children and Armed Conflict, specifically that the Free Syrian Army recruits and uses child soldiers: 

"Throughout the reporting period, the United Nations received consistent reports of recruitment and use of children by FSA-affiliated groups."

  Inner City Press asked the US Mission to the UN to respond to the report, since Congress in its 2008 Child Soldiers Prevention Act said the US Government should condemn the use of child soldiers by paramilitaries like the FSA. Inner City Press was told to put the request for comment in writing, and did, to the UK Mission as well.

   The report had already been circulated to Security Council members in English; the UK said it would wait to provide Inner City Press with a comment until the report was made official on February 3, that is to say, when it was translated into the UN's five other official languages and put on the Internet.

   Readers asked Inner City Press where on the UN website to find the Syria child soldiers report. Inner City Press told them it would go online on February 3, and noted that theFree UN Coalition for Access had previously opposed the UN withholding or delaying the release of important document like this.

  In this case, however, the delay affirmatively helped the Syrian opposition. On January 29 they were in Geneva, issuing statements about abuses by the Assad government. They were not asked about the Free Syrian Army's use of child soldiers.

   On February 3, Inner City Press again asked the UK for its comment, and it did arrive the following day on February 4:

"The UK absolutely condemns the use of child soldiers in all cases, and strongly supports international efforts to stop the use of child soldiers. We urge all parties in the Syrian conflict to release any children held in detention.

"Armed conflict affects millions of lives around the world, and children are among those most vulnerable to the effects of conflict. The only way to secure the long-term future of Syria’s children is to find a political solution to the crisis.

"We have made clear our absolute condemnation of the use of child soldiers. As noted in this report, the use of child soldiers by the opposition is not systematic and is limited to certain elements. We have provided training to the Supreme Military Council of the Syrian opposition on the law of armed conflict, and will continue to work with them to help ensure that they meet their obligations under international law."

    Before publishing the UK's quote, Inner City Press again in writing asked two spokespeople of the US Mission to the UN for their comment -- noting that the UK had provided one. As Inner City Press noted, that might be OK for the United Kingdom -- but what about the US, including in light of the 2008 Child Soldiers Prevention Act, which provides for example:

It is the sense of Congress that— 

 (1) the United States Government should condemn the conscription, forced recruitment, or use of children by governments, paramilitaries, or other organizations; 

 (2) the United States Government should support and, to the extent practicable, lead efforts to establish and uphold international standards designed to end the abuse of human rights described in paragraph (1); 

  There are prohibitions on funding which can only be overridden for formal, public findings by the President. Given all this, Inner City Press on February 4 again asked the two spokespeople for the US Mission to the UN its January 30 question: "could the US provide aid to a non-state group, the FSA and its affiliates, which the UN has found using child soldiers?" 

  The New York Times, saying that the child soldiers report was "quietly presented to the Security Council last week," had a quote from the State Department. Why was the report, and this statement, delayed a full six days until the Geneva II talks were over?

  Even more cynically, Voice of America on whoseBroadcasting Board of Governors US Secretary of State John Kerry serves, also ran a delayed / withheld story on the report; Reuters typically didn't bring up the US Child Soldiers Prevention Act  and claimed that the report was released on February 4, when even the Times said it was February 3 -- and see Inner City Press' January 29 story, here.

 On January 29, Inner City Press published additional quotes from the report, including that:

"Boys aged 12 to 17 were trained, armed, and used as combatants or to man checkpoints. For instance, a 15 year-old boy reported being recruited in April 2012 by the FSA in Tall Kalakh (Tartus governate), and participation in military operations.... Also indicative was the case of a 16 year-old boy from Homs who reportedly joined the FSA as a combatant. In March 2013, his family reported to the United Nations that he was still fighting with the group."

And is this boy still fighting with the FSA? There is more to be said about this UN report, but what steps will actually be taken on this UN report? 

on February 14, the following was received from US Mission deputy spokesperson Tony Deaton:

"We are deeply disturbed by the contents of this report and strongly condemn the mistreatment and torture of children in any conflict. We equally condemn the use of child soldiers in Syria and around the world. The use of children in armed conflict is morally reprehensible, and the United States in no way supports or condones this activity. We vet recipients of our assistance to the moderate opposition and work diligently to prevent assistance from falling into the hands of groups that recruit or use children in combat or employ terror tactics."

While we will continue to pursue how the 2008 Child Soldiers Prevention Act applies after the FSA finding in the UN report, we appreciate the US response and publish it in full.

Watch this site.

Here is the US State Department's Feb 21 transcript:

MODERATOR: Up next, Marie, we have Matthew Russell Lee from Inner City Press. Operator, can you please open Matthew’s line? And Matthew, go ahead.

Inner City Press: Thanks a lot. I wanted to ask something on Syria, and then something else you may have something on. It sounds – this humanitarian resolution at the UN is set for voting on tomorrow morning.

MS. HARF: Yes.

Inner City Press: And it looks like the draft or the final draft put into blue or to be voted on has dropped – it dropped a reference that it had in it to Hezbollah and to the Quds Force. And it made – obviously, made changes to try to garner these votes. Well, do you have anything to say about – do you think that these changes are weak in the draft, and do you have a sense it’s going to be 15-nothing, or what do you think?

MS. HARF: Well, a couple points. You are correct. We do expect the Security Council resolution to be voted on tomorrow. And it’s my understanding that this is basically the original draft that we supported that was drafted by some of our colleagues on the Security Council – Australia, Luxembourg, and Jordan. We didn’t merge the two drafts, right? We negotiated to maintain key provisions of the original resolution that we think are essential to saving lives on the ground.

I don’t want to prejudge the outcome. I think one thing I’ve learned is not to make those kinds of predictions. But what I would say is that if China and Russia and everyone else is as concerned as we’ve all said about the humanitarian crisis, then they should support this resolution. So we will see if we can get a vote that goes the right way here – not for our sake, quite frankly, but for the sake of the Syrian people.