For Afghanistan in 2015, Is A New UN Security Council Resolution Needed by Some Countries?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 3, more here -- Given the new bilateral agreements between Afghanistan with NATO, and separately with the US, is a new UN Security Council resolution needed?

  Back on October 9, German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere said, “We would want to have a UN resolution, a resolution of the U.N. Security Council.”

   Now as the deadline draws near, and it emerges that contrary to what was previously announced the US does envision conducting some combat operations in Afghanistan after the end of the year, the question is whether a resolution will be adopted in the UN Security Council.

   Inner City Press on December 3 asked the ambassadors of both Russia and the United Kingdom about it. Russia's Vitaly Churkin told Inner City Press, “there is anther complicating element. The American operations in Afghanistan on basis of the bilateral agreement with Afghanistan are not covered by this NATO Afghanistan arrangement, and therefore will not be covered by this possible Security Council resolution.”

   He said, “the American seem to have changed their minds. Originally they announced that after this year they would not engage in combat operations. Now there are reports that after all they do envision the possibility of some combat operations. I think that in that context there also needs to be a concern, will NATO be able to stay within announced scope of just training and supporting the Afghani forces?”

 Churkin said that some in NATO now says that a resolution is not absolutely necessary but that “this is required by some counties, both members of NATO and non members of NATO who theoretically would like to participate. But they have their requirements and we have our requirements on the Security Council,” including a substantive end of mission report, and future reporting to the Security Council.

  He concluded that there are too many unanswered questions to say with certainty that the Security Council will be able to adopt a resolution. He said, “there are curtain requirements, we believe, which need to be met. The first requirement is that before we encourage in any way a new operation we need to be updated on the results of the previous operation. At this point there is no assurance that we’ll receive a substantive report. Not just a short sentence that they have completed their mission, but one containing an analysis of what has been accomplished and what has not. This is the first requirement. Another requirement is that we believe that the Security Council cannot simply produce a text of a resolution and let the process go into the blue. We need reports to the SC. And for some reason NATO countries are reluctant to give us assurance that they are going to report their activities to the SC. Without periodic reports to the SC we believe it’s rather strange to endorse something and than to forget all about it.”

  Moments later, Inner City Press asked UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant about it, as he headed to the Permanent Five members' meeting room, into which his Australian counterpart Gary Quinlan had already gone in. Lyall Grant told Inner City Press that some do want such a resolution, and that there'll be a discussion. Watch this site.

    

At UN, Empty Talk of Egypt and Culture Wars on Lesbian Rights, of Muslim Peacekeepers and Decay under Ban

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 1 -- Amid protests by Egyptians in Cairo, New York and elsewhere, the UN Security Council held its end of presidency reception Monday night, hosted by Bosnia in a rooftop space a half dozen blocks from the UN.

That Egypt is the big world news but not present in the Security Council, nor meaningfully addressed by the out of town Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was the talk of the night.

Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representative of one of the Council's permanent members why Egypt had not even been mentioned in consultations. “It's an internal matter,” he said. “We're following it closely, it's a question of timing and that it must be done without violence.”

The spokesman for a Western member said that “the capitals are studying it, they have to get their own positions clear before even thinking of acting through the Council.”

The UK has been most clear, in statements by David Cameron and foreign minister William Hague: Mubarak is a “friend of Britain” and the prospect of Muslim Brotherhood involvement in a subsequent government is abhorrent. To some it echoes the Cold War: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. For thirty years of “emergency” rule.

There were of course other topics. Inner City Press, which reported earlier in the day on attacks in the ECOSOC Committee on NGO on a women's group from Serbia which mentioned discrimination against lesbians in its application for consultative status, asked Serbia's Permanent Representative about the group. He was jovial but hadn't heard of this new Serbian showdown.

The irony is that after Serbia's lower down representative spoke in favor of the group, so did the US and Bulgaria, as well as Belgium and the EU. On the other side were Pakistan, Russia, Sudan and Morocco.

Inner City Press asked Morocco's Permanent Representative about his country's opposition to to the group, the Autonomous Women's Center. “It must be on behalf of the OIC,” he said. Later another Moroccan said his country represents the Arab Group this year in the NGO committee, replacing Egypt whose staffer famously said of a gay rights applicant for consultative status to the UN, “We've asked questions but we just can't get any straight answers from them.”

Now that Egyptian regime is on the rocks, despite its long time Permanent Representative trying to act otherwise at the UN on Monday, delivering a speech to the UNDP executive board as if nothing was happening.

So while the world sees and talks about a wave of change sweeping the Arab world, this leaves no mark inside the UN, where Arab countries like Morocco score points by opposing gay rights.

There was talk of Islamic peacekeeping, with an Asian Muslim country's Permanent Representative telling Inner City Press his country has offered troops to Somalia's Transitional Federal Government if the force ever “gets blue hatted,” or comes under UN command. He said that same of Afghanistan: his country will only send soldiers if the UN is in charge, not ISAF.

While several members characterized Bosnia's presidency in January as rather sleepy, its reception got higher marks from the crowd of diplomatic Epicures, noshing on Kobe beef sliders and burek like Bosnian pastry filled with meat and spinach.

The Bosnian missions first couple ended the evening by dancing, as the lights of midtown Manhattan flickered through the glass roof. Their Deputy was congenial, having served her country through thick and thin.

Inner City Press' question to the Perm Rep about a new documentary about UN peacekeepers in Bosnia buying women -- where was the Autonomous Women's Center then? -- met with a smiling “I'm not working tonight.” But of course he was. And through the course of January he got more accessible and comfortable at the Council stakeout, to his credit, unlike some in the UN.

The deterioration under the Ban Ki-moon “regime” as one called it was also in the air. A well placed Council source recalled “Martin [Nesirky] got excluded from the Council's consultations and all we got was a letter from [Vijay] Nambiar.” Ban's chief of staff Nambiar was in attendance Monday, but chief adviser Kim Won-soo did not seem to be. Susan Rice was nowhere to be seen, nor it appeared was her UK counterpart Mark Lyall Grant.

The Permanent Representatives of France, China and Russia were all present, along with those of just left Council members like Austria and Turkey. Israel's prime minister is much concerned of regime change in Egypt. Israel's hard line Permanent Representative was not seen at that reception Monday night, but earlier on Monday Israel joined the defense of the Serbian group on lesbian rights. And so it goes at the UN.

Footnote: earlier on Monday several dozen UN correspondents discussed the lack of information coming out of Ban Ki-moon's UN, unfavorably comparing Ban's answering in New York to what he does, for example, while in Addis Ababa the last few days, including a France 24 interview against deferring announcing a campaign for a second term.

Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky was reviewed, called alternately rude and “in a tough spot” not getting any information from Ban. We'll address this going forward - later today, and in this new month when Brazil heads the Council, holding a debate on Security and Development on February 11. Watch this site.

UN Conflicted on Drone Deaths, Unaware of Karzai Censorship, Cambodia Impunity

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un1inpun030110.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 1 -- Despite its asserted importance in Afghanistan, the UN was not aware Monday of the Hamid Karzai government's outlawing and censoring of media coverage of Taliban attacks.

Inner City Press asked the spokesman for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who was on Monday in Hollywood, what Mr. Ban or the UN thought of the restrictions. "I'll need to look into it," Mr. Nesirky said. Video here, from Minute 45:55.

Last week Karzai unilaterally struck down the UN's role in the Electoral Complaints Commission, and when Inner City Press asked, Mr. Nesirky referred only to some mirky UNAMA statements. Perhaps Karzai was thus emboldened to censor the media.

The UN's expert on children and armed conflict, Radhika Coomaraswamy, on Monday praised U.S. and ISAF forces for imcreasing their safeguards against killing civilians, including children.

Inner City Press asked Ms. Coomaraswamy how this assessment squares with the killing by the U.S. on February 21 of 27 civilians in Uruzgan Province. Video here, from Minute 33:26.

Ms. Coomaraswamy nodded and said she had met with General McCrystal the very next morning. She said the U.S. has good better at announcing investigations and apologies, but that the next steps will be remediation and accountability. But when will that be?

Just as the UN paid lip service to freedom of the press, but had nothing to say as that freedom was eliminated by its "partner" Hamid Karzai, so Mr. Nesirky also on Monday said that the purpose of tribunals with the UN-affiliated one in Cambodia is to ensure accountability. Video here, from Minute 44:14.

But in light of government interference, there is a call for Mr. Ban to appoint an Assistant Secretary General to try to "save" the Cambodian court.

There is already a UN Under Secretary General, Patricia O'Brien, ostensibly responsible for the UN's interface with the Cambodian tribunal. At a rare press conference by Ms. O'Brien, Inner City Press sought to ask about the Cambodia court, but Ms. O'Brien declined to answer.

Monday Inner City Press asked that she come and provide a briefing not only about Cambodia, about also the UN's Hariri tribunal, and certain other matters. We'll see.

Footnote: Across from UN headquarters on Monday morning, protesters held signs begging the UN to make the Bangadesh miilitary end Operation Uttaran, which has resulted in the death of civilians in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.

At Monday's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Mr. Nesirky about the protest, which also called for the UN Development Program to suspend a program in the area. Mr. Nesirky said he was not aware. Video here, from Minute 43:35. We'll be waiting to see what the UN says -- and does. Watch this site.

Update: after preparation of the above, five hours after the question was raised, the UN provided this answer:

In reference to your question on Bangladesh from today's Noon Briefing, to which Martin said he'd look in to... The United Nations system in Bangladesh is closely monitoring the situation in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and hopes that all will unite to help the recovery from this tragedy in a spirit of peace for the greater good of the nation. Also, the United Nations stands ready to provide targeted assistance to those in need, in close collaboration with the Government.

But isn't that the problem? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1inpun030110.html