In Geneva, SNC Calls SANA Propaganda, "Al Arabiya Lies All the Time," Is the Reply, No Question about Annan to Iran

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 25 -- When Lakhdar Brahimi faced the media after his January 25 meeting with Syria's Bashar Ja'afari and the Syrian National Coalition sans Ahmad Jarba, the first question went to McClatchy. But then Al Manar got called on, as well as media from Iran and Syria. At the UN in New York, this does not happen, under the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Brahimi spoke of preliminary talks, January 25 on humanitarian issues, January 26 on prisoners. He said, wisely, that neither side could speak for him. When the last question chosen turned out to be Syrian media, the UN then called on Reuters.

  When the SNC spokesman followed Brahimi, he denounced Syria SANA as propaganda (and was met with a reply, that "Al Arabiya always lies.") He said that a transitional government will begin to be discussed on Monday. Following the UN's practice, he called on Reuters at the end. See below.

   No one asked about Kofi Annan going to Iran, and how it compares to Ban Ki-moon disinviting Iran to the talk on January 20.

  With these Syria talks in Geneva surprisingly going forward, with the two sides in the same room not speaking to each other but only to Lakhdar Brahimi, on January 25 "The Elders" made an announcement.

  Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, as well as Martti Ahtisaari, Desmond Tutu and Ernesto Zedillo, will to the Iran from January 26 to 29, to discuss among other things "mutual respect" and peace in the region: that is, Syria.

  This comes after current UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on January 20 reversed his "decision" of the previous day of inviting Iran to the Syria talks in Montreux. The contrast, some say, couldn't be clearer.

   (Among those not making the obvious comparison was Reuters editor in chief Stephen Adler, bylined on a dispatch from Davos identifying Annan as "Ex-Syria Envoy." Under Adler's watch, Reuters at least through its UN bureau has degenerated into a pass-through for Western missions, alsoseeking to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN then mis-using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to try to cover it it: that is, censor it from Google's Search. Click here for that story. DMCA filing here, via ChillingEffects.org).

   Now in Geneva Syria's Permanent Representative to the UN Bashar al Ja'afari is speaking for the government. In New York, Ban's spokesperson's office has refused to answer a detailed "note verbale" from the Syrian mission about inaccurate answers to Press questions about who attack UN peacekeepers in the Golan. 

 On January 20 in the Security Council, Ja'afari complained again of inaction on complaints by Herve Ladsous, the fourth French head of UN Peacekeeping in a row. This is why the UN is not even the lead mediator on South Sudan, much less the Middle East or Syria.

Ending the Syria speeches in Montreux on January 22, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called them "productive." Then his spokesperson accused some non-Western media of being "disrespectful of the Secretary General of the UN," after he gave the last two questions to Bloomberg and NHK.  How was it productive?

   Even before the afternoon session began, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius took to the Montreux stakeout to say Syrian foreign minister Moallem was "aggressive." This is the same Fabius who in September at the UN declared Ahmad al Jarba the leader of the Syrian people, and refused to take critical questions from the media including about his country's practices.

   Australia was represented not by foreign minister Julie Bishop but rather its Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Peter Woolcott (who also chairs a humanitarian high level group on Syria, it's been pointed out to Inner City Press.).  Bishop is on Washington, and soon New York. 

   Ahmad al Jarba spoke next to last, thanking Saudi Arabia, viewed as his sponsor, as if in an Oscars speech. Ban Ki-moon wrapped up, calling it productive and asking the assembled (hand-picked, without Iran) minister to "wish [him] luck" as he went to speak to the media. 

  There, the questions were chosen much as they are at the UN in New York, as documented and critiqued by the Free UN Coalition for Access -- but in Montreux, this was actively protested. (FUNCA also questioned the UN citing Ban's press conference as a basis to cancel its noon briefing in New York, on South Sudan, Central African Republic, Mali and other countries in which the UN is at least somewhat less marginal or US dominated.)

  When John Kerry held his press conference, only four questions were taken: CBS, a Turkish media, BBC and Al Hurra, on whose Broadcasting Board of Governors John Kerry himself serves. Freedom of the press at today's US State Department we covered yesterday, here.

After the UN's craven reversal on including Iran in the Syria session in Montreux, it has turned out to be a series of speeches mostly by countries significantly less important to that conflict and the region.

   In the morning session on January 22, Italy and Spain spoke and Japan offered money. Turkey spoke without mentioning the Kurds -- but neither did supposed representative of the range of Syrian opposition Ahmad al Jarba.

   Since Jarba's Saudi-sponsored, Saud al Faisal called him "Excellency," pomp like Jarba's faux "UN briefing" with Gulf and Western media in July.

   Using his PresidentJarba Twitter account, on which Inner City Presspreviously reported, Jarba repeated his own speech. Turns out he follows Anonymous, among only 51 follows. Who knew?

   The UK's William Hague's microphone went dead; when it came back on he bemoaned the lack of a women's delegation to the talks. The UN did not push for this on Syria, nor on South Sudan - but Ban Ki-moon highlighted that for a moment, how ever brief, there was a woman in both the Syria and (Jarba) Syrian National Coalition seat. Call it a photo op.

  Behind Hague was a UN alumni, the UK's former political coordinator in the Security Council David Quarrey. His Russian counterpart Vladimir Safronkov was also there, in Sergey Lavrov's delegation.

  Ban Ki-moon announced a lunch break until 2:45 pm, to be followed by 18 more speakers, then the Syria and SNC speakers like rights of reply. What did people think these speeches would accomplish. We'll have a separate story on that soon.

  At the UN on January 21, Inner City Press asked Haq for the UN's response to Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif saying "Ban Ki-moon contacted me several times last week and I stated to him explicitly that we don’t accept any preconditions for participating in the meeting. We regret that Mr. Ban Ki-moon has withdrawn his offer and believe that such an attitude is not appropriate for the status and dignity of the Secretary-General."

  Haq said Ban believed he had "oral understandings" with Zarif. 

  Inner City Press asked Haq, since the Geneva I Communique requires a commitment to a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms, how are Qatar and Saudi Arabia, both of which are among those still providing weapons and more to armed groups in Syria, invited to Montreux? Where's Ban's dismay at that?

   Haq said that Ban is dismayed at the militarization of the conflict. Video here. 

  Earlier on January 21, Inner City Press spoke with Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN Vitaly Churkin about Ban Ki-moon about-face.

  Churkin told Inner City Press, exclusively, "some people let him down, and not necessarily the Iranians."

  Others have analogized Ban to the American Charlie Brown, kicking at empty space when the football is taken away at the last second. Was Ban Ki-moon set up?

   Since the Geneva I Communique requires a commitment to a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms, how for example are Qatar and Saudi Arabia, both of which provide weapons and more to armed groups in Syria, invited to Montreux?
 
   Also, where are the Kurds?  Those who actually control territory in the north, Rojava, are not part of Ahmad al Jarba's turkey-based Syrian Coalition, and were not separately invited to the talks. What about theirdismay? We'll have more on this.

   On January 20, Inner City Press asked Iran's Ambassador about Ban's dismay or disappointment. Video here.

 Outside the UN Security Council later on January 20, Inner City Press asked Iranian Permanent Representative to the UN Khazaee about Ban having been "dismayed" by the Iranian foreign ministry's spokesperson's comments.

  Kazaee replied, "I think all of you are very well aware about the consistency in our position about G2, so the high political officials are expected to act based on realities."

   Yes, realities: minutes after Ban's spokesperson's disinvitation announcement, Jarba's Syrian Opposition Coalition returned to the position voted on with 44 members absent: they will attend the talks in Switzerland.

  Earlier, after Ban's spokesperson's statement Iran's Khazaee said (and his spokesperson sent to Inner City Press) --

"The   Islamic Republic of Iran appreciates the efforts of the UN Secretary General and his special envoy, Mr. Brahimi in finding a political solution for Syrian crisis. Iran has always been supportive of finding a political solution for this crisis.  

"However the Islamic Republic of Iran does not accept any preconditions for its participation in Geneva II conference. If the participation of Iran is conditioned to accept Geneva I communique, Iran will not participate in Geneva II conference."

  After that arrived, Inner City Press asked Syrian Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari about Iran's statement. He replied, "My sincere advice, don't waste your time on this issue -- they will be there."  Then he went into the Security Council, where Syria is listed as the 35th of 47 speakers on the Middle East, with Iran 39th.  What will they say? Watch this site. 

 At 12:30 pm on January 20, Inner City Press asked Nesirky if Ban is equally dismayed at the Syrian National Coalition's spokesperson calling Ban's bait and switch invite "immoral, even in politics."  Nesirky declined to specifically express dismay at this comment, only saying that a number of comments have been disappointing.  "This one?" Nesirky would not answer.

  Given the SNC's 2 pm ultimatum on Ban to disinvite Iran, Inner City Press asked Nesirky if the invitation to the SNC was the only one to non-Assad Syrians, or if for example Kurds could be invited. Nesirky said: one unified delegation. Hardly -- 44 members of the SNC already dropped out before the vote to attend. What would the vote count be now?

Before the Middle East meeting of the UN Security Council on January 20, the Permanent Representatives of France, the UK and Russia spoke to the press about Iran being invited to the Syria talks beginning in Montreux January 22.

  Ambassador Gerard Araud of France, which Bashar Assad called a proxy state of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, said the ball is in the court of Iran, to explicitly accept Geneva I. The UK's Mark Lyall Grant said the UK position is that Iran must clarify, publicly, that it accepts Geneva I.

  Others ask why should Iran accept a communique of Geneva I to which it was not invited. Others say Iran does in its way accept the communique - it just interprets it differently.

  Russian Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin said "of course" the US had been consulted before Iran was invited. If the SNC now does not attend, Churkin said, it would be a "big mistake."

   Ban Ki-moon went into the Security Council suite with a big entourage; there was a time he was not on UNTV in the chamber. Inner City Press can report that UNTV technicians were asked to pipe in a feed of the public meeting into a side room. There was talk of Ban's selective meetings, using the code name EU P2. 

  The Istanbul based Syrian National Coalition set a deadline of 2 pm in New York on January 20 for the invitation to be rescinded. 

  Soner Ahmed, an SNC spokesman, said Ban "waited to invite Iran until after the coalition’s decision to attend the conference. That is immoral, even in politics."

    Ban previously met with the SNC's Ahmad al Jarba in Ban's UN provided residence; when the Free UN Coalition for Access asked why it had not been on his schedule, the meeting was called personal.  Now, things have really gotten personal.

  Among UNanswered questions is whether the SNC would or would have brought any Kurdish representatives, and why or whether the Kurds will not now be invited.

  Saudi Arabia shot back at the invitation of Iran by saying they should not attend because it "has military forces in Syria." But doesn't Uganda have fighting forces in South Sudan, while being a member of "mediator" IGAD? UN-consistency.

   Ban made his Iran invitation announcement in a hastily thrown togetherpress conference held Sunday evening in an nearly empty UN building, on barely an hour's notice.

Nevertheless, Ban's spokesperson automatically gave the first question to the United Nations Correspondents Association, a partisan group which for example held a faux "UN briefing" for Ahmad al Jarba of the Turkey-based Syrian Coalition. Click here for Inner City Press story on that.

Ban Ki-moon dodged and did not answer on the weakness of Jarba's Coalition, from which over 40 members decided not to attend the vote approving attended at the talks in Switzerland. Nor until the end of this press conference did Ban mention the inclusion of women. Has he asked Jarba about that?

  Ban said he spoke with Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif, who "committed to play a constructive and positive role." Ban repeated this line when asked about the litmus test of accepting that Geneva II is about Geneva I which was about "establishing a transitional governing body with full executive powers" -- on mutual consent, whatever that means.

  Ban also announced supplemental invitations to Montreux for, among others, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands and, yes, South Korea.

  It was at 4:21 pm that the UN sent out an email that Ban would appear for a "brief and important statement" in the UN at 5:30 pm. When that time arrived, the so-called UNCA chair (or "Holy Seat") on which the UN has affixed a metal tag was filled -- and from that seat a complaint was made to try to get another correspondent moved. 

  UNCA's president Pamela Falk of CBS was not there; nor was her first vice president, who nonetheless was heard to call into the room. It is time to end the practice of the UN automatically giving the first question toUNCA - a group of which executive committee members tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN (and to get leaked documents removed from Google's search under a specious DMCA filing by Reuters' bureau chief) and which has not reformed in any way since then.

The Free UN Coalition for Access additionally asks why this announcement was made this way. There is more and more staging at the UN, faux Q&A and UNTV footage put out hoping it will be used as B roll. The UN should be more transparent, less of a scam. We'll have more on this.

   

Jarba's Syria Coalition, With Many Absent, Votes to Go to Geneva: Comparisons with South Sudan

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 18 -- From the Istanbul base of the Syrian Opposition Coalition comes word that the coalition has voted to attend the Geneva II talks: 58 for, 14 against, and three abstentions.

  Less reported is that some 44 members did not attend or vote. 44 plus 14 is... 58. 

  France back in September declared Ahmad Jarba of the Syrian Coalition the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people. Jarba held a faux "UN briefing" on the clubhouse Secretary General Ban Ki-moon gives to the United Nations Correspondents Association, now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance (they also screened a Sri Lanka government film denying war crimes, click here for that.)

   What will the military situation on the ground in Syria mean at the talks in Montreux and then Geneva? Well, at the South Sudan talks in Addis Ababa, what does the joint SLPA - Ugandan re-taking of Bor mean? And if Salva Kiir can call in Uganda to "take out rebels," without any criticism by the UN, why can't...  We'll have more on this.

 Five days before the Geneva II talks on Syria begin (in Montreux, Switzerland), the UN in New York on January 17 was full of talk about Syria.

There are competing events, Norwegian sponsored Voices of Syria featuring Amineh Sawan, Heba Sawan, Anas al-Dabas, and another event across First Avenue on accountability, featuring a pollster. There is a Security Council Arria formula meeting urging women's involvement in Geneva II.

Back on January 6, Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq if the UN had anything to say about the lack of women in the South Sudan peace, or at least ceasefire, talks in Addis Ababa:

Inner City Press: with the talks in Addis, many people have commented on the lack of women in either side’s negotiating team, in light of the things the UN has said under resolution 1325 (2000) and otherwise. Does the UN have any response or comment on that?

Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Certainly, we support the idea of the parties coming together at Addis. This is, as you know, under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD). The Secretary-General has made very clear that he supports this process and you’ll have seen the statement that we had issued recently about that. Beyond that, of course, we hope that the parties have inclusive delegations, but I don’t have any specific comment on who is representing the various parties.

  Since then, the UN has said very little about the lack of women in the South Sudan talks. On Syria, two days before the Security Council's Arria formula meeting about women and the talks, Syria's mission to the UN sent a four page letter to each Security Council member country. Inner City Press has obtained a copy and puts it online here.

  Notably, Syria contrasts the status of women before 2011 in Syria, and since. They pillory an outside cleric's call for "marriage Jihad" (sometimes called "sexual Jihad") of which they say the marriages can last for as little as an hour. They denounce "Takfiris and Wahhabis." They don't directly name Saudi Arabia, but Inner City Press has confirmed the obvious: that's who they mean.

  Syria's Permanent Representative to the UN Bashar Ja'afari, who will attended the talks, is still in New York, and will speak at the Security Council's open debate on January 20 about the Middle East, then head to Switzerland. Ban Ki-moon travels there the same day: same flight? Seat or cabin-mate? There's still that outstanding "note verbal," click here for it. 

At the January 18 press conference after the Arria formula meeting on women's participation in the Geneva II talks on Syria, Inner City Press asked Luxembourg Ambassador Sylvie Lucas if the Security Council will trying to same approach to the Addis Ababa talks on South Sudan.

   Lucas replied that this was really a day to talk about Syria -- when isn't it? -- but that on South Sudan, the hope is for (more) inclusive participation in a second round of talks.  But will there BE a second round, now that Uganda has helped Kiir re-take Bor? Watch this site.

   

On Syria, Now Geneva II Talks Set for January 22, Wait for Next Year, and for Jarbucks?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 25 -- The UN this morning announced a date for the Geneva II talks on Syria: January 22, 2014. 

  Nearly immediately Gulf media quoted their Syrian opposition that it should be further delayed; Bahiya Mardini was quoted that "US Ambassador Robert Ford has assured the opposition that the deal between Iran and Western countries regarding its nuclear program would not negatively affect the Syrian issue."

  But there was no list or mention of invitees in the 333 word announcement sent out by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at 6 am in New York on Monday, see below. Is Iran invited?

  The "Syrian Coalition" of Ahmed al Jarba, declared by France in September to be the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people after a faux UN briefing then UNnoticed meeting with Ban in his UN-provided residence, more than an hour later had not issued any statement.

Back on November 21, Jarbucks' Coalition had this to say:

"The Syrian Coalition condemns the twin blasts near the Iranian embassy south of the Lebanese capital Beirut, which killed and injured scores of civilians on Tuesday, November 19th. On behalf of the Syrian people, the Syrian Coalition extends its condolences to the people of Iran and hopes the government of Iran acknowledges the Syrian people’s daily suffering and reconsiders its unlimited support of the Assad Regime."

  Inner City Press asked, what if this SNC statement's logic were applied to other attacks, like Nine Eleven or the Westgate Mall in Kenya? Then, the denunciation would be near-immediate. So where are the statements from Jarba's sponsors, in Paris, Riyadh, Washington and elsewhere? So far, none.

Here is this morning's announcement by the UN:

The Secretary-General is pleased to announce that he will convene the Geneva conference on Syria in Geneva on Wednesday, January 22, thus bringing the Syrian Government and opposition to a negotiating table for the first time since the start of the Syrian conflict.

The Secretary-General expresses deep appreciation to the Initiating States, the Governments of the Russian Federation and the United States, as well as to other Member States and Joint Special Representative Brahimi for their hard work that has brought us to this point.

We will go to Geneva with a mission of hope. The Geneva conference is the vehicle for a peaceful transition that fulfills the legitimate aspirations of all the Syrian people for freedom and dignity, and which guarantees safety and protection to all communities in Syria. Its goal is the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012, including the establishment, based on mutual consent, of a transitional governing body with full executive powers, including over military and security entities.

The Secretary-General expects that the Syrian representatives will come to Geneva with a clear understanding that this is the objective, and with a serious intention to end a war that has already left well over 100,000 dead, driven almost nine million from their homes, left countless missing and detained, sent tremors through the region and forced unacceptable burdens on Syria’s neighbors.

Noting the Security Council's endorsement of the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué in Resolution 2118 (2013), the Secretary-General will expect all regional and international partners to demonstrate their meaningful support for constructive negotiations. All must show vision and leadership. All can begin working now to take steps to help the Geneva conference succeed, including toward the cessation of violence, humanitarian access, release of detainees and return of Syrian refugees and internally displaced to their homes.

The conflict in Syria has raged for too long. It would be unforgivable not to seize this opportunity to bring an end to the suffering and destruction it has caused.

Watch this site.