On Sri Lanka, UN Duo Welcome Report, Silent Like Ban Ki-moon on Nambiar, White Flag Killings, Shavendra Silva

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 17 -- When the Sri Lanka report of the UN human rights office was belatedly put online, one searched it in vain for any mention of the UN's own failure and worse, for example in the "White Flag" killings of surrenderees, for whom UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Good Offices envoy Vijay Nambiar, by his own account, acted as intermediary. 

  This is not covered, or is covered up, in the UN report. 

  So too in the September 17 statement by UN experts Jennifer Welsh (R2P) and Adama Dieng. The day after Ban did not take a Press question about the Sri Lanka report, his two experts "welcome" the report, citing war crimes and the need for reconciliation, but do not mention the UN's role. They should.

  Former UN Ambassador (and staff member) Palitha Kohona is mentioned in the section on Extrajudicial Executions; his deputy Shavendra Silva, who served on Ban's and Herve Ladsous' Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, is described shelling a hospital which the UN now says had civilians in it. These are war crimes.

 From the new report:

"Major General Shavendra Silva denied hitting Putumattalan hospital and asserted that the facility was only used to treat LTTE fighters, that there were no civilians there. However, this would in no way change the nature of the hospital as a protected objected since LTTE fighters placed hors de combat by sickness or injury could not be targeted under international humanitarian law.  However, testimony collected by OISL strongly contradicts this version of events.  Putumattalan hospital was used to treat civilians, and came under repeated attack."

 On "Allegations of extrajudicial executions in the final phase of armed conflict," the new report says

"Between 16 and 18 May, a number of foreign intermediaries were involved in facilitating communication with senior representatives of the Government, primarily Permanent Secretary Ministry of Foreign Affairs Palitha Kohona, Senior Adviser to the President Basil Rajapaksa, Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa and President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Communications at this stage also included others, such as senior UN officials and foreign journalists."

  One (UNnamed here) senior UN official was Mr. Nambiar. Were there others? Who were they? This is the UN, "reporting" on itself, as it sloppily did on Haiti cholera, and stands ready to try to do on rapes in the Central African Republic. We'll have more on this.

 The report states, "OISL further concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Government of Sri Lanka possessed the requisite knowledge about the intent to surrender to have been able to convey this to the ground forces in time for them to ensure protection. Intermediaries made multiple attempts and a sustained effort to convince key government figures to allow for independent witness to the surrender, which was rejected."

 On September 16, Prince Zeid came out not for a fully international accountability mechanism, but for a “special hybrid court.” 

  In response to generally softball questions, he lauded the new government's approach to the UN. The message, at least to some, is that if lip service is paid to the UN, the push for accountability goes away. 

  There is, of course, the shifting position of the US as well.

  Why after all this delay Zeid's office didn't make the report available before Zeid “took questions” is unclear. In fact, the room in Geneva ran out of questions: Zeid left 10 minutes before it was said he had to. But no arrangement was made to take questions online.

  Nor was Zeid asked about the UN's own failings, from leaving Kilinochchi to the White Flag Killings and beyond. The UN's Petrie Report was conveniently forgotten. Notably, the first round of questions included Voice of America, which at the UN tried to get Inner City Press thrown out after it reported on how Sri Lanka's Palitha Kohona, after renting one of the UN Correspondents Association's then and now president Giampaolo Pioli's apartments, was given a UN screening for his government's genocide denial film, "Lies Agreed To," without other (then) UNCA board members like Inner City Press getting to vote.Reuters did the same, and has tried to cover up.

   Overall, if the UN covers up its own acts, like bringing cholera to Haiti and now, under Herve Ladsous, covering up and excusing rapes in the Central African Republic, how can it offer accountability to places like northern Sri Lanka? Zeid said “we” didn't find genocide, and then left the press conference. Lies Agreed To, indeed. We'll have more on this.

 As an aside, OHCHR's role in covering up the first round of Sangaris rapes remains unclear; the report commissioned by Ban Ki-moon has been, what else, delayed. Zeid's deputy in New York picks and choose how and to whom to answer questions, excluding the investigative Press from his briefing on topics like South Sudan (where the UN is under-reporting ceasefire violations). And so it goes.

Back on August 13, 2015, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about torture in the country - including in 2015. From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: on torture, there’s a report by a group called Freedom From Torture about Sri Lanka, and although some of the witness statements they get are from a previous couple of years ago, they’re actually documenting cases in 2015 even since the election of Mr. Sirisena of the unauthorized detention and torture of people perceived as having been a part of the LTTE in the past.  And I wonder, given the UN’s engagement, what you read out here about the million dollars, about rehabilitation, one of the testimonies is from someone who was, quote, rehabilitated, then released, picked up in a white van, tortured…

Spokesman Dujarric:  I haven’t seen those reports.  Obviously, we stand clearly against the use of torture.

 We'll see.

The UN delayed the war crime report on Sri Lanka until September 16. UN documents leaked to Channel 4 indicate that the UN is trying to undercut that report and support a merely national investigation, or cover-up. 

  Inner City Press asked the UN about it on July 30 and July 31, first two responses below, and on August 5 UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric returned with a third response. Third time's the charm? Here's what he said:

And I’ve asked to offer some more details and clarification to the UN’s support to the Government and people in Sri Lanka.

And so as I said last Friday, the UN supports the Government and the people of Sri Lanka in their efforts to advance reconciliation and accountability.  At the request of the Government of Sri Lanka, the UN is exploring the provision of a broad package of technical and financial assistance in consultation with all key stakeholders.  The framework of UN support for peacebuilding in Sri Lanka was presented in Sri Lanka last June by the Resident Coordinator.  And that presentation is available online on the UN’s country office in Sri Lanka and that’s un.lk.

What is being discussed for support by the Peacebuilding Fund are initiatives to advance the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka through the resettlement of internally displaced persons, national reconciliation, and the development of credible transitional justice mechanisms in line with international standards.  UN support is always built on the basis of inclusive, transparent and participatory consultations with all key stakeholders.

$1 million has already been disbursed to support resettlement and integration initiatives for the remaining internally displaced persons in the north and east on seized land that has been returned by the Government.  For the rest, the UN continues to consult with the Government of Sri Lanka, and all key stakeholders, to finalize the details of UN support.

The same principle of inclusive, participatory and consultative processes will apply to UN support for the establishment of credible accountability and reconciliation mechanisms that meet international standards.

And lastly, the UN of course believes that there should be genuine and inclusive consultations on a national basis, including the Northern Province, to help arrive at the right model in the Sri Lankan context. Done.  Matthew.

Inner City Press:  Thanks for that.  I’m going to have to, I guess, go over that Sri Lanka statement. 

  Here is what Dujarric was responding to: on July 31, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript here:

Inner City Press: yesterday I’d asked you about Sri Lanka and this memo that’s emerged where the UN appears to be working for a purely national mechanism.  And the foreign ministry spokesman there has spoken today about Mr. Feltman’s trip and has mentioned the Peacebuilding Fund.  So I wanted to ask you more specifically, is Mr. Taranco and the Peacebuilding Fund considering funding a purely national accountability mechanism in Sri Lanka contrary to what’s been said here and to the Human Rights Council report that’s due in September?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think what I can tell you is that the UN supports the Government and the people of Sri Lanka and their efforts to advance reconciliation and accountability as evidenced by commitments made by the Secretary General and during the Under-Secretary-General’s recent visit — Feltman’s recent visit to Sri Lanka.  In this regard, we’re exploring provision of a broad package of technical and financial assistance at the request of the Chief Minister, also including the support of the Northern Province to bolster citizen confidence in the peace process.  What is currently under discussion for support by the Peacebuilding Fund are initiatives to advance the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka by resettlement of internally displaced persons, national reconciliation, strengthening human rights mechanism, and ending impunity.  The UN support is always based on the basis of inclusive and participatory consultations with all key stakeholders.  And my understanding is that already $1 million have been already dispersed to support resettlement and integration initiatives for the remaining internally displaced people in the north and east on land that’s been… on seized land that have been returned by the Government.  For the rest, we continue to consult with the Government of Sri Lanka and the Northern Provincial Council and all key stakeholders to finalize the UN support.

Inner City Press:  Are you saying this Peacebuilding Fund support is not for an accountability mechanism that would be entirely national, which is the one denounced by the Tamil group that you mentioned?

Spokesman:  You know, I think the… whether there should be domestic or international process, the… I think what we are looking at is obviously implementing projects both with the support of the Government and the Northern Provincial Council.  If I have more, I will share it with you.

Inner City Press:  What about an international mechanism?

Spokesman:  I think, you know, whether it’s domestic or international, that will need to be determined.  We are obviously awaiting the High Commissioner’s report and recommendations to make that decision.

 We'll have more on this.

 Back on July 30, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: this has to do with the UN’s engagement on the issue of Sri Lanka.  There’s been a… Channel 4 has published what they say is a leaked UN document in which it appears that the UN is preparing to give its blessing to an entirely national accountability mechanism that would involve the National Provincial… according to the document, Northern Provincial Council, Tamil, which they deny that they ever saw it.  They say it’s an outrage and would be a… a… kind of selling out the Human Rights Council and any international mechanism.  I wanted to know, since I saw the pictures of Mr. [Jeffrey] Feltman meeting with that group and that there was a lot of discussions of documents going back and forth, is the document referred to by Channel 4 a document that Mr. Feltman had?

Spokesman:  Let me see… I don’t have any language on that with me here. 

  Five hours later, no answer from Dujarric - who had, it emerged, provided notice of Ban Ki-moon's visit to the US White House only to the same UN Censorship Alliance president, Giampaoli Pioli, who unilaterally granted a UN screening of "Lies Agreed To" after renting one of his apartments to Sri Lanka's Palitha Kohona. This is today's UN.

Back on June 24, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric:

Inner City Press: Sri Lanka.  I wanted to get your comment on this, given the Secretary-General's historic involvement.  It's been now confirmed by the Foreign Minister there that the promised internal domestic human rights investigation into crimes in the final stages of the conflict is now not going to take place until September, and now this is being laid off on elections, due to the failure to dissolve parliament.  So, I guess, given that the Secretary-General, it seems, kind of supported the delay, what's the response?

Spokesman Dujararic:  I don't have any language on that, but I will harvest some for you.

  But the language "harvested" did not address the delay. Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq on June 25 returned with this answer to Inner City Press:

"We were also asked earlier about accountability in Sri Lanka.  I can say that the new Government in Sri Lanka has passed a constitutional amendment which, if implemented appropriately, brings renewed hope for democracy and the rule of law.  In this regard, it is important that the Government consults broadly with all political parties, civil society, and above all victims and their families, to ensure full national support and ownership of these processes.

"The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights remains engaged in discussions with the Sri Lankan authorities on the need for transparent and inclusive processes to develop credible mechanisms for accountability and reconciliation."

  So delaying or even dispensing with the promised domestic war crimes investigation is now OK with Ban's UN? We'll have more on this.

Back in May, with the UN's already long delayed report into war crimes in Sri Lanka postponed until at least September, now one of those most responsible for the crimes in 2009, Jagath Dias of the 57th Division, was named Chief of Staff of the Army. 

  One wondered if those recently praising the Sri Lankan government, from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to US Secretary of State John Kerry during his visit two weeks ago will say anything about this. 

  On May 18, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq if Ban had any comment on Dias, named in Ban's own report on Sri Lanka, getting this post.

  Haq said to wait and see what the Human Rights Council says -- the Human Rights Council which already delayed release of their report.Video here.

  Dias was ejected from Germany and Switzerland, as a Sri Lankan diplomat, for his past.  At the UN, equally problematic military figureShavendra Silva at a screening of the Rajapaksa government's war crimes denial film "Lies Agreed To" chided Inner City Press for attribution to him the acts of Dias' 57th Regiment. 

  Now Silva is in War College in India and Dias is Army chief of staff. Will anything be said by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid, now embroiled in a scandal about OHCHR's seeming cover up for child rapes by French troops in the Central African Republic, and letting French UN Peacekeepin chief Herve Ladsous try to fire the OHCHR whistleblower? What has changed?

 Inside the UN in September 2011 the government's "Lies Agreed To" -- but NOT "No Fire Zone" -- was screened.  When Inner City Press reported on the screening, then on the background fact that the person who agreed to the screening, Giampaolo Pioli, had previously been the landlord of Palitha Kohona, who as Sri Lanka's Ambassador requested the screen in the UN hosted by the United Nations Correspondents Association, then and now headed by Pioli, demands for censorship and expulsion began.

 Unhappy with Inner City Press reporting, Pioli demanded that the story come down.

  When Inner City Press instead of censorship offered amplifications and to publish a letter to the editor of any length, Pioli rejected it and pushed to get Inner City Press thrown out. After some of this was reported in the media in Sri Lanka, and Inner City Press informed Pioli of this and of death threats it had received, Pioli refused to suspend his campaign, instead trying to use the threats as leverage to get Inner City Press to publish a "box," that he would dictate, on the front of its website. 

  In this audio clip, after Inner City Press informed Pioli and other UNCA Executive Committee members that their kangaroo court proceeding had given rise to death threats, Pioli demands a "box of apology... as long as it is Inner City Press." 

  This is what UNCA became, the UN's Censorship Alliance, and what it is, and functions as. Inner City Press when its elected term on the UNCA Executive Committee ended quit the group and co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access, now defending the rights of journalists from Somaliland to Bangladesh and beyond. We will have more on this.

Pioli & Ban Ki-moon, Sri Lanka war crimes denial not shown. UN Photo/Mark Garten

And it has been on HuffPost Live, here. Watch this site.

   

On Responsibility to Protect, Inner City Press Asks UN Duo of Burundi & S Sudan, Failure in Sri Lanka & Critique

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 8 -- Responsibility to Protect was the topics of a UN press conference and debate, or series of speeches, on September 8, even as the UN said nothing about the Saudi coalition's airstrikes on Sana'a and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon did not mention Burundi in his prepared speech, much less Sri Lanka.

  Inner City Press asked UN officials Adama Dieng and Jennifer Welsh at their joint press conference about both Sri Lanka and Burundi, as well as South Sudan and the critique by Venezuela and others of R2P in the UN.

   Dieng called for the release of the African Union's report on crimes in South Sudan; he called Burundi a political problem and Welsh spoke of preventive diplomacy. 12 minute video here. 

  Welsh acknowledged that the UN's response to crimes in Sri Lanka has been a failure; she paid some respect to Venezuela's and Cuba's objections (though back in the afternoon's session, she disagreed with Venezuela's argument that R2P divides states into those who are “responsible” and those who are not).

  In the final 24 minutes there were 12 speakers; Myanmar got cut off (it had not used the work Rohingya) for the next speaker, Iran; Dieng uses his prerogative to give out some more time. Inner City Press believes, on both Burundi and South Sudan, that the UN when it wants to uses deference to regional organizations to turn away from its R2P claims, while it didn't defer to the African Union on Libya. And so it goes.

   

On Syria, UN Advisers Cite Government Barrel Bombs, ISIS & Nusra "Reprisals"

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 12 -- A week after the UN Security Council issued a Press Statement about barrel bombs in Syria but not government helicopters, on June 12 a quartet of UN Special Advisers and Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement directed largely at the government while citing "reprisal" attacks by al Nusra and ISIS. To say that ISIS is only or even mostly engaged in "reprisals" sounds strange.

  Here's from the June 12 statement:

"The Special Adviser of the Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, the Special Adviser of the Secretary Genera on the Responsibility to Protect, Jennifer Welsh, the Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, Rita Izsak and the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, strongly condemned the increased number of government aerial attacks in Syria and the use of indiscriminate weapons, such as barrel bombs, including in civilian populated areas. They warned that such attacks could escalate retaliatory action by non-state armed groups, and consequently, increase the vulnerability of religious and ethnic minorities perceived to support the government.

“'Government air strikes have reportedly killed more than a hundred civilians in the past week. Employing means or methods of combat which cannot distinguish civilian from military objectives is a clear violation of international humanitarian law. Not only has the government of Syria failed in its responsibility to protect its populations from atrocity crimes, but it continues to attack its own people.' The Special Advisers and the Special Rapporteurs urged the Government to abide by its obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law.

"The Special Advisers and the Special Rapporteurs raised alarm about the broader consequences of the aerial attacks by government forces for particular communities in Syria. They warned that as a result of those strikes, non-state armed groups could carry out large scale reprisal attacks against religious and ethnic minorities perceived to be associated with the government, including Shia civilians who live in the besieged villages of al Fu'aha, Kefraya, Nbul and Zahra in Aleppo and Idleb governorates, and Druze communities concentrated in As Suwayda governorate. If protection measures are not taken urgently, they stressed, entire communities risk paying the price for this conflict.

"In addition, the Special Advisers and the Special Rapporteurs reiterated their concern about the ongoing threat to the safety of minority groups in Syria, including Alawites, Armenians, Assyrians, Druze, Ismailis and Kurds, who are being killed, persecuted or otherwise targeted - primarily by non-state armed groups including Jabhat al Nusra and the so-called 'Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant' - on the basis of their religious or ethnic identity. 'We call on all parties to respect international human rights and humanitarian law and immediately stop targeting people on the basis of whom they are and what they believe and to do everything, in action as well as in words, to prevent further rifts and the escalation of tensions among sectarian lines.'"

Back on April 24 when UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's envoy on Syria Staffan de Mistura came to the UN Security Council stakeout, Inner City Press asked himabout criticism of how he has run his office to date. De Mistura declined to respond. But see below.

 On May 30, the UN Spokesperson's Office issued a statement for de Mistura, condemning "the death of at least 70 civilians in Syria's northern Aleppo province by barrel bombs dropped from government helicopters."  The statement, full text here, said that "all evidence shows that the overwhelming majority of the civilian victims in the Syrian conflict have been caused by the use of such indiscriminate aerial weapons." Some were sure to wonder, what about ISIS?

  On June 5, the day after a briefing by UN OCHA's John Ging, the Security Council issued a press statement mentioning barrel bombs but NOT "government helicopters," as Mistura put it. The full Security Council statement is below.

  Inner City Press has also seen Syria's June 4 letter to the Council, which said "the Syrian Arab Army targeted a location in the neighborhood of 'Al-bab' in Aleppo, where the terrorist groups were holding a meeting to plan an attack on the city of Aleppo. The information available confirms the death of 81 terrorists. The incident that happened in the 'Al-Sha'ar' neighborhood in Aleppo was an explosion of weapons warehouse used by terrorists during their activities in the city of Aleppo. The incident resulted in the death of a number of terrorists and civilians."

Here, Roshomon-like, is the UNSC Press Statement of June 5:

The members of the Security Council were briefed by Mr. John Ging, Operations Director of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs regarding the recent upsurge of violence in Aleppo.

The members of the Security Council expressed their deep concern at the continued high level of violence in Syria and condemned all violence directed against civilians and civilian infrastructure, including medical facilities. They expressed outrage at all attacks against civilians, as well as indiscriminate attacks, including those involving shelling and aerial bombardment, such as the use of barrel bombs, which have reportedly been extensively used in recent days in Aleppo Governorate and other areas throughout Syria, leaving many dead and injured civilians, including children.  

The members of the Security Council recalled that all obligations under international humanitarian law must be respected in all circumstances by all parties. They recalled, in particular, the obligation to distinguish between civilian populations and combatants, and the prohibition against indiscriminate attacks, and attacks against civilians and civilian objects. The members of the Security Council reiterated their call on all parties to immediately implement in full the provisions of Security Council resolutions 2139 (2013),  2165 (2014) and 2191 (2014) and of the Presidential Statement of 2 October 2013 (S/PRST/2013/15).

The members of the Security Council reaffirmed the primary responsibility of the Syrian Authorities to protect the population in Syria and reiterated that parties to the armed conflict bear the primary responsibility to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians.

The members of the Security Council condemned increased terrorist attacks resulting in numerous casualties and destruction carried out by ISIL, Al-Nusra Front and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida, and called on all parties to commit to putting an end to terrorist acts perpetrated by such organisations and individuals and reminded that Member States must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, international refugee and international humanitarian law.

The members of the Security Council reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.

The members of the Security Council reiterated that the only sustainable solution to the current crisis in Syria is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process with a view to full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012. In this respect, they expressed their full support for the role and efforts of the Special Envoy, of the Secretary-General, Staffan de Mistura.

  But as de Mistura holds a new round on consultations in Geneva, with all press coverage Banned, he is belatedly replacing his principal political affairs officer with one Stephanie Koury, Inner City Press is informed, who in Iraq headed the UN's Kirkuk office, as well as a stint in another of the UN's failed (or turned-over) mediation missions, in Yemen, see below.

 Previously, Inner City Press reported on how de Mistura ingratiated himself to Ban Ki-moon by hiring and promoting Ban's son in law Siddharth Chatterjee while serving as envoy in Iraq. (Some of that reported wascensored, but not on Inner City Press.) This led to push-back from the UN, which continues to the day - something that the new Free UN Coalition for Access opposes.

  Last week the UN said of de Mistura's upcoming five to six weeks of talks on Syria in Geneva that there will be no interviews or stakeouts, nor even any photo-sprays, during all that time. FUNCA opposes this closing-down of the UN as well.

  A picture has emerged of de Mistura's running of the UN's Syria office, in which "cronies" from his time in Iraq and after that Afghanistan have been favored in jobs, with very little to show for it.

  De Mistura's functional political affairs chief, for example, has been Elpida Rouka, who was de Mistura's "Special Assistant" in Iraq. Her i-Phone composed political memos have been exclusively mocked to Inner City Press by close associates of de Mistura, but de Mistura declared her the only authorized channel of "substantive" information to UN Headquarters in New York.

 At a key moment in de Mistura's doomed push for a "freeze" in Aleppo, Inner City Presss is exclusively informed that de Mistura went with, over ceasefire expert Julian Hottinger, one Matt Waldman, listed as an adviser not only of de Mistura on Syria but also of the European Institute for Peace, which as Inner City Press has reported de Mistura remains president of the Board of Governors.

 (Back in September 2014, Inner City Press asked the UN Office of the Spokesperson, "please confirm or deny that Mr. de Mistura will be (allowed to be) based in Brussels, and separate state his contract status: When Actually Employed? Paid at USG level? Is he being allowed to continue working with / for any non-UN organization, if so which, and what review of possible conflicts of interest was made, and by whom?")

  One might think that the UN's Syria envoy position is or should be a full time job, without outside second positions like continuing as president of the board of a group like the European Institute for Peace. But this is the UN, where the special representative on Cyprus Alexander Downer was allowed to work full time at an investment bank or consultancy Bespoke Approach, Tony Blair as Middle East Quartet representative and businessman, and now a similar UNdisclosed arrangement in Yemen.

(Inner City Press has four times asked simple public financial disclosure questions about Ban's new Yemen envoy Ismael Ould Cheikh Ahmed, without answer.)

  All of the above said, de Mistura is a pleasant man; while in Afghanistan he pledged to get to the bottom of the murder of UN staffer Louis Maxwell there although he never did (nor did others in today's UN).  But Inner City Press - and FUNCA - are committed to a closely-covered and open UN, and the trend, from the top down, is in quite the opposite direction. Here was the UN's "Note to Correspondents" -

The Geneva Consultations on Syria will begin next week Monday, 4 May, at the Palais des Nations and last for an initial period of five to six weeks.

The Special Envoy of the Secretary-General Staffan de Mistura has invited as many of the parties as possible, primarily the Syrian parties (government, opposition and civil society), as well as the regional and international stakeholders, to discuss with the Special Envoy, the dire situation in Syria today and to provide their candid views on where we stand vis-a-vis implementation of the Geneva Communiqué almost three years since it was adopted.

The Special Envoy and the Deputy Special Envoy, Ramzy Ezzeldine Ramzy, will conduct closed and separate consultations with each party.

There will be no photo opportunities, no stakeouts, and no interviews while the consultations are being conducted at the Palais. However, periodic photo and video feeds will be provided by UN Photo and UN Television.

The UNOG Spokesman and Director, a.i., of the UN Information Service in Geneva, and the Office of the Special Envoy's Public Information Officer, will provide periodic updates to the Geneva Press Corps and others, as and when appropriate and necessary.

No major public announcements are expected during, or at the conclusion of, these Consultations. The Special Envoy will assess the progress of his stock-taking at the end of the process and report to the Secretary-General with his findings and recommendations.

Thank you for understanding.  

  Thank you indeed.

 Back on April 24, Inner City Press asked de Mistura if the Saudi-led airstrikes on Yemen changed any of the dynamics on Syria. 

  In reply, de Mistura told Inner City Press that "everything in the region these days is connected." He added that he is focused on Syria.

 Inner City Press also asked de Mistura about criticism made by his former adviser Mouin Rabbani on Qatar's Al Jazeera TV, that Mistura is out of his depth and not up for the task.

 De Mistura replied, I will not respond, you would do the same, if one of your ex-colleagues...

  Inner City Press asked the question because it hadn't been asked, tellingly. 

 Dina Kawar said Mistura “mentioned what he will do next month in Geneva, holding separate meetings with the Syrian parties, representatives of the civil society and regional and international actors. He will provide his assessment to the Secretary General and keep the Security Council informed,” Kawar said, taking no questions.

  Staffan de Mistura emerged, saying he would take two or three questions. He said, “the only way is to test, a stress test,” a phrase like his previous “freeze.” He said, “by end of June we should be in the position to reassess whether any convergence on substance and report to the Secretary General.”

  De Mistura said, “This is not Geneva Three, this is a series of consultation, one to one. We can convene and ask everyone to come and not exclude anyone.. Iran is a member country of the UN, it is a major play in the region, it has influence in Syria. The UN has the right, and will be inviting everyone.”

  Unlike Montreux, it was observed by... one wag.

  Back on April 16, that the Syrian chemical weapons victim and doctor who briefed the UN Security Council did so behind closed doors, with no UN Television coverage, was a product of the Council's rules.

  It was an “Arria formula” meeting, which was not be listed in the UN Journal or even on the blue electronic signs outside it. (The sign said the meeting was about "nutrition.")

  Afterward chemical weapons victim Qusai Zakarya took some questions in the hall, before again going behind closed doors of the UN Censorship Alliance, see below.

  Inner City Press in this public space asked Qusai Zakarya what he thought of UN envoy on Syria Staffan de Mistura.

Qusai Zakarya said replied to Inner City Press, "I think Staffan de Mistura is a hypocrite. I think his very disgusting attempt to shine up the image of the regime is exposed to the Syrian people and to a nlot of members of the international community. His offer on freezes was a joke. If he really cared about saving lives he would have convinced the regime to stop using its fire power. We have a lot of outrage against his attempts, the deal he was trying to offer, it's just another false attempt to shine up the image of the regime."

   Inner City Press asked him if he would meet with any UN official. “I can't answer that questio right now,” he said. Then the convoy went to the clubhouse of the UN Censorship Alliance, which had sent notice only to those who pay it money: "They will have just presented their accounts in front of the UN Security Council at an Arria-formula meeting on Syria Chemical Weapons."

     But why would the doctors, in holding a supposed press conference afterward, not do so in the UN Press Briefing Room on UNTV, as can be done by any NGO or individual as long as sponsored by a member state? 

    Instead, the sequel  show was also behind closed door, in the UN Censorship Alliance (UNCA), not on UNTV. This is the same UNCA which hosted former Syrian Coalition head Ahmad al Jarba, allowing him to claim he had a “UN press briefing.”  It is a scam.

  And so on April 24 Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Dujarric if Jarba's successor, after Hadi al Bahra, Khaled Khoja will hold a Q&A session in the open UN Press Briefing Room. We'll see.

    UNCA and its board members have, for example, sought to get other journalists thrown out of the UN, for reporting on the financial relationship of UNCA's then and now president Giampaolo Pioli with an alleged war criminal, accepting rent money from him and later agree to screen his war crimes denial film inside the UN, under the UNCA banner.  If one has a case to make, this is not the place to make it.

  Even since its outright censorship bid, the way UNCA is run gives less and less confidence. On April 10, the UN Spokesperson's Office announced over its public address system that "in a few short moments in the UNCA room there will be a press conference by a State Department official."

   But as Inner City Press immediately reported, it wasn't any "press conference" -- it was off the record spin, typical of this UNCA now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance (the invitation they send to those who pay UNCA money is below.)

  Just before 5 pm, the UN Spokesperson's Office made a second public address system announcement: it was NOT a press conference, but rather an off the record presentation by the US State Department.

  All this in the big room the UN gives to UNCA, its Censorship Alliance. Why is the UN involved in this in any way at all?

  The announcement by UNCA president Giampaolo Pioli, sent only to those who pay UNCA money (then forwarded to Inner City Press along with messages of shock and disgust) said

"For correspondents interested in an informal off-the-record meeting with [the] Deputy Director, Media Hub of the Americas, U.S. Department of State Bureau of Public Affairs, please join us in the UNCA Meeting Room, Friday, April 10th at 3:30pm.

"The meeting will be to explain the work of the State Department Public Affairs bureau that works with international media, to provide assistance in gaining better access to State Department officials and information, in addition to presenting the work done in the Media Hub of the Americas where the Director is the State Department spokesperson in Spanish and Portuguese for regional media and Spain and Portugal.

Thank you,

Giampaolo Pioli
UNCA President"
  
 Pioli's invite linked to a self-description of this US Bureau of Public Affairs, that “PA/IME works in close collaboration with State Department and interagency colleagues to create and manage tools to ensure accurate coverage of U.S. foreign policy by major international media.”

    UNCA represents only part of the UN press corps. This writer, for example, quit the group after 2012.  UNCA is said by UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to receive the first question in the UN Press Briefing Room “by tradition,” even after UNCA's Executive Board tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN for itsreporting about Sri Lanka, UN Peacekeeping and colonialism (Herve Ladsous) among other topics.

 UNCA did nothing when Ladsous adopted the policy of refusing to answer any questions from the investigative Press, and having his spokespeople physically grab the UNTV microphone to try to avoid the questions being heard.

  Now UNCA wants to facilitate “accurate coverage of U.S. foreign policy.” Does it perform this service for other countries?

    Inner City Press, like the new Free UN Coalition for Access which it co-founded after quitting UNCA, is not against "accurate coverage of US foreign policy." Last month, Inner City Press asked the US State Department about Yemen (including the decision not to evacuate Yemeni Americans from the country), Cuba (the US restrictions on its diplomats at the UN), the Maldives,Middle East and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In each case, Inner City Press reported the answers in full, where possible with video.

  But why provide this platform for one country and not others? Earlier on April 10 UNCA will have a presentation by a former US CIA employee who served in Saipan, Korea, Vietnam and "Burma," as the UNCA notice puts it.

  What has happened to this UNCA under Pioli and presumably current Executive Committee members fromReuters, the US Broadcast Board of Governors and ANSA? And how now can the UN continue to “partner” with UNCA, exclusively, using this partial group as a proxy for the wider press corps? 

 Earlier on April 9, when the UN with little notice canceled its question and answer noon briefing in deference to a"press encounter" with Ban Ki-moon at which Dujarric handpicked the questioners and Ban notably did not call for a halt or even pause in airstrikes on Yemen, UNCA said nothing. (They will, however, have a "Prosecco toast" with Ban later in the month.)

 The Free UN Coalition spoke up in criticism, as here. We'll have more on and of this.

   

R2P Redux: At UN, As Ban Ki-moon Puts Jennifer Welsh on Responsibility to Protect, Sidestepping Genocide, Cote d'Ivoire, Ladsous

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 12 -- After the invocation of Responsibility to Protect to bomb Libya until Gaddafi was killed, among UN member states in the General Assembly the controversy over “R2P” only grew.

  Outgoing UN Special Adviser on R2P Edward Luck told Inner City Press he was only paid one dollar a year “and some say I'm not worth it.” For more than a year he was not replaced.

  But at the UN noon briefing on Friday, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky announced that Jennifer Welsh of Canada would succeed Luck, adding that she would “work under the overall guidance of Mr. Adama Dieng, the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, to further the conceptual, political, institutional and operational development of the responsibility to protect concept, as set out by the General Assembly in paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome document.”

  Inner City Press immediately asked if Welsh will be paid, and if so how the controversy about whether the R2P mandate was agreed to and funded had been addressed by Ban Ki-moon.

  Nesirky said to look at the whole announcement. But even there, on the fly on laptop, the question was not directly answered by the announcement. Inner City Press asked if the phrase “ under the overall guidance” of Dieng meant that R2P is now a sub-set of the Prevention of Genocide. It is still not clear.

  Nesirky gave as his example of successful Responsibility to Protect the case of Cote d'Ivoire. 

  Many would disagree: while UN Peacekeeping, now run four times in a row by a Frenchman most recently Herve Ladsous, and the French “Licorne” mission intervened, perceived supporters of Laurent Gbagbo were killed, for example in Douekoue and Nahibly, in the latter case with UN peacekeepers standing by.

  There was no accountability; in fact, after UN envoy Bert Koenders essentially covered up the UN's deed and omissions in Nahibly, he was rewarded with the higher profile posting atop Ladsous' mission in Mali. Somebody is being protected - but who?

  It seems clear that supporters of R2P think that they are on the side of the angels, and not without some reason. But in the UN system, slipping in Assistant Secretary Generals, especially if they are paid -- this has not been answered -- should be run through the member states, the General Assembly and the Fifth Committee.

  If not, how can the UN preach rule of law? Then again, how can it preach it after so tersely dismissing claims it brought cholera to Haiti? And not answering on its (and Ladsous') support to units of the Congolese Army depicted in theGroup of Experts report the full text of which Inner City Press exclusively put online on June 29? How is this consistent with Responsibility to Protect? Watch this site.