On Nobel Peace Prize's Eve, Ban Ki-moon's Chances Weighed After Sri Lanka, Haiti Cholera

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 9 -- Ban Ki-moon is said to be lobbying to receive the Nobel Peace Prize for his work as UN Secretary General. Book-makers have put odds on his chances, lower than the Pope or Malala or perhaps most deserving, MSF / Doctors Without Borders. 

  But digging deeper, sources close to Ban tell Inner City Press it is another of its advisers, Terje Roed-Larsen, who has “promised Ban a Nobel” or consideration for it, if not this year then before his tenure ends.

If Ban receives it, it will not be based on having made peace, but rather for work on climate change, or perhaps what are called the “post-2015 development goals.”

On the positive side, Ban has linked himself and the UN with combating climate change. During the recently concluded UN General Debate, while most leaders focused on the threats to peace and security posed by Islamic State, or the situation in Eastern Ukraine or the failed or reversed Arab Spring, Ban convened a Climate Change Summit.

Ban also marched, the Sunday before “his” Summit, in the People's Climate March in Manhattan, along with New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, former US Vice President Al Gore, and movie actor Leonardo DiCaprio. All of them called him a leader.

  In terms of mediating disputes and being an impartial voice in favor of peace, however, Ban has been less successful. His inaction or worse during the slaughter of tens of thousands of Tamils in Sri Lanka in 2009 should, many feel, disqualify him. So too his evasion of responsibility for the UN bringing cholera to Haiti, most recently through his Associate Spokesperson on October 9,video here.

Ban is so closely aligned with US foreign policy that few see him as a mediator. In Ukraine, for example, his statements neatly tracked those of Washington and Brussels, and therefore Russia never accepted him as a mediator.

In Syria, too, Ban stopped talking to Bashar Assad, which might be a position of principle but is not really want the Nobel Peace Prize is about, which is talking with the Devil if necessary in the search for peace. 

  This week Ban has called for military action by anyone able -- that would be the US or Turkey -- to defending the Kurdish town of Kobane in Syria. But for example in 2009 in Sri Lanka, he did little to nothing to stop the government from killing thousands of civilians while it sought to “finish” the Tamil Tiger group. Under Ban, protection of civilians is selective -- as are answers.

Ban has allowed “his” chief of UN Peacekeeping, Herve Ladsous, to openly refuse to answer the questions of particular media, and even to block the Press' camera, on topics ranging from rapes by the UN's partners in the DR Congo to why peacekeepers were ordered to surrender to the Al Nusra Front in the Golan Heights, and covered up attacks on civilians in Darfur. 

  On Ladsous and much else, some say it's not so much Ban as some of his advisers and partners, like the UN's Censorship Alliance. They give a false sense of reality.

  If Ban had succeeded in bringing North and South Korea closer during his tenure, that might merit a Nobel Prize. But as a former South Korea foreign minister, he is viewed as too one sided, and as possibly interested in returning to South Korea to run for office, whether or not that happens. Who might be promising him that? And what do the Nobel advisers advice on how to deal with Haiti cholera, if not Sri Lanka, at this point? Watch this site.

   

Before UN's Population Event, Inner City Press Asks UNFPA of Chibok Kidnappings, #BringBackOurGirls

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 22 -- An hour before the International Conference on Population and Development event of the UN General Assembly on September 22, Inner City Press asked Babatunde Osotimehin of the UN Population Fund to confirm or deny if he could a possible deal between Boko Haram and the government of Nigeria, of which he used to be Minister of Health, to Bring Back Our Girls.

  Rather than confirm or deny, he linked Boko Haram to 9/11/01 in the United States, and ISIL, and Malala in Pakistan and women and girls in India; he said all of these should be taken more seriously. Well, yes. But what about the girls kidnapped in Chibok, on which UNFPA and the UN say they are working.

Back on September 19, Inner City Press asked UN officials Thomas Gass and John Wilmoth of the place of sexual and reproductive health issues in the event.

  Gass said the question goes to the heart of what humanity is, citing gender equality and access to sexual and reproductive health services. Wilmoth emphasized that the Cairo Declaration is not being re-negotiated; the previous position, that abortion should be safe where it is legal, remains.

  Back in April 2014 there was an all-night session of fight over the Commission on Population and Development.Past 11 pm the Permanent Representative of Kenya, that month's chair of the African Group, said there would be nosleight of hand solution. He went into Conference Room A with other Permanent Representatives, including those of Norway and then of Cameroon, who told Inner City Press that "in Africa we don't do Programs of Action, we do Declarations." 

  And after a long and murky night in the basement of the UN, a text was in fact adopted followed by a slew of mostly angry speeches from 6 to 7 am. 

Argentina's Permanent Representative regretted that language about unilateral sanctions, debt was not retained. She was followed by speakers from Jordan and Australia, all Security Council members this year. There are not a lot of 6 am Security Council meetings. But this is another part of the UN.

   Iran, set for a big role in CPD 48, joined with Egypt and Oman in slamming the deletion of language about "foreign occupation." South Africa pointed out paragraphs on which it negotiated in it national capacity, NOT as part of the African Group.

  The US speech was surprisingly upbeat, glad for citations to sexual and reproductive health, eager for the ICPD session in General Assembly. (Here is a John Kerry speech, since.)

  Hungary said it does not take "reproductive rights" to include abortion. The Holy See took this further. The European Union's deputy said that principles agreed to in Cairo 20 years ago are being re-litigated now.
 
  But on September 19, that's not what the UN's John Wilmoth told Inner City Press. And as Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access have asked before, what of Myanmar's anti-Royhinga census and reproduction policies? Speaking of reproductive issues? 

  At the September 19 press conference, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access thanked Gass and Wilmoth. Only two questions were asked: press briefings are being privatized as the UN, by its Censorship Alliance. We will be covering that, and the September 22 event. Watch this site. 

   

At UN Human Rights Day, Syria Banned from Speaking as Chair of Asia Group by Japan, Cyprus, Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, Ja'afari Tells Inner City Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 10 -- Syria is the chair of the Asia Pacific Group at the UN for this month. But while every other regional group spoke Tuesday at a Human Rights Day ceremony at the UN, when the turn of the Asia Pacific Group came, the speech took only one minute.

  Syria Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari said that there was no consensus for Syria to speak as the group's chair. Afterward he told Inner City Press exclusively that five countries blocked it -- Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Cyprus and Japan -- and that they "didn't want me to speak as chair. But I did."

  Some wonder where this will lead -- will other countries in other groups, when their month to chair the group comes up, be similarly blocked?

  Other precedents that have been allowed to happen include France holding an event inside the UN and declaring Saudi-sponsored rebel Ahmad al Jarba the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. Ban Ki-moon hosted Jarba at his UN-provided residence. 

 The United Nations Correspondents Association hosted Jarba for a faux "UN" briefing in the clubhouse Ban gives them, now to be tricked out -- literally -- with Samsung equipment given through the South Korean mission and the UN.

It's worth noting that it was the Asia Pacific Group which, tricked or not, sent Sri Lanka military figure Shavendra Silva to serve on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations.

  When Inner City Press reported on this, several Permanent Representatives of Asia Pacific Group countries said they were opposed and would get it reversed. But Sri Lanka and allies fought back; Ban told Inner City Press, it is a decision of member states, and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, typically, refused to answer any Press questions.

  Now this same Asia Pacific Group has allowed a split where its chair for December was banned from speaking for the Group on the awards given to

Biram Dah Abeid of Mauritania, a son of freed slaves who works to eradicate the practice; Hiljmnijeta Apuk of Kosovo, a campaigner for the rights of people with disproportional restricted growth (short stature); Liisa Kauppinen of Finland, President emeritus of the World Federation of the Deaf; Khadija Ryadi, Former President of the Morocco Association for Human Rights; Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice (the Constitutional Court); and Malala Yousafzai, a Pakistani schoolgirl shot by the Taliban who advocates for education.

And so it goes at the UN. Watch this site.

   

On Malala Day, UN Won't Answer on Gordon and Sarah Brown's Charity A World at School, or How Access Granted

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 12 -- Malala's speech at the UN on Friday was an inspiration. But the UN at least in part used it to direct concerned people to a non-UN charity, A World at School, which was started by Gordon Brown's wife Sarah in 2002.

  When Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky about this at Friday's noon briefing, he insisted that the focus should be on Malala's speech. 

 While the UN might have preferred narratives of the day, it seems to Inner City Press (and to the new Free UN Coalition for Access) that the purpose of the UN noon briefing is to answer the questions that are asked.

  If it's just a one-way communication, like much of the UN system's social media, there's no reason to have an in-person question and answer session.

  When Inner City Press said it had “additional questions about this the World at School and the media access, but if you say it’s not the right day, I will ask them another day,” Nesirky said he would get back with responses. 

 But as of 8 pm, no answers have been provided, on A World at School or why the UN Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit told journalists there were no tickets, when Nesirky said there were ten. Who got them? On what basis?@FUNCA_info has asked.

From Friday's noon briefing transcript by the UN:

Inner City Press: on media access, there ended up being no tickets available through [Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit] to attend it. But in trying to pursue tickets, we were referred to something called A World at School and also to the office of the UN Special Envoy on Global Education, Gordon Brown. What is the connection between A World at School and the United Nations? Is it a UN body? And the office of Gordon Brown, it says at the bottom of it, “copyright Gordon and Sarah Brown and the reds” [sic - made up by UN], the website was registered by this World at School, so I wanted to know, is it a UN office, is it funded out of the UN’s budget, both entities are laudable, but it seems a little bit blurry. Is this a UN entity or not? Gordon Brown is a UN official, but why is his website not a UN website?

Spokesperson : Gordon Brown has a very specific role given to him by the Secretary-General as the Special Envoy for Global Education and for, as the leading champion of Global Education First, the initiative that the Secretary-General launched. And of course, the presence of Malala here today on her birthday — and after all, that is what this should be about — was extremely powerful. Anybody who listened to her speech, I imagine could not fail to be moved by it and to feel inspired and motivated by it, too.

As for your question about access, tickets were available. Ten tickets were indeed available and were distributed. It was first-come, first-served. And as you will have seen, and as I think people around the world saw, it was being broadcast, and therefore, people who did not get into the room — and it was not only journalists who could not get into the room — believe me, there are many who would have wished to have been there. It was possible to cover this, and I think many people did cover it, even if they were not in the room.

Inner City Press: A World at School, it seems laudable, the speech was great. I am just trying to figure out, Gordon Brown, what relationship is the UN?

Spokesperson: Listen, Matthew, I think, I am happy to take this up with you, but I truly believe that the focus today should be on Malala and the work that she has done, the symbolism of her visit here. And I think that anybody who has been listening to that, and indeed followed the Youth Assembly that has followed, there are many, many extremely courageous, bright and eloquent young people who are advocating strongly for what is fundamental rights. And I think that’s where the focus should be today. Other questions, please. Yes?

Question [Journalist from Pakistan, not on UNCA board]: But, Martin, that’s all very well about Malala, but why should some outside body be controlling the access to the General Assembly Hall and not the United Nations itself?

Spokesperson: Well, it’s the Trusteeship Council Chamber, and as I have said, the tickets were available.

To whom? These questions should be answered. Watch this site.

  

UN Shunts Malala Fans to Gordon Brown's Wife's Charity, Which Doesn't Answer on its Links with Gordo's "UN" Office

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 12 – The UN made much of Malala Day, and at least Malala herself did not disappoint in her speech. But what is the UN connection?

The UN referred the Press and many people to “A World at School” -- which turns out to be a UK charity set up by Gordon Brown's wife Sarah in 2002.

When Gordon Brown, out of power, was given a UN Envoy job by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, he linked it to his wife's charity.

  But neither Brown's office, nor his wife's A World at School, responded when contacted – as the UN directed – on Friday morning, nor to a request for information about their connection(s) and budget.

Malala spoke movingly; Gordon Brown and Ban much less so. 

  Malala said, "a deal that goes against rights of women is unacceptable," readable as a reference at negotiations with the Taliban by the US and others.

  The UN Department of Public Information, which fumbled or worse on transparency in media access to the event, devoted much time to promoting it with verbatim quotes, and links to Gordon Brown's wife's charity. 

  In fact, even the "UN" website of Gordon Brown's office was UN Envoy was registered, not by the UN, but by the Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown. What is going on?

More than a week ago on July 3, the UN Department of Public Information announced that “Education activist Malala Yousafzai will mark her 16th birthday, on Friday, 12 July 2013, by giving her first high-level public appearance and statement...a limited number of seats will be available for media, contact” the UN Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit.

Inner City Press immediately wrote to MALU, also on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, asking

“this is a timely request for access to cover youth / Malala events on July 12. Please confirm, and also, How many media seats ARE available? Also, what about media seats to cover the new / interim General Assembly hall, and separately, media worktables in the photo booths, as the Free UN Coalition for Access raised to DPI on June 10? The request for media worktable(s) at Security Council stakeout also remaining outstanding.”

  The chief of MALU wrote back that “We have put you on the list of people who have requested a ticket. I am waiting to hear from the organizers how many tickets there will be for the press. There is no mezzanine in the temporary GA for extra seating.”

  But a week late on the eve of Malala Day, as resident correspondents covering the July 11 Security Council meetings on Sudan / South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo were told to stand back and not block photographs of Gordon Brown and his entourage, there was still no word on media access to cover Malala Day and her speech.

  Inner City Press, again on behalf of FUNCA, inquired with UN Media Accreditation Thursday afternoon and was told they still didn't know how many tickets there would be.

  Despite further explanation by FUNCA of how bad the UN will look if it continues to totally exclude the public from the new General Assembly hall in the North Lawn building, and excludes the press from all but a handful of translation-less photo booths during the General Debate in September, both positions were reiterated.

At the UN's noon briefing on July 10, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky.

  We will return to that ongoing issue, and to recent UN reductions in access and even threats to accreditation. But as to Malala Day, after the second inquiry on the afternoon of July 11, there was still no word that evening, nor on the morning of the speech / Day, less than two hours before it's all set to begin.

  Like the exclusion of the press and public from the new General Assembly Hall, and the continuing defense of that despite detailed critique and constructive suggestions from FUNCA, the Free UN Coalition for Access, what does this say about the UN? Watch this site.

Update: After publication of the immedately above UN Media Accreditation & Liaison Unit e-mailed that it:

"will not receive any tickets from the organizers for mezzanine seats to attend Malala Day from 9:30 am to 11:30 am in the Trusteeship Council. For any inquiries, contact Justin van Fleet justin [at] educationenvoy.org or Mara Sirbu mara [at]aworldatschool.org"

   This means that if you followed the directions of UN DPI a week ago -- to write to MALU to access -- you were left until two hours before the event and then told to contact Gordon Brown's flacks.

WORSE: Gordon Brown's wife's charity, which didn't answer. Transcribing Malala's speech from the hall outside the Trusteeship Council Chamber, there was loud hammering and a tour group. The 2013 president of the UN's partner UNCA, Pamela Falk of CBS, was seen inside the TCC by an eagle-eyed FUNCA member; the UN's partner, predictable, did not complain of how (other) media was excluded. It's an Alliance. 

Again, what does this say about the UN?

On MDGs, Rwanda Says Its Not for Donors, Ban Cites "Gilani" of Australia, Africa Absence Surprise

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 12 -- At the “MDGs Momentum” event in the UN's re-opened lobby on Friday afternoon, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon thanked the Ambassadors of the two countries chairing his MDGs advisory group: Australia and Rwanda. (Inner City Press photo here.)

  Both, as it happens, were elected to the Security Council this year. Australia may be said to represent donor countries, and Rwanda the developing world. 

  But Rwanda's Permanent Representative Eugene Richard Gasana made a point of saying, in his speech, that his country is not for MDGs at the behest of donors.

  For Rwanda in the recent past, one wag noted, donors have been fickle: here today, gone tomorrow.

  Afterward Inner City Press asked Gasana about the line. “It's about national ownership,” he said. “It's all about us. Nobody should champion the MDGs because they got money.”

Another speaker, Jeffrey Sachs, said that Rwanda's neighbors are all inspired by its progress on the MDGs. Again one wag had to note, that's not been the message from the neighbor in Kinshasa -- which now, at least according to the UN's Herve Ladsous, is belatedly suspending military officers for the 126 rapes in Minova in late November 2012.

  In offering this thanks, Ban Ki-moon cited Rwanda's President Kagame and Australia's “Prime Minister Gilani.” Inner City Press was there, and heard and taped it. 

 Afterward, the Australian delegation tried to insist it had not happened. And to respond to that, and because the UN often just doctors up its transcripts, Inner City Press is uploading the audio clip, here.

  In fairness, Ban was recounting his call -- on Skype -- to courageous schoolgirl Malala in Pakistan, and about kicking off a soccer game in front of 90,000 fans.

Afterward, more surprise was expressed that in his meeting Thursday with US President Barack Obama -- that's a name Ban wouldn't get wrong -- Ban didn't raise any issues about Africa, “not even about Mali,” as one African diplomat put it.

“Maybe these things seem important to us here, but are not important even to Ban Ki-moon out there,” the diplomat continued, pointing outside to rainswept First Avenue. Perhaps not. Watch this site.

UN Refuses Press Qs on Haiti, Congo Rapes & Raid, Mad about De Mistura Scoop?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 5 -- That UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey almost never has answers to questions is one thing.

  But on April 5 Del Buey decided he wouldn't even let questions be asked. 

 Del Buey simply refused to take Inner City Press questions on Haiti and the Democratic Republic of Congo, countries in which the UN has peacekeeping missions (mis) run by Herve Ladsous costing $800 million and over $1 billion, respectively. To this low has Ban Ki-moon's UN sunk.

The first speaker at Friday's noon briefing was Ban's main spokesman Martin Nesirky, who been gone all week in San Marino, Andorra, Monaco and now Madrid. 

  The purpose of the call-in was to describe and promote a call Ban made -- by Skype! -- to Malala, the courageous schoolgirl shot be extremists in Pakistan.

   Nesirky said clips from the call would soon be uploaded to YouTube.

(Flashback: after the UN raided Inner City Press' office on March 18, on March 19 a UN supervisor wrote to demand that the after raid video be removed from YouTube as a “first step.” This request, about which Inner City Press answered questions from the Department of Public Information which led the raid, has never been withdrawn.)

  As a question to Nesirky, Inner City Press asked him to confirm the Vatican's report that Ban will visit Pope Benedict in Rome on April 9, and to confirm a visit to and appointment of Staffan De Mistura, currently deputy foreign minister of Italy as UN envoy to Mali, “as we have reported.”

“Who's we?” Nesirky asked.

“Inner City Press,” was the answer. Nesirky would not even confirm the Vatican visit. Mighty dangerous, the Vatican.

After Nesirky spoke about Ban's time at the UN World Tourism Organization, Del Buey read out announcements then said he would take questions. 

 After leaving Inner City Press for last, as has become the norm, Inner City Press said for planning purposes that it would ask questions about Sudan, Haiti and the DRC -- all countries in which the UN has peacekeeping missions (mis) run by Herve Ladsous.

  After saying he didn't know about a Small Arms Survey report on South Sudan, Del Buey turned away and told another correspondents, “last question.”

  Why? Inner City Press asked.

  Del Buey seemed to say because he'd been in the room too long. But he took very few questions -- in fact on April 3 he managed to hold his briefing right during Susan Rice's stakeout, taking only two questions in a record low six minute briefing. Is he tired?

  The UN's Censorship Alliance, known as UNCA, never challenges the decline of access to information at the UN. The most recent posting on its glassed-in bulletin board is from February 1.

Meanwhile DPI, from the non-UNCA bulletin board won through advocacy by the Free UN Coalition for Access, recently tore down every flier, saying they were too old, including a critical flier from late March.

  The president of UNCA Pamela Falk of CBS took photos of the March 18 raid, then issued a legal threat to Inner City Press not to write about it.

To this as the UN descended. As to the questions Del Buey refused to taken, much less answer, watch this site.

On Pakistan, Sudan Raises Drones, US Balochistan, Sri Lanka Spins Terrorism

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 30 -- The UN Human Rights Council, elections for which are heating up, allowed a mere 80 seconds per speaker on candidate Pakistan on Tuesday in Geneva.

  Speaking back to back, Sri Lanka wished the country best of luck in its fight with terrorism then Sudan raised the US of drone strikes, by the US.

  As UN system Special Rapporteur Christof Heyns responded to Inner City Press last week, this fight in 2009 killed some 40,000 civilians. Is this the luck being wished?

  Sri Lanka soon faces its own so-called Universal Periodic Review, but with even less time per speaker: only 72 seconds.

  On Pakistan, Sudan raised the issue of drone strikes, days after its Ambassador Daffa-Alla Elhag Ali Osman told Inner City Press his country would be filing a complaint against Israel with the UN Security Council for the bombing of the Yarmouk compound in Khartoum.

  The UN Security Council has been closed for five days: first for Eid and the weekend, now two days and counting for Hurricane Sandy in New York.

  Incoming UNSC member Australia raised Malala by name; Brazil offered some praise despite a glancing reference to "recent disturbing developments." 

 Permanent UNSC member UK raised the death penalty; failed UNSC candidate Canada used its time to ask a question, about religious freedom.

  When US Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Eileen Donahoe took the floor, she said Pakistan has a vibrant media and raised Balochistan. She did not mention US drone strikes, which some believe she should have.

  The US is running to keep its seat on the Human Rights Council, and sent official Harold Koh to make its case at UN Headquarters earlier this month. Inner City Press asked about drone strikes, not only in Pakistan but also Yemen and Somalia.

  Koh said these comply with all international laws, a point about which Inner City Press asked Heyns, who is UN system Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions. He was less sure of their legality.

  But what is or can be resolved in the 80 seconds given on Pakistan? Or the 72 seconds coming up on Sri Lanka? Watch this site.