UNITED NATIONS, September 24 – After India's foreign minister Sushma Swaraj in her UN General Assembly speech said while her country exports IT, Pakistan exports terrorists, Pakistani Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi asked for the right of reply at the end of Saturday's UNGA session. She morphed India as the biggest democracy into the biggest hypocrisy - and raised up a photograph showing the impact of the use of pellet guns. But it appears the photo used was not from Kashmir, but from Gaza. What next?
The day before on Friday, Inner City Press had asked the Commissioner General for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, Pierre Krähenbühl, about UNRWA's policies on social media. Inner City Press asked about another UN agency, UNHCR, being less than transparent after a staffer called for “harder repression” of Anglophones in Cameroon; another example was UNRWA illustrating the situation in Palestine with a photo from... Syria. So these things happen, but UNRWA is under different pressures to issue corrections, including by funders. What will Pakistan do? Will we find out by the Daily Dawn? We aim to have more on this - and on UN Spokespeople being less responsive than government's Ambassadors, because the UN or at least its Spokesman is apparently under no pressure or metric to be responsive. After UN Secretary General met with Yousef Al Othaimeen, the Secretary General of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the UN issues a read-out that "they discussed a number of issues of mutual concern, including counterterrorism, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and Afghanistan, as well as resolving the plight of the Rohingya minority in Myanmar." Inner City Press tweeted photohere. Then the UN "re-issued" the read-out, dropping Somalia and the plight of the Rohinga, and adding the Middle East peace process: "The Secretaries-General discussed a number of issues in OIC’s area of responsibility, including counterterrorism, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, the Middle East Process and Myanmar. The Secretaries-General agreed to strengthen cooperation between the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations." So who complained? Myanmar about the "plight of the Rohingya"? The OIC about no MEPP? Who said, drop Somalia? We aim to have more on this. On September 22, Guteres met with Cameroon's 30-plus year President Paul Biya, he met Saturday morning with DR Congo holdover Joseph Kabila, now with white in his beard, and the prime minister of Togo, where protesters against the father and son in power for 50 years are being shot and killed. Inner City Press covered the meetings, or photo ops, here. There was also Sri Lanka (Sirisena without accountability) and Libya's Serraj. While no read-outs have issued yet, the Cameroon read-out refers only to the political situation in the country - that would be, the killing and jailing of Anglophones. This is today's UN.
UNITED NATIONS, October 31 -- The UN Spokesman ended his open statement at the October 29 UN noon briefing with this: “I have a bit of sad news. We have been informed that Haider Rizvi, who was, as you know, a reporter in the UN press corps for many years, died last night in Lahore, Pakistan. Our thoughts are with him and his family.”
Ours too. Haider began covering the UN in 1993; in recent years there were times he and Inner City Press were the only ones asking questions at press conferences onindigenous issues, on disarmament, decolonization and against the increasing corporatization of the UN.
Relatedly, when Inner City Press resisted attempts atcensorship and ejection by the honchos of the UN Correspondents Association, then co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access, Haider expressed support (“Bravo! I am with you) and said of UNCA, “That gang has become a king mafia.”
UNITED NATIONS, September 30 -- In this UN General Assembly debate, in the fire hydrant spray of words and catch-phrase, some stand out and well as some omissions. Inner City Press will note some of them here, in reverse chronological order.
On September 30, at night, the speaker for Morocco slipped in a reference to the "Moroccan Sahara," criticizing "plans made in offices." Of course, Morocco has tried to Ban Western Sahara speakers even from the UNTV microphone.
Pakistan's Nawaz Sharif said, "I want to use the opportunity today to propose a new peace initiative with India, starting with measures that are the simplest to implement: One, we propose that Pakistan and India formalize and respect the 2003 understanding for a complete eeasefire on the Line of Control in Kashmir. For this purpose, we call for UNMOGIP's expansion to monitor the observance of the ceasefire. Two, we propose, that Pakistan and India reaffirm that they will not resort to the use or the threat of use of force under any circumstances. This is a central element of the UN Charter. Three, steps be taken to demilitarize Kashmir. Four, agree to an unconditional mutual withdrawal from Siachen Glacier, the world's highest battleground."
Libya's "Acting Head of State" Agila Saleh Essa Gwaider used the speech to trash the GNC:
"The House of Representatives, as the legitimate authority elected by all Libyans, has been and still is supportive of dialogue as a strategic option to resolve the political and security crisis in Libya. The House of Representatives made all possible concessions to encourage the extra legitimate authority to disassociate itself from terrorism and join the dialogue table in order to spare Libyans more bloodshed and put an end to the destruction of Libyan cities. However, we notice more intransigence in positions and more misinterpretations of the flexibility shown by the house of representatives. It seems flexibility has been misunderstood, even by Mr Bernardino Leon, the Special Representative of the Secretary General, who tried to bring us back to square one and unravel all that has been achieved in the last months..
“In case of continued intransigence of the General National Congress by rejecting the agreement, the House calls on its boycotting members to advance its interest and the interest of its constituents on any other measures. They are called upon to participate in the election of an inclusive government of national accord, apart from the terrorist groups"
On September 29, St Vincent and the Grenadines slammed the Dominican Republic for its ousters to Haiti, and criticized the UN for not taking responsibility for bringing cholera to Haiti, and for its peacekeepers' rapes in the Central African Republic (which UN Peacekeeping boss Herve Ladsous had linked to a lack of "R&R," here.)
Yemen's Hadi said Yemenis "thanks" the Saudi airstrikes on them.
For the UK, UN Security Council "pen-holder" on Yemen, it was Phillip Hammond who spoke. At first, UNlike most other countries other than, for example, Yemen and the US, the UK's speech was NOT sent out by the UN. After some inquiries, a UK spokesperson said it would come out soon. But should one have to ask so much? We'll have more on this.
Here's from the UK speech; Australia's is below that:
UK: "as the Prime Minister pledged yesterday, the UK will resume a significant role in enabling peacekeeping operations, particularly in Africa where the UK will support efforts by the United Nations and the African Union to end some of the world’s most destabilising conflicts - conflicts that are prompting mass migration from South Sudan and sustaining terrorist groups in Somalia.
"The UN must strive to represent the new realities of our age, with a reformed Security Council. It must have the best possible leadership, with a transparent system for selecting the next Secretary General, and he (or dare I suggest, perhaps, she?) will have to head a more efficient organization, ensuring that every cent it receives from its members states is used to maximum effect.As a founding member of the UN, and as a permanent member of the Security Council, the UK will champion that reform agenda. And we will continue to promote the ideals that the United Nations represents."
But is it "rule of law," when none of the French soldiers accuse of rape a year ago in the Central African Republic have had a judicial decision?
Australia's Julie Bishop:
“All states must uphold their responsibility to protect civilians from the most serious international crimes. Security Council members have a particular responsibility to do so. In that context, we welcome proposals to restrain use of the veto where mass atrocity crimes are being committed. Australia's term on the Security Council in 2013-14 demonstrated that elected members can play an active and constructive role. I am therefore pleased to announce that Australia is nominating to serve again on the Council for the 2029-30 term
“As a non-permanent member of the Security Council, we experienced first-hand the difficulties the Council faces in responding to the crises and conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, South Sudan, Central African Republic and Mali. Nowhere is the devastation greater than in Iraq and Syria. Daesh is wreaking devastating harm on individuals, families and communities and destroying the world's heritage, in gross violation of international law and basic concepts of morality. It cannot be allowed to prevail.
“Australia is participating in coalition military action to combat Daesh in Iraq and Syria. We are doing so within the framework of the Charter, and in a manner consistent with international law. Defeating Daesh requires both military and political action. Reconciliation and inclusive governance in Iraq are key to reducing Daesh's appeal and support. We continue to advocate for a political solution that can bring an end to the conflict in Syria, and we support UN envoy de Mistura's efforts towards this end.
“We do not believe any transition option should be rejected, all permutations of a political solution should be assessed with clear-eyed realism," Bishop said.
The last speech of September 28 was Abdullah Abdullah of Afghanistan, who cited the day's attacks and the only belatedly disclosed death of Mullah Omar. Before him, Bolivia's Evo Morales when off script, sub-tweeting Donald Trump, directly asking why and how the UK claims to own an island, Malvinas, “so close to our continent.' Ecuador's Correa trashed Chevron both for pollution and legal chicanery.
South Africa's Zuma said, “We reiterate our support of the people of Western Sahara and urge the international community to support their struggle for self-determination, freedom, human rights and dignity.”
Nigeria's Buhari said, “Friends of Nigeria and foreign investor partners will be encouraged to know that the new Government is attacking the problems we inherited head-on.” Apparenlty Bring Back Our Girls (also) means Bring Back Our Investment.
Earlier, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said “Democratic backsliding is a threat in too many places, as leaders seek to stay in office beyond their mandated limits” - but didn't say the word, Burundi, while he did shout out The Gambia.
Ban also said, “I am deeply troubled by growing restrictions on media freedoms and civil society” - although when his chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous had Inner City Press ejected from an “open” meeting, Ban did nothing.
New General Assembly President Mogens Lykketoft said, “As President of the General Assembly I will support member states in their ambitions for revitalization and reform – including a new, more transparent process for selection of the next Secretary General.”
“The Brazilian government and society do not tolerate corruption. The Brazilian democracy becomes stronger when the authorities recognize the limits imposed by the law as their own limits. We Brazilians want a country where the law is the limit. Many of us fought for this, precisely when laws and rights were violated during the military dictatorship. We want a country where rulers behave strictly according to their duties, without giving way to excesses. The sanctions of the law must apply to all those who committed illicit acts bearing in mind the need to uphold the principle of due process.”
UNITED NATIONS, September 25 -- India has been the largest contributor to UN Peacekeeping -- 185,000 troops in 44 of the UN's total of 69 missions -- so Inner City Press on September 23 at the Waldorf Astoria after the arrival of Indian Prime Minister Modi asked what India is looking for from the Peacekeeping summit Modi will attend on September 28.
India's Ambassador to the UN Ashoke Mukerji replied that India would like Troop Contributing Countries to be consulted more meaningfully, citing Article 44 of the UN Charter; he emphasized India's skilled personnel and the protection of civilians. Inner City Press asked about DPKO boss Ladsous' comments linking rapes to “R&R,” Mukerje's earlier response is below. There were questions, then and at a subsequently briefing, about Pakistan.
On September 25 after Modi met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon -- Modi gave Ban this book, here, by Ashoke Mukurji -- the UN issued a read out that mentioned Sri Lanka and Nepal, but BUT Pakistan:
"The Secretary-General met today with H.E. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of the Republic of India. They focused their discussion on the importance of implementing the Sustainable Development Goals, in particular with reference to climate change. The Secretary-General emphasised the need for climate change finance as a key to building trust between developed and developing countries. He underlined the tremendous importance of India's role in renewable energy, and encouraged the Prime Minister to continue to show strong global leadership on this issue.
"The Secretary-General commended India for its indispensable contribution to UN peacekeeping. He also underlined India's influential role in supporting the democratic transitions in both Nepal and Sri Lanka."
We'll have more on this.
(The venue of Modi's meeting with Obama is not yet clear; the G4 Summit will occur Saturday September 26 at 8 am in the Waldorf, after which Modi heads to the West Coast including, yes, Facebook.
The buzz at the Indian press conference was how large the (Empire) room was, and of Modi staying in what used to be Obama's and other US Presidents' suite.)
When peacekeepers from France allegedly raped children in the Central African Republic and the UN learned about it more than a year ago, theUN and UNICEF did nothing, until French UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous asked to fire the whistleblower Anders Kompass in March of this year, as stated in two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings.
On September 11, refusing to answer on this, Ladsous instead linked the rapes to soldiers' lack of "distraction" and saying rapes could be avoided by some "relatively cheap R&R," and adding that some "South Asia"Troop Contributing Countries do just that. Video here.
On September 17, Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representative of India, Asoke K Mukerji, and his Deputy Bhagwant Bishnoi about what Ladsous said. Video here. First, Bhagwant Bishnoi distinguished India from what Ladsous said, saying they only rotate troops in the most difficult circumstances. In some, one a year, if more volatile, more often.
Then Ambassador Mukerji said clear, India's is a professional army, not a part time army, there are no "R&R" trips and that is for whoever said it to explain. Video here.
That would be Ladsous, who refuses to answer Press questions. He took no questions as he rushed out of the Security Council on September 17.
(India's Prime Minister will participate in the high level meeting on peacekeeping on September 28, which we'll cover.)
On September 17, the UN Mission in CAR, MINUSCA, issued this statement now about a pornographic film involving peacekeepers:
"The United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) is deeply concerned at reports of a pornographic film circulating in the city of Batangafo, center-west of the Central African Republic, which allegedly involves peacekeepers.
"MINUSCA immediately took steps to try to verify these disturbing allegations. To this end, MINUSCA met with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect of the locality, and with representative of the local population.
"A fact finding mission also visited Kabo, about 55 km from Batangafo, to raise the issue with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect and members of the local community.
"To date, MINUSCA’s contacts with the authorities and local residents have not provided any evidence to substantiate the allegations of a film involving UN personnel. However, the Mission is committed to establishing the truth and requests that anyone in possession of evidence to substantiate these allegations should submit this to the Mission’s attention. This may be done via any MINUSCA office.
"MINUSCA would like to reiterate its strict adherence to the United Nations’ zero tolerance policy with regard to all acts of misconduct and sexual exploitation and abuse."
One wag said, once Ladsous linked rapes to recreation, this should not be surprising.
On September 15 MINUSCA disclosed yet another "allegation of sexual exploitation committed by one of its civilian staff."
Inner City Press: Since Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous said that one of the reasons these abuses take place is people don't leave the country and go for R&R elsewhere for recreation, one could say, how long has the person been in the country?
Spokesman: Matthew, I think… I think you continue to gain great pleasure in distorting what Mr. Ladsous said…
Inner City Press: You can read the transcript. He said…
Spokesman: Listen, I think you raised that issue yesterday. I answered clearly this is a case… a possible case of sexual abuse, which is to be condemned and which will be pursued as far as we can, both internally and with the relevant judicial authorities.
Inner City Press: How long has it been since the person left the country? The reason I ask is that he made the linkage. He's the one that brought up people traveling… [Cross talk - actually, talk over, by scribes]
Spokesman: Matthew, I will say this one last time. Civilian staff and military staff work under two different regimes. So you're… to compare soldiers that have been in-country in very difficult circumstances for three years and civilian staff is not to be comparable. Yes, ma'am?
Inner City Press: I'd wanted to ask you this on Friday or Mr. Ladsous, but I want to ask you, from this podium, he said, in discussing rapes, he said that peacekeepers there don't have enough recreation, that they don't have enough comfort. He said that they are looking into getting them flights to get them fresh air, and although he did use the word, he's not excusing it. I'm going to tell, many people saw this as basically a statement that somehow linking the rapes to a lack of other distractions…
Spokesman Dujarric: I think… I think it's a complete misinterpretation of what Mr. Ladsous said. He stressed a number of times that there was no excuse...
Inner City Press: Then what about the flights? I'm sorry.
Spokesman: I'm a little over-caffeinated with me today so just bear with me. He repeatedly said that there was no excuse for rape. Okay. That is clear. That is UN policy, and I think that's everyone's policy. There is no excuse for rape. What he said in talking about the case of one contingent that had been deployed in basically a very hardship peacekeeping operation for more than three years. When troops are not rotated, when troops don't have an opportunity to be rotated out for [rest and recuperation] and that's true for any armed forces, it creates the conditions where there can be all sorts of abuse or other things developing. It is not an excuse for rape. And I think it's clear that we have seen rape and horrendous sexual abuse by soldiers in many parts of the world. Some of them come from very rich armies. Some come from very poor armies. There is no excuse. What he was saying and I think people would agree with it, that three years for any contingent being stationed in very difficult circumstances is too long.
Inner City Press: I guess what I want to say, US military, an admiral in the Pacific was fired for comments exactly like that for which the person… the person excused himself and apologized… he said distraction, comfort.
Spokesman: Matthew, Matthew. I read what you wrote. I'm aware of the other case. I think they're complete… they're not comparable.
Inner City Press: Where are the flights going? Where are the [rest and recuperation] flights going?
Spokesman: I will come back…
Back in 1995 for similar comments, US Admiral Richard C. Macke was fired, as reported in the LA Times and the New York Times, which said Macke "apologized after members of Congress and Japanese officials complained, but it was too late.... A senior White House official said tonight that Anthony Lake, the national security adviser, had heard of Admiral Macke's remarks and told the Defense Department that the statements were 'not acceptable.'"
Anthony Lake is now in the UN system, as the head of UNICEF - does he think UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous' similar comments in 2015 are acceptable? Or does he, apparently like his and some other major member states, hope no one notices what Ladsous says and, worse, does?
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has yet to act. Nor have Ladsous' French sponsors, who dumped him on the UN after he'd previously beenrejected for the post by Ban's predecessor Kofi Annan, said anything.
When Inner City Press started asking about this, Ladsous took to saying"I don't respond to you, Mister," right on UNTV. Instead he summoned Agence France Presse, Reuters and others to private briefings, as here in the hall. These media didn't report Ladsous' antics -- nor despite being present at Ladsous' September 11 press conference did they report his linkage of soldiers' rapes to their lack of "comfort" or R&R. This is today's UN.
It was Senegalese Babacar Gaye, the head of the CAR mission, and not overall Peacekeeping chief Ladsous who was fired by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon; Inner City Press obtained and put Gaye's letter online here (credited here and here) citing systemic problems.
Before Ladsous' carefully controlled four day visit to the country - no questions on the peacekeeper rapes, colonial photographs sent out - UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press, which asked, that Ladsous would take questions when he returned, including about peacekeepers' sexual abuse.
But when Ladsous appeared at the September 11 UN noon briefing, UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric for the second time did not allow Inner City Press to ask Ladsous a single question. Dujarric gave the first question to the UN Correspondents Association, which after a perfunctory questions about the number of sexual abuse cases said its “real” question was if Ladsous will meet Obama. (Yes, apparently, and inappropriately, see below). Video here.
Inner City Press prepared to ask Ladsous an obvious question: what is his response to appearing in at least two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings as having tried to get the whistleblower Kompass fired? But Dujarric gave the second question to a Reuters reporter who has previously channeled Ladsous, then to Agence France Presse, whose UN reporter in 2011 asked UNCA's board to act on Inner City Press' reporting on Ladsous.
Even with the questions allowed, Ladsous' answers should get him fired. First, speaking of sexual abuse, he said he didn't want to “deflower” the subject. Vine here. Then explaining the peacekeepers' rapes he said that a solution would be to get them more “recreation” (translating back and forth with Dujarric, Ladsous began to say “R and R”).
Ladsous was asked, what do you mean? He said that Asian countries are good at this. We'll have more, but on top of his role in covering up rapes in DR Congo, Darfur and now CAR, this should get Ladsous fired. More here.
UNITED NATIONS, July 22 -- The UN Secretariat's bungling of Yemen mediation has become ever more clear, according to multiple sources and documents exclusively seen by Inner City Press, see below.
Now Inner City Press has exclusively received complaints or allegations that the UN's replacement envoy to Yemen, Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, after his failed humanitarian pause, has gone on vacation.
Two days ago, Inner City Press asked the UN where Cheikh Ahmed is. UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inner City Press that he has been "planning his travels," soon to Riyadh. Yeah, Inner City Press was told by another less constrained but at least as knowledgeable source: planning his future travels while already on vacation. Another source compared it to then UN envoy to Pakistan Jean-Maurice Ripert going on vacation amid national disasters in Pakisan and then losing his post.
The buzz in Sana'a, where Hadi has named a governor in exile described as an Islamist, is that Cheikh Ahmed may well have known of the plans to bring in APC and weapons to those fighting the Houthis in Aden, and so "misleadingly" urged a pause. Another compared this to the UN luring out surrendering rebel leaders in Sri Lanka - to their deaths.
And so from Aden, photographs of brand new light brown vehicles, American-made, brought in. Will they end up in the hands of Al Qaeda?
Inner City Press: I wanted to check first if you have anything on Yemen and the activities of Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed. What's he been doing in the last few days, amid reports of continued death and destruction in the country?
Deputy Spokesman: Yes, Mr. Ould Cheikh Ahmed has been planning his onward travels. The only one to confirm at this stage is that he does plan very shortly to travel to Riyadh, where he is to meet with Saudi authorities, authorities of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and with President [Abd Rabbuh Mansour] Hadi and Vice-President [Khaled] Bahah. And so, he is going to try to talk to them. He's continuing with his efforts to see what can be done to secure a humanitarian pause, even following the end of Ramadan and Eid. And so, he's going to continue with those efforts and travel more broadly in the region after that. We'll try and inform you of other stops as that progresses.
Inner City Press: There's some talk of, if not Mr. Hadi, other ministers trying to return to Aden. Is the UN aware of that? Do they have any comment on that?
Deputy Spokesman Haq: It's not for me to discuss what the Government of Yemen is trying to do. Regarding Aden, we have been concerned about the humanitarian situation on the ground. Our humanitarian colleagues have been continuing even in the absence of a humanitarian pause on the ground to try to provide supplies. I believe that, even though the pause did not go forward as we had wanted, about 60 per cent of the humanitarian activities that we had been planning did, in fact, take place. And so we were able to provide some aid, although not nearly enough. And, of course, we continue to be concerned about the fighting in Aden.
Back on July 9, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon proudly announced a humanitarian pause to start on July 10 at midnight.
When the supposed pause failed, Inner City Press was told on July 14, it took Ban Ki-moon more than two days to speak with Saudi Arabia, through its foreign and defense ministers. Ban, it was said, was "in the air."
Inner City Press: Something on Yemen. Yesterday, you said the Secretary-General was very, very disappointed. So, I wanted to ask, if you can say, starting, I guess it would be, Saturday morning, right after midnight, it became pretty clear that there was no pause. Did he make any… did he make any actual, like, calls, meaning like telephone calls or in some… did he reach out? And can you confirm or deny that some within DPA [Department of Political Affairs] had suggested that he not put out that statement that seemed to imply that there was a pause agreed to as…?
Spokesman Dujarric: No, I… listen, I'm not… Secretary-General was in the air a large part of the weekend. He's also attending the Addis conference. People at various levels were having various contacts. The Secretary-General spoke to both the Defence Minister of Saudi Arabia and the Foreign Minister yesterday, in addition to other contacts that were had in the previous… you know, on Monday and over the weekend. As to the deliberation… the internal deliberations of different opinions expressed within the UN Secretariat, I'm not going to go into that. At the end of the day, it's the Secretary-General's call, and the statement he issued was clear.
The day before on July 13 at the UN noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric why the UN had made another "call" for a pause sound like a commitment to a pause, at least by the Saudi led coalition. Video here.
Dujarric answered that envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed had told the Suadis of his desire for a pause. But that's not what the UN said on July 9.
Dujarric, who has still to issue any written statement, said this at the July 13 briefing:
“Obviously the Secretary General is very, very much disappointed that the humanitarian pause did not take hold over the weekend in Yemen. We are continuing with contacts at various levels.
“Despite the continued airstrikes, despite the fighting our humanitarian partners were able to distribute some vital aid to the desperate people of Yemen where ever they can and how ever they an. Obviously the security situation makes it that much more difficult for critical human aid to be delivered.
“We continue to reiterate our call for unconditional humanitarian pause h p and the Secretary General reminds all parties to the conflict in Yemen, from both inside and outside the country of their obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law.”
Even this wasn't issued as a statement or Note to Correspondents. Ban was in Addis Ababa for the Financing for Development conference; here are his UN's "messaging" points in the run-up to that conference (andhere an Inner City Press story about it; we'll have more). But isn't the UN responsible to say something after a humanitarian pause it announced doesn't happen, and people are killed?
It quickly became clear that some of key parties had not been spoken with or agreed; the pause's midnight beginning came and passed amid airstrikes.
Inner City Press is informed by sources that Ban Ki-moon was urged to not make the dubious pause announcement, including from within the UN's own Department of Political Affairs -- but Ban announced it anyway.
At best, it was rolling the dice. At worse, on the very day that UN is rightly criticizing itself for making false promises of protection in Srebrenica 20 years ago, in this case Yemenis were told there would be a pause, and some perhaps relied on it, to their detriment. And still the UN had said nothing.
After the July 9 announcement, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman if the Saudis had been spoken with. The answer was, Hadi told the Saudis his position. But did Hadi ever agree to the pause, or just to the conditions set forth in his letter to UN? What of Hadi's responsibilities to the Yemeni people?
Now Saudi Al Arabiya has said Saudi Arabia never received any communication from Hadi to stop airstrikes, here. Someone is lying.
Where is the UN's replacement envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed? Headed to Ethiopia, Ban's spokesman said, to meet with Ban on the sidelines of the Financing for Development conference there. Does IOCA harbor ambitions for another UN system post, or back in his own country? What sort of a track record is this? Watch this site.
At the July 10 UN noon briefing in New York, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if the UN had spoken with those in Yemen opposing the Houthis but not supporting or in contact with Hadi. Video here. From Dujarric's answer, it seems no such contact has been made.
So, Inner City Press asked, if such a group fires on the Houthis and they fire back, is the pause over, has it been violated? We'll see what happens.
Back on July 9, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript here:
Inner City Press: can you, one, characterize not the communications with Mr. Hadi, but with Saudi Arabia that's running the coalition, the Saudi-led coalition. And does this mean the Secretary-General's understanding is no airstrikes during this time period, and no further advances or use of heavy weapons by the Houthis? Does the pause mean no firing? What does it mean to each of those two sides?
Spokesman Dujarric: What it means is that, if you read the statement, the President… Secretary-General notes that the President, President Hadi, has communicated his acceptance of the pause to the coalition to ensure their support. A humanitarian pause means no fighting. It means no bombing. It means no shooting. It means no fighting. It means exactly that: a humanitarian pause in the fighting that we've seen, to enable our humanitarian colleagues to get the aid to where it's needed, to preposition, and stockpile, and to reach the millions that need it.
Inner City Press: Right. But just for example, policing, who's doing policing in these various cities? Things happen.
Spokesman Dujarric: Obviously I think… [cross talk] In any area in the country, there is a… there is de facto control and, obviously, there is a need to ensure safety and security. What we're talking about is a humanitarian pause in the fighting that we've been witnessing for weeks on end now.
Inner City Press: So just one last thing on this. So the commitment on airstrikes is through President Hadi to the UN?
Spokesman: You know, the… [cross talk] Obviously, President Hadi is a critical interlocutor with the coalition. And as I've said, we've taken note of the fact that he's conveyed to the coalition his acceptance. We expect everyone involved in this conflict to honor this humanitarian pause.
On July 7 the UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights upped its estimate of civilians killed since March 27 to 1,528, adding that one million people have been displaced since the beginning of this round of the conflict. To the Saudi airstrike on UNDP in Khormaksar, Aden, OHCHR added that "IOM’s Migrant Response Centre in Basateen, also in Aden, was struck by a mortar and an airstrike damaged IOM’s office in Harad."
IOM, as Inner City Press reported, had earlier paused its evacuation by air of those seeking to flee Yemen due to some party, which it left unnamed, demanding information about those fleeing BEFORE the flights could leave. Inner City Press has asked others in the UN about this and has been told IOM should have done the screening after the people were able to flee. IOM refused a direct question about caused it to violate this best practice, then stopped sending the Press any information.
There are countries, normally vocal about civilian deaths, which are selling military equipment to Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies. Ban Ki-moon, now in Oslo, is relying entirely on Saudi-selected replacement envoy Ismael Ould Cheikh Ahmed, who was unable to even get the parties in the same room in Geneva, much less reach an agreement. There remain, for now, OHCHR's body counts.
On June 24, Inner City Press asked the UN's replacement envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed about the request by the Houthis and others to meet not with him but with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who did not meet with them in Geneva. Transcribed here.
On June 25 Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq to confirm receipt of the letter and if Ban will meet them. Haq said Cheikh Ahmed is the envoy, and Ban's headed to San Francisco. The UN Security Council issued a Press Statement, here.
Also on June 25, Inner City Press asked new UN aid chief Stephen O'Brien three questions about Yemen: cholera, the destruction of ambulances in Sa'ada and about international staff. Video here.
O'Brien replied that cholera is a risk; he had no information on WHO it was that destroyed the ambulances in Sa'ada (we can guess.) On international staff, which the UN evacuated earlier, he spoke of a rise from 17 to 70, with the goal of getting to 200. He would not say if they are anywhere in the country outside of Sana'a, citing security. But at least he spoke - the Free UN Coalition for Access thanked him.
Here's from the June 24 stakeout, as fast transcribed by Inner City Press:
Inner City Press: On the parties in Sanaa requesting to meet the Secretary General – what’s your response?
Cheikh Ahmed: "This question was raised during our discussion with the Houthis, the GPC and their allies. The Secretary General had delayed twice his travel in order to be there for the parties. We have sent twice a plane from Sanaa which the delegation from Sana'a could not take.. Therefore the Secretary General had a major engagement, which was the election of the new president of the General Assembly which takes place only once a year , and he had to attend it. But the Secretary General will continue being engaged on this."
The ceremonial elevation of the President of the GA who will take over in September was not an election at all - no vote was taken. At the top, Cheikh Ahmed said (again, as fast transcribed by Inner City Press)
"I just briefed the Security Council on the latest developments in Yemen, with a particular focus on the Geneva Consultation. I informed the Council that the Geneva intra-Yemeni Consultations are a milestone... Despite the raging battles and ongoing violence, and the dramatic humanitarian situation, Yemenis accepted the Secretary General’s invitation and participated in the consultations.
"The personal presence of the Secretary General was an indication of the primary importance attached by the United Nations and the international community, and in particular the Secretary General himself on the Yemeni situation. I deeply regret the deep division between the parties and the lack of compromise that prevented an agreement that was within reach. The holding of the Geneva consultation was itself a great achievement in light of the extreme violence unleashed in Yemen.
"While the government came to Geneva to seek the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2216, the government acted in a positive and constructive spirit. Both sides showed signs of constructive engagement. There is an emerging common ground upon which we can build to achieve a ceasefire coupled with a withdrawal.
"While we pursue a long term cessation of violence, I call on all relevant parties to agree without delay to the humanitarian truce, especially during Ramadan. We should not forget that Yemenis are living under dire conditions and it pains me to witness this ongoing suffering. I call on all stakeholders to spare no effort to help us achieve a temporary respite for the Yemeni people.
"I am aware that reviving the political process will not be easy. The Secretary General and I have been clear from the outset that this consultation was only a stepping stone towards the long inclusive political process. All the parties affirmed their commitment to remain engaged with the UN in search of a peaceful solution of the conflict. I have no doubt that it is possible to build upon this positive spirit in the forthcoming consultation.
"I strongly believe that the UN facilitated intra-Yemeni consultations offer the best chance for moving towards a de-escalation of the crisis and a return to the political process. I personally believe there is no military answer to this conflict. I therefore remain committed and will spare no effort to achieve a cease fire and the swift return to a peaceful, inclusive political process."
Before the meeting, UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft stopped and told the press of the danger of famine in the country, and of his hope for a Yemen Press Statement from the UNSC, in which the UK is the "penholder" on Yemen. Periscope video here, replay including on desktop for 24 hours.
Inner City Press was digging into the letter from political parties IN Yemen, asking for a meeting with Ban Ki-moon, NOT with replacement envoy Cheikh Ahmed. These parties, including but not limited to the Houthis, were delayed in getting to Geneva so that they could not meet with Ban (who while there DID meet with a US-listed Al Qaeda terrorist).
While some are sure to argue that Ban now meeting with the parties would undercut Cheikh Ahmed, others point out the the underlying resolution speaks of the Secretary General's Good Offices INCLUDING his Envoy. The envoy is not the only game in town - nor, given his lack of disclosure, raised by Inner City Press, should he be. We'll have more on this.
UNITED NATIONS, May 27, updated 7:40 pm -- At the UN there is much talk about the protection of journalists in conflict situations, and about freedom of the press. But when Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access on May 21 asked the UN about a journalist killed in South Sudan, where the UN has a mission, there was nothing. Nor in the week since: nothing.
Likewise in Burundi, the statements of the UN Security Council and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon have not mentioned journalists Bireha of Bonesha FM, wounded along with an opposition party leader and now reportedly in hiding like other journalists there, for example from Radio Publique Africaine.
So the Security Council's May 27 event of the Protection of Journalists is, at best, incomplete: perhaps they mean, protection of SOME journalists.
Tellingly, UN correspondents from Reuters and Voice of America, both of whom tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, threw softball questions outside the Security Council - not on Burundi. Their UN Censorship Alliance, UNCA, is promoting its own side event at the same time of the Security Council's belated meeting on Burundi. The head of UNCA Giampaoli Pioli tried to get Inner City Press thrown out for its reporting on Sri Lanka.We'll have more on this, in these live reports:
Update: Mariane Pearl cited "mass surveillance by some UNSC members." Some wonder, why not just say, USA, NSA spying?
Update: Spain's Ignacio Ybfifiez said independent radio is off-air in Burundi. Later, US Ambassador Samantha Power also mentioned Burundi, quoting an unnamed journalist there; New Zealand's new Permanent Representative Gerard van Bohemen also cited Burundi. But why then wasn't Bonesha FM, RPA and others in UNSC's statements? If attempts to include were blocked, why not speak out on it as on some other issues?
Update: Pakistan's Ambassador Dr. Maleeha Lodhi, herself a former journalist, said that embedded reporters raise questions about impartiality.
Update: Australia's Gillian Bird, to her credit, cited the killing of Radio Tamazuj's Pow James Raeth, on which UNMISS and the UN said nothing, despite questions from Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access.
Update of 7:40 pm -- there were fewer rights of reply than expected.
The first was Iran, firing back at Israel for “defamation,” calling it a “pro-apartheid occupier."
(Meanwhile, UN third floor with entrance to UNSC gallery was by then locked. #FreeMedia indeed. FUNCA objected.)
The second reply was by Jordan, to Syria's “unsuccessful attempts to distract attention from regime."
The third reply was by Russia to Ukraine, which it called a leader in killing of journalists, six in 2014.
In sur-reply there was Israel to Iran, which it called “absurd,” calling the UNSC that “appropriate forum” for this “disturbing reality. Ukraine's spokesperson told Russia “don't waste your time, resolve problems in your own country." Then Lithuania's Permanent Representative gaveled it shut.
"Do you call that a jab?" one of the repliers asked Inner City Press. Well, it passes for one at the UN.
From the UN's May 21 transcript:
Inner City Press / FUNCA: In South Sudan, a journalist of Radio Tamazuj, Pow James Raeth, is reported to have been killed by gunfire in Akobo. And I wanted to know whether UNMISS, which I believe still has a facility in Akobo, is aware of it, if they have any comment on it, and what they think is behind the killing of this journalist.
Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq: We'll have to check with UNMISS whatever details there are of that incident.
Seven hours later, there was no answer. Nor six days later. The day before, on May 20, Inner City Press for FUNCA asked about Burkina Faso:
Inner City Press / FUNCA: Burkina Faso has announced that it's banning live political broadcasts for three months in the run-up to elections, and a number of press organizations have been critical of it. Given DPA (Department of Political Affairs) and the UN's kind of involvement in different stages in Burkina Faso, do you have any view of that banning of live political broadcasts?
Deputy Spokesman Haq: I don't know whether it's a banning or whether it's restrictions. There are a number of countries that restrict political broadcasts in the run-up to elections, and sometimes that's designed to lessen the threat of electoral violence, so that's a more complicated issue. So at this stage, we wouldn't have anything to say about that. If there are concerns about actual harassment of journalists, that would be a case for concern.
What about the killing of a journalist in South Sudan? Now the UN Security Council under its Lithuania presidency has a meeting on the protection of journalists, and we are here. But we will not go to the RSF side event with Christophe Deloire held in the clubhouse of UNCA, which typically did not ask about the journalist killing in South Sudan or censorship in Burkina Faso. In fact, UNCA board members tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, for its reporting, becoming the UN Censorship Alliance.
Many organizations like to "launch" their reports at or in the United Nations, and so ask few questions about UN. The Committee to Protect Journalists did one earlier this year.
Tellingly, while CPJ spoke out against the censorship in Burkina Faso, it has said nothing about the UN's defense of it. What is the likelihood of Burkina reversing itself, when it now has UN endorsement?
The CPJ response was no comment on the "internal dynamics of the UN's accreditation process," saying its focus is "international press freedom issues." Isn't censorship at the UN international?
Now it gets worse - the above quoted Q&A was at least in the open UN Press Briefing Room. Now CPJ intends to take its report launch behind closed doors in clubhouse the UN gives UN, its UN Censorship Alliance, publicized only to those who pay UNCA money.
The new Free UN Coalition for Access challenges all this - and CPJ's corporate and selective advocacy for only some journalism. It is a tuxedo approach such as on display in DC.
As example, Inner City Press noted the UN limiting accreditation by geography and to those who abide by the “principles of the Organization,” and total lack of due process rules for journalists on complaints as those filed against Inner City Press in 2012 by Voice of America,Reuters' Louis Charbonneau and the “UN Correspondents Association” for which he spoke on Thursday. Video here, from Minute 12:04.
Rob Mahoney of CJP, who had begun the press conference by saying “we look to the UN” on these issues, declined to comment on the "internal dynamics of the UN's accreditation process," saying he doesn't know enough about it since he focuses on "international press freedom issues." Video here, from Minute 30:40.
But aren't unfair rules of the UN worldwide in denying access to journalists "international press freedom issues"? And how can you "look to the UN" to help if you don't first look AT the UN?
Inner City Press asked UNCA to stop or at least suspend its process; this was refused, including by Charbonneau, who told Inner City Press to “go to the NYPD.”
Remembering CPJ's Bob Dietz' focus on Sri Lanka, Inner City Press wrote to him and CPJ's Joel Simon. The response came from CPJ's Americas Research Associate Sara Rafsky:
“Thank you very much for alerting us about your situation. At the moment, the Americas program is swamped with urgent cases... Thus it will most likely be some time before I can look into your case.”
UNCA's, and Charbonneau's, response was to tear down flyers on the topic. Atop UNCA again is Giampaolo Pioli the past president who, after renting one of his apartments to Palitha Kohona, later granted Kohona's request as Sri Lanka's ambassador to screen that government's war crimes denial film "Lies Agreed To" inside the UN, under the UNCA banner. Inner City Press reported on it, was told to remove the article from the Internet or face expulsion from the UN. That is censorship, and CPJ was informed: but partners with UNCA. This is not press freedom.
CPJ's Joel Simon began the February 12, 2014 "launch" press conference by explaining why it was held at the United Nations (he cited countries trying to use the UN to control the Internet). Inner City Press when called on asked if CPJ thinks the UN Peacekeeping missions in South Sudan and Mali do enough to combat crackdowns on the press there, for example the Salva Kiir government seizing a complete issue of the Juba Monitor, and theats against MaliActu..
Now we wonder, including on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, what CPJ thinks of the UN bureau chief of Reuters, with essentially a permanent seat on UNCA board, mis-using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Google to block access to a leaked anti-Press complaint to the UN from its search. Isn't that censorship?
CPJ & Reuters current and former, Feb 14, 2013 (c) MRLee
The problem here is that groups like CPJ like to use the UN to “launch” their reports. Mahoney joked with two separate Reuters reporters: click here, here and here for three (of many) documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act reflecting Reuters and the UN.
Reuter's Charbonneau shakes with Ban: on what? (c) Luiz Rampelloto
CPJ or at least Mahoney seem to assume that Big Media like Reuters (and Agence France Presse, click here) can do no wrong. But that is not the case. Watch this site.
