Rouhani Q&A All Nuclear & Syria, No Afghanistan, Yemen or Bahrain - But Will "He" Call?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 26 -- When Iranian president Hassan Rouhani held an hour-long press conference across the street from the UN on September 26, nearly all of the questions were about Syria and the P5+1 nuclear negotiations.

  No questions were asked or allowed about Iran's view and actions in such countries as Afghanistan, Bahrain or Yemen. The same questions were asked again and again, with some telling variations. 

 IRIB asked about the imprisonment in Iran of the Washington Post's Jason Rezaian - then quickly turned to Iran's hauled to the US. (The Free UN Coalition for Accesssays, Free 'em all.)

  On the nuclear negotiations, earlier on September 26 Inner City Press asked Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov about their status. Lavrov told Inner City Press, ““I remain cautiously optimistic. If we look at the drafting process of the text, we're very close to our goal but there are sections remaining. The devil is in the details..We still have time until Nov 24, the deadline for the negotiating teams and we'll do our best to ensure that remaining issues are resolved.”

Rouhani said, “after 12 years of up and downs, we must look toward the future and make the courageous decisions on this issue. Iran will never surrender its legal right to civil nuclear activity.”

Asked if Iran would oppose not just Sunni but also Shi'a terrorists, Rouhani shot back that Iran opposed the Shi'ite MEK. He emphasized that Hezbollah is in the parliament in Lebanon.

When AP asked if for nuclear concessions Iran would “help the US” against ISIL, Rouhani said, “You mean the US helping Iran?” He said Iran was the first to assist Iraq against ISIL.

Rouhani told one wan questioner her numbers were “propaganda.”

Richard Roth of CNN asked if Rouhani would be disappointed if this year on the way to the airport he doesn't receive a telephone call from “Him.” Rouhani said such calls are not important. But will He make the call? Watch this site.

   

After US' New Iran-Related Sanctions, Rouhani Slams Them, NY Trip for UN General Assembly UNclear, Jason Rezaian UNaddressed

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 30 -- Amid the P5+1 Iran talks, the US on August 29 announced new Iran-related sanctions. It targeted among others banks, including Tajikistan-based Kafolatbank, “owned by Sarmayeh Bank, which was identified as an Iranian financial institution by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in July 2012.”

    On August 30, Iranian president Hassan Rouhani held a lengthy press conference in Tehran, saying on this that of the P5+1 group the other country whose good will is in doubt is the United States. 

  He denounced the sanctions and said it is unclear if he'll go to the UN General Assembly week in New York or to the “environmental meeting” just before it. If not, Foreign Minister Zarif will lead the delegation.

  Journalists Jason Rezaian and Yeganeh Salehi were asked about, but the question was not answered. The Free UN Coalition for Access believes it should be, as other press freedom questions should not go UNaddressed.

  Just as the US has said it will not coordinate with Iran in striking ISIL, Rouhani said while fighting terrorism if good, Iran will not cooperate or coordinate with the US. One wondered, was this a coordinated statement, or just each side playing to some home-country sentiments?

   On a background call on August 29 with Senior Administration Officials, many of the questions were about Russia (they were not answered, at least not on the call).

  Back on July 18 as the deadline for the Iran nuclear talks loomed, the Joint Plan of Action was extended until November 24. 

  Three Senior US Administration Officials (SAOs) held a press call on background. The first SAO spoke against moves in Congress to legislate on new or future sanctions, saying that could undermine P5+1 unity.

  The second SAO said that while the US is concerned about Iran's activities in Syria, in Gaza and in Iraq, only long-range missiles that could carry nuclear weapons would be addressed in the talks.

  The third SAO bragged that $2.8 billion in the next four months will not begin to fix Iran's economy, and that the US will emphasize that Iran is not open for business, its central bank is under sanctions.

  But didn't BNP Paribas still do business in Iran? On a related note, France's outgoing ambassador to the UN Gerard Araud on July 18 said the the Mistral ships being sold "are not destroyers but transportation and command ships." (A reply: they are amphibious assault vessels.) With this attitude, what's next?

 Back on June 16 with the P5+1 talks starting in Vienna, the question arose how ISIL's advance in Iraq might impact them. 

  On June 16 a Senior State Department Official told the press, "We are open to engaging the Iranians, just as we are engaging other regional players on the threat post by ISIL in Iraq. The issue did come up briefly with Iran on the margins of the P5+1 in Vienna today, separate from our trilateral meeting. These engagements will not include military coordination or strategic determinations about Iraq’s future over the heads of the Iraqi people. We will discuss how ISIL threatens many countries in the region, including Iran, and the need to support inclusivity in Iraq and refrain from pressing a sectarian agenda."

  Earlier on June 16 a US Senior Administration Official told reporters the issue does not give Iran more leverage, while talks about Iraq may occur "on the margins," that is separate from the P5+1 process. 

  Asked of timing, the US official said "we are all focused on July 20... we can get this done."  We'll continue to follow this.

Watch this site.

   

On Saudi UNSC Seat, Arab Group Tries Again Amid Talk of Jordan Not Kuwait, As Obama Raises Funds

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, October 25 -- A week after Saudi Arabia said to would not accept the UN Security Council seat it won without competition on October 17, the country has still not written to either UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon or President of the General Assembly John Ashe to formalize its withdrawal.

While some say this is either incompetence or indecision, others say the Saudis are crazy like a fox. Sources tell Inner City Press that the Arab Group at the UN met on Friday to professionalize what was sent out last Saturday: a request for Saudi Arabia to reverse itself and take the Council seat.

This time, the sources tell Inner City Press, the Arab Group statement will actually be sent by its head for October, Bahrain. And they also exclusively tell Inner City Press that an attempt is being made not to openly discuss the countries ready to step into Saudi Arabia's place.

Last week, from Arab Group sources, Inner City Pressreported the next in line to be Kuwait. (For that and longer form analysis, click here for Beacon Reader.)

  Kuwait remains the preference of many in the Arab Group, but members exclusively told Inner City Press on Friday night that "the US prefers Jordan, to raise the profile of the Syria dossier in the Security Council. What the US wants, it will get."

One jokes, "If the US could just un-do Obama's phone call to Rouhini."

Obama, meanwhile, was in New York on Friday night, at a fundraiser on Fifth Avenue where couples paid over $32,000 to hear about a school in Brooklyn they could easily have visited themselves.

US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, to her credit, met with UN rapporteur on Myanmar Tomas Ojea Quintana, including about the Muslim Rohingya. That is an issue that Saudi Arabia and the OIC tried to act on. But so did Iran. Watch this site.

   

Exclusive: On Saudi UNSC Seat, Arab Group Statement Was Never Agreed To, ICP Is Told, "Reuters Never Called"

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, October 19 -- The Arab Group "press statement" urging Saudi Arabia to "maintain their Membership in the Security Council," e-mailed out Saturday afternoon, was never formally agreed to by the Group, Inner City Press is exclusively told from the Gulf.

  The statement was reported without qualification by Reuters and Agence France Presse, for example, with a Gulf satellite television channel even saying that since no Arab Group member broke the silence procedure, the statement was issued.

  But Inner City Press has learned, at least one member -- surprisingly, from the Gulf -- said it need to consult with its capital. Some other members never formally got the draft statement to comment on or break silence.

  "It's unbelievable," an involved source told Inner City Press, needing anonymity on pain of, well, decapitation. "They all got fooled, Reuters and then. They didn't even check with us. To call it a 'silence procedure' when something is faxed at 11 pm on a holiday, and then sent to the media the middle of the next day is a joke."

  But the hunger not only of Western powers but also of their affiliated media to get Saudi Arabia on the Security Council to take a hard line on Syria and Iran is so great, the source continued, that they cut corners.

  Instead of the most basic fact checking, they launched into paragraphs about the Saudis' supposed motives, to get the attention of the United States, drive the US away from Iran's Hassan Rouhani or toward renewed military threats on Syria. 

 This way, even in reversing course Saudi Arabia could save face, saying they only took the seat because their fellow Arab countries -- minus at least one of course -- begged them to. "We're doing this for you," the Saudis could say.

But what would the "this" be? Urging the same rebels it arms and tells not to negotiate with Assad to go to Geneva Two? Removing or loosening sanctions on Iran? (For more on this,click here for this reporter's longer piece on Beacon Reader, a new feature.)

  Now could the Saudis rely on an Arab Group statement not formally even agreed to, as a basis for playing Hamlet and reversing themselves? Watch this site.

Here is the "Arab Group press release" e-mailed out on October 19, 2013:

"The Arab Group, at level of Ambassadors, Permanent Representatives to the United Nations in New York, discussed in an extraordinary fashion, the situation regarding the position of the Brothers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia regarding their Membership in the Security Council. With our understanding and respect for the position of the Brothers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, we hope that they, which are amongst the blessed who represent the Arab and Islamic world at this important and historical stage, specifically for the Middle East region, to maintain their Membership in the Security Council and continue their brave role in defending our issues specifically at the rostrum of the Security Council."

   

Shut-Down US Government Compared to Lebanon, Feltman's DPA Pitches Maldives, Not Sri Lanka: Report Still Withheld?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 4 -- During this week's shutdown (or slim-down) of the US government, analogies to various other countries and failed states have been made.

  Now former US State Department official Jeffrey Feltman, whom Inner City Press has covered this week in meetings with Iran's Hassan Rouhani and Lebanon's caretaker prime minister Najib Mikati, has brought the analogy home.

  Feltman is quoted as texting Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that he moved on from the US government when it became too much like... Lebanon.

  At the UN, Feltman's Department of Political Affairs is sometimes kept from the biggest ticket items by the big-footing of the Permanent Five members of the Security Council, but it is active on other issues. 

  When on October 2, just before the Security Council's Great Lakes trip which Inner City Press has so far covered here and here took off, DPA at its own request briefed the Security Council about the Constitutional crisis in the Maldives.

  While the UK said that its Commonwealth has already expressed concern at delay in second round of Presidential elections, it should be noted that this Commonwealth still plans to go to Sri Lanka in November for its Heads of Government Meeting.

  Are the UK's concerns consistent? Are Ban Ki-moon's and Feltman's DPA's? Under Ban Ki-moon, did DPA ever ask for a Security Council meeting? Or was it only the British chief of Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes? And what did that come to? And where is Ban Ki-moon's report on the UN's inaction in 2009? Watch this site.

   

At UN, Javad Zarif Asks Envoy to Syria Brahimi If He Comes to Iran Next, Ishallah Is Brahimi's Reply, Censors Jarba Games

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 2 -- "I came to say goodbye," envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi told Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif on Wednesday. "I am leaving."

  "Leaving to our place?" Zarif asked. "Are you coming to Iran next?"

  "Inshallah," Brahimi said. "Insha'Allah."

  UN General Debate week was over, but at 4:10 pm on Wednesday Iran's Zarif met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his team, on the UN's 38th floor.

  Inner City Press went up for the photo-op, along with other camera-people: four Iranian and one Lebanese, for the station Al Mayadeen. No one else, apparently, cared. But up on the 38th floor, even before the meeting, envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi came into view. A UN Security guard ordered, with authority unclear, not to film Brahimi.

  Also present on the UN side were Jeffrey Feltman, formerly the US State Department's Middle East chief, and Angela Kane, the head of UN Disarmament. There was Ivan Simonovic on human rights, and Valerie Amos on humanitarian affairs.

  There was Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson, seen earlier in the day at the press conference on migration, graciously making sure that the Free UN Coalition for Access @FUNCA_info got a question, about the death of workers from Nepal in Qatar.

But it was Zarif who appeared most collected and in charge at the beginning of the meeting with the UN. He said in passing this was his third time up here, "once with the President," Hassan Rouhani. As he signed Ban Ki-moon's book he said, I'll give you one more signature.

Ban's just prior meeting had been with Israeli politician Zehava Galon, Member of Knesset and Chairperson of the Meretz Party in Israel.

  After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Tuesday speech -- for which Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky postponed the noon briefing -- and Iran's right of reply, which Nesirky talked over, it was reported as newsworthy that Iran called Israel, Israel. But that as subsequently corrected, that had been done before. What's in a word?

  While the four Iranian and one Lebanese camera-people and Inner City Press were up covering Zarif, Brahimi and Ban, down on the third floor of the UN there was a 4 pm party for the "end of the GA," in a space which only in July hosted a faux UN briefing by Saudi-sponsored Syria rebel boss Ahmad al Jarba. 

  Those are the politics of those running that club or alliance, the UN Correspondents' Association, UNCA, or UN's Censorship Alliance, to which Ban's UN gives a lock clubhouse for faux UN briefings -- the backdoor way into the UN, it's become known.

Nesirky when Pressed to explain why he postponed for Israel but spoke over Iran's reply replied, as transcribed by the UN:

Question: I understand there was a lot of interest in the speech of the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. [Benjamin] Netanyahu, and there have been other times where I’d wished the briefing had been postponed to hear, for example, the Foreign Minister of Rwanda. But, I just want to know what the policy is, because every day in this last seven days at noon there’s been somebody speaking. What’s the policy on when the briefing is postponed for a particular Head of State? Currently, Iran is speaking, giving its response to what Mr. Netanyahu said, and we’re, obviously, having the briefing at the same time. So, I just wanted to sort of ask you that, in an open-ended fashion, what is the policy?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I think journalists who are covering hard news do understand why I would not think it advisable to go head-to-head with Prime Minister Netanyahu. He’s the Head of Government, not the Head of State, by the way; that’s Shimon Peres. And, that’s the first thing. The second is that there is no hard and fast rule. It’s simply to try to help journalists, like yourself, to be able to cover things to the best of their ability. The fact of the matter is that the journalists in this building, for the most part, were focused today very much on what Prime Minister Netanyahu would have to say, and he was the last speaker in the general debate; and therefore, I took the decision that it would be better not to go head to head with Prime Minister Netanyahu, but to listen to what he had to say and to allow the journalists who are covering him to be able to listen, too, and not be… have their attention divided by wondering whether there was anything going to be said at the briefing, for example, about the chemical weapons team that went in today. As for the rights of reply, that’s a separate matter. That is a procedural matter. This was a speech that was the last one in the general debate.

Inner City Press:: And I really appreciate that. My only question would just be… since you’re using this term “hard news” and that this is harder news than other Heads of State or Heads of Government. Isn’t a definition of “hard news” hearing what the other side has to say, which is taking place right now?

Spokesperson: I think you understand the distinction, Matthew, and I think that most journalists in this room and watching this would understand the distinction

Inner City Press: Did you take a poll? Is that based on any polling data?

Spokesperson Nesirky: It’s based on my experience, for a quarter of a century — far longer than you, Matthew — as a journalist. Thanks very much. Good afternoon, thank you.

And that is another reason for the founding of the Free UN Coalition for Access, @FUNCA_info. Watch this site.

   

UN Defers to Netanyahu Speech, Talks Over Iran's Reply, Attacks with "25 Year Scribe" Card When Inner City Press Asks Why

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- The UN's daily noon briefing was postponed on Tuesday during the UN General Assembly speech of Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, most of which was devoted to critiquing Iran and its new president Hassan Rouhani.

  Once Netanyahu had finished, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky came into the briefing room and began, reading a press release about the search for chemical weapons in Syria. By this time, Iran was delivering its "right to reply" to Israel's speech. But Nesirky's briefing ran right over it.

  Inner City Press, after inquiring about the UN's role in cholera in Haiti, the Congo and denial of visas by the US including to a counselor of the State of Palestine, asked Nesirky what the rule was, for which states a UN noon briefing would be postponed.

Nesirky replied that journalists reporting "hard news" wanted it this way. Video here and embedded below.

But wouldn't "hard news" also include hearing the other side's reply? [Inner City Press obtained and has put it online here.]

Nesirky replied that the journalists "in this building and watching this" agreed with him.

Inner City Press asked if that was based on any polling.

Nesirky said he was a journalist for a quarter of a century, "far longer than you, Matthew." Then he ended the briefing.

  It is this type of pre-fabicated common sense, or news sense, this echo chamber of Gulf and Western media, culminating in the UN's Censorship Alliance UNCA spying for Ban's Secretariat (story here), trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, holding faux UN briefings by Gulf and Western supported Syria rebels, for example, that led Inner City Press to co-found the Free UN Coalition for Access @FUNCA_info.

  While Ban's Secretariat's response was to threaten to suspend or withdraw Inner City Press' accreditation for merely hanging a sign of the Free UN Coalition for Access on the door of its shared office (while UNCA has five signs), FUNCA will not stop. 

  The UN is supposed to hear from both sides and treat them equally. The press is supposed to be able to ask questions, and UN spokespeople are supposed to answer them. Watch this site.

   

As Letta's Coalition Collapsed, He Preened with Rouhani & Maria Bartiromo, Rose Colored Glass in UN Rose Garden

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 30 -- As if in denial as his government collapsed by in Rome, last week Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta gallivanted around New York. From Media Alerts sent out by the Italian Mission to the UN:

September 24: "We are pleased to confirm that the Italian Prime Minister, Enrico Letta, will hold a stakeout in the UN Rose Garden, TODAY, Tuesday September 24, following the address of the President of the United States of America."

The connection to Obama's speech was unclear. Also September 24:

"We are glad to inform that the Italian Prime Minister, Enrico Letta, will meet the press TODAY AT 12:15 PM outside the New York Times building located at 242 West 41st between 7th and 8th Avenues."

The next day, Letta was back in the UN Rose Garden, apparently looking through rose-colored glasses:

"Please be advised that the Italian Prime Minister, Enrico Letta, will hold a possible stakeout in the Rose Garden of the UN, tomorrow, Wednesday, September 25, following his address to the UN General Assembly, at approximately 1 pm."

Also on September 25 Letta Occupied Wall Street, in his way, with the so-called (and once self-described) Money Honey:

"8.20-10.15 Meeting at the New York Stock Exchange with NYSE delegation headed by CEO Niederaurer (Statement, Opening Bell, visit to the trading floor, interview with Ms. Maria Bartiromo for 'Closing Bell' show) (2 Broad Street)"

And then it all wrapped up:

"The concluding press conference of Prime Minister, Hon. Enrico Letta will be held, as scheduled, tomorrow Thursday 26 September at 1:20 pm at the Italian Academy, Columbia University (1161 Amsterdam Avenue)."

While Letta was up to this in New York, also meeting with Hassan Rouhani, his support at home was falling apart. A lesson? Watch this site.

   

Rouhani Presser by UN Has Nuclear Accusations, Nothing on Rights or Press Freedom like Ban Ki-moon's UN

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 27 -- No one can say that Iranian president Hassan Rouhani's Friday press conference was too short -- it ran for an hour. It could have been better organized: no one said, at least from the 11 am start time on, that journalists had to sign up to be considered for a question.

But of the questions taken, not a single one concerned or even mentioned human rights, or press freedom in Iran. It was nukes, nukes, nukes. Margaret Warner of PBS quoted Rouhani from the past about continuing to develop in Isfahan; Margaret Brennan of CBS asked about opening facilities up to "put these doubts to rest."

A reporter from Al Mayadeen in Beirut, on the other hand, asked about Iran being sure to continue its support to "resistance in the region," using Hezbollah as his example.

Rouhani's answers several times emphasized: Al Qaeda must leave Syria. He also called the Taliban's views on women outdated. He said he'd brought with him to New York for these four days a representative from Shiraz and one "on behalf of the minority Jewish community of Iran." He said the tone of Obama's speech sounded different, that he wanted the media to be messengers.

One wanted to ask: what about journalists in jail? What about the Iranian Journalists Association? (Rouhani has said such guilds should be able to exist - but what's been done.)

Inner City Press ran back to the UN to get to the day's noon briefing. The read-out of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting with Rouhini said Ban "raised various human rights issues." Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky, what issues? Press freedom?

Nesirky said Ban noted the release of human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh and urged Rouhani to continue in that way. Apparently nothing on press freedom. Typical of the UN. Watch this site.