Showing posts with label security phase. Show all posts
Showing posts with label security phase. Show all posts

Saturday, November 7, 2009

UN's Security Phase Confusion in Af-Pak Shown at Stakeout, Ban and Nambiar

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unsec1afpak110609.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 6 -- In a press encounter that ended in disarray, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Friday called the UN security threat level in Afghanistan confidential, despite it being public in Pakistan, and then described the reclassification, renovation and vacating of various guest houses in Kabul.

His chief of staff Vijay Nambiar rushed to the stakeout and gestured to spokesperson Michele Montas to end it. Mr. Nambiar then told Inner City Press, we can't tell them how to attack us.

Mr. Ban had emphasized the UN is not abandoning Afghanistan, that it cannot curtail its development efforts there. Inner City Press asked about northwest Pakistan, where the UN country office issued a press release putting the threat level at Phase IV and suspending UN development activities, and asked what the Phase is in Afghanistan. Video here, from Minute 6:42.

Mr. Ban said that security phases are "determined by DSS" [the Department of Safety and Security] "after evaluating all situations." He said it "needs not to be known publicly."

Inner City Press asked if there isn't a conflict of interest, like in Algeria before the UN was bombed there, in which host countries doesn't want the UN Security Phase raised, even if it's needed. Mr. Ban acknowledged that this is "very sensitive," that host countries don't like the level raised because it could effect "national prestige" and "socio economic activities." He said, however, that the UN sets its levels objectively.

Another reporter asked, in light of the UN's pulling out of Iraq after the bombing of its Canal Hotel headquarters, what are the "red lines" that would trigger a pull out from Afghanistan. Mr. Ban began to answer. Inner City Press remarked to a diplomat at the stakeout, yeah, tell the Taliban what it would take for the UN to leave.

Then, as Mr. Ban was describing the categorization of the UN's 93 guest houses into those to be closed and those to be brought to "MOSS" standards, Mr. Nambiar rushed back to the stakeout and gestured that this should stop. Some thought this was because of Ban's next appointment, with his advisory group of businesses on the environment. But Mr. Nambiar explained, we cannot tell them how to attack us.

While this statement was at the stakeout, with no mention of being off the record or on background, some have since tried to say this was implicit. For this reason, Inner City Press is not using the direct quote. But in fact, it is not surprising that even the UN's 38th floor would have divergent views on how much to disclose. Both positions in this case could be defended. And reporting these facts is to show how the UN actually functions.

Inner City Press asked this month's Security Council president, Austria's Thomas Mayr-Harting, if Mr. Ban had told the Council in its consultations what the UN Security Phase is in Afghanistan. He said he would rather not "get into the details." Video here.

Another reporter remarked to Inner City Press that "it is easy enough to learn the UN Security Phase." But why then be so secretive? In fact, Inner City Press is informed that the Phase in Afghanistan, even after the killing of five UN staff in a commando style raid by the Taliban, was kept at Phase III, while it was raised to Phase IV in Pakistan. Is this objective? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unsec1afpak110609.html

UN's Af-Pak Contradictions, on Threat Levels and No Bashardost Run-Off

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unama7sideline110209.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 2 -- As in Kabul UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon assured Hamid Karzai that UN staff will stay in Afghanistan, the UN announced that it is pulling its international staff out of Northwest Pakistan, declaring the area at the UN's "Phase IV" security threat level. Is it safer in Afghanistan, where five UN staff as well as at least two others were killed last week before the second round of voting was canceled?

Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Michele Montas, who declined to provide the UN's threat level for Afghanistan. The UN press office in New York routinely refuses to discuss issues it deems about security. Why then did the UN in Pakistan, in a press release, declare the rise to Phase IV?

The press release, by Isharat Rizvi of UNIC Islamabad, says that Mr. Ban "has declared Phase IV (Emergency Operations) in NWFP and FATA." When Inner City Press asked about it, Ms. Montas replied, "That should not have happened." Video here, from Minute 17:27.

But again, why not? The UN has been criticized in Algeria for giving in to the government's desire that the threat level be kept low, in the run-up to the bombing of the UN in Algiers. So does the UN withhold its threat assessment levels to placate governments? The U.S. State Department, for example, issues public travel advisories for certain countries. But the UN is "owned" by its member states. Did Pakistan complain about the public raising to Phase IV?

Inner City Press also asked, for the second time, if the UN had contacted the third place finisher in the first round of Afghan elections.

Back on October 22, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe

Inner City Press: the number three candidate in Afghanistan, I know you’ve said we may get this hook up, so I wanted to ask you this now. The candidate who came in number three, Mr. Bashardost, has said that he may tell those who voted for him -- 10 per cent of the voters -- to boycott the second round due to continuing concerns of fraud. I wanted to know, in all this, in the UN’s engagement both with Abdullah Abdullah and President Karzai, is the UN speaking to this number three candidate and what do they make of his critique of the second round in advance?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: I’m sure that the UN is supporting all efforts by the Afghan authorities in ensuring that a successful second round takes place.

Now the second round has been canceled, after Abdullah Abdullah withdrew, and the UN apparently never contacted the number three candidate, Ramazan Bashardost. Inner City Press asked Ms. Montas on November 2; she replied that the decision to cancel was up to the Independent Electoral Commission, which most see as dominated by Hamid Karzai.

But even before the IEC announced its decision, the UN's Kai Eide called for a "timely" conclusion. Inner City Press asked Ms. Montas to respond to those who see Eide's comment as indicating a preference, shared by the U.S., that the second round be canceled, not least for security of their people. No, Ms Montas seemed to claim. The UN had no preference. Video here, from Minute 17:27. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unama7sideline110209.html