As US Defends Record on Darfur, France & UK Took Lead, Silence on Bashir Noted

By Matthew Russell Lee

KAMPALA, October 6 -- With US Ambassador Susan Rice and the rest of the UN Security Council heading to Sudan later today, the US Mission to the UN has argued to Inner City Press that it is wrong to say the US has become less vocal about the killing of civilians in Darfur.

Many beyond Inner City Press have asserted that US policy, as symbolized by envoy Scott Gration, has prioritized the North - South conflict over that in Darfur.

But the US Mission, in an October 5 email from New York received by Inner City Press in Uganda, has pointed to quotes by Susan Rice, Gration, Samantha Power and even President Barack Obama for the proposition that it is “just wrong” to say the US has pulled back.

We will run below the quotes the US Mission compiled. This more than meets the Mission's request for “prominence” in addressing this issue. But consider:

In early August, when there were killings in the Kalma Camp in Darfur, it was France and not the US which asked for a Council meeting.

Later, when Inner City Press obtained documents showing the immanent turn over of five supporters of rebel leader Abdel Wahid Nur from the Kalma Camp to the Omar al Bashir government and handed them to representatives of a number of Security Council members including the US, it was another Permanent Member which responded it was actively looking into the documents, and another member which said the context of the impending turn over troubled them. From the US, no response.

Even in President Obama's speech in the UN high level meeting on Sudan on September 24, it was not only Inner City Press which noticed that Obama did not mention Bashir, or the International Criminal Court which has indicted him for war crimes and genocide -- the Organization of the Islamic Conference later cited Obama's failure to mention the ICC as support for its position that Bashir should not have been indicted at all.

We note that the Obama Administration fought to make the UN's September 24 meeting on Sudan open to the press and public.

Susan Rice & unidentified aid arrive in Entebbe on Oct 6, response on turn over of Kalma 5 documents not shown (c) MRLee

Also noted: Obama in his speech to the General Debate (but not on MDGs) did not even mention Sudan.

The perception of the Obama Administration as surprisingly unclear on war crimes is shared by, among others, many in the Tamil diaspora, who expressed shock at Susan Rice's statement taking a wait and see approach to the self - serving self - investigation announced by Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa, as a replacement for a UN panel of experts into accountability in Sri Lanka.

Others have noted the US' silence on Myanmar, then seeming joining of others' call for an international inquiry into war crimes, then a stepping away from that position.

While we are always willing to listen to and publicize responses to analysis, the point here is that questions about the Obama Administration's and Susan Rice's position on war crimes and Omar al Bashir, and even Darfur, extend far beyond Inner City Press. The answer may be not better public image management, but different actions. We'll see. Watch this site.

From the US Mission to the UN:

Matt:

We saw your recent blog post/story which included this erroneous line: “Most troubling is the failure not only of the UN but now also the US to speak out about the rising rate of death in Darfur.”

In the interest of accuracy, we are sending you (below) a collection of just some of the recent statements by senior US officials (including the President of the United States) about the violence in Darfur.

We look forward to your immediate and visible correction of your significant mistake.

(Not pictured here, Matt Lee missing very basic and easily reportable facts.)

Thanks, as always,

Susan Rice, Oct 5: A top US envoy expressed concern Tuesday about renewed violence in Darfur as the UN Security Council powers headed to Sudan to maintain pressure over a referendum which could lead to the country's break-up.

"With less than 100 days until the vote, our visit comes at a crucial time for Sudan," said US ambassador Susan Rice, who highlighted the new fears about events in Darfur, in western Sudan.

"We will push for peaceful, on-time referenda that reflect the will of the people of South Sudan and Abyei, and we will visit Darfur to assess the humanitarian situation and the plight of civilians in the wake of a disturbing uptick in violence," she said.

President Obama, Sept 24:“Despite some recent progress, preparations for the referenda are still behind schedule. Now, the vote is only a little more than a hundred days away. And tragically, as has already been referred to, a recent spike in violence in Darfur has cost the lives of hundreds of more people.”

Samantha Power, Sept 24: Samantha Power is a senior advisor to President Obama. She told reporters this week during a telephone briefing that Mr. Obama's main message to the Sudan meeting will be the need to rapidly implement the Comprehensive Peace Agreement - or CPA - which calls for the North-South vote and another one on the same day by the people of the Abyei region.

"So the number one message is that these referenda must go off on time; that they must be peaceful; and they must reflect the will of the people of South Sudan," she said.

Power says President Obama would also speak about the recent uptick in violence in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Ambassador Rice, Sept 15: if in fact the government upholds its commitments as it says it will, then that will benefit the people of Sudan, and will benefit our bilateral relations-- provided that equal progress is also made on Darfur, where we remain very concerned about the security situation there.

Scott Gration, Sept 15: We’re also very concerned about some of the things that we’ve seen recently that are destabilizing. There have been some assassinations. There have been fighting between those who are pro-Doha and those who are against Doha. And we’re very concerned in getting to the bottom of these and mitigating those tensions.

So we are very involved in Darfur, we will continue to be involved in Darfur, and we don’t see a solution in Sudan until the Darfur issues are resolved, and we’re talking there about increased stability, we’re talking about an environment that people voluntarily can go to places that they want to settle, we’re talking about access for UNAMID, and we’re talking accountability, justice, and ability for people to have their wrongs righted in a way that they respect and the way they want.

This email is UNCLASSIFIED.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ussc1sudan100610.html

In Uganda With UN Council, LRA On Agenda But Not Present, Like Karamoja

By Matthew Russell Lee

KAMPALA, October 6 -- On its way to Sudan, the UN Security Council early Wednesday morning reached its first official stop in Entebbe, Uganda. Their UN-painted plane landed on the airstrip where in 1978 Israeli assault troops moved on a plane full of hijackers and hostages. This was barely comment on, however. It was the middle of the night.

The Security Council's Terms of Reference for Uganda were released Monday in New York, after Uganda's Permanent Representative Ruhakana Rugunda had held a press conference about the Council's work.

The five bullet point range from supporting the fight against the Lord's Resistance Army and the Uganda troops in Somalia to “examining... the Regional Service Center in Entebbe.”

With Entebbe the first stop after sunrise Wednesday, some wondered why the Council members, staff and press were driven fifty kilometers in the middle of the night, past other hotels, past Kampala, to the plush “Speke Resort - Munyonyo.” The scuttlebutt is that the government wanted the Ambassadors to stay in this particular hotel.

Inner City Press rode in a World Health Organization van, past tidy shops including the Jesus Cares Supermarket and branches of Tropical Bank and Post Bank, speaking with a Ugandan staff member of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The UN Resident Representative had asked him to come to the airport at midnight and he had.

He said his job is to monitor human rights, showing reports to the government, and to work with the local media. Inner City Press asked if his Office has received any push back about the wider OHCHR's Democratic Republic of the Congo Mapping Report, which accuses the Ugandan UPDF army of atrocities in the DRC. Not much, he said. Those complaints are directed elsewhere.

Since the Lord's Resistance Army forms one of the Council's five bullet points for Uganda, Inner City Press asked what his office had to say about the LRA. Not much, he said, the LRA has long left, to the Congo, the Central African Republic and South Sudan (where they Council's going midday Wednesday).

In fact, the Council could order its mission in the Congo, MONUSCO, to do more to break up reported LRA camps there. Uganda's Ambassador Ruhakana Rugunda was his government's negotiator on LRA in 2006, and visited Juba as he will later on Wednesday.

To the UN plane, October 5-6, 2010, TOR not shown (c) MRLee

Inner City Press asked about the situation in Karamoja on which it has reported, specifically on UNDP funded involuntary disarmament of pastoralist Karamojong resulting in death and village burn downs. There are still incidents, he said. But what is the UN doing about them? It is not on the Council's agenda.

Footnote: in the VIP lounge in Nairobi, a request was made to Inner City Press on behalf of a unnamed Council member not to report that “nothing is being done.” There is, of course, one or more ways to avoid that. Inner City Press is here to cover the Council's trip and results through Uganda, South Sudan, Darfur and Khartoum. Watch this site, follow on Twitter @InnerCityPress.

On Way to Sudan, China Says No Problem With Meeting Bashir, ICC Non-Member

By Matthew Russell Lee

NAIROBI TO ENTEBBE, October 5 to 6 -- Is Omar al Bashir in Libya? a journalist asked Chinese Ambassador Li Bao Dong in Nairobi's airport's VIP lounge on Tuesday night, as the UN delegation waited to fly to Uganda and then Sudan.

I've heard that, Li Bao Dong replied.

"Would you have a problem meeting with him?"

No, said Li Bao Dong, if it was part of the trip I would do it. He said that China has a "different" relationship with Sudan, and that is not a member of the International Criminal Court.

"Nor is the United States," Inner City Press pointed out.

Li Bao Dong smiled, saying that China and the US have a lot in common. He mentioned the death penalty.

Other Ambassadors, too, are on the record about Bashir's indictment by the ICC. Uganda's Ambassador Ruhakana Rugunda said on Monday in New York that his country favors suspending the indictment of Bashir for a year under Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the ICC. Others have that position. Watch this site.

Part of UN delegation arriving in Entebbe, Oct 5-6, 2010, Bashir not shown (c) MRLee

China's Permanent Representative to UN Li Bao Dong served previously as his country's Ambassador to Zambia. Thinking of mining and labor disputes, Inner City Press asked him if there were any hot issues while he was there. Yes, he said, the issues across the Straits. China's first embassy in the area was in Zambia. But Taiwan sensed weakness and moved in. Li Bao Dong had to fight back the challenge there, and elsewhere in the region. And now he is heading to Sudan. Watch this site.

Footnote: in the VIP lounge in Nairobi, a request was made to Inner City Press on behalf of a unnamed Council member not to report that “nothing is being done.” There is, of course, one or more ways to avoid that. Inner City Press is here to cover the Council's trip and results through Uganda, South Sudan, Darfur and Khartoum. Watch this site, follow on Twitter @InnerCityPress.

P-5 Interests in Sudan & Darfur Reviewed, With Ambassadors in Nairobi Airport

By Matthew Russell Lee

NAIROBI, October 5 -- As the UN Security Council and its five Permanent Members mill around the Nairobi airport before belateding being whisked to a VIP lounge to wait for their flight to Uganda then Juba, the historic role of each P-5 member in Sudan seems worth surveying.

The British, of course, colonized Sudan until its independence in 1956. In Darfur, for example, the British sought local leaders, even defining which tribes were large enough to name their own nazir and have a formal tribal homeland. Arabs in Darfur who didn't make the cut more recently spawned Janjawiid and much destruction.

While the US has been more interested in the North - South, Muslim - Christian conflict, it's worth noting that the CIA as well as France backed Chad in 1987 in driving Gaddafi's Arabist forces back into Darfur, which also played its role in the more recent conflict there.

Now, France is the host to Darfur rebel leader Abdel Wahid Nur, as Inner City Press asked French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner about last week.

China's business relations with Khartoum are well known; why China did not use its Security Council veto to block the referral of Darfur, and ultimately Omar al Bashir, to the International Criminal Court is still not known. Some say China wanted to have additional leverage over Bashir. But now the indictment seemingly cannot be put off.

On October 4 in New York before he and Inner City Press left for the airport, Ugandan Permanent Representative Ruhakana Rugunda said that his country favors suspending the indictment for a year, under Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, but that there is not Council unanimity for this. It wouldn't require a unanimous vote, but any of the P-5 could stop it.

Just as one of the Western P-5 Permanent Representatives told the Press last month that it is impossible to imagine any of the Western P-5s taking a photo with Bashir, it is similarly difficult to imagine them -- much less all three of them -- voting to suspend Bashir's indictment for genocide and war crimes.

Seemingly the least implicated P-5 member is Russia. Their Cold War involvements in Africa notwithstanding, Russia's involvement today seems limited to dominating air transport. But this has led to at least two recent incidents of Russian pilots and crews being kidnapped and beaten in Darfur. While when Inner City Press asked him about it, Russia's Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin minimized these incidents, they may explain his personal participation on the trip.

Footnote: when the plane carrying the Security Council Ambassadors reached Nairobi, less planning than might have been expected had been done. The Ambassadors “sneaked” through a gate for another group's flight.

In future installments we hope to review the business interests of the P-5 members, and the wider interests of the Elected (or Temporary) Ten. Watch this site, and follow on Twitter @InnerCityPress

On Sudan, Voting Materials Delayed Blamed on US, Silence on Darfur Questioned

By Matthew Russell Lee

LONDON, October 5 -- While Khartoum's backsliding is the storyline of the UN Security Council's trip now to Sudan, some of the delay in starting registration is due to decisions by the US and UN, sources tell Inner City Press.

The registration materials are, as widely reported, being printed in South Africa. But why? The US promoted procurement practices and IFES, either because committed to transparency or to keep Khartoum from creating mischief in this way. But the move has resulted in delay. The materials won't be ready until late October. Then they have to be transported all over South Sudan.

In fact, barely half of the polling places will be in South Sudan: 2000. Fully 1600 will be in the North of overseas. No one knows how many Southerns are living in the North. One fear is that the North will over-register them, or create names without voters behind them, to make it impossible to reach the 60% turn out necessary in order to have the secession vote count.

There are questions too about the cost of the elections. Experts tell Inner City Press that the rule of thumb, if there is one, for post-conflict votes is form $10 to $ 15 per voter. Assuming an electorate of 4 to 5 million, this vote should cost $75 million tops. But it is now budgeted for $360 million. Where will the money go?

Most troubling is the failure not only of the UN but now also the US to speak out about the rising rate of death in Darfur.

There is a sense that the suffering in Darfur was raised to gain leverage over Omar al Bashir, and is now being ignored or traded in, for the seemingly more important North - South referendum. It will be hard to rebut this. Watch this space.

Footnote: in John F. Kennedy airport, Inner City Press ran into the Permanent Representatives of Mexico, Turkey and Bosnia, preparing for the flight. Ambassador Heller of Mexico said even he hadn't yet read the full terms of reference of the Security Council's trip, which Inner City Press had just obtained and put online. The trip is being run by two countries, and maybe one and a half. They will have to own also the results.

And, we note, Russia's Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin is on the trip. Who was it, now that we think of it, who kidnapped and beat those Russian pilots in Darfur? Watch this site.

On Way to Sudan, UN Council Praises Chad, Talks Contingencies, Terms of Reference

By Matthew Russell Lee

JFK AIRPORT, NY, October 4 -- As UN Security Council Ambassadors take over on a marathon set of flights from New York to Nairobi then Uganda and Sudan, the final Terms of Reference for their trip speak of the need for “contingency planning... in view of the upcoming referenda” in Sudan. Click here for the Terms of Reference, as obtained by Inner City Press, and see below.

Earlier on Monday in Khartoum, Sudanese Vice President Ali Osman Taha spoke darkly of the referendum being delayed in oil rich Abyei. At Monday noon briefing at the UN in New York, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky if there is any UN response to Taha's statements. Nesirky as usual had no comment.

Additions were made to the Terms of Reference, such as included human rights and children and armed conflict. It is not clear why the initial draft, largely the work of the US and the UK, needed such amendments.

To the 9th of the 13 Sudan paragraphs, “the recruitment of children by armed groups” was added. Not explicitly added is the issue of UN-African Union Darfur chief Ibrahim Gambari negotiating to hand over five supporters of rebel Abdel Wahid Nur to the government.

At least one Permanent Five member of the Council, having read Gambari's leaked documents on Inner City Press, has sent them to “the capital” and hopes the issue can be pursued in Darfur. Mais bien sur.

In the penultimate paragraph, the Council's Sudan Terms of Reference “welcome improved relations between the Governments of Sudan and Chad,” even though this led to the closure of the peacekeeping mission in Chad and Central Africa Republic, and drove Justice and Equality Movement rebel leader not only out of Chad but also out of the Doha peace process. Will the Council meet or at least speak with JEM's Khalil Ibrahim?

Here are the Terms of Reference, as obtained by Inner City Press:

Terms of Reference for Sudan

Led by Ambassadors Susan Rice (United States) and Mark Lyall Grant (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)

1. To reaffirm the Security Council's commitment to and the international community's support for the Sudanese Parties' full and timely implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and to encourage a peaceful, comprehensive, and inclusive resolution for the situation in Darfur. To reaffirm the Security Council's support for the Sudanese Parties in working to make unity attractive and respecting the right to self-determination of the people of South Sudan through credible, peaceful, free and timely referenda on 9 January 2011 that reflect the will of the Sudanese People of these areas and to hold popular consultations, in accordance with the terms of the CPA, and for all parties and states to respect the outcome.

2. To emphasize the importance of the partnership between the UN and the African Union for the international support to the Sudanese peace processes. To express support for the work of the AU High-Level Implementation Panel and the engagement of other regional and international partners of Sudan.

3. To stress that full and successful implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement is essential to sustainable peace and stability throughout the Sudan, including Darfur, and in the region and to encourage increased cooperation between the National Congress Party and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement in carrying out their responsibilities to fully implement the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, including through successful and timely completion of negotiations on post-referendum arrangements.

4. To assess ongoing preparations for the referenda, and to reiterate that, regardless of the results, both parties to the CPA will need to work cooperatively to resolve critical issues and that the United Nations will continue to play an important role in supporting and promoting this dialogue, including through the recently designated UN High-Level Panel for the Referenda to be led by President Benjamin Mkapa.

5. To reiterate the Security Council's support for the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS), to assess its performance and review the assistance provided by the mission, within its current mandate and capabilities, to the implementation of the CPA and the contingency planning being developed by the mission in view of the upcoming referenda, as well as the planning developed for its post-referenda presence in the Sudan, and to underline the importance of full and unhindered access for the mission, to all sites within its area of responsibility.

6. To emphasise the importance of addressing the challenges faced by South Sudan, including insecurity, humanitarian and development needs and capacity building, irrespective of the outcome of the referendum.

7. To emphasise the importance of continuing efforts to support the people of Sudan, democratic governance, rule of law, accountability, equality, respect for human rights, justice and establishment of the conditions for conflict-affected communities to build strong, sustainable livelihoods.

8. To stress the responsibility of all central and local authorities of Sudan for the safety of members of peacekeeping missions, humanitarian workers, and all working under local contracts.

9. To express the Security Council's deep concern about the upsurge in violence in Darfur; the number of civilian casualties and victims of sexual and gender-based violence; the recruitment of children by armed groups; the illegal arms flow into Darfur; and the continued restrictions on humanitarian access. To underline its concern for the security of civilians, humanitarian aid workers and peacekeepers in Darfur and to reiterate the vital importance of the protection of civilians and maintaining full, safe and unhindered access for humanitarian workers to the population in need of assistance.

10. To reiterate the Security Council's support for the AU-UN led peace process and the work of the Joint Chief Mediator, Mr Bassole, including the principles guiding the negotiations, and the urgent need for achieving substantive progress. To urge all rebel groups to join the Doha peace process without preconditions or further delay and to call on all parties to immediately cease hostilities and engage constructively in negotiations with a view to finding a lasting peace in Darfur.

11. To reiterate the Council's support for UNAMID and its personnel and to reiterate its call on the Government of the Sudan and all relevant parties to co-operate fully with the mission; to assess UNAMID's performance and review the challenges it faces in carrying out its mandate, giving priority to the protection of civilians and the facilitation of humanitarian delivery, as well as the priority given to UNAMID's continuing efforts to promote the engagement of all Darfurian stakeholders in support of and to complement the AU-UN political process in Darfur.

12. To welcome improved relations between the Governments of Sudan and Chad following the agreement of 15 January 2010 to normalise their bilateral relations and the establishment of a joint border monitoring mechanism, and to encourage continued co-operation and strengthening of relations.

13. To underline the need to ensure that Security Council resolutions are implemented.

Terms of Reference for Kampala

Led by Ambassador Ruhakana Rugunda (Uganda)

1. To reiterate the Security Council's support to the improvement of relations among the countries of the region and to encourage them to strengthen cooperation in all fields.

2. To emphasize the Security Council's support for action against armed groups in the region, particularly the Lord's Resistance Army.

3. To reiterate the Security Council's support for the Djibouti Peace Process and support for the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) in the stabilization of Somalia

4. To stress the Security Council's firm commitment to the cause of peace in the Sudan, the full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and successful negotiation of a comprehensive and inclusive peace agreement for Darfur.

5. To examine the important contribution by the Regional Service Center in Entebbe, to the work of UN Missions in the region.

Watch this site.

For Sudan With UN Council Trip, a Plan B if No Referendum, Bashir OK Unclear

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 4, 2010 -- A mere four hours before the UN Security Council's trip to Africa and Sudan, the Council's “terms of reference” were still not ready.

Council President for October Ruhakana Rugunda was asked by the Press what the Council is seeking to accomplish, in Sudan and Uganda, his country. “The terms of reference are still being finalized,” he answered.

Inner City Press, which is going on and covering the trip, spent Monday morning inquiring into and reporting on these terms of reference. A Council member complaining that the United States and United Kingdom kept control of all of the planning of the trip and its goals said that “at least” some additional items were being added.

While Ambassador Rugunda declined to confirm, Inner City Press is informed that the Council is looking into a “Plan B” if the referenda scheduled for January 9, 2011 for South Sudan and Abyei are not held.

Also significant, until non Permanent members of the Council belatedly were consulted, human rights in Darfur and children and armed conflict were not among the trip's organizers' terms of reference.

Ruganda was asked by the Press about Sudan's President Omar al Bashir, who is indicted by the International Criminal Court for genocide and war crimes. Ruganda answered, as other Security Council diplomats have of late while adding their hope that Bashir will be in Libya, that “the Council has not asked to meet with President al Bashir, and he has not offered to meet with the Council.”

Inner City Press asked if al Bashir had personally been informed of and agreed to this trip, and to this construction. His senior adviser Rabie Adbelati Obeid has been quoted that al Bashir has not approved the trip. Rugunda responded that the trip has been discussed with “the authorities,” but declined to specify with whom.

Rugunda mentioned the Lord's Resistance Army rebels, who began in Uganda but are now as far afield as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic and, as may related to the Council's trip, South Sudan. Will the Council raise the issue while in Juba? Watch this site.

Footnote: While Rugunda will lead the Uganda leg of the trip, the Sudan legs will be led by Susan Rice of the US and Mark Lyall Grant of the UK. France's Permanent Representative Gerard Araud is not going on the trip; nor are the Permanent Representatives of Russia, Nigeria and Austria.

Requests have been made not to publicize some of the logistics of and even some of the participants on the trip. But to still have not made public the terms of reference of the trip, less than six hours before the plane takes off from John F. Kennedy airport? We will report and Tweet on the trip, follow on Twitter on @InnerCityPress

And see, www.innercitypress.com/sctrip2sudan100410.html

As Darfur Rebel Nur Says UN Nears Genocide, UN Silent, Council Visit Next Week

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 2, 2010 -- While Darfur rebel group of Abdel Wahid Nur has threatened to suspend any cooperation with the UN - African Union Mission UNAMID and the UN Security Council embarks on a trip to Darfur, Juba and Khartoum, the UN in New York has no comment.

Last month Inner City Press published leaked documents indicating the imminent transfer of five rebels from UNAMID to the Sudanese government for prosecution but ostensibly not execution. UN spokesman Martin Nesirky refused to comment on the documents the following day, saying that negotiations were continuing.

Then rebel leader Abdel Wahid Nur told Radio Dabanga that “if UNAMID agrees to a handover, its task in Darfur will have finished and it will have turned into an enemy and participant in the genocide with the National Congress Party... this would bring about an end to the cooperation between UNAMID and the movement.”

This seeming newsworthy, Inner City Press on October 1 while awaiting a visa to enter Sudan to cover the UN Security Council's trip asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky for the UN's response:

Inner City Press: in light of those documents that emerged of Mr. Gambari preparing a letter and terms of, and additional terms to Ali Karti of Sudan — there has been a statement by Abdul Wahid Mohamed al Nur saying that if UNAMID agreed to the hand-over, its task in Darfur will be finished and will have turned into an enemy and participate in the genocide with the National Congress Party and will bring about an end to any cooperation between the Abdul Wahid Mohamed al-Nur faction and UNAMID. So I am just wondering what is, is the UN and UNAMID aware of this statement, and what do they make of it? Do they intend to go forward with its handover or do they not take it seriously?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, I would refer you to what I said, I think it was earlier this week that this, as we’ve said, also not just earlier this week, as we’ve, said this is a topic that has been the subject of intense discussions and those discussions continue and they are confidential. And I don’t have anything further to say on it.

Inner City Press: From those documents, things seem pretty close. I think that’s what they are, the, the…

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, Matthew, as I said, this is something that is confidential and continues. It’s important that it’s done in that way.

Inner City Press: But it doesn’t have, you don’t agree I would assume that if they turn them over it would mean that UNAMID is somehow complicit in genocide in Darfur. I guess I just want a response to this comment.

Spokesperson: I mean, I answer all kinds of questions, Matthew, but not hypothetical ones.

But is it hypothetical? Watch this site.

Taylor Swift Oct 25 Event Will Be In But Not Of United Nations, UN For Sale?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 2, 2010 -- Musician Taylor Swift announced on September 20 that she will “launch” her new album Speak Now “at the United Nations” on October 25. This seeming of note -- would she be named a Goodwill Ambassador? -- Inner City Press on September 23 asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky:

Inner City Press: Taylor Swift has announced via PR Newswire and elsewhere that she would be performing at the United Nations on 25 October with an album release. So it struck me like, I know we have had as many, various sort of foibles here, of sort of commercial presentations within the UN. But are you aware this is widely circulated, in what context, what would be the rule that was applicable to…

Spokesperson: It’s trending on Twitter or what?

Question: No, no. No I’m talking; this is put up by a public relations firm, saying the UN will be used for an album launch. And I just wanted, maybe you don’t know now, but maybe you can find out whether it’s true. And if so, who in the UN system would have sponsored such an event?

Spokesperson: Well, let’s find out. I am sure that my colleagues in the Outreach Division will be able to help me.

This last implied that the UN Department of Public Information might be behind the launch, perhaps naming Taylor Swift as a Goodwill Ambassador for some cause or other.

While not put into the UN's transcripts, Inner City Press has since been told that Taylor Swift's event at the UN has nothing to do the UN.

The Delegates' Dining Room at the UN is run by the caterer Aramark. The UN allows Aramark to rent the space out when it is unused. Taylor Swift rented it, and then put out a press release that led many readers to believe it was a UN event.

One wonder what standards the UN has for Aramark's renting out of the Delegates' Dining Room. Could Aramark rent it to a political party based on hate? For the burning of a religious text? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2taylor100210.html

On Ban's “Abnormal” Understanding with Sri Lanka's Rajapaksa, UN Won't Answer

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1, 2010 -- The UN's stonewalling on Sri Lanka expanded on October 1 with the Spokesman for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon dodging whether Ban reached a private understanding with President Mahinda Rajapaksa that Rajapaksa could represent what Ban said in a one on one meeting about the limits of the UN war crimes panel.

“It's up to individual heads of state” to issue whatever summaries they want, Spokesman Martin Nesirky said.

But did Ban reach an understanding with Rajapaksa, that he could say things not included in Ban's own summary of their meeting? Nesirky did not answer. Video here, from Minute 47:28.

Inner City Press asked again, as it has for months, for a desciption of Ban's contacts with Rajapaksa, including before and as Ban became Secretary General.

After having promised already to provide the answer, Nesirky on October 1 said he didn't understand the question: a list of meetings? Yes, of meetings and topics and whether Ban considers Rajapaksa a personal friend.

How else to explain what Ban's adviser Nicholas Haysom called the “abnormal” summary of the two men's meeting -- which unlike other UN summaries included the President's as well as Ban's words -- and the separate understanding about Rajapaksa issuing his own summary?

Nesirky has still refused to explain how the “abnormal” summary of Ban's meeting with Rajapaksa was produced. Hayson, for one, seemed surprised to see its content.

That Nesirky couldn't or wouldn't explain how it was produced implies that Nesirky was not involved in his preparation. Who was, then?

On the question of Ban's son in law Siddarth Chatterjee's involvement in Sri Lanka, with the Indian army force, Nesirky deemed it “irrelevant” two weeks after saying he would answer it. On October 1, Inner City Press asked if Nesirky had even deigned to ask Ban or his Office about it -- that is, whether Nesirky had the answer and wouldn't provide it, or didn't even have the answer. Even this was not answered.

Nesirky concluded by repeating that there are a lot of other issues than Sri Lanka: the Middle East, Myanmar...

After Inner City Press agreed but noted that Sri Lanka is the only country in which Ban has been burned in effigy - and from which people protested his speech at a midtown Manhattan hotel -- and that an “abnormal” summary of his meeting with the President had been issued, Nesirky asked if Inner City Press was saying that because of the burning in effigy, the summary was different. Perhaps it was a rhetorical question.

From the UN's October 1, 2010 transcript:

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Yes, Matthew.

Inner City Press: Sure, I wanted to ask, this is on another inquiry war crimes, the one in Sri Lanka. I have done a little bit more reporting and can say that a Sri Lankan diplomat yesterday told me that President Rajapaksa had an understanding with the Secretary-General that he could issues his own summary of the tête-à-tête meeting. That they violated no rules; that that was the understanding. I wanted to get your comment on that.

Spokesperson: As I said, it’s up to individual countries. If they wish to provide a readout of a meeting, it’s for them to do.

Inner City Press: Was there an understanding? That’s the word that he used to me, that there was an understanding that would be done, but it wasn’t done, and then the Secretary-General chose not to comment. The understanding was that it would be done in that way.

Spokesperson: Well, as I said, this was tête-à-tête meeting. I wasn’t in the room. I assume that the diplomat that you refer to was also not in the room, and I think I will leave it at that.

Inner City Press: I want to ask, you’ve said that the information about Ban Ki-moon’s son-in-law’s involvement in Sri Lanka is irrelevant, although I would encourage you to just answer questions rather than judge their relevance. But I do want to know whether you are going to give an answer to this description of the Secretary-General’s relationship with President Rajapaksa prior to becoming Secretary-General?

Spokesperson: It’s really important to understand precisely: what do you mean by that?

Inner City Press: [inaudible]

Spokesperson: No, I mean what do you want? A list of the number of times they met or what? I mean, it’s just not clear to me.

Inner City Press: The times that they met; the terms on the issues on which they met about, whether, you know, whether the Secretary-General considers him a personal friend. All going to this point of whether, in on extraordinary…, why this, there was an abnormal described by Haysom as abnormal; and why the Sri Lankan Government is now saying they had a special understanding with the Secretary-General that apparently other Governments don’t get when the issue at issue is a inquiry into war crimes and the killing of 40,000 people. It seems relevant. But I mean, whether you think it is irrelevant, I have asked you that. You’d said you’d get it and I don’t have it. And on the question of the son-in-law, I don’t, have you been told? Have you asked the Secretary-General’s Office for that information or have you just not asked him? Do you have it but you don’t want to tell me or you don’t have it? That’s what I want to know.

Spokesperson: Well, the logic of that is a little bit confused. On the question of the Secretary-General’s meetings or otherwise with President Rajapaksa, the Secretary-General, as you know, before he was Secretary-General was the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Korea. And I will need to check what meetings he may have had in that capacity.

Inner City Press: Check if he went on a visit with the President down to the hometown of the President in southern Sri Lanka.

Spokesperson: And I think we can obviously find that out. I mean, you are asking, we can obviously find out. But I mean, there are a couple of things here. One is that your focus is on this topic. There are many other topics that the Secretary-General deals with, whether it’s Myanmar, or the Middle East or, many topics. And it’s not about homing in and singling out one particular topic.

Inner City Press: No, no, Mr. Haysom himself said it was abnormal, and I think if you look at the readouts that your office put out, there is only one that has a representation of what the country said. It’s also the only country that burned Ban Ki-moon in effigy since he’s been in office. So, I don’t think it’s a random, it’s not a country he picked at random. [inaudible]

Spokesperson: So you think that the readout was done like that because the effigy was burned, is that what you are saying?

Inner City Press: No, I didn’t say that. I said those are true facts that make it significant, you can try to minimize it, but many people were killed, he visited the country [inaudible].

Spokesperson: It’s not about minimizing, it’s not about minimizing. Don’t put words into my mouth, Matthew, It’s not…

Inner City Press: You said there are many other things.

Spokesperson: Yes, that’s not minimizing. That’s just saying that there are other topics.

Inner City Press: But I asked this question at the beginning of the year, about his relationship with Rajapaksa, and I asked it two weeks ago and you’d said you’d get it. So, I don’t want to belabour it, I just want say…

Spokesperson: Well, now you’re belabouring it. And if I have something, I’ll be happy to share it.

Inner City Press: But it’s easy enough to get that. I mean, it’s not…

Spokesperson: Well, if it’s easy enough maybe you will have got it already.

Inner City Press: No, but from the Secretary-General. You are his Spokesman, I am not.

We'll see. Watch this site.

Sudan Trip by UN Security Council and Press Set for Oct 4, Last Minute NCP Questions, Did Bashir Say Yes?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1, 2010, updated -- The trip next week to Sudan by the UN Security Council and media including Inner City Press has been confirmed, with the belated granting of visas by the Sudanese consulate in New York on Friday afternoon.

To some, the trip is still in limbo. A senior official of Sudan's ruling National Congress Party Rabie Abdelati Obeid was quoted Friday afternoon that

“We got to know of this information from the media that the United Nations Security Council will come to Sudan. But, up to now, I don’t think our government has received any information to coordinate, or to do the arrangement required for the U.N Security Council... I doubt that this U.N. Security Council (team) will be coming without informing our government. According to protocol, the president should be aware and should know because he is responsible for each and everything in the country. That is why I think such (a) visit will not happen unless this is (first coordinated with the president’s office) or through the proper channels.”

As presented in New York, the Security Council will travel from Uganda to Juba in South Sudan, west to Darfur, then for meetings in Khartoum. Apparently not part of the meetings is President Omar al Bashir, who has been indicted for war crimes and genocide by the International Criminal Court.

The US and UK said they could or would not meet with Bashir, and they said they were negotiating a mutually acceptable arrangement.

“Don't ask, don't tell” is the compromise that has been worked out: the Council will not ask to meet with Bashir, and he won't ask to meet with them. But, Inner City Press points out, he could just show up. He is after all the president of the country.

France had also expressed opposition to meeting with Bashir, but French Permanent Representative Araud will not be making the trip. Nor will Nigeria's Joy Ogwu.

Russia's Vitaly Churkin a Council meeting on September 30 to ask which journalists had asked to go, and why the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General needed to send anyone at all. Spokesperson Martin Nesirky has been seen rather desperately speaking Russian with Churkin. It does not appear that this has solved Nesirky's and his office's expulsion from Council consultations.

Leaving New York on the evening of Monday, October 4, the Council will first travel via a UN plane from Nairobi to Uganda and meet with President Yoweri Museveni. The troops he has dispatched to the African Union mission in Somalia will be discussed, their compensation and whether in light of the UN's Mapping Report alleging war crimes by the UPDF in the Democratic Republic of Congo they will be withdrawn.

Then on to Sudan, apparently. Outside the Security Council chamber on Friday afternoon, the Permanent Representative of a Permanent Five member of the Council said, of course we are going, they have given us the visas and we have the terms of reference. And at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, Inner City Press received its visa.

So what is the NCP's Rabie Abdelati Obeid talking about? Or does this reflect a split in the NCP, perhaps to reveal itself more while the Council is in Sudan?

As noted above, Inner City Press is going on the trip. The goal is to file five or more pieces a day, wireless permitting. Watch this site.