At UN, Senior Advisory Group Standoff on Broken Equipment & Deployment, Ladsous Silent on Shavendra Silva

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- When UN Peacekeeping's so-called Senior Advisory Group was appointed, the inclusion of Shavendra Silva, a Sri Lankan military figure depicted in the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's own report as engaged in war crimes, was first exposed and covered by Inner City Press.

  Ban told Inner City Press, Silva's inclusion is a decision of member states. His chief of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous refused to answer Inner City Press questions about it.

  Now in the endgame of the SAG, there are at least three issues. And April 3, diplomats met until 8 pm about them, including UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant, French Deputy PR Martin Briens, Pakistan's DPR and others.

  The SAG recommended setting troop rotations at every 12 months. 

  But many Latin American countries say their constitutions do not allow more than six months; India is said to share this position.

  The longer deployments would save the UN, or Ban Ki-moon as SAG-ers put it, $21 million.

  The SAG also proposed that if a country deploys troops but malfunctioning equipment, they should not be paid for personnel. Surprisingly, this would save $170 million according to SAG sources.

  After a dispute about the survey mechanism, the proposed increased troop compensation would be $80 million.

  And so even now on April 3 in the UN's North Lawn building, Permanent Representatives and Deputies were dueling about how to jibe these three. If the cost savings, of longer deployments say, are foregone, how to pay the increased compensation to the troops, without going back to recalcitrant taxpayers for more money?

  Earlier on April 3, Inner City Press sought to ask Ladsous a question. While others also leaving the Security Council, such as DPA's Jeffrey Feltman and DFS' Ameerah Haq, were willing to answer, Ladsous was not. This is a pattern.

  UN Budget Committee chair Miguel Berger of Germany was on the scene on April 3. He remarked to Inner City Press, again you are the only one covering it. He talked up a de-mining event on April 4, which stonewalling Herve Ladsous is slated to also attend. Click here for notice of event on the site of the Free UN Coalition for Access. Watch this site.

On Mali, France's Structure Falls Under Fire, DRC Cited, Ladsous Stonewalls

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- While previous French led UN Security Council sessions on Mali have been surprisingly smooth, Wednesday's was not.

  Afterward, UN Department of Political Affair chief Jeffrey Feltman told Inner City Press, “Well, that was a lively debate.”

  Inner City Press asked Ambassador Susan Rice if the US thought the proposed “parallel” or French force should be under UN control.

  The answer appears to be, Non. Ambassador Rice said that robust counter terrorism work in northern Mali, at the request of the Malian government, should not be part of the UN stabilization mission.

  Rice said the US would have no objection to the Security Council offering its “blessing” to such work, but that would be it. She said proposals had been made in the consultations which raised a lot of questions.

  Other Ambassadors agreed. Vitaly Churkin said while it was a “professional” discussion, it will take time.

  Inner City Press asked Churkin about the parallel force and if it should be under UN control. 

  His answer included noting that despite the claim that the “intervention brigade” for the Democratic Republic of Congo approved last week was an exception and not a precedent, it is already being cited or used for Mali.

  So what's next in Mali: UN drones like Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous started procuring for West Africa -- read, Cote d'Ivoire -- and Central Africa even before getting any Security Council approval?

When Ladsous left the Security Council, unlike Feltman and his DFS counterpart Ameerah Haq he refused to answer or entertain any questions at all, even on Mali. 

  After Ladsous refused a Mali question, Inner City Press asked him on the Democratic Republic of Congo, what assurances he claimed to have received, such that his supposed April 1 deadline was once again not enforced?

  This, he did not answer. Maybe he was rushing to the UN's own radio station, North Korea style. Watch this site.

While Susan Rice Tells Inner City Press Sudan Glasnost “Would Be Nice,” Some Compare to US Reaction to Myanmar

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- When U,S Ambassador Susan Rice spoke to the press in front of the Security Council on Wednesday, her first topic was Mali.

   Inner City Press asked her about Sudan, about Omar al Bashir's announcement that political prisoners would be released. What's the US view, Inner City Press asked, of this supposed glasnost in Khartoum?

  “That would be nice,” Ambassador Rice said and smiled. Then she added the hope that the term political prisoner be defined as broadly for release as while being taken into custody.

  Also on Wednesday Fatou Bensouda the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, where Bashir has been indicted for genocide, is visiting the US State Department in Washington, meeting Stephen J. Rapp.

  One wonders if the UN not only partying with Bashir, but offering free flights to his fellow ICC indictee Ahmed Harun, will come up between Bensouda and Rapp.

  At a UN press conference on Tuesday, Inner City Press asked April's Security Council president Eugene Richard Gasana if he or Rwanda thought the Council should have given Sudan mediator Thabo Mbeki the press statement he asked for, praising the Sudans for the Implementation Matrix.

  Gasana said the relationship between the Security Council and African Union is improving. But if Mbeki favored a Council press statement for the Implementation Matrix, how much more so for actual releases of political prisoners?

  Forget glasnost - compare it to the West's reaction to Myanmar's releases, notwithstanding or ignoring the violence against Muslims in that country. A cynic or inciter might conclude that religion is the difference. Watch this site.

As UN Lets Herve Ladsous Stonewall on Rapes by His Partners, and Spin to UN Radio, Its DPI Stands By

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- The UN's communications strategies and deception have been hitting new lows. 

 Take as an example the UN's handling of its recalcitrant chief of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous and the 126 rapes in Minova from November 20 to 22, 2012 by his partners in the Congolese Army.

  Right on UN Television, managed by the UN Department of Public Information, Ladsous refused to answer Inner City Press' question about the rapes on November 27. 

  While UN TV didn't catch what happened next, Inner City Press with a hand-held camera did. Ladsous took three favored scribes, all of them “leaders” in the United Nations Correspondents Association, out into the hallway for a private briefing. Video here.

The UN and DPI did nothing about that, nor when Ladsous repeated the stonewalling about the rapes on December 7. Video here.

  Is it any wonder, then, that on December 18 Ladsous went further, directing his spokesman to grab the UNTV microphone to try to prevent Inner City Press from even asking the question? Video here.

  After that, Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access wrote a letter of complaint to the head of DPI, which controls UNTV and its microphone.

Without for now getting into the details, what was the outcome? DPI's Stephane Dujarric weeks later told FUNCA that he had spoken privately with Ladsous' spokesman -- not even with Ladsous -- about the microphone grabbing.

  Nothing was said publicly about journalists' rights by DPI, which is also in charge of accrediting reporters to allow them to enter the UN. 

  FUNCA presented the head of DPI with a list of ten proposed amendments and reforms to the Accreditation Rules and Media Access Guidelines, on which DPI has until now only partnered with UNCA, now known as the UN Censorship Alliance.

  Despite numerous assurances, the reforms have yet to be implemented.

  Flash forward to this past month. After Ladsous' stonewalling on the rapes for four months, after Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon about the rapes on March 5, Ladsous' DPKO gave a half answer to his favored hallway scribes, from Reuters and AFP, Tim “Hallway” Witcher.

But after follow-ups (and a spurious complaint by AFP and Reuters for being called, accurately, Ladsous' lapdogs), more was needed.

On March 18, DPI led a raid on Inner City Press' office, without notice or consent; UNCA's president Pamela Falk took photographs and it now appears that other non-UN persons were allowed in. 

  Despite repeated requests, DPI has refused to disclose who it let into Inner City Press' office. Why not?

After the raid, one reform agreed to by DPI -- a non-UNCA bulletin board -- had all of the fliers taken down, including fliers which questioned DPI's performance. Meanwhile all of UNCA's material is left up on the UNCA-only bulletin board.

  On the Minova rapes, Ladsous went even more in-house, or in-grown: he gave an interview to UN Radio thence to the UN's Radio Okapi. Ladsous' microphone grabbing spokesman repacked a noon briefing answer; Reuters Louis Charbonneau typed it up. 

  Finally (for now) on April 2 the deal the UN sold out the Minova victims for was reported on the UN's own UN News Service, like UN Radio, under the command of DPI.

Should it now be known as the UN Department of Propaganda Information?

Footnote: in fairness, under DPI's current chief some “brown-bag” sessions with UN envoys and others have been held; some have been newsworthy and it's appreciated. 

  But it does not make up for Ladsous' outrageous stonewalling, which DPI has enabled (for example following the December 18 microphone grab) and now by having Ladsous while he refuses independent Press questions to spin on UN Radio. What does DPI stand for?

IMF Compares Ireland to Florida & California, Tells ICP of Faster Foreclosures

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- Amid reports that the International Monetary Fund is pushing Ireland to ease and speed up the repossession of homes for mortgage debt, Inner City Press on Wednesday asked the IMF's Ireland Mission Chief Craig Beaumont to compare the situation there to that in the United States.

Beaumont told Inner City Press that Ireland is “not too different from Florida, Nevada and California, where arrears rose quite high. There is something to be learned,” he said.

But what?

Beaumont said that the IMF “will be monitoring how the reform, removing an unintended barrier to repossession, how that impacts the actual number of cases moving forward and time taken to conclusion.”

Conclusion, it seems, is the loss of the home. Watch this site.

Amid UN Stonewalling on Minova Rapes by DRC Army, Victims Traded for Generic Deal with Ban Ki-moon's Expert Bangura?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- After stonewalling on Press questions about 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army for four months, the UN haltingly told favored scribes and its own media that it set an April 1 deadline for action.

It now appears that “action” was no more than another signing to bolster the UN itself: a generic agreement with Ban Ki-moon's expert. The 126 victims have been traded for this?

The April deadline passed and the UN did nothing. Inner City Press asked on March 28 -- UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous refused to answer -- and on April 1 and April 2.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey told April 1 that some unspecified assurances had been given.

  Reuters typed up the same quotes on April 2 from Ladsous' spokesman who had seized the UN Television microphone on December 18 to avoid exactly this question. Video here.

  With the UN refusing to say what the assurances are, three hours after Inner City Press' questions at the April 2 noon briefing the UN's own News Service reports breathlessly on a March 30 signing of a generic agreement between the Congolese prime minister and Ban's special representative on Sexual Violence and Conflict, Zainab Hawa Bangura.

  But even as reported by the UN's own in-house (that is, North Korea style) media, the agreement brings no accountability for the 126 victims of rape in Minova. 

  They have, it seems, been used for the UN to get a generic agreement and move on. Or try to move on. Watch this site.

On Mali at Columbia, Nameless Discussion of Colonialism & Other Big Issues Under Outdate Chatham House Rules Superseded by Social Media

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- On Mali there was an event at Columbia University Tuesday night, advertised as “free and open to the public, but please register by writing.” So Inner City Press did, identifying itself as the Press, listing its office at the UN.

  Columbia's Stephen Wertheim, the last name you'll see in this piece, wrote back, “You are now registered for the talk, which starts at 7:30 pm. We look forward to seeing you there.”

  After that, notice of the event was further publicized on the website of the Free UN Coalition for Access, as still is another event at the UN this Thursday.

  After a final story about the day's Arms Trade Treaty vote in the UN General Assembly, Inner City Press arrived at the event. There were twenty to twenty five people, of all ages -- and all nameless here.

  After a lengthy speech and two social media missives, as the question and answer began, the moderator suddenly said -- and we'll paraphrase and not quote here -- that he should have said so from the beginning, this would be under Chatham House rules, you can use the idea but no quote.

  And so what were the ideas?

That the media focuses too much on the military offensive, which one participant called the kinetic aspect.

That there is a lot of corruption even in the south of Mali.

That the Malian military commits human rights violations, and that the UN does not have the resources to have a crew of human rights observers ready to go there.

That the UN will soon name a Special Representative of the Secretary General.

That the Malian press is reporting rumors of relations of Nicolas Sarkozy and the MNLA. (Inner City Press has been more focused on Sarkozy's hardly concealed try out to help invest Qatar's money, with his contacts in the center-right government in Spain.)

That the Security Council implicitly endorsed the French approach.

Inner City Press, which is surely free to report its own questions but apparently not the answers, asked if the envisioned “parallel force” would be under UN control; if coup leader Amadou Sanogo will continue to play a role in the Malian military, and how the fast action to defend Bamako differed from the decision to let Bagui in the Central African Republic fall.

  There was a response to each question, but how to report the answers under the spirit of the Chatham House rules is not clear. 

 As Inner City Press left it was told, despite the language of the invitation and its RSVP as the Press, that it is somehow understood that events in the university are under Chatham House rules.

  No, that is not automatically understood. People give on the record speeches at universities. In fact, since students have Facebook pages and blogs and, yes, Twitter accounts, it is entirely unclear what restriction on a class or seminar would look like, or how they could work.

  Nevertheless, Inner City Press has complied with the belatedly announced Chatham House rules. Who is served? The Security Council hears Wednesday on Mali. Watch this site.

Footnote: the UN office that Inner City Press listed on its RSVP has, as we've noted, been raided by the UN and others on March 18. We'll have more on this.

In Arms Trade Treaty Garbage Time, Liechtenstein Parses Versions, Consensus is a Feeling to Mexico?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- After a full day of Arms Trade Treaty speeches in an increasingly empty UN General Assembly, one's eyes can glaze over at the interpretations offered, to mix a metaphor. But if it's not reported on now, when will it be?

And so we turn back to what Liechtenstein said late in the afternoon, just before the Holy See spoke last. 

  As clarified to Inner City Press after its 140 character tweet didn't capture all the nuance -- “ the tweet below was just forwarded to me, thanks for drawing attention to my statement this afternoon in the plenary” -- Liechtenstein's deputy permanent representative Stefan Barriga's point was that the term “overriding risk” in the English text contains not surprisingly some ambiguity in it:

“namely whether in the risk assessment some other factors could be taken into account, other than just the probability of the risk materializing. That ambiguity, however, could be resolved when looking at other language versions, all of which are equally authentic. The French version speaks of 'preponderant risk,' the Spanish of 'manifest risk,' and the Russian of 'significant risk.' These clearer and narrower terms should prevail over the more ambiguous “overriding risk”. Check out Article 33, paras. 3 and 4 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which addresses the issue. (A separate question would of course be how to reconcile the French, Spanish and Russian version – but they are really not very far apart).”

We love this stuff -- so much, it seems, that we conflated it with a separate Russian reliance on its language version of the text, on which it abstained. Anyway, duly noted.

In back to back press conferences about the ATT, Inner City Press asked president Peter Woolcott what consensus meant to him. He agreed with the general UN version, though he said he doesn't like it.

Mexico, on the other hand, is arguing that consensus is not a rule but a feeling in the room, that any president, like Woolcott was, can brand as consensus. Would this work in the budget committee? We doubt it. But we'll keep covering it. Watch this site.

While Ladsous Covers Up DRC Army's 126 Minova Rapes, Reuters Channels His Mic Grabber Spokesman

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- How low will UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous go to sweep under the carpet the 126 rapes in Minova by its partners in the Congolese Army? 

  How far will media “partners” go in helping Ladsous claim he got assurances that he refuses to disclose, even to them?This far.

   On March 28 Inner City Press asked at the noon briefing about the rapes. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky said a deadline for action of April 1 had been set, and had been reiterated by Ladsous to Congolese foreign minister Tshibanda on March 27.

  But later on March 28 when Inner City Press put the question twice to Ladsous on UN Television he refused to answer. And while Tshibanda did answer Inner City Press' question about the rape, he was dismissive of the UN's ultimatum.

  But after Inner City Press asked again at the UN noon briefing on April 1, now Ban's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey said that some unspecified assurances had been given. He said the UN was waiting for official notification, and said the deadline was at midnight.

  After midnight Inner City Press wrote to Del Buey and to Nesirky, on European time in Andorra with Ban Ki-moon, asking what the assurances were, or what the UN would do.Neither sent any answer.

  So at noon Inner City Press asked Del Buey again. He reiterated the previous day's comment, that assurances were given but he would not or could not say what they were.

Other than a sign of further UN stonewalling it didn't seem newsworthy, having written the exact same story the day before with Del Buey's identical noon briefing answer to Inner City Press.

  But after the noon briefing, Reuters published a story with no criticism or analysis of the delay by UN Peacekeeping, using exactly the quote Del Buey gave the day before -- but this time put in the mouth of Ladsous' spokesman Andre-Michel Essoungou.

  Where did Essoungou say or type and e-mail exactly the same thing as Del Buey said at the previous day's noon briefing? The story doesn't say.

  Nor, understandably perhaps, does the Reuters story say that Essoungou on exactly this question of Minova rapes seized the UN Television microphone to try to avoid an Inner City Press question to Ladsous. Video here.

  In fact, when Inner City Press asked the question of the Minova rapes on November 27 on UNTV, Ladsous refused to answer it and summoned favored scribes, including Louis Charbonneau of Reuters the author of the April 2 story, into the hall for a private briefing. Video here. Should that have been mentioned? Reasonable minds may disagree. Watch this site.

At UN, Arms Trade Treaty Passes With 22 Abstentions and the 3 No's, Woolcott Tells ICP of Speakers List

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- When the Arms Trade Treaty was blocked on March 28 under the rules of consensus, the headlines read that only three countries were against it: Syria, North Korea and Iran.

But even then, in speeches like Sudan's and Belarus', one could hear abstentions coming.

And Tuesday in the UN General Assembly there were 23 abstentions, including the two most populous countries on Earth, China and India, and the most populous predominantly Muslim country, Indonesia.

Afterward, Inner City Press asked ATT president Peter Woolcott, after thanking him on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, about criticism of his allowing, before a promised ruling, Mexico and others to make an argument against the UN meaning of consensus. 

  He replied that there was a speakers list that he followed. He said he personally does not favor negotiating under the rule of consensus. Other might say: it showed.

 Inner City Press asked Mexico's Luis Alfonso de Alba, who gave a thoughtful answer about "no vetoes," that may resonate in the UN Budget Committee.

   It was announced that Angola did not abstain, but voted Yes (hence, 22 abstentions, still quite populous.)
In speeches before Tuesday's vote, as Syria's Bashar Ja'afari spoke, US Ambassador Susan Rice was walking out. After that, a full hour into the speeches, Qatar's delegation rolled in. They ended up abstaining. Qatar supports rebels in Syria.

Sudan on the other hand said it was abstaining, citing the failure to address the arming of “mutinous” groups, like the SPLM-North and rebels in Darfur.

Russia, which by a point of order Thursday night put an end to the Mexico-launched attempt to redefine consensus, on Tuesday morning zeroed in on what knowledge of genocide might mean, in Article 6.3. Its Ambassador Churkin said Russia would not have broken consensus on March 28, but would now abstain, as did China. It's hard to call this consensus. Watch this site.

Rwanda's Gasana Cites Genocide, FDLR, As UNSC President Awaits Minova Rape Investigation Results

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- Rwanda's Eugene Richard Gasana is President of the UN Security Council for April, the month of the genocide in his country in 1994. He held a press conference Tuesday about the month's Council work. Many questions were about North Korea.

Inner City Press asked Gasana about the resolution the Council adopted on March 28 creating an “intervention brigade” in the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

  Since then, the Congolese foreign minister Tshibanda has said the brigade will be in place by April 30, and will eradicate the M23 as both a military and political movement if it does not “cease to exist.”

Is this helpful?

Gasana said that Rwanda voted for the resolution, and views it as a victory not for DRC but for the region. He said the FDLR remains a threat.

Inner City Press asked about the UN and Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous allowing the April 1 deadline for action by the DRC on the 126 rapes by its soldiers in Minova to pass without any action or specifics about assurances that Tshibanda supposedly gave to Ladsous.

Gasana said he and Rwanda are waiting for the results of the investigation. The UN has already said, after many questions asked and evaded, that two battalions of the Congolese Army were there and responsible.

What happened to the deadline?

Inner City Press asked about the Security Council's relations with the African Union. Gasana diplomatically said that the relationship is improving, it's a process not an event.

Inner City Press, for the Free UN Coalition for Access, urged Gasana to hold as many press stakeouts as possible during the month, particularly after Council closed door consultations. At the end he said, yes, he will try. Watch this site.

Footnote: The first question was unilaterally grabbed, by shouting out, by an unelected representative of the old UN Correspondents Association. This organization, according to documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act from Voice of America, worked in 2012 to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.

  The first questioner's former employer Reuters, according to the documents, supported the move to get Inner City Press thrown out. Now, leading to the launch of FUNCA, they've become even worse in 2013. More on this to follow. Watch this site.

As Ban Slams DPRK, Is It In His South Korean “National Capacity” As Asked by UNCA President Pam Falk of CBS?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- As the situation between the Koreas heats up, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is in Andorra. But he made a point of speaking on the issue at a press conference opening, then in response to a question on it.

  He said, “rising rhetoric and threats by the DPRK authorities has gone too far, and it has heightened the level of tensions on the Korean Peninsula. That is why I am taking this opportunity visiting Andorra to make a special mention.”

  But in what capacity was Ban Ki-moon speaking?

  Earlier on April 1, Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey was asked for Ban's comments “in his national capacity.”

  To some it seemed a strange request. The phrase is used when a monthly president of the Security Council is speaking, to get him or her to step out of that role and state a national position.

But a UN Secretary General is not supposed to have, or at least say or act on, a “national capacity.” This is for example what some say the French chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous does: use the UN to advance his country's position.

  But the Secretary General? And the president of the UN Correspondents' Association, sometimes know as Ban's UN Censorship Alliance, being the one to ask for Ban's position in his “national capacity”?

  Perhaps this is what was discussed in the luncheon between Ban and UNCA's 13 opaque apostles, a meeting after which some of the 13 wrote stories quoting Ban but refused to release a transcript or recording of the session, even to their own UNCA members.

  The UN also refused to release a transcript or recording, beyond a set of canned “highlights.” No highlight concerned Sudan or Haiti, but there was discussion. Why only for 13? And was it there at that luncheon, on the Peninsula, that some wink and nod about Ban's position in his “national capacity” was given? Watch this site.

Footnote: Falk was not present at Tuesday's beginning of UNSC Presidency press conference by Rwanda; she sent a person who ran and lost to be one of the apostles of opacity, Evelyn Leopold formerly of Reuters and now a Huffington Post contributor, who yelled out demanding the first  question, then didn't give the microphone to any other questioners. To this has UNCA sunk.