As IMF Weighs Financial Inclusion in Kenya, Why Not Elsewhere? Ghana Update

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 2 -- Amid the Kenya report released under embargo today by the International Monetary Fund is a review of financial inclusion and technology:

"Financial inclusion continues progressing with mobile-banking loans and deposits driven by M-Shwari (7 million customers in its first year of operations) and higher SME access to credit.

"M-Pesa was introduced in 2007 as a means to transfer money via mobile phones. M-Pesa users deposit money into a 'cell phone account,' and use SMS technology for transfers and 'on demand' payments. Thanks to its use of low-cost technology, overall transaction costs have declined as bills can be paid remotely. Even more importantly, the poor have benefited the most: M-Pesa reaches 84 percent of population earning less than US$2 a day.  M-Shwari, a deposit-lending facility tailored to the poor, has 7 million active customers in over a year of operations. Kenyan farmers benefit from schemes to acquire equipment, like water pumps, with repayments being made through M-Pesa; M-Kopa allows the use of solar panels in areas not served by the power grid, with repayments in small installments."

   Whether in other contexts the IMF is promoting financial inclusion is another question. But there is much to be learned from Kenya - including for lower income parts of the ostensibly developed world. We'll have more on this.

  On October 1 at the UN, Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access pushed for and reported on a briefing about African Regional Economic Communities, here.

  Back on September 25, with Ghana hosting an International Monetary Fund visit, Inner City Press asked IMF Spokesperson Gerry Rice about what Ghana’s President John Mahama said this week at the New York Stock Exchange: "It is my hope that by January we should start a three-year IMF program to try and stabilize the macroeconomic environment.”

Rice took the question from Inner City Press and said "I can tell you we currently have an IMF team in Accra to initiate discussions on a program. We will have a press release at the end of that mission. The context is, indeed, that the Ghana authorities initiated discussion on an economic program that could be supported by the Fund. Those are the discussions that are then taking place. So it's premature to have dates and more details on that process because the team is in Ghana. We’re expecting it to conclude this week, and we will communicate at the right time."

  Then this, concluding that "discussions on a possible program that could be supported by the IMF will continue in Washington during the Annual Meetings."

  Inner City Press also submitted this question on September 25: “Ukraine PM Yatseniuk yesterday said, 'We do understand that we have to readjust the program. Because when we started the program with the IMF, it was a peace program. For today, this is a wartime government and a wartime program.' What is the IMF's response to / comment on this?”

  While Rice said that there was no request for any “readjustment” yet, that the IMF will combine two reviews in November with an eye toward its Executive Board meeting on Ukraine at the end of the year or early 2015. He said the purpose of such reviews, generally, is readjustment.

  But Rice did in this answer address the appropriateness of IMF lending into what Yatseniuk called “a wartime government and a wartime program" speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. We'll have more on this as well.

 Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info

On African Regional Economic Communities, AU Urges Assessed Contributions, Maged Abdelaziz 2 African Vetos, FUNCA Briefing

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- After a UN session on African Regional Economic Communities there was a press conference involving Tete Antonio, Permanent Observer of the African Union to the UN, Maged Abdelaziz, UN Special Adviser on Africa, and the Free UN Coalition for Access, which challenged the closing and privatization of the UN Press Briefing Room.
Click here for video of RECs briefing, here for FUNCA on HuffPo Live.

In the 32nd floor conference room of the Special Adviser on Africa, Inner City Press asked how the work of the RECs related to the African issues on the agenda of the Security Council, for example in South Sudan.

Tete Antonio said, “You know our fight, we are trying to convince the Security Council to have assessed contributions to make sure the AU or the RECs on behalf of the international community is very successful.”

Maged Abdelaziz spoke of Agenda 2063, issues raised by Egypt and Cape Verde including “Silencing the Gun” dealing with the economic and the governance components.

Near the end of the session, after responses by several of the RECs including ECOWAS on its work in Guinea Bissau and Mali, Abdelaziz said in his personal capacity, not as a UN official, that Africa deserves two Permanent seats on the Security Council, with veto. This, he said, would have prevented what a number of speakers called the foreign interference in Libya. This is an ongoing theme. Watch this site.

Footnote: After the UN session on African Regional Economic Communities held on the morning of October 1 in UN Conference Room 2, there was a press conference scheduled for 1 pm on the second floor. This conflicted with an event of UNCA, now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance; the African press conference got canceled. Inner City Press went down to Conference Room 2 and urged, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, that the briefing be reinstated. 

 But up on the second floor, the UN Spokesperson's office said this would be difficult. The UN Press Briefing Room, previously taken over by the French delegation, was locked. Finally it was decided to conduct the session up on the 32nd floor, in what we'll call a FUNCA briefing. Video here.

   

At UN, Press Banned From Covering UN Security Council, Free UN Coalition for Access Fights, Scribes Cavort with Herve "The Censor" Ladsous

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- Press access at the UN has continued to decline under Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. 

  On October 1, with the General Debate over, Inner City Press went to cover the Security Council's bilateral meetings which begin the new month, presidency passing from the US to Argentina.

  But UN Security told Inner City Press it and any other media - none other tried - could not enter the second floor of the Conference Building without a "secondary pass" that the media cannot obtain.

  For the Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press called the UN Media and Accreditation and Liaison Unit, which had the day before said the second floor would re-open. MALU came and told Inner City Press it could stay. But as soon as MALU left, UN Security ordered the Press to leave, just as US Ambassador Samantha Power approached the Security Council. No questions.

  This is the lack of press freedom and access in today's UN which FUNCA, UNlike others, is fighting.

  On September 27, Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous blocked Inner City Press' camera filming from the General Assembly media stakeout then got MALU to tell Inner City Press to stop filming.Video here. Scribes including Reuters followed Ladsous down the hall for a private briefing; Ladsous canceled his announced public Q&A stakeout about Mali.

 On both September 29 and 30, the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Ladsous' censorship and issued and posted a flier, here. The old UN Correspondents Association did nothing - in fact, the head of UNCA and the Reuters bureau chief, himself a habitue of censorship by misusing copyright, here, were seen cavorting with Ladsous. This is not defense of press freedom - this is capitulation and collaboration in censorship.

   During the week of the General Debate, journalists weren't even able to go to the General Assembly stakeout without an escort from the UN Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit -- an escort that often did not come on time, or come at all.

  On September 25, the office of Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric announced there would be a question and answer stakeout at 3 pm. Inner City Press immediately ran there, but was banned from getting in. As the Free UN Coalition for Access, the problem was tweeted, and not only journalists but diplomats have been responding to it. But nothing from Dujarric or MALU.

  In fact Dujarric played a part in, at least defending, a French-only briefing in the UN Press Briefing Room.

On September 23, the entourage of French President Francois Hollande repeatedly but unsuccessfully ordered the UN accredited Press to leave the UN's Press Briefing Room.  Video here.

  On September 25 when the Free UN Coalition for Accessasked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who peaked out from the VIP / Green Room behind the Press Briefing Room, about the incident, he said sometimes countries try to reserve the Room.

   Asked if other countries had done so during this General Assembly, Dujarric said yes.

   Inner City Press then asked Dujarric which other countries, beyond his native France:

“based on your answer at today's noon briefing, please state which countries during this UNGA have used the UN Press Briefing Room for briefing not open to all UN correspondents, other than France at 11 am on September 23. Also, what was your role on September 23 around 11 am in the room behind the Press Briefing Room podium?”

 This has been Dujarric's response:

Subject: please state which countries..
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:06 PM
To: Inner City Press
Cc: funca

I don't have the information on the first point for you. On the second, I'm not sure that I understand it except that I was just looking into the room. I tend to be a curious person.

Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
United Nations Headquarters

   FUNCA is left wondering: ARE there any other countries? The question has been asked again by FUNCA, elsewhere. And it has been on HuffPost Live, here. Watch this site.

Footnote: the old UN Correspondents Association, which is given privileged status and set-aside first questions nearly always used for softballs, has done nothing to improve or even defend press access. In fact, members of UNCA's Executive Committee have tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, and there have been no reforms since. It's become the UN's Censorship Alliance. They provide Ban Ki-moon with photo ops playing soccer with them. This is today's UN - andFUNCA is fighting to hold the UN to its stated principles.

   

On Syria, After Murky Photo-Op With Ban Ki-moon, Hadi Al Bahra Wants Air Support

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- A week after the rebels of the "Syrian Opposition Coalition" were presented by some counties as the new or "only legitimate" government of Syria, they have called for "air support." Hadi al Bahra, who had a meeting with on September 27 UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon which was publicized while banning the independent press, to Al Hayat:

"criticizes the failure to give sufficient support for the Free Syrian Army in its battle against ISIS and the Assad regime, calling on the international coalition to 'provide air cover for the FSA in the areas what will be wrestled from ISIS to protect them from the attacks of Assad’s air force and to help the FSA fill the void after driving ISIS out of northern Syria.'

"In an exclusive interview with Al Hayat newspaper, Bahra said that that 'the elimination of terrorism and extremism cannot be achieved through military operations alone, but through an integrated social and political process and through addressing the root cause of terrorism, namely the dictatorial Assad regime.'

"Commenting on the visit of the Syrian Coalition’s delegation to New York, Bahra said that 'we have received clear promises from the American administration that it would cooperate with the political and military leadership of the Syrian Revolution, a stance is also shared by countries such as France, Britain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. All these countries share with us the same vision that the anti-ISIS campaign will not yield tangible results unless there are integrated political and social programs and full coordination with the Syrian opposition. The Russians will surely change their position towards the situation in Syria when the balance of forces is changed on the ground. Russia has specific interests in the region, so do the Russians support Assad out of love for it, or that because the Assad regime serve their interests as long as it holds to power. Therefore, when the balance of power is tipped the military and political burdens will outweigh the benefits of preserving the Assad regime and consequently its position will change.'" (Source: Syrian Coalition)

  On September 29, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric why the independent press was banned, and who attended along with Hadi al Bahra.

  Dujarric said to ask the Syrian Opposition Coalition -- that is, no transparency from the UN -- and said that when Ban met non-governmental parties like Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, only UN Photo was present. He said he was not equating the two.

 Inner City Press asked Dujarric if Ban met any other rebels during this General Debate, since there are many rebel groups in the world.

  Dujarric said the Syrian rebels were the only ones Ban met with. We'll have more on this. 

  It was Saturday afternoon in a mostly empty UN when this photo-op was added to Ban's schedule, in his 38th floor office:

"05:20 pm    38th Floor    Photo Opportunity:  The Secretary-General with H.E. Mr. Hadi al-Bahra and other Members of the National Coalition of Syria Revolution and Opposition Forces
(UNTV/PHOTO,  INTERNATIONAL MEDIA, WEBCAST)"

  But when Inner City Press went the requisite 30 minutes in advance in order to cover the photo-op, it was told that only the UN's in-house photo service could attend to create this propaganda photo.

  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, which pushes for media freedom, asked al-Bahra and the Syrian Coalition why it was closed. They tweeted back:

@innercitypress - We asked. But told by @UN_Spokesperson that option of opening to media only available to "member states". 

   But, as Inner City Press immediate replied -- after finding that the photo op wasn't even on UN EZTV, the 29 channels of the UN's in-house TV network --  Ban held an open photo op on August 18 with Malala, who is not a member states. We'll have more on this.

   All week, Ban has been holding such meetings in his office with heads of state and government. Now, this one rebel group is in. What about other rebel groups? Doesn't this selectivity as least call out for transparency -- having other than in-house media present?

  Ban's UN is lawless -- including dodging service of legal papers for bringing cholera to Haiti.

  After 5 pm on Friday, September 26, the Syrian Coalition Media Office went out by email a speech, entitled "Hadi al Bahra addresses United Nations General Assembly."

 The question, asked by Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access, was where and when was this speech ostensibly given to the UN General Assembly? The rebels are not the government, at least not yet. So what did the e-mail mean?

After approval by the US Congress to arm and train rebels in Syria, and the airstrikes in Syria that began on September 22, Free Syrian Army commanders began complaining the strikes hit only ISIL (and Khorasan).

  The Syrian Opposition Coalition, set to be presented as a government in an event in the UN's Economic and Social Council chamber on September 24, put this out:

"Nasr al-Hariri, Secretary General of the Syrian Coalition, said that the Syrian people will not trust the international efforts to fight ISIS as long as they ignore the voices of millions of Syrians who have been subjected to the terror of the Assad regime and its allies,” during a visit to the FSA battalions in the countryside of Aleppo and Idlib, along with Mohammed Qaddah, Vice President of the Syrian Coalition. 'We regret that the international community has come up with partial solutions to the Syrian conflict in which hundreds of thousands were killed or detained by the Assad regime. The military strikes being carried out by the international coalition against the positions of ISIS and Al Nusra Front will be short of stemming the tide of extremism as long as they are directed against the symptoms of the problem and not its root cause. Moreover, these strikes will only be interpreted as an attempt to reproduce and rehabilitate the Assad regime and will prompt more Syrians to take up arms as long as the Assad regime is spared the military strikes.' 

"Hariri also stress that any solution other than helping the Syrian people topples the Assad regime will only serve to consolidate extremism in Syria and the region. Therefore, the international community must assume its responsibilities and deal with the situation in Syria in a more realistic and responsible way. Hariri stresses that the world is not yet aware that the battle against terrorism cannot be solved only militarily, but must include an organized political process capable of addressing the root causes of extremism. 

"The meager international support for the Syrian national projects, including the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian Coalition, has led to the emergence of other projects that attracted many young people who do not necessarily endorse those projects’ vision. However, we are quite certain that those young people, when provided with the suitable alternative, will be an essential part of the mosaic structure on which the new Syria will be built. 

"The Syrian people cannot accept watching the international coalition’s warplanes avenging the killing of journalist James Foley while failing to do justice to Hamza al-Khatib, Abdul Qader Al Saleh, Ghiath Matar and hundreds of thousands of Syrians. Furthermore, terrorism cannot be fought piecemeal, but its root causes must be addressed to save Syria and the whole world from the threats imposed by the extremist groups.” It is worth mentioning that many FSA commanders expressed their willingness to cooperate in order to further institutionalize the FSA and prepare it to effectively lead the struggle against the Assad regime and ISIS."

  On September 23, the UN's new (third) Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura was supposed to take questions from the press at 4:50 pm on September 23. But he did not appear. After a time the UN said he was lost: he had gone to the wrong stakeout, but Spokesman Stephane Dujarric was looking for him.

   Finally after 6 pm de Mistura and Dujarric arrived. But de Mistura declined to comment on the airstrikes on Syria, deferring to Ban Ki-moon. Dujarric chose six questioners, three of whom were from Italian media. Dujarric called out "ANSA;" de Mistura said, "bongiorno" This is what the UN and this post have become: de Mistura is half-Italian, with little chance of success or even relevance it becomes a "local boy makes good" story.

  (Certainly, de Mistura may see it differently: Inner City Press has heard from a range of UN sources that de Mistura feels he could and should be Secretary General.)

  Normally Inner City Press would not comment on the nationality of the questioners selected. But earlier on September 23, Dujarric who is French was involved in aproblematic French-only use of the UN Press Briefing Room by President Hollande. 

  Dujarric peeked out of the door while Inner City Press was being told to leave the UN Press Briefing Room, partial video here; the Free UN Coalition for Accessunderstands that Media Accreditation was told to back off from the French event by the Spokesman's Office. So. Noon briefings where this could be asked have been canceled; written questions have not been answered. This too is today's UN.

  On September 22 after a day of UN formalities, and with John Kerry with the Syrian Opposition Coalition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the US started bombing in Syria, see below. It cited help from five Arab Kingdoms in hitting ISIL by Raqqa, but went it alone against the Khorosan group near Aleppo.

  On September 23 when UK Development Secretary Justine Greening spoke about aid to Syria, Inner City Press asked her if these airstrikes were coordinated in any way with humanitarians on the ground, amid reports one was close to a hospital.

  Greening declined to get into the specifics, saying the UK was not part of the airstrike but supported them. She said that the spread of ISIL had hurt humanitarian efforts, which is certain. 

  Greening said, "I won't get into the details, the UK was not part of the airstrikes. The advance of ISIL placed pressure on the ability of humanitarian workers." 

   But why not coordinate with aid workers on the ground?  And what about this Khorosan group, until now mentioned only once in a White House briefing?

  On a background White House press call, a Senior Administration Official said that the US long told Russia that its support for Assad would lead to the rise of extremism. Unsaid was Russia's position that US allies' support of fighters in Syria led to extremism. 

  Tellingly, Ban Ki-moon has yet to speak about the air strikes. Inner City Press asked his spokesman for a comment on the night of September 22, and saw this spokesman on September 23. But no answer.

  Inner City Press has put these questions to Dujarric:

Press questions on deadline: what is Ban Ki-moon's response to US on the record (and reportedly Saudi Arabia, Jordan and UAE) bombing in Syria without consent of Syrian government, or approval of the UN Security Council? Separately, was Ban Ki-moon informed in advance?

  Hours later, no response from the UN.

   Back on  September 19 while the UN Security Council's meeting on Iraq went on, Canada's Foreign Minister John Baird came out to take questions at the Council stakeout.

  Inner City Press asked him if Canada thinks that for airstrikes in Syria against ISIL, the consent of the Assad government or of the Security Council should be sought.

  Baird said that on "intervention in Syria there are two views. One could say that every country has a right to defend itself. Iraq is being attack by terrorists in the neighboring country. We take great issue with Assad... That has yet to be determined."

  The Syrian Opposition Coalition, it emerges, will hold a press conference inside the UN building on September 22. But it will not be a UN press conference - instead, it will be in the clubhouse the UN gives to what has become itsUN Censorship Alliance (having tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN), publicized only to those who pay money to UNCA in dues.

  Why not go through the front door, and have a member state like Canada sponsor the Syrian Coalition's Hadi Al Bahra in the UN Press Briefing Room, as others do? We'll have more on this.

  On September 18, the day after the US House of Representatives voted to arm and train "moderate" rebels in Syria, the Syrian Opposition Coalition said training 5,000 will not be enough. An hour later, they put out a statement about ISIL stranding 7,000 civilians on the Syrian - Turkish border:

"As the 'Islamic State' intensifies shelling on Ayn al Arab (Kobanê in Kurdish) in northern Syria, thousands of people remain trapped in the towns and villages in the area. As as a result, activists reported a mass exodus of civilians from the neighboring villages of Kaalak, Zark Qumshi, Zalkhek, and Turaman. The Syrian Coalition condemns ISIS's brutal tactics and calls on Turkish authorities to open borders in the area and provide refuge to those fleeing from the barbaric group. More than 7000 civilians are reported to be stranded along the Turkish Syrian borders since Thursday, most of them women and children."

 Echoes of Mount Sinjar in Iraq - and that led to airstrikes. Earlier on September 18, the Syrian Coalition put this out:

"Abdelahad Astepho, member of the political committee, said that the US Congress’s vote in favor of President Obama’s plan to train and equip the Free Syrian Army is 'a step in the right direction though it was made late. Limiting the training and equipment program to 5,000 FSA fighters is not enough to counter the threat of the Assad regime and ISIS. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the number of trainees to solve the whole problem of terrorism once and for all. Moreover, limiting the program to this small number may prolong the bloody conflict, thus prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people.' Astepho calls on the US Senate 'to back the training and equipment program and for its immediate implementation, as any delay will cost Syrians more lives. Any delay in the implementation of this plan will lead to further expansion of the terror practiced by the Assad regime and the terrorist group ISIS.'"

 This after on the Senate floor just who these "moderate" rebels are was still being questioned. If 5000 is not enough, how many would be? To the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on September 17, former Ambassador Bob Ford said there are 80,000 "non-Nusra, non-ISIL" rebels. Where do these figures come front?

   Back on September 13, hours after US President Barack Obama's speech, the Syrian Coalition put out a press release requesting airstrikes and cash from Congress, pronto.

While more than two dozen countries pledged support for Iraq against the Islamic State in the Security Council on September 19, who would speak on UNTV about it?

  For more than an hour the media was told that French foreign minister Laurent Fabius would be “coming to the stakeout” to take questions on UNTV. It was pushed back, then when finally Fabius emerged he rushed past the stakeout into the hallway, where he spoke only in French.
 
 Update: to be fair, the French Mission put out this transcript.

  So too with Turkey's foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. When he emerged from the Security Council, hesummoned Turkish media down the hallway for a private stakeout. Some non-Turkish journalists weren't allowed to go, something protested by the Free UN Coalition for Access. But why not openly take questions?

  The three on-camera stakeouts that occurred were bySyria's Bashar Ja'afari, Iraq's Foreign Minister Jaafari (no relation, if that needs to be said), and Canada's John Baird. To the last of these, Inner City Press asked if before any bombing in Syria consent should be sought from Damascus or the Council. That has “yet to be determined,” Baird replied.

  Iraqi FM Jaafari, when Inner City Press asked if the Coalition should speak with Syria, seemed to dodge the question. But at least he took questions on camera, as did Syria's Ja'afari. Where were the others? Is this how GA Week will be? FUNCA in is on the case, including aboutfaux UN press conferences like those held in the private club handed out by the UN to its Censorship Alliance. That group tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, now masquerades on media freedom. This is how the UN works. Watch this site.

   

UN To Spread Moroccan Law Banning Preachers Not Gov-Trained, US Cheers, Morocco Response to Inner City Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- Morocco was celebrated in the September 30 session of UN Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee, at which the United States spoke, and positively. Inner City Press asked a question, which has now been answered.

 But is the UN promoting laws that violate the US Constitution?

Here's what the UN itself published on September 30:

“Morocco has developed a strategy to prevent the abuse of religion to justify and incite terrorist violence and is now sharing it with the world. An institute has been established in the Kingdom where religious teachers undergo mandatory training before they start preaching in public. Jean-Paul Laborde, Executive Director of the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) and Assistant Secretary-General hailed the dissemination of these teachings also called the 'Moroccan Experience.'”

  Inner City Press went to the UN Security Council stakeout and asked Morocco's speaker, and a person beside him who seemed to be an interpreter, if this doesn't violate the US Constitution's freedom of religion clause -- how can exercise of religion be so controlled by a government? How could the UN be propagating this model, with the US cheering it on?

  The Moroccan minister gave a long answer in Arabic, which was then not translated. Inner City Press has submitted to the Moroccan Mission to the UN this question, in English: is it 

“true that in Morocco a person cannot preach before mandatory training before they start preaching in public, and if so, how this relates to provisions like those in the US Constitution saying that the free exercise of religion cannot be controlled or impacted by government? Also, whether new laws against foreign fighters, traveling for terrorism, can be abused given the terrorism is not defined and some countries may use their laws against dissidents and political opponents?”

  And the answer, as subsequently provided by the Moroccan Mission, translated from what Morocco's minister said:

“Fundamentally, Islam does not believe in compulsion in religion, nor in forcing any one to believe in the religion, and guarantees to all people their freedom of religion.

“The historical circumstances criss-crossed by these countries in dealing with a lot of developments, in dealing with contemporary life and with the human rights system in general, make them progress towards further harmonization of laws with their requisites, and with life conditions and culture.

“Morocco cannot discuss freedom of religion because this question is deeply rooted in the Islamic religion. However, and as it is also stipulated in the United Nations laws,there are some elements that should adapt to the culture of each country.”

   As to how the US could support the UN's propagation and promotion of a law that is entirely counter to the US Constitution, that remains to be answered. Watch this site.

   

At UN After Herve Ladsous Blocks Press Filming at Stakeout, Return of the UN Censorship Alliance: UNCA, Reuters, UN Spokesman

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 30, video here -- When UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous arrived at the General Assembly stakeout on September 27 to try to do his question and answer on Mali early as he did on South Sudan, without the Press present, it didn't work.Video here. He blocked Inner City Press' camera with a file folder then walked away, canceling the public stakeout and summoning friendly media including Reuters with him. 

  On September 30 Reuters' bureau chief continued on with Ladsous despite or because of the censorship issues raised. So too the head of UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance, even while the Free UN Coalition for Access publicly raised the range of issues on which press access is in decline, here. 

  Back on September 29, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it, if the UN of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon thinks it appropriate for an Under Secretary General to engage in censorship. Dujarric said he hadn't seen the video. It's here, and the Q&A with Dujarric is here. UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I had a couple DKPO questions. But this one is more fundamental. I wanted to know what the position of UN is on an Under-Secretary-General basically blocking a camera that’s filming from an entirely legal stakeout position which seems to be within the definition of kinda censorship. Why didn’t Mr. Ladsous in fact hold the stakeout on Mali on Saturday?

Spokesman Dujarric: I can look into it. I think there was a couple of scheduling issues. I can look into it.

Inner City Press: On tape he came up and put a file folder in front of a camera to stop it from filming.

Spokesman Duujarric: I’ll look into it. I’m not aware of the incident.

   Dujarric said there were "a couple of scheduling issues." But at least two wire services reported Ladsous' privatized spin without noting the censorship that took place right in front of them. If they censor this, what else is missing in their reports?

  On September 30, Inner City Press asked Dujarric again, on Sri Lanka and Ladsous:

Inner City Press: I have two press freedom questions. In Sri Lanka, there has been a meeting of journalists to meet about digital security and the meeting was broken up, as it has been before, by the Government. And people say that the Government believes that this attempt to encrypt journalist meetings is in some way related to the UN Human Rights Council probe. So, who is on the ground there to respond? What is the UN's response to the Government breaking up meetings of journalists in this way?

Spokesman Dujarric: There is a UN country team. I have not seen anything from them; but, obviously, the Secretary-General's position on the need to preserve and guard press freedom has been often stated

Inner City Press / FUNCA: And this is one, and I actually asked it yesterday, so maybe you will have something on it. It's a little less… but since it happened in the building, I will ask you about it, the holding up by an Under-Secretary-General of a file folder to block the filming from a totally legitimate stakeout position, what is the UN's position on that?

Spokesman Dujarric: I think your linking of the two incidents may be a bit of a stretch. My understanding is that he was not blocking the UNTV stakeout, the UNTV stakeout camp.

Inner City Press: That is not what I asked. I'm saying if a correspondent is filming from the stakeout, can an Under-Secretary-General walk over and cover the camera with a file folder?

Spokesman Dujarric: I hear you. I have nothing to add.

  While Dujarric may be fine with Ladsous blocking a Press camera, it is censorship. Not only the Reuters' bureau chief, himself a censor (here) but the head of the UN Correspondents Association on September 30 cavorted with Ladsous. This is how it became the UN's Censorship Alliance, and why the UN continues to decay. The Free UN Coalition for Access is opposing these insider games: watch the FUNCA site, andfeed.

  In English Ladsous spun, "UN peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous told reporters later on Saturday that with the presence of French forces greatly reduced in the region, UN peacekeeping forces have to take a more dynamic stance and go in search of the attackers. 'We can't be sitting ducks,' he said."

  In French Ladsous spun, "'Je crois que c'est incontestable: les terroristes et les jihadistes, et sans doute aussi les trafiquants, ont repris du poil de la bête,' dans le nord du Mali, a déclaré Hervé Ladsous à des journalistes, jugeant 'intolérables' les attaques perpétrées contre les Casques bleus."

  Why couldn't he say this at the UNTV stakeout and take questions? What does it say about those who went to Ladsous' privatized spin-zone, which he began here, with Reuters, Voice of America and AFP? Old video here.

   As Ladsous stood at the stakeout, Inner City Press filmed as it did on September 26 when Ladsous refused to answer basic Press questions about his missions in Central African Republic and Golan. 

  Ladsous demanded, What are you going to do with this? He and a staffer tried to block the filming with file folders. Then he got UN Media Accreditation to ask Inner City Press to put down the camera and stop filming. But this is the stakeout. The Free UN Coalition for Accessdefends the rights to cover the UN. (The old UN Correspondents Association has partnered with Ladsous, first along with Agence France Presse and then further.)

   Ladsous and one of his "publicity" staffers tried to block the filming with file folders. Video here. Finally Ladsous walked away with his team including the Reuters correspondent who has himself engaged in censorship, telling Google to remove from Search his "for the record" complaint to UN Media Accreditation, claiming it is copyrighted. It is a strange position from a media that claims exclusive leaks. 

   After Ladsous stormed off, two of his staffers returned to say that the stakeout still might happen. But at 2:42 pm, an hour and forty-two minutes after it was supposed to happen, the UN said it was canceled - but not why.

   Before UN Peacekeeping held its September 26 meeting about the Central African Republic, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Uganda deciding not to send its troops as peacekeepers to the MINUSCA mission, under Herve Ladsous.

Dujarric said he would try to get an answer, but none was sent six hours later. So when Herve Ladsous, the fourth French chief of UN Peacekeeping in a row, came to the General Assembly stakeout past 6 pm on September 26, Inner City Press several times put the question to him: What about the Ugandans? Video here.

  Ladsous made his opening statement only in French, then ignored the Press question in English about Uganda pulling out of his peacekeeping mission, at the same time that the Philippines is pulling out of Ladsous' mission in the Golan Heights after he ordered their troops to surrender to the Al Nursa Front extremist group, which still has their UN Peacekeeping vehicles, weapons and uniforms.

Instead, Ladsous pointed at Agence France Presse, which previously on Ladsous' behalf filed complaints against Inner City Press, including through UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance. 

  The first time was when Inner City Press reported that Ladsous was by no means the first choice to replace Alain Le Roy atop peacekeeping, but was deposited into the job after the UN decided that the first choice, Jerome Bonnafont, was too flashy. So they got Ladsous.

Ladsous on September 26 proceeded to brag about new countries coming into UN Peacekeeping, singling out Sweden. Inner City Press once again asked, what about Uganda pulling out of the CAR mission, and added, what about the Filipinos pulling out of his mission in the Golan? Video here.

Ladsous as has become his practice - compilation here, UK coverage here - refused to answer and walked away with two of his aides. They looked back over their shoulders as they went up in the elevator.

How can a UN official get (over) paid but answer no critical questions? How can an official under whose watch the Darfur mission has covered up attacks on civilians, and who has ordered at least two countries' peacekeepers to surrender to terrorists, keep his job? 

  The questioning is spreading and one would think would come to a head in the upcoming review of peacekeeping, which Inner City Press has heard and reported will be headed by Louise Arbour. The new Free UN Coalition for Access asserts that UN Under Secretaries General should answer media questions, and there should be accounability. We'll see.