On Sri Lanka, Inner City Press Asks UN of Electoral Violence After Ban Ki-moon Called GL Peiris on December 24

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 5 -- Amid attacks on opponents of Mahinda Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka in the run-up to elections, Inner City Press on January 5 asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the violence, and why his office delayed the read-out of Ban's December 24 call to minister GL Peiris until December 29. Video here.

   The delay was not explained; Dujarric said that recent events, including today (January 5) make Ban's call for reconciliation and political dialogue all the more important. Something wrong with this sequence: Ban makes a call, violence increases; his Office says his call if more important than ever.

   On December 23 after Rajapaksa reiterated that he will not cooperate with the UN inquiry in to human rights and war crimes, Inner City Press asked Dujarric about that. Video here.

 On December 29, Dujarric's office put out this read-out of Ban's calls to  Peiris on December 24 -- that is, the read out came five days after the call:

"The Secretary-General spoke on the phone with H.E. Mr. GL Peiris, Minister of External Affairs of Sri Lanka, on 24 December. The Secretary-General conveyed his strong expectation that the Government of Sri Lanka will ensure the peaceful and credible conduct of the Presidential Election on 8 January 2015. The Secretary-General also noted the importance of inclusive participation of all Sri Lankan voters, including from minority communities, in the election process without any fear. He reaffirmed the UN’s continuous support for reconciliation, political dialogue and accountability in Sri Lanka. "

  We'll see.  Meanwhile the UN's website for the inquiry says, "The call for submission is now ended. No further submission will be accepted." Is this really Ban's "Rights Up Front"?

When the UN's Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide Adama Dieng took questions on December 9, Inner City Press asked him if he considered what happened in Sri Lanka in 2009 (and before and after) to be genocide, and of the work of and reaction to the UN panel, see below.

  Dieng said what happened in 2009 was a failure of the international community, with the killing of thousands "under our eyes." Video here, and embedded below.

  Dieng cited the UN's Petrie report, and then Ban Ki-moon (who'd gone on a Rajapaksa sponsored victory tour of northern Sri Lanka in mid 2009) later establishing a "Rights Up Front" program.

  (As Inner City Press points out, Ban has tellingly disconnected Rights Up Front from its roots of failure in Sri Lanka.)

  As the belated investigation of war crimes in Sri Lanka mandated by the UN Human Rights Council proceeds, new evidence concerning the "white flag killings" of surrendering Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam leaders has emerged.

  A statement has been published in media censored by the Sri Lankan government that Shavendra Silva, Sri Lanka's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, was ordered by Defense Secretary and presidential brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa "not to accommodate any LTTE leaders attempting to surrender and informed that they all should be killed." Full text below.

 Killing those who are surrendering is a war crime. The LTTE leaders were lured out, to their deaths, by assurances delivered through the UN from Sri Lankan officials including its Permanent Representative to the UN Palitha Kohona.

  Inner City Press has doggedly pursued the ramification of these White Flag killings and the wider Bloodbath on the Beach (initially here, in Johns Hopkins' SAIS Review of International Affairs); below is a response to Inner City Press from Shavendra Silva. Tellingly, there has been censorship inside the UN itself.

  Palitha Kohona and Shavendra Silva appeared on a three person "UN" panel with Giampaolo Pioli, past and future president of the United Nations Correspondents Association, to screen a film denying war crimes called "Lies Agreed To." Photo below.

  As Inner City Press reported, Pioli had a previous financial relationship with Kohona, having rented him one of his Manhattan apartments; for using the UN Correspondents Association to screen the Sri Lanka government war crimes denial inside the UN, Pioli did not seek prior approval of other UNCA Executive Committee members.

  Inner City Press reported these facts, after pro-government media in Sri Lanka portrayed the screening inside the UN as a victory or even absolution. Immediately after that, Pioli convened a series of "emergency" UNCA  Executive Committee meetings. Links to audio are below; here's a sample story from The Guardian in the UK.

  First, Pioli demanded that the article be removed from the Internet (he rejected the offer to submit a written response of the type Shavendra Silva submitted).

  After Inner City Press refused to remove the entire article from the Internet, Pioli said he would get Inner City Press thrown out. Issues about the French mission to the UN were raised. Pioli's First Vice President from Reuters filed a complaint with the UN's Media Accreditation and Liaison unit, copied to Pioli (the Reuters bureau chief subsequently filed a sworn statement with Google to get this blocked from Search, claiming it was a private and even copyrighted communication, here.) 

  But Voice of America, which filed a formal request to the UN to "review" Inner City Press' accreditation, is subject to the US Freedom of Information Act. After Pioli tried to get Inner City Press to withdraw the FOIA request it filed, Inner City Press obtain documents, many heavily redacted and some not yet reported, showing how the campaign to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN worked, including UNCA talking "quietly" with UN officials to bring it about.

  We'll have more on all this. But how can it be, as the belated investigation of Sri Lanka war crimes goes forward, that not only is Shavendra Silva still a Deputy Permanent Representative in the UN (Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told Inner City Press that Silva being one of his advisers of Peacekeeping Operations was simply up to member states), but that this censor, Pioli, is slated in a classic no-competition "election" to come to head the UN Correspondents Association at least for 2015?

  This is a new low at the UN. The new Free UN Coalition for Access, which seeks to hold the UN to its stated principles including defending the right to free press and investigative journalism in the UN, will now pursuing these issues. 

Shavendra Silva, Giampaolo Pioli & Kohona in UN, UNCA banner, decay

Here is the new statement, as published, followed by Silva's previous response, and background including audio clips

Date: 5/17/2009   Time: 11.45 am – 12.30pm

Place: Wellamulliwikkal, MLT Sri Lanka (58 Division Operations room)

When the instructions from Mr.Gotayabhaya Rajapaksha the Secretary Defence of Sri Lanka to the 58 Division Commander Brigadier Shavendra Silva (Now Major General) was passed down over the telephone I was with the Brigadier. I was functioning as one of the defence correspondents attached to 58 Division.

The conversation took place is as follows.

Time:11.45am 1st call.

Mr.Gotabayaya Rajapaksha to Brigadier Shavendra Silva

Ordered not to accommodate any LTTE leaders attempting to surrender and informed that they all should be killed.

Time: 12.00 noon. -2 nd call.

Mr.Gotabayaya Rajapaksha to Brigadier Shavendra Silva.

Mr. Rajapaksha confirmed his order to Brigadier Shavendra Silva and informed about the International influence the LTTE is trying to bring upon on the Government at that time.

There after at about 12.15pm the Division Commander Brigadier Shavendra Silva having summoned his Brigade Commanders and Commanding Officers briefed them on what Secretary Defence told him.

However I do not know whether the troops on ground carried out the above instructions or not .

After two days time on the 19th I called the Commander of the Army General Sarath Fonseka and asked whether he is aware about the above instructions given by Mr. Gotabhaya Rajapaksha. He said that he is not aware about such instructions.

If any international commission or any war crime court requests from me to give any evidence regarding this telephone conversation between Mr.Gotabhaya Rajapaksha and Brigidier Shavendra Silva on 17th May 2009 I am prepared to give a statement or an affidavit to them.

Shavendra Silva to Inner City Press:

What I said was, in  the paragraph (90 of the POE page 25), never talks about the 58 Div shelling PTK hospital. After you read out loud the first part of the first  line of paragraph 90 where you talked about 55 and 58 Div, where I replied that what is in the paragraph is incorrect as it was the 53 and 58 Divisions who were involved in PTK. and the 55 Div was not there. Thats why I told you at the briefing that the content of the paragraph in the POE is inaccurate. In fact, later after the briefing I told you that they were in Challai when you asked where that Division was.

warm regards,

Ambassador Major General Shavendra Silva WWV RWP RSP USP psc
Deputy Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka
To the United Nations

Background and audio clips:  Press access and answers to questions at the UN generally have been in decline since at least 2011. Now the newFree UN Coalition for Access is combating the trend, which can only be done by naming names and providing specifics, now including audio. And so these clips, in reverse chronological order.

 In this audio clip, two days before formally beginning a process to try to get Inner City Press thrown out, Giampaolo Pioli as President of the United Nations Correspondents Association complains about Inner City Press reporting that he rented out of his Manhattan apartments to "Palitha" [Kohona, Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the UN] in the context of Pioli unilaterally using UNCA to screen a Sri Lanka government war crimes denial movie inside the UN. 

 Two days later, Pioli would convene a UN Correspondents Association Excutive Committee meeting to "examine" Inner City Press and try to throw it out - first of UNCA, then of the UN at a whole. This is the Pioli slated to return, with no competition at all, to head what he made the UN's Censorship Alliance.

 In a previous audio clip, Pioli tried to dictate to Inner City Press how it should have covered Sri Lanka, suggesting it should simply transcribe what "Palitha" (Kohona) and Shavendra Silva said and not report that he, Pioli, had rented out of his Manhattan apartments to Kohona before agreeing to use UNCA to screen the Sri Lankan government's war crimes denial film inside the UN.

  "Why did you have to" report that? Pioli demanded, claiming the rental arrangement was significantly further in the past than it was.

  When Inner City Press refused to remove the article from the Internet, and Pioli refused the offer to publish a letter to the editor, Pioli made good on his threat to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Complaints were filed by Pioli's first vice president from Reuters, who also used the Reuters servers for the campaign.

  Now Pioli has reappeared, slated to re-take over the helm of UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance. Who will serve him last his past first vice president, a position current held by a representative of Turkish media? As to how correspondent Pioli owns so much real estate, there is a Turkish connection on which we will have more. The UN cannot be allow to further decay on press freedom and access. Watch this site.

  In the last audio clip, Pioli as President of the UN Correspondents Association said of this Press story about him, "take it out" -- that is, remove the entire story from the Internet -- because it is false or, he then says, "basically false."

  But Pioli first complained that he still found online (audio) facts of which he admitted "nothing is false" -- that before unilaterally deciding to screen a Sri Lankan government film denying war crimes he had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the UN.

  What was reported wasn't false, but Pioli ordered "take it out" and off the Internet. That is censorship. One question is, why is Pioli now seeking to return as head of UNCA, which he turned into the UN Censorship Alliance?

  The same clip has Pioli's then Vice President, himself a censor, here, deriding Inner City Press as a blogger someone "using" UNCA. In fact, after seeing how it could be used for censorship, Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

   On September 6, 2011 without consulting with other UNCA board members Pioli used the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium and UNCA's now-debased logo to host a war crimes denial film by Sri Lanka's government. Inner City Press reported on the event, here. 

  Numerous "emergency" UNCA meetings followed, including about Inner City Press' coverage of Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping despite his role during the Rwanda genocide of 1994; there was an amateurish statement drafted by Pioli about ethics. 

  Then Pioli, supported by Agence France Presse, said that no dissent, no matter how short, could to appended to the statement. Audio clip here. AFP even said, send it out yourself - seemingly an invitation to write about the issue, which happened and led to threats to oust Inner City Press from the UN, which Voice of America requested saying it had thesupport of AFP and Reuters, which then tried a cover-up, here.

(There was was an even more free press unfriendly "apology" drafted by Pioli, as well as his UNCA stirring up death threats which have been ongoing -- but that's another story.) 

   The day of Pioli's UNCA screening -- without UNCA board approval or even notice -- of Sri Lanka's war crimes denial, attempts at outright censorship began.

  Pioli had a financial relationship with Sri Lanka's ambassador Palitha Kohona, renting Kohona one of Pioli's Manhattan apartments. Inner City Press was told if it persisted in reporting this, Pioli would get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Inner City Press offered to run a response by Pioli, of any length, but the demand was that the article be removed from the Internet in its entirety: pure censorship. This is UNCA's past and seemingly future; watch for the next installment in this series --

Pioli on January 5 went to the UN noon briefing apparently only to try to brand it for the UNCA he's used for censorship; we'll have more on this.

As Chile Takes Over UN Security Council Presidency, Inner City Press Asks of Palestine & Sudan, FUNCA For Q&A Stakeouts

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 5 -- When Chile's Ambassador Cristián Barros Melet held a press conferenceon the January Program of Work of the UN Security Council, when he is President, Inner City Press asked him about a next Palestine resolution, and about rapes and expulsions in Sudan.

   Ambassador Barros replied he has not been informed, formally or informally, as President of any new Palestine resolution, but he's read in the media that it might be next week. (That is what Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has said.)

   On Sudan, Barros called the government's move to expel the two officials, Yvonne Helle of the UN Development Program and UN Resident Coordinator Ali Al-Za'tari, “negative,” and called the situation of addressing it “fluid.”

  On Syria, in his national capacity, Barros called Russia's work on a Syrian - Syrian dialog important.

  On Ukraine, Barros said that Lithuania and UK pressed the item and he expects a meeting in the month.

 Also in the month is a debate on January 19 with Chilean President Bachelet on inclusive development. We'll be there.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access, which as the second question thanked Barros for the briefing and offered hopes for many question and answer stakeouts (Chad in December did more than a dozen), has suggested that naming which Council members press particular agenda items is welcome transparency.

  Barros announced a Council mission to Haiti January 23-25. 

Footnote: Grabbing the first question, returning head of the “UN Correspondents Association” Giampaolo Pioli after having tried to brand even the noon briefing with that UNCA acronym, took the set-aside first question and asked about Haiti -- with no mention of the UN's role in bringing cholera to the Island, much less UN Peacekeeping being filmed shooting at democracy demonstrators. Will his cluster of Italian sites report a word about Haiti? 

  The goal seems only to have been to try to brand. FUNCA says in 2015, UNacceptable - and is ready for the month. Watch this site.

   

In Sudan, Exchange Rate Scam Alleged in UN Staff Dollars to Bank of Khartoum

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive, 4th in a Series

UNITED NATIONS, January 5 – With the UN having belatedly moved to stand up to pressure from the Sudanese government of Omar al Bashir, who has ordered UN officials Yvonne Helle and Ali Al-Za'tari to leave the country, Inner City Press has reported on a way in which the UN transferred the U.S. dollars of UN national staff in Sudan to the Bank of Khartoum.

   Inner City Press has exclusively published a letter from the UN Federal Credit Union claiming the transfer was related to UN sanctions, and an opinion from the US Office of Financial Assets Control which says that is not the case. Inner City Press questions to the UN and its agencies were by then pending for days.

  On December 30, the day it was belatedly received, Inner City Press published a response from the UN and the UN Development Program, below.

  Since then, Inner City Press has obtained a series of e-mails from UN whistleblowers to UNDP about the transfer to the Bank of Khartoum, as well as UNDP's responses.

  On November 28, Sudan whistleblowers wrote to UNDP's hotline that under an arrangement with Bank of Khartoum (BoK) would become the recipient of all UN local staff salaries in US dollars while it would be paying their salaries in local currency using the UN exchange rate around 5.99 SDG. 

 The bank of Khartoum will be benefiting from the difference between the UN exchange rate and The Central Bank of Sudan rate for commercial importers 8.47 SDG (BoK USD selling rate  for businessmen). The net profit per each dollar channeled to Bank of Khartoum is around 2.47 SDG.

  There were additional charges in the whistleblowers' communications to UNDP, including about how Bank of Khartoum was chosen (this is not addressed in the UN's and UNDP's response to Inner City Press, below.)

  UNDP's response to the whistleblowers was to ask for identifying information about the whistleblowers, and then to blandly state that it is not uncommon in areas such as Sudan, to make similar arrangements with Banks to pay the salary of local staff."  

  But what about the obvious exchange rate loss? It is reminiscent of another UN scam Inner City Pressexclusively uncovered, the overpayment of Myanmar by inflated foreign exchange rate in the wake of Cyclone Nargis.

  And what about the losses to UN system staff set forth in their complaint to Al Za'tari, which Inner City Press exclusively published here?

 On December 30, Inner City Press wrote to UN spokespeople again:

"This is a request that Deputy SG Eliasson or someone else from the Secretariat hold a press availability on Sudan's decision to expel Yvonne Helle (which I asked about at the December 24 noon briefing) and Ali Al-Za'tari.. A media availability by the Secretariat, ideally the DSG but another if necessary, later this afternoon is being requested, including on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access. Either way, am awaiting Secretariat response on why UN national staff members' US dollar accounts in UNFCU were transferred to the Bank of Khartoum, and why the UN Secretariat said nothing publicly when the Country Director of UNFPA was expelled from Sudan in April."

  This last question, about the UN's silence on the UNFPA ouster in April, has yet to be answered. But on UNFCU, the UN Office of the Spokesperson sent this, which we publish in full:

"There has been a restriction on the cashing of foreign checks by Sudanese national staff.  At the same time, the Bank of Khartoum has put on hold all foreign check cashing by all staff in  Sudan.
Since this decision was taken in November 2014, UNDP has  been working with UNFCU to find an acceptable solution.

"UNDP would like to further clarify that the issue is unrelated to  the requested departure by the Sudan government of the United  Nations Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordinator, and Resident Representative of the United Nations Development Progamme (UNDP) and the  UNDP  Country Director. UNDP is coordinating with the UN and with the Government of Sudan to address the situation.  UNDP remains strongly committed to the human development, peace and  security of all the citizens of Sudan."

  Again, see UNFCU's letter, here, and OFAC's reply to UN staff, here. We'll have more on this. 

    In the first document Inner City Press exclusively published, here, UNFCU's President and CEO William Predmore told national staff in Sudan that

"We understand the concerns of our members after necessary account restrictions were implosed, and we regret there was not an opportunity to deliver communications more swiftly to the individuals impacted... As you may be aware, UNFCU is subject to U.S. Regulations (including those promulgated by the Office of Foreign Assets Controls (OFAC)). In order to ensure compliance with those regulations, checking account services and debit card services were terminated for local staff.”

   (Many were stranded with AMT cards that didn't work, while their dollars were transferred to the Bank of Khartoum.)

  But contrary to what UNFCU's Predmore told staff in writing, the US OFAC in the second document Inner City Press is exclusively publishing today, here, told UN staff that sanctions law and regulation does NOT require what the UN has done, citing 31 CFR 538.531. Click here to view in PDF.

   Last week Inner City Press exclusively reported on the UN Federal Credit Union abruptly telling UN national staff in Sudan that their accounts were being frozen and the dollars in them transferred to the Bank of Khartoum. Inner City Press has asked the UN, including UNDP, OCHA andUNFPA, to explain this. 

   On December 27 Inner City Press exclusively published a complaint filed with Ali Al-Za'tari about the change,here. Inner City Press notes that the decision to give the UN national staff's dollars to the Bank of Khartoum flies in the face, in fact, of the sanctions.  The complaint to Al-Za'tari states that 

“UNFCU closed checking and savings accounts of national staff without prior notification and consultation and unilaterally transferred all funds of staff members' accounts to local saving accounts to be paid in SDG by Bank of Khartoum... Based on the long years of established provision of the UNFCU service, majority of national staff have made long term financial arrangements taking into account UNFCU deposits facilities which provided solutions to many of their problems such as medical treatments and education to them and their families.”

  Tellingly, Predmore's letter to staff also says that the switch was made pursuant to UNDP's rules. What rules?

  Now the UN Security Council is set to meet on December 30 about Sudan's order to Ali Al-Za'tari and Yvonne Helle to leave; the Council will say they are in support of UN staff. What will they do about UN staff members' dollars having been given to the Sudanese authorities?

  In essence, UNDP and its Resident Coordinator Ali Al-Za'tari gave Khartoum the U.S. dollars of UN national staff, without notice. Even that wasn't enough to keep him in the country. But it is reminiscent of another UN scam Inner City Press exclusively uncovered, the overpayment of Myanmar by inflated foreign exchange rate in the wake of Cyclone Nargis.

  That was covered and credited – will this be? Or does thescam here extend to covering up the complicity of UN officials like not only Herve Ladsous but even, yes, Ali Al-Za'tari, who remained silent when UNFPA's country director was thrown out of Sudan in April, and as Inner City Press asked the UN on December 24, gave in quickly to the ouster of Yvonne Helle? Watch this site.

   

In Palestine, OIC's Madani Cites Visits to "Influential Countries" - New 5 & Nigeria?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 5, more here -- Days after the UN Security Council rejected Palestine's draft resolution, Mahmoud Abbas met in Ramallah with Secretary General Madani of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation, which on January 5 issued this read-out:

"Madani stated that the OIC is endeavouring action by its contact group of foreign ministers. This includes visits to the capitals of influential countries to convey the message and demands of the OIC vis-à-vis the Palestinian cause and Al-Quds. He further pointed out that the mission of this team has become more urgent in light of the recent vote of the UN Security Council on the draft resolution to end the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories."

  So do these "influential countries" which have been visited include the five new members of the Security Council -- New Zealand, Spain, Venezuela, Angola and Malaysia -- as well as, for example, Nigeria? Abbas has indicated that preparations are underway for another vote in the Security Council, now with these five new members.

  Abbas on December 31 signed the Rome State to join the International Criminal Court. Inner City Press had asked Palestine's Permanent Observer Riyad Mansour about just this move back on December 11, here. 

  On January 2 just after the UN accepted Palestine's papers to join the ICC, Inner City Press asked Mansour if the decision has been made to ask for action on Israel at the ICC, and about the CRomnibus appropriations bill provision to cut US funding to the Palestinian Authority if it does so. Video here and embedded below.

  Mansour said Palestine has already asked the ICC Registrar for retroactivity to cover the last Gaza war in 2014, and that he would met with a representative of the ICC Registrar, who happened to be in New York, in an hour's time.

  On the threatened funding cut, which Senator Chuck Schumer issued a press release about, Mansour said it was strange to punish the Palestinians for seeking justice.

  Inner City Press also asked Mansour if Nigeria's absention on the Palestine resolution surprised him. He said to focus on the larger power, and that Nigeria's Explanation of Vote sounded like they had voted Yes. 

 So what happened?

  On the afternoon of December 31, the US State Department's Jeff Rathke, Director of Office of Press Relations, put out this statement:

"We are deeply troubled by today’s Palestinian action regarding the ICC. It is an escalatory step that will not achieve any of the outcomes most Palestinians have long hoped to see for their people. Actions like this are not the answer. Hard as it is, all sides need to find a way to work constructively and cooperatively together to lower tensions, reject violence, and find a path forward.

"Today’s action is entirely counter-productive and does nothing to further the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a sovereign and independent state. It badly damages the atmosphere with the very people with whom they ultimately need to make peace. 

"As we’ve said before, the United States continues to strongly oppose actions – by both parties – that undermine trust and create doubts about their commitment to a negotiated peace. Our position has not changed.  Such actions only push the parties further apart. 

"Every month that goes by without constructive engagement between the parties only increases polarization and allows more space for destabilizing actions.  Our efforts should focus on creating an environment for meaningful talks. 

"While we are under no illusions regarding the difficult road of negotiations, direct negotiations are ultimately the only realistic path for achieving the aspirations of both peoples. All of us would like to see the day when that effort can resume, and can lead to the peace that we all know is the only real, sustainable answer to the underlying causes of this conflict."

  The document is supposed to be filed or deposited with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who is listed as on "annual leave." (Ban's spokespeople have no press briefing scheduled for today.)

  The ICC, of course, is no panacea. Sudan's Omar al Bashir, for example, was been indicted by the ICC for genocide, but still UN officials like Herve Ladsous meet with him without providing explanations. Still, Abbas said he would do something, and now he has.

  The Palestinian resolution which failed on December 30 needed nine "Yes" votes to trigger the expected US veto. It got only eight "Yes" votes, as Nigeria abstained along with the United Kingdom, Lithuania, South Korea and Rwanda.

 Afterward, Palestine's Mansour said, "Why have the efforts of the Arab Group, with the full support of the NAM and the OIC and all other friends worldwide, to legislate this consensus through the Council as a contribution towards bringing an end to this conflict through peaceful, political, diplomatic and non-violent means repeatedly blocked?"

 The NAM is the Non-Aligned Movement and as Inner City Press noted contemporaneous with the vote, both Rwanda and Nigeria are members of NAM (list here) -- but both of them abstained.

  Rwanda's abstention was assumed, including in the Arab Group meeting held earlier on December 30. The abstention of Nigeria, which meant that the United States' "No" vote would not be considered a veto, was something else.

  To the surprise of some, Nigeria and its President Goodluck Jonathan were not listed among the calls of US Secretary of State John Kerry. The State Department's spokesperson Jeff Rathke on December 30 said

"In the last 24 to 48 hours the Secretary has made a number of calls to counterparts.  Let me give you a list of them.  He has spoken with President Kagame of Rwanda; he has spoken on a few occasions with Jordanian Foreign Minister Judeh; he has spoken with the Saudi foreign minister, the Egyptian foreign minister, with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, with the UK foreign secretary, with the EU high representative, Chilean Foreign Minister Munoz, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linkevicius.  The – he has spoken, as I mentioned yesterday, with PA President Abbas.  He has spoken with the Luxembourg foreign minister, with German Foreign Minister Steinmeier, and with French Foreign Minister Fabius. So by my count, that’s 13 different individuals.  Some of them he’s spoken with more than once, so more than 13 calls over the last day or two."

  Despite this, it's said that Kerry called Goodluck Jonathan, and that a State Department spokesperson - Rathke? - said it. Where? We continue to wait.

 It's reported that while Kerry doesn't list a call to Nigeria, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyau did -- for Goodluck, some say.

 Inner City Press after the vote asked Jordan's Ambassador Dina Kawar if the Arab Group intended to put this or another Palestine resolution in front of the new line up of Security Council members entering in two days, with Angola replacing Rwanda and Malaysia replacing South Korea (and New Zealand replacing Australia, which voted no). She said the Arab Group would keep working, but did not say when another resolution will be put forward.

  So what comes next? Below, we cover the issue of the International Criminal Court.

   A source from inside the Arab Group meeting tells Inner City Press that question - the benefit or not of "making" the US veto - was a major topic in the meeting, but the decision was made by the Arab Group to support the Palestinians' strategy and request for a vote, with the above expectation, at this time.

   On December 30 at around 1 pm, Mansour said, “We are happy that the Arab Group on the basis of previous ministerial meetings has considered in a positive and responsible way the request of the Palestinian leadership to put the draft resolution to a vote, possibly this afternoon, if not tomorrow morning, this is related to the readiness of the Secretariat of the Security Council.”

Referring it seems not only to the US but also to the UK, Palestine's Mansour said on Tuesday, “If one party decides for whatever reason that they do not want to go along with this massive support to find a solution to this conflict, to try to save the two-state solution by asking for an end of the Occupation that started in 1967, so that the State of Palestine could enjoy its independence, if a party is not going to go along with this mood, in Europe and in all corners of the globe... it is not for lack of giving time as Arabs, we have been deliberating for almost three and a half months.”

  At 11:30 am on December 30, another meeting about the amended draft began in UN Conference Room 9. UN Television hastily set up a microphone and stakeout (without formally informing the press corps, which the Free UN Coalition for Access is inquiring into). 

  Down in the UN's first basement diplomats from Jordan paced around; the meeting upstairs in the Security Council about Sudan throwing out two more high UN officials was essentially forgotten. 

   Before the Sudan expulsions meeting on December 30 of the Security Council, for now their last of the year, UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant told the press of the Palestine amended draft, “the new text has been circulated but no negotiations have been scheduled and no vote has yet been scheduled, so we wait to see if there will be a vote this year, or next year or not at all.”

   On the contents of the resolution, Lyall Grant said “there are difficulties with the text, particularly the language on time scales and the language of refugees. We would have some difficulties with the text. We don't know when the vote will be held.”

Palestine met with the Arab Group at the UN about the pending draft Security Council resolution on December 29.  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Palestine's Observer Riyad Mansour and Jordan's Permanent Representative Dina Kawar about US opposition. Video here.

  The text of the amended draft is below; six changes include:

New in PP 3 “and to independence in their State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital,”

New PP6 “Recalling also its relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, including resolution 478 (1980) of 20 August 1980, and bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community,”

New PP8: “Recalling the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 9 July 2004 on the legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,”

New phrasing in OP2: “a just resolution of the status of Jerusalem as the capital of the two States which fulfils the legitimate aspirations of both parties and protects freedom of worship;”

adding the 2 words “and prisoners;”

New 10bis. "Reiterates its demand in this regard for the complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem."

   Less than an hour before the Arab Group meeting ended, at the US State Department briefing in Washington, the Department's spokesperson said the US opposes the draft, and others oppose the draft as well, in part because it “fails to account for Israel's legitimate security needs.” 

Update from US transcript: 

MR. JEFF RATHKE:  "We’ve seen reports regarding Palestinian and Jordanian plans to bring their text to a vote at the Security Council.  There are discussions still taking place in New York and we are – and with the Secretary, who has spoken with some of his counterparts, and we are therefore engaging with all the relevant stakeholders.  As we’ve said before, this draft resolution is not something that we would support and other countries share the same concerns that we have."

  Inner City Press asked, and Mansour replied, “There was a telephone conversation between President Mahmoud Abbas and Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday and I'm sure they discussed all the issues.”

   Dina Kawar said the amendments concern “the issue of Jerusalem, and others concern prisoners, water, settlements.” She said, “the Arab Group supports, they have now the copy of the new amendments, we are going to submit today to the Secretariat.”

  On timing she said, “If I tell you this week and it happens next week you're going to come back and ask" why.

Dina Kawar and Riyad Mansour on Dec 28, 2104, (c) M.R. Lee

 Mansour said on the timing of a vote, “realistically it could be tomorrow or the day after.”

Watch this site.