Sunday, February 27, 2011
With UN Panel Blocked from Sri Lanka, Ban Says “There Was An Agreement"
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 8 -- On Sri Lanka, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday insisted to Inner City Press that “there was an agreement” and that his “Panel will visit Sri Lanka.”
But not only have seven weeks gone by since Ban praised President Mahinda Rajapaksa for his “flexibility” and announced his Panel on Accountability would go -- since then, a range of UN officials have acknowledged that Sri Lanka has now refused to let the UN Panel go and speak with Rajapaksa's Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Commission.
Inner City Press has it from both sides that the UN is now offering a mere video conference call or even answers to written questions.
So much for the agreement.
Left unanswered, still, is with whom the stated agreement was.
From the UN's transcript of Q&A with Mr. Ban on Tuesday:
Inner City Press: Sri Lanka – I need to ask you this. In both of your two last monthly press conferences, you said that your Panel was going to travel to the country, you praised President Rajapaksa’s flexibility. It now appears, and I’ve now heard from people on both sides that the Panel is probably not going to go, that they’ve offered a video conference. I just wondered what happened. Who did you speak with before you said that they could go and how do you read this now, with their failure to go, as the deadline approaches?
SG Ban: I can tell you that there was an agreement and that my Panel will visit Sri Lanka and they are still discussing about the format and their role in Sri Lanka. And whenever it is decided, I will let you know.
{Inner City Press: If they don't go, their work is not finished?}
SG Ban: I didn’t say that they [wouldn’t] go.
{Inner City Press: They will go?}
SG Ban: They will try to go anyway.
Watch this site.
On Thai - Cambodia, UN Moves for Monday Council Meeting, With ASEAN
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 8 -- A day after the UN Security Council did not act on Cambodia's request for a Council meeting, late Tuesday agreement emerged to hold the requested meeting on Monday, February 14.
To make clear that the UN is deferring to the regional group ASEAN, its mediator between Thailand and Cambodia Marty Natalegawa will be invited to come and speak.
Meanwhile Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told the Press on Tuesday that he had spoken with the prime ministers of Thailand and Cambodia. Some wonder why Ban isn't mediating, or even asked to mediate, under UN Charter Article 99.
Natalegawa was previously Indonesia's Permanent Representative to the UN, and some now mentioned him for higher, even the highest, UN position.
EU's Ashton, Who Cut Sri Lanka's GSP Plus, Says Rajapaksa Blocks Inquiries, While Ban Praises His "Flexibility"
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 8 -- While UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon praises Sri Lanka president Mahinda Rajapaksa's “flexibility,” even as Ban's Panel on Accountability is blocked from traveling to Colombo, the EU's Catherine Ashton on Tuesday was more direct when Inner City Press asked her Tuesday about the removal of GSP Plus tariff benefits for the country.
“It's me that did the GSP Plus removal from Sri Lanka,” she said. “It's important if you have a program that says, this is conditionality, if you don't do it or you do something in breach of it that there are consequences. I stand by that completely. We did our own independent look into what had been going on. I'd like to see Sri Lanka make progress.”
Inner City Press asked her about the UN's position, saying (before being cut off by her spokesman) that “the government is not going to allow.”
Ashton said that “the government usually doesn't allow things like that. The President took the power to prevent independent inquiry, wouldn't allow someone in to do the inquiry into GSP Plus, which meant that it was much more complicated. So the words 'the government doesn't allow' are not unusual.”
Meanwhile Ban Ki-moon cites a 2005 visit while he was South Korean foreign minister as somehow pushing for accountability, and praises Rajapaksa's “flexibility.” Seven weeks later, with the UN now offering Sri Lanka a mere video conference call, will Ban explain his statements? Watch this site.
Inner City Press also asked Ashton about Myanmar. She said she and ASSK are exchanging letters, and that she hopes the EU will be able to send someone to visit her soon, as well as others in the opposition. We'll see.
As UN Says It Will Return $180 M in Peacekeeping Leftovers, It Has Yet to Account for $100 M Security “Earmark” from US
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 8 -- The day before the US House of Representatives is slated to consider a proposal to get back from the UN funds left over from closed peacekeeping missions and some $179 million from the UN's US Tax Equalization Fund, the UN belatedly told Inner City Press that “we intend to return $180,745,000 of the cash balances of closed peacekeeping missions that had been owed to Member States as of 30 June 2010.”
On the Tax Equalization Fund, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky at the noon briefing on Tuesday, following the UN declining to answer Inner City Press' written questions:
After asking Friday and today at the noon briefing (and in emails in between) for a basic accounting or even estimate of the Tax Equalization Fund and money left over from closed peacekeeping missions and yet receiving no information or estimate by close of business today, I have the following additional questions, prior to Tuesday's noon briefing and action in the House:
Esther Brimmer, assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs, told CQ that “the $179 million in overpayments are in the form of credits, not cash, and thus cannot be refunded per se. Moreover, Brimmer said, much of that sum – up to $100 million – already has been repurposed to help enhance security at the U.N. complex in New York City.”
How was the referenced money “repurposed”? Did the US Mission or State Department indicate how it could be repurposed? How? What other countries have allowed extra budgetary money to be similarly repurposed and how much?
Do the UN Secretariat agree with the State Dept that it is not possible to refund monies to the US from the Tax Equalization Fund?
How was the $100 million referenced in Esther Brimmer's quotes spent?
Is it possible for funds to be reimbursed to the US from the UN from the closed peacekeeping accounts?
When asked in person on Tuesday, Nesirky insisted that Inner City Press should “ask the State Department.” Inner City Press, fine it would ask -- and has asked -- the US how it conveyed its okay to the UN -- but how was the “nearly $100 million” spent?
Nesirky did not answer, but said that further information should be available later today. Watch this site.
On Tuesday morning, Inner City Press asked the spokespeople for the US Mission to the UN about Esther Brimmer's quote that “up to $100 million... already has been repurposed to help enhance security at the U.N. complex,” and about the US position on suspending International Criminal Court prosecution against Sudan's Omar al Bashir, and about an American national arrested in the Congo on gold smuggling charges, asking that the financial question be answered before noon.
By press time the answers had been received, but they will be reported here when they are. For now, here is the UN's response to Inner City Press on the peacekeeping “left over” funds, sent along with another answer just before the day's noon briefing:
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply
Date: Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Subject: Your question on peacekeeping funds
To: Inner City Press
The United Nations is returning the money owed to Member States from closed peacekeeping missions. To that end, we intend to return $180,745,000 of the cash balances of closed peacekeeping missions that had been owed to Member States as of 30 June 2010. That action is subject to a decision of the General Assembly (in the context of its consideration of the Secretary-General's report A/65/556).
On Thai - Cambodia, UNSC Defers to ASEAN's Natalegawa, UN Replacement?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 8 -- Despite a request from Cambodia's prime minister Hun Sen for a UN Security Council meeting on the fighting with Thailand, the Council on Monday did not schedule a meeting, deferring instead to the mediation of Indonesia's foreign minister Marty Natalegawa, for ASEAN.
Inner City Press, which reported before the Council's consultations on the matter that two countries wanted to hold a meeting, is now told that in the consultations, Russia spoke in favor of having a meeting, saying this is what the Council is for.
As Russian Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin left the Council on Monday, Inner City Press asked him about the Council having a meeting on Cambodia's request. We are not against it, he replied.
Inner City Press then asked the Council's president Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti if Hun Sen's public request that the UN establish a buffer zone around the Preah Vihear temple.
No, she answered, that request had not been made to the Council. Meanwhile, Thailand's prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has said he will call UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday.
Natalegawa was previously Indonesia's permanent representative to the UN, and knows the system well. His successor on January 31 told Inner City Press that ASEAN led by Indonesia is trying to get Western sanctions on Myanmar lifted, while getting Myanmar to agree to an ASEAN envoy to that country.
Some expect Natalegawa to be able to keep the Thai - Cambodia issue off of the Council's formal agenda, by the withdrawal of Cambodia's request just as a similar request was withdrawn in 2008, when Viet Nam was president of the Council. But for now the fighting has continued.
A buzz at the UN this week concerns the open dissatisfaction with Ban by several countries, including veto-wielding Security Council member Russia. If Ban were denied a second term, as the US denied one to Boutros-Boutros Ghali, the next five or ten years would be seen as belonging to the Asia group, just as Kofi Annan replaced Boutros for the African group.
What higher profile and more adept replacement could there be from the Asia group, some say, than Natalegawa? Watch this site.
As UN Won't Account for US Tax Fund, $100 M Earmark for Security Questioned
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 7 -- As in Washington the House of Representatives prepares to vote on a proposal to have the UN return hundreds of millions of dollars to the US, in New York the UN is refusing to answer simple questions about how much money is at issue.
Meanwhile it has emerged that for fully $100 million of the so-called Tax Equalization fund, the US Mission or US State Department told the UN to use it for security. To some it is unclear if this donation -- or “ultimate earmark,” as we are calling it -- was done legally or transparently.
The House bill targets money left over from closed down UN peacekeeping missions, for example in Eritrea and Chad, and the US Tax Equalization Fund. Of this, Esther Brimmer, assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs, told CQ that
The question now arises, how did the US Mission or State Department give the UN the approval to “repurpose... up to $100 million,” even if ostensibly for security of the UN in New York City?
On February 4, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq about the proposal in Congress:
Inner City Press: there is this proposal in the House of Representatives by Eric Cantor [Republican-Virginia] and others to ask for a refund from the UN tax equalization fund and also from closed-down UN peacekeeping operations. I wonder if, I mean this is on — it’s not only on their website, they said they are going to bring it to a vote. Is there some way to know how much is in each fund and also what does the UN think about this open call by the host, in the host country’s parliament, I guess, to have this money returned?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Well, first of all, it is not by the host country’s parliament at this stage. This is something happening within a parliamentary body, if you will. And we don’t comment on processes as they work their way through the legislative system. So we leave it to the legislature of the United States to work out this particular matter.
Inner City Press: Is it possible to know how much money is in each, just objectively, in each pool…?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, I believe my colleagues in the Department of Peacekeeping Operations are looking into that matter.
But three days later not even an estimate has been provided.
On February 7, Inner City Press asked Ban's main spokesman Martin Nesirky:
Inner City Press: There is a discussion in Washington, although admittedly on probably more among one party than another about recouping funds from the UN. And I just wanted to, I understand that that’s something that’s taking place in Washington, but the numbers that they are using, they are saying there is $243 million in funds from closed peacekeeping operations and $180 million in this thing called the tax equalization fund. And I just wonder, is that something… can the UN… I’ve been trying to get this… Can they confirm that those were the numbers? And if they can, if there is some argument of why none of this should be returned, it would be good to hear it, but I just want to make sure if those are the numbers, the numbers being thrown around down there, are in fact the numbers accepted up here?
Spokesperson Nesirky: I think we will be able to give you some numbers a little bit later today.
By close of business six hours later, no numbers had been provided. Inner City Press has submitted more questions, including with regard to Esther Brimmer's quotes:
How was the referenced money “repurposed”? Did the US Mission or State Department indicate how it could be repurposed? How? What other countries have allowed extra budgetary money to be similarly repurposed and how much?
Do the UN Secretariat agree with the State Dept that it is not possible to refund monies to the US from the Tax Equalization Fund?
How was the $100 million referenced in Esther Brimmer's quotes spent?
Is it possible for funds to be reimbursed to the US from the UN from the closed peacekeeping accounts?
Watch this site.
On Sri Lanka War Crimes, UN's Ban at Oxford Listed 2005 Trip for S. Korea, Now His Panel Offers Mere Video Call
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 7 -- “I visited Sri Lanka twice” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said on February 2 at Oxford, answered a question about the UN failing to protect Tamils and failing to pursue accountability for those who ordered them killed.
Inner City Press had covered Ban's May 2009 trip to Sri Lanka, but was unaware of any other trip Ban made to the country since he became UN Secretary General. So for five days Inner City Press has asked Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky for the date of the second trip, without response.
On February 7 at the day's UN press briefing, Inner City Press asked Nesirky if Ban might paradoxically have been referring to a trip he made in 2005, when he did not yet work for the UN but was South Korea's foreign minister.
“I think your analysis is correct,” Nesirky said, “he was referring to a trip he made when he was foreign minister.”
The question still remains, what was accomplished for accountability during that trip? Some in fact tie that 2005 trip, which included a detour to President Mahinda Rajapaksa's Southern hometown of Hambantota where late a Chinese port was built with South Korea involvement, with Rajapaksa convincing Sri Lanka's candidate for Secretary General to withdraw in favor of Ban.
Here is how media reported the 2005 trip at the time:
Lee Hae-chan, Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea will be in Sri Lanka today and tomorrow... The Prime Minister will be accompanied by a high level delegation including Ban Ki-moon, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Kang Dong-suk, Minister of Construction and Transportation and Cho Young-taek, Vice Minister for Public Policy Co-ordination in Prime Minister's Office... The relief supplies will be later distributed by the Korean NGOs operating in Sri Lanka. Together with Prime Minister Rajapakse, Prime Minister Hae-chan will travel along the western coast to have a first-hand view of the destruction to lives, livelihoods and property and will make a stop-over in Hambantota.
How is referring to this trip an answer to this question, asked at Oxford?
Q: The UN has failed to protect and prevent in such countries as Sri Lanka, where over 40,000 innocent civilians were massacred in 2009. Will you ensure, during your term, that those responsible are brought to justice? Will you ensure there is a proper investigation of war crime?
On this last, Ban on February 2 said
I visited Sri Lanka twice and I had very serious talks with the President and Government leaders. After a lengthy, very difficult, almost turbulent course of negotiations, I was able to convince the Sri Lankan Government that a group of experts would be established. Still, it has not yet been able to complete its mission. They are still negotiating with the Sri Lankan Government.
Inner City Press on February 7 asked Ban's spokesman to confirm or deny that the UN is now offering Sri Lanka a mere video conference call or even just written questions, rather than a visit. The discussions continue, Nesirky said, repeating that a visit to Sri Lanka is “not essential.” Nesirky's Deputy Farhan Haq said that a visit to Sri Lanka is “desirable.” So what is a video conference, or written questions? Watch this site.
As Congo Arrests American for Gold Trade, UN's Meece Knows Little, No LRA
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 7 -- Last week in Eastern Congo, four foreigners were arrested for illegal gold trading and exploitation. Two Nigerians, an American and a French national were taken from their plane at the airport in North Kivu capital Goma, province governor Julien Paluku said.
On February 7 Inner City Press asked Roger Meece, the head of the UN Mission in the Congo MONUSCO, about the arrests and MONUSCO's role. He said the Congolese acted on a situation “at best irregular, that's the most charitable description.”
Inner City Press asked him if the US (or France or Nigeria) had communicated with Kinshasa or the UN about their nationals being arrested. “I can't speak for the countries involved,” said Meece, previously the US Ambassador to the Congo. Nor has the US said anything about the arrest, or about the US-registered plane, which flew from Nigeria.
After Inner City Press asked, Meece said that it is possible the Bosco Ntaganda is involved -- the same Ntaganda who has bragged of working with the UN after being indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
The UN in Sudan transported ICC indictee Ahmed Haroun in an UNMIS plane, saying that it was necessary in order to try to calm tensions. The UN in Congo, MONUSCO, could make the same argument about Bosco Ntaganda.
The Brazilian president of the Security Council for February read out a press statement in which the Council took issue with the promotion of men implicated in human rights abuses.
Inner City Press asked if the Lord's Resistance Army had even been discussed. Yes, under security, the Brazilian Ambassador answered. Still, given that the long Council press statement did not even mention the LRA, it seems it was an afterthought, even to the US delegation. Watch this site.
At UN on Thai - Cambodia, 2 Council Members Said to Want Meeting, Not ASEAN Deferral
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 7 -- After Cambodia's prime minister Hun Sen wrote Sunday to the President of the UN Security Council, Brazil's Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, she made 14 calls to Council members and the Secretary General's office about the border skirmishes with Thailand.
The consensus on Sunday, Inner City Press is told by sources, was to have ASEAN deal with the conflict in the first instance, with Indonesia's foreign minister (and former UN ambassador) taking the lead.
On Monday morning, however, something change. With the issue set to be discussed in closed door consultations under Any Other Business, two countries are said to want there to be a formal meeting on Cambodia's requests, which now include a request for UN peacekeepers and a buffer zone.
Much discussed on Monday morning at the UN was the last time this border and temple dispute came to the Council, in 2008. Then, with fellow ASEAN member Viet Nam holding the Council presidency, pressure was brought to bear to keep the dispute at the national and regional level.
Finally, Viet Nam's Permanent Representative told Inner City Press, “Letter withdrawn.... problem disappear.” But will that happen this time? Perhaps not. Watch this site.
As Thai - Cambodia Fighting Escalates, UN & Its Council Unresponsive, Repetition?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 6 -- As fighting escalates between Thailand and Cambodia, the UN and its Security Council presidency did not answer questions on the matter, even after Cambodia's prime minister Hun Sen wrote to demand an urgent meeting of the Council.
Inner City Press, which had asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesmen about the dispute starting February 4, asked the top two listed contacts at the UN Mission of Brazil, this month's Council president, to confirm the receipt and circulation to members of Cambodia's requests. More than 12 hours later, there was no response. Nor to detailed questions to Ban's two two spokesmen.
While one would expect the UN to be more responsive, perhaps this disinterest is related to the last time this border and temple dispute came to the Council, in 2008. Then, with fellow ASEAN member Viet Nam holding the Council presidency, pressure was brought to bear to keep the dispute at the national and regional level.
Finally, Viet Nam's Permanent Representative told Inner City Press, “Letter withdrawn.... problem disappear.” Will that happen this time?
Ban's spokesman on the morning of February 6 were asked this:
Does Ban Ki-moon agree that this UN affiliated process has increased tension and should be suspended? [Thai PM] “Abhisit said Thailand was attacked first so it had to respond. The country also viewed the areas around the Preah Vihear Temple as "very sensitive", therefore nothing should be done to increase the tensions between the countries. 'That means the World Heritage registration procedures [with regard to areas surrounding the ancient Hindu temple] should now be suspended. We have been warning the World Heritage Committee for quite some time,' Abhisit said.”
Twelve hours later, there was no response. Watch this site
“The Subprime Virus” Omits the Activist Cure, Mystification in CFPB Republic
By Matthew R. Lee
SOUTH BRONX NY, February 6 -- Given the role of predatory lending in the financial meltdown that still haunts the global economy, the February 10 publication by Oxford University Press of a book on the topic, “The Subprime Virus” by law professors Kathleen Engel and Patricia McCoy seemed likely to counter revisionism and re-focus on the decade long fight against loan sharks.
Alas, the book makes scant mention of community or even consumer activism, much less the Community Reinvestment Act protests to banks' applications which results in some of the Federal Reserve Board's few enforcement orders and fines.
For example, the authors write about HSBC's seminal and fated acquisition of Household International without mentioning all of the community based challenges to Household and to the deal, and to HSBC afterward.
The book is like writing about the civil rights laws without mentioning how and why they were passed. It is a form of mystification.
Instead of political and social explanation, we have yet another narrative of the economic stations of the cross leading to the seizing up of global markets. At this point, such re-telling is no longer what is needed: it is like another book about the moment to moment flight plans of the 9/11/01 hijackers, and views of airport safety experts. That said, this one is told in some detail.
In the book's lengthy index, the Community Reinvestment Act is not mentioned once. Meanwhile, the “Solutions” chapter of the book has a four paragraph section entitled “Ensuring Access to Affordable Credit,” the purpose of the CRA.
Patricia McCoy has recently been appointed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, from which CRA enforcement powers were stripped. If the book is an indication of awareness of, or respect for, the Community Reinvestment Act and the grassroots groups which use it, perhaps the stripping is a blessing in disguise.
The lack of focus not only on past activism that that needed in the future, including the near future, might be attributable to an inordinate faith in the Obama administration and the CFPB. But even with a President like Barack Obama, it is not law professors who are going to protect consumers and communities. Everything is politics: but “The Subprime Virus” seems to miss this.
By contrast, the 2009 book “Busted” by journalist Edmund Andrews does not purport to be an expert account. In fact, much of Edwards' story is about how he fell into foreclosure on a home he bought for his second wife and their blended family, and how that marriage fell apart. The story shoots lower, but ends of higher. We recommend it.
As Egypt's IMF Rep Quits, Its Ambassador Wants UN Job Like Choi - & Kouchner?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 6 -- With Egypt's Permanent Representative to the UN Maged A. Abdelaziz set to meet on Monday with the returned Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, there's been scant reporting of a topic the two have discussed for some time now: a top UN job for Maged.
For many months the UN Secretariat has been abuzz with Maged's demands for a UN job. When the number two post at the UN Development Program opened up, Maged tried to become the African Group's candidate. This lead to a split; the job was awarded to a candidate from Costa Rica.
Since then, a senior UN official repeated to Inner City Press on February 4, Maged has continued to press for a UN posting, even as his name circulated in the pre-January 25 days as a possible foreign minister. “Now that chance is off the table,” the UN official told Inner City Press. “So Maged will just have to push the UN harder.”
Meanwhile Egypt's now deposed finance minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali resigned as head of the Monetary and Finance Committee of the International Monetary Fund. He could have tried to stay on, but didn't. A lesson for Mubarak?
The UN in recent years has handed top posts to a number of former Ambassadors, for example giving its Somalia post to Augustine Mahiga after he was Tanzania's Permanent Representative to the UN. The UN's envoy to Cote d'Ivoire, Choi Young-jin, was South Korea's Ambassador to the UN, along with masterminding Ban Ki-moon's campaign to become Secretary General.
Now the buzz is that deposed French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner wants to become the head of the UN Mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH. Not only NGOs and many Haitians, but even other UN officials, think it would be a “terrible decision,” given France's history with Haiti. But this is Ban Ki-moon's UN. Watch this site.
Blocked from Sri Lanka, UN Panel Offers Video Conference or Written Questions
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 5 -- Seven weeks after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told the Press that his Panel on Accountability could travel to Sri Lanka due to President Mahinda Rajapaksa's “flexibility,” the UN has sunk so low as to propose a conference call by video, or even just written questions and answer, instead of any visit, Inner City Press has learned.
In interviews with different sides, Inner City Press has learned that a series of options has now been proposed, starting with a visit to New York by Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Commission.
Rajapaksa's LLRC has said it will only speak with the Executive Office of the Secretary General, not Ban's panel -- the Panel would “sit in” on the talks, was the Sri Lankan proposal.
The UN has also proposed a video conference call, or answers to a series of written questions about accountability. All in all, strikingly different than what Ban claimed on December 17 -- that his panel could go to Sri Lanka -- and that Ban repeated to Inner City Press on January 14.
After that, and after Ban's Spokesperson's Office refused repeatedly to answer questions about Ban's statement and who he'd spoken with before making them, while on his current ongoing trip Ban gave a speech at Oxford, after which he replied to a question by saying that his Panel “has not yet been able to complete its mission. They are still negotiating with the Sri Lankan Government.”
On February 4, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson's office in writing and in person to explain this statement (as well as Ban's statement that he had been in Sri Lanka twice since May 2009).
The UN did not answer the written questions -- and still hasn't -- so at the February 4 noon briefing Inner City Press asked how Ban's statement squares with the previous statement that travel to Sri Lanka, which has been blocked by the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa is “not essential.”
Ban's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq answered that Ban's Panel “has been discussing the proper arrangements to see if they can have such arrangements made.”
Haq said that of the Panel that “they do believe it is desirable to travel to Sri Lanka, but not essential.”
Now it seems that the UN would settle for a mere video conference call, or even written answers to questions. How could that constitute “completing the mission”?
From the UN's February 4, 2011 transcript:
Inner City Press: I want to ask on Sri Lanka; there was some quotes given out of Ban Ki-moon’s responses at his Oxford speech afterward. He was asked a question about Sri Lanka, and he said that his panel, quote, “has not been able to complete their initial stage”. I just wanted to know if that’s actually what he said and if that, how that squares with the idea that it’s not essential to go to Sri Lanka.
Acting Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq: In terms of what he actually said, it’s available in our — if you go to the off-the-cuff part of our website, the questions and answers that he had at Oxford are posted there. So, you could see it that way.
Inner City Press: How does that square with the idea that travelling to Sri Lanka is not essential? Why have they not been able to complete their work, if that’s not the thing missing?
Acting Deputy Spokesperson: As you are aware, the panel has been discussing proper arrangements, to see whether it can have such arrangements made. The panel has made it clear that they do believe that it is desirable to travel to Sri Lanka, but not essential. And that has been their consistent position.
Is it consistent to now be offering video conference or written questions? Watch this site
JPM Chase Closing Mission Accounts Not Solved In Closed UN Meeting
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, February 4 -- The move by JPMorgan Chase to close the accounts of many countries' missions to the UN was the hot topic in the closed door session of the UN's Host Country Committee meeting on February 3.
But when the meeting ended the Committee's chairman Minas Hadjimichael, the Permanent Representative of Cyprus, left through a side door facing the East River and proceeded through unplowed snow out to First Avenue.
Inner City Press, which has covered the bank issues and tries to cover the Host Country Committee despite Hadjimichael declaring it closed, ran and caught up with him on First Avenue.
“Was there a solution of banks?” Inner City Press asked.
Hadjimichael said, “It was not an item on the agenda of the meeting. It came up under Any Other Business.... America replied, saying they would try.”
Last month, Patrick Kennedy from the US State Department came to New York to tell ambassadors he was working on it. Inner City Press asked Hadjimichael for an update. He said he thanked the US for trying, but “ I am worried there is no solution, the deadline is approaching.”
Observing through the glass of the closed ECOSOC chamber on Thursday, Inner City Press saw Iran spoke, and heard that Uganda among others also spoke out. After the last meeting with Kennedy, Egypt's ambassador Maged Abdelaziz, spoke out against Chase's cut off. Now he has other worries.
But what about the Secretariat, which after Inner City Press' last article put this out:
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 8:05 AM
Subject: Your questions on Chase Bank
To: Inner City Press
We can say the following in reply to your questions at the noon briefing:
Some ambassadors emerging from the US briefing about their accounts being shuttered think the UN should withdraw all its accounts with Chase. Has this been broached with the administration? Being weighed at all?
We understand that this was raised by one Member State delegate in the briefing with Ambassador Kennedy. The UN Secretariat has not been approached in this matter.
Will Chase open an office in the UN building after the CMP?
Under the CMP, the new UN building design includes space provision for banks. No agreements have been entered into with any banks for this space.
Watch this site.
At UN, Gay Rights Group Loses 9-7 in NGO Committee, Sudan Wins, Egypt Speaks
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 4 -- The International Lesbian and Gay Association has been applying to ten years for consultative status with the UN's Economic and Social Council. On Friday afternoon, Belgium called for a vote on its application. Sudan immediately countered with a No Action Motion, to block voting on Belgium's proposal and the group.
After much back and forth, the vote was called. Sudan's No Action Motion won 9 for, 7 against and one abstention (Kyrgyzstan). Surprisingly, India voted no. Cuba did not vote at all, and Mozambique was “not present.”
Here were the votes on Sudan's motion to block voting on the gay rights group:
Peru No, Russia Yes, Senegal Yes, Sudan Yes, Turkey No, USA No, Venezuela Yes, Belgium No, Bulgaria No, Burundi Yes, China Yes, Cuba __, India No, Israel No, Kyrgyzstan Abstain, Morocco Yes, Mozambique Not present, Nicaragua Yes, Pakistan Yes
After the vote, the US noted that it could re-raise the group's application at the full ECOSOC, as it did last year. A request Thursday morning to Ban Ki-moon's spokesmen for a comment on the comments on and against gay rights in the UN Committee on NGO had still not been responded to be week's end.
The question Inner City Press submitted Feb 3 was:
“In the ECOSOC Committee on NGOs earlier this week, Morocco, Sudan, Russia and Pakistan opposed consultative statsu for the Autonomous Women's Center, after noting that its application referred to discrimination against lesbians. Pakistan's representative said that whatever UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon may have said, it was on his own behalf, not on behalf of member states. Pakistan argued in the ECOSOC Committee on NGOs on Monday that discrimination against gays and lesbians is 'not recognized by the UN.'
Please provide the Secretariat's - ideally, the S-G's -- response to this characterization of the S-G's statements and whether discrimination against LGBT is “recognized by the UN.” Will Ban be doing anything for the Autonomous Women's Center, or another gay rights group denounced Wednesday morning in the ECOSOC Committee on NGOs?”
As of 6 pm on Feb 4, there was not response. Watch this site.Earlier on Friday, this is a summary of what was said about the Australian Lesbian Medical Association:
Pakistan's delegate asked if homosexuals are more prone to sexually transmitted diseases, in terms of having and transmitting those diseases. He asked the NGO support its response with medical documents...
Belgium's delegate did not believe the Committee should place conditionalities on the kind of documents to be provided.
Later on Friday, the representative of Egypt said he was was in an awkward position as a former member of the committee. He said that there was any acceptable and internationally recognized definition to “controversial” references and notions discussed. He did not recognize there was any legally bounding definitions for terms as sexual preferences or orientation or that such terms had been defined by any internationally recognized instrument in the human rights arena.
Meanwhile in Egypt...
At UN, Ouattara's Bamba Says Month Too Long, Chad Too Far, Gbagbo Cut Lights
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 4 -- As the UN Security Council agreed on elements to the press deferring to the African Union's High Level Panel on Cote d'Ivoire, Alassane Ouattara's ambassador Yousoufou Bamba told Inner City Press that the AU outcoming “wasn't quite progress.”
Speaking exclusively to Inner City Press on the steps outside the Council chamber, Bamba said “one month is too long,” referring to the time given to the AU Panel. “It gives time to Gbagbo,” Bamba said.
Inner City Press asked about the inclusion by the AU on its panel of Idriss Deby of Chad. “Too far,” Bamba replied. He might have said the same of South Africa, which proposed the Council press statement.
In light of reports of water and electricity cut off to Abobo and other Ouattara strong holds, Inner City Press asked Bamba if he thought Gbagbo was behind them. Yes, he said, “and also to the North, every night. Doing so, let us say, he is losing his last support.”
UN's Ban Ki-moon and Bamba at swear-in, (c) MRLee
UN envoy Choi Young-jin had been billed for an on camera stakeout, but did not do it. Several UN correspondents complained. Inner City Press rushed back from the UN noon briefing to find Mr. Choi speaking off camera to three reporters. While we will aim to have more on that, Inner City Press asked about the two journalists arrested after flying with the UN from Bouake to Abidjan.
Choi said they had landed and were in a taxi when arrested. Why was the UN flying them? Choi said the UN has been flying people for Gbagbo and Ouattara for some time. And still for Gbagbo? “If he asks,” said Choi.
Choi would not speak of the helicopters voted on by the Council two weeks ago, of which Inner City Press reported this morning that Ukraine's parliament has now approved. Bamba confirmed this. (The Brazilian President of the Council said it had not come up, when Inner City Press asked after the press statement.)
Of Choi, Bamba said he called the Prime Minister at 2 am while patrolling Abobo. Others say there will be a big Korean reception in New York, including Choi, when Ban Ki-moon returns. We'll see.
As UN Says Panel Sri Lanka Visit “Desirable But Not Essential,” Ban Ki-moon Gets Protested
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 4 -- After the UN has repeatedly said that travel to Sri Lanka by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel on Accountability is “not essential,” Ban answered a question amid protests after his speech at Oxford by saying that his Panel “has not yet been able to complete its mission. They are still negotiating with the Sri Lankan Government.”
On February 4, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson's office in writing and in person to explain this statement (as well as Ban's statement that he had been in Sri Lanka twice since May 2009).
The UN did not answer the written question, so at the February 4 noon briefing Inner City Press asked how Ban's statement squares with the previous statement that travel to Sri Lanka, which has been blocked by the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa is “not essential.”
Ban's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq answered that Ban's Panel “has been discussing the proper arrangements to see if they can have such arrangements made.”
Haq said that of the Panel that “they do believe it is desirable to travel to Sri Lanka, but not essential.”
UN officials have already told Inner City Press, and then more formally confirmed, that Ban's Panel is unable to talk, that Sri Lanka will only talk to the Executive Office of the Secretary General.
Haq did not allow the obvious question: how can the Panel meet its extended end of February deadline if Ban says, absent travel to Sri Lanka, the Panel “has not yet been able to complete its mission”? Will the intransigence of the Rajapaksa government make the panel unable to complete it mission?
Inner City Press has repeatedly asked with whom Ban spoke before saying on December 17, and again on January 14, that the Panel could travel to Sri Lanka. Watch this site.