Showing posts with label #FrPrez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #FrPrez. Show all posts

Monday, March 30, 2015

On Yemen, Inner City Press Asks US State Department, UN Security Council President About Airstrikes on Haradh IDP Camp Confirmed to ICP by UNHCR


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 30 -- Amid continued airstrikes in Yemen, on March 30 came reports of an airstrike on an internally displaced persons camp in Haradh. Inner City Press immediately sought confirmation (and comment) from the UN, and then from the US State Department.
 In a State Department daily press briefing held by telephone from the Iran nuclear talks in Lausanne, Switzerland, Acting Spokesperson Marie Harf told Inner City Press she had just seen reports of the IDP camp just before the briefing. She said that in all conflicts parties should take "feasible measures to reduce harm to civilians." 
 Inner City Press asked if the US views developments in Yemen -- these include naval shelling of Aden and the closure of ports -- are making a return to talks between the Houthis and Hadi more likely.
  Harf said such talks are the goal but that it is challenging at the moment, due to what the Houthis have done.
  Hadi's foreign minister has said the killings at the Haradh camp are attributable to the Houthis. Harf said there may be more information forthcoming. Watch this site.
  Inner City Press also asked the March president of the UN Security Council, Francois Delattre of France, about the Haradh IDP camp; he said he has not come up in the UN Security Council. Yet?
  At the March 30 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if the UN had any comment on civilian casualties in the Saudi-led offensive on Yemen, and if Ban Ki-moon raised the issue at the Arab League summit. 
  Haq said Ban had raised it. But what has been said publicly by the UN? Haq said the UN pulled 100 international staffers out of the country on Saturday but still has 13 internationals and 700 local staff and partners there.
 Inner City Press asked Haq if any of these 713 were in the Haradh camp. This, Haq did not answer.
  It was UNHCR which answered first, via its Spokesperson for Asia, Babar Baloch:
"Dear Matthew: Sadly, the reports are correct. Our team on the ground confirms the attack on Al Mazraq area in Hajjah that took place around 11.30am local time with unconfirmed reports of 15 to 20 deaths and as many injured. There are two IDP camps in the area that host some 1100 displaced families. We are not able to confirm how the attack happened, but remain concerned for the safety and security of the displaced."
  In front of the UN Security Council on the morning of March 30, questions were asked of entering Ambassadors - nearly all about Boko Haram. Inner City Press asked a spokesperson about the airstrike on IDPs in Yemen but news seemed not to have reached the Security Council.  Later, a Council member's spokesperson said they've heard of it but do not for now anticipate any meeting. Why not?
An hour later, still silence from Ban Ki-moon and the UN Office of the Spokesperson.  Finally, four minutes before the day's noon briefing, this from UN Spokesperson's Office:
"OCHA in Yemen says that its local partners report that airstrikes hit one of the IDP camps and the surrounding area in Hajjah and that there are reports of civilian casualties.  The United Nations and partners are working to verify this information."
  At the highest levels, the UN system is in a sense "all - in" with the Saudi military coalition, quiet on the fact that it includes Sudan and on civilian casualties.
Back on March 27 in Washington Inner City Press asked State Department spokesperson Jeff Rathke if the US has been in contact with the UN's Jamal Benomar:
"On Yemen, has the U.S. had any contact with Jamal Benomar, the special advisor who’s supposed to be mediating?  And how do you think that the – what’s the process from bombing to getting the Houthis back to the table?  Is anyone actually reaching out to them?" 
  Rathke said he didn't have such information in front of him. But later a State Department official told Inner City Press on background:
"We remain in regular contact with UN Special Advisor Jamal Benomar.  We understand that Benomar remains engaged with political representatives from all parties, including the Houthis.  While we have not had direct contact with the Houthis, we have passed messages to them.

"The path for political dialogue will come when the Houthis and former regime elements halt their destabilizing military actions and realize that the only viable path forward is through peaceful negotiations."
  On civilian casualties in Sana'a, Rathke said "we’ve always been clear that in every conflict, all sides should avoid civilian casualties.  I don’t – I’m not able to corroborate those reports that you’ve mentioned, but clearly, we think it’s important to act in a targeted way in any kind of military conflict." Here is Amnesty International's report.  This will be updated.
 Inner City Press also asked Rathke about the Maldives government threatening migrant workers with deportation for demonstrating about abusive conditions, and the 11 year sentence imposed on former defense minister Nazid. Rathke said he may revert with some comments. Here is the State Department's March 13 comment on the Maldives, here.
  And later the State Department issued a "Question Taken" about the Maldives, including press freedom, here.
 On March 26 Inner City Press asked Rathke if the US thinks former President Saleh could play any role going forward, and for its position on Sudan participating in the "Saudi coalition" the US supports.
  Rathke replied about the US Treasury Department sanctions imposed on Saleh on November 10, 2014, and reiterated previous US criticism. From the State Department transcript (video here from Minute 26:49)
QUESTION:  Matthew Russell Lee, Inner City Press.  I wanted to know what the U.S. thinks of the role of former President Saleh, and do you think that he has any role to play in the negotiations that are trying to be had?  And also, you said repeatedly that the U.S. supports Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners, and it’s said that Sudan is one of the partners and that they’ve offered three air force planes.  And I wanted to know, would the U.S. support Sudanese participation in bombing Yemen?

MR. RATHKE:  So I’ll take the second one first.  We are aware that the Government of Sudan has announced that it is taking part in the actions organized by the Saudis.  We’re not in a position to confirm the details of or the nature of their participation.  Again, this is a Saudi-organized and Saudi-led coalition, so I don’t have more to say on that aspect.

You asked about former President Saleh.  And so we have long made clear our concerns about the obstructive role that former President Saleh plays in Yemen.  He has consistently sought to undermine Yemen’s political transition.  This is widely recognized by the international community, which, in fact, sanctioned former President Saleh under UN Security Council Resolution 2140 just a few months ago.  That was in November 2014.  And the reason was for his obstruction of the political transition and undermining the government.

The U.S. Treasury Department has sanctioned former President Saleh on November 10th, 2014 for engaging in acts that directly or indirectly threaten the peace, security, and stability of Yemen.  So our position on him and his role, I think, is quite clear. 
  On Inner City Press' question on Sudan, note this is the same Sudanese air force bombing civilians in Darfur, Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states.
   Inner City Press also asked Rathke about the US restricting Cuban diplomats to within 25 miles of Columbus Circle in New York -- Rathke said this is being negotiated, along with the US' desire for free movement in Cuba -- and if the US will be replacing Russ Feingold as Special Envoy on the Great Lakes.
  I have no personnel announcements, Rathke said, twice.
  Earlier in the day reporters complained about the lack of answers from the International Monetary Fund. Rathke at least kept fielding questions, and had a surprising number of if-asked statements in his binder.
   Inner City Press at the International Monetary Fund briefing on March 26 asked again about the status of the IMF program in Yemen.  From the IMF transcript:
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about Yemen. I asked online actually a couple of times ago, and you had said it wasn’t helpful but there would be a review in the spring. Now, with these air strikes by Saudi Arabia and Houthi’s moving on Aden, what is the status of the IMF’s program, and what is the thinking, how are you going to review it?
MR. MURRAY: Thanks for that question. Well, obviously, we are watching the rapidly evolving situation in Yemen carefully and closely at the moment. Given a host of uncertainties surrounding Yemen at this moment, the first review under the Fund supported program is postponed until the situation clarifies.
When it will clarify? Can’t say. Certainly, the review mission is postponed. One of our biggest concerns about Yemen is the impact on the poorest there, and the economic reverberations of events. Way too soon to say what those will be, but we are just going to have to keep an eye on the situation.
Inner City Press: Has the IMF had any kind contact with the Houthi’s since they have been in contact --
MR. MURRAY: I’m not aware of any recent contact with the Houthi’s, certainly not in recent days. I really don’t have any recent guidance on that.
   Back on January 22, Murray had answered Inner City Press that while events in Yemen were not helpful, the review was not until Spring. Now it is postponed indefinitely.
  Inner City Press also asked Murray to confirm that the IMF may declined to proceed with Haiti if it continues to subsidize electricity. Murray said he would get an answer to the question and that it would be circulated and inserted into the transcript. Watch this site.
Three days after the UN Security Council convened on Yemen for a rare Sunday meeting on March 22 and issued only a Presidential Statement against outside interference, Saudi Arabia began airstrikes against the Houthis inside Yemen, citing Article 51 of the UN Charter.
   At the US State Department briefing on March 25, outgoing spokesperson Jen Psaki would only confirm that Hadi left his residence -- "voluntarily" -- while at the UN in New York Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq cautioned against increased militarization in Yemen.
  Will the UN Secretariat criticize Saudi Arabia now? 
 On March 24, Hadi wrote again to the Council and asked for "the Security Council to issue a binding resolution under Chapter VII inviting all willing countries who wish to to provide immediate support;" he also cited al-Qaeda and Daesh.
  This is not the way Iraq did it. 
On March 23 the foreign minister of Saudi Arabia seemed to express this willingness. (On March 24, Saudi Arabia spoke in the UN Budget Committee to say same sex relationship are "morally unacceptable;" Yemen, perhaps because of the pending request, did not vote.)
Inner City Press: there have been two statements I wanted to ask if there's any response to.  One is by the new Foreign Minister of Yemen calling for a no-fly zone, making this request presumably to the Arab League, and also from the Foreign Minister from Saudi Arabia saying they'll take whatever necessary measures to curb Houthi advance.  So I’m just wondering, Jamal Benomar said there is no military solution and there should be talks, but is there any response by the UN to these two statements? 

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, in general, like I said at the start of this briefing, Mr. Benomar did urge all sides in this time of rising tensions and inflammatory rhetoric to appreciate the gravity of the situation and de-escalate by exercising maximum restraint, ceasing all hostilities and refraining from provocation and using violence to achieve political goals.  And that remains our standpoint as a whole. Regarding a request to the League of Arab States, of course, that will be for them to consider
  Call it deferring.  
  After the two-hour closed door meeting of the Security Council, during which Permanent Five members' Permanent Representatives drifted away one by one, no one came out to the UN Television stakeout to speak on the record and apparently little new was said behind closed doors. 
  Hours after the UN Security Council scheduled the emergency meeting on Yemen, the US announced:
"Due to the deteriorating security situation in Yemen, the U.S. Government has temporarily relocated its remaining personnel out of Yemen.  We have informed President Hadi of this step as part of our close coordination with the Yemeni government.  We will continue to engage the Yemeni people and the international community to strongly support Yemen’s political transition.  We also continue to actively monitor terrorist threats emanating from Yemen and have capabilities postured in the area to address them.  As we have in the past, we will take action to disrupt continuing, imminent threats to the United States and our citizens.

"There is no military solution to Yemen’s current crisis.  We urge the immediate cessation of all unilateral and offensive military actions.  We join all of the other members of the Security Council in underscoring that President Hadi is the legitimate authority in Yemen and re-emphasize our support for his efforts to lead Yemen through crisis.  We call upon the Houthis, former President Ali Abdallah Salih, and their allies to stop their violent incitement that threatens President Hadi, Yemeni government officials, and innocent civilians.

"We encourage all Yemeni factions to constructively engage in the UN-led political dialogue to achieve an inclusive power sharing agreement.  No unilateral assertion of authority will succeed in Yemen.  We urge a renewed commitment to a peaceful political transition consistent with the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, the National Dialogue Conference outcomes, and relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.

"We are concerned that the well-being of all Yemenis now stands threatened by increasing instability, with extremists trying to capitalize on growing volatility as witnessed in the unconscionable March 20 attacks that killed over 130 Yemeni men, women, and children.  Progress in the political transition process offers Yemen the best hope to address these grave threats.  The United States remains committed to supporting all Yemenis in this endeavor and to aiding those who continue to strive for a peaceful, prosperous, and unified Yemen."
  Five weeks after the last Yemen resolution of the UN Security Council was adopted on Sunday, February 15, now on Sunday March 22 the Council held another emergency meeting on Yemen. Much has changed, most recently airstrikes on Hadi's headquarters in Aden and more deadly bombing of largely Houthi mosques in Sana'a.
  With less than 24 hours notice on March 21 the new emergency Security Council meeting was reported by the UN Spokesperson, Inner City Press, Lithuania, Jordan which requested the meeting, and France the Council's president for March. 
  It was said Hadi requested the meeting; some speculated he wants the "Houthi coup" language that was dropped from the February 15 resolution revived. But with the Houthis themselves targeted, how would this play? And if a first round of sanctions didn't stop these developments, would a second round?
Update: Sources tell Inner City Press that UN envoy Jamal Benomar abruptly left Yemen, and that Hadi's goal is to get (more) UN Security Council authorization for military action against the Houthis "and Saleh." But he could already claim to be authorized for that. A Presidential Statement doesn't mean victory on the ground, though... 
Update II: a question, of course, is how all this UN Security Council action relates to its P5+1 talks with Iran on the nuclear file. Seems the draft PRST would call on "all member States to refrain from external interference which seeks to foment conflict and instability and instead to support the political transition." ALL member states? Including Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Or only Iran?
  On a cold Sunday in New York, the UN Security Council scheduled a 5 pm vote on a resolution on Yemen.Diplomats rushed in. The Gulf Cooperation Council had submitted a draft with the word "Houthi coup" in it, but the phrase did not survive.
  After the watered down resolution was adopted 15-0, Inner City Press asked Saudi Arabia's Permanent Representative about the threat of new sanctions, given how little previous sanctions on Ali Saleh and two Houthi leaders accomplished - and, does he think the Houthis are working with Saleh? (Video here and embedded below.)
  He replied that both are spoilers, they could work together directly or indirectly. The Gulf Cooperation Council will be continuing to push the Security Council, for example on the house arrest of Hadi and others.
  Jordan's Permanent Representative added that come members did not want the word coup.
 Inner City Press notes that while Hadi consented to US drone strikes, a coup would leave such consent "up in the air."
 After the diplomats left, two different Arabic language channels described what had occurred in entirely different terms: one as a "strong message," the other as "weak."  And so it goes.

    

Thursday, March 19, 2015

After UN Gives Waiver to Two DRC Generals for LRA But Not to Fight FDLR, Inner City Press Asks UNSC Prez Delattre Why


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 19 -- After the UN Security Council's open meeting about the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the UN Mission there on March 19, DRC Foreign Minister Raymond Tshibanda told Inner City Press that the UN had given waivers and worked on Itura and against the Lord's Resistance Army with the two Congolese generals it now refuses to support to fight the FDLR militia.
   This give rise to the question, if the UN Security Council says neutralizing the FDLR is so important, why is MONUSCO or DPKO in New York applying a more strict standard for UN support to this fight than they did to the fight against the LRA?
   When UN Security Council President for March Francois Delattre of France emerged after Council consultations, Inner City Press asked him just this. 
  Delattre's answer, video here, was about the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, but did not explain why a waiver was sought and granted for the LRA fight, and now not to fight the FDLR.

From the French Mission to the UN's transcript:
Inner City Press : On the due diligence policy, the foreign Minister Tshibanda here said that the two generals had issued that MONUSCO had previously worked with them in Ituri and on the LRA. So, some people are left wondering, if fighting the FDLR is so important, why was a waiver given to other fight and not for this one ? Despite how important the policy is. What has changed that MONUSCO can’t find a way to be involved or fight the FDLR directly ?
A: Here, our understanding is that, as you said, this question is really part of the UN human rights due diligence policy. This policy has been in place in DRC for many years and has proven its usefulness to ensure that all military operations in DRC are conducted in accordance with human rights and international humanitarian law. So we have a framework here and we fully support this policy in DRC and elsewhere by the way.
 Inner City Press began to ask this follow-up on the waiver but was cut off. While others spin, we will continue with this question - watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

On Darfur Rapes, French PR Delattre Tells Inner City Press of UNSC Press Statement, But What Of UNAMID's November 9 Press Release?


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 17, more here -- With UN Peacekeeping still providing few to no updates on its UNAMID mission's under-reporting of attacks in Darfur, including 200 reported rapes in Tabit in October 2014, Inner City Press on March 17 asked the month's Security Council president, Francois Delattre of France, if the issue came up in closed door consultation. Video here, French mission transcript below.

  Inner City Press specifically asked Delattre about the November 9 press release by the peacekeeping mission UNAMID which said there was no evidence of rape and that Tabit residents get along well with Sudanese security forces -- essentially covering up the rapes.

  Delattre to his credit did respond to the question, saying that the issue came up in consultation and mentioning a November Press STATEMENT by the Security Council urging access. But the Press RELEASE by the UNAMID mission, which remains online, has yet to be explained or addressed, and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous refused to answer Press questions on it on March 17.  We'll have more on this.

From the French Mission's March 17, 2015 transcript:
Q : On the mass rapes allegations that were made in Tabit in October, could you give us some sense in the consultations of what Council members are expecting DPKO and Unamid to do to get access ? Also how they explained the 9 November 2014 press release which said the rapes didn’t happen and that people were happy with the army. What is it going to be done about that?
A: First, as soon as the news of these horrible rapes broke, DPKO requested Unamid to launch an investigation which faced considerable restrictions of access from the Sudanese Government.
Secondly, as you said the Security Council in a press statement back in November called on the Sudanese authorities to allow the full and unrestricted freedom of movement for Unamid to be able to conduct its investigation without any interference.
This issue was raised during the consultations this morning and Hervé Ladsous mentioned the fact that efforts are ongoing to continue the investigation. In other words, we don’t give up.
  Back on January 26 Inner City Press asked Security Council ambassadors Mark Lyall Grant of the UK and Raimonda Murmokaite of Lithuania, "what happened with UNAMID going back for real investigation of rapes in Tabit?"
  Lyall Grant replied, "We continue to press DPKO to encourage UNAMID to revert on the Tabit allegations."
   Murmokaite added, "have been raising the issue at consultations, will continue."
 And so Inner City Press at the January 26 UN noon briefing asked Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here:
Inner City Press: two of the Security Council ambassadors this morning said they continued to ask DPKO to ensure that the Tabit site of alleged mass rapes is revisited. I want to know has any action been taken on that? Has there been any move by UNAMID?
Spokesman Dujarric: The request to visit Tabit stands. There's nothing to report.
 Nothing to report? Back on January 8 Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, video here:
Inner City Press: what has the UN system done in order to get access again to Thabit in Darfur, where there were allegedly 200 rapes, and then the Government didn’t allow any inspectors. What have you done since we last spoke on it? 
SG Ban: As for the first part of the question, as you know, we tried to have a thorough investigation. This report might not have been sufficient because of the lack of full cooperation of the authorities on the ground. That has really hampered our authorities to go into the field and get a thorough investigation. It is important that we have to have a thorough investigation and as a matter of principle, there should be a clear accountability process and justice. I am firm about this matter. And we will, in the course of time, have better information on this matter. 
  While appreciated, it is widely recognized that the more time goes by, the more difficult a credible rape investigation becomes. So why did UNAMID issue a cover-up November 9 press release? 
  On December 12 in International Criminal Court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda's six-month report to the Security Council, she said that the reported rapes in Tabit should "shock the Council into action." But will it? To some, the Council appears to have moved on.
   Bensouda, who like the Security Council members was given only the Executive Summary of Ban Ki-moon's cover up (of cover up) report on Darfur, thanked Ban for the report and hoped that it would be acted on. Belatedly ensuring that UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous answers questions about his and his Department's performance would be a start.
   Ten days after after the UN issued a statement on its internal investigation into charges it covered-up attacks in Darfur, its UNAMID mission there  on November 9 issued a statement that "village community leaders reiterated to UNAMID that they coexist peacefully with local military authorities in the area" and that no evidence of rape was found.
 On December 4, Inner City Press asked Ladsous, Why did UNAMID not say on November 9 that it was surrounded by soldiers? Video here,and embedded below.
  As is his habit, Ladsous did not answer on December 4, even with his UN Peacekeeping under fire for cover ups. It is a pattern with Ladsous. He refused Press questions for months about rapes in Eastern Congo in Minova by DRC Army units his UN Peacekeeping supports: video compilation here; Vine here.

  On the morning of December 4 Ladsous claimed to the Security Council that UNAMID's findings were "inconclusive" due to army presence. But his UNAMID's press release whitewashed the situation in Tabit and did not mention the army presence. The covering-up continues, with no credibility, as Ladsous did on the Minova raped by DR Congo Army units his UN Peacekeeping supports.
 On November 25, a wide range of groups in Darfur petitioned the UN Security Council about UNAMID's malfeasance. Inner City Press that morning obtained the letter (h/t) and put it online in full here.
 While UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric, when Inner City Press asked at noon, said he had not seen the letter, by 6 pm when Inner City Press asked November's Security Council president about the letter, he confirmed receipt.
  Quinlan said he had circulated the letter to the other 14 Council members -- as of 3 pm, one of them had not yet received it -- and that he expects the issues to be considered when the Security Council takes up UNAMID "next week, under Chad's presidency." 
 (On November 26, the UK Mission to the UN"s Arran Skinner told Inner City Press, "I can confirm that we received the letter indirectly. In terms of contents, on alleged rape cases, the Security Council issued a press statement calling for a full investigation. The UK initiated the call for a press statement and so agree that this issue needs to be looked at.")
  On Ban Ki-moon's report into UNAMID under-reporting attacks on civilians and even peacekeepers, Inner City Press asked and Quinlan repeated it should be taken up soon, the question is finding the right, credible (or disinterested) briefer. Watch this site for that. 
  Inner City Press at the November 17 UN noon briefing asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about Sudanese forces having filmed UNAMID's interviews.
  Who is going to take action, on whom, about that? Inner City Press and the new Free UN Coalition for Access are asking.




  We'll be following this. Watch this site.

 
  

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

French Mission on Twitter Answers 1 of 4 Questions, Gao Report Up to UNSG, Silence on Haiti, Sale of UN Posts, Approval of Hillary Clinton's UNSC Stakeout


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, March 11 -- When the French Mission to the UN solicited questions on Twitter for its spokesman and political coordinator, Inner City Press submitted four questions, one of them days in advance to increase the odds of it being answered.
 In fairness, one of the four questions was responded to: Inner City Press asked (as it has before) "Will the report on MINUSMA shooting at demonstrators in Gao, Mali, go to UNSC and be made public? If not, why not?"
 To this the French Mission to the UN replied, "Gao report was commissioned by UNSG. He will examine it and decide on the next steps #FrPrez."
 Inner City Press asked a follow up -- "Is France concerned to see & act on report?" -- but this has yet to be answered. The analogy might be to report(s) on Darfur, which the Security Council does see and discuss, at least under other Presidencies.
  Not discussed or answered is the UN Peacekeeping mission in Haiti introducing cholera to the island and the ongoing impunity and lack of accountability to victims. Inner City Press asked the French mission about it, without answer.
 A newer arising issue was whether as the UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric answered earlier on March 11 the French Mission OK-ed the use of the Security Council televised stakeout for a 20 minute appearance on March 10 by Hillary Clinton to answer hand-picked questions about her privatized emails. Video here. This question was not answered either.
  Another questioner asked or opined about Saudi Arabia funding Islamic State or Daesh -- no answer, even more expected than usual given Suadi Arabia's recall of its Ambassador to Sweden for talking about its human rights record.
  Of the two questions about the UN mission MONUSCO not moving to neutralize the Hutu FDLR militia the French mission answered one, by a favored correspondent; a more funny response was proffered to a question about Claire Underwood on House of Cards, Season 3 (No spoiler alert.)
 A question about Mexico went unanswered; a question whether the French-led mission to Burundi this week will look inot the Cibitoke massacre went unanswered -- for now. Watch this site.
On Gao, after UN Peacekeeping shot protesters in Northern Mali, the UN commissioned a report which it said will be finished by the end of March. But will it be made public, or even be submitted to the UN Security Council which formed the Mali mission?
  Inner City Press on March 4 tried to ask the Security Council president for March, Francois Delattre of France, about the Gao report. Video here. But Delattre replied, for the second time in two days, "I have to run." Vine here.
 On March 5 Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric if the report will go to the Security Council. Dujarric replied "in some form" and that the findings would be made public. Video here.
 So later on March 5, along with a question about a briefing about African Union cooperation which UN official Taye Brook Zerihoun told Inner City Press he had given in the Council, Inner City Press asked Delattre about the Gao report: will the Council get, or request to get, the report? 
  Delattre this time didn't run but rather answered. He answered only the Africa Union question, video here. It's appreciated but leave the question open: what is going to happen with the report, with the incident and accountability? 
  Tellingly, perhaps, the French Mission transcription of Delattre's press encounter included Inner City Press' African Union but not its Gao report question, compare video to transcript. We'll have more on this.
The UN Security Council speaks in at least four different ways: resolutions, Presidential Statements, Press Statements and the weakest form of action, "Elements to the Press."
  When French Ambassador Francois Delattre came to the UN Security Council stakeout on March 4 as Council president he read out "Elements to the Press about Mali. 
  Inner City Press twice asked, Question on Mali? But Delattre for the second time in two days said, "I have to run" and declined to answer.Video here and embedded below.
   Now the UN peacekeeping mission in Mali, MINUSMA, has publicly mis-characterized the Elements to the Press that Delattre read out as a Press Statement or "Declaration a la Presse," including in a tweet at-naming the French Mission to the UN, which offered no correction. It was also e-mailed out (which should be similarly corrected) and put here on the MINUSMA Facebook page.
Update of March 6 - after this report, MINUSMA changed its Facebook page to say "Elements to the Press" - but left its tweet and email announcement uncorrected. Ban Ki-moon also issued a statement urging Coordination to sign.)
   Perhaps France, and ultimate MINUSMA boss Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row atop UN Peacekeeping, would have preferred the stronger form, Press Statement, to Elements to the Press. But the are different, and it is the job of a Security Council president to make sure the two are not mistaken or mis-represented, particularly not by a UN mission.
  Maybe if Delattre has deigned to take the question(s) about Mali, alongside the three hand-picked questions he did take about Libya, it would have been more difficult to mis-describe the Elements to the Press he read out as a formal Press Statement.
  So will this be fixed? Or will the running continue? Watch this site.

  Here is what Delattre read, and questions he refused to answer.
"We heard a briefing by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Mali, Mr Mongi Hamdi, who gave us an update on the Algiers peace talks and the Agreement on Peace and Security in Mali initialed on 1 March 2015... We encourage the armed groups of the coordination to initial the agreement."
  Inner City Press asked, what about the MNLA not signing? But Delattre said, for the second time in two days, "I have to run" -- then proceeded to stand to the side of the stakeout, decidedly NOT running. 
Update: French mission spokesperson Thierry Caboche has replied that the "Press Elements agreed by UNSC on Mali encourage Coordination groups, including MNLA, to initial Algiers agreement."
 It's appreciated, and added here in full - but since the Elements to the Press in the first paragraph cites that "Agreement on Peace and Security in Mali initialed on 1 March 2015 by representatives of the Malian Government, one of the coalition of armed groups Platform' and all members of the international mediation team" then never names the MNLA, the Mali question should have been taken and answered, alongside fully three questions on Libya.
    Inner City Press also asked about the UN's "independent" report into UN Peacekeepers shooting at protesters (who were angry about the UN using attack helicopters, but that's another story).
  Delattre did not answer about this report, which one would think like the report on the Tabit rapes in Darfur also covered by UN Peacekeeping through its UNAMID mission, would go to the Security Council.
  On February 26, two days before Delattre took over as Security Council President, the UN announced that "the high-level team mandated by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to conduct an inquiry into the violent protests that took place in Gao, Mali, on 27 January is concluding an eight-day visit to Mali.
    “During this visit, the team met with the Malian national authorities, the authorities of the region of Gao, the national police and the civil protection service in Gao, representatives of MINUSMA, local leaders from the Cadre de Concertation des Notables de Gao, the associations who organized the protests on 27 January, authorities from the hospitals that received the victims, opposition parties, and several other interlocutors who could help shed light on the events. The team also spoke to the protestors who were injured during these events, and visited the bereaved families, to whom they expressed condolences.
  The team was "composed of three independent experts with extensive international experience: Bacre Waly Ndiaye (Senegal), Mark Kroeker (US) and Ralph Zacklin (UK)."
     Back on January 29, the UN said that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon  “deplores the incidents that took place on 27 January during a demonstration in front of the MINUSMA base in Gao town in the north of Mali. He is saddened by the violence that surrounded the demonstration and the reported death of at least 3 protesters and the injury of several others.”
   “The inquiry team will now travel to New York to present its preliminary report to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. It will present its final report by the end of March 2015,” the UN on Thursday said.