On Mali, France Drafts Its Own Blank Check for $800M Mission Led by Its Ladsous

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 15 -- To some it seems strange that France would be the country to draft the Security Council's resolution on Mali, and that its draft would have the Council “welcoming the action of the French forces.”

  But the French draft, which Inner City Press has put online here, would also authorize French forces to use “all necessary means” to intervene.

  Before the draft came out, Inner City Press asked French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud to compare France's plans for Mali with what it did in Cote d'Ivoire, where it operated its own Force Licorne parallel to, and often ultimately directing, the UN mission. Araud declined.

  On Monday Inner City Press asked Araud about Chad saying it will pull its troops from the anti-guerrilla or anti-terrorist fight in Mali. Araud replied, that was an announcement of president Deby, and said it wouldn't immediately impact the negotiations on the proposed new $800 million UN mission, MINUSMA.

  As another comparison, one wonders if the transition from the untried AFISMA to MINUSMA will go better than in the Democratic Republic of Congo, between MONUC and the current discredited MONUSCO.

  Behind it all is Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping. As shown, while Ladsous represented France at the UN during the Rwanda genocide,he argued for the escape of the genocidaires into Eastern Congo.

  Having a DPKO chief independent from France would be one way to counter-act the danger of letting France drafts it own mandate in Mali. But there is an increasing sense of who Ladsous works for. Watch this site.

Footnote: on the green side, the resolution says “to consider the environmental impacts of MINUSMA.” So will there be an Environmental Impact Statement? Watch this site.

In Mali, French Triple Play Has EU Lecointre & UN Ladsous, Sanogo Not Shown

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 27 – With a move on in the UN Security Council to prepare a blue helmeted UN Peacekeeping mission for Mali, rather than the African AFISMA mission approved in December, it looks like it could be a clean sweep for France.

  UN Peacekeeping is run by Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row in that position. Ladsous in fact was France's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN in and around 1994.

  On Wednesday Inner City Press asked France's current Permanent Representative Gerard Araud, what about coup leader Captain Amadou Sanogo now being formally in charge of the “reform” of the Malian military?

  Araud replied that it is possible to deal only with Mali's General Chief of Staff, who is named Ibrahima Dahirou Dembele.

  In this, Araud followed the line of the head of the European Union Training Mission (EUTM), General Francois Lecointre, who said between Ibrahima Dahirou Dembele and Defense Minister Yamoussa Camara, “these contacts are sufficient for me.”

  And Francois Lecointre is what? A French military official, of course. Call it the French connection.

  Inner City Press also asked Araud about reports that Chad had told France that Malian fighters have escaped into Darfur in Sudan.

  Araud said he was not aware of this, and it was not discussed in Security Council consultations. But shouldn't it have been? Since the Council already has a $1 billion peacekeeping mission in Darfur?

  And what DID Sudanese foreign minister Ali Karti discuss with his French counterpart Laurent Fabius in Paris? Watch this site.

Amid Mali Pledges, UK Defense Minister Hammond "Misspoke," France Is Blamed, Doesn't Know

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- Amid a flurry of financial pledges in Addis Ababa for the Malian Army and the prospective AFISMA mission, outside the UN Security Council on Tuesday Inner City Press asked French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud how much France is pledging. He said they are pledging, but that he did not know how much.

  Moments later a Security Council diplomat told Inner City Press, "By intervening in Libya, France caused the Mali problem. Let them pay for it!" Anonymity was granted because the diplomat is not the Permanent Representative.

  Whatever the pledges made, it's worth remembering that Western countries on the Security Council decided not to pay for the Kenyan naval component of the African Union's AMISOM mission in Somalia, after its work in Kismayo. So will all of these pledges actually be paid.

  Meanwhile, amid bafflement at the statement by UK Defense Secretary Phil Hammond that Mali is a predominantly Christian country, Inner City Press asked the UK Mission to the UN if he said that.

  The UK Mission's new Head of Press and Public Affairs, Iona Thomas, "we spoke earlier about the UK Defence Secretary’s comments on religion in Mali earlier today. I can confirm that he misspoke." It's appreciated. Watch this site.

IMF Disburses $18.4 to Mali, Sanogo & Arrest of PM No Problem if Donors Like It, French Connection

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 28 -- When the International Monetary Fund board voted Monday to disburse $18.4 million to Mali, it raised not only funds but questions.

   The IMF's embargoed press release recounted how an earlier IMF disbursement had been "derailed by the March 2012 coup d'etat and its aftermath."

   Inner City Press asked the IMF's head of mission Christian Josz what had changed, given that coup leader Amadou Sanogo is still a power in the Malian Army, and the prime minister Josz met with in November, Cheick Modibo Diarra, had since been arrested in his home and not allowed to leave the country.

   Josz replied that the change had been the willingness of donors to contribute to Mali -- a product of the French military intervention -- and the effect on GDP growth projections, which had fallen from 5.6% to negative 1.5% before going back up.

   The French military intervention, then, brought money to Mali through the IMF, run by France's former finance minister Christine Lagarde.

   Inner City Press asked a follow up, whether the IMF board had considered the various impacts on GDP growth if the African-led force AFISMA takes the lead instead of France, and if northern Mali is given political autonomy.

  Josz protested that the IMF only considers "macro-economics." But in this case, it seems that the sudden willingness of France and other Western donors to contribute, after bombing, is what turned things around for the IMF.

  In turn, the IMF says it is only disbursing funds because the Western donors are now willing. It's a circle, and sometimes it can be lucrative, if only to the tune of $18.4 million, to be the subject of a military intervention. Confidence can rise!

  Josz said that 95% of Mali's GDP is from the south, where a new coal mine in opening. He said a third mobile phone operator is opening in Mali. He compared the $18.4 million to a $110 million gap.

(Back on March 22, 2012, Inner City Press asked the IMF about the coup which had just occured in Mali and they respond with a quote from Josz: 'The economic program of the government of Mali supported by the IMF remains on track," click here for that.)

   Josz when he visited the country in November met also with Tienan Coulibaly, then Minister of Economy, Finance and Budget. A Tieman Coulibaly showed up at the UN in December as the Foreign Minister, and Inner City Press asked him about Sanogo and the arrest "in the airport" of then prime minister Cheick Modibo Diarra.

Tieman Coulibaly said of course Sanogo still has a role, and dispute where Cheick Modibo Diarra had been arrest -- not in the airport, but in his home. Video here from Minute 5:40. Is that better? Watch this site.

On Casualties in Mali, France Points at Resolution 2085 It Says It's Not Under, Applauding Ban Ki-moon to Deploy?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 22 -- After the Mali meetings of the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Gerard Araud about civilian casualties, about French bombings halting humanitarian aid in Gao, Konna and Mopti, and about executions by France's allies in the Malian Army, which includes coup leader Amadou Sanogo.

  Araud's response was that France negotiated Security Council resolution 2085, which includes some human rights language. But on his way into the Council in the morning, when Inner City Press asked when this resolution would be implemented, 

Araud replied that France is not operating under Resolution 2085.

  After quoting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon "applauding" France's intervention (while only "encouraging" ECOWAS and the African Union), Araud said France is urging Ban to quickly deploy monitors in Mali.

  But what of those already executed by the Malian Army?

  During the Security Council meeting, after a number of former French colonies praised Operation Serval, it was said that 6000 troops might become part of AFISMA. Chad's Ambassador told Inner City Press his country's 2000 would not necessarily all be part of AFISMA. So how many are?

  Inner City Press asked Araud about the critiques of France's intervention leveled by Egypt and Turkey, among others. Araud replied only on the first, saying that President Morsi is coming to Paris. Well, Gaddafi went to Paris before him, and we see how that worked out. Watch this site.

On Mali, Araud Tells ICP Feltman Briefs UNSC Tuesday, Chad Not with Serval?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 21, updated -- The morning after France reported bombed Timbuktu in northern Mali --first video here -- Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Gerard Araud when the UN Security Council will be updated about France's military intervention.

  Araud told Inner City Press, tomorrow (January 22) in an open meeting. Inner City Press asked Araud who would be briefing.

  Probably Jeffery Feltman, Araud answered, referring to the American chief of the UN Department of Political Affairs.

  Earlier, Chad's Ambassador to the UN told Inner City Press while his country is sending troops to Mali, they will not be with the French Operation Serval. We are sending more troops that other countries, he told Inner City Press, in order to have autonomy.

  When Inner City Press asked Araud about Chad, Araud said yes they will participate, the legislature [in Chad] has already agreed. But with Serval? Watch this site.

Update of 2 pm -- Inner City Press is informed that, along with Feltman, speakers Tuesday afternoon will include the Permanent Representatives of Cote d'Ivoire (as ECOWAS Chair), Chad, Senegal and Burkina Faso.

Footnote: A "serval" is a hissing cat; some have jokingly called France's intervention "Operation Hissyfit," though no one in Timbuktu is laughing.

As France Bombs Mali, UNclear If UN's Ban Ki-moon "Confirmed in Advance" SC Satisfaction

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 13 -- As France expands its air strike on Mali from Konna to Gao, claiming it is all within the "framework of international law," questions remain unanswered.

  The law at issue is Security Council Resolution 2085, drafted by France and adopted as modified on December 20, 2011. In Operative Paragraph 11, which a country involved in the negotiation described to Inner City Press as the "Algerian element," various safeguards and steps are required:

"11. Emphasizes that the military planning will need to be further refined before the commencement of the offensive operation and requests that the Secretary-General, in close coordination with Mali, ECOWAS, the African Union, the neighbouring countries of Mali, other countries in the region and all other interested bilateral partners and international organizations, continue to support the planning and the preparations for the deployment of AFISMA, regularly inform the Council of the progress of the process, and requests that the Secretary-General also confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction with the planned military offensive operation."

  Focusing on the last clause, that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon should "confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction with the planned military offensive operation," Inner City Press on January 12 asked Ban's top three spokespeople to "Please state, both as of the beginning of France's military operation and as of your response, what the Secretary General did to 'confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction with the planned military offensive operation,' specifying both what the Secretary General knew about the plans and operation, and what he knew of the Council's position on those plans and operation(s). Also, less pressingly, what did Mr. Prodi do while in Bamako?"

  So far, there has been no answer; whatever is provided will be published. But there are questions of how Ban Ki-moon even COULD have confirmed in advance the Council's satisfaction with France's military offensive.

  On January 10 at the Security Council, where France proposed and procured a non-binding press statemen tcalling for a speed up of the deployment of the African-led AFISMA mission, France did not meaningfully present its plans for a military offensive. So how could Ban "confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction"? Watch this site.

On Mali, France's Bombing Bypassed Dec. 20 Resolution, Ban Scammed?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 12 -- France claims that its intervention and aerial bombardment in Mali, begun Friday, "resides in the framework of international legality." But the Security Council outcome France proposed and procured on January 10 was a mere press statement, non-binding.

  (Some have mis-reported a Jan. 10 "resolution," click here.)

  And so the framework that Francois Hollande and Laurent Fabius are referring to must be the Security Council resolution they procured on December 20. 

   But there is a problem.

  As Inner City Press reported in December, Resolution 2085 contains in Operative Paragraph 11 a number of steps that are required before military action begins:

"11. Emphasizes that the military planning will need to be further refined before the commencement of the offensive operation and requests that the Secretary-General, in close coordination with Mali, ECOWAS, the African Union, the neighbouring countries of Mali, other countries in the region and all other interested bilateral partners and international organizations, continue to support the planning and the preparations for the deployment of AFISMA, regularly inform the Council of the progress of the process, and requests that the Secretary-General also confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction with the planned military offensive operation."

  Well placed African diplomats highlighted this to Inner City Press as the so-called "Algerian element." And now France has acted without any of the steps and safeguards in the resolution it drafted and championed and agreed to.

   Inner City Press asks: did France get Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to "confirm in advance the Council's satisfaction with the planned military offensive operation" -- the details of which it seems Ban wasn't informed of?

  Was this the meaning of Ban's statement after he got letters from France and Mali's post-coup government?

   Were French-drafted UNSC Resolution 2085's steps and safeguards only applicable to AFRICAN intervenors? Or is France's claim that its intervention, in which already at least 100 people have been killed, resides in the framework of international legality based only on a resolution they haven't complied with and a press statement that is not binding? Watch this site.

Footnote: Some surmise that France's timing -- beginning bombing on Friday, without coming back to the Security Council as at least one Permanent Five member's Permanent Representative said would probably happen -- is based on getting as much done "sur le terrain" as possible before having to brief parliamentarians on Monday. Ah, legality...

French Bombing in Mali Relies on Mere UNSC Press Statement, Not a Resolution

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 12 -- As France launched air strikes in Mali on January 11, it tossed off a letter to the UN asserting that its actions were within the bounds of international legality. This was the position the US administration of George W. Bush took on Iraq. 

 What's the difference, under "international legality" such as it is?

  On January 10, France called for and got a UN Security Council closed door meeting at 6 pm, New York time. 

  What issued was a press statement, a type of action described in other contexts as non-binding, which issued a reminder "call for a rapid deployment of the African-led International Support Mission in Mali (AFISMA)."

  France and the Security Council has spent months questioning the plans for AFISMA, before most recently issued a ("binding") resolution on December 20.

  Some wonder, why go through all that if you can launch air strikes and go to war relying on a mere press statement?If only George W. Bush had known.

  But the trick here, for France and its supporters, is to blur the distinction between Security Council resolutions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and these press statements, which the UN often churns out at the drop of a hat.

  Inner City Press covers the Security Council, for example two wan press statements, also drafted by the French, on another of its former colonies the Central African Republic, issued on successive Fridays on January 4 and January 11, both times after 5 pm. 

   On January 11, Inner City Press was the only journalist at the Security Council stakeout to hear the statement and asked questions.

  On Mali, Inner City Press asked rhetorically on Twitter, forum for rhetorical questions in 140 characters, "France claims its bombing's within bounds of international legality, didn't GW Bush say that about Iraq?"

 A sample "former intelligence analyst" with a blog on Le Monde replied, in fine Twitter fashion, "@innercitypress ever heard about UN? It's in NY."

  Yes, we've heard of the UN: we cover it and its Security Council. And it's because of that we note: a press statement is not a resolution.

Solution? TIME Magazine, in an otherwise deft article, simply mis-describes the January 10 press statement as a resolution -- "the UN Security Council held an emergency session Jan. 10 to pass a resolution calling for the 'swift deployment' of an international intervention force."

    To call it a resolution is not accurate. Watch this site.

Footnote: In fairness to TIME's African coverage, they were right on in their reporting on the failures of the UN mission in the Congo overseen by Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping. 

  While failing and stonewalling in the Congo, Haiti and elsewhere, Ladsous alongside proposing UN drones went to France in December to opine that no force would begin action in Mali until September. He is supposedly involved in the planning of the force. This further illuminates and complicates France's role. We'll have more on this.

At UN, South Africa Sangqu on Missions in Somalia, Mali & DRC, Fight for Fairness

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 3 -- After two years on the UN Security Council, South African diplomat Baso Sangqu held his wrap-up press conference on Thursday before taking up a new position in Addis Ababa. 

Inner City Press asked Sangqu about the UN's relations with the African Union and African regional organizations, in Somalia, Mali and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

  In Somalia, just before South Africa left the Security Council, it led the push for the African Union position that the naval component of the AMISOM mission, that is Kenyan ships, should be made a compensated part of AMISOM. But this was rebuffed or deferred by the UK, which "has the pen."

  Sangqu hearkened back to the push for African peacekeeping in Somalia begun in the Council by his predecessor Dumisani Kumalo, and said the force should still be "re-hatted" and properly compensated.

   He called on the Council's other African members to keep up the push. Inner City Press will be asking new member Rwanda.

  Likewise on Mali, Sangqu said that the AFISMA mission should be paid for out of UN assessments, not only on a voluntary basis.

   On DRC he quoted Uganda's Yoweri Museveni on the MONUSCO mission having turned into military "tourism," and said discussion are underway that might -- might -- see South African troops in DRC serving in an international neutral force.

  In his opening statement, Sangqu brought up Western Sahara, an issue on which South African like Uganda before it has taken the lead in pushing the African Union position: referendum with self-determination as an option. Will Rwanda take that banner up, this year with Morocco on the Council, and then in 2014 without?

 Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, thanked not only Sangqu but the rest of the South African mission team for their openness over the last two years.

  From Deputy Doc Mashabane to political coordinator Zaheer Laheer, from Cedrick Crowley to spokesperson Nomfanelo Kota, from its able representative on the 1540 Committee to its legacy in the current President of the General Assembly's office, it's been a good run. To be repeated.

Footnote, inside baseball: After Inner City Press said this thank-you on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, the fill-in representative of the old, some say outdated group cut in rudely, "Jesus Christ." Video here, from Minute 7:34. There was no need for it: certainly there must be room for two groups, multi-party democracy, in any UN with South Africa in it.

   But for now FUNCA fliers announcing its principles (Freedom, Fairness) are torn down. As was said* in the first 15 seconds of the archived webcast, video here, UNCA or its representative are "normally antagonistic." 

  In fact in 2012 at least three of them tried to dis-accredit the Press, and met with the UN about it. And so, South Africa style, a new party or movement is born. Thank you, South Africa.

* - this was not a blooper but refreshing and needed candor. But will the UN now try to edit it out? Watch this site.

Mali's New FM Coulibaly Denies 2d Coup, Admits Sanogo Is Involved, ECOWAS Says Shouldn't Be, Sovereign Decision?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 20 -- When is accepting the leader of a coup d'etat a purely internal matter of a sovereign state?

  The question arose Thursday about Mali after the UN Security Council adopted a resolution authorizing a mission to work with the Malian army to re-take the north of the country.

  While Mali was lobbying for the resolution, its prime minister resigned at 4 am Bamako time; UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting with the then-foreign minister was canceled.

  Now the new foreign minister Tieman Coulibaly is in town, and Inner City Press asked him if Captain Amadou Sanogo, who led the earlier coup, is still involved, and why that prime minister resigned at 4 am after being arrested at the airport. Video here from Minute 5:10.

  He was not arrested at the airport, new foreign minister Coulibaly cut in. He said prime minister Diarra -- the brother of a former UN Under Secretary General -- resigned for the good of the country: it "was necessary to move forward, the former prime minister had become a problem for Mali. Satisfied?" Video here from Minute 5:40.

  Moments later Inner City Press asked Cote d'Ivoire Ambassador Bamba, speaking for the West African group ECOWAS, if Sanogo should still be involved. No, Bamba answered.

  The final stakeout of the day, and perhaps year, was by Moroccan Ambassador Loulichki, the President of the Security Council through December 31. Inner City Press asked him about the seeming split between the Malian representative's statement and that of Bamba for ECOWAS: should Sanogo still be involved?

That is a sovereign matter up to the Malians, Loulichki said. So what does it mean when the Security Council calls for the restoration of democracy, or of deposed leaders -- is that an interference with sovereignty. There are double standards, and then triple standards. Watch this site.

On Mali, Some See DPA for US and DPKO for France, Rights in Resolution?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 5 -- After the West African group ECOWAS "deplored" the recommendations by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that a mission to Mali be paid for by voluntary contribution and not through the UN budget, representatives of ECOWAS, the African Union and Mali addressed the Security Council on Wednesday.

  Many close observers noted that Mali's representative Traore Rokiatou Guikine seemed to say that the Tuaregs cannot be negotiated with, and asked Inner City Press, what sort of message does this send? Answer: not one likely to avoid military action.

  After the open meeting, Inner City Press asked each of them, and France's Ambassador Gerard Araud, about the mission that has been named AFISMA. 

  The African Union representative Tete Antonio said that voluntary contributions had not worked for the AU missions in Darfur, AMIS, and AMISOM in Somalia, at first.

  Inner City Press asked Antonio if the resistance of the US to fast military action in Mali, made public recently by General Carter Ham, wasn't similar to France dismissing the position of the regional group ICGLR that the M23 mutineers should be negotiated with -- both representing a Permanent Five member dissing an African regional grouping.

  Antonio said, let's keep this to Mali, and keep an open mind.

   Other well placed UN sources told Inner City Press this was a case of the UN Department of Political Affairs, led by American Jeffrey Feltman, issuing recommendations similar to the US position, while the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, led by its fourth Frenchman in a row Herve Ladsous, pushes the French line. 

  There are many who say that: but Ladsous find such questions so insulting, he refuses to take any more Press questions in the UN.

   Not so French Ambassador Araud. He took Inner City Press' question, after the closed door consultations, about how the UN's Huamn Rights Due Diligence Policy would apply to this AFISMA mission with the Malian military. Training, he said, to be conducted by ECOWAS and the European Union.

  Inner City Press asked Araud, Is France comfortable with Mali's post-coup military? He said it is not a question of being comfortable. He also took a Press question about how the UN's Human Rights Due Diligence Policy is being, orshould be, implemented in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Watch this site.