On Palestine as ATT Vice Chair, UN Tells ICP Any “Participating State” Can Do It

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 20 – With Palestine's bid to be a vice chair of the upcoming Arms Trade Treaty talks proceeding, Inner City Press on Wednesday asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman about positions the Press is told Ban's Secretariat took in closed door “informal” meetings.

  Multiple sources tell Inner City Press that Ban's Secretariat took the position that the format used in the summer, before Palestine was voted as a non member observer State on November 29, should still be used this coming March: that is, a “member states” format that would exclude Palestine. 

   (Palestine argues that it is all states, for which it qualifies.)

   Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press that the “Secretariat often provides technical advice on matters of protocol,” but that it is “up for those who are participating in that conference to determine.”

   After the noon briefing, Ban's spokesperson's office sent Inner City Press the following:

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:41 PM
Subject: Your questions at today's noon briefing
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

Regarding your question on the rules of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) Conference: By resolution 67/234 the General Assembly decided that the rules of procedure for the 2012 ATT Conference would be applicable to the upcoming meeting. Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure for the 2012 ATT Conference provides in part as follows: "The Conference shall elect from among the representatives of participating States the following officers: a President, 14 Vice-Presidents and a Rapporteur-General, as well as the Chairs of the Main Committees.”

   Inner City Press showed this answer to a well placed supporter of Palestine's bid to be vice chair. Ah hah, this source said, pointing at the words “ participating States.” 

  He said, that means All States. Then he wondered why the Secretariat would have said one thing in closed door informals, but now apparently another publicly, in writing.

The ATT talks kick off on March 18. Watch this site.

UN Arms Trade Treaty Opening Stalled on Question of Palestine, Ammo Is Easy?

By Matthew Russell Lee, Partial exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 2 -- Ban Ki-moon was slated to speak at 10:30 am Monday at the opening of the UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty. But it did not happen. The opening was delayed, at least until Monday afternoon. Why?

On June 29 in a nearly empty UN North Lawn building, two representatives of the Palestinian Mission to the UN sat talking with the Argentine chair of the ATT. Nothing was resolved. On July 2, sources in the North Lawn told Inner City Press a dispute arose about where and how to seat Palestine.

As Inner City Press exclusively reported on June 8, Palestine after being voted into UNESCO next participated in the Law of the Sea event, which it had been seeking since 1974. And now the ATT.

At 1:30 pm on Monday, after asking questions at Security Council stakeouts by Navi Pillay and French Ambassador Gerard Araud, Inner City Press asked the Argentine chair of the ATT about the Palestine issue. It is not resolved yet, he exclusively told Inner City Press. They are talking about it right now.

Two representatives of the Holy Sea moved past the stakeout and into the garage. They are a precedent; there are others. Watch this site.

Footnote: In an NGO press conference last week previewing the ATT, the word "Palestine" did not arise. (Nor does it in this derivative wire story.) This, however, was asked and answered:

Q: the US/Mexico dispute. The NRA has been mentioned. It has its internal political issues on this. Some have said ammunition shouldn't be covered. How do you expect this issue will play out in July?

Abramson: Are you talking about ammunition in particular? There were a couple disputes in February. ... It's my expectation that ammunition will be included in the treaty. It's really a very small number of countries, including the United States, who are arguing against it. And it's a little bit nonsensical for the United States, actually because the United States already licenses the import and export of weapons, so functionally they're arguing for a standard lower than what they already do. I think they understand that. You've already started hearing the United States talk about, if you provide us with a workable solution we'll work at that. So I'm relatively confident that that issue can be worked through, in part because it's just insane to think of this treaty without ammunition. When you're talking about the harms caused by guns, it's not the gun, it's the bullet. If you're talking about the issue where you're asking, will this make a difference? The guns, they have a long life span. If you really want to control their harm, you have to control the expendable item, which is the ammunition. And multiple countries are making this case. So I do expect that be resolved.

Watch this site.

Bad Omens for Rio +20 as Votes Called on Israeli NGOs, "All States" Foregone

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 21 -- The bad omens for the Rio Plus 20 conference continued to accumulate Monday in the UN General Assembly, where contentious votes were held on whether to accept a list of NGOs which included, according to Syria and others, two Israeli groups which claim to operate in Occupied Terrritories.

  It was a rainy morning with no turn out; US ally Liberia was in the chair. When Syria spoke up asking for a delay of the vote, supported immediately by Cuba, Nicaragua and Egypt, the Liberian chairwoman said this is time-sensitive and should be be delayed. The Rio conference is in a month.

  Syria named the two groups, and said they had been rejected for accreditation in the UN's Economic and Social Council and were now getting in the backdoor. 

Notwithstanding, votes were held, with this low turnout.

Algeria's Permanent Representative, the chair of the Group of 77 and China, came rushing toward the GA Hall. He stopped and told Inner City Press "we had the votes for the 'All States' format but didn't push for a GA vote, but now they do this." He noted that the chair of the session was "the Liberian PR." He went in and promised repercussions.

  Afterward more than one Permanent Representative complained to Inner City Press as one of them put it that since "they pushed for a vote on this, they shouldn't expect consensus in Rio." So who is being short-sighted?

  Afterward Algeria's Permanent Representative and then others explained that under the usual "All States" format, Palestine "and two islands" would have had full participation in Rio. But as an accomodation, they said -- perhaps as UNESCO membership fall out? -- they agreed not to call for a vote, but to accept the MDGs format, in which Palestine is an observer. Will they ask to reverse this?

  On Syria's motion to defer action, 33 votes with Syria, 53 against with seven abstaining.

  On Syria's motion to amend the resolution to delete the two NGOs at issue, 28 voted for -- including for example both Sri Lanka and Jordan, which have another disagreement -- with 58 against. Should this turn out be sufficient?

  Afterward a series of non-ALBA Latin American countries explained that their votes did not mean they changed their position on Israel and the Occupied Territories. 

  The Democratic People Republic of Korea -- that is, North Korea -- complained that its vote had been registered as that of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Only at the UN. Watch this site.