Ban Ki-moon's UN Fetes Africa But Gave Sahel to Italy, W. Africa to EU, Maged in Defense

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 16 -- As the UN trumpeted its Africa Week on Tuesday, Inner City Press asked the UN's Special Advisor on Africa, Egypt's former Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz, to respond to criticism that for example the UN's top envoys in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Cote d'Ivoire and now the Sahel are all Europeans, that Tanzanian Asha Rose Migiro was replaced as Ban Ki-moon's Deputy by Jan Eliasson of Sweden, and USG Tibaijuka taken out. Video here, from Minute 23.

  Maged Abdelaziz, whose taking of the OSSA post also drew criticism from the UN African Group directly to Ban Ki-moon, offered an on-camera defense, initially of Eliasson.

  He said Eliasson has a "genuine passion for Africa," that he has traveled with Eliasson in Africa and will do so again in mid-November, to Addis Ababa. OK, but what about the West Africa envoys, and Romano Prodi for the Sahel, being paid as a full time Under Secretary General while working from his native Italy?

  Maged Abdelaziz said the UN is a "multicultural organization," and that it should not be expected that all its envoys to Africa would be Africans.

  He rattled off other posts held by Africans: UNFPA, UNAIDS -- whose chief, at least according to the UN, is from France -- and the threatened with merger mandates of children and armed conflict and sexual violence in conflict. 

  To list someone he didn't mention, there is Adam Dieng in the Genocide Prevention job (rather than DGACM, which has been given for now to a Belgian, holding the post for someone else in the future).

  OK, but why was Ian Martin given Libya, and then Prodi the Sahel? Or Bert Koenders given Cote d'Ivoire? To what end?

  Inner City Press also asked about Sudan and South Sudan, and NEPAD's Ibrahim Assane Mayaki replied that the government in Juba invited NEPAD to help design their development plan.

Footnote:   During the press conference, an 80 page "NEPAD Guide 2012" was distributed. There is a section on water -- praising Rio Tinto.

   There is a full page devoted to "General Electric in Africa." Both are listed as "Platinum Members" in the back; one of the Corporate Members is Citigroup, whose former chief of Africa (and Europe and the Middle East) Michael Corbat replaced Vikram Pandit on Tuesday. Multicultural, indeed...

On UN Turf, Eliasson Takes Political Roles from Feltman, Team Ban Wary?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 6 -- When the top job in the UN Department of Political Affairs passed from B. Lynn Pascoe to fellow American Jeffrey Feltman, as first reported by Inner City Press, it was thought that the DPA post under Feltman would have at least as much power as it did under Pascoe.

  Feltman, after all, was the US State Department's top man on the Middle East, and Feltman was selected rather than inherited by the Obama administration.

  But another simultaneous change at the UN is cutting into the mandate of DPA and its chief, well placed UN sources tell Inner City Press.

  New Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson, unlike his predecessor Asha Rose Migiro, has been given supervisory powers over peace, security and political affairs for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. 

  Andrew Gilmore, taking the position formerly held by Nicholas "Fink" Haysom before Ban's Five Year mobility rule chased him to Kabul, reports to Eliasson, as will his deputy Mr. Khan of Pakistan.

  So the DPA post is less powerful, just as Feltman takes it over. Meanwhile, the well placed sources say, there is the brewing potential of Ban and "the South Koreans" (as the sources put it) becoming concerned of the powers amassed by Eliasson.

  Monday before writing this story, Inner City Press arrived 15 to 20 minutes early for the media opportunity of Ban's meeting with senior staff and swearing in of the new Acting chief of the Department of General Assembly and Conference Management, about whose recruitment an Inner City Press question from Friday has yet to be answered.

  But despite greeting several Under Secretaries General on their way up, and checking in with UN Security and the liaisons for such media opportunities, attending turned out to be impossible. It is explained that the escort went up 20 minutes before and that was that.

  Later, Eliasson and no fewer than three bodyguards passed through the UN's Vienna Cafe on their way into Conference Room C, which had no sign outside at all. He emerged at 11:35 am, chatting with long time American Assistant Secretary General Bob Orr and US Deputy Permanent Representative Rosemary DiCarlo. And so it goes at the UN.

Feltman Thanks Ban Ki-moon But Should Thank Obama, Knows Maged, Eliasson Redux

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 2 --On Monday morning Jeffrey Feltman, until recently the top US official on the Middle East, was sworn in by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as the head of Ban's Department of Political Affairs. Inner City Press photo here, YouTube channel video here.

 

  Back on March 28, Inner City Press exclusively and accurately reported that Feltman would get the job because the Obama administration through its State Department choose him. 

 

 Ban had little choice in the matter, just as Ban had no choice in France putting Herve Ladsous atop UN Peacekeeping, the fourth Frenchman in a row in that post.

  Ladsous was at Monday's swearing in of Feltman and Jan Eliasson as Ban's new Deputy Secretary General, replacing Tanzania's Asha Rose Migiro. (As if it made up for this diss of Africa, Ban last week gave Migiro another UN job, envoy to Africa on HIV / AIDS.)

  Both men swore allegiance to the UN and its Charter's Article 100, to not accept instructions from any country. But since particular countries control the highest posts -- France with Peacekeeping, the US with DPA, for example -- how can this oath be taken seriously?

  Feltman in brief remarks after the swearing in thanked Ban for "selecting me for this position," and recounted spending Sunday reading the UN charter. Better late than never, said one wag. Reading it is one thing; abiding by it is another.

  Feltman shook hands with the assembled Ban Under Secretaries General. Before him, Eliasson had made a point of showing previous interactions with many of the USGs - with Diarra, for example, on the 2005 reforms, with Susana Malcorra on turf wars, and so forth.

  Feltman did not know many of the USGs, the exception being Maged Abdelaziz, the Mubarak era Egyptian Ambassador to the UN who Ban gave his "Special Adviser on Africa" job over the objection of major sub Saharan African countries. "We know each other," Feltman told Ban, of Maged. You don't say. Inner City Press photo of the Feltman - Maged greeting is here.

  Last week Inner City Press wrote of the tenure of Lynn Pascoe, and noted that he had grown into the job. Will it be so with Feltman? Watch this site.

Footnote: Eliasson, who as Inner City Press reports is being a transition staffer from the UN mission in Libya at a cost that bothers whistleblowers, reminisced about his dealing with Ban in 2007 "during the Darfur crisis" -- as if that crisis is over. Inner City Press photo of Ban and Eliasson on July 2 is here.

 

In the weeds: in covering the Geneva "Action Group" on Syria meeting on June 30, Inner City Press reported that the UK's former political coordinator at the UN David Quarrey was there with William Hague. On July 2 Inner City Press asked what Quarrey's position is and learned: UK Middle East director.

  So if, as the UK wants, they ever took back DPA from the US, could Quarrey replace Feltman? By that token, why shouldn't Robert Mood, soon to be decommissioned from Syria, by considered to head UN Peacekeeping? If Ban's claim that experience is paramount is true....

At AU, Ban Spins "Negligence" in S. Sudan As UN Stonewalls, Drops Migiro

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- Amid charges of UN negligence in not ensuring that its Mission in South Sudan had military helicopters from mid November until the bloodshed in Pibor in Jonglei State, Ban Ki-moon on Sunday while refusing to say what he knew and when again put his spin on the issue.

He told the AU Summit in Addis Ababa

"South Sudan is twice the size of Germany, with less than 100 kilometers of paved roads. Our peacekeepers are doing all they can — with what they have. Despite severe logistical constraints, particularly air transport, the mission succeeded in saving many lives during the recent crisis in Jonglei. Yet clearly: without air assets such as helicopters, we cannot do all that we must do to protect people. Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."

Meanwhile Ban's spokesman in New York Martin Nesirky after twice refusing to say when Ban knew that UNMISS had no military helicopters and when what Ban's called his "begging" belatedly began on Friday referred Inner City Press on this to UN Peacekeeping, "DPKO and DFS" which he said would provide "the details."

And so Inner City Press wrote to chiefs Herve Ladsous and Susana Malcorra and agency spokespeople:

This concerns South Sudan. In a January 18 speech the Secretary General said he "saw the violence in South Sudan coming weeks before but had no military helicopters and, 'at the critical moment, I was reduced to begging for replacements.'"

But I'm told that the UN was informed in mid November that the Russian helicopters would not fly.

The Secretary General said more on this topic on January 25, and on January 26 and today I asked his spokesman to name the date on which the UN / Ban Ki-moon was notified (and separately, knew) that there would not be military helicopters flying in South Sudan.

On January 26 the spokesman said "in December" and when I asked when in December he said, "I don’t have the exact date now."

Today when I asked again, rather than provide the date he told me to ask DPKO / DFS.

So I am asking:

1) when was the UN told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

2) if different, when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

3) when did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?

4) what does the UN say was the impact on its ability to protect civilians in Pibor of not having military helicopters?

Separately, in her January 23 video briefing, SRSG Hilde Johnson said after being told that Russian helicopters wouldn't fly, she was "subsequently" told that they would. I asked what date, she said she didn't have it with her but it would be provided. It hasn't been; I've asked about it at the UN noon briefing: can that date now be provided?

But rather than answer these questions, including for information that was already promised to the UN, DPKO's Kieran Dwyer provided more spin, entirely dodging the questions on which Ban's spokesman had publicly referring Inner City Press. Dwyer wrote:

Susana Malcorra has forwarded your email to me (copy below). I have spoken with her; she was on her way to the airport for official travel when she received it. I believe that her briefing to you on the topic of the helicopters earlier in January covered most of these issues, and I will reiterate the key points in response to your email today on behalf of her and the other addressees.

It was the end of November 2011 when the Russian military helicopters in South Sudan stopped flying. However, at no stage did the Russian Government tell the United Nations that there was a permanent or irrevocable decision to keep the helicopters grounded.

Therefore, while military helicopters were grounded in November all our efforts through late last year and early this year were to ensure the conditions for the Russian military helicopters to fly again. This included direct efforts by the Secretary-General himself, which he has referred to.

Even until today, while we are aware of media reports of the decision by the Russian Government to withdraw its military helicopters from South Sudan, we have not been formally advised of this.

On the ground, the Mission was informed that Russian crews were awaiting instructions from their capital. So our efforts continued to focus on ensuring conditions to allow them to fly again. The United Nations cannot replace the Russian helicopters while they are still based in South Sudan and when the UN has not been informed of any irrevocable decision that they will not fly again. In the meantime, the United Nations sought temporary measures by mobilising helicopters from neighbouring missions.

This information was provided to you in an extensive briefing by Susana Malcorra earlier in January.

Not only is there still no date provided -- it's that after Malcorra in a "briefing" that she asked be mostly off the record, Ban gave a speech entirely passing the buck, and the UN has since refused to provide the basis of what Ban is saying: what did Ban know, and when did he know it?

Significantly, the UN didn't even mention its failure to get military helicopters to Pibor until it was exposed, by Inner City Press, in a January 11 story. Then, rather than make disclosure and say how this would be avoided in the future, the spinning and stonewalling began, and has spread.

So less than an hour after DPKO's Dwyer's response, Inner City Press asked him, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson again:

This is not responsive to the questions asked, nor does it provide the information that Hilde Johnson said at the end of her January 23 video briefing would be provided.

You refer to what USG Malcorra said on January 16, but these questions as I explained spring from Ban Ki-moon's January 18 R2P speech and January 25 statements:

-- WHEN did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?

-- when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

These are the questions I have been asking in the noon briefing, and on which I was referred to DPKO / DFS. So I am waiting for the answer(s), and the information SRSG Johnson said she would provide.

Even the statement you have sent does not mention what the Russians have told me was the UN inserting into the draft Letter of Assist having machine gun mounts on the helicopters, and the role that played in the delay and ultimate rejection of the draft Letter of Assist.

Along with answering the questions that I actually asked, please address this last as well. And please confirm or deny that another troop contributing country has, they say, had an offer of military / "attack" helicopters on the table before the UN, for two months they say, and state the issues considered in delaying and, at least for now, not accepting these helicopters.

In the more than 30 hours and counting since these reiterated questions were sent to DPKO, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson, not one of the questions has been answered.

Meanwhile Ban to the AU in Addis said, "our peacekeepers are doing all they can... Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."

Ban also said "I have made Africa a priority from day one" - less than a week after he belated confirmed that he is dropping Asha-Rose Migiro of Tanzania as his Deputy Secretary General, as Inner City Press first reported, likely for the aforementioned Susana Malcorra of Argentina.

Nor despite repeated public requests from the African Group has Ban appoined, as required, a full time Special Adviser on Africa.

But the claims in Addis, amid continued refusal to take and answer the simple questions about presumptive negligence in South Sudan, is becoming outrageous, and will continue to be pursued. Watch this site.