In Afghanistan, UN Won't Investigate Black Jail or Speak on Election Spending

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unama1jail051210.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 12, updated -- With Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Washington to meet with Barack Obama today, it's not only the US that's making nice: the UN is following suit, abdicating even on human rights to both the US military and Karzai government.

In most countries where the UN has a presence, particularly a Mission like it has in Afghanistan, it claims to monitor human rights violations. So for example, if only to burnish its credibility, the UN Mission under both Kai Eide and now Staffan de Mistura has issued press releases criticizing killings of civilians by the US and ISAF, when the numbers are too high.

But when Inner City Press asked the UN on May 11, with Karzai in the US, about reports of a "black prison" on the Bagram base, UN spokesman Martin Nesirky replied "this is a United States base; it’s for the United States to comment on."

Inner City Press asked, "Does UNAMA have any human rights component? Doesn’t the UN have some role, where it has a peacekeeping mission, to investigate claims like this?"

Nesirky said, "The UN’s mandate there is very clear and this particular story... this is something that you can clearly ask the US."

But it's not about asking, it's a question of what the UN is going to do. Does it just sit in a country, see reports of human rights violations, and do nothing? In Sudan, for example, while the UN actually does very little to stop the killing, it does speak about it a lot. But the UN dares not criticize the US -- or for that matter China or other Permanent Five members of the Security Council who could veto a second Ban Ki-moon term.

Nor is the UN clear about money it's said to offer. A week after the UN flip flopped on whether it would offer aid to the interim government in Kyrgyzstan -- at first no, then ostensibly yes, which upon inquiry was simply a quantification of aid already being given -- Inner City Press asked how much the UN will devote to the upcoming Afghan parliamentary election. Karzai's fraud addled election cost the UN quite a bit.

From the May 11 UN transcript:

Inner City Press: it’s reported that the upcoming parliamentary elections there; this IEC [Independent Election Commission] official, Zakaria Barakzai, has said that the UN will make up a funding shortfall of some $40 million. Is that the case? What is going to be the UN’s financial contribution or activity in connection with that election?

Spokesperson Nesirky: We need to find out the exact numbers for you, if you’re giving me numbers like this. I am not familiar with those. I would need to find out.

Inner City Press: Also it’s reported, including by the UN’s own ReliefWeb, that the Afghan Government has cancelled the licences of 172 non-governmental organizations, including 20 international NGOs. I’m wondering if the UN, as it did in Sudan, for example, has any comment on this cancelling of licences of NGOs.

Spokesperson: This is something that our colleagues in Kabul are probably very familiar with. I have not heard; my colleagues here in New York have not heard any particular word from the Mission there. If we have something, then we will obviously let you know.

Inner City Press: There is also a report today that, both by the BBC and the Red Cross, of the discovery of a black jail; i.e., an unreported interrogation centre on the Bagram Air Force Base that the United States runs in Afghanistan. I wonder if it’s, if that is anything that the UNAMA [United Nations Assistance Mission for Afghanistan] or its human rights component has ever heard of? Do they intend to investigate it? Do they have any comment on it?

Spokesperson: That’s something for the United States. This is a United States base; it’s for the United States to comment on. We’ve seen the reports.

Question: Does UNAMA have any human rights component? Doesn’t the UN have some role, where it has a peacekeeping mission, to investigate claims like this?

Spokesperson: The UN’s mandate there is very clear and this particular story — obviously we’ve seen that story on the BBC. This is something that you can clearly ask the US.

But the US Misison to the UN hasn't even answer a question posed on the morning of May 11, 24 hours later. Watch this site.

Update: over 24 hours later, this came in:

Subject: Your questions on Afghanistan
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply
Date: Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:40 PM
To: matthew.lee [at] innercitypress.com

We have some answers from UNAMA concerning your recent questions at the noon briefing about Afghanistan.

Concerning the financing of the Afghan elections: It is not correct that the UN funds elections in Afghanistan. Rather, Staffan de Mistura has asked donors to release funds to support Afghanistan's electoral bodies for the upcoming elections. The UN will work on mobilizing funds to fill the gap.

Concerning the licensing of NGOs: The UN Mission (UNAMA) and Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) are looking into it further but have no comment at this time. It does not seem to affect any NGOs working with UN.

Concerning reports about a secret prison facility at Bagram, UNAMA has no independent information on this report.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unama1jail051210.html

Eide's Taliban Talks Ascribed to Ambition to Lead UN, India Critical, Pakistan Elusive

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
www.innercitypress.com/un2taliban032310.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 23 -- Why did former UN envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide start publicly bragging that he spoke with the Taliban? Inner City Press sought answers this week, officially from the UN, then from diplomats from India, Pakistan and Ban Ki-moon's own office.

The last of these had the most cynical or realistic explanation. In short, Kai Eide dreams of being UN Secretary General. The theory from the third floor of the UN's new building is that after Ban and the Asia Group, Europe is up next. Russia will block Eastern Europe, so Western Europe with his its last chance.

Beyond Jan Eliasson -- here this week for Water -- and Carl Bildt, candidates include both Kai Eide and his successor in Kabul, Staffan de Mistura. The senior Ban advisor said that in case de Mistura talks with Taliban and peace results, Eide wants it in the record that he began the strategy.

India on the other hand told Inner City Press that the UN should not speak with the Taliban. Pakistan, on its national day, was more cagey, characterizing Kai Eide's going public as "sad." And then the hammer blow from the third floor of the new building, the kiss of UN death to Eide. How do they like Galbraith now?

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2taliban032310.html

UN's Eide Spoke with Taliban, then Holbrooke, But UN Claims No Instructions

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un1taliban032210.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 22 -- The UN distanced itself Monday from its former envoy Kai Eide's talks with the Taliban. "At no time was Kai Eide instructed to speak to the Taliban," UN spokesman Martin Nesirky read out, in response to a question from Inner City Press. Video here, from Minute 24.

Given that US envoy Richard Holbrooke has said that Kai Eide told the US about his talks with the Taliban, it is hard to believe that Kai Eide did not simultaneously or before tell UN Headquarters about his talks. So for the UN spokesman to carefully said that Eide was never "instructed to speak to the Taliban" misses the point, intentionally.

If Eide told UN Headquarters and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about his talks with the Taliban, and they and he were allowed to continue, that was consent. Why not own up to it?

Back on March 18, Inner City Press asked the head of UN Peacekeeping, Alain Leroy, about Hamid Karzai's anger at Pakistan for targeting "moderate" Taliban who could be spoken with. "I don't have to comment," Leroy responded. Video here, from Minute 5:29.

Nesirky pointedly refused at Monday's noon briefing to answer a related questions about the UN in Afghanistan, triggered by a quote from the UN spokesperson in Kabul Susan Manuel that in Kandahar, there "has been a temporary reduction" of UN staff. “We’re trying to determine the profile of the staff, or who needs to be there doing what.”

The UN and Nesirky often deflect questions by saying that the UN does not speak or wish to see stories about the movements of its staff or other "security" matters. But here, the UN has spoken openly about pulling staff out of the way of an impending military engagement. Watch this site.

UN Footnote: Eide's former deputy and nemesis Peter Galbraith has scoffed at Eide's claims. The UN, at least on background, continues to scoff at him, most recently in connection with a briefing about the upcoming elections in Sudan. Most people understand elections can't be perfect, one senior UN official told Inner City Press. "Except Peter Galbraith." The status of Galbraith's claim of retaliation by the UN is not known. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1taliban032210.html

At UN, Leaked Memo Shows Low Morale and Commuting in Afghan Mission Amid Arrivals of de Mistura and from Dubai

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
www.innercitypress.com/unleak1afgh022210.html

UNITED NATIONS, February 22, updated -- A UN memo leaked to Inner City Press about the UN's embattled mission in Afghanistan UNAMA paints a picture of low morale and a closed down recruitment system as relocated staff prepare to return from Dubai, to Afghan locations from which they'll have to commute.

The memo, sent out by UNAMA chief of staff Peter Schmitz on February 22 and nearly immediately forwarded to Inner City Press, concerns relocation and safety issues in the continuing aftermath of the "Bakhtar Guest House tragedy... in which the UN was directly targeted for the first time."

It announces that by the end of February, 30 additional housing units will be become available. They will, however, be where "the commute takes a lot of time" and exposes staff "to additional risks."

The memo acknowledges that "in the second half of 2009, virtually no new staff joined the mission. Partly, we have ourselves to blame." Now, the UN in Afghanistan and Iraq (UNAMI) have been "given the special authority to issue mission specific one year contracts."

The memo acknowledges that since the UNAMA budget has twice doubled, it is "important that we do not lose credibility in the eyes of the ACABQ [Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions] and Fifth [Budget] Committee."

The testing time is now. Kai Eide, the UN's top envoy who quit in the wake of allegations he covered up Hamid Karzai's electoral fraud, will leave on March 6, when his successor Staffan de Mistura, who even the New York Times described as a faceless bureaucrat, will arrive. According to the memo, "we will be able to discontinue the relocation arrangement in Dubai by 8 March 2010 and have all staff return from there to Kabul."

The memo concludes with some cheerleading to tell de Mistura what works and what doesn't. Given the UN's lack of whistleblower protections, and di Mistura's insider connections, will such candid recommendations be made or implemented? We'll see. Below is the memo.

After publishing the article above, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky about the memo at the February 22 noon briefing:

Inner City Press: on Afghanistan, a memo has emerged from the Chief of Staff of UNAMA, Mr. [Peter] Schmitz, saying among other things, that virtually no new staff have joined the mission in the second half of 2009, and that new units are being, that the relocation from Dubai will take place by 8 March. Can you, one, can you confirm that the move to Dubai will be finished by 8 March? And two, how can it be, what does it mean if the budget is doubled that no new staff have been hired? Galaxy is closed, which used to be the way that they recruited staff. If Galaxy is closed, what’s it been replaced by and what are the plans to actually spend the money that’s been allocated to UNAMA?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Okay. A lot of questions there, and I can’t really go into detail on each of them. What I can say is the Secretary-General has said very clearly that he is concerned about the slow pace of recruitment for positions in UNAMA. There were some fairly stark reasons why that was the case, and he is certainly keen that people should be able to take up posts as soon as possible and should be able to apply for position as soon as possible. On the details, the various technical parts -- I’ll have to come back to you on that.

While still waiting for the "technical" answers, the memo has been syndicated by the WaPo FP, with credit, here. The memo is below.

Kabul, 22 February 2010

Dear Colleagues,

Since 15 December 2009, when we sent the last circular on the security and relocation issues, there have been a number of developments that should improve the situation of the Mission in the weeks and months to come.

Secure Accommodation and Office Space

As you know, the need to provide secure accommodation that meets the higher standards established after the Bakhtar Guest House tragedy, has been a major bottleneck for UNAMA. The good news is that by the end of this month, 30 additional housing units will be come available in UNOCA. Moreover, a further 50 units will be completed by the end of April. As a result, we will be able to discontinue the relocation arrangement in Dubai by 8 March 2010 and have all staff return from there to Kabul.

With 80 units available by the end of April, we should also be able to accommodate the new staff coming on board over the next few months.

It is understood that UNOCA is not an ideal location for those staff who have their offices or frequent meetings in the center of the city. The commute takes a lot of time and exposes them to additional risks even though the use of armoured vehicles has now been mandatory for some time. Therefore, we continue to look for additional accommodation and office space inside the city and we have identified some promising options. Once the negotiations on these options are completed, we will inform staff who wish to be closer to the city.

Recruitment

At the beginning of the year with the 2010 budget coming into effect, UNAMA had a vacancy rate of 44%. The situation had reached a point where the SRSG felt obliged to alert the Security Council that if the staffing back log were to continue, UNAMA would not be able to implement key elements of its mandate.

UNAMA is not the only mission suffering from this situation. We all know that the more stringent recruitment procedures required by the new contractual arrangements, in particular the introduction of a review by the newly established Field Central Review Boards (FCRB), created delays to a degree that in the second half of 2009, virtually no new staff joined the Mission. Partly, we have ourselves to blame because we started too late with the implementation of the new procedures. As a result, numerous recruitment cases were returned to the Mission by the FCRB for further clarifications.

The Department of Field Support and the Office for Human Resources Management have realized that UNAMA (and UNAMI) had reached a choking point. Therefore, we and UNAMI have been given the special authority to issue mission specific one-year contracts to staff who have been interviewed by the Mission and recommended to be placed on the roster concerned for selection.

Moreover, the Field Personnel Division (FPD) of DFS sent a team led by Masaki Sato to assist UNAMA in addressing the back log of cases pending endorsement by the FCRB. As of mid-February, exercising its new authority, UNAMA has issued 53 mission specific contracts. The selected staff should be arriving over the next two months, providing a desperately needed respite. Nevertheless, there are still numerous vacancies yet to be filled. Stephani Scheer, the Chief of Mission Support, together with the team from New York and the Section Chiefs have prioritized the vacancies and established interview panels that will pursue the necessary recruitment steps.

A key element in this context is the issuance of mission specific vacancy announcements. Since the Galaxy system is closed, and since many of those who applied previously never intended to come to Afghanistan, FPD has established lists of candidates who indeed are willing to join UNAMA. If we cannot find any suitable candidates on these lists or if we know of eminently suitable candidates who are not currently in Galaxy, mission specific vacancy announcements can be issued.

We will continue to get help from FPD. However, the brunt of the time-consuming interview work will have to be borne by us. While it is understood that the steps involved in recruiting staff seem arduous and take time away from our daily work, we must approach this task with a sense of urgency. If we don’t prioritize recruitment now we will not be able to get out of this slump. Moreover, UNAMA’s budget virtually doubled in two consecutive years, 2009 and 2010. This not only shows that Afghanistan is still high on the international agenda, it also places a lot of responsibility on us. It is important that we do not lose credibility in the eyes of the ACABQ and the Fifth Committee which placed a lot of trust in our ability to utilize the additional resources in an effective and efficient manner.

Field Issues

From my regular visits to UNAMA’s field offices, I know that our colleagues in the field have particular hardships to endure. They live in remote locations and their offices and living accommodations are more often not at the standard we would like them to enjoy. Moreover, with the new MOSS and MORSS requirements, many field locations need to be upgraded to a higher category. Where premises cannot be upgraded, new locations have to be found. The CMS has established a priority engineering plan to address these issues. She is also making every effort to improve internet and Lotus connectivity, crucial tools of communication, particularly in remote office locations

Reimbursement of Additional Security Cost

The new security requirements, in particular the need for internal guards (Gurkhas), have increased the cost for office and accommodation security exponentially. The Security Management Team (SMT) has before it a proposal to increase the amount reimbursable to staff for security upgrades. The SMT’s decision is expected shortly. Staff should not suffer financially because of the additional security requirements. The CMS is devising a policy for the various housing situations to ensure that nobody will incur financial losses.

In this context it is important, that those staff members who were the primary lease holders for one of the many guest houses that had to be vacated following the Bakhtar guest house tragedy, approach their landlords to recover any rent they may have paid in advance. The Legal Office will provide assistance, if necessary. In the event that landlords decline to return rent paid in advance, they should make this known to the CMS. A separate circular will be issued in this regard providing more details.

We should, however, keep in mind that efforts to homogenize the salaries and entitlements of all entities in the UN System have not yet come to pass. UNAMA staff will have lesser entitlements than the staff of the agencies, funds and programmes. Hence, while we are trying to interpret our rules and regulations with the maximum benefit for staff in mind, there are things that we cannot not do within the current regulatory framework.

Staff Morale

Following the Bakhtar guest house incident in which the UN was directly targeted for the first time, we all felt somewhat depressed. Moreover, the rather tumultuous unfolding of the elections last year led to vehement and often unfair criticism of the Mission and UNDP ELECT which, no doubt, left some scars on our self-esteem. How we perceive our work and how our work is perceived by others clearly has an effect on our morale.

Two weeks ago, I convened a meeting with all Section Chiefs to address these issues. They raised many of the problems mentioned above relating to secure accommodation and staffing. They also put forward a number of ideas and proposals that we will follow up upon in the near future.

A key to staff morale is also the relationship between staff and their supervisors. Particularly in the remote locations in the field with little opportunity for other than office related activities, inter-personal relations can become strained. Such situations should be addressed in an open and transparent spirit in discussions with the supervisor. No purpose is served if conflicts are left to fester and then turn into formal complaints to the Conduct and Discipline Unit. I would appeal to all managers and supervisors to actively engage with their staff and to nip interpersonal conflicts in the bud.

New Leadership

Mr. Staffan de Mistura has been appointed as the new Special representative of the Secretary-General in Afghanistan. He will have in-briefings in New York during the first week of March and is expected to arrive in Kabul in the course of the second week. Kai Eide will leave on 6 March. A new Deputy Special Representative for Pillar I is expected in early April.

For quite some time, UNAMA has been suffering from the fact that one or the other position of the leadership troika was vacant. With the full complement of senior leaders in place, we should be able to make UNAMA’s structures work in the way that they were designed to.

Invariably, a new SRSG will make changes and adjustments. Change can be a challenge, but it should also be considered as an opportunity. We should all strive to help the new SRSG to settle in and take on his heavy responsibilities. Please be frank in pointing out to him what you believe works and what doesn’t. There is always room for improvement.

There are many challenges ahead, but with an open and collegial approach we can master them.

Cheers!

Peter Schmitz
Chief of Staff
UNAMA
Kabul

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unleak1afgh022210.html

At UN, Kai Eide's Swansong and Ban's Prerogative, Afhgan Veto in Wings

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un2monte010610.html

UNITED NATIONS, January 6, updated Jan. 7 -- As outgoing UN envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide spoke in the Security Council Wednesday morning, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin slumped next to him, non-plussed. Eide fell under fire not only for allegedly covering up President Hamid Karzai's election fraud in 2009, but also from Russia and others for being, in their view, too willing to talk with the Taliban.

The question of who will replace Eide has already been decided by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, a senior Ban advisor told Inner City Press on the evening of January 5. Publicly, it's between Staffan de Mistura, favored by the U.S. and Ban, and Jean-Marie Guehenno, favored by France (and pronounced by the Russian mission as "Gavno," or excrement.)

The self-styled Paper of Record slammed both Kai Eide and de Mistura's "low key style" and "bureaucratic instincts." The UN's response, seeming decided on at a meeting Monday morning and crystallized in talking points, was to question why the paper chimed in with an editorial at this time.

As the Security Council's gabfest on Afghanistan came to an end, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon what he made of the New York Times editorial. He said he had read it, but that choosing the replacement of Kai Eide is his "prerogative." But what about Hamid Karzai's veto?

As to the origins of the Gray Lady's editorial, while the U.S. State Department is pushing de Mistura, there are other views in Foggy Bottom, with direct access to Times Square. The finger points at Richard Holbrooke, and as the actual author the retired op-ed writing Robert Unger. Last time, Holbrooke lobbied Ban to get Peter Galbraith appointed. Given how that worked out, the theory goes, Holbrooke couldn't lobby Ban directly, but rather had to work through the Times. But Ban has in essence shot it down.

Left unanswered for a week now are questioned posed to spokesman Martin Nesirky about Ban Ki-moon's son in law Siddarth Chatterjee, hired by de Mistura in Iraq, later promoted by Jan Mattsson at UNOPS in Copenhagen, in both cases reportedly to gain favor with Mr. Ban. On January 6, Nesirky for the first time cut off questions, saying at 12:30 that Ban was about to speak at the Security Council stakeout. But up to 12:50, Ban had still not appeared.

Others muse that Ban Ki-moon's call for NATO to name a civilian / humanitarian czar is a fall back position. If de Mistura is vetoed by Karzai, he could go for the UN-urged NATO position. It would be nice to get more of these questions answered, but at this UN it is not happening. Watch this site.

Footnote: as the Council meeting broke up Mona Juul, Norwegian Deputy Ambassador, and lambaster of Mr. Ban, waited and greeted Kai Eide. In her anti-Ban memo, the only SRSG she praised was... her paisan Kai Eide. Eide will hold a press conference at the UN on January 7. We'll be there.

Update January 7, 8:21 a.m. -- And then it was canceled:

Please note that the press briefing that had been scheduled for 10:00 am on Thursday by the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Afghanistan, Kai Eide, has been cancelled. Mr. Eide is traveling to Washington, D.C. today and is unavailable for the briefing.

(He later told the Norwegian press he had been summoned to meet iwth Richard Holbrooke.) And so Kai Eide goes out as he came in. Al Kai Eide, we hardly knew ye...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2monte010610.html

Galbraith Claims Disclosed Oil Interest to UN, Eide Leaked Before Leaving? Successor Tales

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unama1leak121109.html

UNITED NATIONS, December 11 -- As the Norwegian press reports UN envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide will leave the post in March if not before, the conflict between Eide and his former deputy Peter Galbraith has taken a new twist.

In an e-mail to Inner City Press, Galbraith claims that he disclosed to the UN his interest in a Kurdish oil field, and expresses "surprise that a Norwegian tabloid happened to write a story about it within a week of my Washington Post Outlook piece describing Kai Eide's role in downplaying the fraud in the Afghanistan elections."

The implication, spelled out by Galbraith's supporters, is that the UN and perhaps Kai Eide himself leaked Galbraith's financial information to the Norwegian press. Galbraith has refused, however, to release a copy of the financial disclosure form he filed with the UN.

Inner City Press has asked the UN if Galbraith disclosed the oil interest. UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson responded that Galbraith filed a form, but that its contents will not be disclosed, even to the UN's executive 38th floor, apparently. The financial disclosure forms are filed with PriceWaterhouseCoopers. It is unclear who in the UN system vets them for conflicts of interest.

Additionally, the Norwegian media which reported Galbraith's interest were following a story between the oil company DNO and the Kurdish Regional Government. During their course of their inquiry, they stumbled on documents reflecting an interest in the oil field by a company which only later was discovered to be controlled by Galbraith.

Still, UN officials have bad mouthed Galbraith both on and off the record. At a press conference at UN headquarters, the number two official of UN Peacekeeping Edmond Mulet said that Galbraith had an ulterior motive which would later be revealed. And a senior UN official from the 38th floor called UN correspondents to make them aware of the Norwegian stories.

While Eide unilaterally announced he will stay until March, the word from the 38th floor -- read, deputy chief of staff -- is that Eide will leave after the conference on Afghanistan.

A question is, who's next for the UN in Afghanistan? While Inner City Press joked on Friday with former Nepal envoy Ian Martin -- "next stop Kabul?" -- the smart money is on former UN envoy to Iraq Staffan de Mistura. The reasoning is telling: if the UN puts someone higher profile in, they will have to spend more on security. One wag also wondered whether de Mistura would bring his previous chief of staff with him.

Jean Marie Guehenno was said to be in the running, but apparently France is not lobbying for him. Inner City Press sought to question Mr. Guehenno at an event on the Congo one week ago, but he declined to answer questions. Zut alors!

Galbraith wrote to Inner City Press that:

Subj: Re: Press Q from UN: did you disclose oil interest
From: Peter Galbraith
To: Inner City Press

Dear Matthew,

I did disclose all financial holding and interests to the UN including the fact that I had a breach of contract claim in arbitration against DNO. (This is the accurate description of the interest and not as described in the NY Times.) The contents are confidential and, for lots of reasons, I intend to keep them that way. The key accusation in the NYT story--that I pushed through constitutional provisions for my own benefit is untrue and illogical. I was a private citizen and had no ability to push through anything. The NYT provides no source for this allegation and, in a breach of any standard of fairness, never asked me to respond to it.

My arrangement with DNO dates back to June 2004 or more than five years ago. I do find it surprising that a Norwegian tabloid happened to write a story about it within a week of my Washington Post Outlook piece describing Kai Eide's role in downplaying the fraud in the Afghanistan elections. But, I also find the UN's ever shifting public explanations for my firing also to be curious. Not one of them was ever mentioned to me at any time. And they all smell of desperation to come up with some rationale for firing a senior UN official who had a private disagreement with boss about whether UNAMA should be concerned about massive fraud in a UN funded and supported election.

On the chapter 6 stuff, you are all wet. If you read carefully the questions and answers, you will see they were replies to questions sent both to Amb Redman and me. They reflected the views of the US government, which I represented and not me personally. Since they were questions to the record, I may not have even seen them before they were submitted. (At this stage, I can't recall). The USG took the same position on enforcing the arms embargo as the UK, France, Germany and Russia. None felt legally obliged to report on violations. The only difference is that we were asked our view by the Croatians and the others were not. But their position and behaviour was the same. (except for Russia which was a major source of arms going to Croatia and Bosnia, in spite of the government's pro-Serb tilt.)

I appreciate very much your doggedness in pursuing the issue of how the UN handled the Afghan elelection fraud. Keep up the good work. Peter

Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unama1leak121109.html

UN Denies Galbraith's a Whistleblower, Told Him to Be Quiet about Kai Eide's and UNAMA's Pro-Karzai Bias

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un2elections100709.html

UNITED NATIONS, October 7 -- With the UN facing charges of bias and cover up of fraud in Afghanistan, Wednesday in New York the UN presented no fewer than three officials to the Press corps, all intent on rebutting and bad mouthing the UN's fired deputy envoy Peter Galbraith.

The Department of Peacekeeping Operation's second in command Edmond Mulet said the Galbraith has "personal motives" for going public with his complaints that main envoy Kai Eide has been covering up electoral irregularities in the service of Hamid Karzai. Inner City Press asked Mulet to describe how Galbraith has hired for the job, and why these personal motives, or propensity to be a loose cannon, had not been discovered at the time.

Mulet said that while Galbraith had been "a candidate among others... he was selected by the Secretary General... I cannot deny that him being a citizen of an important country that plays an important role in Afghanistan, that also was a factor we took into consideration." Video here, from Minute 1:01:56.

According to Mulet, the UN thought Galbraith's American citizenship was a plus, that Galbraith would somehow represent or be a conduit to the United States. So what now -- does Galbraith speak for the U.S.? Or, as some surmise, did Richard Holbrooke create a Frankenstein and then "leave him out to dry"?

Inner City Press asked Mulet and his colleagues to respond to Galbraith's statement in the Daily Telegraph that

"the final instruction from the Secretary-General before sacking him last week was: 'Do not talk.' He initially agreed to Ban Ki-moon's request after being given assurances that his dismissal would be presented as a dispute over how the UN mission was handling electoral fraud in Afghanistan. But he decided to break his silence, after officials announced instead that his sacking was in the 'best interests of the mission.' 'I might have tolerated even this last act of dishonesty in a dispute dating back months if the stakes were not so high.'"

While Mulet didn't answer, his colleague Wolfgang Weisbrod-Weber, the Director of the Asia and Middle East Division of DPKO, said that while he didn't know what Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, DPKO has told Galbraith "do not exacerbate the divergence of views in public unnecessarily."

Since Galbraith was complaining not only of electoral fraud but also of bias by his boss, Kai Eide, and was told to be quiet and then was fired, Inner City Press asked how this complied or relates to the UN's statement policy of protection of whistleblowers' rights to make such complaints. Video here, from Minute 1:04:14.

Mulet insisted that Galbraith is not a whistleblower, saying "he has a personal agenda, a person objective that will become clear in the future." Another reporter said that Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar said that Galbraith was removed because he was trying to engineer an unconstitutional change of government in Afghanistan. There was no response to this, nor to Inner City Press' question about whether the UN will, as Karzai challenger Abdullah Abdullah and others have urged, conduct an investigation of Eide's actions, by the Office of Internal Oversight Services.

While Mulet and Craig Jenness, Director of the Electoral Assistance Division of the Department of Political Affairs both insisted that the UN had no monitoring role in Afghanistan, a May 11, 2009 press release by the UN stated that "UNAMA will follow these elections closely and monitor the campaign to help ensure that the fundamental political rights of the Afghan people are respected. " So which is it? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2elections100709.html

UN Accused in Kabul, Bombed in Pakistan, UNDP Questioned on Security

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un1afgpak100509.html

UNITED NATIONS, October 5 -- With the UN in Afghanistan accused of siding with Hamid Karzai and covering up fraud, while the UN World Food Program in Islamabad got bombed and five staff members killed, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Michele Montas faced a slew of questions on "Af-Pak" on Monday.

One reporter asked if the UN thinks there is any connection between the allegations against it in Kabul and the bombing in Pakistan. No, Ms Montas insisted. She said that the Iraqi staff member killed, Mr. Botan Ahmed Ali Al-Hayawi, survived a previous bombing of the UN in Peshawar.

Inner City Press asked Ms. Montas, since Afghan challenge Abdullah Abdullah has noted the lack of a UN investigation of its envoy Kai Eide, if the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services is beginning such a review. No, Ms. Montas said. One question is, why not?

Regarding Islamabad, while it might not be the right day to ask it, UN Development Program sources tell Inner City Press that UNDP had been charged with improving UN system security in Islamabad, possibly moving to a single UN system building in the diplomatic zone.

These sources muse that when UNDP Administrator Helen Clark met with Pakistan's representative, rather than security the topic was how to protect Pakistan's interests in connection with Bangladesh's announced investigative tribunal into war crimes, which UNDP was supposed to assist. Ms. Clark has yet to do a press conference in the UN briefing room.

The UN Staff Union aimed the blame yet wider, issuing a statement that

"The Staff Union is extremely concerned that the United Nations administration has not implemented all necessary safety and security arrangements to protect its staff. The Staff Union calls for an investigation to determine the circumstances related to this attack, especially since this incident was not without warning, occurred after two United Nations staff members were killed in the 9 June suicide attack on a hotel in Peshawar, and took place after the tightening of security that was a result of last year’s attack on the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad. "

And still, no action of the post-Algier so called "Accountability" report by the UN. Nor any OIOS investigation of Kai Eide. And so it goes at the UN.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1afgpak100509.html

Candidate for UN's #2 Afghan Post Dismissed Chapter VI of UN Charter, Ignored Arms Embargo, Kai Eide Won't Comment

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un2galbraith031909.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 19 -- The controversy surrounding the reported nomination of American diplomat Peter Galbraith to the UN's second-highest post in the UN Mission in Afghanistan, UNAMA, was directly raised to UNAMA chief Kai Eide on Thursday, without it being resolved. Eide insisted that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is still considering candidates for the post. But when Inner City Press asked if there are any candidates other than Galbraith, Eide said he would choose not to comment. Inner City Press asked for Eide's views on Galbraith's actions and statements with respect to UN sanctions while he was U.S. Ambassador to Croatia. Eide said he will leave that to the Secretary General.

What the Secretariat should and now does know is that Galbraith is on record that it is not a violation to ignore UN Security Council resolutions which call upon" states to cooperate with Sanctions Committees, "including reporting any information brought to their attention concerning violations of the embargo," as long as such calls are under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. This evasive and legalistic approach to UN Security Council resolutions is hardly one to be expected from someone subsequently aspiring to become a high UN official.

A problem with Galbraith re-becoming a U.S. official, sources say, is a series of allegations that he lobbied for the Kurdistan Regional Government without filing a registration.

UN Security Council sources asked Inner City Press about the UN-relevant aspects its March 18 report on Galbraith's past, to which this is added, from Questions for the Record Submitted to Ambassador Galbraith in the House International Relations Committee on May 30, 1996, at page 130 --

Question 6. Did the United States notify the U. N. Sanctions Committee of any Iranian arms transfers to Bosnia in violation of the international arms embargo? Was the United States required to provide notice of such transfers of which it was aware by U. N. Security Council Resolution 740 or by any other U. N. Security Council resolution?

Amb. Galbraith's Answer: The United States did not violate any obligations under this resolution. Resolution 740 contained a number of provisions, one of which "call(ed) upon" states to cooperate with the Yugoslavia Sanctions Committee, "including reporting any information brought to their attention concerning violations of the embargo." By this resolution, the Council did not impose a legally binding obligation on member states to submit particular information, as is evidenced by the lack of a reference in the resolution to Chapter VII of the UN Charter. (Here at Pg. 130).

Eide on Thursday said it is up to Ban Ki-moon. So what is up with Ban Ki-moon? Will he appoint UN officials, some of whom respect Security Council resolutions under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, and others of whom like Galbraith do not?

Eide also said that "I believe that the use of between 500 million and 1 billion dollars are never reported to the Afghan government." Inner City Press asked him on what he based the statement. Eide replied it is an estimate based on which countries and entities do not report. Inner City Press asked Eide to name the entities and countries. I'll leave that for you to figure out, Eide replied.

Inner City Press asked Afghanistan's Ambassador to the UN Zahir Tanin which countries this referred to. "Kai Eide should tell you," Ambassador Tannin replied. But Eide did not say. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2galbraith031909.html