On Gaza After UN Security Council Adopts Midnight Presidential Statement, Inner City Press Asks Jordan About Resolution, Prosor of Israel about Leaked Drafts

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 28 -- After the UN Security Council called no vote on a draft resolution on Gaza pending for the last nine days, at midnight on Sunday, July 27 (or Monday, July 28) the Council convened to adopted a Presidential Statement, below.

 Afterward, Inner City Press asked Jordan's Deputy Permanent Representative why no vote had been called the draft resolution, if there was one or more vetoes or abstaining votes that would block it.

  He said things haven't reached that stage; rather it was a matter of seeing when the members of the Council thought a resolution would be useful to support of ceasefire.

 

  Some ask: so is that the UN Security Council's only function?

  Inner City Press asked Israel's Ron Prosor about the different drafts leaked to Haaretz and Al Jazeera (which Inner City Press noted, here). Prosor went wider scope with his answer. A ceasefire did not sound closer.

  Prosor was also asked about Ban Ki-moon flying around in a Qatar-funded private jet - a question on which Inner City Press first reported eight days ago, and on which Ban himself should answer.

 Palestine's Riyad Mansour cited as a precedent a 1994 Security Council resolution providing protecting in Hebron, by Norwegians in white shirts, he said. He said he wished the Presidential Statement had called for Israel to pull out of Gaza, and that he wished for a resolution. We will continue on this.

  Inner City Press immediately inquired and was informed it was to adopt a Presidential Statement; the version below was provided. But why not a resolution? Why proceeding so cautiously, compared most recently with the July 21 resolution on MH17 in Ukraine?  

     As to the UNSC, here's the PRST as provided - and adopted:

UNSC Presidential Statement

The Security Council expresses grave concern regarding the deterioration in the situation  as a result of the crisis related to Gaza and the loss of civilian lives and casualties.

The Security Council calls for full respect of international humanitarian law, including the protection of civilian population, and reiterates the need to take appropriate steps to ensure the safety and well-being of civilians and their protection.

The Security Council expresses strong support for the call by international partners and the Secretary-General of the United Nations for an immediate and unconditional humanitarian ceasefire, allowing for the delivery of urgently needed assistance, and they urged all parties to accept and fully implement the humanitarian ceasefire into the Eid period and beyond. The Security Council commends the efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry for their efforts in this regard.

The Security Council also calls on parties to engage in efforts to achieve a durable and fully respected ceasefire, based on the Egyptian initiative. In this regard, the Security Council welcomes the efforts of international partners and the convening of the international meeting to support the ceasefire held in Paris on July 26, 2014 and urges all concerned regional and international parties to vigorously support efforts to consolidate an agreement between the parties.

The Security Council emphasizes that civilian and humanitarian facilities, including those of the UN, must be respected and protected, and called on all parties to act consistently with this principle.

The Security Council calls for the full implementation of resolution 1860 (2009) and stressed the need for immediate provision of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian civilian population in the Gaza Strip, including through urgent additional contribution to UNRWA. The Security Council recognizes and commends the vital role played by the Agency, along with other United Nations agencies and humanitarian organizations, in addressing the critical humanitarian needs in Gaza.

The Security Council urges the parties and the international community to achieve a comprehensive peace based on the vision of a region where two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace with secure and recognized borders as envisioned  in Security Council resolution 1850 (2008).

  Earlier, with even the “humanitarian pause” over in Gaza, the draft "framework" agreement rejected by the Israeli cabinet on July 25 was leaked from both sides. 

   But the versions leaked by each side were different.

  On Al Jazeera a one-page document was waved around, which had Qatar in the first paragraph as one of the signatories making commitments, which provided for the opening of “border and non-border” crossings and specified fishing rights up to 12 nautical miles, and a $47 million commitment by the US.

  In the “5 pm Confidential Draft” published by Ha'aretz, Qatar is the last paragraph (without Egypt), fishing rights and the $47 million from the US are not specified, nor are “non-border” crossing being opened.

  At least, the two sides leaked different stages or versions of the draft. Or is there more to this, in the spin war that this stage of the Gaza war has become?

  (The drafts are different; Al Jazeera is saying Ha'aretz stole its scoop. There may be more to this.)

  Meanwhile, silence at the UN with the draft Security Council resolution of Jordan and the Arab League not scheduled for a vote, and canned statements from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who after taking a Qatar-funded private jet from New York to Doha refused through his spokespeople to answer Inner City Press' follow-up questions on who paid for the rest of his travel. Watch this site.

   

On Iraq, UN Security Council Minus One, Nigeria, Approves a Statement on Anbar: No Restraint in Falluja?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 10 -- The situation in Anbar in Iraq is deadly serious; in the UN Security Council in New York, less so.

  After the Security Council met on January 9 about Iraq, Inner City Press asked Jordan's Permanent Representative Prince Zeid, the Council president for the month, if a draft Presidential Statement had been circulated by the United States.

  Zeid replied on the Council's "continuing examination on possibility of putting something out."

  When on Friday afternoon a public meeting of the Security Council was called for 5:30 pm, it was for the agreed-to presidential statement. The UN's machinery whirled into gear: the UN Television cameras, Security officers, interpreters.

  But when the meeting started at 5:34 pm, even watching UNTV on a small screen out at the stakeout it was clear that one of the 15 seats was empty: Nigeria's.

  Since it is often said that all 15 have to be present to hold such a meeting, Inner City Press ran up to the third floor gallery to look again. Sure enough: Nigeria's seat, next to Luxembourg, was empty. Click here.

  Prince Zeid read about the Presidential Statement -- it did NOT call on the government to show restraint -- and the meeting was over.

  Iraq's Permanent Representative Mohamed Ali Alhakim came out and despite being discouraged by some from doing a public, UN televised stakeout, told Inner City Press (on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access) that he would take to the microphone.

  Inner City Press asked him what the government sees as the next steps in Falluja, given that at least some Council members have been talking about the need to show restraint, even maximum restraint.

  Mohamed Ali Alhakim replied that the government is "working with the tribes" and is hoping that the fight can take place outside of the city.

  Afterward Inner City Press asked a Council legal expert if, in fact, Nigeria was marked absent and if there was any precedent. "You saw what you saw," was the pithy answer; a precedent back in 1950 was cited. Surely there are some more recent. But this is just the first month, for the five new members.

  Since the statement was basically agreed to between the United States and Iraq and rubber stamped by the other Council members, perhaps it was fair for Nigeria to not arrive. In further fairness, there was a closed meeting down in Conference Room 1 of the "Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations," which Nigeria has chaired. Photo and snark here. We may have more on this. Watch this site.

   

At UN on Syria PRST, Online Here, Silence Extended to 2:30, Probe Dropped

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- On Syria a series of compromises in the UN Security Council led to a Presidential Statement, not resolution, slated forpossible adoption at 3 pm on Wednesday.

Inner City Press has obtained the final draft, and puts it online here.

At 12:45, Hardeep Singh Puri, the Council's president for August, told Inner City Press that the silence procedure on the draft had been extended from 1 to 2:30. He called adoption "doable."

The European members had proposed a resolution, but settled for a Presidential Statement. Russian Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin told the press that this so-called PRST was a format more appropriate for the situation of Syria.

Brazil, operating on the principles of its IBSA grouping with India and South Africa, had on Tuesday proposed a text which condemned violence against security forces. As UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant explained to the Press, the only remaining reference in this direction is a call to end violence by all sides and against "reprisals against state institutions."

The so-called blended text by the UK and Brazil had called for an investigation of human rights violations. This has been removed, Churkin said, adding that it was not a Russia's request.

Inner City Press asked the UK's Mark Lyall Grant about it. He said it came out at the request of "one member... not Russia or China." He declined, at least on the record, to identify which country demanded it come out.

Inner City Press asked Hardeep Singh Puri which country asked for it to come out. It's more complex, he said. The question was who would conduct the investigation. If you say the Syrian authorities are committing the violations, how can they investigate themselves?

A Presidential Statement is said to require 15-0 unanimity: that is, the concordance of Lebanon, which blocked the first proposed Council statement on Syria. Wednesday there was talk of precedents to get around this, talk of China disassociating itself from decision on the demarcation of the Iraq - Kuwait border, and of a UN disassociation "in another way."

Council members were given until 1 pm -- now 2:30 -- to break silence, and if not, to come to a formal meeting at 3 to adopt it. Watch this site.

At UN on Syria, Stalling on Violence Against Security Forces, Text Online Here

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- As the UN Security Council haltingly reconvened on Syria Wednesday morning, if and how to refer to violence against security forces, and what's called the "container" or format, resolution or Presidential Statement, remained at issue.

The draft text sent to capitals Tuesday night, which Inner City Press has obtained and is pasting below as a public service, refers to and "immediate end to all violence [, including violence against security forces]."

The brackets indicate it is not agreed to. On Wednesday morning Inner City Press asked a Western spokesman if his country could live with a text condemning violating against security forces.

He replied, "No... not appropriate as you have civilians are defending themselves against an unacceptable crackdown."

Inner City Press then asked South African Permanent Representative Baso Sangqu about the issue. He said "we'll have to find the language, there has to be some reference" because there are "armed gangs" in Syria.

Given buzz about Lebanon disassociating itself from a Presidential Statement, which is usually understood to require 15-0 consensus, Ambassador Sangqu said, "there's precedent in the past. We're trying to find a way. This is very difficult for Lebanon."

Inner City Press pointed out, "No court is going to review."

Ambassador Sangqu replied, "Exactly. We're going to find a way."

Then, after a meeting of less than ten minutes, the Council broke up for 30 minutes for "one on one" talks.

Update of 11:23 am - the 30 minutes went longer; it was Western explained that Russia asked for the "Perm Reps only" meeting, to discuss a package deal. US Ambassador Susan Rice came out and said "things are moving." She left "for a Cabinet meeting," she said. Western spokespeople very upbeat; an IBSA rep too. Could it be?

Here is the text with five brackets sent to capitals Tuesday night:

Express grave concern at the deteriorating situation in Syria, and express profound regret at the death of many hundreds of people.

Condemn systematic violations of human rights and the use of force against [unarmed] civilians [by the Syrian authorities].

Call for an immediate end to all violence [, including violence against security forces], and urge all sides to act with utmost restraint, and to refrain from reprisals.

Call on the Syrian authorities to fully respect human rights and to comply with their obligations under applicable international law, and call for a credible and impartial

national investigation into the violence in Syria. Those responsible for the violence should be held accountable.

Note the announced commitments by the Syrian authorities to reform, and regret the lack of progress in implementation, and call upon the Syrian Government to implement their commitments.

Reaffirm its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Syria.

Stress that the only solution to the current crisis in Syria is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process, with the aim of effectively addressing the legitimate aspirations and concerns of the population which will allow the full exercise of fundamental freedoms for its entire population, including that of expression and peaceful assembly.

Call on the Syrian authorities to alleviate the humanitarian situation in crisis areas [by ceasing military operations against affected towns], to allow [immediate and] unhindered access for international humanitarian agencies and workers, and cooperate fully with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights [mission].

[Request the Secretary-General to update the Security Council on the situation in Syria within 7 days.]

At UN on Libya, African Council Members Want Statement on Compliance With Resolution 1973, US Said to Oppose

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, June 14 -- When African Union ministers wanted to come engage with the UN Security Council about NATO's bombing of Libya, the United States wanted to keep the meeting behind closed doors, the UK even suggesting it merely be a lunch, sources told Inner City Press.

Now in advance of the June 15 meeting, which will be a briefing and “interactive dialogue,” sources tell Inner City Press that the US is opposing an African proposed Presidential Statement, which would reiterate the importance of compliance with Council Resolution 1973.

Below is a copy of the draft, obtained by Inner City Press, which among other things “reaffirms that resolution 1973 (2011) explicitly excludes a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.”

The three African members of the Security Council -- South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon -- are proposing the Statement. The US is apparently saying they cannot decide on the draft in 24 hours. (Others note that recently on Sudan, US Ambassador Susan Rice put forward a draft Presidential Statement at 2 pm and asked for it to be adopted that day.)

The timing excuse, some feel, is a ruse: the US is hoping that Gaddafi can be killed and taken from power before the Security Council issues any further statement on Libya.

Before publication of this story, Inner City Press asked US Mission to the UN in writing to answer three questions, including this one. While the Mission's spokesman provide an interim answer to one of the three questions, there was not answer to the request for denial or confirmation and comment on the US "opposing on Libya a proposed statement reiterating compliance with Resolution 1973, and why."

Inner City Press spoke to an anti-Gaddafi member of Libya's Mission to the UN, who confirmed the African proposed statement and that the US will not accept it. He said, “the freedom fighters are now within 40 kilometers of Tripoli.”

Neither Libyan side, he predicted, will speak in the interactive segment of the June 15 meeting. “We don't have credentials,” he said. Previously, the UN let Ambassadors Shalgam and Dabbashi speak, but no more. Nor does Gaddafi have a representative at the UN, after Nicaraguan former president of the General Assembly Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann was blocked, with Susan Rice saying his tourist visa would be revoked if he tried to speak for Gaddafi.

Footnote: No other than Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam has moved to hold a press conference at the UN. As it happens, it will not be inside the UN but rather across the street. Watch this site.

Here is the African-proposed Draft Presidential Statement on Libya

At the _____th meeting of the Security Council, held on 15 June 2011, in connection with the Council’s consideration of the item entitled “the situation in Libya”, and having received a briefing from a ministerial delegation of the African Union High-Level Ad-hoc Committee on Libya, the President of the Security Council made the following statement on behalf of the Council:

The Security Council expresses its deep concern over the continuation of violence in Libya, and reaffirms its commitment to the full implementation of United Nations Security Council resolutions 1970 (2011) and 1973 (2011) in letter and spirit to ensure protection of civilians in Libya. The Security Council reaffirms that resolution 1973 (2011) explicitly excludes a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.

The Security Council demands a complete end to violence and all attacks against and abuses of civilians, perpetrated by all parties and the establishment of an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire. They stressed the need for such a ceasefire to be credible and verifiable, and encouraged the African Union and the United Nations, as well as other stakeholders, to spare no efforts in achieving this objective. The Security Council further demands a speedy solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate aspirations of the Libyan people and tackles the underlying causes of the current crisis.

The Security Council stresses the need for a political solution to the conflict in Libya. In this respect, and recalling the provisions of paragraph 2 of UN Security Council resolution 1973(2011), they welcome the efforts of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Libya, Mr. Abdel-Elah Mohamed Al-Khatib, and those of the AU High-Level ad hoc Committee on Libya in the context of the AU Roadmap. The Security Council agreed on the need for close coordination of all efforts in support of the UN and in accordance with paragraph 2 of Security Council resolution 1973(2011) to find a solution to the crisis. The Security Council welcomes the joint effort being undertaken by the UN, AU, LAS, OIC and EU and looks forward to the outcome of their next meeting to be held in Cairo, Egypt on 18 June 2011.

The Security Council expresses its serious concern over the deteriorating humanitarian situation in the country, and calls for full compliance with human rights and International Humanitarian Law and the creation of the required conditions for the delivery of assistance to all needy populations across Libya, including by guaranteeing appropriate access to humanitarian organisations. The Security Council stresses the need to provide necessary support to the African migrant workers living in Libya, including those seeking to leave the country.

The Security Council reaffirms its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

The Security Council will remain seized of this matter and will continue to meet to review the implementation of its resolutions on the situation in Libya.

At UN on Abyei Draft, Sudan PR Denies Food Theft, Dismisses Burning of “Huts," UNSC to Set June 10 Meeting

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 3, updated -- Seventy hours after the US introduced a draft Presidential Statement on Abyei, Sudan's Ambassador Daffa-Alla Elhag Ali Osman walked into the Security Council in a bright white suit. Already a Council Deputy Permanent Representative had told Inner City Press that more work was needed on the Statement, to begin at 1 pm on Friday.

As Sudan's Ambassador walked out of the Council, Inner City Press asked him about the draft. He said it had been inaccurate to call Sudan's tanks in Abyei an occupation. (Inner City Press is told that this word is being removed). He took issue with the phrase that the influx of Miseriya was an attempt at ethnic cleansing.

“That is prejudging,” he said. “Let it happen, genocide or ethnic cleansing, and then talk about it.”

When Inner City Press asked him about the accusation that tons of food was stolen in Abyei, he said he hadn't seen the World Food Program see that. Asked by another journalist about the burning of houses, he said, “those are huts, these things happen in war. Where are you from - Lebanon? These things happen there.”

And then he was gone, at least until 1 pm.

Update of 11:40 am -- a Deputy Permanent Representative tells Inner City Press that the meeting on the Sudan PRST has been moved up from 1 until just after the consultations on UNOCA, as early as noon. What else will come out of the draft? Watch this site.

Update of 12:30 pm -- Inner City Press is told that if the Council finally reaches agreement on this PRST, it will be adopted by being read out in the Chamber at 4 pm...

Update of 1:19 pm -- after a Deputy Permanent Representative tells Inner City Press that the Sudan PRST is “definitely” going to be adopted at 4 pm, another source explains to Inner City Press that there is only one paragraph open, in which the US wants to require new meetings on the topic every seven days, other members don't. Eminently solvable.

Update of 2:26 pm -- while another Deputy Permanent Representative tells Inner City Press that the Council has agreed to hold another meeting on Sudan next week, says they have still not agreed on how to express it in language and “put it on paper.” A Western representative asks Inner City Press, if we put it out at 4, the news can still be distributed, right? But of course...

Update of 2:51 pm -- the Political Coordinators have just left the Council, a number of them telling Inner City Press that the agreement, to be typed up by the US and translated into French in which Gabon will read it out, is to remain seized of the matter and to calendar another meeting on Sudan for June 10... Timing of adoption now depends on US typing up, and translation...

Update of 4:32 pm -- while the players have arrived for adoption of the Sudan PRST at the Security Council, still the meeting hasn't started. Meanwhile, reports of a UN leak saying it WAS ethnic cleansing in Abyei, here

Update of 4:39 pm -- a Deputy Permanent Representative tells Inner City Press, “the French translation is not ready.”