On Migration, Inner City Press Asks UN' Peter Sutherland about US & Mexico, Niger Desert, Goldman Sachs

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 27 -- As the UN belatedly wades into the migration crisis debate, its until now part time Special Representative on Migration Peter Sutherland took Press questions on May 27.

Inner City Press asked him about those migrants who die not on the water but for example in the desert in Niger, and whether the United States' resistance to internationalizing its issues with migrants from Mexico and Central America led the UN to avoid holding, for example, a General Assembly meeting about the topic. Inner City Press also asked Sutherland about this other job, as outgoing chairman of Goldman Sachs. Video here.

Sutherland answered this last question first, emphasizing that the UN post he took in 2006 from Kofi Annan was “pro bono” -- without pay. But isn't it a full time issue?

Sutherland declined to comment on the US, adding that “the Administration” is helpful on UN migration issues. He's a nice guy, but refusing to comment on the elephant in the room, and simultaneously serving the UN and Goldman Sach (and before that BP) is a telling symbol of today's UN. He still might accomplish something on the issue - we hope so. 

Back on May 11 before the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs Federica Mogherini briefed the UN Security Council on May 11 on the EU's proposal to try to stop unauthorized migration to Europe from Libya, Angola's Permanent Representative Ismael A. Gaspar Martins stopped and told the press that you don't deal with refugees with bombs.

  So when Mogherini came to take questions at the Security Council stakeout, Inner City Press with hand raised sought to ask her about this view. Video here and embedded below.

  After questions were handed to Reuters, two Italian media and the New York Times, and Agence France Presse got a question answered by blurting it out, Inner City Press asked about Angola's view.

 Mogherini told Inner City Press, "we discussed this and share the view that there is no military solution."

   Inner City Press said, what about attack helicopters?

  Mogherini said, "We're talking about a naval operation."

  But that of course can involve military force, including airstrikes by attack helicopters. But no follow-up was possible. While an African journalist had his hand up the whole time, more Italian journalists were called. A Kurdish journalist who asked about Iraq was told by Mogherini that she only answers on topic.

  Afterward, as before, Mogherini did a separate stakeout only for Italian media, Inner City Press tweeted photo here, rebuffing the only question asked in English, then leaving.

 The Free UN Coalition for Access is troubled by this continued approach.

 Back on April 28 when Mogherini came to take questions outside the Security Council, it was announced that after the "international" media, she would do a separate stakeout just for media from her native Italy. 

  Then the questions handpicked for Mogherini were all Western and Gulf (Saudi), particularly on the issue of Iran. An Iranian journalist was rejected. Chosen were Reuters, NYT, BBC jumping in and France 24, specifically selected, with a copycat Libya question.

  At the end - or, before the Italian only stakeout -- Inner City Press asked, Sudan, Burundi, anything? But there was not. Nor on Western Sahara, on which EU members earlier on April 28 pushed a resolution without human rights monitoring for a UN peacekeeping mission, MINURSO.

 On Sudan, the questions are obvious: over 90% vote for al Bashir, cover up of Tabit rapes. But in Burundi, the EU's Patrick Spirlet has been quoted that the EU will give 80 elections observers - even as radio stations are closed and people killed. What's the answer?

Maybe they're just getting it together.

 The Security Council - with its EU members - will hear about Burundi on April 28. Watch this site.

(The new Free UN Coalition for Access challenges such one-sided use of the UN Security Council stakeout. The old UNCA, UN's Censorship Alliance, won't. It is run by Giampaolo Pioli of Italy.)

 On April 27 Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq, and got in response an "if-asked." Transcript here

Inner City Press:  On Burundi, over the weekend, the ruling party nominated the current president for a third… to run for a third term.  And there have been crackdowns by the police, the closure of a radio station, Radio Public Africaine, and others… I'm wondering other countries have spoken.  What is the UN's response to what's happened?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Yeah, we're following the situation in Burundi very closely and we're deeply concerned over the violence over the weekend, including of a number of deaths following the announcement that the president would seek a third term and we urge a swift investigation into the violence.  Said Djinnit, the Special Envoy for the Great Lakes is in Bujumbura to convey the UN’s concerns and work with all parties on defusing tensions.

  Perhaps as Ban does more and more, he will "outsource" the rest of the UN's reaction to Geneva, while he for example cavorts with those who, like in Burundi, go after independent journalists. 

  In Burundi, the RPA was raided and told to stop live-streaming the crackdown. 

 Where is the UN Security Council, and its "pen-holder" on Burundi, on this?
 
   

On Ban Ki-moon's Five Year Rule, UN Won't Provide Any List, Says There Is No Waiver Process, Of Douste-Blazy: Irreplaceable?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 5 -- Back in January 2012, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, “I have already asked my senior staff, who are completing five-year terms to find other positions or leave the organization.” He added that this “ five-year rule is my own initiative.”

   But is this “rule” being complied with?

On August 5, Inner City Press asked Ban's Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci about a few sample “hold-over” officials in their UN posts for more than five years. Maestracci said some people are irreplaceable, or hard to replace.

Inner City Press asked if there is any process for Ban to waive this five year rule. No process, Maestracci replied.

So Inner City Press asked if Ban's Spokesperson's office, which has refused for weeks Inner City Press' request for a list of Ban's ten, or even five, last trips on private jets not paid for from the UN's general budget, could at least provide a list of UN officials who have been allowed to stay on past five years, despite Ban's stated rule.

   Inner City Press has begun to compile a list, but one would think the UN would have one.

  If you have the list, just publish it, Maestracci said. To this has the UN descended. Instead of providing any answer, Ban's spokesperson's office says, go ahead and keep asking (on travel). Or, go ahead and publish, on this.

  Robert Serry said on television his been in his post six years. But he is leaving, on PNG-ed, this Fall. 

  But what about Matthew Nimetz, UN envoy on the "name issue" of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia -- in place since 1999, that is, FIFTEEN years? Click for his date of appointment.

What about Peter Sutherland on Migration, since 2006?

What about Philippe Douste-Blazy, UN envoy on Innovative Financing, since February 2008, about whom Inner City Press have previously asked questions, here and then here? It is better to answer questions, when public positions and member states' money is at stake. We'll have more on this. Watch this site.

   

As Nepal Workers Die In Qatar, Ban Ki-moon's Migration Envoy Has No Comment, Another One to Visit, But Not Sri Lanka, Partial UN

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 3 -- Amid deaths in Qatar of construction workers from Nepal and elsewhere, Inner City Press on October 2 asked Peter Sutherland, Special Representative of Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on International Migration and Development what the UN is doing about Qatar.

Qatar has a Lounge in the renovated UN; it is celebrated including by Ban for its role in Syria (despite pouring in arms to dubious rebel groups).

Sutherland told Inner City Press, "I can't comment, I don't know the facts." Video here, from Minute 23:16. He went on to praise "progress" in the United Arab Emirate, while noting 38 to 40 domestic workers sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia. (As Inner City Press reported, one from Sri Lanka was beheaded.)

How could Sutherland not know about these well publicized stories from Qatar as they prepare for their controversial World Cup? Inner City Press gave Sutherland a business card, if and when he had a comment.

A day later, hearing nothing, Inner City Press put the same question to Francois Crepeau, UN Special Rapporteur on the protection of migrants, noting that is listed as traveling to Qatar November 3 - 10 (and seeking to go to Sri Lanka).Video here, from Minute 20:47.

  Crepeau replied that precisely because he is going to Qatar, he could not comment. He had at least read the articles; after the briefing he told Inner City Press he will hand Qatar a report on his last day there as well as holding a press conference. He did not know if it would be streamed on the Internet -- it should be.

He said he has asked requested to visit Sri Lanka, but it has not been answered. Video here, in Minute 23.

Inner City Press continues to ask: why won't Ban Ki-moon release his report on UN inaction in Sri Lanka in 2009? And now, why doesn't Ban Ki-moon say something about the mistreatment and death of construction workers in Qatar. Is this "Sports and Development"? Watch this site.

Footnote: The UN's webcast archive of the press conference including Francois Crepeau mistakenly says that Abdelhamid El Jamri was there - he was not. The Free UN Coalition for Access has raised this to UN Webcast and its supervisor, Stephane Dujarric, so far without response.

  This stands in contrast to Dujarric's solicitous responses to another's online suggestion about INSTRAW, and to a favored or courted journalist having difficulty accessing the UN. This UN's responses are partial.

It considers some good (like Saudi sponsored Syria rebel boss Ahmad al Jarba, who met with Ban Ki-moon and wasallowed to have a still unexplained faux "UN briefing" with Dujarric's partners), and some are ignored or threatened. But does this UN have this right? Watch this site.