By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow Up on Exclusive, Media Critique
On February 5, rather than follow up, Reuters used a UN briefing about Syria and destruction of cultural heritage, largely by rebels, to promote the Hollywood film Monuments Men. (At the same UNESCO briefing, the State Department's Voice of America demanded to know if the Assad government is lying about protecting antiquities.)
As to US Ambassador Samantha Power? Reuters' focus was not FSA child soldiers, but rather Pussy Riot -- and on this, though not on the FSA child soldiers, the US Mission was fast with an e-mailed quote. This is how it works.
This is the story, then, of two UN reports and how they were either blared or covered up by sample wire Reuters.
The more recent report shows the FSA recruiting and using child soldiers, which should for example ban them from US aid under the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008.
On January 29 Inner City Press first published quotes from the UN's report on Syria Children and Armed Conflict, specifically that the FSA recruits and uses child soldiers:
"Throughout the reporting period, the United Nations received consistent reports of recruitment and use of children by FSA-affiliated groups."
Reuters didn't report on this until a full
six days later -- it claimed that the report was only made public that day, February 4 -- and did not mention the US law on support to child soldier recruiters.
Inner City Press back on January 30 asked the US Mission to the UN to respond to the report. Inner City Press was told to put the request for comment in writing, and did, to the UK Mission as well.
The report had already been circulated to Security Council members in English; the UK said it would wait to provide Inner City Press with a comment until the report was made official on February 3, that is to say, when it was translated into the UN's five other official languages and
put on the Internet.
In this Syria / FSA child soldiers case, the delay by the UN -- and as noted by Reuters -- affirmatively helped the Syrian opposition. On January 29 they were in Geneva, issuing statements about abuses by the Assad government. They were not asked about the Free Syrian Army's use of child soldiers, certainly not by Reuters.
Contrast this with Reuters' breathless blaring of advance copies of the UN's Democratic Republic of the Congo sanctions Group of Experts report accusing Rwanda of supporting the M23 rebels.
Last summer, Reuters highlighted those portions of the GoE report without publishing it. Inner City Press put the
whole report online.
By the logic of this censorship complaint to Google, any leaked document could be blocked for Google's Search under a claim of "copyright."
On the Syria report on February 3, Inner City Press again asked the UK for its comment, and it did arrive the following day on February 4:
"The UK absolutely condemns the use of child soldiers in all cases, and strongly supports international efforts to stop the use of child soldiers. We urge all parties in the Syrian conflict to release any children held in detention.
"Armed conflict affects millions of lives around the world, and children are among those most vulnerable to the effects of conflict. The only way to secure the long-term future of Syria’s children is to find a political solution to the crisis.
"We have made clear our absolute condemnation of the use of child soldiers. As noted in this report, the use of child soldiers by the opposition is not systematic and is limited to certain elements. We have provided training to the Supreme Military Council of the Syrian opposition on the law of armed conflict, and will continue to work with them to help ensure that they meet their obligations under international law."
It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) the United States Government should condemn the conscription, forced recruitment, or use of children by governments, paramilitaries, or other organizations;
(2) the United States Government should support and, to the extent practicable, lead efforts to establish and uphold international standards designed to end the abuse of human rights described in paragraph (1);
There are prohibitions on funding which can only be overridden for formal, public findings by the President. Given all this, Inner City Press on February 4 again asked the two spokespeople for the US Mission to the UN its January 30 question: "could the US provide aid to a non-state group, the FSA and its affiliates, which the UN has found using child soldiers?"
Inner City Press had previously noted to them difficulty is getting responses from the State Department in Washington, which says some of its notices are restricted to "mainstream" -- read, legacy -- media, and to "ask the Mission."
The US Mission has yet to respond. But today's New York Times, saying that the child soldiers report was "quietly presented to the Security Council last week," has a quote from the State Department. Why was the report, and this statement, delayed a full six days until the Geneva II talks were over?
On January 29, Inner City Press published additional quotes from the report, including that:
"Boys aged 12 to 17 were trained, armed, and used as combatants or to man checkpoints. For instance, a 15 year-old boy reported being recruited in April 2012 by the FSA in Tall Kalakh (Tartus governate), and participation in military operations.... Also indicative was the case of a 16 year-old boy from Homs who reportedly joined the FSA as a combatant. In March 2013, his family reported to the United Nations that he was still fighting with the group."
And is this boy still fighting with the FSA? There is more to be said about this UN report, but as to the US and the recent report it is or is moving toward aiding the armed FSA, what steps will actually be taken on this UN report, which unlike the UN's report accusing Rwanda, Reuters was six days late in reporting, such as it did? Watch this site.
