In UN Debate, China & North and South Korea Take On Japan, France's Araud Quotes Bismarck, Of DR Congo & Rwanda

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- The UN Security Council debate on "War, its lessons, and the search for a permanent peace" on January 29 featured several rounds of fighting on issues ranging from Japan and World War II to Russia and Georgia, Armenia and Turkey, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

  Chinese Permanent Representative Liu Jieyi told Inner City Press he would be raising the issue of Japanese prime minister Abe visiting the Class A War Criminals" in the Yasukuni shrine, and he did. He said, "What Abe is doing is to try to reverse the verdict on the war and defend war criminals."

  Hours later when Japan spoke, it argued that there are others, not just war criminals, in the Yasukuni shrine. Its response on comfort women -- sexual slavery -- did not convince South Korea, which replied that it is not a charity issue, that Japan must accept legal responsibility. 

 North Korea, or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, said much the same thing: a rare chance for rapprochement, courtesy of Jordan which proposed and sponsored the debate.

  That the debate was in the Security Council was questioned by some, who saw the Council once again grabbing terrain that belongs to the 193 states in the General Assembly. India's Permanent Representative Mukerje opposed any idea for the UN to get involved in re-examining historical narratives (Mukerje told Inner City Press this could be inferred from Jordan's concept paper.)

  Georgia talked about Russia giving 500 vehicle permits for the Sochi Olympics to Abkhazia; Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative Pankin used a short reply to mention South Ossetia as well.

  Armenia and Turkey, the last of the replies, "did not have a common understanding," as Turkey put it, of events in 1915. Turkey said the UN had not called it a genocide.

  Kenya spoke about the International Criminal Court, saying it must work harder to be impartial and not to "manipulate justice for the powerful."

  France's Gerard Araud said, without mentioning the Shah, that Iran was once an ally of Israel (whose Ron Prosor mentioned not only Rwanda but also Cambodia). Araud cited the Kaiser and quoted from Bismarck; it hearkened back to Araud's statement to the Assemblee Nationale on June 12, 2013 that Rwanda is like "the Prussia" of its region.

  The DRC used its speech to talk about Rwanda and the M23 rebels. Rwanda's Deputy Permanent Representative replied with a series of questions: was it Rwanda who killed Lumumba? Was Rwanda responsible for Mobutu? Who hosted and failed to separate the genocidaires from Rwanda in 1994? We'll have a separate story on this question. Watch this site.

Footnote: Tellingly, even as China spoke about war crimes and Japan, the UN spokesperson's office loudly squawked that correspondents should go to the Agence France-Presse(and Kyodo) farewell drinks hosted by UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance. War crimes, shwar crimes.

   

With DR Congo's Mende Citing "Terrorist Attack," Will France Draft UNSC Statement, As Full Battalion Shifted to South Sudan?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 30 -- Amid the gunfire in Kinshasa, the spokesperson for Joseph Kabila has called it a "terrorist attack." 

   Following minster of information Lambert Mende's statement, and the events, the question arises: will France, which holds the UN Security Council "pen" on the DRC and controlled the Council's recent trip there now draft a Council press statement on the chaos?

  While this remains to be seen -- France has been silent in the Council of last on the breakdown in its former colony the Central African Republic, even as eight African peacekeepers have been killed -- it must be noted that the UN has proposed removing a full battalion of peacekeepers from its MONUSCO mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here for long form analysis on Beacon Reader.

  For a week since Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced that he would move peacekeepers and "assets" including attack helicopters from DRC, Darfur, Abyei, Liberia and Cote d'Ivoire to South Sudan, Inner City Press has asked Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky about any UN analysis or recognition of the potential impacts on the places the peacekeepers would be removed from.

  Nesirky has not answered the questions. None of them. Another question Inner City Press asked, about tensions between South Korea and Japan including in South Sudan after Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe's visit to a shrine for Japan's World War Two dead, Nesirky answered but first to other media on a regional or politicized basis, 13 hours before a more general "Note to Correspondents." These practices are being opposed by the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

  Mende's use of the word "terrorist" has significance: the Security Council routinely issues fast press statements condemning terrorist attacks. (See yesterday's Inner City Press story here.) So will France propose a press statement now on the DRC? And will it address, as the UN Secretariat hasn't, the pull out of a battalion from MONUSCO at this time? Watch this site.

Footnote: Meanwhile for hours after what Mende called the "terrorist attack," nothing has been heard from the UN's envoy to the DRC Martin Kobler. One wag wondered if Kobler was "pulling a Hilde Johnson" -- the UN's envoy in South Sudan said little in the days after the fighting and killing in Juba. Is Kobler now as aligned with Kabila as Johnson is with Salva Kiir?

  Kobler's MONUSCO mission was blithely tweeting out photographs of blue helmets holding hands with Congolese children... in Pinga in North Kivu, far far away. This is the Department of Peacekeeping Operations under Herve Ladsous, who "has a policy" of not answering Press questions, video here, UK coverage here. This is the UN of late: no answers, just spin.

   

On South Sudan, As Salva Kiir Moves on Bentiu and Riek Machar Accuses IGAD-Member Uganda of Bombing, UN's Ban Ki-moon Praises Them

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 28 -- Amid reports of attempts to "retake Bentiu" and to re-retake Bor in South Sudan, and after Riek Machar accused IGAD-member Uganda of bombing troops loyal to him, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued this statement:

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 11:10 AM
Subject: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on the outcome of IGAD Summit

Statement Attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General on the outcome of IGAD Summit

The Secretary-General welcomes the outcome of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Summit held on 27 December, appointing a mediation team to work with the Government of south Sudan and opposition in reaching a cease fire, the release of the detainees and building toward a process of peaceful dialogue.

The Secretary-General commends IGAD for its work and offers his full support to this process.

The United Nations stands with the people of South Sudan and will continue to do everything within its means to protect civilians at risk and provide necessary humanitarian assistance.

All violence, attacks and human rights abuses must end immediately. The Secretary-General reminds those responsible that they will be held accountable. He calls on the Government and all concerned to ensure the rights and security of civilians are protected.

New York, 28 December 2013

  It sounds fine, but what about Bentiu? What of Machar's allegations against IGAD-member Uganda? As set forth below, what about the areas including in the Democratic Republic of the Congo from which peacekeepers are being withdrawn? 

  And, in light of Ban's spokesperson's apparent selective pre-distribution of a Ban statement about Japan, South Korea and China to some media 13 hours before others, did this one similarly go out in stages?

While the UN has refused to answer Press questions about the foreseeable impacts of moving peacekeepers out of the Eastern Congo, Darfur, Abyei and even Cote d'Ivoire, on December 27 it uploaded to YouTube a video featuring 72 Bangladeshi UNPOL peacekeepers arriving in South Sudan from now less-protected by unspecified parts of the DRC.

  The Bangladeshi move, approved quickly by prime ministerSheikh Hasina whom the UN has purported just a week before to be pressuring for flexibility in upcoming elections, was meant to show how seriously the UN takes the protection of civilians. 

   But what is being left behind in the Congo? Why not answer that question? See longer form analysis on Beacon Reader, here.

  The UN Security Council, whose president for December Gerard Araud told Inner City Press that the impact of the shifting of peacekeepers had not been discussed, was slated to here from the UN's envoy to South Sudan Hilde Johnson on December 27. 

  But that session was canceled, so that Johnson could go to the IGAD meeting in Nairobi and presumably make Salva Kiir's case.

  Now it is re-scheduled for 10 am on December 30. At least the Council is meeting on South Sudan -- with 11 peacekeepers killed this month in Central African Republic, the Council barely meets on it.

  France's president Francois Hollande and UN Secretary General Ban -- location undisclosed -- had a telephone chat and different read-outs on December 27. Hollande said he wants the UN to play a more important role (read, pick up the slack, save the bacon, cut and run) and Ban Ki-moon promised to consult with the Security Council on the coming days.

  But where is he? The UN will not say, despite a request from the Free UN Coalition for Access. This, the UN tries to erase -- or Ban -- from its transcripts, click here for that. Now, Ban's spokesperson gave some media a statement on Japan, South Korea and China between 7 and 8 pm on December 27 -- then emailed it to others, including the Press which has earlier asked about the tensions, a full 13 hours later. And so it goes in Ban's UN. Watch this site.

   

After Press Questions on UN Role in Japan Ammo to Koreans in South Sudan, Ban Ki-moon Speaks on Abe's Visit to Yasukuni - But From Where?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 28 -- Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to the controversial Yasukuni shrine to Japan's World War Two dead has drawn a comment from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. It comes after a week of his spokesperson refusing to answer any Press questions including on Korean - Japanese relations, South Sudan and even where Ban was on December 26 and 27.

  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Martin Nesirky, among more than a dozen ignored questions, to "please state where the SG *is,* much as other figures such as President Obama and NYC's incoming mayor do, in light of online notice that '26-27 December 2013, Secretary-General is away from Headquarters,' or please explain why that is not the SG's / UN's practice."

  Even the policy questions has not been answered; Ban's location was never provided. Similar questions plagued New York City's outgoing mayor Michael Bloomberg, and candidates to replace him committed to make public where they are, since they are public officials.

  Is the UN Secretary General not a public official? Ban has commented on South Korea's (and China's but not North Korea's) anger at Abe's Yasukuni visit.

  But Ban's spokesperson has not answered, or even acknowledged receipt of, this question Inner City Press submitted in lieu of the canceled UN noon briefing which theFree UN Coalition for Access @FUNCA_info repeatedly asked be put back on the schedule, given the crises in South Sudan and Central African Republic, and what Ban described as mobility and partnership reforms which failed in the UN Budget Committee and General Assembly on December 27:

"on South Sudan, in light of the Secretary General's response at his last stakeout, please provide his / the UN's response to the subsequent report that

'The Korean side is now accusing the Japanese of politically using the emergency faced by Korean troops in South Sudan, with one unnamed official telling the Chosun Ilbo that the Abe government’s linking of the ammo supply to its “active pacifism” initiative was a “clear political provocation.” Another unnamed official said Korea had told the Japanese to handle this quietly out of fear that the locals would turn hostile and attack Korean troops if word got out that they’d received ammo, but the Japanese were instead turning this into a big story. Korean government officials are also saying that they intend to return all the ammo to Japan once Korean ammo arrives from Korea, despite the fact that the Japanese said they could keep it.'"

This question has still not been answered. But twenty hours after Inner City Press submitted it, Nesirky's office sent this out, which we publish in full:

Note to Correspondents

In response to questions from journalists, the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General has the following to say:

The Secretary-General is aware of the visit by the Prime Minister of Japan to the Yasukuni shrine, as well as of a strong reaction to it by China and the Republic of Korea. The Secretary-General has consistently stated that the countries in Northeast Asia are important partners for the United Nations whose contribution is significant in shaping our future.

It is highly regrettable that tensions from the past are still plaguing the region. The Secretary-General has been consistent in urging the countries in the region to come to a common view and understanding of their shared history. He stresses the need to be sensitive to the feelings of others, especially memory of victims, and focus on building mutual trust and stronger partnership. Leaders bear special responsibility in that regard, as the region should strive to be forward-looking and harmonious.

28 December 2013, New York

Refusal to answer basic questions, among other things, hardly leads to meaningful harmony. But it has been a full week without UN answers to basic questions. Watch this site.