Showing posts with label achim steiner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label achim steiner. Show all posts

Saturday, December 1, 2018

Amid UN Bribery Case Jeff Sachs and Steiner Shown As CEFC Advisers But Guterres Still No Audit, Bans Press


By Matthew Russell Lee, Video I II III RS HK

FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, December 1 – In the UN bribery prosecution by the US against Patrick Ho of China Energy Fund Committee, on the morning of November 30 the prosecution  detailed how CEFC bought UN PGA Sam Kutesa - and played an audio wiretap of Ho discussing bribing UN PGA John Ash with Sheri Yan, who did jail time in the first UN bribery case of Ng Lap Seng. But UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has refused to even start an audit of who else CEFC is bribing in the UN. In fact, CEFC remains accredited to the UN Economic and Social Council. Inner City Press asked repeatedly about it - and was roughed up and has been banned from any entry into the UN for 150 days and counting. Now we can report, as the first in a series, that among those who consorted with and advised China Energy Fund Committee were current UN Development Program Executive Director Achim Steiner - and Jeffrey Sachs. See photos here, from a CEFC brochure which they have tried to cover up. 

The UN has refused to answer Inner City Press questions about Steiner, CEFC and its pitching of weapons, despite the promise to UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression David Kaye by the UN Department of Public Information with which Sachs has also had interaction. How it is acceptable for the UN to cover up bribery and weapons for oil offers under the claim of sustainable development and rough up and ban the Press which digs into it? Why hasn't Guterres begun an audit of CEFC? And where else does this inquiry lead? As to Uganda, CEFC instead of $500,00 case did a wire transfer - it was cheaper, through pliant HSBC bank which also money launders for Mexican drug cartels - and there was Ho, in purple like today, as Museveni's inauguration. He brought gift with him - a vase, painting, what locked to be a clock - to a dinner at Kutesa's residence. Then the prosecution flashed a list of the times Ho entered the UN - the UN has that information, you see, though they refused to provide it when Inner City Press asked, as to Francis Lorenzo, Ho and Carlos Garcia, preferring to ban Inner City Press. The prosecution left for Monday showing the agreement under which CEFC and its missing Chairman Ye bought unit 78B in Trump World Tower. After a wan cross examination by Ho's lawyer Benjamin Rosenberg (Judge Preska essentially shut him down), the jury was told they may get the case as early as Wednesday, when Antonio Guterres like his predecessor will be put up for sale at Cipriani on 42nd Street. This week, along with the depths of UN corruption, revealed how in China the formal government has a murky relationship with quasi state firms like CEFC, which on the one hand paved Xi's way into the Czech Republic and on the other, tried to get Chad's Deby to "make" Chinese state oil company CNPC to get it a piece of the action, perhaps for the Defense Committee of the Chinese Communisty Party, presumably the sources of the weapons and drones CEFC was offering to Deby and others in Libya and South Sudan. This is the NGO that Antonio Guterres has refused to audit and keeps in the UN while roughing up and banning Inner City Press. Kutesa's sale of the UN began through previous PGA Vuk Jeremic, who told Kutesa it would be "win - win" with CEFC. Then Ho emailed Kutesa's chief of staff Arthur Kafeero, whom Inner City Press wrote about before being banned from even entering the UN by UNSG Antonio Guterres. Later Ho did his emailing with Sam's wife Edith Gasana Kutesa, who asked for money to supposedly make good on an electoral campaign pledge to help Kutesa's young constituents (although she also bragged that Kutesa had no opposing candidate). She wrote, Youth are impatient - so send me the money! Ho arranged for $500,000 while pitching Edith on all the things (and people) CEFC had bought in Czech Republic. As Inner City Press reported and asked about before being roughed up and banned by UNSG Antonio Guterres, the Czech Ambassador headed ECOSOC, which refused to even look into CEFC's accreditation after Ho's arrest. CEFC used the UN to pitch weapons to dictators. And Guterres is covering up for them. Ho met Kutesa and his son Isaac for three hours in the PGA office - the type of entry Guterres is trying to prevent coverage of - and as his "PGA residence." Ho would email Kafeera and be scheduled as  speaker at the UN, which under Guterres took CEFC's $1 million even AFTER Ho was arrested. The UN of Guterres is corrupt. Periscope video here. Also on November 30, finishing up on the Chad scheme with FBI Agent Galicia, a CEFC web page with Bill Clinton was shown. We'll have more on this. On November 29, Senegal's former Foreign Minister Cheikh Gadio admitted he took $20,000 from an unnamed courier from a businessman he did not want to identify. Then Gadio pushed a journalist in the street and told Inner City Press he would answer its questions later. Video here (YouTube), shorter (Twitter). But if that seemed to give home to Ho, the upcoming Uganda scheme should not. Whether not a disputed prosecution chart comes into evidence, the undelying timeline is damning. Ho for CEFC told then UN President of the General Assembly Vuk Jeremic, who was already working for CEFC, that they wanted to meet his successor Sam Kutesa of Uganda. This culminated, while Kutesa was still UN PGA, in CEFC's chairman Ye Jianming being named a special adviser to the United Nations PGA. This is disgusting, given that CEFC was pushing weapons to Idriss Deby in Chad. More disgusting, Ho used Ye's inroaded into the Czech Republic, whose ambassador to the UN, chairing UN ECOSOC, refused to act on ECOSOC accredited CEFC even after Ho was arrested. Guterres and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric played their cover up roles in this. We'll have more on all this. Gadio is not the defendant in this bribery case - he is, at least so far, the prosecution's lead witness, with a Non Prosecution Agreement. But does that NPA cover Gadio, after his testimony, pushing a journalist on the street outside the court? Video here (YouTube), shorter (Twitter). Inner City Press along with other journalists, mostly from Hong Kong media, waiting outside the Southern District of New York courthouse at day's end. Gadio emerged and Inner City Press asked him how he thought the day had gone. He did not answer but rushed past. Inner City Press asked, louder, "Are you still running for president of Senegal?" Gadio turned back and pushed a journalist who was following him. This happened again a few blocks away. Finally on the stoop of a pharmacy on Canal Street Gadio's companion said he would not be answering questions today but to give your business card. Inner City Press gave its and asked if the former President of Senegal Gadio who took money from China for dropping Taiwan was Abdoulaye Wade. Gadio looked back in recognition - then was gone. Inner City Press previously questioned him in the UN when he was the Organization for Islamic Cooperation's envoy on the Central African Republic. Much has changed since then. As Inner City Press reported yesterday, Gadio was already on shaky ground when his email to Ho complaining he hadn't gotten Chinese money after, as Senegal's foreign minister in 2005, he worked to drop Taiwan and recognize the PR of China. But the bag of (campaign) cash allegation, dropped without warning in cross examination by Edward Kim, caused a break in the proceeding. Inner City Press rushed down to retrieve its phone and tweet and quickly live stream the news, here. Back upstairs, the name of the businessman was not disclosed, allegedly to protect him - from current president Macky Sall? We'll have more on this. Gadio testified for a second day about how he tried to broker weapons to Chad's President Idriss Deby from CEFC's Patrick Ho, who delivered gift boxes with $2 million in cash inside. Gadio's testimony got more specific, that in March 2015 Deby wanted to keep the meeting with CEFC small and confidential, "because of the war situation." Gadio cited Boko Haram, and Ho in a text message said CEFC's offer, for CNPC's 10%, was $200 million "and some arms." This is the head of a still UN accredited NGO, offering weapons for oil - with no audit by SG Antonio Guterres. Gadio tried to get paid for offering opportunities with the Chad - Cameroon pipelines. Gadio's firm Sarata had its bank account in Dubai closed for not being able to document where the money came from; his joint UN tax return with his wife, the head of the UN in Equatorial Guinea, was found to be false and is part of Gadio's non prosecution agreement. And the UN? And Gadio's reiterated dream to run for President of Senegal, after saying in writing he wanted money from China, while foreign minister, for flipping the country from Taiwan to the PR of China? The defense began its cross examination shortly before the lunch break, getting Gadio to admit he misspoke when he claimed Deby was calling him everyday. Mid-day Periscope video here. These will be more in the afternoon, which we'll report, while Guterres' UN tries to cover up the corruption in its walls - by banning the Press. Watch this site.
 - and what happened afterwards. But there are clouds on the horizon, unless Judge Preska swats them down, for the cross examination of Gadio. The lawyers for Ho, who it seems clear was using the corrupt UN's "special consultative status" to promote oil business and military equipment, point out these US statements, which the prosecutions does not want the jury to hear about: "That Dr. Gadio had intentionally omitted a key asset from his disclosures to
Pretrial Services (Ex. A at 20 (“[T]he only reasonable interpretation of that is Mr.
Gadio doesn’t want to admit his association with that firm although it is not
reasonably subject to dispute.”));
• That Dr. Gadio’s statement in an email to Dr. Ho in 2014 was “referring to a $2
million bribe that Mr. Gadio later wrote about how he should get a fee for and he
negotiated it and he got $400,000 to the firm that he omitted from the Pretrial
Services report” (id. at 21);
• That Dr. Gadio had “admitted facts that the law recognizes as criminal” (id. at
25);
• That Dr. Gadio had omitted foreign income from the Pretrial Services report
“both to avoid taxes and because he didn’t want anyone to know what it was for
because it’s a lot of money, $400,000 wire or two $200,000 wires . . .” (id.); and
• That the omissions are “an additional indication [Dr. Gadio] is running away from
what I’m referring to as the Gadio Firm which he omitted in the description of his
employment because that is a serious problem” (id. at 26). " These statements, like Gadio's threat to trash CEFC to Deby unless CEFC paid him money, are serious problems - unless blocked. The only certainty here is that the UN is corrupt, and a venue for corruption. Gadio texted Deby that his "Chinese friends" were coming to N'djamena with "excellent offers." But when the meeting happened, after speeches by Deby and Ho and CEFC's Zang, suddenly CEFC brought in gift boxes, "as big as that TV," Gadio told the court. Deby accepted them. But then Gadio, back in his hotel, got a call to return to meet Deby alone. According to Gadio, the coup leader Deby was offended. He had no problem with the cash staying in the country, but required a letter re-characterizing it as a donation. This was provided but Gadio criticized how it was written. By this time, the email made clear, Gadio was mostly focused on getting paid. He'd asked CEFC for $100,00 for a Dakar event co-sponsored by France's then-President Francois Hollande. (He also took money from Total, Hertz and a Zimbabwe cell phone company). Gadio texted his son Boubker in Dubai that if the Chinese didn't pay him by January "we will go to Chad in January and destroy their reputation and strategies in Chad! The President will listen to us!" This was ALL IN CAPS. When asked about the threat by Douglas Zolkind of the prosecution, getting ready for the defense's cross examination, Gadio said he as "translating my frustration" which Zolkind repeated as channeling. This might not work well on cross, which we will be covering, watch this site. Day 3 video here. Initially, UN President of the General Assembly Vuk Jeremic set it up, putting CEFC who he went on to work for in contact with Gadio. Both met Ho - Jeremic with UN Security who said nothing - in Trump World Tower. Gadio used the UN to reach Deby, in a "high level" meeting on Central African Republic. (In another Gadio UN connection, when confronted about the $2 million in cash Gadio called his wife, the head of the UN in Equatorial Guinea.) UN PGA Jeremic's deal making culminating in CEFC offering tanks and surveillance equipment to military coup leader Deby (Gadio lauded him a Pan Africanist, citing no less than Marcus Garvey). 
 Gadio's emails may kill off once and for all his ambition to run again for President of Senegal. In one, he complains that in 2005 when he was Foreign Minister and Senegal switched from recognizing Taiwan to the PR China, he didn't get paid. He wrote that the then President of Senegal got millions of dollars from the Chinese but didn't pass through any to him and that he complained to his Chinese counterparts about it. How will this play in Senegal? Watch this site. The opening statements were given on November 26. US Prosecutor Paul A. Hayden said Patrick Ho used UN accredited NGO CEFC to cultivate Sam Kutesa while he was President of the General Assembly, and is caught on audio tape planning to bribe other high UN official(s) - and still no audit by UNSG Antonio Guterres. On November 27 after former UN President of the General Assembly Vuk Jeremic under subpoena testified about the role of Cheikh Gadio in CEFC reaching Chad's president Deby, Gadio himself took the stand at 4:35 pm. Post-testimony stand-up video here.

He said he didn't know that CEFC's Ho would have $2 million in gift boxes to hand over at Deby's mansion -- he said he could "only think of it as a bribery attempt" -- but that he "didn't walk away." Why not? Gadio said he wanted to get paid for his and his company SARATAs work - and then Gadio said Deby needed help to fight Boko Haram, an excused use for example by the also long term president of Cameroon, Paul Biya. Inner City Press has heard from Senegal that, contrary to a portion of the defense's opening statement, Gadio is no longer running for president there but instead supports incumbent Macky Sall. He stopped abruptly a few minutes before five o'clock and, unwittingly, stayed in the court room as defense and prosecution began to argue about whethere Ho's visits to the US when he did not enter the UN should still come into evidence. Inner City Press has repeatedly asked the UN to disclose its knowledge of how many times Ho, from his base across First Avenue in Trump World Tower, entered the UN - but Guterres' UN has refused. Likewise, Gadio when asked to disclose his jobs after being Senegal's foreign minister listed a political party but NOT his stint as the Organization for Islamic Cooperation's envoy on Central African Republic. We'll have more on this - and this: earlier on November 27 a CEFC voluteer then staffer, David Riccardi-Zhu, said he was referred to CEFC by his father who worked for the UN. He attended meetings in CEFC's office / apartment in the Trump World Tower, where Ho met with a yet to be named "foreign representative from the United Kingdom." He described UN DESA bending over for CEFC and its sustainable development award - which in 2017 Guterres' DESA still took CEFC's money for even after Ho was arrested and indicted for UN bribery. Inner City Press asked the UN repeatedly about it - and was then roughed up by Guterres' security and has been banned from entering the UN 145 days and counting.  Earlier on November 27, Jeremic described doing work for CEFC while still PGA. He tried to get CEFC business with Mexico's PEMEX through "Emilio." He later tried to broker the sale of a potash mine - in court he said since this is related to fertilizer, it is "a high priority of the UN." He went to meetings in Trump Tower - the one across from the UN, in Apartment 78B, not the one on Fifth Avenue - and acted as a go-between for a CEFC Texas foray, with Noel Thompson who, Jeremic said, promoted wrestling in the UN. The UN comes off as entirely corrupt. And it emerged that Ho was trying to cut his own deal, around CEFC which is paying his legal fees. As soon as Jeremic left he started the process to sign on as a CEFC consultant at $333,333 a year. This require a waiver from Serbia, where he had been foreign minister. But the UN, then as now, has NO cooling off period. Inner City Press asked Jeremic about it during the court's lunch break. He said he had complied with rules - Serbian rules. There are no UN rules; UNSG Antonio Guterres refused to audit CEFC, lawlessly roughs up and bans Inner City Press which asks, including banning it from UNGA week which must now be seen as a hotbed of oil and gas and potash deals. We'll have more on this - it is unclear if Jeremic will take up the rest of the court's day, or if Gadio may start before the end of November 27. On November 26 at 9 am before heading to cover jury selection, Inner City Press in writing asked Guterres, his Deputy Amina J. Mohammed and Global Communicator Alison Smale: "November 26-7: On this the day the UN bribery trial of Ho / China Energy Fund Committee / PGA Kutesa begins, please immediately provide the UN's read out of the DSG's meeting Nov 22 with China's FM, and separately state where the increasingly reported issue of Chinese (government aligned) NGO bribery in the UN was discussed. Relatedly, again, what safeguards are in place for the SG's appearance, for which money is being charged, to ensure that the (Ng Lap Seng) pattern does not repeat itself on the evening of December 5, 2018." Hours later, lead UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq replied with this, seeming recycled from the Ng Lap Seng case: "Regarding question Nov. 26-7, we can say that the Organization has cooperated extensively in this matter by making thousands of pages of documents available, as well as providing access to UN personnel." Did Guterres' UN really make thousands of pages of documents available in this Patrick Ho case? If so, how can Guterres claim the case does not concern the UN and merit an audit? We'll have more on this. In the US' opening, Hayden described Ho meeting Cheikh Gadio for the first time steps from the UN; defense lawyer Benjamin Rosenberg countered that Gadio's desire to run for president of Senegal made him cut a deal at any cost. Periscope just after leaving court, here. Longer YouTube here. Before these openings, dozens of prospective jurors were whittled down to 12 with three alternates. Among those not agreed on to stay were the editor of a major magazine and a retired investment banker who travels to get Democrats elected to national office. (We are not using names or more - the insider scribes say there is an understanding, on which we'll have more). Most jurors said they read few newpapers, with a reference to the Daily News for the commute, Yahoo "junk" and social media. They filed into Courtroom 12A, the prosecution estimated the trial will take two, possibly three weeks. Ho was brought in, wearing purple; he looked to the back of the courtroom, eight or so most Asian journalists, Inner City Press, no one apparently from the UN. Some 35 prospective jurors were assigned numbers and were told the case involved charges of bribery of Chad's President Idriss Deby and of Sam Kutesa, then the President of the UN General Assembly, still Uganda's foreign minister. Did any juror feels biased? No one raised their hand. Any juror particularly burdened by a two or three week trial? Many stood up and, after sidebars, some were excused including one Amy Tan (called back to the sidebar twice). The defense had a jury consultant, one Dr. Blackburn, described to the jurors by the defense as "with us." Mid-day Periscope live stream at courthouse door here. The day before the U.S. has asked that Cheikh Gadio not be asked what he heard about how the $2 million Ho gave to Chad's President Idriss Deby was used. The government argues in a letter motion to Jude Loretta A. Preska that Ho didn't know: "Gadio has no personal knowledge as to what happened to the $2 million cash that the defendant and his CEFC colleagues brought to Chad and presented to President Déby. Gadio has no firsthand information as to whether these funds were ultimately used, in whole or part, for “good” or “bad” or “permissible” or “impermissible” purposes after CEFC sent the so-called “donation” letter. However, Gadio’s 3500 material reflects that, at some point, a third-party told Gadio that the money was directed to a supposed good and permissible use. Gadio does not know whether this is true, and in any event, he never spoke about this with the defendant. Thus, the defendant should be precluded from cross-examining Gadio
about what he learned after-the-fact from any third-party." The U.S. also seeks to prevent Gadio being cross-examined about misstatements to pre-trial services when he was Ho's co-defendant. It is not clear when Preska will rule on the letter motion. She has said the trial will begin at 10 am each day but she is willing to hear arguments in her chambers before that. Inner City Press, which covered the pre-trial hearing even while banned from the UN by UNSG Antonio Guterres who is trying to cover it up, not even auditing CEFC's other and ongoing activities in the UN, will be covering the trial. Ho has tried to use CEFC's ongoing UN "Special Consultative Status" to avoid criminal charges. This and Ho's other motions were denial by Judge Preska on November 14, including a motion to exclude testimony from Cheikh Gadio, from government expert Mr. Walkout, and to exclude Ho's dealings with Sam Kutesa's predecessor as UNGA President Sam Ashe. All of this will come in at trial - and makes the failure by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to even audit CEFC's bribes in the UN more outrageous. This UN-accredited NGO offered to broker arms not only to Chad but also Qatar, Libya and South Sudan, about which Guterres and the UN purport to care so much. Ho and CEFC offered themselves as  way to evade Iran sanctions. This evidence will come in a trial; the government has agreed not to mention terrorism or US - Iran relations. A 23 minute video of Ho's UN speeches will not come in, being called "gauzy" as is the UN of Guterres who has banned Inner City Press which covers the UN's increasing corruption, from Ng Lap Seng and Ashe to CEFC, Kutesa and beyond, ongoing. We'll have more on this. Ho was trying to exclude testimony from initial co-defendant Cheikh Gadio about Chadian President Idriss Deby's reaction to the bribe. The papers were filed on November 13 and are first being reported by Inner City Press, which as it covers this second UN bribery case has been roughed up and now banned for 132 days by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres who won't even audit CEFC's ongoing activities in the UN. Four months after the arrest for UN bribery of former Senegalese foreign minister Cheik Gadio and Patrick Ho, the head of China Energy Fund Committee full funded by CEFC China Energy, his ultimate boss at CEFC Ye Jianming was brought in for questioning in China. On October 4 Ho was again denied bail. Periscope video here. On October 22, the new trial date was set for November 26. On November 12 Inner City Press, banned from the UN by Secretary General Antonio Guterres amid its questions about the CEFC bribery and its connection to the Ng Lap Seng conviction, asked Guterres and his spokesmen: "November 12-4: Now that it is clear that Foreign Intelligence Surveilance Act wiretaps show Sheri Yan, jailed for UN bribery in the PGA John Ashe case, communicating and planned with Patrick Ho of CEFC, please explain why SG Antonio Guterres has not even started an audit into the range CEFC's bribery and interactions in the UN, why it still has access to UN while Inner City Press which which pursued Ng Lap Seng's and Yan's bribery even into the UN Press Briefing Room (29 Jan 2016) and the Patrick Ho / CEFC case, has been denied access to anything in the UN for 131 days with no due process." Guterres' deputy spokesman Farhan Haq conducted a noon briefing Inner City Press was banned from, starting with a total of three correspondents. Video here. He and the UN have not answered since, see below. After he did not answer - but he did answer Yahoo News for a story which, inexplicably, does not mention Guterres or his failure to audit CEFC's activities at the UN. Others who have done nothign about the bribery, or about Guterres' roughing up and banning of Inner City Press, like HRW's Ken Roth and FP's Colum Lynch, belatedly retweeted the Ho / Yan corruption story. But what will they and the UN they love so much do? On November 4 Ho's attempt to "suppress all evidence obtained or derived under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" was denied, with a decision that no hearing on it was needed. The FISA information includes wiretaps of Ho and another bribing NGO the Global Sustainability Foundations's Sheri Yan or her deputy planning to pay bribes. This is described today by the Sydney Morning Herald, which while saying that UN officials who it leaves unnamed are lavishing praises on the Belt and Road which Ho now uses as a defense of his alleged bribes, fails to mention main praiser Antonio Guterres. Nor does SMH - Shaking My Head -- mention that unlike even Ban Ki-mon with Ng Lap Seng, Guterres has refused to even start an audit into Ho's (and Yang II's) bribery in the UN, but instead had roughed up and banned Inner City Press which reports on it. Ng Lap Seng paid money to a group Guterres is slated to headline a fundraiser for on December 5, a group he and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric use to support their attack on the investigative Press. We'll have more on this. Hong Kong television has broadcast a report on these alleged UN and Deby bribes, including an interview with Inner City Press which has been banned from the UN by Antonio Guterres amid its coverage of UN corruption and Guterres' refusal to even audit, has been broadcast. The Court's ruling against Ho on FISA notes that "FISA requires a finding of probable cause to believe that: (1) the target of the electronic surveillance or physical search is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power." There will be at least one more court session before the trial starts; voir dire and jury instructions are being debated. The reckoning time is approaching. In a hearing Inner City Press covered - there were no other UN correspondents there, for this UN bribery case - it emerged that the prosecution has turned over 3,300 emails to a vendor, and that each side will meet with Judge Preska "in camera" about Confidential Information, under US v Mustafa, 992 F. Supp. 2d 335. Video here. We'll have more on this. Ho's lawyers, paid by CEFC, are arguing that the Chinese government's One Belt, One Road (OBOR) campaign, under which they says Ho's payments were made, must be considered at the delayed trial with testimony from "Professor Kirby as 'an expert in contemporary China’s business, economic, and political development with a particular focus on international activities.'" Given the many timesas UN Secretary General that Antonio Guterres, who has refused to even audit CEFC's and Ho's payments in the UN, has praised China's One Belt, One Road - might Guterres be called or offer himself as a pro-Ho defense witness at trial? Guterres already maintains a secret banned from the UN list including "political activists," see here. His failure to audit is also covering up UN-accredited NGO CEFC's communications with "Iranian officials, apparently so that they could discuss potential transactions involving oil or precious metals. (See Gov’t Br. at 11-12.)  The government proffers “evidence of the defendant’s interest in and willingness
to broker transactions in arms.” 

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

At UN, Ban Ki-moon Taps Italy's Grandi to Replace Portugal's Guterres at UNHCR, European Males



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS,  November 11 -- That Italy's Filippo Grandi was a candidate to replace fellow European male Antonio Guterres atop the UN's refugee agency UNHCR was first reported by Inner City Press on September. Now after some irregular lobbying at the UN for Denmark's Helle Thorning-Schmidt, it has been confirmed: after interviews by Deputy Eliasson, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has chosen Grandi.

 After Inner City Press first reported the candidacy of Italy's Grandi, obliquely credited here, Germany became soft-promoting its own Achim Steiner, who has been head of the UN Environmental Program since 2006.

 After Ban's announcement, from PGA Lykketoft, this:

"The President of the UN General Assembly, H.E. Mogens Lykketoft, has been informed by the Secretary-General of his intention to appoint Filippo Grandi of Italy as the new United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The President will table the selection on the agenda of the General Assembly next week. "

 On September 24, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric to confirm Steiner was in the running (he wouldn't) and that Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson was head of, or even simply on, the review panel - Dujarric declined, but some took the story from the briefing Q&A nonetheless. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: About the UNHCR position.  I wanted to ask, it's been reported publicly that the Deputy Secretary-General, Mr. [Jan] Eliasson, is on the panel or heading the panel to review, and I wanted you to respond to that.

Spokesman Dujarric:  No.

Inner City Press:  In terms of transparency.

Spokesman:  No.

Inner City Press:  And Mr… here's a question.  It's reported that Achim Steiner is a candidate.  He said so himself.  What I wanted to know is, in the UN system, in the five-year role that Mr. Ban [Ki-moon] has or, just generally, when does Mr. Steiner have to leave UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) or when does his term at UNEP expire?

Spokesman:  I think his term at UNEP is constitutionally mandated, so I would refer you to the man… to the UNEP bylaws

 Germany has a better record on refugee issues, certainly recently, and the UN system is "down one German" with the replacement of Angela Kane by South Korea's Kim Won-soo. (Then again, German Martin Kobler, who was NOT selected for the OCHA post, is now the UN's Libya envoy.) Plus, Ban Ki-moon recently turned over the UN Global Compact to a Dane, Lise Kingo, while the President of the General Assembly is held by Denmark's Mogens Lykketoft (who's twice toldInner City Press he favors or "recommends" his fellow Dane Thorning-Schmidt and emphasizes it was not under her tenure that Denmark published ads in Lebanon to dissuade asylum seekers.)

  On September 22, Inner City Press again asked Dujarric about the process, on which the call for nominations closed on September 14. Despite calls in the UN General Assembly for increased transparency (Inner City Press asked the "ACT" group about it, here), the UN Secretariat is leaving this murky. From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: There was a press conference here earlier today about the next Secretary-General process, but what I glean from it and wanted to ask you is, on this currently I guess the nominations are closed to head UNHCR, but it seems like, with the resolution that was passed in the GA about transparency and process, I'm wondering if you can say anything at all about, is it entirely the Secretary-General's decision?  Is he conferring with people?  The PGA [President of the General Assembly] says he plays no role.  How does the selection of this…

Spokesman Dujarric: I would encourage you to read a note the Secretary-General sent to the General Assembly in, I think, 2012 which outlines how he intends to manage the nomination of senior officials in which there is — he balances transparency, you know, with the need to protect confidentiality and it clearly outlines his consultations with Member States and with regional groups as a critical way of increasing the transparency of the selection process.  I think we have seen how for senior, heads of senior agencies, often a letter is sent out asking for nominations.  So I would encourage you to read that which really outlines the process and the thinking behind the process.

Inner City Press:  Specifically on this post, can you say whether there's any finalist that comes from a country from which refugees predominantly come rather than a host country…

Spokesman:  I think Matthew…

Inner City Press:  Would that be important?

Spokesman:  The date for… the date for, the closing date for nominations, I think, was less than a week ago.  While we do not share the short list, I can be pretty sure that there is no short list as of yet and the Secretary-General and his team will be looking for the best possible candidate to lead what is a critical agency, especially at this time.

  Well, the Danish candidate had policies criticized by UNHCR itself.

  On September 9, a Senior US State Department Official told the press that the US' goal last year was to resettle 70,000 refugees and it came within 13 of that number. The goal is to increase, but the official declined to say by how much.

  While the US official several times cited UNHCR - the US as largest donor, an upcoming meeting after the UN General Assembly week - the official was not asked, and did not say, what the US would be looking for in the new head of UNHCR.

 On September 9, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if the former Danish Prime Minister's record, already criticized by UNHCR, should not disqualify her. Haq would not directly address this, but did say that a candidate with a good record on refugees would be sought. Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access, as on UNOCHA) asked what Ban will do for transparency of the selection process. We'll see -- or not.

  There is another nominee Inner City Press has reported, Filippo Grandi of Italy, from 2010 to 2014 the head of UNRWA. Sources complain to Inner City Press that Thorning-Schmidt should be disqualified by UNHCR's criticism of Denmark during her tenure, and the Grandi is among other things not "high profile" enough.  (The same can be said of some of those asking their countries' support to run to replace Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, but more on this anon.)

  The US always owned, and recently re-upped for, the UNHCR Deputy spot. So why not a more migrant- or refugee-side nominee? We hope to have more on this.



Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN on September 8:

Inner City Press: I want to ask you, it is reported that the former Prime Minister of Denmark, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, has been raised to the Secretary-General by the current Government as a candidate to replace Mr. Guterres.  Can you confirm that?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric:  No, I mean, I've seen the reports.  There is a mechanism through which the next UNHCR Head will be selected.  Once there is a new Head to be named, one will be named.

Inner City Press: because some people are saying it's ironic given Denmark's position on accepting refugees.

Spokesman:  People see irony in a lot of the places.

Inner City Press:  Let's see if we can generate irony.  Does the Secretary-General have any view of Arab Gulf States who are quite involved in the conflict in Syria in terms of having supported rebel groups etcetera, the number of refugees they've taken?  What has… is he calling them on the phone?

Spokesman: I would — gentlemen… you know, my podium is your podium, but it comes with certain risks and irony. I think I would encourage you to read what the Secretary-General's Special Representative on migration, Mr. Sutherland, said today in Geneva, where he talked about responsibility, about global responsibility towards refugees, and that that responsibility doesn't mean just giving financial support.  It means taking people in.  And that responsibility needs to be shared

   While many have noted that Saudi Arabia and Gulf Arab countries that have poured funding into the war in Syria have not taken a single refugee, when UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made a round of calls on September 6 to (unnamed) leaders, these were only in Europe.

  As on sexual abuse by peacekeepers, "name and shame" is the opposite of Ban Ki-moon's approach. He didn't name the European leaders he spoke to, and didn't call Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar or Bahrain, much less the US, Canada or Australia.

Former UK foreign secretary David Miliband appeared on both ABC This Week and NBC Meet the Press on September 6, talking about refugee flows from Syria only in term of Assad, with no mention at all of ISIS. Even when Miliband cited Aylan Kurdi fleeing from Kobane, he blamed it on barrel bombs.

  Looking back to Miliband's time as UK foreign secretary, one couldn't help noting for example that if he'd put even deployed even half of this advocacy during the slaughter in Sri Lanka in 2009, lives might have been saved.  The argument that he, and Kouchner for example, were constrained on Sri Lanka due to terrorism is put to the lie but Miliband's airbrushing of ISIS now.

  ABC This Week did not asked Miliband about Gulf states taken no refugees, nor about the UK's policies under David "Swarm" Cameron; neither US Sunday show asked about Corbyn and the UK Labor race.

 Last month on the UN Security Council's Syria Presidential Statement,  adopted “unanimously” with Venezuela disassociating itself as Lebanon when it was a member of the Council did on Syria, an issue still unaddressed is the exclusion of Elected Ten members from negotiations.

  Inner City Press asked Nigeria's Ambassador Joy Ogwu about this on August 14, if the Elected Ten members of the Security Council should  be brought into negotiating documents earlier, Video here, from 2:43.

   Ambassador Ogwu said, on UNTV camera, “That’s an aspiration of the ten elected members. There should be more participation.”

  In this case, until Venezuela objected, they were given a mere 18 hours. What is the point of running for a seat on the Security Council if rubber stamping is all that's expected of you?

  This paragraph, and its compliance or non-compliance with Syria's constitution, was and is at issue:

“10. The Security Council demands that all parties work urgently towards the comprehensive implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, aimed at bringing an end to all violence, violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law and the launching of a Syrian-led political process leading to a political transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people and enables them independently and democratically to determine their future, including through the establishment of an inclusive transitional governing body with full executive powers, which shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent while ensuring continuity of governmental institutions.”

  Disassociation, allowing it to be adopted as unanimous while a member can disavow it, may solve a problem for this particular text. But other ongoing dysfunctions of the Security Council continue. Watch this site.



Back on August 7 the Security Council on August 7 a resolution to establish a so-called accountability mechanism for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Outside the Council before and after the unanimous vote on August 7, Russia's ambassador Vitaly Churkin referred to a Presidential Statement he said may be adopted early next week, to support UN envoy Staffan de Mistura's work.

  Inside the Council after the vote, Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari began his speech with a reference to the 70th anniversary of the US dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. He went to to say the UN never investigated the use of chemical weapons, by rebels he said, in Khan al Asal.

   In its resolution the Security Council “recalls that in its resolution 2118, it decided that the Syrian Arab Republic and all parties in Syria shall cooperate fully with the OPCW and the United Nations.” It seems doubtful that ISIS will cooperate.

   Churkin in his post-vote speech inside the Council said that “the existing mechanics of the UN and OPCW do not have a mandate to identify those participating in such acts. Moreover, we became witnesses of the many politicized statements in this regard, which were clearly meant to be propaganda. It was necessary to eliminate this gap, which was done with the adoption of today’s resolution... Any efforts in the Syrian area must be in line with assisting a search for a political solution to the conflict.”

   Inside the Council, US Samantha Power delivered this speech. At the stakeout, questions were given to Reuters, Al Hurra (really, France 24, by mistake), and Voice of America. (We'll have a separate piece on Power's response to the Press' final question about Burundi. For now, here's previous stakeout, sit-down.

   After the meeting ended, on the steps leading out from the UNSC stakeout, Churkin said “I hope it will translate into our continued joint work on the political front. We are working, I think very well, on a PRST [Presidential Statement] in support of Staffan de Mistura’s efforts. I hope it will be adopted...” More on InnerCityPro.com.

Thursday, September 24, 2015

Germany Pushes Achim Steiner for UNHCR, UN Won't Confirm, Nor Reviewer Eliasson


By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive series

UNITED NATIONS, September 24 -- While UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric declined to confirm to Inner City Press on September 8 that Denmark has nominated its former Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt to replace Antonio Guterres as UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the country has said it, even as it tries to dissuade refugees from coming. (Inner City Press asked the UN Spokesman about that irony as well, transcript below.)

 After Inner City Press first reported the competing candidacy of Italy's Filippo Grandi, obliquely credited here, now Germany is promoting its own Achim Steiner, who has been head of the UN Environmental Program since 2006.

 On September 24, Inner City Press asked Dujarric to confirm Steiner is in the running (he wouldn't) and that Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson is head of, or even simply on, the review panel - Dujarric declined, but some took the story from the briefing Q&A nonetheless. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: About the UNHCR position.  I wanted to ask, it's been reported publicly that the Deputy Secretary-General, Mr. [Jan] Eliasson, is on the panel or heading the panel to review, and I wanted you to respond to that.

Spokesman Dujarric:  No.

Inner City Press:  In terms of transparency.

Spokesman:  No.

Inner City Press:  And Mr… here's a question.  It's reported that Achim Steiner is a candidate.  He said so himself.  What I wanted to know is, in the UN system, in the five-year role that Mr. Ban [Ki-moon] has or, just generally, when does Mr. Steiner have to leave UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) or when does his term at UNEP expire?

Spokesman:  I think his term at UNEP is constitutionally mandated, so I would refer you to the man… to the UNEP bylaws

 Germany has a better record on refugee issues, certainly recently, and the UN system is "down one German" with the replacement of Angela Kane by South Korea's Kim Won-soo. (Then again, German Martin Kobler, who was NOT selected for the OCHA post, is in line to be Libya envoy.) Plus, Ban Ki-moon recently turned over the UN Global Compact to a Dane, Lise Kingo, while the President of the General Assembly is held by Denmark's Mogens Lykketoft (who's twice toldInner City Press he favors or "recommends" his fellow Dane Thorning-Schmidt and emphasizes it was not under her tenure that Denmark published ads in Lebanon to dissuade asylum seekers.)

 There is also, with Steiner, the Brazilian "two-fer;" he was born in Brazil and is a dual citizen.

  On September 22, Inner City Press again asked Dujarric about the process, on which the call for nominations closed on September 14. Despite calls in the UN General Assembly for increased transparency (Inner City Press asked the "ACT" group about it, here), the UN Secretariat is leaving this murky. From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: There was a press conference here earlier today about the next Secretary-General process, but what I glean from it and wanted to ask you is, on this currently I guess the nominations are closed to head UNHCR, but it seems like, with the resolution that was passed in the GA about transparency and process, I'm wondering if you can say anything at all about, is it entirely the Secretary-General's decision?  Is he conferring with people?  The PGA [President of the General Assembly] says he plays no role.  How does the selection of this…

Spokesman Dujarric: I would encourage you to read a note the Secretary-General sent to the General Assembly in, I think, 2012 which outlines how he intends to manage the nomination of senior officials in which there is — he balances transparency, you know, with the need to protect confidentiality and it clearly outlines his consultations with Member States and with regional groups as a critical way of increasing the transparency of the selection process.  I think we have seen how for senior, heads of senior agencies, often a letter is sent out asking for nominations.  So I would encourage you to read that which really outlines the process and the thinking behind the process.

Inner City Press:  Specifically on this post, can you say whether there's any finalist that comes from a country from which refugees predominantly come rather than a host country…

Spokesman:  I think Matthew…

Inner City Press:  Would that be important?

Spokesman:  The date for… the date for, the closing date for nominations, I think, was less than a week ago.  While we do not share the short list, I can be pretty sure that there is no short list as of yet and the Secretary-General and his team will be looking for the best possible candidate to lead what is a critical agency, especially at this time. 

  Well, the Danish candidate had policies criticized by UNHCR itself.

  On September 9, a Senior US State Department Official told the press that the US' goal last year was to resettle 70,000 refugees and it came within 13 of that number. The goal is to increase, but the official declined to say by how much.

  While the US official several times cited UNHCR - the US as largest donor, an upcoming meeting after the UN General Assembly week - the official was not asked, and did not say, what the US would be looking for in the new head of UNHCR.

 On September 9, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if the former Danish Prime Minister's record, already criticized by UNHCR, should not disqualify her. Haq would not directly address this, but did say that a candidate with a good record on refugees would be sought. Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access, as on UNOCHA) asked what Ban will do for transparency of the selection process. We'll see -- or not.

  There is another nominee Inner City Press has reported, Filippo Grandi of Italy, from 2010 to 2014 the head of UNRWA. Sources complain to Inner City Press that Thorning-Schmidt should be disqualified by UNHCR's criticism of Denmark during her tenure, and the Grandi is among other things not "high profile" enough.  (The same can be said of some of those asking their countries' support to run to replace Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, but more on this anon.)

  The US always owned, and recently re-upped for, the UNHCR Deputy spot. So why not a more migrant- or refugee-side nominee? We hope to have more on this.



Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN on September 8:

Inner City Press: I want to ask you, it is reported that the former Prime Minister of Denmark, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, has been raised to the Secretary-General by the current Government as a candidate to replace Mr. Guterres.  Can you confirm that?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric:  No, I mean, I've seen the reports.  There is a mechanism through which the next UNHCR Head will be selected.  Once there is a new Head to be named, one will be named.

Inner City Press: because some people are saying it's ironic given Denmark's position on accepting refugees.

Spokesman:  People see irony in a lot of the places.

Inner City Press:  Let's see if we can generate irony.  Does the Secretary-General have any view of Arab Gulf States who are quite involved in the conflict in Syria in terms of having supported rebel groups etcetera, the number of refugees they've taken?  What has… is he calling them on the phone?

Spokesman: I would — gentlemen… you know, my podium is your podium, but it comes with certain risks and irony. I think I would encourage you to read what the Secretary-General's Special Representative on migration, Mr. Sutherland, said today in Geneva, where he talked about responsibility, about global responsibility towards refugees, and that that responsibility doesn't mean just giving financial support.  It means taking people in.  And that responsibility needs to be shared

   While many have noted that Saudi Arabia and Gulf Arab countries that have poured funding into the war in Syria have not taken a single refugee, when UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made a round of calls on September 6 to (unnamed) leaders, these were only in Europe.

  As on sexual abuse by peacekeepers, "name and shame" is the opposite of Ban Ki-moon's approach. He didn't name the European leaders he spoke to, and didn't call Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar or Bahrain, much less the US, Canada or Australia.

Former UK foreign secretary David Miliband appeared on both ABC This Week and NBC Meet the Press on September 6, talking about refugee flows from Syria only in term of Assad, with no mention at all of ISIS. Even when Miliband cited Aylan Kurdi fleeing from Kobane, he blamed it on barrel bombs.

  Looking back to Miliband's time as UK foreign secretary, one couldn't help noting for example that if he'd put even deployed even half of this advocacy during the slaughter in Sri Lanka in 2009, lives might have been saved.  The argument that he, and Kouchner for example, were constrained on Sri Lanka due to terrorism is put to the lie but Miliband's airbrushing of ISIS now.

  ABC This Week did not asked Miliband about Gulf states taken no refugees, nor about the UK's policies under David "Swarm" Cameron; neither US Sunday show asked about Corbyn and the UK Labor race.

 Last month on the UN Security Council's Syria Presidential Statement,  adopted “unanimously” with Venezuela disassociating itself as Lebanon when it was a member of the Council did on Syria, an issue still unaddressed is the exclusion of Elected Ten members from negotiations.

  Inner City Press asked Nigeria's Ambassador Joy Ogwu about this on August 14, if the Elected Ten members of the Security Council should  be brought into negotiating documents earlier, Video here, from 2:43.

   Ambassador Ogwu said, on UNTV camera, “That’s an aspiration of the ten elected members. There should be more participation.”

  In this case, until Venezuela objected, they were given a mere 18 hours. What is the point of running for a seat on the Security Council if rubber stamping is all that's expected of you?

  This paragraph, and its compliance or non-compliance with Syria's constitution, was and is at issue:

“10. The Security Council demands that all parties work urgently towards the comprehensive implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, aimed at bringing an end to all violence, violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law and the launching of a Syrian-led political process leading to a political transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people and enables them independently and democratically to determine their future, including through the establishment of an inclusive transitional governing body with full executive powers, which shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent while ensuring continuity of governmental institutions.”

  Disassociation, allowing it to be adopted as unanimous while a member can disavow it, may solve a problem for this particular text. But other ongoing dysfunctions of the Security Council continue. Watch this site.



Back on August 7 the Security Council on August 7 a resolution to establish a so-called accountability mechanism for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Outside the Council before and after the unanimous vote on August 7, Russia's ambassador Vitaly Churkin referred to a Presidential Statement he said may be adopted early next week, to support UN envoy Staffan de Mistura's work.

  Inside the Council after the vote, Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari began his speech with a reference to the 70th anniversary of the US dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. He went to to say the UN never investigated the use of chemical weapons, by rebels he said, in Khan al Asal.

   In its resolution the Security Council “recalls that in its resolution 2118, it decided that the Syrian Arab Republic and all parties in Syria shall cooperate fully with the OPCW and the United Nations.” It seems doubtful that ISIS will cooperate.

   Churkin in his post-vote speech inside the Council said that “the existing mechanics of the UN and OPCW do not have a mandate to identify those participating in such acts. Moreover, we became witnesses of the many politicized statements in this regard, which were clearly meant to be propaganda. It was necessary to eliminate this gap, which was done with the adoption of today’s resolution... Any efforts in the Syrian area must be in line with assisting a search for a political solution to the conflict.”

   Inside the Council, US Samantha Power delivered this speech. At the stakeout, questions were given to Reuters, Al Hurra (really, France 24, by mistake), and Voice of America. (We'll have a separate piece on Power's response to the Press' final question about Burundi. For now, here's previous stakeout, sit-down.

   After the meeting ended, on the steps leading out from the UNSC stakeout, Churkin said “I hope it will translate into our continued joint work on the political front. We are working, I think very well, on a PRST [Presidential Statement] in support of Staffan de Mistura’s efforts. I hope it will be adopted...” More on InnerCityPro.com.

 
  

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

As Germany Pushes Achim Steiner for UNHCR Top Refugees Post, Of Filippo Grandi & Fading Dane Thorning-Schmidt



By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive series

UNITED NATIONS, September 23 -- While UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric declined to confirm to Inner City Press on September 8 that Denmark has nominated its former Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt to replace Antonio Guterres as UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the country has said it, even as it tries to dissuade refugees from coming. (Inner City Press asked the UN Spokesman about that irony as well, transcript below.)

 After Inner City Press first reported the competing candidacy of Italy's Filippo Grandi, obliquely credited here, now Germany is promoting its own Achim Steiner, who has been head of the UN Environmental Program since 2006.

 Germany has a better record on refugee issues, certainly recently, and the UN system is "down one German" with the replacement of Angela Kane by South Korea's Kim Won-soo. Plus, Ban Ki-moon recently turned over the UN Global Compact to a Dane, Lise Kingo, while the President of the General Assembly is held by Denmark's Mogens Lykketoft (who's twice told Inner City Press he favors or "recommends" his fellow Dane Thorning-Schmidt and emphasizes it was not under her tenure that Denmark published ads in Lebanon to dissuade asylum seekers.)

 There is also, with Steiner, the Brazilian "two-fer;" he was born in Brazil and is a dual citizen.

  On September 22, Inner City Press again asked Dujarric about the process, on which the call for nominations closed on September 14. Despite calls in the UN General Assembly for increased transparency (Inner City Press asked the "ACT" group about it, here), the UN Secretariat is leaving this murky. From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: There was a press conference here earlier today about the next Secretary-General process, but what I glean from it and wanted to ask you is, on this currently I guess the nominations are closed to head UNHCR, but it seems like, with the resolution that was passed in the GA about transparency and process, I'm wondering if you can say anything at all about, is it entirely the Secretary-General's decision?  Is he conferring with people?  The PGA [President of the General Assembly] says he plays no role.  How does the selection of this…

Spokesman Dujarric: I would encourage you to read a note the Secretary-General sent to the General Assembly in, I think, 2012 which outlines how he intends to manage the nomination of senior officials in which there is — he balances transparency, you know, with the need to protect confidentiality and it clearly outlines his consultations with Member States and with regional groups as a critical way of increasing the transparency of the selection process.  I think we have seen how for senior, heads of senior agencies, often a letter is sent out asking for nominations.  So I would encourage you to read that which really outlines the process and the thinking behind the process.

Inner City Press:  Specifically on this post, can you say whether there's any finalist that comes from a country from which refugees predominantly come rather than a host country…

Spokesman:  I think Matthew…

Inner City Press:  Would that be important?

Spokesman:  The date for… the date for, the closing date for nominations, I think, was less than a week ago.  While we do not share the short list, I can be pretty sure that there is no short list as of yet and the Secretary-General and his team will be looking for the best possible candidate to lead what is a critical agency, especially at this time. 

  Well, the Danish candidate had policies criticized by UNHCR itself.

  On September 9, a Senior US State Department Official told the press that the US' goal last year was to resettle 70,000 refugees and it came within 13 of that number. The goal is to increase, but the official declined to say by how much.

  While the US official several times cited UNHCR - the US as largest donor, an upcoming meeting after the UN General Assembly week - the official was not asked, and did not say, what the US would be looking for in the new head of UNHCR.

 On September 9, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if the former Danish Prime Minister's record, already criticized by UNHCR, should not disqualify her. Haq would not directly address this, but did say that a candidate with a good record on refugees would be sought. Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access, as on UNOCHA) asked what Ban will do for transparency of the selection process. We'll see -- or not.

  There is another nominee Inner City Press has reported, Filippo Grandi of Italy, from 2010 to 2014 the head of UNRWA. Sources complain to Inner City Press that Thorning-Schmidt should be disqualified by UNHCR's criticism of Denmark during her tenure, and the Grandi is among other things not "high profile" enough.  (The same can be said of some of those asking their countries' support to run to replace Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, but more on this anon.)

  The US always owned, and recently re-upped for, the UNHCR Deputy spot. So why not a more migrant- or refugee-side nominee? We hope to have more on this.



Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN on September 8:

Inner City Press: I want to ask you, it is reported that the former Prime Minister of Denmark, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, has been raised to the Secretary-General by the current Government as a candidate to replace Mr. Guterres.  Can you confirm that?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric:  No, I mean, I've seen the reports.  There is a mechanism through which the next UNHCR Head will be selected.  Once there is a new Head to be named, one will be named.

Inner City Press: because some people are saying it's ironic given Denmark's position on accepting refugees.

Spokesman:  People see irony in a lot of the places.

Inner City Press:  Let's see if we can generate irony.  Does the Secretary-General have any view of Arab Gulf States who are quite involved in the conflict in Syria in terms of having supported rebel groups etcetera, the number of refugees they've taken?  What has… is he calling them on the phone?

Spokesman: I would — gentlemen… you know, my podium is your podium, but it comes with certain risks and irony. I think I would encourage you to read what the Secretary-General's Special Representative on migration, Mr. Sutherland, said today in Geneva, where he talked about responsibility, about global responsibility towards refugees, and that that responsibility doesn't mean just giving financial support.  It means taking people in.  And that responsibility needs to be shared

   While many have noted that Saudi Arabia and Gulf Arab countries that have poured funding into the war in Syria have not taken a single refugee, when UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made a round of calls on September 6 to (unnamed) leaders, these were only in Europe.

  As on sexual abuse by peacekeepers, "name and shame" is the opposite of Ban Ki-moon's approach. He didn't name the European leaders he spoke to, and didn't call Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar or Bahrain, much less the US, Canada or Australia.

Former UK foreign secretary David Miliband appeared on both ABC This Week and NBC Meet the Press on September 6, talking about refugee flows from Syria only in term of Assad, with no mention at all of ISIS. Even when Miliband cited Aylan Kurdi fleeing from Kobane, he blamed it on barrel bombs.

  Looking back to Miliband's time as UK foreign secretary, one couldn't help noting for example that if he'd put even deployed even half of this advocacy during the slaughter in Sri Lanka in 2009, lives might have been saved.  The argument that he, and Kouchner for example, were constrained on Sri Lanka due to terrorism is put to the lie but Miliband's airbrushing of ISIS now.

  ABC This Week did not asked Miliband about Gulf states taken no refugees, nor about the UK's policies under David "Swarm" Cameron; neither US Sunday show asked about Corbyn and the UK Labor race.

 Last month on the UN Security Council's Syria Presidential Statement,  adopted “unanimously” with Venezuela disassociating itself as Lebanon when it was a member of the Council did on Syria, an issue still unaddressed is the exclusion of Elected Ten members from negotiations.

  Inner City Press asked Nigeria's Ambassador Joy Ogwu about this on August 14, if the Elected Ten members of the Security Council should  be brought into negotiating documents earlier, Video here, from 2:43.

   Ambassador Ogwu said, on UNTV camera, “That’s an aspiration of the ten elected members. There should be more participation.”

  In this case, until Venezuela objected, they were given a mere 18 hours. What is the point of running for a seat on the Security Council if rubber stamping is all that's expected of you?

  This paragraph, and its compliance or non-compliance with Syria's constitution, was and is at issue:

“10. The Security Council demands that all parties work urgently towards the comprehensive implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, aimed at bringing an end to all violence, violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law and the launching of a Syrian-led political process leading to a political transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people and enables them independently and democratically to determine their future, including through the establishment of an inclusive transitional governing body with full executive powers, which shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent while ensuring continuity of governmental institutions.”

  Disassociation, allowing it to be adopted as unanimous while a member can disavow it, may solve a problem for this particular text. But other ongoing dysfunctions of the Security Council continue. Watch this site.



Back on August 7 the Security Council on August 7 a resolution to establish a so-called accountability mechanism for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Outside the Council before and after the unanimous vote on August 7, Russia's ambassador Vitaly Churkin referred to a Presidential Statement he said may be adopted early next week, to support UN envoy Staffan de Mistura's work.

  Inside the Council after the vote, Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari began his speech with a reference to the 70th anniversary of the US dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. He went to to say the UN never investigated the use of chemical weapons, by rebels he said, in Khan al Asal.

   In its resolution the Security Council “recalls that in its resolution 2118, it decided that the Syrian Arab Republic and all parties in Syria shall cooperate fully with the OPCW and the United Nations.” It seems doubtful that ISIS will cooperate.

   Churkin in his post-vote speech inside the Council said that “the existing mechanics of the UN and OPCW do not have a mandate to identify those participating in such acts. Moreover, we became witnesses of the many politicized statements in this regard, which were clearly meant to be propaganda. It was necessary to eliminate this gap, which was done with the adoption of today’s resolution... Any efforts in the Syrian area must be in line with assisting a search for a political solution to the conflict.”

   Inside the Council, US Samantha Power delivered this speech. At the stakeout, questions were given to Reuters, Al Hurra (really, France 24, by mistake), and Voice of America. (We'll have a separate piece on Power's response to the Press' final question about Burundi. For now, here's previous stakeout, sit-down.

   After the meeting ended, on the steps leading out from the UNSC stakeout, Churkin said “I hope it will translate into our continued joint work on the political front. We are working, I think very well, on a PRST [Presidential Statement] in support of Staffan de Mistura’s efforts. I hope it will be adopted...” More on InnerCityPro.com.

 
  

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

African Group Diplomats Tell Inner City Press They're Rejecting Ban Ki-moon's Bid for Achim Steiner II at UNEP, Showdown on Human Rights Council Focal Point


By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, December 18 -- Three weeks ago, the African Group beat the European Union and US 78 to 76 on Thanksgiving Eve in the UN's Third Committee, with 18 abstaining. 

  The issue was whether at the UN Human Rights Council a new "Focal Point" could be established without General Assembly review. The answer, then, was no.

  Now it and other items are coming up in the full General Assembly. The African Group has met and members have told Inner City Press they've decided to "stand strong."
  They tell Inner City Press exclusively that they're taking the same position on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's request to give Achim Steiner another two years atop the UN Environment Program in Nairobi, Kenya. Team Ban is sure to try to push back.
   Inner City Press was the first to report the November 27 result, linking it to the UN Security Council's rebuff of the African Union's request for a one year deferral of the International Criminal Court's Kenya proceedings on November 15.
But based on feedback, including at China's classy and uncensored End of Security Council Presidency reception and then at an Indian Fifth Committee reception, a bit more explanation was necessary. The African Group in essence protested an end run around the 193 members of the General Assembly. And on that basis, they won.
The issue was whether the Human Rights Council, created by and a subsidiary of the General Assembly, could create a new Focal Point without review by the General Assembly. The answer was no.
This was discussed, animatedly and over dumplings, at the Chinese mission on 35th Street minutes later. Many Permanent Representatives still hadn't heard of the vote. Sri Lanka's, for example, after conferring with a former landlord / scribe pitched Inner City Press on the sins of the British, for example the Chagos Islands and further back, the Mau Mau.
  Then at the Indian mission, the Fifth Committee which still has yet to hit its Superbowl / late night moment noshed and drank. But back in the UN, the Third Committee continued. On women human rights defenders, Norway agreed to strip out a paragraph, PP 13, which led a slew of countries to pull out as co-sponsored.
   In the traditional end of session of poem, the UK said that "UK fully endorses, as long as it's within existing resources." Egypt responded with a rhyme about R2P. And that was that! Until the full General Assembly takes up all these items. Watch this site.

 
  

Thursday, February 14, 2013

At UN, Even Basic Financial Disclosure Refused by Peacekeeper Ladsous, Meece of the Congo, Candidates for Human Rights & Security



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 14 – Two years ago, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon claimed that 99% of his officials had made public disclosure of their finances

  As Inner City Press showed, it wasn't true then. And it is not true now.
As of February 14, 2013, the most recent data set of disclosures on the UN website was of 2010 finances, disclosed in 2011. In this data set, for example, Ban's main political adviser Jeffrey Feltman is not even listed.

  Ban's chief of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous has refused to make even minimal disclosure, stating, "in accordance with General Assembly Resolution A/RES/60/238, I have chosen to maintain the confidentiality of the information disclosed in my financial disclosure statement.”

   Ban's big claim is that he would lead by example, and his top officials would make public disclosure. One would think Ban could condition giving a top post on making disclosure. 


    Likewise, Ban's envoy to the Congo, Roger Meece, has refused to disclose. How can the UN preach for example mining disclosure to the Kabila government if Meece won't diclose? Neither does ASG Franz Baumann

  Why wouldn't OCHA chief Valerie Amos disclose? Or Achim Steiner of UNEP?

   By contrast, Ladsous' deputy Edmond Mulet did make at least basic disclosure, of equity funds with Templeton and Franklin, and outside service as “Advisory Board Member, Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum, Social Science Research Council, New York.”
  
That's how easy it is. So why wouldn't Ladsous do it? After months of refusing all Press questions, on February 6 he finally partially answered one. It was appreciated: but then stonewalling continued on the follow-ups.

  Also still listed in the most recent UN financial disclosure data set but not reporting is Amat Al Alim Alsoswa, a former minister of strongman Ali Saleh in Yemen who, we can now report, is trying to take over the Deputy position to Navi Pillay at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva. 

  Pillay discloses; why should a deputy be selected who not only served a dictator, but refuses to disclose?

   Kevin Kennedy, listed in his former position as deputy in Haiti, declined to disclose. Thursday he was given a tour near the Security Council, in his new post as acting chief of UN Security. Why not disclose?

  Now gone Haiti mission chief Mariano Fernandez did disclose. Ban nominated a candidate Honore from Trinidad and Tobago, who got blocked. (Click here for that Inner City Press exclusive.) Will Ban's new nominee commit to disclose?


Footnotes: On February 7, Ban doled lunch and quotes to 13 members of the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association, an organization which spent most of its meeting in 2012 trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN (initially for reporting involving Sri Lanka and, who else, Herve Ladsous). 

 Documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act show Voice of America, saying it had the support ofReutersbureau chief Louis Charbonneau and Agence France Presse's Tim Witcher, asking the UN's Stephane Dujarric to "review" the accreditation of Inner City Press.


  In 2013, they or most of them have been engaged intearing down free speech flyersmocking an alleged victim of sexual harassment, using two counterfeit social media accounts.

  Why does Ban meet and "partner" with this UNCA, as his main or only interlocutor on press issues? Why has neither side released a transcript or recording to other journalists at the UN, including those who have launched the new alternative Free UN Coalition for Access? Ah, transparency.