On Syria, After Murky Photo-Op With Ban Ki-moon, Hadi Al Bahra Wants Air Support

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 1 -- A week after the rebels of the "Syrian Opposition Coalition" were presented by some counties as the new or "only legitimate" government of Syria, they have called for "air support." Hadi al Bahra, who had a meeting with on September 27 UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon which was publicized while banning the independent press, to Al Hayat:

"criticizes the failure to give sufficient support for the Free Syrian Army in its battle against ISIS and the Assad regime, calling on the international coalition to 'provide air cover for the FSA in the areas what will be wrestled from ISIS to protect them from the attacks of Assad’s air force and to help the FSA fill the void after driving ISIS out of northern Syria.'

"In an exclusive interview with Al Hayat newspaper, Bahra said that that 'the elimination of terrorism and extremism cannot be achieved through military operations alone, but through an integrated social and political process and through addressing the root cause of terrorism, namely the dictatorial Assad regime.'

"Commenting on the visit of the Syrian Coalition’s delegation to New York, Bahra said that 'we have received clear promises from the American administration that it would cooperate with the political and military leadership of the Syrian Revolution, a stance is also shared by countries such as France, Britain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. All these countries share with us the same vision that the anti-ISIS campaign will not yield tangible results unless there are integrated political and social programs and full coordination with the Syrian opposition. The Russians will surely change their position towards the situation in Syria when the balance of forces is changed on the ground. Russia has specific interests in the region, so do the Russians support Assad out of love for it, or that because the Assad regime serve their interests as long as it holds to power. Therefore, when the balance of power is tipped the military and political burdens will outweigh the benefits of preserving the Assad regime and consequently its position will change.'" (Source: Syrian Coalition)

  On September 29, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric why the independent press was banned, and who attended along with Hadi al Bahra.

  Dujarric said to ask the Syrian Opposition Coalition -- that is, no transparency from the UN -- and said that when Ban met non-governmental parties like Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, only UN Photo was present. He said he was not equating the two.

 Inner City Press asked Dujarric if Ban met any other rebels during this General Debate, since there are many rebel groups in the world.

  Dujarric said the Syrian rebels were the only ones Ban met with. We'll have more on this. 

  It was Saturday afternoon in a mostly empty UN when this photo-op was added to Ban's schedule, in his 38th floor office:

"05:20 pm    38th Floor    Photo Opportunity:  The Secretary-General with H.E. Mr. Hadi al-Bahra and other Members of the National Coalition of Syria Revolution and Opposition Forces
(UNTV/PHOTO,  INTERNATIONAL MEDIA, WEBCAST)"

  But when Inner City Press went the requisite 30 minutes in advance in order to cover the photo-op, it was told that only the UN's in-house photo service could attend to create this propaganda photo.

  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, which pushes for media freedom, asked al-Bahra and the Syrian Coalition why it was closed. They tweeted back:

@innercitypress - We asked. But told by @UN_Spokesperson that option of opening to media only available to "member states". 

   But, as Inner City Press immediate replied -- after finding that the photo op wasn't even on UN EZTV, the 29 channels of the UN's in-house TV network --  Ban held an open photo op on August 18 with Malala, who is not a member states. We'll have more on this.

   All week, Ban has been holding such meetings in his office with heads of state and government. Now, this one rebel group is in. What about other rebel groups? Doesn't this selectivity as least call out for transparency -- having other than in-house media present?

  Ban's UN is lawless -- including dodging service of legal papers for bringing cholera to Haiti.

  After 5 pm on Friday, September 26, the Syrian Coalition Media Office went out by email a speech, entitled "Hadi al Bahra addresses United Nations General Assembly."

 The question, asked by Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access, was where and when was this speech ostensibly given to the UN General Assembly? The rebels are not the government, at least not yet. So what did the e-mail mean?

After approval by the US Congress to arm and train rebels in Syria, and the airstrikes in Syria that began on September 22, Free Syrian Army commanders began complaining the strikes hit only ISIL (and Khorasan).

  The Syrian Opposition Coalition, set to be presented as a government in an event in the UN's Economic and Social Council chamber on September 24, put this out:

"Nasr al-Hariri, Secretary General of the Syrian Coalition, said that the Syrian people will not trust the international efforts to fight ISIS as long as they ignore the voices of millions of Syrians who have been subjected to the terror of the Assad regime and its allies,” during a visit to the FSA battalions in the countryside of Aleppo and Idlib, along with Mohammed Qaddah, Vice President of the Syrian Coalition. 'We regret that the international community has come up with partial solutions to the Syrian conflict in which hundreds of thousands were killed or detained by the Assad regime. The military strikes being carried out by the international coalition against the positions of ISIS and Al Nusra Front will be short of stemming the tide of extremism as long as they are directed against the symptoms of the problem and not its root cause. Moreover, these strikes will only be interpreted as an attempt to reproduce and rehabilitate the Assad regime and will prompt more Syrians to take up arms as long as the Assad regime is spared the military strikes.' 

"Hariri also stress that any solution other than helping the Syrian people topples the Assad regime will only serve to consolidate extremism in Syria and the region. Therefore, the international community must assume its responsibilities and deal with the situation in Syria in a more realistic and responsible way. Hariri stresses that the world is not yet aware that the battle against terrorism cannot be solved only militarily, but must include an organized political process capable of addressing the root causes of extremism. 

"The meager international support for the Syrian national projects, including the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian Coalition, has led to the emergence of other projects that attracted many young people who do not necessarily endorse those projects’ vision. However, we are quite certain that those young people, when provided with the suitable alternative, will be an essential part of the mosaic structure on which the new Syria will be built. 

"The Syrian people cannot accept watching the international coalition’s warplanes avenging the killing of journalist James Foley while failing to do justice to Hamza al-Khatib, Abdul Qader Al Saleh, Ghiath Matar and hundreds of thousands of Syrians. Furthermore, terrorism cannot be fought piecemeal, but its root causes must be addressed to save Syria and the whole world from the threats imposed by the extremist groups.” It is worth mentioning that many FSA commanders expressed their willingness to cooperate in order to further institutionalize the FSA and prepare it to effectively lead the struggle against the Assad regime and ISIS."

  On September 23, the UN's new (third) Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura was supposed to take questions from the press at 4:50 pm on September 23. But he did not appear. After a time the UN said he was lost: he had gone to the wrong stakeout, but Spokesman Stephane Dujarric was looking for him.

   Finally after 6 pm de Mistura and Dujarric arrived. But de Mistura declined to comment on the airstrikes on Syria, deferring to Ban Ki-moon. Dujarric chose six questioners, three of whom were from Italian media. Dujarric called out "ANSA;" de Mistura said, "bongiorno" This is what the UN and this post have become: de Mistura is half-Italian, with little chance of success or even relevance it becomes a "local boy makes good" story.

  (Certainly, de Mistura may see it differently: Inner City Press has heard from a range of UN sources that de Mistura feels he could and should be Secretary General.)

  Normally Inner City Press would not comment on the nationality of the questioners selected. But earlier on September 23, Dujarric who is French was involved in aproblematic French-only use of the UN Press Briefing Room by President Hollande. 

  Dujarric peeked out of the door while Inner City Press was being told to leave the UN Press Briefing Room, partial video here; the Free UN Coalition for Accessunderstands that Media Accreditation was told to back off from the French event by the Spokesman's Office. So. Noon briefings where this could be asked have been canceled; written questions have not been answered. This too is today's UN.

  On September 22 after a day of UN formalities, and with John Kerry with the Syrian Opposition Coalition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the US started bombing in Syria, see below. It cited help from five Arab Kingdoms in hitting ISIL by Raqqa, but went it alone against the Khorosan group near Aleppo.

  On September 23 when UK Development Secretary Justine Greening spoke about aid to Syria, Inner City Press asked her if these airstrikes were coordinated in any way with humanitarians on the ground, amid reports one was close to a hospital.

  Greening declined to get into the specifics, saying the UK was not part of the airstrike but supported them. She said that the spread of ISIL had hurt humanitarian efforts, which is certain. 

  Greening said, "I won't get into the details, the UK was not part of the airstrikes. The advance of ISIL placed pressure on the ability of humanitarian workers." 

   But why not coordinate with aid workers on the ground?  And what about this Khorosan group, until now mentioned only once in a White House briefing?

  On a background White House press call, a Senior Administration Official said that the US long told Russia that its support for Assad would lead to the rise of extremism. Unsaid was Russia's position that US allies' support of fighters in Syria led to extremism. 

  Tellingly, Ban Ki-moon has yet to speak about the air strikes. Inner City Press asked his spokesman for a comment on the night of September 22, and saw this spokesman on September 23. But no answer.

  Inner City Press has put these questions to Dujarric:

Press questions on deadline: what is Ban Ki-moon's response to US on the record (and reportedly Saudi Arabia, Jordan and UAE) bombing in Syria without consent of Syrian government, or approval of the UN Security Council? Separately, was Ban Ki-moon informed in advance?

  Hours later, no response from the UN.

   Back on  September 19 while the UN Security Council's meeting on Iraq went on, Canada's Foreign Minister John Baird came out to take questions at the Council stakeout.

  Inner City Press asked him if Canada thinks that for airstrikes in Syria against ISIL, the consent of the Assad government or of the Security Council should be sought.

  Baird said that on "intervention in Syria there are two views. One could say that every country has a right to defend itself. Iraq is being attack by terrorists in the neighboring country. We take great issue with Assad... That has yet to be determined."

  The Syrian Opposition Coalition, it emerges, will hold a press conference inside the UN building on September 22. But it will not be a UN press conference - instead, it will be in the clubhouse the UN gives to what has become itsUN Censorship Alliance (having tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN), publicized only to those who pay money to UNCA in dues.

  Why not go through the front door, and have a member state like Canada sponsor the Syrian Coalition's Hadi Al Bahra in the UN Press Briefing Room, as others do? We'll have more on this.

  On September 18, the day after the US House of Representatives voted to arm and train "moderate" rebels in Syria, the Syrian Opposition Coalition said training 5,000 will not be enough. An hour later, they put out a statement about ISIL stranding 7,000 civilians on the Syrian - Turkish border:

"As the 'Islamic State' intensifies shelling on Ayn al Arab (Kobanê in Kurdish) in northern Syria, thousands of people remain trapped in the towns and villages in the area. As as a result, activists reported a mass exodus of civilians from the neighboring villages of Kaalak, Zark Qumshi, Zalkhek, and Turaman. The Syrian Coalition condemns ISIS's brutal tactics and calls on Turkish authorities to open borders in the area and provide refuge to those fleeing from the barbaric group. More than 7000 civilians are reported to be stranded along the Turkish Syrian borders since Thursday, most of them women and children."

 Echoes of Mount Sinjar in Iraq - and that led to airstrikes. Earlier on September 18, the Syrian Coalition put this out:

"Abdelahad Astepho, member of the political committee, said that the US Congress’s vote in favor of President Obama’s plan to train and equip the Free Syrian Army is 'a step in the right direction though it was made late. Limiting the training and equipment program to 5,000 FSA fighters is not enough to counter the threat of the Assad regime and ISIS. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the number of trainees to solve the whole problem of terrorism once and for all. Moreover, limiting the program to this small number may prolong the bloody conflict, thus prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people.' Astepho calls on the US Senate 'to back the training and equipment program and for its immediate implementation, as any delay will cost Syrians more lives. Any delay in the implementation of this plan will lead to further expansion of the terror practiced by the Assad regime and the terrorist group ISIS.'"

 This after on the Senate floor just who these "moderate" rebels are was still being questioned. If 5000 is not enough, how many would be? To the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on September 17, former Ambassador Bob Ford said there are 80,000 "non-Nusra, non-ISIL" rebels. Where do these figures come front?

   Back on September 13, hours after US President Barack Obama's speech, the Syrian Coalition put out a press release requesting airstrikes and cash from Congress, pronto.

While more than two dozen countries pledged support for Iraq against the Islamic State in the Security Council on September 19, who would speak on UNTV about it?

  For more than an hour the media was told that French foreign minister Laurent Fabius would be “coming to the stakeout” to take questions on UNTV. It was pushed back, then when finally Fabius emerged he rushed past the stakeout into the hallway, where he spoke only in French.
 
 Update: to be fair, the French Mission put out this transcript.

  So too with Turkey's foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. When he emerged from the Security Council, hesummoned Turkish media down the hallway for a private stakeout. Some non-Turkish journalists weren't allowed to go, something protested by the Free UN Coalition for Access. But why not openly take questions?

  The three on-camera stakeouts that occurred were bySyria's Bashar Ja'afari, Iraq's Foreign Minister Jaafari (no relation, if that needs to be said), and Canada's John Baird. To the last of these, Inner City Press asked if before any bombing in Syria consent should be sought from Damascus or the Council. That has “yet to be determined,” Baird replied.

  Iraqi FM Jaafari, when Inner City Press asked if the Coalition should speak with Syria, seemed to dodge the question. But at least he took questions on camera, as did Syria's Ja'afari. Where were the others? Is this how GA Week will be? FUNCA in is on the case, including aboutfaux UN press conferences like those held in the private club handed out by the UN to its Censorship Alliance. That group tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, now masquerades on media freedom. This is how the UN works. Watch this site.

   

As Qatar Hosted Syrian Coalition at UN, Anti-Jarba Protests, Scribes

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 22 -- While Qatar sponsored anevent at the UN in New York on March 21 featuring the Syrian Coalition headed by Ahmad al Jarba, a group calling its the Syrian Grassroots Movement held protests seeking to oust Jarba.

   By March 22, the group stated that some 40,000 people in 58 cities inside Syria had participated in demonstrations to get Jarba out of his post, saying "it is time to put an end to political corruption."

  Back in September 2013, France sponsored an event in the UN and called Jarba the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. French Ambassador Gerard Araud was the first questioning at Qatar's March 21 Syrian Coalition event. What is France's position now? Who chooses the leaders?

  Likewise, back in July 2013 and earlier this month, the Jarba-led Syrian Coalition held faux "UN" events in the clubhouse Ban Ki-moon's Secretariat gives to the largely Gulf and Western UN Correspondents Association. How does that now appear, in light of the anti-Jarba protests?

   Qatar's March 21 event was not listed in the UN Journal nor in the UN Media Alert. It was not on the UN's publicly available webcast.

  Select media outlets were there, when Inner City Press came in at the end to ask a question: Al Jazeera on the podium in Qatar's event, Al Arabiya like a Saudi diplomat -- not the Permanent Representative -- in the audience along with Al Hayat, even Al Hurra, on whose Broadcasting Board of Governors US Secretary of State John Kerry serves.

   The new Free UN Coalition for Access is against faux UN events, in the clubhouse the Secretariat gives to what's become its UN Censorship Alliance or elsewhere.

   On March 21 Inner City Press put these questions, also on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, to the UN's top two spokespeople:

"there is an event in Conference Room 4 right now, sponsored by Qatar, which is no listed in today's UN Journal, nor is it on UN Webcast http://webtv.un.org/ but it appears to be being filmed. Please explain the legal status of this meeting, if there are any sponsored beyond Qatar, how it was publicized and if any request to have it webcast was made. Thanks, on deadline."

  But no answer was provided. Inner City Press ran to the event and from the back of a three quarters empty Conference Room 4 asked why the event was so stealth: not in the UN Journal, not webcast.

  The Permanent Representative of Qatar answered, saying it was a "special event" to which Qatar had invited (some) member states and groups, and (some) media. There is a UN Media Alert, but this event was not put in it.

  Perhaps it was publicized by the Gulf & Western United Nations Correspondents Association, which has twice hosted faux "UN" events by the Syrian National Coalition or Syrian Coalition. (In both cases, the Free UN Coalition for Access suggested that the SNC hold its events in the UN briefing room, accessible to all journalists.)

  Since French Ambassador Gerard Araud, the first questioner flanked by representatives of Saudi Arabia and of Turkey which earlier in the day banned Twitter, has spoken about "fakes" and others about accountability, Inner City Press asked if the groups Al Nusra and ISIS, and those who fund them such as private individuals in Qatar alluded to at the US State Department briefing earlier in the day, could or would be held accountable.

  The SNC representative emphasized what he called links between the Assad regime and ISIS, saying it was too easy to blame the Gulf countries.

Here's from the March 21 US State Department briefing transcript:

Question: you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors. Do you also have concerns about the reasons that these countries said that they withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar? In other words, do you – if you have concerns about the withdrawal of the ambassadors, do you also have concerns about Qatar’s behavior, which – alleged behavior, let’s say – which led to these countries withdrawing their ambassadors?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know one of the issues that has been mentioned is the issue of private donations to extremists – and that’s something that some have mentioned – operating in Syria and elsewhere. It remains an important priority in our high-level discussions, and one that we also certainly raise with all states in the region, including Qatar, including the Government of Kuwait, wherever we have concerns.

After Inner City Press asked about the sponsorship of the event, a one-page "Joint Statement by the Co-Organizers" was passed out, listing among the co-organizers France, the UK, US, Belgium, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Inner City Press tweeted it. 

   Even 24 hours later, the UN's top two spokespeople had not answered the simple questions put to them, above. Watch this site.

   

UN's Ban Distances Himself from Sudan's Bashir, After Off the Record Lunch with Journalists

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
www.innercitypress.com/ban5press080108.html

UNITED NATIONS, August 1 -- With Sudan's President Omar Al Bashir threatened with an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court, it has been reported that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has been advised by his lawyers to "distance himself politically" from Al Bashir. The London-based newspaper Al Hayat, with a long-time correspondent at UN Headquarters, sourced this to "Ban aides."

At the August 1 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas if the report is true. "I don't have a response," Ms. Montas said. But was Ban advised to distance himself from Al Bashir? "I'm sure that issue was discussed with the Secretary-General," Montas said, adding that is Ban's decision what to do with such advice. Video here, from Minute 23:16.

Further inquiry by Inner City Press leads to the inference that the sourcing of the story was Ban Ki-moon himself. It is an open secret that Ban has been holding a series of off-the-record lunches with select reporters, including on July 30 the Al Hayat correspondent. Whether a shifting of the sourcing from Ban to his aides -- or perhaps in fairness a subsequent confirmation by aides -- complies with Ban's understanding remains to be seen.

The question arises, as the trigger for this piece, why would Ban be distancing himself from the advice or decision that he be distant from Bashir? What is gained by telling select journalists, on the condition that they not report it, that he is taking seriously the ICC Prosecutor's charges of war crimes including rape, and of genocide, by Al Bashir? Perhaps it was understood that they would report it?

Some say that the decision to step back from Al Bashir is as much personal as legal. Just before ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo formally announced that he is seeking an arrest warrant against Al Bashir, Ban telephoned Bashir. Afterwards, Sudanese state media characterized the call as one in which Ban was critical of the prosecutor. Ban's office ultimately responded to the characterization, and criticized statements by Sudan's Ambassador to the UN. When Inner City Press asked, on the record, which statement were being criticized, there was no answer. But was there an off the record answer?

The series of lunches continued on August 1, when Ms. Montas was seen escorting a half dozen journalists to the elevator. Would the lunches become on the record? Would they cease? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban5press080108.html