UN General Assembly Adopts $5.4 Billion Budget With Public Balcony Empty, Press Banned from Media Booths, Ban Ki-moon's UN Needs Change

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 23 -- When the UN General Assembly approved a $5.4 billion two-year budget on the evening on December 23, there were a lot of late nights in the basement's Conference Rooms 5, 6, 7 and 8 were behind it. Inner City Press periodically covered that basement action, on Twitter and Periscope - but for the final approval, the Press was absent or shut out.

   Inner City Press went to cover the approval session but found the door to media booths locked, and no one to open them. Through a circuitous route, Inner City Press arrived at the public balcony - which was entirely empty. A supervisor from UN Security - which this week told Inner City Press to be quiet as it spoke about corruption by former President of the GA John Ashe -- said he would not open the media booths.

 So Inner City Press observed from the otherwise empty balcony. (The new Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, will be pursuing this.)

  There was some drama: Cuba called a point of order that left new PGA Mogens Lykketoft flummoxed, conferring with Catherine Pollard. Turkey, El Salvador and others took the floor to say they are not party to the Law of the Sea Treaty. Iran criticized the politicization of this year's Syria human rights resolution.

   Ironically, Canada and EU and US spoke at length about transparency, even as the public balcony was empty and the media booths locked. Worse, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said “openness benefits everyone,” though he has presided over the closing, and refused Inner City Pressquestions on Burundi, then on any topic including the UN corruption scandals at his end of the year press conference.He left Wednesday without taking questions.

  By contrast, India's outgoing Ambassador Asoke Mukerji congratulated his Nepali counterpart on a job well done; others congratuled South Africa as chair of the Group of 77. There was a lot of hard work done in the Committee and it should be praised. In 2016, however, the UN must do better. Watch this site.

As Cuba Embargo Slammed at UN 191-2, SWIFT Cut-Off, Set-Aside Wasted

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 27 -- The annual UN General Assembly vote against the US' embargo on Cuba has no abstentions this time: only two against (US and Israel) and 191 for. The US speech was given by Ronald D. Godard, U.S. Senior Area Adviser for Western Hemisphere Affairs, and said "We find it unfortunate that despite our demonstrated bilateral progress, the Cuban government has chosen to introduce a resolution that is nearly identical to those tabled in years past."

  Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez said in his speech, "SWIFT cancelled a service contract; the first payment of the company Sprint to initiate direct telephone calls as well as several other banking transfers for the operations of charter flights were withheld."

  Inner City Press only the day before, on October 27, asked the UN's Special Rapporteur on Unilateral Coercive Measures about SWIFT; he said an alternative SWIFT might be needed. One would have liked to hear the view of the foreign minister of Cuba, impacted by SWIFT. 

(Footnote: But the first of only four question was set-aside for UNCA, now the UN Corruption Association, which took funds from a Macau based businessman then gave an award to his "media," and got him a photo op with Ban Ki-moon. There's been no answer on that, either.) But we will continue to ask about SWIFT, and about the embargo or blockade. Watch this site.

   For years, the US has restricted to within 25 miles of New York City not only Cuban diplomats but also UN staff members who are Cuban nationals. 

On September 29, Inner City Press asked Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla about the status of this 25 mile rule. Video here. He replied that for the ten years he lived in Manhattan he was subject to it, adding that it has been modified so that principal officers are not only restricted, and others give notice of such travel. But what about Cuban UN staff?

  (Inner City Press also asked Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla if Cuba believes the UN should pay compensation to the families of people killed by the cholera the UN is accused of bringing to the island. His reply was about Cuba's medical commitment, here.) 

On September 29, this was Cuba's read-out of the Raul Castro - Obama meeting:

“Raul Castro Ruz, President of the Councils of State and of Ministers, met this Tuesday with Barack Obama, President of the United States, in the context of the High Level Segment of the Seventieth Session of the UN General Assembly.

“During the meeting, which was held in a respectful and constructive climate, both dignitaries exchanged their views on the visits paid by His Holiness Pope Francis to Cuba and the United States. They agreed on the need to work on the agenda that both countries will be discussing in the next few months as part of the process toward the normalization of relations.

“In particular, both Presidents discussed issues related to cooperation in mutually beneficial areas and in third countries, as it is the case in Haiti. The dialogue on bilateral and multilateral issues and the solution of problems that are still pending between both nations.

“President Raul Castro reiterated that for Cuba and the United States to be able to have normal relations, the blockade that has caused damages and hardships to the Cuban people and affects the interests of American citizens should be lifted, and added that other issues that are harmful to the sovereignty of Cuba should also be resolved.

"The Cuban President ratified Cuba's willingness to work in order to build a new type of relation between Cuba and the United States based on respect and sovereign equality."

Back on August 4 Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it:

Inner City Press: On the host country agreement, I wanted to ask whether, given the new re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba, whether Cuban nationals who work for the UN are still subject to a 25-mile restriction outside of New York.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Again, that’s a question to ask the US authorities.  This is not a restriction that is imposed by the United Nations.  It’s a question of the bilateral relations between those two countries.

Inner City Press:  Right.  But given the UN speaks up about restrictions on travel on its staff in countries likes Sudan and don’t ask Sudan if they’re restricting our staff, I’m asking you are UN staff members who are nationals of Cuba still restricted within 25 miles, as a UN question?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  No, that’s a question actually of US policy.  Does the US policy make that restriction?  Please ask the US Government on that.  That’s not something that’s put upon anyone by us.

  Again, this misses the point. When Sudan or other countries imposes restrictions on the movement of UN staff, the UN (sometimes) speaks up. To say, ask the country imposing the restriction on UN staff makes no sense, or is craven. We'll have more on this.

 Back on July 1, on the day the US' Jeffrey DeLaurentis handed President Barack Obama's letter to Raul Castro, setting July 20 for the re-opening of embassies, Inner City Press asked a Cuban diplomat in New York if the restrictions on him, and on Cuban UN staff, to stay within 25 miles of Columbus Circle would remain in place.

  Yes, was the reply, with a shaking of the head. How this is legal under the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN is not clear. But the UN says nothing about it.

  Later on July 1, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement welcoming the move, but saying nothing about the US' restrictions not only on Cuban diplomats but also on UN staff of Cuban nationality, who work for Ban. Ah, leadership. Ban said (with the bracketed word "more" crossed out) --

"The Secretary-General welcomes the announcement today that Cuba and the United States will reopen embassies in Havana and Washington, D.C.. The restoration of diplomatic ties is an important step on the path toward the normalization of relations.

"In keeping with the principles of its founding Charter, the United Nations supports efforts to promote [more] harmonious and good neighbourly relations among States. The Secretary-General hopes that this historic step will benefit the peoples of both countries."

  Back on April 1 as talks continued between Cuba and the US, including in Havana on telecommunications, Inner City Press on April 1 asked the UN to confirm that Cuban nationals who are UN staff members are for now required to seek prior approval before venturing more than 25 miles from Columbus Circle in Manhattan. 

  While the UN openly complains when restricted in certain other countries, this restriction it refuses to confirm or discuss. From the UN's April 1 transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about UN staff's ability to travel more than 25 miles outside of New York... I'd like you to comment on whether Cuban staff, i.e., employed by the UN, but from Cuba, are subject to that restriction, and what the Secretariat has done either historically or recently to oppose that, and your position on the legality of the host country limiting UN staff to a certain distance from Manhattan. 

Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq:  As you know, there's a Convention on the privileges and immunities of UN and associated staff, so I would just refer to you that.  So for any problems that we have in any of the countries where we operate, we take them up with the local authorities, and in this case, it would also be an issue for the Host Country Committee.

Inner City Press:  Right, but can we either now or later today just get an answer from the UN, maybe it's OHRM or OLA, are you aware, because I am, of restrictions imposed by the host country on UN staff members from particular countries, and what's your position on that?  [overlapping talking]

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Like I said, our position is in line with the Convention on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and associated staff.  So we have that as a clear point.  And then if we have concerns with any countries, we take them up at different levels.  And like I said, in this case, sometimes there would be issues for the Host Country Committee and we'd take it up there.

Inner City Press:  I'm just wondering, can the UN not say whether it has staff members based here in New York who are restricted from traveling?

Deputy Spokesman:  Whenever we have any concerns, we take them up with the authorities as need be, including with the Host Country Committee.  

   Back on March 26 Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson Jeff Rathke about US limitations on Cuban diplomats. From the State Department transcript:

Inner City Press:  Cuba has complained that its diplomats accredited to the UN in New York are not allowed to go more than 25 miles outside of the city or from Columbus Circle.  And I wanted to know whether this restriction is one of the things that’s being negotiated.  Is it considered being lifted?  Is it – where does it stand, and how do – and what’s the U.S. – given that generally people accredited to the UN can travel freely, how does the U.S. justify it?

MR. RATHKE:  Well, we’ve said from the very start of our rounds of talks with the Cuban Government that one of the topics we want to discuss is the ability of American diplomats in Cuba to move around freely and, of course, the Cubans have a similar concern.  I’m not going to get into the state of those discussions, but that’s clearly a topic that we’ve been talking about over the last few rounds.

  Rathke went on to say it is part of the negotiations. 

 Back on March 13, after Cuba came out in strong defense of Venezuela after US President Obama's executive order, the US was disappointed but not surprised, a senior State Department official told reporters on a background call.

   Inner City Press wondered from the UN, what of the US' requirement that Cuban diplomats -- and even Cuban UN staff members -- must stay without 25 miles of Columbus Circle in Manhattan? 

  Will that restriction, which seems contrary to the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN and the Vienna Conventions, be removed? 

   Currently in charge of the US' “interest section” is Jeffrey Delaurentis, formerly with the US Mission to the UN. What does he say about the 25 mile restriction? And how might he fare in a nomination process in the US Senate? Watch this site.

   

Inner City Press Asks Cuba's FM of US' 25 Miles Rule, He Says It's Modified; On Haiti

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 29 -- For years, the US has restricted to within 25 miles of New York City not only Cuban diplomats but also UN staff members who are Cuban nationals. 

On September 29, Inner City Press asked Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla about the status of this 25 mile rule. Video here. He replied that for the ten years he lived in Manhattan he was subject to it, adding that it has been modified so that principal officers are not only restricted, and others give notice of such travel. But what about Cuban UN staff?

  (Inner City Press also asked Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla if Cuba believes the UN should pay compensation to the families of people killed by the cholera the UN is accused of bringing to the island. His reply was about Cuba's medical commitment, here.) 

On September 29, this was Cuba's read-out of the Raul Castro - Obama meeting:

“Raul Castro Ruz, President of the Councils of State and of Ministers, met this Tuesday with Barack Obama, President of the United States, in the context of the High Level Segment of the Seventieth Session of the UN General Assembly.

“During the meeting, which was held in a respectful and constructive climate, both dignitaries exchanged their views on the visits paid by His Holiness Pope Francis to Cuba and the United States. They agreed on the need to work on the agenda that both countries will be discussing in the next few months as part of the process toward the normalization of relations.

“In particular, both Presidents discussed issues related to cooperation in mutually beneficial areas and in third countries, as it is the case in Haiti. The dialogue on bilateral and multilateral issues and the solution of problems that are still pending between both nations.

“President Raul Castro reiterated that for Cuba and the United States to be able to have normal relations, the blockade that has caused damages and hardships to the Cuban people and affects the interests of American citizens should be lifted, and added that other issues that are harmful to the sovereignty of Cuba should also be resolved.

"The Cuban President ratified Cuba's willingness to work in order to build a new type of relation between Cuba and the United States based on respect and sovereign equality."

Back on August 4 Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it:

Inner City Press: On the host country agreement, I wanted to ask whether, given the new re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba, whether Cuban nationals who work for the UN are still subject to a 25-mile restriction outside of New York.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Again, that’s a question to ask the US authorities.  This is not a restriction that is imposed by the United Nations.  It’s a question of the bilateral relations between those two countries.

Inner City Press:  Right.  But given the UN speaks up about restrictions on travel on its staff in countries likes Sudan and don’t ask Sudan if they’re restricting our staff, I’m asking you are UN staff members who are nationals of Cuba still restricted within 25 miles, as a UN question?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  No, that’s a question actually of US policy.  Does the US policy make that restriction?  Please ask the US Government on that.  That’s not something that’s put upon anyone by us.

  Again, this misses the point. When Sudan or other countries imposes restrictions on the movement of UN staff, the UN (sometimes) speaks up. To say, ask the country imposing the restriction on UN staff makes no sense, or is craven. We'll have more on this.

 Back on July 1, on the day the US' Jeffrey DeLaurentis handed President Barack Obama's letter to Raul Castro, setting July 20 for the re-opening of embassies, Inner City Press asked a Cuban diplomat in New York if the restrictions on him, and on Cuban UN staff, to stay within 25 miles of Columbus Circle would remain in place.

  Yes, was the reply, with a shaking of the head. How this is legal under the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN is not clear. But the UN says nothing about it.

  Later on July 1, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement welcoming the move, but saying nothing about the US' restrictions not only on Cuban diplomats but also on UN staff of Cuban nationality, who work for Ban. Ah, leadership. Ban said (with the bracketed word "more" crossed out) --

"The Secretary-General welcomes the announcement today that Cuba and the United States will reopen embassies in Havana and Washington, D.C.. The restoration of diplomatic ties is an important step on the path toward the normalization of relations.

"In keeping with the principles of its founding Charter, the United Nations supports efforts to promote [more] harmonious and good neighbourly relations among States. The Secretary-General hopes that this historic step will benefit the peoples of both countries."

  Back on April 1 as talks continued between Cuba and the US, including in Havana on telecommunications, Inner City Press on April 1 asked the UN to confirm that Cuban nationals who are UN staff members are for now required to seek prior approval before venturing more than 25 miles from Columbus Circle in Manhattan. 

  While the UN openly complains when restricted in certain other countries, this restriction it refuses to confirm or discuss. From the UN's April 1 transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about UN staff's ability to travel more than 25 miles outside of New York... I'd like you to comment on whether Cuban staff, i.e., employed by the UN, but from Cuba, are subject to that restriction, and what the Secretariat has done either historically or recently to oppose that, and your position on the legality of the host country limiting UN staff to a certain distance from Manhattan. 

Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq:  As you know, there's a Convention on the privileges and immunities of UN and associated staff, so I would just refer to you that.  So for any problems that we have in any of the countries where we operate, we take them up with the local authorities, and in this case, it would also be an issue for the Host Country Committee.

Inner City Press:  Right, but can we either now or later today just get an answer from the UN, maybe it's OHRM or OLA, are you aware, because I am, of restrictions imposed by the host country on UN staff members from particular countries, and what's your position on that?  [overlapping talking]

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Like I said, our position is in line with the Convention on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and associated staff.  So we have that as a clear point.  And then if we have concerns with any countries, we take them up at different levels.  And like I said, in this case, sometimes there would be issues for the Host Country Committee and we'd take it up there.

Inner City Press:  I'm just wondering, can the UN not say whether it has staff members based here in New York who are restricted from traveling?

Deputy Spokesman:  Whenever we have any concerns, we take them up with the authorities as need be, including with the Host Country Committee.  

   Back on March 26 Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson Jeff Rathke about US limitations on Cuban diplomats. From the State Department transcript:

Inner City Press:  Cuba has complained that its diplomats accredited to the UN in New York are not allowed to go more than 25 miles outside of the city or from Columbus Circle.  And I wanted to know whether this restriction is one of the things that’s being negotiated.  Is it considered being lifted?  Is it – where does it stand, and how do – and what’s the U.S. – given that generally people accredited to the UN can travel freely, how does the U.S. justify it?

MR. RATHKE:  Well, we’ve said from the very start of our rounds of talks with the Cuban Government that one of the topics we want to discuss is the ability of American diplomats in Cuba to move around freely and, of course, the Cubans have a similar concern.  I’m not going to get into the state of those discussions, but that’s clearly a topic that we’ve been talking about over the last few rounds.

  Rathke went on to say it is part of the negotiations. 

 Back on March 13, after Cuba came out in strong defense of Venezuela after US President Obama's executive order, the US was disappointed but not surprised, a senior State Department official told reporters on a background call.

   Inner City Press wondered from the UN, what of the US' requirement that Cuban diplomats -- and even Cuban UN staff members -- must stay without 25 miles of Columbus Circle in Manhattan? 

  Will that restriction, which seems contrary to the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN and the Vienna Conventions, be removed? 

   Currently in charge of the US' “interest section” is Jeffrey Delaurentis, formerly with the US Mission to the UN. What does he say about the 25 mile restriction? And how might he fare in a nomination process in the US Senate? Watch this site.

   

At UN, Obama Has 9 Applause Lines, 27 Minutes Over Time, Ladsous UNacted On

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 28 --  US President Barack Obama drew applause nine times, including Cuba, UN Peacekeeping and the rule of law, during his UN General Assembly speech of 42 minutes: 27 minutes over the stated limit.

 The first applause, loud, was when Obama said he believes the US Congress will lift the embargo on Cuba. There was applause when he mentioned strengthening UN Peacekeeping - but the US has so far done nothing about UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous having on September 11 linked peacekeepers' raping to “R&R,” video here.

  The third applause line was for not equating Islam with terrorism; the fourth was for the rule of law. By then the speech was at 30 minutes, double the stated limit.

The fifth applause line what the government's cracking down is sign of weakness. It was UNclear if Saudi Arabia was clapping, what with Raif Badawi for example. The sixth was for education of girls; the seventh applause line was that New York City is diverse. That could have been “Glorious Mosaic;” moments later Obama spoke of “false prophets” and some heard the Simon and Garfunkel song, “written on the subway walls.” The eighth was amorphous and the ninth was just for ending.

  Whenever Obama referred to Russia, UNTV cut to Sergey Larvov in Russia's seat (Putin was to speak later, and to meet with Obama after the Peacekeeping summit). On Syria it cut to Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari, on Iraq to that country's ambassador. There was Cuba's Raul Castro; there was a shout-out to Senegal, whose Macky Sall is scheduled for a press conference later in the day.

  Just after Obama's speech, Inner City Press went to Turkey Prime Minister Davutoglu's press conference and asked him about Libya, about locking up Vice News staff and other journalists, and threatening to close Twitter. Davutoglu said journalism is legal, terror propaganda is not. We'll have more on this.

 Before US President Barack Obama comes to New York and the UN from September 27 to 29, three Senior Administration Officials took questions from journalists for an hour on September 24, previewing among other events Obama's UN Peacekeeping summit set for September 28.

 But none of the officials, nor the called-on journalists, asked about the widely publicized sexual abuse scandals in UN Peacekeeping or what reforms the US will push for.

  On September 23, Inner City Press asked three representatives of the Government of India -- on the record, not on background -- what they want out of the Peacekeeping summit. More respect for Troop Contributing Countries, was the answer, days after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous' linkage of rapes to “R&R” was deemed a TCC insult.

   The US officials said that Obama will be pushing Indian Prime Minister Modi on the environment to see what he'll commit to. By contrast, the Indian officials on September 23 spoke of Modi going to the West Coast to look into environmental firms, including the battery technology of Tesla, to store sustainably produced energy.

  (Modi, it is said, is staying in the Waldorf suite where Obama used to stay, before moving to the New York Palace after charges of Chinese spying. It is at the New York Palace that the US administration will be holding most of its bilateral meetings and events, which Inner City Press will cover as much as possible.)

  There were two questions about Cuba; Al Arabiya was called on but was not on the line. There were questions to be asked, too, about UN reform. But they will have to wait. Watch this site.

India has been the largest contributor to UN Peacekeeping -- 185,000 troops in 44 of the UN's total of 69 missions -- so Inner City Press on September 23 at the Waldorf Astoria after the arrival of Indian Prime Minister Modi asked what India is looking for from the Peacekeeping summit Modi will attend on September 28.

  India's Ambassador to the UN Ashoke Mukerje replied that India would like Troop Contributing Countries to be consulted more meaningfully, citing Article 44 of the UN Charter; he emphasized India's skilled personnel and the protection of civilians. Periscope video here.  Inner City Press asked about DPKO boss Ladsous' comments linking rapes to “R&R,” Mukerje's earlier response is below.

  (The venue of Modi's meeting with Obama is not yet clear; the G4 Summit will occur Saturday September 26 at 8 am in the Waldorf, after which Modi heads to the West Coast including, yes, Facebook.

The buzz at the Indian press conference was how large the (Empire) room was, and of Modi staying in what used to be Obama's and other US Presidents' suite.)

When peacekeepers from France allegedly raped children in the Central African Republic and the UN learned about it more than a year ago, theUN and UNICEF did nothing, until French UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous asked to fire the whistleblower Anders Kompass in March of this year, as stated in two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings.

  On September 11, refusing to answer on this, Ladsous instead linked the rapes to soldiers' lack of "distraction" and saying rapes could be avoided by some "relatively cheap R&R," and adding that some "South Asia"Troop Contributing Countries do just that. Video here.

 On September 17, Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representative of India, Asoke K Mukerji, and his Deputy Bhagwant Bishnoi about what Ladsous said. Video here. First, Bhagwant Bishnoi distinguished India from what Ladsous said, saying they only rotate troops in the most difficult circumstances. In some, one a year, if more volatile, more often.

  Then Ambassador Mukerji said clear, India's is a professional army, not a part time army, there are no "R&R" trips and that is for whoever said it to explain. Video here.

  That would be Ladsous, who refuses to answer Press questions. He took no questions as he rushed out of the Security Council on September 17.

 (India's Prime Minister will participate in the high level meeting on peacekeeping on September 28, which we'll cover.)

 On September 17, the UN Mission in CAR, MINUSCA, issued this statement now about a pornographic film involving peacekeepers:

"The United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) is deeply concerned at reports of a pornographic film circulating in the city of Batangafo, center-west of the Central African Republic, which allegedly involves peacekeepers.

"MINUSCA immediately took steps to try to verify these disturbing allegations. To this end, MINUSCA met with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect of the locality, and with representative of the local population.

"A fact finding mission also visited Kabo, about 55 km from Batangafo, to raise the issue with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect and members of the local community.

"To date, MINUSCA’s contacts with the authorities and local residents have not provided any evidence to substantiate the allegations of a film involving UN personnel.  However, the Mission is committed to establishing the truth and requests that anyone in possession of evidence to substantiate these allegations should submit this to the Mission’s attention. This may be done via any MINUSCA office.

"MINUSCA would like to reiterate its strict adherence to the United Nations’ zero tolerance policy with regard to all acts of misconduct and sexual exploitation and abuse."

  One wag said, once Ladsous linked rapes to recreation, this should not be surprising.

  On September 15 MINUSCA disclosed yet another "allegation of sexual exploitation committed by one of its civilian staff."

  Inner City Press on September 15 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press:  Since Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous said that one of the reasons these abuses take place is people don't leave the country and go for R&R elsewhere for recreation, one could say, how long has the person been in the country?

Spokesman:  Matthew, I think… I think you continue to gain great pleasure in distorting what Mr. Ladsous said…

Inner City Press:  You can read the transcript.  He said…

Spokesman:  Listen, I think you raised that issue yesterday.  I answered clearly this is a case… a possible case of sexual abuse, which is to be condemned and which will be pursued as far as we can, both internally and with the relevant judicial authorities.

Inner City Press:  How long has it been since the person left the country?  The reason I ask is that he made the linkage.  He's the one that brought up people traveling…  [Cross talk - actually, talk over, by scribes]

Spokesman:  Matthew, I will say this one last time.  Civilian staff and military staff work under two different regimes.  So you're… to compare soldiers that have been in-country in very difficult circumstances for three years and civilian staff is not to be comparable.  Yes, ma'am?

  Later on September 15, Dujarric declined a Press question about what Ladsous said, ironically during a Reditt "Ask Me Anything" session. Ask Me Anything, except...

  On September 14, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about what Ladsous had said, similar to comment which as noted below have gotten other military officials fired, even after they apologized. (Ladsous has not apologized, clarified, or answered any Press questions.) September 14 video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press: I'd wanted to ask you this on Friday or Mr. Ladsous, but I want to ask you, from this podium, he said, in discussing rapes, he said that peacekeepers there don't have enough recreation, that they don't have enough comfort.  He said that they are looking into getting them flights to get them fresh air, and although he did use the word, he's not excusing it.  I'm going to tell, many people saw this as basically a statement that somehow linking the rapes to a lack of other distractions…

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think… I think it's a complete misinterpretation of what Mr. Ladsous said.  He stressed a number of times that there was no excuse...

Inner City Press:  Then what about the flights?  I'm sorry.

Spokesman:  I'm a little over-caffeinated with me today so just bear with me.  He repeatedly said that there was no excuse for rape.  Okay.  That is clear.  That is UN policy, and I think that's everyone's policy.  There is no excuse for rape.  What he said in talking about the case of one contingent that had been deployed in basically a very hardship peacekeeping operation for more than three years.  When troops are not rotated, when troops don't have an opportunity to be rotated out for [rest and recuperation] and that's true for any armed forces, it creates the conditions where there can be all sorts of abuse or other things developing.  It is not an excuse for rape.  And I think it's clear that we have seen rape and horrendous sexual abuse by soldiers in many parts of the world.  Some of them come from very rich armies.  Some come from very poor armies.  There is no excuse.  What he was saying and I think people would agree with it, that three years for any contingent being stationed in very difficult circumstances is too long.

Inner City Press:  I guess what I want to say, US military, an admiral in the Pacific was fired for comments exactly like that for which the person… the person excused himself and apologized… he said distraction, comfort.

Spokesman:  Matthew, Matthew.  I read what you wrote.  I'm aware of the other case.  I think they're complete… they're not comparable.

Inner City Press:  Where are the flights going?  Where are the [rest and recuperation] flights going? 

Spokesman:  I will come back…

  Back in 1995 for similar comments, US Admiral Richard C. Macke was fired, as reported in the LA Times and the New York Times, which said Macke "apologized after members of Congress and Japanese officials complained, but it was too late.... A senior White House official said tonight that Anthony Lake, the national security adviser, had heard of Admiral Macke's remarks and told the Defense Department that the statements were 'not acceptable.'"

  Anthony Lake is now in the UN system, as the head of UNICEF - does he think UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous' similar comments in 2015 are acceptable? Or does he, apparently like his and some other major member states, hope no one notices what Ladsous says and, worse, does?

  UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has yet to act. Nor have Ladsous' French sponsors, who dumped him on the UN after he'd previously beenrejected for the post by Ban's predecessor Kofi Annan, said anything.

 When Inner City Press started asking about this, Ladsous took to saying"I don't respond to you, Mister," right on UNTV. Instead he summoned Agence France Presse, Reuters and others to private briefings, as here in the hall. These media didn't report Ladsous' antics -- nor despite being present at Ladsous' September 11 press conference did they report his linkage of soldiers' rapes to their lack of "comfort" or R&R. This is today's UN.

  It was Senegalese Babacar Gaye, the head of the CAR mission, and not overall Peacekeeping chief Ladsous who was fired by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon; Inner City Press obtained and put Gaye's letter online here (credited here and here) citing systemic problems.

  Before Ladsous' carefully controlled four day visit to the country - no questions on the peacekeeper rapes, colonial photographs sent out - UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press, which asked, that Ladsous would take questions when he returned, including about peacekeepers' sexual abuse.

But when Ladsous appeared at the September 11 UN noon briefing, UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric for the second time did not allow Inner City Press to ask Ladsous a single question. Dujarric gave the first question to the UN Correspondents Association, which after a perfunctory questions about the number of sexual abuse cases said its “real” question was if Ladsous will meet Obama. (Yes, apparently, and inappropriately, see below). Video here.

  Inner City Press prepared to ask Ladsous an obvious question: what is his response to appearing in at least two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings as having tried to get the whistleblower Kompass fired? But Dujarric gave the second question to a Reuters reporter who has previously channeled Ladsous, then to Agence France Presse, whose UN reporter in 2011 asked UNCA's board to act on Inner City Press' reporting on Ladsous.

Even with the questions allowed, Ladsous' answers should get him fired. First, speaking of sexual abuse, he said he didn't want to “deflower” the subject. Vine here. Then explaining the peacekeepers' rapes he said that a solution would be to get them more “recreation” (translating back and forth with Dujarric, Ladsous began to say “R and R”).

  Ladsous was asked, what do you mean? He said that Asian countries are good at this. We'll have more, but on top of his role in covering up rapes in DR Congo, Darfur and now CAR, this should get Ladsous fired. More here.
   

On SDGs, Cuba's Raul Castro on Embargo, Chinese President Xi's $2 Billion Pledge Praised by Evo, Sudan's Bashir Absent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 26 -- Among the Sustainable Development Goals speeches in the UN General Assembly Hall on September 26, China's Xi Jinping grabbed headlines with a $2 billion pledge for a South - South development fund.

 This was praised, less than an hour later, by Bolivia's Evo Morales in a press conference elsewhere in the UN; Inner City Press asked Morales about sovereign debt restructuring, which new GA President Mogens Lykketoft on September 25 told Inner City Press will NOT be dealt with in the UN's walls, a position contrary to the views and votes of the Group of 77.

  Raul Castro said the US embargo is holding back Cuba's development; Iran's Hassan Rouhani said the nuclear deal will be good for the environment. Lebanon raised the problem of being classified as a middle income country, which Inner City Press has asked UN officials from Sigrid Kaag to outgoing UNHCR chief Antonio Guterres about (who will take the post from Guterres, and their view and action on this, is the subject of an ongoing Inner City Press series, also involving Lykketoft and his fellow Dane, former Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt.

   Sudan's Foreign Minister conveyed the greeting of Omar al-Bashir, of whom wire(s) reported, probably knowing even at the time it was false, that he would visit New York despite his indictment for genocide by the International Criminal Court. There is a lot of made-up news around the UN, especially now. And we're on the look out for it.

 These Sustainable Development Goals, to which a session of the UN General Assembly is devoted, are being promoted in videos, flags, projections on the UN buildings.

  Inner City Press on September 4 asked film-maker Richard Curtis and Amina Mohammed, Special Advisor to the Secretary-General on Post-2015 Development Planning about this campaign, and if it will raise the issue of who will PAY for implementation of the goals -- including if the corporate partners of the campaign are in fact paying or avoiding their taxes.

  To Amina Mohammed and DPI's Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked when the UN will have a Freedom of Information Act. Video here.

Earlier on September 3 when the International Monetary Fund resumed its biweekly embargoed media briefings, Inner City Press submitted four questions. Inner City Press asked:

"Who from the IMF is coming to the UN General Assembly (and SDGs, etc) week in late September, and what is their program? What meeting will they participate in? What do they hope to accomplish?"

IMF Deputy Spokesperson William Murray answered, as fast transcribed by InnerCityPro:

“Matthew, and others, the Managing Director is scheduled to attend the UNGA particularly the SDGs segment in late September. There was a previous meeting in Addis Ababa we participated in at a high level that dealt with the SDGs... The IMF's Executive Board recently endorsed a 50% increase in access to all the funds concessional lending facilities and to maintain a 0% rate for low income countries that struggle with disasters and conflict. The Executive Board of the Fund has endorsed IMF's engagement in sustainable inclusive growth, on which we'll be elaborating in the weeks and months to come.”

  One focus should be financial inclusion, on which we'll have more during UNGA week.

 In the meanwhile, Murray also said Managing Director Christine Lagarde is about to arrive in Ukraine for "opportunistic" meetings with the authorities, and an IMF mission team will go there on September 22.

  On September 3, Inner City Press also submitted questions about Nepal and Grenada, as well as this:

"In Indonesia the Vice Speaker of the House of Representatives Taufik Kurniawan recently said, 'We do not ask for IMF support in crisis;' at the UN in NY on Sept 2, the Vice Chairman of the House of Representatives of Indonesia H. Fadli Zon told Inner City Press much the same thing. What is the IMF's response to these criticisms or resistance to the IMF, from elected representatives of the country where the IMF now plans its 2018 Annual Meetings?"

  We hope to receive answers.

  Back on July 8 when the International Monetary Fund released reviews and papers about the United States, complete with support of the Dodd Frank Act and mentions of anti money laundering protection Inner City Press asked about the proposal to raise the definition of Systemically Important Financial Institution from $50 billion up to $500 billion and if tight AML strictures are to blame for cutting off remittances to Somalia.

  Aditya Narain, IMF mission chief for the Financial Sector Assessment Program and deputy director, Monetary and Capital Markets department, told Inner City Press that the IMF believes such definition should give predictability, but should be based on risk and not necessarily only asset size.

  Narain told Inner City Press, "On the first one, our general belief is that supervisory approaches should be risk based, and therefore the materiality and proportionality of institutions should be taken into account for to develop supervisory frameworks. At the same time, we also recognize that it’s important to have some clear rules, regarding a unit, in this case size of institutions, because not only does it set a baseline of expectations, but it also provides a useful framework for people to anchor their expectations on. So that’s why, in a sense we would agree that it’s important to make these approaches risk based and therefore not dependent on size alone. I should add also, that our only political ideology is financial stability, for the purpose of this exercise.

  But will this be used FOR the Senator Richard Shelby draft bill?

  On remittances, Aditya Narain said it is an important question but one that the IMF is dealing with in other venues; it apparently wasn't raised to the US during this process. Why not?

 Narain told Inner City Press, "On the regulatory question, this is an issue which is being discussed in several forums where the IMF has been participating, and this is an issue not just for the US, although it has been most discussed in the context of the US, but the effects of the AML on remittances and the result, the stringent adherence to standards has led to a concern more globally that might be affecting the flow of remittances to those jurisdictions... where such remittances and the channels through which they flow are more important. We have not discussed this... there is work ongoing in the Fund, including in collaboration with other institutions like the World Bank... and we expect to be able to have more information on this in a few months time."

   In the embargoed media conference call, two questions in a row went to the Financial Times, which opined that the IMF report takes the side of the Democratic Party. The IMF disagreed. The IMF said, in writing, “As the epicenter of the global financial crisis that began in 2008, the United States passed a major law in 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act, to reform its financial system. Officials need to complete the rulemaking under the law, while parts of reform agenda face legislative proposals to water them down.”

   Central Banking asked two questions and Reuters one, on federal insurance regulation.  Watch this site.
   

US to Host UN Peacekeeping Summit, No Questions on Sexual Abuse, Of Modi, Waldorf & Tesla

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 24 --  Before US President Barack Obama comes to New York and the UN from September 27 to 29, three Senior Administration Officials took questions from journalists for an hour on September 24, previewing among other events Obama's UN Peacekeeping summit set for September 28.

 But none of the officials, nor the called-on journalists, asked about the widely publicized sexual abuse scandals in UN Peacekeeping or what reforms the US will push for.

  On September 23, Inner City Press asked three representatives of the Government of India -- on the record, not on background -- what they want out of the Peacekeeping summit. More respect for Troop Contributing Countries, was the answer, days after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous' linkage of rapes to “R&R” was deemed a TCC insult.

   The US officials said that Obama will be pushing Indian Prime Minister Modi on the environment to see what he'll commit to. By contrast, the Indian officials on September 23 spoke of Modi going to the West Coast to look into environmental firms, including the battery technology of Tesla, to store sustainably produced energy.

  (Modi, it is said, is staying in the Waldorf suite where Obama used to stay, before moving to the New York Palace after charges of Chinese spying. It is at the New York Palace that the US administration will be holding most of its bilateral meetings and events, which Inner City Press will cover as much as possible.)

  There were two questions about Cuba; Al Arabiya was called on but was not on the line. There were questions to be asked, too, about UN reform. But they will have to wait. Watch this site.

India has been the largest contributor to UN Peacekeeping -- 185,000 troops in 44 of the UN's total of 69 missions -- so Inner City Press on September 23 at the Waldorf Astoria after the arrival of Indian Prime Minister Modi asked what India is looking for from the Peacekeeping summit Modi will attend on September 28.

  India's Ambassador to the UN Ashoke Mukerje replied that India would like Troop Contributing Countries to be consulted more meaningfully, citing Article 44 of the UN Charter; he emphasized India's skilled personnel and the protection of civilians. Periscope video here.  Inner City Press asked about DPKO boss Ladsous' comments linking rapes to “R&R,” Mukerje's earlier response is below.

  (The venue of Modi's meeting with Obama is not yet clear; the G4 Summit will occur Saturday September 26 at 8 am in the Waldorf, after which Modi heads to the West Coast including, yes, Facebook.

The buzz at the Indian press conference was how large the (Empire) room was, and of Modi staying in what used to be Obama's and other US Presidents' suite.)

When peacekeepers from France allegedly raped children in the Central African Republic and the UN learned about it more than a year ago, theUN and UNICEF did nothing, until French UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous asked to fire the whistleblower Anders Kompass in March of this year, as stated in two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings.

  On September 11, refusing to answer on this, Ladsous instead linked the rapes to soldiers' lack of "distraction" and saying rapes could be avoided by some "relatively cheap R&R," and adding that some "South Asia"Troop Contributing Countries do just that. Video here.

 On September 17, Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representative of India, Asoke K Mukerji, and his Deputy Bhagwant Bishnoi about what Ladsous said. Video here. First, Bhagwant Bishnoi distinguished India from what Ladsous said, saying they only rotate troops in the most difficult circumstances. In some, one a year, if more volatile, more often.

  Then Ambassador Mukerji said clear, India's is a professional army, not a part time army, there are no "R&R" trips and that is for whoever said it to explain. Video here.

  That would be Ladsous, who refuses to answer Press questions. He took no questions as he rushed out of the Security Council on September 17.

 (India's Prime Minister will participate in the high level meeting on peacekeeping on September 28, which we'll cover.)

 On September 17, the UN Mission in CAR, MINUSCA, issued this statement now about a pornographic film involving peacekeepers:

"The United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) is deeply concerned at reports of a pornographic film circulating in the city of Batangafo, center-west of the Central African Republic, which allegedly involves peacekeepers.

"MINUSCA immediately took steps to try to verify these disturbing allegations. To this end, MINUSCA met with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect of the locality, and with representative of the local population.

"A fact finding mission also visited Kabo, about 55 km from Batangafo, to raise the issue with the Mayor and the Deputy Prefect and members of the local community.

"To date, MINUSCA’s contacts with the authorities and local residents have not provided any evidence to substantiate the allegations of a film involving UN personnel.  However, the Mission is committed to establishing the truth and requests that anyone in possession of evidence to substantiate these allegations should submit this to the Mission’s attention. This may be done via any MINUSCA office.

"MINUSCA would like to reiterate its strict adherence to the United Nations’ zero tolerance policy with regard to all acts of misconduct and sexual exploitation and abuse."

  One wag said, once Ladsous linked rapes to recreation, this should not be surprising.

  On September 15 MINUSCA disclosed yet another "allegation of sexual exploitation committed by one of its civilian staff."

  Inner City Press on September 15 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press:  Since Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous said that one of the reasons these abuses take place is people don't leave the country and go for R&R elsewhere for recreation, one could say, how long has the person been in the country?

Spokesman:  Matthew, I think… I think you continue to gain great pleasure in distorting what Mr. Ladsous said…

Inner City Press:  You can read the transcript.  He said…

Spokesman:  Listen, I think you raised that issue yesterday.  I answered clearly this is a case… a possible case of sexual abuse, which is to be condemned and which will be pursued as far as we can, both internally and with the relevant judicial authorities.

Inner City Press:  How long has it been since the person left the country?  The reason I ask is that he made the linkage.  He's the one that brought up people traveling…  [Cross talk - actually, talk over, by scribes]

Spokesman:  Matthew, I will say this one last time.  Civilian staff and military staff work under two different regimes.  So you're… to compare soldiers that have been in-country in very difficult circumstances for three years and civilian staff is not to be comparable.  Yes, ma'am?

  Later on September 15, Dujarric declined a Press question about what Ladsous said, ironically during a Reditt "Ask Me Anything" session. Ask Me Anything, except...

  On September 14, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about what Ladsous had said, similar to comment which as noted below have gotten other military officials fired, even after they apologized. (Ladsous has not apologized, clarified, or answered any Press questions.) September 14 video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press: I'd wanted to ask you this on Friday or Mr. Ladsous, but I want to ask you, from this podium, he said, in discussing rapes, he said that peacekeepers there don't have enough recreation, that they don't have enough comfort.  He said that they are looking into getting them flights to get them fresh air, and although he did use the word, he's not excusing it.  I'm going to tell, many people saw this as basically a statement that somehow linking the rapes to a lack of other distractions…

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think… I think it's a complete misinterpretation of what Mr. Ladsous said.  He stressed a number of times that there was no excuse...

Inner City Press:  Then what about the flights?  I'm sorry.

Spokesman:  I'm a little over-caffeinated with me today so just bear with me.  He repeatedly said that there was no excuse for rape.  Okay.  That is clear.  That is UN policy, and I think that's everyone's policy.  There is no excuse for rape.  What he said in talking about the case of one contingent that had been deployed in basically a very hardship peacekeeping operation for more than three years.  When troops are not rotated, when troops don't have an opportunity to be rotated out for [rest and recuperation] and that's true for any armed forces, it creates the conditions where there can be all sorts of abuse or other things developing.  It is not an excuse for rape.  And I think it's clear that we have seen rape and horrendous sexual abuse by soldiers in many parts of the world.  Some of them come from very rich armies.  Some come from very poor armies.  There is no excuse.  What he was saying and I think people would agree with it, that three years for any contingent being stationed in very difficult circumstances is too long.

Inner City Press:  I guess what I want to say, US military, an admiral in the Pacific was fired for comments exactly like that for which the person… the person excused himself and apologized… he said distraction, comfort.

Spokesman:  Matthew, Matthew.  I read what you wrote.  I'm aware of the other case.  I think they're complete… they're not comparable.

Inner City Press:  Where are the flights going?  Where are the [rest and recuperation] flights going? 

Spokesman:  I will come back…

  Back in 1995 for similar comments, US Admiral Richard C. Macke was fired, as reported in the LA Times and the New York Times, which said Macke "apologized after members of Congress and Japanese officials complained, but it was too late.... A senior White House official said tonight that Anthony Lake, the national security adviser, had heard of Admiral Macke's remarks and told the Defense Department that the statements were 'not acceptable.'"

  Anthony Lake is now in the UN system, as the head of UNICEF - does he think UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous' similar comments in 2015 are acceptable? Or does he, apparently like his and some other major member states, hope no one notices what Ladsous says and, worse, does?

  UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has yet to act. Nor have Ladsous' French sponsors, who dumped him on the UN after he'd previously beenrejected for the post by Ban's predecessor Kofi Annan, said anything.

 When Inner City Press started asking about this, Ladsous took to saying"I don't respond to you, Mister," right on UNTV. Instead he summoned Agence France Presse, Reuters and others to private briefings, as here in the hall. These media didn't report Ladsous' antics -- nor despite being present at Ladsous' September 11 press conference did they report his linkage of soldiers' rapes to their lack of "comfort" or R&R. This is today's UN.

  It was Senegalese Babacar Gaye, the head of the CAR mission, and not overall Peacekeeping chief Ladsous who was fired by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon; Inner City Press obtained and put Gaye's letter online here (credited here and here) citing systemic problems.

  Before Ladsous' carefully controlled four day visit to the country - no questions on the peacekeeper rapes, colonial photographs sent out - UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press, which asked, that Ladsous would take questions when he returned, including about peacekeepers' sexual abuse.

But when Ladsous appeared at the September 11 UN noon briefing, UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric for the second time did not allow Inner City Press to ask Ladsous a single question. Dujarric gave the first question to the UN Correspondents Association, which after a perfunctory questions about the number of sexual abuse cases said its “real” question was if Ladsous will meet Obama. (Yes, apparently, and inappropriately, see below). Video here.

  Inner City Press prepared to ask Ladsous an obvious question: what is his response to appearing in at least two UN Dispute Tribunal rulings as having tried to get the whistleblower Kompass fired? But Dujarric gave the second question to a Reuters reporter who has previously channeled Ladsous, then to Agence France Presse, whose UN reporter in 2011 asked UNCA's board to act on Inner City Press' reporting on Ladsous.

Even with the questions allowed, Ladsous' answers should get him fired. First, speaking of sexual abuse, he said he didn't want to “deflower” the subject. Vine here. Then explaining the peacekeepers' rapes he said that a solution would be to get them more “recreation” (translating back and forth with Dujarric, Ladsous began to say “R and R”).

  Ladsous was asked, what do you mean? He said that Asian countries are good at this. We'll have more, but on top of his role in covering up rapes in DR Congo, Darfur and now CAR, this should get Ladsous fired. More here.
   

UN Tells Inner City Press to "Ask US" of Its Cuban Staff Restricted to 25 Miles From NYC

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 4 -- For years, the US has restricted to within 25 miles of New York City not only Cuban diplomats but also UN staff members who are Cuban nationals. Now amid the thaw in US-Cuba relations, on August 4 Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about it:

Inner City Press: On the host country agreement, I wanted to ask whether, given the new re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba, whether Cuban nationals who work for the UN are still subject to a 25-mile restriction outside of New York.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Again, that’s a question to ask the US authorities.  This is not a restriction that is imposed by the United Nations.  It’s a question of the bilateral relations between those two countries.

Inner City Press:  Right.  But given the UN speaks up about restrictions on travel on its staff in countries likes Sudan and don’t ask Sudan if they’re restricting our staff, I’m asking you are UN staff members who are nationals of Cuba still restricted within 25 miles, as a UN question?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  No, that’s a question actually of US policy.  Does the US policy make that restriction?  Please ask the US Government on that.  That’s not something that’s put upon anyone by us.

  Again, this misses the point. When Sudan or other countries imposes restrictions on the movement of UN staff, the UN (sometimes) speaks up. To say, ask the country imposing the restriction on UN staff makes no sense, or is craven. We'll have more on this.

 Back on July 1, on the day the US' Jeffrey DeLaurentis handed President Barack Obama's letter to Raul Castro, setting July 20 for the re-opening of embassies, Inner City Press asked a Cuban diplomat in New York if the restrictions on him, and on Cuban UN staff, to stay within 25 miles of Columbus Circle would remain in place.

  Yes, was the reply, with a shaking of the head. How this is legal under the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN is not clear. But the UN says nothing about it.

  Later on July 1, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement welcoming the move, but saying nothing about the US' restrictions not only on Cuban diplomats but also on UN staff of Cuban nationality, who work for Ban. Ah, leadership. Ban said (with the bracketed word "more" crossed out) --

"The Secretary-General welcomes the announcement today that Cuba and the United States will reopen embassies in Havana and Washington, D.C.. The restoration of diplomatic ties is an important step on the path toward the normalization of relations.

"In keeping with the principles of its founding Charter, the United Nations supports efforts to promote [more] harmonious and good neighbourly relations among States. The Secretary-General hopes that this historic step will benefit the peoples of both countries."

  Back on April 1 as talks continued between Cuba and the US, including in Havana on telecommunications, Inner City Press on April 1 asked the UN to confirm that Cuban nationals who are UN staff members are for now required to seek prior approval before venturing more than 25 miles from Columbus Circle in Manhattan. 

  While the UN openly complains when restricted in certain other countries, this restriction it refuses to confirm or discuss. From the UN's April 1 transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about UN staff's ability to travel more than 25 miles outside of New York... I'd like you to comment on whether Cuban staff, i.e., employed by the UN, but from Cuba, are subject to that restriction, and what the Secretariat has done either historically or recently to oppose that, and your position on the legality of the host country limiting UN staff to a certain distance from Manhattan. 

Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq:  As you know, there's a Convention on the privileges and immunities of UN and associated staff, so I would just refer to you that.  So for any problems that we have in any of the countries where we operate, we take them up with the local authorities, and in this case, it would also be an issue for the Host Country Committee.

Inner City Press:  Right, but can we either now or later today just get an answer from the UN, maybe it's OHRM or OLA, are you aware, because I am, of restrictions imposed by the host country on UN staff members from particular countries, and what's your position on that?  [overlapping talking]

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Like I said, our position is in line with the Convention on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and associated staff.  So we have that as a clear point.  And then if we have concerns with any countries, we take them up at different levels.  And like I said, in this case, sometimes there would be issues for the Host Country Committee and we'd take it up there.

Inner City Press:  I'm just wondering, can the UN not say whether it has staff members based here in New York who are restricted from traveling?

Deputy Spokesman:  Whenever we have any concerns, we take them up with the authorities as need be, including with the Host Country Committee.  

   Back on March 26 Inner City Press asked US State Department spokesperson Jeff Rathke about US limitations on Cuban diplomats. From the State Department transcript:

Inner City Press:  Cuba has complained that its diplomats accredited to the UN in New York are not allowed to go more than 25 miles outside of the city or from Columbus Circle.  And I wanted to know whether this restriction is one of the things that’s being negotiated.  Is it considered being lifted?  Is it – where does it stand, and how do – and what’s the U.S. – given that generally people accredited to the UN can travel freely, how does the U.S. justify it?

MR. RATHKE:  Well, we’ve said from the very start of our rounds of talks with the Cuban Government that one of the topics we want to discuss is the ability of American diplomats in Cuba to move around freely and, of course, the Cubans have a similar concern.  I’m not going to get into the state of those discussions, but that’s clearly a topic that we’ve been talking about over the last few rounds.

  Rathke went on to say it is part of the negotiations. 

 Back on March 13, after Cuba came out in strong defense of Venezuela after US President Obama's executive order, the US was disappointed but not surprised, a senior State Department official told reporters on a background call.

   Inner City Press wondered from the UN, what of the US' requirement that Cuban diplomats -- and even Cuban UN staff members -- must stay without 25 miles of Columbus Circle in Manhattan? 

  Will that restriction, which seems contrary to the Host Country Agreement between the US and UN and the Vienna Conventions, be removed? 

   Currently in charge of the US' “interest section” isJeffrey Delaurentis, formerly with the US Mission to the UN. What does he say about the 25 mile restriction? And how might he fare in a nomination process in the US Senate? Watch this site.