On Ukraine, UNSC Silent on Embassy Attack Seven Hours After US

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 14, more here -- On this Saturday at 1 pm in Washington, US State Department Jen Psaki told the press, "The United States condemns the attack on the Russian Embassy in Kyiv, and calls on Ukrainian authorities to meet their Vienna convention obligations to provide adequate security."

  But seven hours later, not only was UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon silent on the issue, the UN Security Council had not issued its boilerplate Press Statement about the “inviolability of diplomatic missions under the Vienna Convention" of 1963.

  When embassies are attacked, these statements are routine. If one is blocked here, what is the message?

   While Ban Ki-moon stayed silent on the embassy, he issued a statement condemning "in the strongest terms the downing of an Ukrainian military airplane today in Lugansk, killing 49 people."

  If these events, or decisions to block statements on attacks on embassies, are being linked, what is the precedent?

When asked of the killings in Odessa on May 2, or the more recent jet bombing of Luhansk, the UN tells the Press to wait for the June 17 report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

  Navi Pillay, leaving that post on August 31, in her June 10 last opening statement to the Human Rights Council said, "In Ukraine, the UN response to the crisis stepped up as the situation deteriorated in February 2014. My Office swiftly deployed a human rights monitoring mission that has so far issued two reports, with concrete recommendations including guarantees for the implementation of minority rights. I hope that the new Government will address the human rights challenges in Ukraine, and I encourage it to devise a comprehensive human rights reform plan that includes accountability for violations."

   In other parts of her speech, Pillay mentioned specifics, including for example on the deadly mine accident in Turkey. But on Ukraine, nothing on jet bombings or the asserted use of chloroform in Odessa.

   Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has nominated to replace Pillay Prince Zeid, who has represented and spoken for Jordan on the Security Council since January. On Ukraine, what has he said of the jet bombing, of Odessa, of the detention and shelling death of journalists attributed to the government?  He is set to be voted on - or approved by acclamation - on June 16. Watch this site.

Background: Of the UN's last report on Ukraine, dated May 16, much  much has been said. Here is what is said about the events of May 2 in Odessa:

“63. On 2 May, a national unity rally gathered around 1,500 people, including many fans from the football clubs of Chornomorets Odesa and Metalist Kharkiv, as well as city residents. Among the crowd there were reportedly also some radical members of the Right Sector and Maidan self-defence unit armed with bats and metal sticks. Shortly after the rally began, the latter were provoked by approximately 300 well-organized and armed pro-federalism activists; the rally turning into a mass disorder, which lasted for several hours. As a result, four protesters in support of Ukraine were killed by gunshots (a fifth died later in the hospital from his injuries). Many were injured during the afternoon (mostly protesters supporting federalism). During the evening, violent clashes between the two sides continued on the main square (Kulikove polje), which ended in a fire a at the Trade Union building where protesters supporting federalism had taken refuge. As a result of the events, 46 people died of whom 30 (including 6 women) were trapped and unable to leave the burning building and 8 (including one woman) died from jumping out of the windows. In total, 38 died at the scene of the fire. At least 230 were injured.”

  While not attributing the setting of the fire which targeted “pro-federalism” activists, the UN report says that these “armed” pro-federalism activists “provoked” the Right Sector.

  Ivan Simonovic is in Ukraine, but will only go to Odessa AFTER today's report has been released. Inner City Press has previously reported on what OHCHR sources have said are Simonovic's moved to try to become Pillay's successor(there are other candidates; more on that soon). 

  Now sources say with Eastern Europe in line to pick the successor to Ban Ki-moon as UN Secretary General, Simonovic may be vying for the UN's top post alongside Irina Bokova and others, including non Eastern Europeans Helen Clark of UNDP and Kevin Rudd of, well, Kevin Rudd, who'd like to compete with Kamel Morjane, long time associate of Ben Ali in Tunisia, to replace Lakhdar Brahimi on Syria.

  Ah, politics.

  Tellingly, when US Voice of America wrote up the UN report, here, it didn't even mention Odessa (or Odesa), citing only anti-government groups. There is legislation pending in the US Congress to confirm that Voice of America must follow the US line -- but isn't that already the case? 

  In full disclosure, Voice of America along with UN Correspondents Association executive committee members from Reuters and Agence France Presse sought to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN,  as documented by Freedom of Information Act inquiries. Click here (VOA letter to current UN spokesman), here (AFP) and here for VOA about Reuters' support, here's Reuters bureau chief asking Google to ban from Search his “for the record” complaint to the UN against Inner City Press: censorship.

  As a human rights irony, these same and UNCA's executive committee set up a kangaroo court to prosecute Inner City Press for its reporting on Sri Lanka war criminals and conflicts of interest, here.

  Ah, human rights. Watch this site.

   

As UN's Ban Ki-moon Urges Libyans to Support Government After Bombing of French Embassy, Nigerians in Baga Told the Same?

By Matthew Russell Lee, News Muse

UNITED NATIONS, April 23 -- The UN Security Council was on a suburban retreat Tuesday in Greentree, New York, but managed to issue a Press Statement condemning the car bombing of the French embassy in Tripoli.

  Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who along with senior staffers was also on the retreat, also put out a statement. Ban's statement, strangely, called “on all Libyans to support their Government's efforts to establish strong and effective security institutions.”

  Should the UN Secretary General be telling the citizens of any country to “support their Government”? Or is it somehow different, to call for support for the Government for a particular purpose?

Then again, some of the countries that the UN and Ban Ki-moon condemn are if nothing else engaged in effort to “establish strong... security institutions.” Is that always a good thing?

  Ban's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey was asked to provide a summary of what Ban was discussing with the Security Council. 

  Del Buey replied that it is all confidential -- this despite at least one Permanent Five member of the Council tweeting his country's topic, Climate Change, and despite the other topic, Peacekeeping, being widely known.

  Given the increasing opacity of the UN Secretariat under Ban (and even worse, of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous), it was not possible to ask not only about Bahrain banning the UN's special rapporteur on torture, but also for clarification of Ban's April 22 statement on Nigeria.

  Inner City Press at the April 22 noon briefing asked about the fighting in Baga in which 185 civilians were reportedly killed. Later on April 22, Ban issued a statement calling on “all extremist groups” to stop their attacks.

  Now it's reported that the militaries of Chad and Niger participated along with that of Nigeria in the assault on Baga. Did Ban know that? Is there any UN role in this trilateral fight, which scarred Baga and killed civilians?

  Will the residents of Baga be called on “to support their Government's efforts to establish strong and effective security institutions”? Watch this site.

On Embassy Attacks, Wittig Won't Answer on Denigration of Religion, Araud

By Matthew Russell Lee

 

UNITED NATIONS, September 14 -- After two days of protests of an anti-Islamic YouTube video at embassies not only of the US but also the UK and, notably, Germany in Sudan, this month's UN Security Council president Peter Wittig of Germany came to the Council stakeout at 8:30 pm on Friday to read a Council statement. Video here.

  When Wittig finished reading, Inner City Press asked him about what several other Council members had told it earlier in the afternoon: that the September 12 statement on the killing of US diplomats in Libya had initially included a condemnation of the denigration of the religion -- that is, of the murky film -- but that France's Ambassador Gerard Araud blocked it, saying he was proud to have the freedom to denigrate religion.

Wittig answered, you certain don't expect me to speak about internal and confidential deliberations of the Council." Then, brushing off Inner City Press' follow up, he said that Germany's position is reflected in the Council statement. Video here.

  But what several other Security Council members raised to Inner City Press is that France and other European countries -- including Germany -- now cite freedom of speech as a basis for not condemning the YouTube video, but have laws against other forms of speech.

  It gets divisive, and could be distinguished, but the comparison is inevitable. Dodging it may not be the best approach.

  Also on September 14, the US had its Vice President Joe Biden make the call to his Sudanese counterpart, Vice President Taha.

  Since President Barack Obama himself called Egypt's Morsi and then Yemen's Hadi, it seemed clear that Obama wanted to avoid any talk with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for genocide.

  But while the US seemed to excuse Libya for the attack, even as anti-aircraft guns roared in Benghazi, in Sudan as it would be in Iran, protests were blamed on the government, even as it killed protesters. On the other hand, Sudan did bus protesters to the embassies. Watch this site.

On N. Korea, Russia Complains Sanctions Hinder Its Embassy, Ban to Write DPRK

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, December 20 -- As the death of Kim Jong-Il drew signatures in a condolence book in New York including from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Deputy, Asha Rose Migiro, after a quiet Security Council meeting with virtually no media coverage a critique was made of the Council's sanctions on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Inner City Press has learned, and confirmed, that the delegation of Russia, this month's Security Council president, complained that the sanctions are impinging on the work of their "large" embassy in Pyongyang.

Citation is made to Paragraph 21 of the Council's 2009 tightening of sanctions in Resolution 1874:

"Emphasizes that all Member States should comply with the provisions of paragraphs 8 (a) (iii) and 8 (d) of resolution 1718 (2006) without prejudice to the activities of the diplomatic missions in the DPRK pursuant to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."

While some other members of the Security Council said that the sanctions don't impact on their embassies, Russia raised the issue on Tuesday at the end of a closed door meeting about the UNDOF mission.

On Monday Russian Permanent Representative Vitaly Churkin, when asked about Kim Jong-Il's death, said to look for statements already made from Moscow. Beyond those, the US, China, UK, France and Germany had all already spoke on Kim Jong-Il's death before at noon on Monday UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued this:

"The Secretary-General has learned that the leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Kim Jong Il, passed away. The Secretary-General extends his sympathy to the people of the DPRK at this time of their national mourning. The Secretary-General reaffirms his commitment to peace and security on the Korean peninsula. The United Nations system will continue to help the people of the DPRK. The Secretary-General is closely following the situation."

Following up on the statement, Inner City Press asked Ban's Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq

Inner City Press: one more follow-up on this, has the Secretary-General made any phone calls? I know President [Barack] Obama spoke to President Lee [Myung-bak] of South Korea; has the Secretary-General, has he spoken to any regional leaders? Does he intend to do so?

Associate Spokesperson Haq: Yes, I expect he does intend to do so. We will try to provide you some details of those phone calls as they take place. They haven’t taken place so far, but I expect that he will be in touch with people, as needed.

But at the next day's noon briefing, no update on any calls was given by Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky. Inner City Press is informed by Security Council members that Ban told them not only did Migiro sign the condolence book, but Ban is going to send a letter to the DPRK authorities. What will be in it?

One wag joked about offering another Kim, Ban's senior adviser of five years, Kim Won-soo. But that of course was a joke, and there are said to be enough of those on this. Watch this site.