UNESCO Corruption of Azoulay Hits Mosul In Iraq Exposed By Banned Inner City Press

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive, more here

UNITED NATIONS GATE, July 2 – Following the exclusive report by Inner City Press of May 26, the wind of panic in the Cabinet of Azoulay is blowing across UNESCO.  In February 2018, only few months after the election of the French Director General Audrey Azoulay, UNESCO launched the “Revive the Spirit of Mosul” initiative ostensibly to participate in the reconstruction of this city, after years of war and destruction.  This seemingly noble initiative was in fact a cover up operation of reinforcing French influence in Iraq in order to secure markets and work for French companies. Inner City Press, before being roughed up and banned by Antonio Guterres, can trace this all the way back to France's abstention for BNP Paribas on Iraq Oil for Food.

  UNESCO was used and abused since then in the realization of that pragmatic end. All donations received from Governments around the world are accurately planned to be channeled in due course to corporations close to the French administration.  How did that happen? This is how. Immediately after the launch of the initiative, a special team was established within UNESCO led by the Director of the Cabinet of Azoulay, Nicolas Kassianides, well know by now for his illegal housing grants exposed by Inner City Press. 

  Members of this restricted team are only fully loyal people to Azoulay such as the Assistant Director General for Culture Erneso Otone Ramirez, one of his senior Directors, Lazare Eloundou Assomo and the member of the Cabinet of Azoulay, exposed by Inner City Press as the forgetting her passport while traveling on official missions, Sunna Altnoder. 

As a next step, the Director of the UNESCO office in Baghdad, Louise Haxthausen, was removed straight away, since she was considered by Kassianides too close to the government of Iraq after her several years of experience in the country, and too independent in her dealing with issues that progressively became sensitive for French national interests. She was replaced by a Director well know for his submissive behavior in any circumstance, the Italian Paolo Fontani.  

At some point earlier this year, the Iraqi government expressed dissatisfaction that UNESCO is focusing on the reconstruction of one city only. The response from Azoulay was rib-tickling; in a meeting with the highest authorities of Iraq, she simply countered their line of reasoning by pointing out that UNESCO must first do the “re-looking of Mosul”.  The people present in the room are still telling the story over lunches and dinners when time for jokes arrives together with coffee and cognac.  Why focusing on Mosul is having a plain and simple rationalization. Most of the millions received by UNESCO are for projects to be implemented in that particular city. Actually, there are no prospects for business elsewhere at this stage. Thus, in corrupted UNESCO, the dirt keeps on oozing this time in the context of Iraq.  Furthermore, the French DG Audrey Azoulay supported and supervised personally the organization of a concert with her French partners and friends in Chateau de Chambord. 

 Unfortunately for her, it did not attract any media attention outside Paris.  According to a member of the Cabinet of Azoulay, the transactions of UNESCO in Mosul are among the most well-kept secrets in the House. The Cabinet member even considers that a number of parallel dealings are most probably piloted by some specialized French services. 

  For instance, why would the Director of Cabinet Nicolas Kassianides go on mission to Iraq next week? Since when is a UNESCO Director of Cabinet allowed to deal with tasks which fall normally under the responsibilities of the Director General, or of her Assistant Director generals for culture or for external relations.  Nicolas Kassianides proves to be an expert in shady deals and this is why he is the one designated by Azoulay to meet next week in Baghdad the Iraqi Ministers of Culture, of Education and for Foreign Affairs, as well as the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff who has nothing to do with UNESCO matters. All those meetings are clearly DG or Assistant DGs level. Obviously, if the Director of Cabinet was from another country but France, it would have been unconceivable to go on such high-level official mission. This French oriented management style is changing the nature of the organization, but strangely enough, UNESCO member states remain silent on that blatant usurpation of power by one country.  

  “Kassianides is clearly taking instructions elsewhere”, said our source in the Cabinet. “As a former staff of Quai d’Orsay, and being fully aware that his days in UNESCO are counted, he must keep good relations with his former administration in order to get a good position there after successfully defending the French national interest under the cover of multilateral UN work”.  The state of affairs in the Cabinet has been left to deteriorate progressively and as long as member states remain silent, the reputation of UNESCO will remain severely affected. The governing bodies of UNESCO must remember that it involves at present a number of different scandals with regard to Azoulay’s administration and a whole series of kickbacks and schemes that really make problems for the overall credibility of the organization. Still banned Inner City Press will have more on that.

After ICP's Scoop on UN in Iraq “Losing” 25 Guns Confirmed, Some Let Off Hook

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, December 20 -- The day after Inner City Press asked both US Ambassador Samantha Power and UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the UN Mission in South Sudan giving automatic weapons to warlord James Koang, who killed civilians, a new UN outrage was brought to the attention of Inner City Press and after its publishing and asking about it (video here), was confirmed by the UN.

   Since the UN covered up its arming of South Sudan warlord Koang, and refuses to answer written questions including about its use of public funds, we published this report on this we'll follow up:

The UN Assistance Mission in Iraq, UNAMI, under the authority of the UN Department of Safety and Security (DSS), have “lost” 25 weapons from their armory in their base in the Green Zone in Baghdad.

The loss includes 18 Glock 9mm pistols, 5 G36 assault rifles, and 2 G36 sniper rifles.  Sources say that 10,000s of thousands of rounds of ammunition are also missing.

DSS only discovered or internally acknowledged this months after the fact and cannot account for their loss. The UN's Fijian Guard Unit have had to start patrolling inside the base.

   This is an outrage, on which we'll have more. At the UN "noon" briefing on December 20, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it. Video here. At first he dodged, then got handed a statement by his deputy that confirmed that the "light" weapons are missing.


UN transcript here: 

Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask you on Iraq, yesterday, I'd asked you about the South Sudan, and it seems like there's an acknowledgment that weapons were given to this James Koang and… with some reasoning.  I wanted to ask you now, and maybe you'll know this or you can find out.  I've heard that UNAMI [United Nations Assistance Mission] in Iraq run by DSS [Department of Safety and Security] has lost… has lost control of 25 weapons, including 18 Glock pistols, including 2 sniper rifles.  And what I wanted to know is, one, it seems like it's pretty serious if it's happened.  It would be twice that weapons have gone to unknown people that may kill people with them.  But what is the protocol of UN Missions informing the Security Council when heavy lethal weapons… they either give them over voluntarily or, in this case, seemed to have lost possession of them?

Spokesman:  I'm not aware of the details of the investigation that may be going on in Iraq.  If I have something to share with you, I will.  I think, as we said yesterday, the incidents in South Sudan happened a number of years ago.  It was a very tense situation in the beginning of the civil war.  I think better procedures were then put in place to ensure that weapons that are confiscated are then destroyed, and that's the policy that's in place in the Mission.

ICP Question:  Right.  But can you get some answer on Iraq?  I just…

Spokesman:  If I have something to share with you, I will share it with you.

Minutes later after being handed a sheet of paper, Dujarric read out:

My colleague Farhan [Haq], who's always very quick, has given me some guidance on the Iraq weapons issue.  I can tell you that it was discovered that several small arms and light weapons were missing from the armoury in Baghdad.  Physical check of all UN compounds and inventories was immediately conducted and efforts to locate and recover the missing weapons continue.  Thorough fact-finding/investigation into this very unfortunate occurrence was immediately started, and it is ongoing.  The respective Iraqi authorities, as well as the UN Secretariat, have been informed and are providing cooperation and assistance, as necessary.

ICP Question:  Just one quick follow-up on that.  I just wanted; I hear small arms/light weapons.  We hear the term a lot.  Inner City Press has reported prior to this briefing that this involves not only Glock pistols but five G36 assault rifles and two G36 sniper rifles and tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition.  So I guess my question is, one, does that fall under the definition of sniper rifles?

Spokesman:  Sniper rifles… several small arms/light weapons.

ICP Question:  Why does the UN have sniper rifles?

Spokesman:  This is part of the protection team for the UN in Baghdad.

ICP Question:  And what would be the… what would be the, I guess, accountability if these sniper rifles and presumably marked ammunition are used to kill civilians in Iraq?

Spokesman:  I think our focus right now is on recovering these weapons. 

 Since that confirmation, nothing from Dujarric and many leaving the UN off the hook.

When the UN Security Council members met about South Sudan on December 15, the best they could do was extend the mandate of the UNMISS mission for a single day. Even then, there was already news of UNMISS having given arms to warlord, or “rebel general,” James Koang.

 Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Samantha Power about this on December 16 and she said she hadn't read it. On December 19, even while fielding a pre-picked question on South Sudan, Power still refused to answer. Video here.

This was in a Small Arms Survey report, picked up in the Washington Post. Inner City Press tweeted it at UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, requesting a comment. Nothing.

  On the morning of December 16, Inner City Press asked the Ambassadors of the UK and New Zealand about it, and both had heard of it and said it needed to be investigated. The Ambassador of France, the country that has run UN Peacekeeping for 20 years, did not comment. Video here.

  The US holds the pen, and more, on South Sudan. In the early afternoon of December 16, when US Ambassador Samantha Power held a stakeout about Syria, Inner City Press asked about the US South Sudan draft, and the Washington Post report. Power said she hadn't seen the Washington Post report, but that the draft would pass. Video here.

At 4 pm the resolution, changed, was adopted 15-0. Afterward Egypt, for example, criticized the US for not consulting enough, and showing its draft(s) too late. Final adopted draft here. 

But three days later on December 19 when Samantha Power came again to the Security Council stakeout, while it was mostly on Syria Power or her spokesman made sure to pick a South Sudan question which would allow Power to gently urge Japan to support the US call for sanctions and an arms embargo.

  Inner City Press asked right after, what about UNMISS arming Koang? Nothing. Then as Power left, Inner City Press asked the question, quite audible. Power walked off; the understanding is that she has now read the report but wants to ask the UN about it before any comment. 

Later on December 19, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  On South Sudan, I wanted to know, on Thursday, The Washington Post published a report based on the small arms survey report that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) gave hundreds of automatic weapons to a SPLM (Sudan People’s Liberation Movement)-in Opposition commander named James Koang, who, in turn, killed civilians with them.  And I'm wondering, since it's pretty outrageous, what is UNMISS' under… explanation for having turned these weapons over?  And even if they say they were under duress, what was their responsibility once they gave these weapons to the civilians that were killed with them and also to… did they ever inform the Security Council?  And what do they do to protect civilians from their weapons they gave to a warlord?

Spokesman:  I don't have anything to share with you on that.

ICP Question:  I heard that UNMISS has an answer.

Spokesman:  I… they may.  I don't have anything for you on that right now.
Later: I've just been given something that I didn't have with me on UNMISS, which I will share with you, which… from the Mission, which says, when UNMISS opened its gates to save lives as the conflict erupted, it applied utmost diligence to disarm and collect weapons and ammunition from people seeking protection.  The Mission worked tirelessly and impartially to save thousands who sought refuge in its camps at the points… protection of civilians sites in the town and avoid an escalation of violence with the forces controlling the area.  Anyone who was armed and seeking for protection was not allowed to enter the UN Compound.  In December 2013, at the early stages of the conflict, some SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) soldiers abandoned weapons outside the UNMISS compound, in order to seek protection inside the compound in Bentiu.  UNMISS collected the abandoned weapons and safely stored them according to its weapons management policy.  In response to direct threats from local SPLA commanders to UNMISS to hand over weapons abandoned by the soldiers, the Mission facilitated the transfer of a limited number of weapons to Major-General James Koang, who commanded the SPLA 4th Division in Bentiu at the time.  Later in that month, he officially defected to the then newly-established SPLM-in-Opposition.  Since January 2014, the Mission has also conducted several destructions of weapons and ammunitions that pose risks to the civilian population and UN staff.  The Mission underscores that a political solution is the only viable solution to the crisis, as it continues to implement its protection of civilians mandate in Bentiu and around the country. 

Question:  Follow-up?

Spokesman:  Yeah.

ICP Question:  Do they… I mean, first of all, what's the number of weapons that they handed over?  Small arms survey puts it at… at several hundred automatic weapons so it seems like… it's a large number.  Why didn't they… this whole idea of like stay and deliver or stand and deliver, once they handed the weapons over, what did they do to ensure that they, in fact, wouldn't just be used to kill civilians?

Spokesman:  Well, obviously, the Mission has continued to protect civilians in the… tens of thousands of civilians at its point… protection of civilians sites in Bentiu since then and continues to do so.  I don't have an update on the exact number of weapons we're talking about.

ICP Question:  And just one… I'd asked you whether… whether at the time because it seems like a pretty extreme thing to do to give these weapons.  Did DPKO (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) or UNMISS tell the Council… and I ask you because my understanding… I asked Samantha Power about this on Friday, and today the US Mission has said that they're asking the UN for its answer.  So did they not tell… I read from that that they didn't tell the Council.  Is this the kind of thing that the Council should have been told?
Spokesman:  I don't know what was updated in 2013 at the time. 

  And after that, nothing from the UN - Ban Ki-moon didn't answer when Inner City Press asked, Vine here, video here - nor from the US Mission to the UN.

Speaking for the US on December 16 was deputy Isobel Coleman, who did not in her speech mention UNMISS arming Koang. (In full disclosure, she is also the USUN ambassador to whom the Government Accountability Project directed its request that the Mission opposed the UN's eviction and restriction of Inner City Press - and apparently did nothing.) Nor now about this - the smashing by UN thugs of the same Periscope-camera ICP used to broadcast Samantha Power. We'll have more on this.

  There were already over 9,000 viewers of Inner City Press' Periscope of this South Sudan Q&A, but even after Inner City Press tweeted the Washington Post story to Power, her spokesman and the US Mission generally, there was no response.

None of these did ANYTHING when Inner City Press was evicted, and is still restricting, by the UN of Ban Ki-moon and Cristina Gallach this year, despite a request from the DC-based Government Accountability Project. We'll have more on this.

ICP's Scoop Confirmed on UN in Iraq “Losing” 25 Weapons, Glocks & Sniper Rifles

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, December 20 -- The day after Inner City Press asked both US Ambassador Samantha Power and UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the UN Mission in South Sudan giving automatic weapons to warlord James Koang, who killed civilians, a new UN outrage was brought to the attention of Inner City Press and after its publishing and asking about it (video here), was confirmed by the UN.

   Since the UN covered up its arming of South Sudan warlord Koang, and refuses to answer written questions including about its use of public funds, we published this report on this we'll follow up:

The UN Assistance Mission in Iraq, UNAMI, under the authority of the UN Department of Safety and Security (DSS), have “lost” 25 weapons from their armory in their base in the Green Zone in Baghdad.

The loss includes 18 Glock 9mm pistols, 5 G36 assault rifles, and 2 G36 sniper rifles.  Sources say that 10,000s of thousands of rounds of ammunition are also missing.

DSS only discovered or internally acknowledged this months after the fact and cannot account for their loss. The UN's Fijian Guard Unit have had to start patrolling inside the base.

   This is an outrage, on which we'll have more. At the UN "noon" briefing on December 20, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it. Video here. At first he dodged, then got handed a statement by his deputy that confirmed that the "light" weapons are missing.

 Inner City Press asked why the UN has sniper rifles, and what will happen if someone is killed with them. First we want them back, Dujarric said. Watch this site.

When the UN Security Council members met about South Sudan on December 15, the best they could do was extend the mandate of the UNMISS mission for a single day. Even then, there was already news of UNMISS having given arms to warlord, or “rebel general,” James Koang.

 Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Samantha Power about this on December 16 and she said she hadn't read it. On December 19, even while fielding a pre-picked question on South Sudan, Power still refused to answer. Video here.

This was in a Small Arms Survey report, picked up in the Washington Post. Inner City Press tweeted it at UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, requesting a comment. Nothing.

  On the morning of December 16, Inner City Press asked the Ambassadors of the UK and New Zealand about it, and both had heard of it and said it needed to be investigated. The Ambassador of France, the country that has run UN Peacekeeping for 20 years, did not comment. Video here.

  The US holds the pen, and more, on South Sudan. In the early afternoon of December 16, when US Ambassador Samantha Power held a stakeout about Syria, Inner City Press asked about the US South Sudan draft, and the Washington Post report. Power said she hadn't seen the Washington Post report, but that the draft would pass. Video here.

At 4 pm the resolution, changed, was adopted 15-0. Afterward Egypt, for example, criticized the US for not consulting enough, and showing its draft(s) too late. Final adopted draft here. 

But three days later on December 19 when Samantha Power came again to the Security Council stakeout, while it was mostly on Syria Power or her spokesman made sure to pick a South Sudan question which would allow Power to gently urge Japan to support the US call for sanctions and an arms embargo.

  Inner City Press asked right after, what about UNMISS arming Koang? Nothing. Then as Power left, Inner City Press asked the question, quite audible. Power walked off; the understanding is that she has now read the report but wants to ask the UN about it before any comment. 

Later on December 19, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  On South Sudan, I wanted to know, on Thursday, The Washington Post published a report based on the small arms survey report that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) gave hundreds of automatic weapons to a SPLM (Sudan People’s Liberation Movement)-in Opposition commander named James Koang, who, in turn, killed civilians with them.  And I'm wondering, since it's pretty outrageous, what is UNMISS' under… explanation for having turned these weapons over?  And even if they say they were under duress, what was their responsibility once they gave these weapons to the civilians that were killed with them and also to… did they ever inform the Security Council?  And what do they do to protect civilians from their weapons they gave to a warlord?

Spokesman:  I don't have anything to share with you on that.

ICP Question:  I heard that UNMISS has an answer.

Spokesman:  I… they may.  I don't have anything for you on that right now.
Later: I've just been given something that I didn't have with me on UNMISS, which I will share with you, which… from the Mission, which says, when UNMISS opened its gates to save lives as the conflict erupted, it applied utmost diligence to disarm and collect weapons and ammunition from people seeking protection.  The Mission worked tirelessly and impartially to save thousands who sought refuge in its camps at the points… protection of civilians sites in the town and avoid an escalation of violence with the forces controlling the area.  Anyone who was armed and seeking for protection was not allowed to enter the UN Compound.  In December 2013, at the early stages of the conflict, some SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) soldiers abandoned weapons outside the UNMISS compound, in order to seek protection inside the compound in Bentiu.  UNMISS collected the abandoned weapons and safely stored them according to its weapons management policy.  In response to direct threats from local SPLA commanders to UNMISS to hand over weapons abandoned by the soldiers, the Mission facilitated the transfer of a limited number of weapons to Major-General James Koang, who commanded the SPLA 4th Division in Bentiu at the time.  Later in that month, he officially defected to the then newly-established SPLM-in-Opposition.  Since January 2014, the Mission has also conducted several destructions of weapons and ammunitions that pose risks to the civilian population and UN staff.  The Mission underscores that a political solution is the only viable solution to the crisis, as it continues to implement its protection of civilians mandate in Bentiu and around the country. 

Question:  Follow-up?

Spokesman:  Yeah.

ICP Question:  Do they… I mean, first of all, what's the number of weapons that they handed over?  Small arms survey puts it at… at several hundred automatic weapons so it seems like… it's a large number.  Why didn't they… this whole idea of like stay and deliver or stand and deliver, once they handed the weapons over, what did they do to ensure that they, in fact, wouldn't just be used to kill civilians?

Spokesman:  Well, obviously, the Mission has continued to protect civilians in the… tens of thousands of civilians at its point… protection of civilians sites in Bentiu since then and continues to do so.  I don't have an update on the exact number of weapons we're talking about.

ICP Question:  And just one… I'd asked you whether… whether at the time because it seems like a pretty extreme thing to do to give these weapons.  Did DPKO (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) or UNMISS tell the Council… and I ask you because my understanding… I asked Samantha Power about this on Friday, and today the US Mission has said that they're asking the UN for its answer.  So did they not tell… I read from that that they didn't tell the Council.  Is this the kind of thing that the Council should have been told?
Spokesman:  I don't know what was updated in 2013 at the time. 

  And after that, nothing from the UN - Ban Ki-moon didn't answer when Inner City Press asked, Vine here, video here- nor from the US Mission to the UN.

Speaking for the US on December 16 was deputy Isobel Coleman, who did not in her speech mention UNMISS arming Koang. (In full disclosure, she is also the USUN ambassador to whom the Government Accountability Project directed its request that the Mission opposed the UN's eviction and restriction of Inner City Press - and apparently did nothing.) Nor now about this - the smashing by UN thugs of the same Periscope-camera ICP used to broadcast Samantha Power. We'll have more on this.

  There were already over 9,000 viewers of Inner City Press' Periscope of this South Sudan Q&A, but even after Inner City Press tweeted the Washington Post story to Power, her spokesman and the US Mission generally, there was no response.

None of these did ANYTHING when Inner City Press was evicted, and is still restricting, by the UN of Ban Ki-moon and Cristina Gallach this year, despite a request from the DC-based Government Accountability Project. We'll have more on this.

EXCLUSIVE: UN in Iraq “Loses” 25 Weapons, Glocks & Sniper Rifles, Sources Tell ICP Covered-Up Like South Sudan

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, December 20 -- The day after Inner City Press asked both US Ambassador Samantha Power and UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the UN Mission in South Sudan giving automatic weapons to warlord James Koang, who killed civilians, a new UN outrage has been brought to the attention of Inner City Press.

   Since the UN covered up its arming of South Sudan warlord Koang, and refuses to answer written questions including about its use of public funds, we publish this report on this we'll follow up:

The UN Assistance Mission in Iraq, UNAMI, under the authority of the UN Department of Safety and Security (DSS), have “lost” 25 weapons from their armory in their base in the Green Zone in Baghdad.

The loss includes 18 Glock 9mm pistols, 5 G36 assault rifles, and 2 G36 sniper rifles.  Sources say that 10,000s of thousands of rounds of ammunition are also missing.

DSS only discovered or internally acknowledged this months after the fact and cannot account for their loss. The UN's Fijian Guard Unit have had to start patrolling inside the base.

   This is an outrage, on which we'll have more. Watch this site.

When the UN Security Council members met about South Sudan on December 15, the best they could do was extend the mandate of the UNMISS mission for a single day. Even then, there was already news of UNMISS having given arms to warlord, or “rebel general,” James Koang.

 Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Samantha Power about this on December 16 and she said she hadn't read it. On December 19, even while fielding a pre-picked question on South Sudan, Power still refused to answer. Video here.

This was in a Small Arms Survey report, picked up in the Washington Post. Inner City Press tweeted it at UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, requesting a comment. Nothing.

  On the morning of December 16, Inner City Press asked the Ambassadors of the UK and New Zealand about it, and both had heard of it and said it needed to be investigated. The Ambassador of France, the country that has run UN Peacekeeping for 20 years, did not comment. Video here.

  The US holds the pen, and more, on South Sudan. In the early afternoon of December 16, when US Ambassador Samantha Power held a stakeout about Syria, Inner City Press asked about the US South Sudan draft, and the Washington Post report. Power said she hadn't seen the Washington Post report, but that the draft would pass. Video here.

At 4 pm the resolution, changed, was adopted 15-0. Afterward Egypt, for example, criticized the US for not consulting enough, and showing its draft(s) too late. Final adopted draft here. 

But three days later on December 19 when Samantha Power came again to the Security Council stakeout, while it was mostly on Syria Power or her spokesman made sure to pick a South Sudan question which would allow Power to gently urge Japan to support the US call for sanctions and an arms embargo.

  Inner City Press asked right after, what about UNMISS arming Koang? Nothing. Then as Power left, Inner City Press asked the question, quite audible. Power walked off; the understanding is that she has now read the report but wants to ask the UN about it before any comment. 

Later on December 19, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  On South Sudan, I wanted to know, on Thursday, The Washington Post published a report based on the small arms survey report that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) gave hundreds of automatic weapons to a SPLM (Sudan People’s Liberation Movement)-in Opposition commander named James Koang, who, in turn, killed civilians with them.  And I'm wondering, since it's pretty outrageous, what is UNMISS' under… explanation for having turned these weapons over?  And even if they say they were under duress, what was their responsibility once they gave these weapons to the civilians that were killed with them and also to… did they ever inform the Security Council?  And what do they do to protect civilians from their weapons they gave to a warlord?

Spokesman:  I don't have anything to share with you on that.

ICP Question:  I heard that UNMISS has an answer.

Spokesman:  I… they may.  I don't have anything for you on that right now.
Later: I've just been given something that I didn't have with me on UNMISS, which I will share with you, which… from the Mission, which says, when UNMISS opened its gates to save lives as the conflict erupted, it applied utmost diligence to disarm and collect weapons and ammunition from people seeking protection.  The Mission worked tirelessly and impartially to save thousands who sought refuge in its camps at the points… protection of civilians sites in the town and avoid an escalation of violence with the forces controlling the area.  Anyone who was armed and seeking for protection was not allowed to enter the UN Compound.  In December 2013, at the early stages of the conflict, some SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) soldiers abandoned weapons outside the UNMISS compound, in order to seek protection inside the compound in Bentiu.  UNMISS collected the abandoned weapons and safely stored them according to its weapons management policy.  In response to direct threats from local SPLA commanders to UNMISS to hand over weapons abandoned by the soldiers, the Mission facilitated the transfer of a limited number of weapons to Major-General James Koang, who commanded the SPLA 4th Division in Bentiu at the time.  Later in that month, he officially defected to the then newly-established SPLM-in-Opposition.  Since January 2014, the Mission has also conducted several destructions of weapons and ammunitions that pose risks to the civilian population and UN staff.  The Mission underscores that a political solution is the only viable solution to the crisis, as it continues to implement its protection of civilians mandate in Bentiu and around the country. 

Question:  Follow-up?

Spokesman:  Yeah.

ICP Question:  Do they… I mean, first of all, what's the number of weapons that they handed over?  Small arms survey puts it at… at several hundred automatic weapons so it seems like… it's a large number.  Why didn't they… this whole idea of like stay and deliver or stand and deliver, once they handed the weapons over, what did they do to ensure that they, in fact, wouldn't just be used to kill civilians?

Spokesman:  Well, obviously, the Mission has continued to protect civilians in the… tens of thousands of civilians at its point… protection of civilians sites in Bentiu since then and continues to do so.  I don't have an update on the exact number of weapons we're talking about.

ICP Question:  And just one… I'd asked you whether… whether at the time because it seems like a pretty extreme thing to do to give these weapons.  Did DPKO (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) or UNMISS tell the Council… and I ask you because my understanding… I asked Samantha Power about this on Friday, and today the US Mission has said that they're asking the UN for its answer.  So did they not tell… I read from that that they didn't tell the Council.  Is this the kind of thing that the Council should have been told?
Spokesman:  I don't know what was updated in 2013 at the time. 

  And after that, nothing from the UN - Ban Ki-moon didn't answer when Inner City Press asked, Vine here, video here- nor from the US Mission to the UN.

Speaking for the US on December 16 was deputy Isobel Coleman, who did not in her speech mention UNMISS arming Koang. (In full disclosure, she is also the USUN ambassador to whom the Government Accountability Project directed its request that the Mission opposed the UN's eviction and restriction of Inner City Press - and apparently did nothing.) Nor now about this - the smashing by UN thugs of the same Periscope-camera ICP used to broadcast Samantha Power. We'll have more on this.

  There were already over 9,000 viewers of Inner City Press' Periscope of this South Sudan Q&A, but even after Inner City Press tweeted the Washington Post story to Power, her spokesman and the US Mission generally, there was no response.

None of these did ANYTHING when Inner City Press was evicted, and is still restricting, by the UN of Ban Ki-moon and Cristina Gallach this year, despite a request from the DC-based Government Accountability Project. We'll have more on this.

Inner City Press Asks Iraq Ambassador Alhakim About Turkish Troops, He Says Draft Resolution With Egypt

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 16 -- When Iraq's Ambassador to the UN M A Alhakim took questions at the Security Council on February 16, Inner City Press asked him what Iraq wants the Council to do about the 650 Turkish troops in the country without permission.

 We want a resolution, Ambassador Alhakim replied, saying that a draft is with Security Council member Egypt, and citing the Arab League.

 Inner City Press also asked Alhakim about the UN Liaison Officer confirmed as killed the day before in Diayala. Alhakim expressed condolences and said Iraq will try to find and bring the perpetrators to justice. One thought of the unresolved killing of UN staffer Louis Maxwell in Afghanistan, where UN envoy Jan Kubis also served. We'll have more on this.




Back on December 18, 2015 fter the Iraq - Turkey meeting of the Security Council held after the higher profile Syria meeting, Inner City Press asked Iraqi Foreign Minister Jaafari and Turkish Ambassador Cevic about their dispute.

 Inner City Press asked Jaafari if his statement in the Council met Iraq might use force, and also to answer if the stated agreement of the Permanent Five members of the Council's ambassadors in Baghdad to act for Iraq had translated or traveled to the Security Council in New York.

  Jaafari said that while Iraq seeks peace, all possibilities are on the table. Video here and embedded below.

 When Turkey's Permanent Representative Cevic came to the stakeout, Inner City Press asked him about Jaafari's request for a resolution condeming Turkey's invasion and demanding the withdrawal of Turkish troops.

Cevic gamely insisted that Turkey means well and will resolve this.Video  here.

 Reuters translated this as, "At U.N., Turkey accuses Iraq of undermining Islamic State fight." and so it goes at the UN. There were no Elements to the Press.

Inside the Council, Jaafair had said that "on the third of December 2015, Turkish forces estimated at hundreds of soldiers with a number of armored vehicles, tanks, and artillery penetrated into Iraqi territory in depth of 110 kilometers into northern Iraqi territory; in particular, the province of Nineveh without asking for an official permission from the Iraqi federal authorities.. Iraq is requesting the Security Council to assume its international legal responsibilities under the UN Charter, and to adopt a clear and explicit resolution includes the following, first, condemnation of the Turkish occupation and illegal incursion against the will of a founding member state of the UN, in breaching the rules and provisions of the UN Charter and the norms of international law. Second, demanding Turkey to withdraw its troops immediately, and to ensure, with all available measures, immediate and unconditional withdrawal to the recognized international border between the two countries, and to ensure the non-recurrence of such unilateral actions which jeopardize international relations and exacerbate sectarian and nationalist tensions in the region and expose regional and international security to significant risks.”

  Jaafari last paragraph in the Security Council on Friday concluded, “As we hand over the duty to protect Iraq and its security, unity and territorial integrity to your esteemed council, which is stressed in its resolutions, the Republic of Iraq retains its inherent right of individual or collective self-defense according to the provisions of Article 51 of the UN Charter, if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, and to take all necessary measures to end this hostile act which is an affront to good-neighborly relations, and threatens international peace and security.”

Back on December 8 after the UN Security Council met behind closed doors about Turkey's activities in Iraq, afterward in front of the Council Iraqi Ambassador Alhakim explained his country's position. Inner City Press Periscope video here. In pertinent part:

“A couple of days ago, troops from Turkey moved into Iraqi territory. That is illegal against international law, and against the Charter of the United Nations. We are working on this bilaterally between Baghdad and Ankara, and when we need, we have letters available to the Security Council, but they are no being issued by Baghdad yet."

Q: Are you confident Turkey will remove its troops soon?

Amb Alhakim: "We believe that Ankara understood the Iraqi position, strongly. We have made it very clear that what came through the border has to go back... There is a meeting between the Russian ambassador in Baghdad, and that’s normal, because we summoned as well by the prime minister, as well as the foreign minister, and also the ambassador of US, Britain, as well as, there will be a brief tomorrow at the foreign ministry to the P5...".

 Now on December 11, Alhakim handed US Ambassador Samantha Power and her team his government's letter, in Arabic as Power told Reuters, but also a translation, which Inner CIty Press has obtained and puts online here:

"Letter to the Security Council on the violation of the Turkish troops against Iraq sovereignty.

       At a time when Iraq is engaged in the struggle against global terrorism on the behalf of the international community, and Iraq's army alongside various security forces are fighting the integral battle against the abhorrent Da’esh entity which controls some Iraqi cities, we were hoping that a neighbor would aid Iraq and protect its security, sovereignty and help embolden Iraq in this conflict.

       On the evening of the 3rd of December, 2015, Turkish military forces comprised of over hundreds soldiers, their tanks and armored cars had crossed Iraq's internationally recognized borders, penetrating into Iraqi territory in depth of 110 kilometers inside Iraqi territory, stationing themselves in Bashiqa town, near the city of Mosul in northern Iraq, without any semblance of prior consent, coordination or consultation with the Iraqi federal government; ultimately constituting a flagrant violation of the provisions and the principles of the UN Charter, as well as a breach of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Iraqi state - fully protected under the provisions of the UN Charter and the principles of international law and the relevant Security Council resolutions, which emphasized the independence and sovereignty of Iraq and the unity and integrity its territory.

The intrusion of Turkish troops deep into Iraqi territory with a significant number of Turkish soldiers and their military hardware is an act of provocation and a violation of the provisions of international law and this unilateral military movement is a hostile act in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the relevant provisions of international law.

       Iraq has stressed in the letter to the Security Council dated the 25th of June, 2014, along with the  letter dated on the 20th of September, 2014, that the assistance for Iraq in regards to military training and advanced technology with the necessary weapons to fight Da’esh terrorist entity, must be conducted in accordance with the "bilateral and multilateral agreements, with full respect for national sovereignty and in line with the Iraqi Constitution, and in coordination with the Iraqi armed forces". On this legitimate and incontestable basis, Iraq rejects and strongly opposes any military movements in the fight against terrorism in Iraq that have been made without prior consultation with the Iraqi federal government and without its consent to such military movements and condemns it in the strongest possible terms.

      Iraq has worked, out of the respect for good faith in dialogue as a means to resolve international disputes and our commitment to constructive, neighborly relations and mutual respect with Turkey, to contain the situation through diplomatic channels and bilateral mechanisms with Turkey, but its efforts did not succeed in persuading Turkey to withdraw its troops from the occupied Iraqi territories in question.

         In this regard, Iraq calls on the Security Council to shoulder its responsibilities in the maintenance of  international peace and security in accordance with the UN Charter, in order to protect Iraq and its sovereignty, safety and territorial integrity which has been unlawfully violated by Turkish troops that have penetrated into Iraqi territory without advanced notice, nor the knowledge or approval of the Iraqi federal government, and calls on the Security Council to compel Turkey to withdraw its military troops and hardware immediately, and to ensure with all available measures, the immediate and unconditional withdrawal to the  recognized international border between the two countries, and to ensure the non-recurrence of such violations against Iraqi sovereignty which jeopardize international relations and exposure of regional and international security apparatus to such a callous and significant risk.

        Iraq would like to inform member states that Iraq retains its inherent right of self-defense in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Charter and the norms of international law, and to take all necessary measures to end this hostile act and to stop the questionable Turkish ambitions in sovereign Iraqi territory. Such acts are offensive to good-neighborly relations, and threaten international peace and security.
       I should be grateful that this letter be circulated to the members of the Security Council, and distributed as an official document to the United Nations.

                       Yours Sincerely.

                                                  Dr. Ibrahim al-Jaafari
                                        Foreign Minister of the Republic of Iraq
                                                  11 / December / 2015"

On the Vienna process, after the Syria talks moving to New York on December 18 was called into question by Russia on December 8, along with a statement that the group that killed Russia's pilot in northern Syria should be on the terrorism list compiled by Jordan, Inner City Press put thee questions to  Turkey's Ambassador Cevic. Video here.   Here's fast transcript by InnerCityPro.com:
Inner City Press: On Syria, do you think the Vienna process meeting should take place in New York on the 18th? Are you satisfied with the Saudi process for choosing the opposition?

Amb Cevik: The plans, I don’t know how fixed, I mean how clear it is, but we are making our preparations for the meeting.

Inner City Press: Are there any groups invited to Saudi Arabia that you think shouldn’t be part of the opposition delegation?

Amb Cevik: I think so far, in our view, they are working on the right concept. Let’s see if they succeed. Having a coalition group that would be able to take part in the process is one of the most important things.
Inner City Press: [Russia] said the group that killed their pilot should be put on the terror list. Do you have any view on that?

Amb Cevik: If they know the specifics, I don’t know. But to our knowledge, there was no terrorist organization, no extreme Daesh, Nusra, in that area. They are the Turkomens, and we know them, they are moderate people.

  This may be an issue. Watch this site.



On Syria after coy comments by the UN's Ban Ki-moon if the next meeting would be in New York, John Kerry in Washington at the Saban Forum in Washington on December 5 said:

"the governments involved are going to meet later in this month in New York in order to continue to move this process forward.  Our goal is to facilitate a transition that all parties have stated that they support: a unified Syria...The purpose of this transition will be to establish a credible, inclusive governance within six months.  The process would include the drafting of a new constitution and arrangements for internationally supervised elections within 18 months...Meanwhile, a nationwide ceasefire will go into effect between the government and the responsible opposition, assuming they come to the table and they begin this initial process."

  But who is this "responsible opposition"? Does it include Al Qaeda affiliates? Can last-minute mergers cleanse these groups? Watch this site.

 Back on November 14 in the shadow of the November 13 Paris attacks, the International Syria Support Group met and issued a statement in Vienna, follow by statements by US John Kerry, Russia's Sergey Lavrov and the UN's Staffan de Mistura, flashing his pince-nez and the highlighted document below.

  But what will happen when a group said to be linked to Al Nusra is hit by an airstrike, and the Free Syrian Army says it's them, not Nusra?

Meeting in Vienna on November 14, 2015 as the International Syria Support Group (ISSG), the Arab League, China, Egypt, the EU, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the United States to discuss how to accelerate an end to the Syrian conflict.  The participants began with a moment of silence for the victims of the heinous terrorist attacks of November 13 in Paris and the recent attacks in Beirut, Iraq, Ankara, and Egypt.  The members unanimously condemned in the strongest terms these brutal attacks against innocent civilians and stood with the people of France.

Subsequently, the participants engaged in a constructive dialogue to build upon the progress made in the October 30 gathering. The members of the ISSG expressed a unanimous sense of urgency to end the suffering of the Syrian people, the physical destruction of Syria, the destabilization of the region, and the resulting increase in terrorists drawn to the fighting in Syria.

The ISSG acknowledged the close linkage between a ceasefire and a parallel political process pursuant to the 2012 Geneva Communique, and that both initiatives should move ahead expeditiously.  They stated their commitment to ensure a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition based on the Geneva Communique in its entirety.  The group reached a common understanding on several key issues.
The group agreed to support and work to implement a nationwide ceasefire in Syria to come into effect as soon as the representatives of the Syrian government and the opposition have begun initial steps towards the transition under UN auspices on the basis of the Geneva Communique.  The five Permanent Members of the UN Security Council pledged to support a UNSC resolution to empower a UN-endorsed ceasefire monitoring mission in those parts of the country where monitors would not come under threat of attacks from terrorists, and to support a political transition process in accordance with the Geneva Communique.   
All members of the ISSG also pledged as individual countries and supporters of various belligerents to take all possible steps to require adherence to the ceasefire by these groups or individuals they support, supply or influence.  The ceasefire would not apply to offensive or defensive actions against Da’esh or Nusra or any other group the ISSG agrees to deem terrorist.
The participants welcomed UN Secretary General Ban’s statement that he has ordered the UN to accelerate planning for supporting the implementation of a nationwide ceasefire.  The group agreed that the UN should lead the effort, in consultation with interested parties, to determine the requirements and modalities of a ceasefire.  
The ISSG expressed willingness to take immediate steps to encourage confidence-building measures that would contribute to the viability of the political process and to pave the way for the nationwide ceasefire.  In this context, and pursuant to clause 5 of the Vienna Communique, the ISSG discussed the need to take steps to ensure expeditious humanitarian access throughout the territory of Syria pursuant to UNSCR 2165 and called for the granting of the UN’s pending requests for humanitarian deliveries.   The ISSG expressed concern for the plight of refugees and internally displaced persons and the imperative of building conditions for their safe return in accordance with the norms of international humanitarian law and taking into account the interests of host countries.  The resolution of the refugee issue is important to the final settlement of the Syrian conflict.  The ISSG also reaffirmed the devastating effects of the use of indiscriminate weapons on the civilian population and humanitarian access, as stated in UNSCR 2139.  The ISSG agreed to press the parties to end immediately any use of such indiscriminate weapons.
The ISSG reaffirmed the importance of abiding by all relevant UN Security Council resolutions, including UNSCR 2199 on stopping the illegal trade in oil, antiquities and hostages, from which terrorists benefit.
Pursuant to the 2012 Geneva Communique, incorporated by reference in the Vienna statement of October 30, and in U.N. Security Council Resolution 2118, the ISSG agreed on the need to convene Syrian government and opposition representatives in formal negotiations under UN auspices, as soon as possible, with a target date of January 1.  The group welcomed efforts, working with United Nations Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura and others, to bring together the broadest possible spectrum of the opposition, chosen by Syrians, who will decide their negotiating representatives and define their negotiating positions, so as to enable the political process to begin.  All the parties to the political process should adhere to the guiding principles identified at the October 30 meeting, including a commitment to Syria’s unity, independence, territorial integrity, and non-sectarian character; to ensuring that State institutions remain intact; and to protecting the rights of all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination.   ISSG members agreed that these principles are fundamental.
The ISSG members reaffirmed their support for the transition process contained in the 2012 Geneva Communique.  In this respect they affirmed their support for a ceasefire as described above and for a Syrian-led process that will, within a target of six months, establish credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance, and set a schedule and process for drafting a new constitution.  Free and fair elections would be held pursuant to the new constitution within 18 months. These elections must be administered under UN supervision to the satisfaction of the governance and to the highest international standards of transparency and accountability, with all Syrians, including the diaspora, eligible to participate.   
Regarding the fight against terrorism, and pursuant to clause 6 of the Vienna Communique, the ISSG reiterated that Da’esh, Nusra, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the UN Security Council, and further, as agreed by the participants and endorsed by the UN Security Council, must be defeated.  The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan agreed to help develop among intelligence and military community representatives a common understanding of groups and individuals for possible determination as terrorists, with a target of completion by the beginning of the political process under UN auspices.
The participants expect to meet in approximately one month in order to review progress towards implementation of a ceasefire and the beginning of the political process.


When the Chair of the UN's Syria Commission of Inquiry Paulo Sergio Pinheiro took questions after a closed door meeting with the Security Council, Inner City Press asked him about airstrikes in Syria, particularly by members of the Council. Periscope video here.

   Pinheiro replied that, not having been to Syria (except once as an individual, he told Inner City Press afterward, second Periscope here), he could not determine the facts of the airstrikes. But he said he had urged the Council members involved to comply with international humanitarian and human rights law.

Here fast transcription by InnerCityPro.com:

Inner City Press: For the 2 commissioners: with the increasing airstrikes by many parties now inside Syria, how is the commission able to collect, are you able to collect information about the airstrikes that occur and to figure out who’s doing what? And did you have any guidance to, there’s some members of the Security Council who are involved in these strikes, in terms of how to conduct them or how to coordinate more? I’d just like to know how you’re dealing with this new change.

Pinheiro: As you know, we investigate violations of human rights law and breaches of international and humanitarian law from – by all warring parties, by government, by the armed groups, by the terrorist groups... Yes, we had said this to the Security Council in the formal meeting, that we have received delegations about casualties, about results of those airstrikes that you have mentioned. But at this point, we are not in a position to attribute what was the responsible, the member state responsible for this airstrikes. We hope by March when, or in February when we release our report, to be in a better position to elaborate on that. What we have done, it was what we said at the human rights council, that our roles is to remind member states involved in these airstrikes the necessity of respecting the protection of the civilian population in terms of human rights and humanitarian law.

   It was said the Commission would share information with countries -- or rather, prosecutors or courts -- looking into their own nationals, as victims or perpetrators. Afterward, only on Periscope, Inner City Press asked Pinheiro if this every implicated the type of privacy concerns the UN and its Herve Ladsous cite as a basis to go after OHCHR's Anders Kompass, who blew the whistle on French troops' rapes in the Central African Republic, alleged violating victims' privacy.

  Pinheiro said disclosure would require the consent of the victims, but said that is most often given. He summoned over the Commission's Coordinator James Rodehaver, who previously did similar work on Afghanistan. It was Rodehaver who clarified that it is not countries but prosecutors and courts which can request information. He noted that a court in Sweden has cited the Commission's work, to show the conditions in a particular place and time in Syria.

  Pinheiro added that the Commission's work should make the type of “Mapping” exercises as was done in Eastern Congo unnecessary. The information has been collected. Now what? Watch this site.

Inner City Press Asks Iraq FM Jaafari and Turkey Ambassador Cevic About Territorial Integrity, P5 & Article 51 of UN Charter

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 18 -- After the Iraq - Turkey meeting of the Security Council held after the higher profile Syria meeting on December 18, Inner City Press asked Iraqi Foreign Minister Jaafari and Turkish Ambassador Cevic about their dispute.

 Inner City Press asked Jaafari if his statement in the Council met Iraq might use force, and also to answer if the stated agreement of the Permanent Five members of the Council's ambassadors in Baghdad to act for Iraq had translated or traveled to the Security Council in New York.

  Jaafari said that while Iraq seeks peace, all possibilities are on the table. Video here and embedded below.

 When Turkey's Permanent Representative Cevic came to the stakeout, Inner City Press asked him about Jaafari's request for a resolution condeming Turkey's invasion and demanding the withdrawal of Turkish troops.

Cevic gamely insisted that Turkey means well and will resolve this.Video  here.

 Reuters translated this as, "At U.N., Turkey accuses Iraq of undermining Islamic State fight." and so it goes at the UN. There were no Elements to the Press.

Inside the Council, Jaafair had said that "on the third of December 2015, Turkish forces estimated at hundreds of soldiers with a number of armored vehicles, tanks, and artillery penetrated into Iraqi territory in depth of 110 kilometers into northern Iraqi territory; in particular, the province of Nineveh without asking for an official permission from the Iraqi federal authorities.. Iraq is requesting the Security Council to assume its international legal responsibilities under the UN Charter, and to adopt a clear and explicit resolution includes the following, first, condemnation of the Turkish occupation and illegal incursion against the will of a founding member state of the UN, in breaching the rules and provisions of the UN Charter and the norms of international law. Second, demanding Turkey to withdraw its troops immediately, and to ensure, with all available measures, immediate and unconditional withdrawal to the recognized international border between the two countries, and to ensure the non-recurrence of such unilateral actions which jeopardize international relations and exacerbate sectarian and nationalist tensions in the region and expose regional and international security to significant risks.”

  Jaafari last paragraph in the Security Council on Friday concluded, “As we hand over the duty to protect Iraq and its security, unity and territorial integrity to your esteemed council, which is stressed in its resolutions, the Republic of Iraq retains its inherent right of individual or collective self-defense according to the provisions of Article 51 of the UN Charter, if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, and to take all necessary measures to end this hostile act which is an affront to good-neighborly relations, and threatens international peace and security.”

Back on December 8 after the UN Security Council met behind closed doors about Turkey's activities in Iraq, afterward in front of the Council Iraqi Ambassador Alhakim explained his country's position. Inner City Press Periscope video here. In pertinent part:

“A couple of days ago, troops from Turkey moved into Iraqi territory. That is illegal against international law, and against the Charter of the United Nations. We are working on this bilaterally between Baghdad and Ankara, and when we need, we have letters available to the Security Council, but they are no being issued by Baghdad yet."

Q: Are you confident Turkey will remove its troops soon?

Amb Alhakim: "We believe that Ankara understood the Iraqi position, strongly. We have made it very clear that what came through the border has to go back... There is a meeting between the Russian ambassador in Baghdad, and that’s normal, because we summoned as well by the prime minister, as well as the foreign minister, and also the ambassador of US, Britain, as well as, there will be a brief tomorrow at the foreign ministry to the P5...".

 Now on December 11, Alhakim handed US Ambassador Samantha Power and her team his government's letter, in Arabic as Power told Reuters, but also a translation, which Inner CIty Press has obtained and puts online here:

"Letter to the Security Council on the violation of the Turkish troops against Iraq sovereignty.

       At a time when Iraq is engaged in the struggle against global terrorism on the behalf of the international community, and Iraq's army alongside various security forces are fighting the integral battle against the abhorrent Da’esh entity which controls some Iraqi cities, we were hoping that a neighbor would aid Iraq and protect its security, sovereignty and help embolden Iraq in this conflict.

       On the evening of the 3rd of December, 2015, Turkish military forces comprised of over hundreds soldiers, their tanks and armored cars had crossed Iraq's internationally recognized borders, penetrating into Iraqi territory in depth of 110 kilometers inside Iraqi territory, stationing themselves in Bashiqa town, near the city of Mosul in northern Iraq, without any semblance of prior consent, coordination or consultation with the Iraqi federal government; ultimately constituting a flagrant violation of the provisions and the principles of the UN Charter, as well as a breach of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Iraqi state - fully protected under the provisions of the UN Charter and the principles of international law and the relevant Security Council resolutions, which emphasized the independence and sovereignty of Iraq and the unity and integrity its territory.

The intrusion of Turkish troops deep into Iraqi territory with a significant number of Turkish soldiers and their military hardware is an act of provocation and a violation of the provisions of international law and this unilateral military movement is a hostile act in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the relevant provisions of international law.

       Iraq has stressed in the letter to the Security Council dated the 25th of June, 2014, along with the  letter dated on the 20th of September, 2014, that the assistance for Iraq in regards to military training and advanced technology with the necessary weapons to fight Da’esh terrorist entity, must be conducted in accordance with the "bilateral and multilateral agreements, with full respect for national sovereignty and in line with the Iraqi Constitution, and in coordination with the Iraqi armed forces". On this legitimate and incontestable basis, Iraq rejects and strongly opposes any military movements in the fight against terrorism in Iraq that have been made without prior consultation with the Iraqi federal government and without its consent to such military movements and condemns it in the strongest possible terms.

      Iraq has worked, out of the respect for good faith in dialogue as a means to resolve international disputes and our commitment to constructive, neighborly relations and mutual respect with Turkey, to contain the situation through diplomatic channels and bilateral mechanisms with Turkey, but its efforts did not succeed in persuading Turkey to withdraw its troops from the occupied Iraqi territories in question.

         In this regard, Iraq calls on the Security Council to shoulder its responsibilities in the maintenance of  international peace and security in accordance with the UN Charter, in order to protect Iraq and its sovereignty, safety and territorial integrity which has been unlawfully violated by Turkish troops that have penetrated into Iraqi territory without advanced notice, nor the knowledge or approval of the Iraqi federal government, and calls on the Security Council to compel Turkey to withdraw its military troops and hardware immediately, and to ensure with all available measures, the immediate and unconditional withdrawal to the  recognized international border between the two countries, and to ensure the non-recurrence of such violations against Iraqi sovereignty which jeopardize international relations and exposure of regional and international security apparatus to such a callous and significant risk.

        Iraq would like to inform member states that Iraq retains its inherent right of self-defense in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Charter and the norms of international law, and to take all necessary measures to end this hostile act and to stop the questionable Turkish ambitions in sovereign Iraqi territory. Such acts are offensive to good-neighborly relations, and threaten international peace and security.
       I should be grateful that this letter be circulated to the members of the Security Council, and distributed as an official document to the United Nations.

                       Yours Sincerely.

                                                  Dr. Ibrahim al-Jaafari
                                        Foreign Minister of the Republic of Iraq
                                                  11 / December / 2015"

On the Vienna process, after the Syria talks moving to New York on December 18 was called into question by Russia on December 8, along with a statement that the group that killed Russia's pilot in northern Syria should be on the terrorism list compiled by Jordan, Inner City Press put thee questions to  Turkey's Ambassador Cevic. Video here.   Here's fast transcript by InnerCityPro.com:
Inner City Press: On Syria, do you think the Vienna process meeting should take place in New York on the 18th? Are you satisfied with the Saudi process for choosing the opposition?

Amb Cevik: The plans, I don’t know how fixed, I mean how clear it is, but we are making our preparations for the meeting.

Inner City Press: Are there any groups invited to Saudi Arabia that you think shouldn’t be part of the opposition delegation?

Amb Cevik: I think so far, in our view, they are working on the right concept. Let’s see if they succeed. Having a coalition group that would be able to take part in the process is one of the most important things.
Inner City Press: [Russia] said the group that killed their pilot should be put on the terror list. Do you have any view on that?

Amb Cevik: If they know the specifics, I don’t know. But to our knowledge, there was no terrorist organization, no extreme Daesh, Nusra, in that area. They are the Turkomens, and we know them, they are moderate people.

  This may be an issue. Watch this site.



On Syria after coy comments by the UN's Ban Ki-moon if the next meeting would be in New York, John Kerry in Washington at the Saban Forum in Washington on December 5 said:

"the governments involved are going to meet later in this month in New York in order to continue to move this process forward.  Our goal is to facilitate a transition that all parties have stated that they support: a unified Syria...The purpose of this transition will be to establish a credible, inclusive governance within six months.  The process would include the drafting of a new constitution and arrangements for internationally supervised elections within 18 months...Meanwhile, a nationwide ceasefire will go into effect between the government and the responsible opposition, assuming they come to the table and they begin this initial process."

  But who is this "responsible opposition"? Does it include Al Qaeda affiliates? Can last-minute mergers cleanse these groups? Watch this site.

 Back on November 14 in the shadow of the November 13 Paris attacks, the International Syria Support Group met and issued a statement in Vienna, follow by statements by US John Kerry, Russia's Sergey Lavrov and the UN's Staffan de Mistura, flashing his pince-nez and the highlighted document below.

  But what will happen when a group said to be linked to Al Nusra is hit by an airstrike, and the Free Syrian Army says it's them, not Nusra?

Meeting in Vienna on November 14, 2015 as the International Syria Support Group (ISSG), the Arab League, China, Egypt, the EU, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the United States to discuss how to accelerate an end to the Syrian conflict.  The participants began with a moment of silence for the victims of the heinous terrorist attacks of November 13 in Paris and the recent attacks in Beirut, Iraq, Ankara, and Egypt.  The members unanimously condemned in the strongest terms these brutal attacks against innocent civilians and stood with the people of France.

Subsequently, the participants engaged in a constructive dialogue to build upon the progress made in the October 30 gathering. The members of the ISSG expressed a unanimous sense of urgency to end the suffering of the Syrian people, the physical destruction of Syria, the destabilization of the region, and the resulting increase in terrorists drawn to the fighting in Syria.

The ISSG acknowledged the close linkage between a ceasefire and a parallel political process pursuant to the 2012 Geneva Communique, and that both initiatives should move ahead expeditiously.  They stated their commitment to ensure a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition based on the Geneva Communique in its entirety.  The group reached a common understanding on several key issues.
The group agreed to support and work to implement a nationwide ceasefire in Syria to come into effect as soon as the representatives of the Syrian government and the opposition have begun initial steps towards the transition under UN auspices on the basis of the Geneva Communique.  The five Permanent Members of the UN Security Council pledged to support a UNSC resolution to empower a UN-endorsed ceasefire monitoring mission in those parts of the country where monitors would not come under threat of attacks from terrorists, and to support a political transition process in accordance with the Geneva Communique.   
All members of the ISSG also pledged as individual countries and supporters of various belligerents to take all possible steps to require adherence to the ceasefire by these groups or individuals they support, supply or influence.  The ceasefire would not apply to offensive or defensive actions against Da’esh or Nusra or any other group the ISSG agrees to deem terrorist.
The participants welcomed UN Secretary General Ban’s statement that he has ordered the UN to accelerate planning for supporting the implementation of a nationwide ceasefire.  The group agreed that the UN should lead the effort, in consultation with interested parties, to determine the requirements and modalities of a ceasefire.  
The ISSG expressed willingness to take immediate steps to encourage confidence-building measures that would contribute to the viability of the political process and to pave the way for the nationwide ceasefire.  In this context, and pursuant to clause 5 of the Vienna Communique, the ISSG discussed the need to take steps to ensure expeditious humanitarian access throughout the territory of Syria pursuant to UNSCR 2165 and called for the granting of the UN’s pending requests for humanitarian deliveries.   The ISSG expressed concern for the plight of refugees and internally displaced persons and the imperative of building conditions for their safe return in accordance with the norms of international humanitarian law and taking into account the interests of host countries.  The resolution of the refugee issue is important to the final settlement of the Syrian conflict.  The ISSG also reaffirmed the devastating effects of the use of indiscriminate weapons on the civilian population and humanitarian access, as stated in UNSCR 2139.  The ISSG agreed to press the parties to end immediately any use of such indiscriminate weapons.
The ISSG reaffirmed the importance of abiding by all relevant UN Security Council resolutions, including UNSCR 2199 on stopping the illegal trade in oil, antiquities and hostages, from which terrorists benefit.
Pursuant to the 2012 Geneva Communique, incorporated by reference in the Vienna statement of October 30, and in U.N. Security Council Resolution 2118, the ISSG agreed on the need to convene Syrian government and opposition representatives in formal negotiations under UN auspices, as soon as possible, with a target date of January 1.  The group welcomed efforts, working with United Nations Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura and others, to bring together the broadest possible spectrum of the opposition, chosen by Syrians, who will decide their negotiating representatives and define their negotiating positions, so as to enable the political process to begin.  All the parties to the political process should adhere to the guiding principles identified at the October 30 meeting, including a commitment to Syria’s unity, independence, territorial integrity, and non-sectarian character; to ensuring that State institutions remain intact; and to protecting the rights of all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination.   ISSG members agreed that these principles are fundamental.
The ISSG members reaffirmed their support for the transition process contained in the 2012 Geneva Communique.  In this respect they affirmed their support for a ceasefire as described above and for a Syrian-led process that will, within a target of six months, establish credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance, and set a schedule and process for drafting a new constitution.  Free and fair elections would be held pursuant to the new constitution within 18 months. These elections must be administered under UN supervision to the satisfaction of the governance and to the highest international standards of transparency and accountability, with all Syrians, including the diaspora, eligible to participate.   
Regarding the fight against terrorism, and pursuant to clause 6 of the Vienna Communique, the ISSG reiterated that Da’esh, Nusra, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the UN Security Council, and further, as agreed by the participants and endorsed by the UN Security Council, must be defeated.  The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan agreed to help develop among intelligence and military community representatives a common understanding of groups and individuals for possible determination as terrorists, with a target of completion by the beginning of the political process under UN auspices.
The participants expect to meet in approximately one month in order to review progress towards implementation of a ceasefire and the beginning of the political process.


When the Chair of the UN's Syria Commission of Inquiry Paulo Sergio Pinheiro took questions after a closed door meeting with the Security Council, Inner City Press asked him about airstrikes in Syria, particularly by members of the Council. Periscope video here.

   Pinheiro replied that, not having been to Syria (except once as an individual, he told Inner City Press afterward, second Periscope here), he could not determine the facts of the airstrikes. But he said he had urged the Council members involved to comply with international humanitarian and human rights law.

Here fast transcription by InnerCityPro.com:

Inner City Press: For the 2 commissioners: with the increasing airstrikes by many parties now inside Syria, how is the commission able to collect, are you able to collect information about the airstrikes that occur and to figure out who’s doing what? And did you have any guidance to, there’s some members of the Security Council who are involved in these strikes, in terms of how to conduct them or how to coordinate more? I’d just like to know how you’re dealing with this new change.

Pinheiro: As you know, we investigate violations of human rights law and breaches of international and humanitarian law from – by all warring parties, by government, by the armed groups, by the terrorist groups... Yes, we had said this to the Security Council in the formal meeting, that we have received delegations about casualties, about results of those airstrikes that you have mentioned. But at this point, we are not in a position to attribute what was the responsible, the member state responsible for this airstrikes. We hope by March when, or in February when we release our report, to be in a better position to elaborate on that. What we have done, it was what we said at the human rights council, that our roles is to remind member states involved in these airstrikes the necessity of respecting the protection of the civilian population in terms of human rights and humanitarian law.

   It was said the Commission would share information with countries -- or rather, prosecutors or courts -- looking into their own nationals, as victims or perpetrators. Afterward, only on Periscope, Inner City Press asked Pinheiro if this every implicated the type of privacy concerns the UN and its Herve Ladsous cite as a basis to go after OHCHR's Anders Kompass, who blew the whistle on French troops' rapes in the Central African Republic, alleged violating victims' privacy.

  Pinheiro said disclosure would require the consent of the victims, but said that is most often given. He summoned over the Commission's Coordinator James Rodehaver, who previously did similar work on Afghanistan. It was Rodehaver who clarified that it is not countries but prosecutors and courts which can request information. He noted that a court in Sweden has cited the Commission's work, to show the conditions in a particular place and time in Syria.

  Pinheiro added that the Commission's work should make the type of “Mapping” exercises as was done in Eastern Congo unnecessary. The information has been collected. Now what? Watch this site.