Syria's Ja'afari on Kurdish Unilateral Moves, Softly Interpreted by UN

By Matthew Russell Lee

WASHINGTON, March 16 -- Before UN envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura took four questions in Geneva on March 14, he announced that for the next ten days, he will grant no exclusive interviews.  Background below.

 On March 16, after de Mistura canceled a stakeout so it could travel to Bern -- to feel the Bern, as one wag put it -- Syria's Bashar Ja'afari spoke at the UN microphone, with a too-soft UN interpretation into English.

  Ja'afari was asked about the announcement by the Kurdish PYD that it will declare autonomy, on which Inner City Press previously reported, below. Ja'afari offered praise for PYD but said such unilaterally moves are not envisioned by the Geneva process. But if the PYD is not allowed at the table?

  Ja'afari to CNN said Russia's decision to pull back military forces was a joint one with Damascus. We'll have more on this.

Later on March 14, after de Mistura briefed the UN Security Council by video, Ambassador Gaspar Martins of Angola, president of the Council for March, emerged to say that all members found Russia's announcement of starting to withdraw most of its forces from Syria positive.

  Inner City Press asked Gaspar Martins if the (yet to be agreed) inclusion of Kurdish groups in Syria into the talks was discussed. Yes, he said, there is a desire that the talks get more inclusive.

 But will they, particularly after the Ankara attack?

  Now, Kurdish official Idris Nassan says Kurds will declare self determination in northern Syria. So it seems those who delayed and demurred on Kurdish involvement in the UN's Geneva talks have only themselves to blame.

 On March 15, Inner City Press put the question to US State Department spokesperson John Kirby. From the State Department transcript:

Inner City Press: what does the U.S. think of the inclusion of Kurdish groups from – in Syria in the talks?  There’s more and more – many countries talk – say they should be involved.  Obviously, Turkey says that they shouldn’t be involved; there’s the Ankara attack.  Has your – what’s the thinking here?

MR KIRBY:  I’ve addressed this before and our position is exactly the same.  The invitations to the talks were decided and sent by the UN, by Special Envoy de Mistura.  He sent invitations this time to the same groups that he sent last time.  Right now, that does not include Kurdish groups in the proximity talks.  That said, as before, he continues to consult with a wide range of groups, to include Kurdish groups.  And we believe that we need to respect his decision-making process going forward and how he wants to conduct these talks.  We’re going to continue to support that.  And again, there are consultations, there are discussions going on.  We recognize that those consultations are important.

  But what about Kurds declaring self determination in northern Syria? We hope to have more on this.

Here's some background on de Mistura's M.O. in Geneva, then Inner City Press' question on it: on March 1 the "Association des Correspondants Aupres des Nations Unies a Geneve" (ACANU), in a bit of advocacy the NY-based UNCA does not engage in, protested de Mistura making announcements about the Syria talks in exclusive interviews, and not to all correspondents at once.

 Inner City Press has obtained the ACANU letter, which was cc-ed to UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric (who threw Inner City Press out of the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29 and out of the entire UN on February 19 and 22,petition here) and published it here.

  In New York, Ban Ki-moon and his Under Secretaries General like Herve Ladsous dole out information to favored correspondents; Ban's USG for Public Information Cristina Gallach on February 19 went so far as to oust Inner City Press after speaking with Giampaolo Pioli's UNCA but not Inner City Press. Will de Mistura, as now pledged, be different?

On March 14, Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press there is no policy in this regard. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I saw you [carbon copied] on this, so it seems like a fair question to you.  I saw a letter from the ACANU, or the Geneva press association of correspondents, directed to Mr… Mr. de Mistura and [carbon copied] to you, protesting that he announced a delay… initial delay in the Syria talks in an exclusive interview.  And I saw him this morning very early say that he's not going to do any exclusive interviews between 14 and 24 March, sort of as an accommodation.  I guess I wanted to know, what is the UN's policy in terms of both the Secretary-General or a news-maker like de Mistura giving… ACANU seemed to say very clearly this information should be given to all correspondents at the same time.  Do you agree with that?

Spokesman:  No, Mr. de Mistura is a seasoned diplomat.  He chooses to… he deftly handles the media, and he will do whatever he feels he needs to do.  There is no policy per se on any of these issues that you raised.

  No policy - like on the "lending out" of the UN Press Briefing Room, resulting in differences of opinion on the right to cover events there which the UN, Dujarric, can use as a pretext to oust the Press.

  UN Geneva spokesman Ahmad Fawzi on March 14 gave the first question to “our Turkish colleague” -- who asked about the timing of elections in Syria. The next picked questioner identified himself “with the Geneva press corps;” then Al Jazeera Arabic asked if there is any deadline for a deal to be reached.

  To this, de Mistura said this first round would run from March 14 to 24 -- during which no exclusive interviews, he said -- then a recess of a week or ten days. This will be folllowed by a second round of two weeks, then another recess, length undefined.

  Fawzi's final question went to ACANU, representing Geneva correspondents accredited by the UN, hopefully (much) better than the decaying and corrupt UN Correspondents Association the UN uses in New York. This question was to say when meetings begin and end. And then it was over.

One couldn't help wonder if there were anywhere near this focus on the slaughter in Yemen - and where is de Mistura's counterpart Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed?

 On Syria, will the Ankara attack impact mounting demands that the Kurds be given a role in this round of talks? We'll have more on this.

On Syria, UN Only Gave Partial List of Opposition As Talks Ended, Turkish Concerns

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 16 -- When the UN pulled the plug on the Intra-Syrian Talks, or merely as envoy Staffan de Mistura said pushed them back to February 25, de Mistura said that the UN "is not prepared to hold talks for the sake of talks."

 On February 16, Inner City Press asked Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari about de Mistura's and Ban Ki-moon's explanations of why those talks ended - and about the UN saying Ban was misquoted in or misinterpreted by the Financial Times.

  Ja'afari said that the UN would rather blame itself than the opposition, because then the UN would get push-back from “Westerners.” Ja'afari said that de Mistura's deputy only provided him with a partial list of the opposition delegations as the talks were ending. Ja'afari called them badly organized.

  Before Ja'afari spoke, the Security Council's president for February Rafael Ramirez of Venezuela told reporters that the Council's members agreed to tell Turkey to comply with international law. Associated Press - click here for AP's UN rape reporting on Feb 15 - asked if that meant all members.  All to different degrees, was the answer.

From Munich on February 11, the statement below was issued.
On February 11 in the press conference in Munich, three questions were taken: New York Times, Russian N TV, and BBC Arabic.

Russia's Sergey Lavrov brought up Ukraine, and said he would not mention Palestine. (One waited to hear of Yemen.) He said the Financial Times misused what Ban Ki-moon said, that Ban hadn't blamed Russia. (Inner City Press witnessed Ban enter the Security Council soon after Vitaly Churkin on February 9, but Ban's spokesman refused to say why.) We'll have more.
  Inner City Press on February 10 asked UK Ambassador to the UN Matthew Rycroft about the exclusion of the Kurdish PYD from the talks. Video here.

  Rycroft, one of the few Security Council Ambassadors who still speaks to the media gaggle on his way into the Council, told Inner City Press he didn't want to second-guess the co-chairs of the talks, de Mistura, John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov.

  Back on February 5, the UN Security Council met to hear from de Mistura by video, behind closed doors. Afterward, Inner City Press asked three of the Permanentn Representatives in attendance why the Kurdish PYD had been excluded from the talks.

 Security Council President for February Rafael Ramirez of Venezuela said, Yes, this had been discussed. Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said since Kurds at 15% of Syria, they should be included - and that if Turkey supports Syria's territorial integrity, it should stop blocking the PYD.

  But after French Ambassador Francois Delattre speechified at the UNTV microphone and had taken two questions, Inner City Press asked quite audibly about the PYD. Video here.  Delattre's spokesman directed that the UNTV microphone be given to Reuters for a vague question, then Delattre said, C'est fini.

  Inner City Press asked again, loudly, about the PYD. Delatte walked away, indicating as he has before, I will have to get back to you. But he has not, for eaxmple on Burundi. Later Inner City Press heard rumblings about the use of Periscope -- see here for acts of Voice of America -- which, ironically, a number of Security Council delegations use and follow Inner City Press on. But what ABOUT the PYD? Watch this site.

On the way in, UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft stopped and took five questions from four media, largely blaming Russia for the pause in the talks. Video here.

  Inner City Press tried asking, third time until it worked, what about the “petty procedural issues” that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had also blamed in his post-pause statement. A definition has yet to be given; Rycroft replied to Inner City Press' question on what the opposition should do on February 25 by saying that the opposition needs to be shown it is supported.

   For balance, Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin was asked about this accusation and called it “in bad taste.” Churkin added, “They should blame those who support the terrorists. It's not a Russian escalation, it's intensified efforts by the government to fight the terrorists.”

 On February 4 in front of the UN Security Council, Inner City Press asked Rycroft's Deputy Peter Wilson what Ban Ki-moon meant by "petty procedural" and other issues stalling the talks. Video here, and see below.

 Later on February 4 the UN Mission of Venezuela, President of the Security Council for February, issued a statement that, on February 5 the Security Council will hold a meeting to evaluate the political situation in Syria after the talks were suspended for three weeks by the Special Envoy of the Secretary General Staffan de Mistura.

  Venezuela's Ambassador Rafael Ramirez said in his national capacity, “We are in favor of dialogue without any preconditions, and the most important thing is that the countries that have influence with the government or the opposition are committed to and confident in the negotiations.”

  Inner City Press asked Ramirez if Sudan will speak on the debate on sanctions on February 11; Ramirez said yes. On February 1 Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access (FUNCA) asked Ramirez to hold such Q&A stakeouts after closed door meetings: and on February 4, he did. Tweeted photo here.

  The UK's Peter Wilson said the London Conference is "our" (UK) focus, and to pay attention to the speech Ban gave. On that way to the UN Security Council stakeout, another country's diplomat told Inner City Press there would be a session with de Mistura on February 5.

  As Inner City Press was filming the Q&A with Wilson, the correspondent from Voice of America took two photographs... of Inner City Press' phone. The gola, we surmise for past and recent experience, may be to Ban filming and whole technologies at the UN Security Council stakeout and even elsewhere in the UN, which the old UN Correspondents Association has tried to do in the past.

 The new Free UN Coalition for Access (FUNCA) would oppose that - watch this site, and note that many Security Council delegations use Periscope, and the UN itself purports to promote social media.

  Notably, de Mistura's statement did not cast blame for the failure - but hours later, Reuters channeled a "senior UN official" it allowed to remain unnamed:

"A senior U.N. official told Reuters on condition of anonymity that de Mistura called a halt to the talks after Russia increased air strikes to help the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, undermining the negotiating process. 'I think the special envoy decided to suspend the talks because the (United Nations) did not want to be associated with the Russian escalation in Syria, which risks undermining the talks completely,' the official said."

  Reuters did not explain WHY it granted anonymity to this described "senior UN official." But since even this source said he or she "thinks" de Mistura decided, it called into question, what kind of source is this? UN Political chief Feltman, whom Reuters UN bureau chief has previously used, would not "think" what de Mistura decided. 

 But now Ban Ki-moon has said, or read, what the unnamed senior UN official said, albeit without naming any country, see below.

 Does Reuters grant (more) anonymity to Ban Ki-moon?

 At the UN in New York on February 3, Reuters' correspondent actively cut off Inner City Press questioning about UN corruption, saying "you're grasping at straws." Vine here, story here.

  Meanwhile the UN bureau chief promoted himself appearing at aVienna UN event, top-heavy with Reuters connections.

 On February 4, Ban said this:

"It is deeply disturbing that the initial steps of the talks have been undermined by the continuous lack of sufficient humanitarian access, and by a sudden increase of aerial bombings and military activities within Syria.  The focus on the people of Syria is also being lost amid petty procedural matters."

  Ban Ki-moon and petty? Say it ain't so.

Back on December 18 in the Lotte New York Palace Hotel, ministers Lavrov and Gentiloni, Fabius and Kerry passed through with entourages; UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon left early typically without answering any questions, as Inner City Press Periscoped andreported. Hours later, the draft resolution was agreed to, then adopted 15-0 by the UN Security Council, here.

 On December 26, the UN issued this for its envoy Staffan de Mistura:

"Further to resolution 2254 (2015) of the Security Council, unanimously adopted on 18 December 2015, United Nations Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. Staffan de Mistura, has intensified efforts towards convening representatives of the Syrian Government and the broadest possible spectrum of the Syrian opposition and others to engage in a political process leading towards implementation of the objectives and principles for a political solution to the Syrian conflict as contained in the Geneva Communique of 30 June 2012, and the Vienna Statements of 30 October and 14 November 2015.

"In line with the clear parameters outlined in Security Council resolution 2254 (2015), the Special Envoy intends to complete his consultations in early January, with a view to initiating intra-Syrian talks on a target date of 25 January 2016 in Geneva. He counts on full cooperation of all the relevant Syrian parties in this process. Continuing developments on the ground should not be allowed to derail it. The Special Envoy also relies on the continued crucial support of the International Syria Support Group.

The people of Syria have suffered enough. Their tragedy is now felt throughout the region and beyond. They deserve the full attention and commitment from all their Syrian representatives, who should now show leadership and vision to overcome differences for the sake of Syria."

 The day before, on December 25, on Syria UNRWA's spokesman Chris Gunness said:

"UNRWA welcomes any developments that could end the armed conflict in and around Yarmouk, and ease the inhuman conditions that Palestine refugees and other civilians are in Yarmouk continue to endure. Over the past three months, there have been persistent reports of negotiations for some form of truce or evacuation arrangement in Yarmouk.  These reports are credible and UNRWA is taking them seriously, although they have not been officially or formally confirmed, and details have been vague. There are several thousands of civilians living in deeply abject conditions in Yarmouk. As UNRWA is deeply concerned about their well-being, the Agency is seeking from the Syrian government further details of any negotiated arrangements that will affect the humanitarian situation of civilians in Yarmouk. In particular, UNRWA demands that any arrangements being negotiated in and around Yarmouk must include guarantees for a durable cessation of hostilities, for the protection of civilians, and for safe, uninterrupted humanitarian access for UNRWA and other humanitarian actors. UNRWA is redoubling its strong appeals to the Government of Syria and relevant actors to allow and facilitate humanitarian access to Yarmouk.  This is urgently needed to enable UNRWA to   deliver food, clean water, winter supplies,  healthcare,  and other humanitarian assistance and services to civilians in Yarmouk. UNRWA stands ready immediately to respond to the humanitarian needs of the entire civilian population of Yarmouk."

  Meanwhile the head of Jaysh al Islam Zahran Alloush was killed al Ghouta.

  Back on December 18 at the UN the US day ended in a bilateral meeting between Iranian minister Zarif and John Kerry -- a photo spray was canceled -- and a low key meeting on Iraq and Turkey that we asked about and reported on here.

  Kerry and Lavrov, joined by UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, held this three-question press conference. Kerry said the negotiations should begin in mid to late January (in contrast to the early January in the resolution). Lavrov said only the “patriotic opposition” should be involved in negotiations. Staffan de Mistura said very little.

  That Kerry's spokesman John Kirby, who ran the press conference, gave the second question to the Washington Post, and the third to Russian media, was perhaps understandable. But the first question, Kirby set aside for “Al Arabiya.”  The question quickly turned into three, after being branded for “UNCA,” now the UN Corruption Association, a group which sold seats with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for $6000 only earlier this week.

 We now add: UNCA gave one of its prizes, a free trip to Turkey, to one of its Vice Presidents, from Agence France Presse. Even Kellogg's prohibits its employees from competing for its prizes. But not UNCA, which ignoring the Iraq - Turkey meeting in the Security Council was trying to buy people with Prosecco on December 18, after selling seats with Ban for $6,000.

  Several other UN-based journalists -- not (only) this one -- complained afterward that the first question and attempted follow up were a “Saudi circus” which made the UN press corps look bad -- as did attempt to throw out certain journalists, photographers, from the front row at the beginning.

   Afterward a photo spray of a meeting between Kerry and Iran's Zarif was declared “by invitation only” and then canceled. In the Security Council, with very few journalists still at the stakeout, the US presidency began the meeting on Iraq's complaint against Turkey being in its territory. We'll have more on this.

After the vote inside the Council Lavrov said, “The unanimous adoption today on the Council has created a broad front on the basis of the UN Charter, on the basis of all of those who are pushing back against terror, including the Syrian army, [some] armed militias, parts of the Syrian opposition, and the Russian air forces, in response to the legitimate request of the Syrian government."

Inside as Nasser Judeh of Jordan spoke, UN TV cut repeatedly to Syria's Bashar Ja'afari, looking more and more skeptical. France's Fabius spoke briefly and left. Outside at the stakeout, talk turned to a Kerry press conference, open to all.

 Italy's Paolo Gentiloni, by contrast, scheduled a press availability only for Italian media. A wag from the Free UN Coalition for Access asked, Isn't Gentiloni the foreign and not interior minister? Isn't he running for a Security Council seat? We'll have more on this.

In the  hotel lobby in the late morning a Permanent Five member of the Security Council's spokesperson briefed a gaggle of journalists in the lobby amid hissed that it was “off the record.”

  There was a gingerbread model of the NY Palace hotel which, the sign said, took 300 hours to make. All that was lacking, one wag - this one - snarked on Twitter, was a little gingerbread Laurent Fabuis.

 Back that UN, the 1 pm stakeout by the EU's Mogherini was postponed and then canceled. The Security Council scheduled for 3 pm got pushed back to 4.  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if Ban had spoken, what would he have said? Vine here.

On December 17, the day before Syria talks resumed at the New York Palace Hotel in Manhattan, finance ministers spoke in the UN Security Council about cutting off financing for ISIS. French finance minister Michel Sapin spoke darkly of the use of pre-paid cards for the November 13 Paris attacks; Russia's Ambassador Churkin named two Turkish companies as involved in ISIS oil sale.

  Inner City Press asked Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari, who came to take questions at the Council stakeout, about ISIS' oil. He named Turkey, then want on to name Qatar and Saudi Arabia, slamming its “Sunni coalition” recently announced.

  When US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, along with Sapin and the UK's George Osborne held a short press conference in the UN briefing room, Inner City Press hoped to asked Sapin about pre-paid cards, and Lew and Osborne about Bitcoin. But the question, just four, were limited to Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, the New York and Financial Times. So it goes.

   It seems there will be no Press access at the New York Palace; Ja'afari has said he will speak, at the UN, and whatever ISSG press availability there is should be at the UN, with a 3 pm meeting on December 18 scheduled. Watch this site.

Back on December 8, Inner City Press put thee questions to  Turkey's Ambassador Cevic. Video here.   Here's fast transcript byInnerCityPro.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.

UN Insists Intra-Syrian Talks Start, de Mistura With Ja'afari, "Other Participants" Later

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- The UN this morning announced that the intra-Syrian talks have in fact started, with a meeting between UN envoy Staffan de Mistura and Assad's Ambassador to the UN in New York, Bashar Ja'afari. Here's the full text of the UN's statement, by de Mistura's new spokesperson, issued by his last one:

"Statement Attributable to the Spokeswoman of the Special Envoy for Syria
Ms. Khawla Mattar

As previously announced by the U.N. Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. Staffan de Mistura, the Intra-Syrian Talks will start today.

Mr. de Mistura will start by meeting the government’s delegation today, headed by the Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations, Mr. Bashar Jaafari. He will continue meetings with other participants in the talks and with representatives of the civil society subsequently.

As indicated by Mr. de Mistura  in his press conference on 25 January, these will be proximity talks, meaning that the parties will be meeting with him separately. We will keep you informed, accordingly."

  We'll see.

   On January 25 de Mistura started his press conference in Geneva on a 15 minute delay, he apologized then said, "Due to the intense disagreements frankly, and different opinions on who should be on the list, the actual beginning of the talks, which was meant to be today, have been delayed. Today, therefore, instead of announcing the beginning of the talks, I’m in a position of still announcing to you the date in which, in my opinion, we will be in a position to send invitations: tomorrow. And the date which we’ll be aiming at having  the beginning of intra-Syrian talks: 29th January.."

   Why will that work any better? There will be no photos, de Mistura said. Then, taking over the picking of question, he took one on.. how many rooms?

de Mistura: The issue about rooms, and delegations, will be part of the creativity of the proximity talks. There will be a lot of shuttling, because there is not only diff delegations but also vicil society, women, and others who deserve to be heard…you could have quite a lot of simultanrous meetings taking place.

Q: Are you expecting a general ceasefire?

A "Every party has a right to decide when it wishes to come. Our main principle is, no preconditions

We will be pushing, and I think from the American and Russian side there’s also an interest in this: at the beginning we will be discussing a ceasefire. So the choice is whether to talk about that before or during.
…I think the Syrians are telling us something, they say we want something concrete, when you start talks give us something concrete. So we will be pushing the ceasefire talk…the condition should be that it is a real ceasefire and not just local. This is not what we want. We want something that will put an end to the fighting."

  Back on January 18 when after closed door consultation with UN Syria envoy de Mistura the Security Council's president for January Elbio Rosselli was asked if there will be a delay in the talks past January 25, he replied, "I would only say that no different date was considered today.”

  But de Mistura has yet to send out any invitations; who will be invited has not yet been agreed, as the UN announced in its noon briefing held as Rosselli spoke. Here's what Rosselli said at the stakeout:

"“The Security Council heard today the first oral report by Mr. de Mistura who's been working very, very actively following on the different aspects of Resolution 2254 of 18 December last year. As you all know, Mr. de Mistura has had a very, very active and hectic agenda, visiting most of the capitals of the concerned states, traveling from Riyadh to Damascus, to Amman, back to Geneva, moving to Tehran, moving everywhere.

“There has been since the very first days of January concern about whether the situation that erupted between Saudi Arabia and Iran could affect the course of the process. Mr. de Mistura has made very clear references that he got directly from the ministers of foreign affairs of both Iran and Saudi Arabia assurances that that would not be the case, and that that incident is completely isolated from the consideration of the agenda of 2254.

“We the Council reiterated its very strong unanimous support for the role that Mr. de Mistura is playing, has played and will continue to play and the central aspect of the process in the the terms of resolution 2254. This is as much as I would be in a position to transmit to you.”

  Meaning, it seems, that these were the Council's agreed-to Press Elements. We'll have more on this.

Back on December 18 in the Lotte New York Palace Hotel, ministers Lavrov and Gentiloni, Fabius and Kerry passed through with entourages; UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon left early typically without answering any questions, as Inner City Press Periscoped andreported. Hours later, the draft resolution was agreed to, then adopted 15-0 by the UN Security Council, here.

 On December 26, the UN issued this for its envoy Staffan de Mistura:

"Further to resolution 2254 (2015) of the Security Council, unanimously adopted on 18 December 2015, United Nations Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. Staffan de Mistura, has intensified efforts towards convening representatives of the Syrian Government and the broadest possible spectrum of the Syrian opposition and others to engage in a political process leading towards implementation of the objectives and principles for a political solution to the Syrian conflict as contained in the Geneva Communique of 30 June 2012, and the Vienna Statements of 30 October and 14 November 2015.

"In line with the clear parameters outlined in Security Council resolution 2254 (2015), the Special Envoy intends to complete his consultations in early January, with a view to initiating intra-Syrian talks on a target date of 25 January 2016 in Geneva. He counts on full cooperation of all the relevant Syrian parties in this process. Continuing developments on the ground should not be allowed to derail it. The Special Envoy also relies on the continued crucial support of the International Syria Support Group.

The people of Syria have suffered enough. Their tragedy is now felt throughout the region and beyond. They deserve the full attention and commitment from all their Syrian representatives, who should now show leadership and vision to overcome differences for the sake of Syria."

 The day before, on December 25, on Syria UNRWA's spokesman Chris Gunness said:

"UNRWA welcomes any developments that could end the armed conflict in and around Yarmouk, and ease the inhuman conditions that Palestine refugees and other civilians are in Yarmouk continue to endure. Over the past three months, there have been persistent reports of negotiations for some form of truce or evacuation arrangement in Yarmouk.  These reports are credible and UNRWA is taking them seriously, although they have not been officially or formally confirmed, and details have been vague. There are several thousands of civilians living in deeply abject conditions in Yarmouk. As UNRWA is deeply concerned about their well-being, the Agency is seeking from the Syrian government further details of any negotiated arrangements that will affect the humanitarian situation of civilians in Yarmouk. In particular, UNRWA demands that any arrangements being negotiated in and around Yarmouk must include guarantees for a durable cessation of hostilities, for the protection of civilians, and for safe, uninterrupted humanitarian access for UNRWA and other humanitarian actors. UNRWA is redoubling its strong appeals to the Government of Syria and relevant actors to allow and facilitate humanitarian access to Yarmouk.  This is urgently needed to enable UNRWA to   deliver food, clean water, winter supplies,  healthcare,  and other humanitarian assistance and services to civilians in Yarmouk. UNRWA stands ready immediately to respond to the humanitarian needs of the entire civilian population of Yarmouk."

  Meanwhile the head of Jaysh al Islam Zahran Alloush was killed al Ghouta.

  Back on December 18 at the UN the US day ended in a bilateral meeting between Iranian minister Zarif and John Kerry -- a photo spray was canceled -- and a low key meeting on Iraq and Turkey that we asked about and reported on here.

  Kerry and Lavrov, joined by UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, held this three-question press conference. Kerry said the negotiations should begin in mid to late January (in contrast to the early January in the resolution). Lavrov said only the “patriotic opposition” should be involved in negotiations. Staffan de Mistura said very little.

  That Kerry's spokesman John Kirby, who ran the press conference, gave the second question to the Washington Post, and the third to Russian media, was perhaps understandable. But the first question, Kirby set aside for “Al Arabiya.”  The question quickly turned into three, after being branded for “UNCA,” now the UN Corruption Association, a group which sold seats with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for $6000 only earlier this week.

 We now add: UNCA gave one of its prizes, a free trip to Turkey, to one of its Vice Presidents, from Agence France Presse. Even Kellogg's prohibits its employees from competing for its prizes. But not UNCA, which ignoring the Iraq - Turkey meeting in the Security Council was trying to buy people with Prosecco on December 18, after selling seats with Ban for $6,000.

  Several other UN-based journalists -- not (only) this one -- complained afterward that the first question and attempted follow up were a “Saudi circus” which made the UN press corps look bad -- as did attempt to throw out certain journalists, photographers, from the front row at the beginning.

   Afterward a photo spray of a meeting between Kerry and Iran's Zarif was declared “by invitation only” and then canceled. In the Security Council, with very few journalists still at the stakeout, the US presidency began the meeting on Iraq's complaint against Turkey being in its territory. We'll have more on this.

After the vote inside the Council Lavrov said, “The unanimous adoption today on the Council has created a broad front on the basis of the UN Charter, on the basis of all of those who are pushing back against terror, including the Syrian army, [some] armed militias, parts of the Syrian opposition, and the Russian air forces, in response to the legitimate request of the Syrian government."

Inside as Nasser Judeh of Jordan spoke, UN TV cut repeatedly to Syria's Bashar Ja'afari, looking more and more skeptical. France's Fabius spoke briefly and left. Outside at the stakeout, talk turned to a Kerry press conference, open to all.

 Italy's Paolo Gentiloni, by contrast, scheduled a press availability only for Italian media. A wag from the Free UN Coalition for Access asked, Isn't Gentiloni the foreign and not interior minister? Isn't he running for a Security Council seat? We'll have more on this.

In the  hotel lobby in the late morning a Permanent Five member of the Security Council's spokesperson briefed a gaggle of journalists in the lobby amid hissed that it was “off the record.”

  There was a gingerbread model of the NY Palace hotel which, the sign said, took 300 hours to make. All that was lacking, one wag - this one - snarked on Twitter, was a little gingerbread Laurent Fabuis.

 Back that UN, the 1 pm stakeout by the EU's Mogherini was postponed and then canceled. The Security Council scheduled for 3 pm got pushed back to 4.  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if Ban had spoken, what would he have said? Vine here.

On December 17, the day before Syria talks resumed at the New York Palace Hotel in Manhattan, finance ministers spoke in the UN Security Council about cutting off financing for ISIS. French finance minister Michel Sapin spoke darkly of the use of pre-paid cards for the November 13 Paris attacks; Russia's Ambassador Churkin named two Turkish companies as involved in ISIS oil sale.

  Inner City Press asked Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari, who came to take questions at the Council stakeout, about ISIS' oil. He named Turkey, then want on to name Qatar and Saudi Arabia, slamming its “Sunni coalition” recently announced.

  When US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, along with Sapin and the UK's George Osborne held a short press conference in the UN briefing room, Inner City Press hoped to asked Sapin about pre-paid cards, and Lew and Osborne about Bitcoin. But the question, just four, were limited to Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, the New York and Financial Times. So it goes.

   It seems there will be no Press access at the New York Palace; Ja'afari has said he will speak, at the UN, and whatever ISSG press availability there is should be at the UN, with a 3 pm meeting on December 18 scheduled. Watch this site.

Back on December 8, Inner City Press put thee questions to  Turkey's Ambassador Cevic. Video here.   Here's fast transcript byInnerCityPro.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.

In Syria, Amid Terrorist Water Cuts & Government Airstrikes, UN Dodging on "Besieged"

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 27 -- When UN Relief Chief Stephen O'Brien briefed the UN Security Council about the humanitarian situation in Syria on August 27, he cited Government airstrikes and shelling and water cuts by "non-State armed groups and designated terrorist groups."

 Where the line between these two is was not drawn. Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari criticized the UN reports for calling Al Qaeda a "non-State armed group."

 O'Brien said, among other things, “On 12 and 16 August, Government airstrikes hit a market place in Duma killing over [one] hundred people and injuring many more. This attack took place just a few days after the indiscriminate shelling of Damascus by non-State armed groups. Despite the outrage and condemnations, there has since been at least one further, similar attack. According to reports, since mid-August approximately 200 people have been killed and 400 injured in eastern Ghutah. Shelling of Damascus has also continued, reportedly killing over 30 people on 23-24 August only. This tit-for-tat approach by the warring parties is causing devastation to the ordinary women, men and children of Syria and it must stop.

   "Non-State Armed Groups and designated terrorist groups deliberately cut access to essential services such as water and electricity. Such acts violate international humanitarian law and must be stopped immediately. In Aleppo City, water supply was cut from 2 to 18 July and again in early August -- during the hottest month of the year -- affecting an estimated 1.7 million people. Similarly in Dar'a City and the surrounding villages, active fighting disrupted the supply of water and electricity for more than ten days affecting some 300,000 people. The city of Damascus was also affected by water cuts as non-State armed group cut off the supply from the Wadi Barada Springs which provide water to Damascus. It is unconscionable for anyone to live under these conditions."

 O'Brien said "UNRWA was able to access Yalda on 18 August and again on 19 and 24 August as well as today, to provide life-saving healthcase consultations for 1000 people and 200,000 water purification tablets." He did not say "typhoid," nor "Yarmouk." If it wasn't accessible from June 8 to August 18, is that not "besieged"? We hope to have more on this.

On August 17 after the UN Security Council's Syria Presidential Statement was adopted on August 17 with Venezuela disassociating itself from Paragraphs 8 and 10 (speech online here), Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representatives of Venezuela and New Zealand, then France's deputy, about the process.

  Inner City Press asked Venezuela's Rafael Ramirez about the Elected Ten members of the Security Council being consulted only at the end:

Inner City Press: Do you think the elected 10 members should have been involved earlier?

Amb Ramirez: We haven't been involved in the negotiation. Just the P5, they prepared a consensus, and then come here, to everybody for support. We are here elected... The idea is supposed to be a democratic body, but it’s not.

  New Zealand's Permanent Representative, when Inner City Press asked if he shared this view said yes, that he had expressed it.

 By contrast when Inner City Press asked France's Deputy Permanent Representative Alexis Lamek about the views not only of Venezuela but also New Zealand and others, characterized this as merely process,video here. Isn't France the one talking about (some) reforms in the Security Council?

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

UNSC Adopts Syria Chemical Weapons Accountabilty Mechanism Resolution, Talk of Khan al Asal, Hiroshima, PRST

By Matthew Russell Lee

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

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

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

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

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

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

At UN, Ban Ki-moon's Handpicked Questions Ignore Africa, Rape Scandals, Syria Sound Cut

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 29 -- When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon did a rare question and answer stakeout after addressing the Security Council about Syriaon July 29, it preempted and canceled the day's UN noon briefing about the UN's work all over the world.

  But Ban in his opening statement mentioned only Syria and Yemen. One of the questions handpicked by his spokesman touched on Afghanistan; neither Ban or de Mistura, who said nothing, answered it. There was not a word about Africa, well over half of the Security Council's agenda and UN's work.

  Ban Ki-moon for example recently implicitly gave his blessing to Burundi strongman Pierre Nkurunziza's unconstitutional third term. Ban opined that Nkurunziza's re-election or coronation was "broadly peaceful," despite media being closed down and refugees fleeing from the country. But no question to Ban has been allowed. TheFree UN Coalition for Access protests this.

  There are rape scandals surrounding the UN, from cover-up of French soldiers' rapes of children in Central African Republic by Ban's (French) head of peacekeeping Herve Ladsous to the UN's refusal to provide any accountability for an aid worker allegedly raped INSIDE the UN's "Protection of Civilians" camp in Bentiu in South Sudan. But not a word on this from Ban, or in the handpicked questions.

  After Ban left, taking the taciturn de Mistura with him, the president of the Security Council for July, Gerard von Bohemen of New Zealand, did a stakeout. Inner City Press was able to ask him if there was any discussion if the Syrian National Coalition will participate in de Mistura's "working groups" (he said, not int he room), and about the upcoming MH17 vote.

  But when Syria's Ambassador Ja'afari came to speak at the stakeout, it was nearly empty. Soon, the sound went out. (@InnerCityPress restarted its live #Periscope broadcast, here for 24 hours, since the UN had stopped.) Ja'afari said, this is not the first time this has happened. Inner City Press asked him about Turkey - but that's another story. This is the story of what the UN has become, or is becoming. Watch this site - and InnerCityPro.com. 

he was the opening act for his envoy Staffan de Mistura, who was supposed to make a new proposal. 

 What de Mistura set out, however, was a mere "deepening" of the Geneva Consultations he's been engaged in since May 5. In what seemed like form over substance, de Mistura said:

   “What I am today proposing is deepening the Geneva Consultations format. I now intend to invited Syrians to parallel, or simultaneous, thematic discussions through intra-Syrian working groups addressing the key aspects of the Communique, as identified by them in the first phase of the Consultations.”

   These key aspects were bullet-pointed by de Mistura as “Safety and protection for all, including ending sieges, ensuring medical access and releasing detainees; 

"political and Constitutional issues including essential principles, transitional governing body and elections; 

"military and security issues including combating terrorism, cease-fires and integration of forces; and 

"public institutions, reconstruction and development, including institutions continuing to deliver public services under a top leadership acceptable to all and acting in accordance with principles of good government and human rights.”

  While de Mistura referred to a "Fear of the Black Flag" flying over Damascus, it wasn't clear who would be in these working groups. Nevertheless it was said that the Security Council was working on a Presidential Statement to support de Mistura.

  When Ban himself spoke, all the trappings of gravitas were given. The day's UN noon briefing was canceled, in deference to Ban's (scripted?) question and answer session set for 12:40 pm.

  Even before 10 am, Ban's personal rostrum or lectern was set up at the UNTV stakeout. Given that it was torn from the hands even of a member state's foreign minister - and later President of the General Assembly -- this meant the UN assumed no member state would want (or dare) to speak before Ban's 12:40 pm stakeout.

 This is today's UN.

   

After ISIS Captures Jordanian Pilot, ICP Asks UN, Of Carve-Out for Air Campaign

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 24 --  After a Jordanian bomber was shot down over Al Raqqa in Syria and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant paraded the captured pilot through the streets and social media, Inner City Press on December 24 asked the UN's spokesman about it.

  After shuffling through his papers, spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press that "on the Jordanian pilot, the Secretary General noted with concern the news of the downing of the Jordanian military plane which reportedly crashed around the city of Raqqa in Norther Syria and also noted with concern the pilot being taken as prisoner. The Secretary General calls on his captors to treat the pilot  in accordance with international humanitarian law."

   While that certainly should be done, some note that the Syria humanitarian resolution adopted by the UN Security Council on December 17, citing international humanitarian law, explicitly excluded the US-led bombing campaign including Jordan.

  The resolution by its terms covers "all parties to the Syrian domestic conflict."

  After the adoption, Inner City Press asked Australian Permanent Representative Gary Quinlan, standing next to his Jordanian counterpart, yes or no, if any of the obligations in the resolution apply to the US-led campaign of air strikes in Syria.

  "No," Quinlan replied.

   "Why not?" Inner City Press asked.

  Quinlan said "I know where you are going" with that, but emphasized that the resolution had been adopted unanimously.

   But the question was and is, why carve out anyone, particularly one using force from the air, from a Security Council resolution about international humanitarian law?  To some, the answer is obvious, involving Israel being exempt from resolutions about the Golan Heights, US aversion to the International Criminal Court, etc. 

  But why are these double standards simply accepted without question? After Quinlan and his counterparts from Luxembourg and Jordan finished speaking at the Security Council stakeout microphone, the dozen journalists listening to them left as Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari came to the microphone to reply. 

  Ja'afari referred to a "gentlemen's agreement," on which Dujarric on December 24 said that the UN does inform Damascus of aid convoys and their contents.

When outgoing UN humanitarian aid chief Valerie Amosbriefed the Security Council about Syria on December 15, there was in the Spokesperson no accompanying report. Amos' briefing to the Council did not address casualties from US and Gulf allies' air strikes, as November's written report had.

 Instead, Amos said that “all parties to the conflict continue to violate the most basic laws with devastating consequences. The Government has continued to use barrel bombs in densely populated areas, killing and maiming people. The use of barrel bombs has been particularly acute in Aleppo, Hama, Idlib, Rural Damascus, Deir Ez-Zor, Ar-Raqqa and Da'ra.”

 She did mention that “opposition groups have also prevented medical supplies from reaching besieged communities in Nubul and Zarah.” 

 Most troublingly, Amos said that the UN has received reports of 350 children, some as young as five years old, being trained for combat in a military camp in Ar-Raqqa by ISIL.

  Back in late November, the UN released its Syria aid access report  in the same pre-spun way it did on April 23,then on May 22, on June 20 and then on July 24 and August 28. Unlike other reports, for example on Sudanwhere both the UN's Herve Ladsous and Valerie Amos have been petitioned by Darfuri groups, here, the UN put an advance copy of this Syria report its its so-called "gray lady."

  As previously reported, the "gray lady" holds documents, of late only the month's Security Council program of work, of which advance copies are released, sometimes with a heads-up to favored media. 

  Who decided for the UN Secretariat and Spokesman which are the important issues meriting such treatment? The Free UN Coalition for Access posits that it should be all reports, with no advance notice to favored media. The system could be fixed, but to simply without explanation return to the current murk is UNacceptable - and typically UN.

  In December, a correspondent was told, "there is no more gray lady." 

  The new "advance" report, dated November 21, nevertheless says, in Paragraph 9, that "armed opposition and designated terrorist groups continue shelling government controlled areas, including in civilian populated areas... including in Damascus, Homs, Hama and Quneitra. For example, on October 20, mortar shelling was reported on a university in Quneitra."

  So who did this shelling: the  "designated terrorist groups" ISIL and Al Nusra, or the "armed opposition" and did this include the Free Syrian Army? 

 In Paragraph 15, the new / "advance" UN report says that "the international coalition continued airstrikes against ISIL in Syria on a near-daily basis with reports of some 865 people killed, including 50 civilians, in Aleppo, Deir ez-Zor, Hasakeh, Idlib and Raqqa since strikes began."

  Fifty out of 865 - the UN doesn't opine.  The UN report describes the proposal of its envoy Staffan de Mistura (without giving credit to the Geneva-based Center for Humanitarian Dialogue for the idea). Today, the Syrian Coalition said:

"Commenting on the ceasefire proposal put forward by the UN special envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura, the Syrian Coalition stated that “the goal of any UN move should guarantee the right of the Syrian people to self-determination, to choose their political system, to preserve the unity of Syria and to reject any foreign intervention, especially Iran’s military and political intervention. “Any political process must be based on the Security Council resolutions, including resolutions No. 2118, 2165, 2170, the Geneva I protocols, and the clauses related to the establishment of a transitional governing body with full powers, and accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The starting points for Mistura’s plan must include the establishment of protected safe zones, a no-fly zone north of latitude 35, and south of latitude 33, and in the Qalamoun region, and taking tangible measures to expel the terrorist foreign militias imported by the Assad regime. The plan must also ensure the delivery of relief aid to the areas under siege, the prevention of the Assad regime from using civilians as hostages in exchange for political gains, the release of detainees and the disclosure of Assad’s secret prisons.” Moreover, the statement stresses that the proposed local ceasefires in some areas must be based on the Geneva protocols and the UN Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 2165." The Syrian Coalition, as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people, confirms it is open to any efforts aimed at helping the Syrian people get rid of tyranny, stressing that it is the only party mandated to respond to the UN initiatives that should not affect the unity of the Syrian opposition, rehabilitate the Assad regime or its head, or fuel fears of a taking Syria toward fragmentation and division."

  The September report, conveniently cutting off on September 17, said "Government forces also shelled and undertook airstrikes against ISIL positions in the northern and eastern parts of the country in an attempt to stop ISIL."  What about the US and five Kingdom's airstrikes?

  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access went to the UN Spokesperson's Office on September 29, the eve of the Security Council's month meeting, and asked for an explanation why rather than reform the pre-spin system, the reports are simply not pre-released. There was no explanation.

Update: on September 30, the UN Spokesperson's office put the report, dated September 23, into its "Gray Lady." What was the point? We'll have more on this. The UN should be transparent.

 The new report goes on, "Government- controlled cities and towns continued to be subject toindiscriminate mortar attacks, shelling and vehicle-borne improvised explosivedevices by armed opposition, extremist and designated terrorist groups, notably in
Aleppo and Damascus governorates. For example, in Aleppo city, extensive shellingin the Khalideah residential and commercial area at the beginning of September resulted in the deaths of eight civilians, including women and children."
 
 On a group neither listed with ISIL and Al Nursa, nor (formally) with the Free Syrian Army, the new UN report says "On September 5, armed opposition groups took control of the Dokhanya and Ein Tarma suburbs of Damascus and engaged government forces in Midan and Zahira al Jadida, located less than 2 km from the Old City. A similar operation took place in Teshrine district, north of Damascus. On 16 September, one of the main Islamic Front factions (Ajnad al Sham) announced the beginning of a second phase of rocket attacks on the centre of Damascus."

   In the new system, selective reports circulate for days before the UN's actual report. 

  The spoon-fed pre-spinner, ironically, has engaged incensorship of other leaks, click here for ChillingEffects.org, here for critique by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

  As Inner City Press reported here, Australia along with Luxembourg and Jordan pushed a  resolution on Syria aid access. 

  Again, the UN report does not directly address calls in Washington to support the Free Syrian Army -- which is still listed by another part of the UN as recruiting and using child soldiers.

  On ISIL, the report continues in Paragraph 8: "ISIL continues to increase its influence in the Syrian Arab Republic, predominantly along the main supply lines in rural central Homs, Hama, Rif
Dimashq, southern Hasakeh and western Aleppo. It also continues to fight for the control of border crossings and natural resources. During the reporting period, it made advances in Raqqa, Hasakeh, and Aleppo governorates following clashes with Government forces."

  How has the pre-spinning worked, or not worked? Back on July 24 at 11:15 am US state media began tweeting about the report. Inner City Press went to the Spokesperson's Office and asked if it had been put out as described below. No, was the answer.

  But 15 minutes later, the Spokesperson's Office squawked that the report had been distributed to the Council, and there is then was in the "gray lady" -- the only UN report still distributed this way -- no reports on Africa are.

 Back on June 20, just before 6 pm, the UN Spokesperson's Office announced over its "squawk" system to correspondents still in the building that the report had been circulated. This meant it had been placed in piece of furniture in the Spokesperson's Office which has sat empty for many days now.

  Apparently only these Syria reports are now pre-released, pre-announced and pre-spun. 

  In terms of the Spokesperson's duty to answer questions, there was by closure on June 20 no answer to Inner City Press' request to confirm or deny Ban Ki-moon was handed legal papers about the introduction of cholera into Haiti as he entered the Asia Society, Inner City Presscoverage here.

  Back on May 22 the UN's go-to wire service, which has also tried to get other media thrown out, gushed that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's "toughly worded report... said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government bore the greater responsibility."

   This wire's report didn't mention the Free Syrian Army displacing people (in the report) or the FSA recruiting child soldiers (in another recent UN report, which Inner City Press noted here.)

  Nor did it mention, for example, "45,000 in areas besieged by opposition forces in Nubul and Zahra." The number remains the same in the June 20 report.

   As we diplomatically sketched on April 23 hoping for some reform, the UN Spokesperson's Office makes "advance copies" of reports available. That is fine - but there is no consistency in who they tell of the availability of reports or how they make the announcement.

  Showing bias, they only "squawk" over the internal intercom system some but not all reports. 

  Now this inconsistency applies to pre-releasing some but not all reports. Who decides? How?

   Using the squawk system rather than e-mailing all resident correspondents favors media, like the UN friendly wire, which have a person sitting in their office -- for example a person who filed a "for the record" complaint against another media, than scammed Google into banning the leaked complaint from Search, misusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, click here for that.

  Other international organizations handle this with less bias. The IMF gives accredited media like Inner City Press embargoed copies of documents, and hold embargoed briefings to which accredited journalists anywhere in the world can pose questions, then wait and report at the embargo time. The UN must improve: and the Free UN Coalition for Access is working on this.

  Other have complained about this murky UN practices; others still a month ago asked FUNCA to wait a week before proposing reforms, which it did. But where are any reforms? We will continue to Press.

   If the Gulf & Western insiders on the board of the UN Correspondents Association, which tried to get other media thrown out of the UN, have a problem with disclosure, they too should push the UN to reform. But they won't even reform themselves, and for example commit not to seek the expulsion of other media from the UN. 

  The current spokesperson has taken sides on this and other things; it is time for reform. If Ban Ki-moon is so tough and principled, why was he praising the president of Sri Lanka just after a report showed him seeking to "go all the way" and kill all his opponents? This all circles back. We'll have more on this.

Further back-ground: On April 30 when UN Humanitarian chief Valerie Amos took media questions, Inner City Press asked her about two paragraphs of her report on Syria, the advance copy of which was released on April 23 as analyzed below.

   Paragraph 47 disclosed 25 UN staff members detained. Inner City Press asked, by whom? Amos said by both the government and the armed groups. 

 The June 20 report, in Paragraph 44, says "29 UN staff (27 UNRWA and 2 UNDP) are currently detained of which four are missing."

   The Free UN Coalition for Access has repeatedly asked, including at UN noon briefings, why these reports don't just go online for all to see. The response, off-camera, has been to allow translation into the UN's official six languages. Really?

  The result is that stories are written, for example here by Reuters, that focus on the Syrian government while the report has whole sections about Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS, et al. Is this retyping really "reporting" by the Reuters bureau chief, who himself is engaged in censorship, here?

 Despite the lack of any stated rule in this regard,  FUNCA and Inner City Press have been criticized for even questioning or reporting on this anti-public process. A previous UN spokesperson told Inner City Press the reason for stealth is that "the member states" would like pre-release before translation. But doesn't the Secretariat WORK for member states? Or is this how they buy the fealty of the scribes?

   But if Gulf media immediately scans and puts the advance copy online, where is the mystery? Where is the double standard? Wouldn't it be better for the UN itself to put the report online when available?

 And then not, as it did on Western Sahara, change the report after getting pushed around? FUNCA is and will remain for UN transparency and fair treatment. And FUNCA maintains there should be answers -- including from UN Under Secretaries General -- and written rules. The UN has outright refused to explain why for example the Turkish Cypriot leader Eroglu was allowed to speak on UNTV but Polisario is not. The lack of rules only benefits the powerful: media, countries, corporations.

  Back in April when Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja'fari came to speak, Inner City Press asked him about US-made BGM-71 TOW missiles now in Syria, of the group Harakat Hazm. They are with Al Nusra, Ja'afari said.

  Inner City Press asked on what basis Ja'afari said the US approved their transfer to Syria, if they could have come through Turkey. Ja'afari said there is no way they could come in without approval from Washington. Video here -- this is Inner City Press YouTube video.

  Unlike other stakeouts, the UN did not put on its UN Webcast archive Ja'afari's long April 17 stakeout including on TOW missiles. Inner City Press asked about it on April 22 at the noon briefing, and later another UN individual acknowledged it had not gone up. But why?  Now, only after asking, it is up. Click here (TOW question and answer from Minute 15:17.) This is how the UN works, or doesn't.

  This has happened again in June  - click here.

  Ja'afari was asked by Voice of America, why Syria doesn't use Russia or China to get a meeting about Kassab. Ja'afari responded to the question; he did not say as France Ambassador Gerard Araud did on April 15 to Al Mayadeen, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent."
 
  By Araud's logic, is not Voice of America an agent? Is not France 24, also called on by Ja'afari? Ah, freedom of the press. Here is what the Free UN Coalition for Access has done so far.

   When outgoing French Ambassador Araud scheduled a press conference on human rights for April 15, he began to receive many questions, here, about blocking human rights monitoring in Western Sahara. 

  It is a policy Araud is particularly associated with, since Javier Barden quoted him calling Morocco France's "mistress." Araud spoke of suing, but hasn't.

   But when during the April 15 press conference, in which Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Accesswere not called on, Araud was asked about France having killed people in Algeria, Araud told the questioner, You are not a journalist, you are an agent. Video here.

  The French run press conference gave the first question to Al Arabiya, for UNCA (now known as the UN's Censorship Alliance), then France 24.  By Araud's spokesperson Frederic Jung, a Voice of America affiliate was given a question. 

  Syria "Caesar" report panelist David Crane was asked who funded it and answered on camera merely that he was paid. (The photographs, Inner City Press noted and notes, are extremely troubling - all the more reason that taking Qatar's funding and denouncing the only critical question were unwise.)

  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Crane to confirm the payment was from Qatar. He confirmed it. Inner City Press asked, did you seek any other, less compromised funding? The answer was no. In fact, Crane said he gave his recommendations to the Syrian National Council. Afterward Inner City Press asked him if he meant the Turkey based group headed by Ahmed Al Jarba, and Crane said yes, than added, "The resistance" writ large.

     When Qatar sponsored an event at the UN in New York on March 21 featuring the Syrian Coalition headed by Ahmad al Jarba, a group calling its the Syrian Grassroots Movement held protests seeking to oust Jarba.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Watch this site.