Showing posts with label ladosus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ladosus. Show all posts

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Amid UN Rape Talk, Ladsous Leaves UNSC, UN Women No Comment, Serval Questions



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 10 -- Amid a litany of rape charges against UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press exclusively obtained and on February 12 published UN emails showing another round of sexual abuse of minors in Ouaka prefecture in the Central African Republic by UN Peacekeepers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Click here to view.

 On March 4 at 11 am Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report on "Special measures for protection from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse" came out from under embargo and Inner City Press immediately published this review.

Ban's response is inadequate; tellingly, it is not the boss of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who has on camera linked the rapes to R&R, who is presenting or pitching the response, but lower profile Atul Khare.

On March 10, Ban presented his report to the UN Security Council, followed by Council members' speeches. Ladsous attended - refusing Inner City Press' question about Code Blue's critique on the way in -- and left even as China was speaking.

 Later at the March 10 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked the director of UN Women Phumzile Mlambo, not for the first time, for her response to Ladsous having publicly linked the rapes to R&R. She replied that she remembered the Press question, but hadn't been able to "corroborate" it.

  "Watch your Twitter feed," Inner City Press said, and send her (and Brazil's Permanent Representative Patriota) the video link.

  Spain in the debate said that countries should have six months to take action. So how long has French taken on the Sangaris rapes? Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric for his view. He said the French process is ongoing. For how long?

  We'll have more on the question of whether the draft Security Council resolution should also address Sangaris, and for example the French Force Licorne in Cote d'Ivoire. Inner City Press asked Brazil's Patriota if the issue should be in the General Assembly as well. He said yes, citing Jose Ramos Horta -- who has chimed in to the UN against its ouster of Inner City Press, so far without it being reversed. Now we can say: Ban knows. Personally.

On March 4 at the 11:15 am press conference -- tellingly, the UN Correspondents Association wasn't present - Inner City Press asked Khare why it wasn't Ladsous presenting, why Ban Ki-moon noted without criticism a mere nine day suspension for sexual exploitation, why sexual abuse of a 14 year old was classified by the UN as "transactional"?

 Khare did not explain Ladsous' absence, nor answer if Ladsous was the unnamed UN official who pre-spun Reuters and a few others.

He did not directly say that Reuters broke the embargo - he said to ask DPI about that , which is funny in that DPI threw Inner City Press out of the UN for trying to cover an event in this same UN Press Briefing Room, while collaborating with Reuters - but added he was surprised to see the advance story. Video here.

There is no accountability at the top - or in the field. The March 4 report in Paragraph 20 presents as legitimate a nine day suspension for sexual exploitation, and undefined "administrative sanctions" for sexual exploitation that led to a "Peacekeeper baby." This is shameful.

  Zeid firing whistleblower Kompass was asking about by France 24 - but not Ladsous.

 As to the Central African Republic, where the UN covered up French Sangaris troops child rapes and then fired the whistleblower -- not mentioned in the report -- the UN blamed the victims, saying the country is poor, women and girls are for sale: a more diplomatic entree into what Ladsous came out and said on September 11, 2015, linking rapes to R&R.

 Combine this with an Inner City Press question Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric refused to answer - how could the UN log in sexual abuse of a 14 year old, statutory rape, as "transactional" sex -- and the scam of Ban's response becomes clear.

 Perhaps because the product is so worthless, the attempt to sell and spin it was extensive.

  Since December Inner City Press has asked at noon briefings when Ban Ki-moon's response to the Deschamps report would be released, including asking about member state dissatisfaction with the response, and Ladsous.  "March," Ban's two spokesman said.

 On Wednesday Inner City Press learned that not the official responsible for the rapes, Herve Ladsous, but lower profile Atul Khare had shot a UN TV "interview" about the response. Now, in similar propaganda fashion, an UNnamed UN official has poured the spin on Reuters and the old "small group of reporters" -- that is, those who never reported that Ladsous, on camera, linked the rapes to R&R. This is the UN Corruption Association.
 
  Inner City Press on March 3 asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about DPKO.  I've seen a story in which an unnamed UN peacekeeping official has, I guess, previewed what Mr. Khare is going to say on Friday, and he talks about possible court-martials and even DNA testing.  And I guess… first, I wanted to ask, who was he?  And the reason I ask is, if you're talking about name and shame, why would DPKO be presenting its information anonymously?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Matthew, the background briefings that are provided are background briefings.  You know that we have background briefings.  You've attended them.  And I will abide by the rules of them.

Inner City Press:  Did Mr. Atul Khare conduct already, on Wednesday of this week, a sit-down interview with UNTV?  And, if so, when will it be released?  And why would… is this actually a publicity campaign to promote belated response to the rapes in the CAR [Central African Republic]?  Or can we see the video now?  Is it under embargo?  I would like to know what the rules of that.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Different UN officials do, in fact, talk to UNTV, and that's part of what we do in order to actually communicate the work of the United Nations.  There's nothing untoward about that.  And it will air at some point fairly soon, I believe.  But, ultimately, it becomes public when it does.  You'll be able to see it on the website, as anyone else.

  But, even as to the report which the UN insisted was under embargo until 11 am on March 4, when Reuters nevertheless published a weak story about it on March 3, with no mention of Ladsous, the UN did nothing.

  Given the UN's no due process move to on February 19 expel Inner City Press from the UN for merely trying to cover an event in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29, petition here, Inner City Press strictly complied with the embargo although obtaining the report through other channels was easy.

 Reuters doesn't have to worry about the UN throwing it out - it does (some in) the UN's dirty work. We'll have more on this as well.

  Even from within DPKO there is disgust at the response, as dodging or not implement many of the recommendations. More on that when the UN belatedly comes out from behind its self-pleasuring curtain of its own media, and insider scribes. One final note: the Reuters bureau chief at the March 1 press conference by Angola on its Program of work loudly cut off another reporter - not this one -- as if owning the UN.
  After Inner City Press on February 15 asked about the email its had published - and Reuters' UN bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, notably,tried to dismiss and then stole the story - on February 16 UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq in the noon briefing read out a statement confirming nearly all of the email Inner City Press had published: that there were four new victims, minors, troops from DR Congo.

 But Haq did not say that two of the victims had children from the statutory rape. So Inner City Press asked Haq to confirm that, and asked who would pay: the UN or the DRC soldiers? Haq said there are meetings in Ban's office to respond to just such issues, after December's Deschamps report. Video here.

 And then Reuters, even while its editor Dan Grebler said the first theft was being looked into, just retyped and stole it again, this time by its UN correspondent Michelle Nichols, here.

  It was this same Nichols who, at the UN Security Council stakeout on February 18 while Inner City Press was live-streaming after asking about a draft statement on Palestine, cut in loudly with "I see you Periscoping!"  And? So what? UN missions and the UN itself are broadcasting inside the UN on Periscope. Why would one media try to censor others?

  On February 15, Reuters first tried to claim these were "old" rapes, here -- then when shown otherwise, simply stole the story with no credit.This is apparently policy.

  So Inner City Press raised the issue of theft of exclusives (and lack of objectivity, at least at the UN) to Reuters itself. For now, we've received this, cc-ed also not only to the (repeat) offender but also to Reuters' genial seeming Brian Moss and Clive McKeef:

"Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. The appropriate Reuters staff will look into it and get back to you as soon as feasible.

Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor, Americas Desk"

  But but February 18, still no response. It's not that complicated.  Or was the Reuters correspondent's "intervention" the response? We'll have more on this too.

 The underlying emails, dated February 11, 2016, describe at least four underage victims, two of whom were impregnated by the rapist UN peacekeepers -- "in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture."

  On February 15, after emailing questions for two days to UN spokespeople in CAR and New York, Inner City Press at the UN's noon briefing asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the rapes, and the email it published on February 12. Haq answered, dodging on part of the email but not denying it. Video here.

 Then Associated Press asked, what about these new allegations? Video here. Haq answered - and from that, AP wrote its own derivative and belated story -- without credit, and without any mention of the critique of the UN in the emails. This is how it works, or doesn't.

 This too - Reuters UN "bureau chief" on Monday evening first reflexively came to the UN's defense saying that "Alleged Central African Republic rapes UN spox talked about today are same ones UN CAR said Feb 4 it was probing," citing (what else) a Reuters story of February 4 -- about a Human Rights Watch report about rapes in Bambari. But read the February 11 emails Inner City Press exclusively published, here:

“Herewith sharing with you a report I have just received from UNICEF indicating four minor girls aged between 16 and 17 years were victims of sexual exploitation and abuse allegedly committed by members of the DRC battalion in the locality Ngakobo in the Ouaka prefecture.”

  Up the email chain, Mercedes Gervilla in UN headquarters writes that “it would seem that many among the troops concerned, including Commanding officers were well aware of the abuse to which these children were being subjected. I also regret to inform you that in addition to these new 4 cases, there will likely be two more...”.  [We'll have more on this.]

  This is called... spinning for the UN. This is a trend at Reuters, even last week, here.



And there is a history: this same Reuters UN Bureau Chief Lou Charbonneau, when challenged, wrote to Stephane Dujarric, UN Spokesman, trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, here.

  When this was exposed, Charbonneau cited Reuters to get his email to the UN taken out of Google's search, saying he never meant for it to be public and it was somehow copyrighted. (See his filing here, made public by EFF's ChillingEffects.org). That's censorship... by Reuters.

  This this case, after being shown this reflexive defense of the UN was wrong, Reuters simply re-wrote the story and stole it, with no credit.

 And now we must go back: Charbonneau announced a policy of not crediting Inner City Press, see here.

 This was raised at the time to Reuters, including to Stephen J. Adler. What kind of company is this?

  (Inner City Press previously asked the decaying UN Correspondents Association, while it tried to censor Press coverage of its boss, to promulgate a best practice for media at the UN to credit others' exclusives; it never happened. AP at the UN speaks for this UNCA, and apparently it for AP.)

  In the email chain Inner City Press exclusively published, middle management at the UN noted that the majority of sexual abuse in CAR has been committed by the battalions from the DRC and the Republic of Congo. And so Inner City Press posed these questions to UN spokespeople in both New York and the CAR:

"This is a request for your comment on, and any update on, the sexual abuse and exploitation cases in the Feb 11, 2016 emails now here

Also, what will be done with the Republic of Congo and DR Congo contingents? We are interested in if the UN and DPKO can, as currently be configured, be reformed.What is the status of the sexual abuse and exploitation cases that have been listed, including in the UN Press Briefing Room?"

  The response received by Inner City Press on Saturday afternoon in New York was from Bangui-based MINUSCA spokesman Vladimir Monteiro:

"Regarding your questions on DRC and Congo, here is Minusca's position:

"On DRC contingent, a decision to repatriate them has already been taken. It will be completed without delay by the end of the month. It is just a matter of planning it properly.

"On the 120 troops from Congo, they have been cantoned in Berberati to permit investigations by national investigators before their repatriation to their country  which will occur on 20 February 2016. For further details on this matter please contact HQ."

  But of course Inner City Press has already contacted "HQ" or UN Headquarters, including for example Ismini Palla of Ladsous' DPKO, who gave Agence France Presse the response to questions Inner City Press has publicly posed to UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to the DPKO spokesman Nick Birnback, also cc-ed.

  So where ARE the updates on the cases the UN's Diane Corner listed in the UN Briefing Room? Why was it reported in early January that the DRC contingent had "been dismissed" when, in mid February, they are still in place? What is the status of the Burundian contingent in CAR? Follow up questions have been submitted to UN officials and spokespeople in CAR and headquarters in New York.

  Well placed sources tell Inner City Press these two countries' soldiers have been in the UN MINUSCA mission nearly entirely due to Ladsous and, more outrageously, the / his French government due to its political relations with the Republic of Congo and DRC.

  Ladsous, as Inner City Press has reported, told Burundi's Vice President that he is "pragmatic" about human rights; even on camera, Ladsous linked the rapes to "R&R," click here for video.

  While Ladsous' DPKO and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson announced that the DRC contingent would be pulled out of Bambari and CAR in late Janaury, Inner City Press is informed this never happened: they are still there.

  Ladsous' DPKO, and now the UN Spokesperson's Office, are engaged in misleading the press and public, and doling out what information they provide to only the friendliest media.

 For recent example, Inner City Press for week has reported on and asked about the repatriation from CAR of Burundian troops charged with abuse during the crackdown on opponents of Pierre Nkurunziza's third term. Even after Inner City Press obtained and published on February 9 proof of three repatriations, all UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press is that he would seek an update.

  Simarily, Ladsous' lead spokesman Nick Birnback told Inner City Press DPKO would have something to say about the particular Burundian officers in CAR Inner City Press asked him about.

  Then Ladsous' spokespeople including Ismini Palla gave their limited confirmations to Reuters and Agence France Presse, who published it without credit or context. (Neither media reported on Ladsous linking rape to R&R - nor did AP.)

 In a February email by UN official Anthony Banbury, soon to leave the UN after some heartfelt tears of outrage at peacekeepers' rapes, it is said:

"We have a pack of predatory criminals and rapists, preying on young girls,
under the banner of the United Nations. How can we stand by? In my view that battalion should be ordered to cease operations today, same with the RoC battalion, and be confined to camp and guarded full time so they cannot continue to abuse children. While we would pay a short-term price in terms of operations, we would gain so much in terms of the integrity and reputation of the UN, in the CAR and internationally, and we would almost certainly prevent more rapes of minor girls. We simply cannot sustain the argument that the benefit these troops are bringing to the UN and PoC is greater than the harm they are doing."

  What will the UN do? What will France, with new foreign minister Jean Marc Ayrault, do? How long can Ladsous - and the Congolese contingents - remain in place?


 


Having been told by sources of more rapes by peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, Inner City Press on January 26 reported them and on January 27 asked the UN's spokesperson Stephane Dujarric to confirm them - but he wouldn't. UN transcript here. Video here.




  So what is the protocol of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, who linked the rapes to "R&R," here? How many more do they know about?

The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report...

  When the Panel's three members held their December press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others. We'll have more on this.

Monday, April 14, 2014

Ukraine Turchynov Talks to Ban Ki-moon of UN Peacekeeping, UNrealistic, Ladsous Mali Echo


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 14 -- Oleksandr Turchynov of Ukraine, in a telephone call with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, suggested a joint "counter-terrorism" operation in Eastern Ukraine with UN peacekeepers.

  This and much reporting on it ignores that all UN peacekeeping operations require authorization from the Security Council, in which Russia (and China) have veto rights.

  But it also ignores how the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations has lost any semblance of impartiality under Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head DPKO.

  Counter-terrorism has an echo of Mali, where first the French Serval forces, then later a "re-hatted" UN Mission under Ladsous, MINUSMA, are un-transparently in northern Mali.

  In this context, the idea of a UN Peacekeeping mission in Eastern Ukraine is, well, laughable.
   When the UN Security Council met to exchange speeches late on April 13, it was two hours before a deadline by Ukraine's president to use force in Eastern cities.
   Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, who had requested the meeting, tweeted photo here, said he hoped his "Western colleagues" would get on the phone and try to get this "criminal degree" rescinded. 
   Several speakers cited the meeting slated for Geneva on April 17. But Churkin said if force is used, why would Russia sign off on that meeting? 
  US Ambassador Samantha Power among other things cited to funding, saying the $1 billion US loan guarantee goes into place on April 14 and the US wants the International Monetary Fund to move forward. She said, "On Monday, we will conclude the $1 billion loan guarantee for Ukraine... We strongly support concluding the agreement between Ukraine and the IMF so the international community can bolster Ukraine’s economy."
   After the meeting Inner City Press asked Churkin if Russia was aware of any "Western colleagues" behind the scenes asking for an extension of the deadline. Churkin's answer mentioned, skeptically, US Secretary of State John Kerry.

   When Ukraine's long-time Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev came to the stakeout microphone as the second and last speaker there, Inner City Press first asked him about any extension - no, he said, this was the last deadline -- and about Crimea. Video here.
  On the latter Sergeyev pulled out a sheet of paper from the UN Refugee Agency UNHCR and cited 4000 displaced people, using the word genocide.  As the last question, Inner City Press asked about the CIA's John Brennan. That is only heard from Russia, Sergeyev said. And then he was gone, less than two hours before the deadline.  Video here. Watch this site.
  Inner City Press had arrived at the Security Council at 7 pm and was reliably informed that there will be an open meeting, and a briefing by UN Assistant Secretary General Taranco (and not Under Secretary General Feltman, who traveled to Ukraine with Ban Ki-moon when he met the leader of the Svoboda Party, and stayed behind for days.
   Still, just before 7 pm there were only three cars parked in front of the UN, tweeted photo here, and no UNTV at the stakeout.
  It was only Friday April 11 when Sergeyev was slated to give a talk promoted by UN scribes  at Rutgers University in Newark entitled "Seeing Through the Spin: Sorting Fact from Fiction in Public Information." 
   UN deputy human rights official Ivan Simonovich's report on Ukraine is slated to be heard, also behind closed doors. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke on another topic, Western Sahara, with Morocco's King on Saturday but the UN refused to give a read-out, click here for that. Watch this site.
  Back on March 30 it was midnight in Paris when US Secretary of State John Kerry came to take two questions from two media about his meeting with Russia's Sergey Lavrov. One of the two asked about Palestine, Israel and prisoners. That, Kerry declined to answer, saying only that he spoke with Benyamin Netanyahu fifteen minutes before.
   Kerry was asked what was said about the "Russian troops." He replied those troops are on Russian soil, so it's not about legality. To some, this implies that Crimea, or at least Russian presence there, is off the table.
   On Crimea, as if in a parallel universe the UN Security Council will hold an "Arria formula" meeting on March 31 featuring a Crimean Tatar and a journalist from Crimea, organized by Council member Lithuania, it was confirmed to Inner City Press.
   Tatar leader Mustafa Jemilev has been calling for another referendum in Crimea.  This meeting comes a day after US Secretary of Stat John Kerry and Russia's Sergey Lavrov meeting at the Russian Ambassador's residence in Paris. While the US talked Crimea, Russia moved on to Moldova.
   Russia's read-out of Putin's call to Obama raised the latter issue and was silent on the former. Much was made of this by talking heads on US Sunday morning shows.
   Perennial David Gergen mocked Kerry for turning his plane around to meet with Lavrov, asking rhetorically if this is the promised diplomatic isolation. A pair of Michaels, Hayden and Morell, mused about a commitment for Ukraine not to join NATO, or even the European Union. But what about the IMF deal?
  Soon to be former elected official Mike Rogers, headed to talk radio, went beyond dark talk of a land bridge to Moldova to speculate about Russia moving from South Ossetia to Armenia. He's running for the Republican Presidential nomination, it seems.
   On March 28 while at the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon took selective questions from the press about Ukraine (and Venezuela), the US White House issued a read-out of a call between President Barack Obama and Russia's Vladimir Putin, here.  Russia issued a different read-out, here. So how relevant is the UN?
   Later a Senior Administration Official explained,
We’re not going to get into the details, but they discussed the latest iteration of a working document that Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov have been working on to de-escalate the situation, which has been the guiding concept of our approach.
As you know, previously we discussed general elements of an off-ramp, including: international monitors, pull back of Russian forces, and direct Russia-Ukraine dialogue - supported by the international community - taking into account the Ukrainian government's openness to constitutional reform and upcoming Ukrainian elections. Throughout this process, we have been coordinating closely with the Ukrainians, including on this diplomatic proposal.
And later still:
The U.S. de-escalation proposal was fully coordinated with the Ukrainian government, and responded to points raised in a March 10 Russian paper.  We are awaiting a response from the Russians.
  Back at the UN, Ban Ki-moon mentioned the word "radical."
  It was inevitable: as Inner City Press first reported, while in Kyiv Ban met with the leader of the Svodoba Party, adjudged as both racist and anti-Semitic and most recently beating up a television executive then getting the footage censored from YouTube via a bogus Millennium Digital Copyright Actcomplaint.
  In fact, on March 27 at the UN General Assembly stakeout Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin told Inner City Press Ban's meeting was "disturbing" and that he looked forward to an explanation in the March 28 Security Council consultations. Video here. (We hope to have more on this.)
  At the March 28 noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq if Ban had known in advance that Svoboda's leader would be present, and if he would address it at the stakeout. Video here.
  Haq declined to provide anything more than the list of parties Ban met with, which was provided after Inner City Press repeatedly asked over two days.
   But when Ban came to speak after briefing the Council, the questioners chosen were AP, CBS (or, the UN's Censorship Alliance), Bloomberg and Voice of America. While noting as an aside that Voice of America tried ot get the investigative Press thrown out of Ban's UN, in a request to Ban's now-spokesman,click here, big picture, all four questioners selected by / for Ban were Western -- all US-based, in fact. Ban was not asked about the Svoboda meeting.
   Moments later, Inner City Press asked outgoing Security Council president for March Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg about Ban meeting Svoboda. She said, among other things, that You should have asked the Secretary General.
  But how? We'll have more on this.
   On March 27 when the UN General Assembly voted on a resolution rejecting the Crimea referendum, it was far from unanimous. There were 100 countries for, 11 against and fully 58 abstaining.
  Afterward, Inner City Press asked Russia Ambassador Vitaly Churkin about citation in the meeting of Kosovo as a precedent, and about UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon having met the leader of the Svoboda Party.
  Churkin took issue with a high US official claiming there was a referendum in Kosovo, and expressed concern about Ban meeting with a party deemed among other things racist and anti-Semitic.
   Inner City Press ran, before 12:10 pm, to the UN noon briefing in order to ask these and other questions. But Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq had begun and ended the briefing before 12:09. 
   This contrasts to Ban's Spokesperson's Office having, for example in October 2013, delayed the noon briefing so thata(nother) country's speech could be covered, click here for that.
  When asked on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Accesswhat the Spokesperson's Office policy is, Haq said, "You want a policy where it's all about you." We'll have more on this.
  In the GA meeting beyond Kosovo, Nicaragua cited the Honduras coup as an analogy. St. Vincent's cited Grenada, saying the positions are reversed but abstaining because the Ukraine resolution is about the principals, not the principles.
  Uruguay cited Kosovo and also the referendum carried out in the Malvinas / Falkland Islands. UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant was in the room, and tweeted at; if there's a response we'll publish.
   Earlier it was 4:25 am in New York and Washington when theInternational Monetary Fund announced its preliminary agreement for a $14 - $18 billion loan program with Ukraine. 
 Inner City Press asked the IMF to confirm or comment on reports that the Ukrainian "increase the price of natural gas for household consumers by an average of 50%" is attributable to the IMF. 
  At the IMF's 9:30 am embargoed briefing, IMF deputy spokesperson William Murray read out the question then said that the program has five components, including energy sector reform.
  He said Ukraine will reduce subsidies to the energy sector, and that current prices in Ukraine are two to three times lower than in neighboring countries. He said, as it did to other questions, that responses were given in a press conference in Kyiv.
 In New York at the UN, a General Assembly meeting started at 10 am. Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin recounted history and said radicals "called the shots" in the change of government. We've noted that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with the leader of the Svoboda party while in Kyiv.
  In Washington later on March 27 the US Congress is expected to act on a $1 billion loan guarantee to Ukraine, but not on the IMF changes the Obama administration requested. Obama Press Secretary Jay Carney issued a statement welcoming the IMF preliminary deal, concluding that "We also remain committed to providing the IMF with the resources it needs – in partnership with Congress – to provide strong support to countries like Ukraine as well as reinforcing the Fund’s governance to reflect the global economy."
 
  Two weeks ago on March 13, the day after several US Senators argued that International Monetary Fund quota reform would have to be approved by Congress to enable the IMF to meaningfully assist Ukraine, Inner City Press asked IMF spokesperson Gerry Rice if this is true. Video here, from Minute 12:05.
  Rice genially said several times that the question couldn't or wouldn't be answered while the IMF mission is “in the field” in Ukraine. He initially gave the same answer to Inner City Press' question that had nothing to do with Ukraine: is it true, as Russia reportedly argued at the most recent G-20 meeting, that quota reform could be accomplished without US approval, under some set of rule changes?
  Rice during the briefing repeated this could not be answered while the mission is in Ukraine. Later it was conveyed that the reform is not possible without US approval. The answer is appreciated: a benefit of asking in person. But Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access) hope to make the online asking of questions work better from now on. 
 And on March 27, for example, IMF deputy spokesperson William Murray read out this question from Inner City Press:
"On Zimbabwe, please confirm IMF is re-opening its office and respond to Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa saying part of the deal included cutting Zimbabwe's wage bill from 70 percent of the budget but this pledge will not be met, 'addressing it overnight would mean very drastic measures which I indicated to them (IMF) I am not prepared to take. That would mean retrenchment of civil servants.'"
  On March 27, Murray said he would not comment directly on what the Finance Minister said, but pointed to a press release we will add a link to.
  Back on March 13 in another non-Ukraine question, Inner City Press asked Rice about a book published earlier this week in Hungary, that the then-economy minister in 2011 told Goldman Sachs that the government would be going to the IMF for a program. Since much currency trading ensued, Inner City Press asked if the IMF has any rules limiting its government interlocutors from trading on or sharing insider information.Video here, from Minute 31:12.
  Rice said there are confidential provisions. But are those only for the contents of communication and not the existence of communications or negotiations? We'll see.
  

Saturday, March 8, 2014

As Chad Eyes Sudan Deal, It Got 300 French Troops to Watch Libya, From Burkina Faso to Francophonie - or , FrancAfrique


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 8 -- While Sudan and its president Omar al Bashir, indicted for genocide by the International Criminal Court, are being criticized by the US if not Herve Ladsous' UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, they're said on the brink of another deal with Chad.

  The Gazette de N'djamena today reports that Chad's President Deby is so upset with Cameroon for hosting former Central African Republic president Bozize that he intends to shift his and Chad's business over to Port Sudan.

  Meanwhile a buzz in the UN is that French bought the acquiescence of Chad, with its two-year Security Council seat, to a UN mission in CAR by committing to send 300 French special forces to Northern Chad to help keep out trouble from Libya. 

  The deal is said to have been cut when Deby last dropped in on Francois Hollande in the Elysee Palace -- it's like a Mafi social club in New Jersey, in the iconic teledrama The Sopranos.

 Meanwhile another French ally under fire, in Burkina Faso, is said to be vying to a soft landing atop La Francophonie. But the current occupant of the position would have to agree. Tony Soprano -- excuse us, France -- can make that happen.

  On Darfur, amid attacks on civilians in late February, and the blocking of African Union - UN peacekeepers of UNAMID from accessing the sites, the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations under Herve Ladsous in New York had said little.

   Back in July 2013 Ladsous met with Sudan's president Omar al Bashir, indicted for genocide in Darfur by the International Criminal Court, but has refused to say why, despite critiques from some human rights groups, the Press and implicitly Fatou Bensouda, prosecutor of the ICC.  This is Ladsous: film & UK.
  On the morning of March 8 US State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki issued this statement:
We are deeply concerned by the recent escalation of violence by the Sudanese Government-supported Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Darfur. The United States strongly condemns attacks on civilians and calls upon the Government of Sudan to prevent further violence and to cease its own campaign of aerial bombardments.
On February 27th, the RSF, with media reports of support from the Sudanese Air Force, burned homes and attacked civilians outside of Nyala, resulting in multiple casualties and thousands of displaced civilians in Darfur. On February 23rd members of the RSF attacked and robbed internally displaced persons from the Kalma Camp in South Darfur, according to media reports. The Government of Sudan has refused to allow UNAMID peacekeepers access to the area to investigate these incidents.
We urge the Government of Sudan to uphold its commitments and allow UNAMID peacekeepers unhindered and immediate access to these areas, as mandated by the African Union and the United Nations.
The people of Darfur have suffered insecurity, violence and atrocities for far too long. Together with the international community, we urge the Government of Sudan and the armed movements active in Darfur to begin an inclusive and comprehensive political dialogue to achieve a peaceful resolution to the conflicts in Sudan and reestablish the rule of law.

   But where is Ladsous' DPKO? 
  Back on February 4, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's lead spokesperson Martin Nesirkyabout a full-on critique of UN Peacekeeping's Darfur mission by its former spokesperson, Aicha Elbasri:
Inner City Press: On Darfur, maybe you have something on the Government ordering the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) to suspend operations. And I also wanted to know if there’s any response from the UN to former UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur] spokesperson Aicha Elbasri. She’s gone public, saying basically that, while serving as spokesperson of UNAMID, she wasn’t given information; that the Mission under-reports abuses of civilians and other developments in Darfur. I wanted to know, what’s the response of the UN to that?
Spokesperson Nesirky: I’d have to check with the Department of Peacekeeping Operations on both of those.
  So, respecting that, Inner City Press waited. The answers weren't directly provided by e-mail as the UN does with other, but read out at the noon briefing, apparently to see if anyone else might report more positively on them (no one did)
"we were asked about reporting by the African Union–UN Mission on developments in Darfur. UNAMID notes that it reports verified information on the situation in Darfur to the United Nations and to the African Union on a daily basis. This information is then made public in the Secretary-General’s quarterly reports to the Security Council and, as the situation warrants, in press statements."
  To a casual or ill-informed listener, it sounded like a legitimate answer. But as the UN and its Department of Peacekeeping Operations under Herve Ladsous know, this is part of Aicha Elbasri's critique:
"On 24 April I resigned from UNAMID and wrote my end-of-mission report requesting the Department of Peacekeeping Operations to look into UNAMID’s violations of the UN Public Information policy which calls for open, transparent and honest information-sharing with the media. I didn't receive any response. On past August, I requested the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services to open an investigation into the matter. The information I shared with them should have made anyone who cares about the people of Darfur and the UN values and policies jump, call me and take a quick action. What I received so far is a deafening silence. And I can no longer wait, because every day that goes by, more men, women and children die in Darfur in total impunity and invisibility. So today I will break the UN code of conduct and share with you some confidential photos and information that show the African Union, the United Nations and UNAMID’ conspiracy of silence."
  Surely Ladsous' DPKO (and Carman Lapointe's OIOS) know what Aicha Elbasri submitted. But the public response was as set forth above.
  Ban Ki-moon tried to send his former speechwriter Michael Meyer to Sudan as communications chief of UNAMID; it never happened. Now Meyer is in Nairobi, "dean of the graduate school of media and communications at Aga Khan University." On the ICRC, Inner City Press checked and has found that inquiry was made - by the ICRC, not the UN -- with Sudan's "HAC." We'll have more on all this. Watch this site.