Mugabe Out As Goodwill Ambassador of WHO, Guterres Was Silent, Echo of Biya & N Korea Cyanide

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 21 – Responding to the outrage at Robert Mugabe being named a Goodwill Ambassador of the World Health Organization, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has now rescindedthe appointment, here. During the controversy, the head of the UN system Antonio Guterres was notably silent. He heads the system, but is not providing leadership, at the very least not publicly. The UN often blames similar absurdities on "member states" - WHO, in this cases, responded. But unlike the UN's cover up of bringing cholera to Haiti, its cover up in Cameroon including with threats to the Press and its assistance to North Korean cyanide, this was a simple matter of dropping an outside party, not the UN's own sins. The latter, the UN has a strong aversion to, including under Guterres. Earlier this year when Inner City Press asked Guterres spokespeople  why the UN World Intellectual Property Organization provides help to North Korea for patents on cyanide, the UN refused to comment, just as it did on retaliation by Francis Gurry against whistleblowers at WIPO and other UN system agencies. Several Inner City Press readers have recently mused that perhaps Guterres will give some goodwill position to Cameroon's Paul Biya, like Mugabe a "long time President," in Biya's case for 34 years. This as the UN delivered a threat to Inner City Press to “review” it accreditation on Friday afternoon at 5 pm. The UN official who signed the letter, when Inner City Press went to ask about the undefined violation of live-streaming Periscope video at a photo op by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, had already left, minutes after sending the threat. What to make of the letter's vague statement, "filming and recording on the 38th floor are limited to official photo opportunities, and recording conversations of others in the room is not permitted. It has been brought to our attention that you breached that rule recently"? It's not only vague as to when, but absurd: once a Periscope is authorized to start streaming, it is impossible to not record someone who speaks loudly at the photo op. This comes two days after Inner City Press asked Guterres about the UN inaction on threatened genocide in Cameroon, and the UN claimed Guterres hadn't heard the 15-second long question.  Recently at a photo op, Guterres' adviser on Cameroon Khassim Diagne spoke loudly. Inner City Press later reported, based on sourcing, that Diagne who was previously the representative to Cameroon for UNHCR, the UN refugee agency Guterres ran, speaks in favor of Cameroon's government. Is this letter a response to the reporting? Is it retaliation? Is it intimidation to stop reporting on this threatened genocide? We can't ask the complainant, Maher Nasser: after the threat was delivered, he blocked Inner City Pres on Twitter, here.

  It also comes after Alison Smale the head of the Department of Public Information which would “review” Inner City Press' accreditation has ignored three separatepetitions from Inner City Press in the six weeks she has been in the job, urging her to remove restrictions on Inner City Press' reporting which hinder its coverage of the UN's performance in such crises as Yemen, Kenya,Myanmar, and the Central African Republic where Guterres travels next week, with Smale's DPI saying its coverage of the trip will be a test of its public relations ability. But the UN official who triggered the complaint is Maher Nasser, who filled in for Smale before she arrived. 

UN's Letter Threatening to Review Inner City Press' Accreditation for Audio Report While Staking Out on Cam... by Matthew Russell Lee on Scribd

His complaint is that audio of what he said to Inner City Press as it staked out the elevators in the UN lobby openly recording, as it has for example with Cameroon's Ambassador Tommo Monthe, here, was similarly published. 

A UN “Public Information” official is complaining about an article, and abusing his position to threaten to review Inner City Press' accreditation. The UN has previously been called out for targeting Inner City Press, and for having no rules or due process. But the UN is entirely UNaccountable, impunity on censorship as, bigger picture, on the cholera it brought to Haiti. And, it seems, Antonio Guterres has not reformed or reversed anything. This threat is from an official involved in the last round of retaliation who told Inner City Press on Twitter to be less "negative" about the UN - amid inaction on the mass killing in Cameroon - and who allowed pro-UN hecking of Inner City Press' questions about the cholera the UN brought to Haiti and the Ng Lap Seng /John Ashe UN bribery scandal which resulted in six guilty verdicts. We'll have more on this.

UN General Assembly Debate Schedule Has Ukraine & Egypt, Mugabe & Sri Lanka, Abbas & Kiir: A September to Remember?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 31 -- When UN General Assembly week begins on September 24, US President Barack Obama will speak second after Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, as before. But according to the scheduled Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access are today putting online here, then things get more interesting.

The head of state of Morocco, presumably the King, is scheduled for that same first morning, along with France's Francois Hollande and Argentina's Cristina Kirchner. That afternoon starts with Evo Morales of Bolivia, which has just declared Israel a terrorist state.

Thursday, September 25 has the head of state of Iran, presumbly Hassan Rouhani, and then back to back Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and President Sisi of Egypt. That afternoon has for example Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka, as well as Joseph Kabila of the DRC and Erdogan of Turkey.

On Friday, September 26, the head of state of the State of Palestine, Mahmood Abbas, is on the schedule; in the afternoon there's Haiti, Venezuela, Serbia and Nepal.

Saturday, deep into the General Debate, Russia and China go back to back represented by ministers, as is Security Council member Australia. The afternoon has Salva Kiir of South Sudan but from Burundi, the Vice President.

Monday, September 29 has the Deputy Prime Minister of Syria and ministers from Thailand and Bahrain. The afternoon has Malaysia.

The final day, September 30, has the Head of Government of Israel and a minister from Sudan in the morning; in the afternoon a minister of North Korea or the Democratic People Republic of Korea as well as Myanmar. And then it's over, or should be. Watch this site.

   

On ICC, Request by African Union Not Yet Filed With UNSC, Kenya Ambassador Tells Inner City Press, FUNCA on Ban Ki-moon's UNlisted Calls

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, October 18 -- Amid conflicting reports about a request to the UN Security Council to defer the International Criminal Court's Kenya case or cases, Inner City Press on Friday asked Kenya's Permanent Representative Macharia Kamau if the formal request had been filed.

  No, he told exclusively Inner City Press, adding that it not a move by Kenya, but by the African Union.

  Inner City Press noted that Ambassador Kamau was scheduled to meet with Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson later in the morning. Yes, Ambassador Kamau replied, but not about the ICC, about the other issues back home.

On October 14, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesikry:

Inner City Press: there's a report that says that the Secretary-General called a number of the Presidents in attendance [at the AU] and told them that he would use his position to amend the Rome Statute... it also includes the response of one of the Presidents, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, saying that the Secretary-General has no ability to amend the Rome Statute. Is it? Could we get just a factual readout of who he called in connection with that AU summit?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I will check. What we will be able to say: the Secretary-General certainly did make a number of telephone calls, but I don’t think that we will be going into the details of those calls.

Inner City Press: What about just WHO he called?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I can tell you that a number of telephone calls were made, and not just by the Secretary-General.

The Free UN Coalition for Access @FUNCA_info believes that as a matter of transparency, such calls by the UN Secretary General should be disclosed. Selectively disclosing some but not all calls to heads of state turns the UN (further) into a House of Spin. Watch this site.

   

UN GA Schedule Has Iran, Chavez & Sri Lanka, Syria on Last Day, Qatar on First

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 14 -- After next month's UN General Assembly is kicked off on the morning of Tuesday, September 25 by Brazil's Dilma Rousseff and US President Barack Obama, then things get interesting. Inner City Press is putting the Provisional List of Speakers online here.

  The next day, Iran's head of state Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to speak in the morning. Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa starts that afternoon's session, which includes Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe.

  Also on the afternoon of September 26 is Rwanda's President Paul Kagame, followed the next morning by Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with the so-called M23 mutineers probably still on the agenda.

  But another son-of-a-leader, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, is not scheduled to come. Syria is related to what some call "garbage time" the next week and even month. On Monday, October 1, Syria is penciled in at only the Ministerial level.

  The same is true of the world's most populous democracy, India: only a minister will come, on October 1. Ethiopia, perhaps not surprisingly, plans to send its Deputy Prime Minister, on Friday, September 28 -- the same day Venezuela's Head of State -- Hugo Chavez? -- is scheduled to speak.

  Evo Morales of Bolivia is the last speaker on September 26, perhaps ready with the coca leaf he's waved before. Palestine is the last speaker on the morning of September 27 -- will another announcement be made?

  Turkey, which roughed up UN Security during Mahmoud Abbas' presentation last year, is set this year for the first day, but not in the premium time between Barack Obama and, well, France's new president Francois Hollande.

  In that Tuesday morning space is Qatar, armer of rebels everywhere, and Serbia whose Vuk Jeremic will have taken over the presidency of the the General Assembly from Qatar. 

  Morocco is in there, in the midst of its supposed dispute with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about his Western Sahara envoy Christopher Ross.

  Also Tuesday morning there is Cyprus, which holds the presidency of the European Union (whose own spot comes on the next afternooon), Georgia, Indonesia and Bulgaria, sure to talk about this summer's terrorist attack.

Tuesday afternoon, beyond Turkey, has Finland (which isrunning for a Security Council seat against Australia -- confined to Thursday -- and Luxembourg). There are also Argentina sure to talk about the Malvinas, and Myanmar, unlikely to meaningfully address the abused Rohingyas.

What will have happened with the Rohingyas, with Assad and M23, by this debate in late September? Watch this site.

UN Shrugs at Zimbabwe Amnesty Draft as Ban's Envoy is Barred from Harare

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban2zim080808.html

UNITED NATIONS, August 8 -- The UN's and Ban Ki-moon's approach to Zimbabwe has grown more soft or distant. On August 7, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas about the draft agreement between Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai which reportedly "would grant amnesty for every Zimbabwean who, in the course of upholding or opposing the aims of ZANU-PF or Zimbabwe, committed crimes within Zimbabwe. Since the United Nations is involved through Mr. Haile Menkerios, does it have any view on whether that blanket amnesty is acceptable?"

Despite the UN's usual mouthing of the mantra of the end of impunity, Ms. Montas declined to comment on the amnesty provisions, stating instead that "we are not part of the negotiation, which is led, as you know, by President Thabo Mbeki. At this point, the negotiations, as far as I know, Mr. Mbeki is supposed to go back there but so far, Mr. Menkerios is in Pretoria, still discussing the different issues." Video here.

But when, the very next day, it was reported that Mugabe has blocked the UN's Haile Menkerios from visiting Zimbabwe, Ms. Montas was that "we are not involved directly" and that she was not aware of Menkerios being blocked.

Some found this strange, given that it has been reported in the South African press that

"Zimbabwe's permanent representative to the UN, Boniface Chidyausiku, confirmed that Menkerios was blocked from visiting Harare. 'The talks have now reached a delicate stage and we don’t want any interference. Why does he want to engage in a parallel process?' he said. Diplomatic sources said Menkerios -- who was due in Harare today -- was told by Zimbabwean authorities... that even if he arrived there, no official would meet him and his visit would not be regarded as authorized... UN spokesman Farahan Haq said yesterday Menkerios was in Pretoria and 'arrangements are still being made for his visit' to Zimbabwe. UN representative in Harare Agostinho Zacarias is expected to travel to Pretoria today to meet Menkerios."

It's worth noting that just after the U.S.-sponsored sanctions resolution failed due to Russia's and China's double veto, Ban through Ms. Montas harshly criticized Amb. Boniface Chidyausiku for questioning the objectivity and impartiality of the UN's Department of Political Affairs, click here for that.

Later on August 7, Inner City Press asked U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad for the U.S. position on amnesty for Mugabe. His answer was long, but he did not address amnesty until he was walking away from the stakeout, when he deployed the "we are against impunity" phrase. Video here, at end. His pre-walkaway answer, from the U.S. mission's transcript:

Inner City Press: There are reports of this draft power sharing agreement between Mugabe and Tsvangirai that would provide for blanket amnesty for all crimes committed in the past. Given the US's position in the sanctions resolution that didn’t pass, what does the US think of a power sharing agreement that provides for blanket amnesty.

Ambassador Khalilzad: Well first we have to see that there is an agreement that restores legitimacy to Zimbabwe. There is a crisis of legitimacy there because of did not happen and what happened there in the second round of elections. Whatever happens has to respect the results of March the first round and two has to be acceptable to the opposition and we will have to see. And second there is also a crisis of the humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe. Still there are conditions on NGO operations in Zimbabwe. Those need to be removed and removed immediately. So we want these negotiations to succeed, we want there to be a path to establishment of legitimate order in Zimbabwe.

We thought the way to bring that about was to put pressure on Mr. Mugabe and those responsible for the crisis by putting focused sanctions on them. But some thought that no, that is not the best way, and that the best way is to proceed without sanctions. So the burden is on those who disagreed with our approach to produce results. And I think we are not there yet. We haven't seen anything that can assure us that both the crisis of political legitimacy and the crisis of humanitarian assistance to the people of Zimbabwe is being effectively addressed, yet. But, you know we will see. We will see what happens. Thank you very much.

Then, in response to a shouted follow-up about amnesty, he said that the U.S. is against impunity.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban2zim080808.html

Zimbabwe Opposition Calls UN Agencies Complicit, Not Helping Refugees, Council Action Blocked

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN

www.innercitypress.com/un1zimmdc042908.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 29 -- The funds and programs of the UN have been "complicit" and "incestuous" with the Robert Mugabe government in Zimbabwe, Tendai Biti of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change told the press on Tuesday. Following a closed-door briefing of the Security Council by UN political chief Lynn Pascoe, UK Deputy Permanent Representative Karen Pierce emerged to predict that in May, when the UK has the Council presidency, an open meeting on the topic will be held. Inner City Press asked her for the UK's response to the MDC's critique of UN agencies' support of Mugabe. Amb. Pierce focused on the UN's food and other humanitarian aid. She did not address the degree to which such aid, particular the "capacity building" offered without standards by the UN Development Program, may serve to prop up what the UK calls regimes or dictatorships, in Zimbabwe, Myanmar and elsewhere.

Inner City Press' question to Mr. Biti resulted in his description of the MDC office on Nelson Mandela Avenue in Harare being full of "internal refugees," compared to a near-empty UN space he described nearby. UK Ambassador Pierce said she had not been aware of this. She is, however, in a position to do something about it.

U.S. Deputy Permanent Representative Alejandro Wolff was asked, " Zimbabwe's Ambassadors made a lot – a number of times made the comparison to Florida in 2000 and said this is a vote dispute. Do you see anything to that analogy? They're saying it took six weeks then, why not six weeks for them? "

Ambassador Wolff replied, as transcribed by the U.S. mission, "I'm not even going to comment. It’s a ludicrous comparison and all you have to do is talk to the Zimbabwean opposition and see what their views are on how America conducts its elections." But are they the right one's to ask?

South African Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo, responding to Wolff's comments, said that countries have elections, some of them do it well, some not so well. He noted that SADC and the African Union are involved, and that the Mugabe government has invited a team from the World Food Program to come and visit the country. As to the UN's so-called "good offices," Kumalo said this should not be discussed in the Security Council, or on camera outside of the Council. Quiet diplomacy is what he said is needed, not unlike what China says it is doing in Darfur. When Biti said that some countries are "playing ping-pong" with the people of Zimbabwe, it was to China that one correspondents mutterings turned. Formal Council action on Zimbabwe was blocked. Russia said the matter did not belong in the Council.

Some wondered how the MDC, a self-described non-state actor, came to speak on UN Television at the Security Council stakeout. In the past, Western Sahara's Polisario Front, a non-state actor that is party to a Security Council monitored negotiation, had the plug pulled as they spoke at the stakeout. The MDC, some noted, was supported by the United States, which also set up a meeting at its mission for Mr. Biti late on Tuesday. Some UN cynics wondered how helpful it will be, in the long run, to be so closely aligned with the U.S. and the UK. Only time will tell.

Footnote: an Inner City Press present at the UNCTAD meeting in Accra, Ghana recounts that the meeting between the UN's BAN and MDC's leader Morgan Tsvangirai did not look planned in advance. "He just button-holed the S-G," the source marveled. "Then it was claimed as an example of diplomacy." Whatever it takes...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1zimmdc042908.html

On Deby's Chad Evictions, France Offers then Amends Defense, Claims No Deal on Zoe's Ark

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1francechad041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- France's relations with Chad and Idriss Deby were on display Wednesday at the UN, both in what how its Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert answered on-the-record questions from Inner City Press about mass evictions in N'Djamena and the pardon and release of the Zoe's Ark staff members following their conviction for abducting 103 children, and in how its mission (mis) transcribed Ripert's remarks. The exchange began with Inner City Press asking about reports of evictions after Deby was "almost overthrown in February." Amb. Ripert immediately took issue with this phrasing, saying, "You mean in February when rebels tried to cease power by force against Deby, the elected President of Chad?" Of course, Deby himself took power the same way that the rebels tries.

But on the evictions, Ripert said, "whatever happens in the operations done in N'Djamena, he should do that in respecting the rule of law and the legislation of Chad. if you known N'Djamena, you how it is a very small city and it is difficult to accommodate everyone so the question is not is he allowed to do that, the question is how is it done concretely for the people living these difficult times in Chad." Video here, from Minute 5:44.

The "it" in Ripert's phrase, from the question, signifies evictions. Why isn't it a question of whether he can do it? How is this different from Robert Mugabe's Operation Murambatsvina / Take Out the Trash in Zimbabwe, which France criticized?

The French mission's transcription of Ripert's remarks different from what's actually shown in the video, putting these words in Ripert's mouth: " whatever happens in the operations done in N'Djamena, he should do that in respecting the rule of law and the legislation of Chad. The question is not how did he allow to do that: the question is how it is done concretely for the people who are living." Click here for the French mission's full transcription as sent to media.

The omission of Ripert's statement about N'djamena being so small that not everyone can be accommodated (thereby seeming to justify evictions) and the switch from what he said -- "it is not a question of if he is can do that" -- to "the question is not how did he allow to do that" both operate, after the fact, to make Ripert's defense of Deby's evictions less apparent. Inner City Press has made similar findings in UN in-house transcripts, for example about the UN in Somlia, but until now has taken the French mission's transcripts at face value.

Inner City Press also asked about Deby's pardon and France's release of the Zoe's Ark staff convicted of kidnapping, and whether as has been reported that was any quid pro quo, for France to help defend Deby from the rebels in exchange for Deby pardoning the French citizens. Ripert denied not only a deal, but even any negotiations, even according to the transcript: " there was absolutely no negotiation, no exchange and there is no commitment of the French Government to pay any kind of money that those people hold from the families of those victims."
This was later clarified to mean, France might collect the money for Chad, but it would be coming from the social workers -- perhaps, it was suggested, from the advance and royalties Eric Breteau is said to be receiving for a book about the case. Breteau has alleged that the French government knew what he and his colleagues, including the good doctor Philippe Van Winkelberg, were doing. We'll see.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1francechad041008.html