UK Ambassador to US Westmacott Pitches British Missiles for US Drones, French Veolia from OPT Settlements to OPCW Syria

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 17 -- While the UK at the UN in New York talks peace, the UK Ambassador to the US Peter Westmacott published a promotional article on February 14 entitled, "Why the U.S. Should Use British Missiles on Reaper Drones." Click here to view.

The article gushes that "the U.S. military has just finished testing a British-designed missile, the Dual-Mode Brimstone. The tests successfully proved that the Brimstone is compatible with one of America’s main unmanned aerial vehicles, the Reaper."

  It was re-tweeted by @MBDAIncUSA, whose Twitter profile is "MBDA Inc: Global leader in missiles and missile systems. Arlington VA, Westlake Village, CA & Hunstville, AL Global · brimstonemissile.com." This is the British firm, emphasizing its plants in Virginia, California and Alabama.

  Couldn't the UK government find someone else to so openly pitch drone missiles? 

   Meanwhile on February 16 in Paris, French prime minister Ayrault met with representatives of Siemens, Volvo, General Electric and Nestlé -- but not Veolia, the French firm which (also fronting as US based, through a subsidiary) recently got the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons contract in Syria. 

  UNmentioned was the Veolia also does business in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, click herefor that Inner City Press story. Much much France is being paid by in UN -- that is, global taxpayers' -- money under a confidential "Letter of Assist" for airfield services in its former colony Mali has not yet been disclosed, by the UN or France.

  Today, French president Francois Hollande and his Council on Attractiveness also featuring Laurent Fabuis hosts yet more companies. With French diplomat Herve Ladsous installed as the fourth Frenchman in a row atop UN Peacekeeping, it's a drone, drone world. Watch this site.

   

Before Global Model UN, Financial Sponsors' Names Disappear, Malaysia on Refugees

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/gmun1malaysia020410.html

UNITED NATIONS, February 4 -- As the UN promotes its upcoming Global Model United Nations, to be held in Malaysia, questions arose about previous corporate sponsorships of the event, and of some participants' travel. Inner City Press asked UN official Eric Falt about listed 2009 "sponsors" including Nestle and AIG affiliate C.V. Starr. Video here, from Minute 31:13.

Falt said he thought the deal with Nestle had fallen through, and hadn't heard of "the other" sponsor, AIG's C.V. Starr. Later he sent the following explanation:

With regard to Nestle, we had been in discussion with them last year to possibly sponsor students from developing countries who could not afford to attend the first conference in Geneva. In this end, this did not happen but the information relating to their expected sponsorship somehow remained on the website. As an admittedly late update, Nestle's name has now been removed from the website as a sponsor.

Since students are responsible for paying their own expenses (i.e., travel and accommodations), we encouraged them to seek their own funding from local enterprises. The names of other sponsors you mentioned who were also listed as “SPONSORS who provided financial assistance to Global Model UN Delegates” were provided to us by the students themselves. The United Nations did not have any direct connection with any of these sponsors. In any case, I would agree that this is potentially confusing and we have therefore removed this list of "secondary" sponsors from the website as well.

We're not sure that the solution to this "confusion" is to remove information about who is paying to fly delegates to the Global Model UN. If AIG (or Nestle) is paying, it should be known.

During the press conference, Mr. Falt said that the UN reviews potential corporate sponsor under rules promulgated by the UN Global Compact -- it's not "anything goes," he said. But the Global Compact has as a member, for example, PetroChina which is under fire for its engagement with the Al Bashir government of Sudan. If there are standards, what are they? And is the solution removing the names of sponsors, even "secondary" sponsors, from the UN's website?

Inner City Press also asked Malaysia's Ambassador about human rights complaints against his country for treatment of refugees, and crackdowns on free press. He graciously responded that these must be seen in the "context of the country itself... we have three major groups, and many smaller." He said that although Malaysia has not joined the Refugee convention, it still implements. But there are stories of mistreatment of asylum seekers, for example from Myanmar, here.

Will these type of issues -- UN engagement with corporations like Nestle, AIG or even PetroChina, and the host country's treatment of asylum seekers, for example from Myanmar -- be allowed to be debated at the 2010 Global Model UN? We'll see. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/gmun1malaysia020410.html

At UN, Holmes Denies UK Slows Somali Aid, Five Small CERF Deadbeats, HSBC for Gaza

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/cerf1somalia120909.html

UNITED NATIONS, December 9 -- The UN's humanitarian coordinator John Holmes, in his previous life a UK diplomat, on Wednesday told the Press that he is "not aware that the UK government has followed [the] example" of the United States in slowing aid to Somalia following concerns of diversion. Video here, from Minute 4:48.

But on December 8, the Office in Charge for Somalia of the Food and Agriculture Organization, Graham Farmer, told the Press that not only the U.S., but also the UK have slowed their aid based on these concerns.

The UK's Minister of State for International Development Gareth Thomas, speaking to the Press earlier on December 9, was asked for the UK's position on the claim by the African Group that they had been promised the number two post in the UN Development Program. He declined to comment on the fact that the UNDP top was given this week to Rebecca Grynspan, a decidedly non African Costa Rican.

In response to another question, about his praise of Fair Trade certification for the Nestle Kit Kat chocolate bar despite non governmental organizations' call for a boycott of Nestle for child labor, water overuse and breast milk issues, he said the government is trying to get UK supermarkets to source six percent of their goods from Africa. Video here, from Minute 13:12.

He also would not comment on the UK's attempts in the UN's Fifth Committee to change the "scale of assessment" to pay relatively less into the UN's budget.

On Holmes' office's chart of donors to the UN Central Emergency Relief Fund, the UK is on top, albeit paying 15% less in 2009 that in 2007 and 2008. At the bottom of the list are several relatively small countries such has Tuvalu, Benin and St. Lucia which have given one or two thousand dollars. Holmes said these are signs of political support.

The Maldives, much in the news these days for having its ministers meet underwater to publicize climate change, pledged a thousand dollars in both 2007 and 2008, but has not paid on either pledge. El Salvador pledge two thousand dollars in 2007 but still has not paid. The other "deadbeats," as reporters called them, are Djibouti, Haiti and Mongolia. The last of these has sent doctors to Darfur.

On the corporate side, HSBC Bank Middle East Limited contributed $10,000. Inner City Press asked Holmes about it, and he said "I think there's a link there probably to Gaza." Video here, from Minute 6:14.

HSBC is known to have branches in the unregulated Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Meanwhile, UNICEF uses a bank on the terror sanctions list, just as UNRWA was exposed as doing earlier this year. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/cerf1somalia120909.html

As UNHCR Pulls Back from Deal with Nestle, It Fudges on Future Bluewashing

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unhcr4nestle112709.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 27 -- Two weeks ago, the UN's refugee agency told Inner City Press on the record that despite Nestle's alleged involvement in child labor in Cote d'Ivoire and abusive water practices, "we are in discussion with Nestle about cooperation on future projects that will help deliver clean water and support small scale farming initiatives for refugees."

Inner City Press published an article about this prospective "bluewashing," citing non governmental organizations which had made UNHCR aware of their concerns about Nestle record.

On November 22, UNHCR sent the NGOs two messages, first that "there is currently no plan for an agreement with Nestlé but we do not rule out the possibility in the future." Asked a follow up by the NGOs to confirm that no deal would be announced in late November, UNHCR's Sybelle Wilkes replied that "I can confirm that there is no agreement and no planned agreement."

Inner City Press asked Ms. Wilkes and Ms. Melissa Fleming, in light of her earlier in the month "we are in discussion with Nestle about cooperation," to confirm the last assurance to the NGOs, that there is "no planned agreement" between UNHCR and Nestle.

But Ms. Fleming said she was traveling, and Ms. Wilkes would not confirm her own earlier statement, instead stating "I'm writing to follow up on a question you sent to Melissa Fleming. I can confirm that there is no agreement with Nestle, but UNHCR does not rule out the possibility in the future." Why wouldn't she say for the record what she'd told the NGOs, that there is "no planned agreement"? Can UNHCR be trusted? Why stonewall? Why fudge?

In fact, UNHCR came under fire this month in the UN budget committee, for failing to provide documentation for many of its expenditures. There are many well meaning people working for UNHCR, but the way the agency is being run is not consistent.

And Nestle, under fire for its participating in the UN's CEO Water Mandate as well as UN Global Compact, has a history of paying money to try to make problems go away. Previously it demanded compensation from Ethiopia for a subsidiary nationalized decades ago, then tried to diminish the backlash with a donation to UNHCR. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unhcr4nestle112709.html

In UN Water, Questions of Coke and Nestle by Press Prove UN Is Fair, UN Claims

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/uncorp1water110809.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 8 -- "Water is the new carbon," the UN's Nikhil Chandavarkar told the Press on November 6. Following a debate in the UN General Assembly's Second Committee, he told a press conference that it is important to "set a price for water."

Inner City Press asked him about criticism of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's "CEO Water Mandate" for inviting in corporations like Coca-Cola, Suez and Nestle which are accused of negative impacts on lower income people. Video here, from Minute 38:56.

Chandavarkar said the while the CEO Water Mandate came out of the UN Global Compact, it is not the UN's role to assess particular corporations' behavior, including with respect to water. He said that the UN views the private sector of "one of the nine major groups" and tried to give corporations' view an airing.

When Inner City Press followed up asking if corporations really get only one-ninth of the voice and power on the issue, Chandavarkar turned the questions around. That NGOs protested to Ban about his CEO Water Mandate, he said with a smile, is "a tribute to the UN." Video here, from Minute 41:18.

Chandavarkar went further, telling Inner City Press that the "very fact that you are able to raise the issue shows that we are getting the airing from them."

Apparently the argument is that Inner City Press should be so grateful for being "able to raise the issue" that... it shouldn't raise the issue. And the NGOs who wrote to Ban Ki-moon should realize that this is being used by the UN against their position.

They said that "through the CEO Water Mandate, the U.N. is helping to advance corporate control of water.” The UN says that the letter proves that the UN is fair. Only at the UN...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/uncorp1water110809.html

On Blood Chocolate, Nestle and Child Trackiffing, Does UN Act in Cote d'Ivoire or through its Global Compact?

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unblood1nestle101409.html

UNITED NATIONS, October 14 -- As Halloween approaches in the United States, when tons of chocolates will be bought and handed out as treats, at the UN an organization Stop the Traffik held a briefing and was asked about child labor in cocoa production in Cote d'Ivoire. The group's web site asks, "Nestle, What Are You Doing?"

Inner City Press asked, since Nestle is a member of the UN Global Compact, about human rights and fair labor, what is the UN doing? And since the UN has 7000 peacekeepers in Cote d'Ivoire, what has it done on the child labor and trafficking issue? Video here, from Minute 24:33.

Steve Chalke, the founder of Stop the Traffik and "UN.GIFT's Special Advisor on Community Action against Human Trafficking" at first answered that Nestle is not the problem, the industry is the problem. But them he went on to praise Cadbury and Mars, at least in the UK and Australia, for making commitments which Nestle has yet to make.

Simone Monasebian, Chief of New York Office of UN Office on Drugs and Crime, did not answer about the UN Global Compact or about UN Peacekeeping in Cote d'Ivoire. (The UN's envoy there, Choi Young-jin, reads his mandate so narrowly that on October 13 he declined to comment not only the the Trafigura toxic waste scandal, but also the timing of elections). Rather, Ms. Monasebian said that UNODC gets only 10 percent of its funds from the UN's regular budget. The rest, she said, is voluntary and earmarked. If Member States gave money for this issue, UNODC would do more.

She mentioned that the last President of the General Assembly Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann named two facilitators to being informal consultations toward a global plan of action on the topic, and that some say current PGA Ali Treki has named a third facilitator.

Inner City Press asked PGA Treki's spokesman about this at the noon briefing, he said he hadn't heard, to ask the Third Committee. But people say that the Ambassador of Tunisia has been named. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unblood1nestle101409.html