Showing posts with label ramallah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ramallah. Show all posts

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Ban Ki-moon's Trip Starts in Qatar But No Gaza, Still, UN Won't Confirm to Inner City Press Free Use of Qatari Plane


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 19, more here -- On the day UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is to "travel to the region" of Israel and Palestine, diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban will fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.

  At 6:20 on July 19, the UN announced "The Secretary-General is traveling to the Middle East this weekend to express solidarity with Israelis and Palestinians and to help them, in coordination with regional and international actors, to end the violence and find a way forward. To that end, he will begin his travel on Sunday in Doha, Qatar. From there, he will travel onward to Kuwait City, Cairo, Jerusalem, Ramallah and Amman in his effort to encourage a durable cease-fire. Other stops may also be added. He will return to New York by the end of the week."

   There was no answer, yet, on the use of a Qatari plane. The diplomats who complained to Inner City Press questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

   Ban's spokesman has responded but not yet answered.

 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:

"Please state whether the Secretary General is accepting free transportation from any member state or outside party for his current trip to the region concerning the Gaza crisis, and if so please explain the reason and any safeguards in place against influence or conflict of interest.
"Such disclosure should be common practice; if necessary, note that former Spokesperson Nesirky did answer such Press questions, for example concerning the Secretary General flying on a UAE plane (see sample below). On deadline, thank you in advance.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Your questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM

- The UAE Government provided an aircraft to fly the Secretary-General from Beirut to Abu Dhabi because of time constraints.
     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Press question if SG is accepting free travel from any member state or outside party, as was disclosed in 2012, on deadline, thanks
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress [dot] com
Cc: FUNCA [at] funca.info
Dear Matthew, Thanks for your question and thanks for the draft answer. The logistical details of the SG's trip, including the travel arrangements are still being worked out. Once we are in a position to confirm them, i will revert.
best
Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
  Inner City Press has thanked Dujarric and his colleagues for the interim response and asked, "both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Poroshenko's office say they have spoken with the Secretary General and give read-outs. Will a UN read-out be put out? If so, when? If not, why not?"
    For now we note that the Qatari foreign ministry has listed on its website, for example, receiving a call from Ban Ki-moon. Earlier on July 19, this came out from Jeddah:
"The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Iyad Ameen Madani, asked the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon to visit the Gaza Strip during his current tour of the region in order to observe first hand the severe damage to innocent human lives, the destructions of homes and infrastructure caused by the unrelenting Israeli raids on Gaza, that have also claimed the lives of hundreds of mostly defenseless Palestinian elderly and children."
  On July 18 after the Gaza meeting of the UN Security Council, the Press was sent "the revised draft resolution that will be put before the Members of the Security Council by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in its capacity as the Arab representative on the Security Council."
  Inner City Press put the document online, here, explicitlycomparing it to Resolution 1860 (2009), which passed because the US abstained but did not veto, as it would later do on settlements. We will stay on this.
  Meanwhile the French government has banned a demonstration planned for July 19 about the situation of Palestinians in Gaza. 
  Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for the UN's position. Haq said "our general point of view on this is that people have a right to peaceful protest.... We'd have to see how this proceeds, you're talking about something to happen in the future."
  But the ban is already in place.
  While the French government predicts that Saturday's demonstration would be violent, that's akin to prior restraint or profiling. There are have peaceful protests about Palestine in France, for example on July 16.
  But from Niger -- appropriately -- Francois Hollande said “we cannot allow the conflict to be imported into France." 
 Is Ban's UN criticizing France? Is a man biting a chien? Whether a formal statement comes out may be the test.
  So how is a statement of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon produced? The question was raised by those, both in the real / outside world and even inside the UN who were surprised by this Ban statement of July 13:
“The Secretary-General, abhorring the images of Israeli families hovering in shelters in fear for their children's safety, repeats his condemnation of Palestinian rockets fired from Gaza and demands an immediate cessation of these indecent attacks. The Secretary-General is also deeply worried about the impact on Palestinian families of Israeli military action.”
   Several UN officials expressed surprise or even "disgust... at putting Israel first despite no deaths versus 180 in Palestine, abhorring the first but only 'deeply worried' about Gazans."
  And so based on complaints and reporting, Inner City Press can say that such statements are said to originate with a desk officer in UN Department of Political Affairs, run by former US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman.

  Then they are reviewed, on the Middle East, by Antonella Caruso, then Feltman, then in Ban's office one Andrew Gilmour. That's how this statement was issued, Inner City Press is informed.
  On July 12 at noon the UN Security Council issued a press statement on Gaza, after several rounds of back and forth. After that, nothing stopped -- nothing at all. 
  Just past noon in New York Inner City Press asked the State of Palestine's Observer Riyad Mansour of the status of the (stronger) draft resolution, and if he expects US Secretary of State John Kerry to mediate or facilitate.
  Mansour said if Israel does not stop, other steps will be taken including in the Security Council.
  Hours later, the Israel Defense Force itself confirmed to Ha'aretz and others that "Israel Navy's Shayetet 13 (Flotilla 13) commando unit raided a target in the Gaza Strip."
  Now what?
  A Gulf media demanded an explanation of the three hour delay, then asked another question to Mansour and the Saudi Ambassador beside him.
  Tellingly, hours later that same Gulf media posted online a story about the UN Security Council press statement quoting Reuters, not present at the stakeout, about the statement.
  Meanwhile, Reuters claimed a (compensated) "exclusive" about Jordan and the US on Syria -- without even mentioning the two countries' negotiations about the Gaza output(s) of the UN Security Council. 
  Informed sources told Inner City Press that while the US, or "Washington," initially said they would accept no Security Council action at this point, once an emergency meeting of the Arab Group moved for a draft resolution, the US changed tack.
  "The US doesn't want to have to veto, so they can continue to point the finger at Russia and China on Syria," as one source put it.  So the US agreed - or was said to agree -- to a press statement calling for a ceasefire.
 
  The source went on "If Israel disregards it and continues, what will the Council do?" What, indeed. 
.
  Inside the Security Council on July 10, Israel's Ron Prosor told BanKi-moon that while he had given his speech, five rockets had been fired at Israel (Prosor played a rocket warning siren on his phone, to make his point.) At the stakeout, on-camera, Prosor raised the number of rockets to six.
  While Palestine's Riyad Mansour spoke on camera, the stakeout was nearly full with journalists. But when Prosor spoke there were far fewer -- one of whom told Inner City Press, “This is a question for FUNCA,” the Free UN Coalition for Access. Again Prosor played the rocket siren warning, and used the line “From Abuja to Falluja.”
  Inner City Press asked Prosor about those who say Hamas is not formally part of the unity government; he replied, “Hamas is Hamas.”
  On Palestine joining or complaining to the International Criminal Court, Inner City Press' question which Ban Ki-moon dodged on July 9, Prosor did not answer. Yet.
  Watch this site.

 
  

UN Won't Yet Confirm to Inner City Press Free Use of Qatari Plane For Ban's Trip to Qatar, Ramallah, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 19, more here -- On the day UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is to "travel to the region" of Israel and Palestine, diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban will fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.

    They questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

   Ban's spokesman has responded but not yet answered.

 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:

"Please state whether the Secretary General is accepting free transportation from any member state or outside party for his current trip to the region concerning the Gaza crisis, and if so please explain the reason and any safeguards in place against influence or conflict of interest.
"Such disclosure should be common practice; if necessary, note that former Spokesperson Nesirky did answer such Press questions, for example concerning the Secretary General flying on a UAE plane (see sample below). On deadline, thank you in advance.
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Subject: Your questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM

- The UAE Government provided an aircraft to fly the Secretary-General from Beirut to Abu Dhabi because of time constraints.

     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:

From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Press question if SG is accepting free travel from any member state or outside party, as was disclosed in 2012, on deadline, thanks
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress [dot] com
Cc: FUNCA [at] funca.info
Dear Matthew, Thanks for your question and thanks for the draft answer. The logistical details of the SG's trip, including the travel arrangements are still being worked out. Once we are in a position to confirm them, i will revert.
best
Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General

  Inner City Press has thanked Dujarric and his colleagues for the interim response and asked, "both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Poroshenko's office say they have spoken with the Secretary General and give read-outs. Will a UN read-out be put out? If so, when? If not, why not?"

    For now we note that the Qatari foreign ministry has listed on its website, for example, receiving a call from Ban Ki-moon. Earlier on July 19, this came out from Jeddah:
"The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Iyad Ameen Madani, asked the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon to visit the Gaza Strip during his current tour of the region in order to observe first hand the severe damage to innocent human lives, the destructions of homes and infrastructure caused by the unrelenting Israeli raids on Gaza, that have also claimed the lives of hundreds of mostly defenseless Palestinian elderly and children."
  On July 18 after the Gaza meeting of the UN Security Council, the Press was sent "the revised draft resolution that will be put before the Members of the Security Council by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in its capacity as the Arab representative on the Security Council."
  Inner City Press put the document online, here, explicitlycomparing it to Resolution 1860 (2009), which passed because the US abstained but did not veto, as it would later do on settlements. We will stay on this.
  Earlier on July 18 In his briefing to the Security Council, Under Secretary General Jeffrey Feltman droned on for five pages until he said Secretary General Ban Ki-moon “will leave for the region tomorrow, to express solidarity with Israelis and Palestinians and to help them, in coordination with regional and international actors, end the violence and find a way forward.”

 At that very moment, Ban was upstairs meeting with an Italian official. Downstairs, former US official Feltman said that the the UN Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, “is stretched to the limit, raising fears that further civilians warned of IDF operations could not be accommodated.” 
  Feltman left until the end of his speech to the Council Ban's plan to travel to the region, starting on Saturday.
  But will Ban be going to Gaza?
  Meanwhile the French government has banned a demonstration planned for July 19 about the situation of Palestinians in Gaza. 
  Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq for the UN's position. Haq said "our general point of view on this is that people have a right to peaceful protest.... We'd have to see how this proceeds, you're talking about something to happen in the future."
  But the ban is already in place.
  While the French government predicts that Saturday's demonstration would be violent, that's akin to prior restraint or profiling. There are have peaceful protests about Palestine in France, for example on July 16.
  But from Niger -- appropriately -- Francois Hollande said “we cannot allow the conflict to be imported into France." 
 Is Ban's UN criticizing France? Is a man biting a chien? Whether a formal statement comes out may be the test.
  So how is a statement of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon produced? The question was raised by those, both in the real / outside world and even inside the UN who were surprised by this Ban statement of July 13:
“The Secretary-General, abhorring the images of Israeli families hovering in shelters in fear for their children's safety, repeats his condemnation of Palestinian rockets fired from Gaza and demands an immediate cessation of these indecent attacks. The Secretary-General is also deeply worried about the impact on Palestinian families of Israeli military action.”
   Several UN officials expressed surprise or even "disgust... at putting Israel first despite no deaths versus 180 in Palestine, abhorring the first but only 'deeply worried' about Gazans."
  And so based on complaints and reporting, Inner City Press can say that such statements are said to originate with a desk officer in UN Department of Political Affairs, run by former US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman.

  Then they are reviewed, on the Middle East, by Antonella Caruso, then Feltman, then in Ban's office one Andrew Gilmour. That's how this statement was issued, Inner City Press is informed.
  On July 12 at noon the UN Security Council issued a press statement on Gaza, after several rounds of back and forth. After that, nothing stopped -- nothing at all. 
  Just past noon in New York Inner City Press asked the State of Palestine's Observer Riyad Mansour of the status of the (stronger) draft resolution, and if he expects US Secretary of State John Kerry to mediate or facilitate.
  Mansour said if Israel does not stop, other steps will be taken including in the Security Council.
  Hours later, the Israel Defense Force itself confirmed to Ha'aretz and others that "Israel Navy's Shayetet 13 (Flotilla 13) commando unit raided a target in the Gaza Strip."
  Now what?
  A Gulf media demanded an explanation of the three hour delay, then asked another question to Mansour and the Saudi Ambassador beside him.
  Tellingly, hours later that same Gulf media posted online a story about the UN Security Council press statement quoting Reuters, not present at the stakeout, about the statement.
  Meanwhile, Reuters claimed a (compensated) "exclusive" about Jordan and the US on Syria -- without even mentioning the two countries' negotiations about the Gaza output(s) of the UN Security Council. 
  Informed sources told Inner City Press that while the US, or "Washington," initially said they would accept no Security Council action at this point, once an emergency meeting of the Arab Group moved for a draft resolution, the US changed tack.
  "The US doesn't want to have to veto, so they can continue to point the finger at Russia and China on Syria," as one source put it.  So the US agreed - or was said to agree -- to a press statement calling for a ceasefire.
 
  The source went on "If Israel disregards it and continues, what will the Council do?" What, indeed. 
.
  Inside the Security Council on July 10, Israel's Ron Prosor told BanKi-moon that while he had given his speech, five rockets had been fired at Israel (Prosor played a rocket warning siren on his phone, to make his point.) At the stakeout, on-camera, Prosor raised the number of rockets to six.
  While Palestine's Riyad Mansour spoke on camera, the stakeout was nearly full with journalists. But when Prosor spoke there were far fewer -- one of whom told Inner City Press, “This is a question for FUNCA,” the Free UN Coalition for Access. Again Prosor played the rocket siren warning, and used the line “From Abuja to Falluja.”
  Inner City Press asked Prosor about those who say Hamas is not formally part of the unity government; he replied, “Hamas is Hamas.”
  On Palestine joining or complaining to the International Criminal Court, Inner City Press' question which Ban Ki-moon dodged on July 9, Prosor did not answer. Yet.
  Watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

UN Belatedly Confirms Palestinian Hunger Striker Letter, DRC Wire Contrast



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 19 – What forces the UN to respond, and how? A week ago, Palestinian Permanent Observer Riyad Mansour told Inner City Press he had just delivered a letter to the office of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon asking for action on hunger striking prisoner Samer Issawi.

  Inner City Press went to the February 12 noon briefing and asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky to confirm receipt of the letter, and what would then be done:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask whether the Secretary-General has received a letter from President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, or the State of Palestine, about this prisoner, Samira Sami, who has been on hunger strike for 200 days. I was told that this letter was given to the Secretariat, I don’t know in what format. Are you aware of the letter and if asked the Secretary-General to use his good offices to somehow work on this case?

Spokesperson Nesirky : I think I will need to check further with our colleagues in Jerusalem — Mr. Serry’s team — to find out a little bit more about that, I don’t have anything concrete here right now.

Inner City Press: The reason I ask is because Ambassador Mansour came back, it was in the middle of all this DPRK action, came by the stakeout and said that he had given this letter, I don’t know if it was to the Secretary-General himself, or someone else --

Spokesperson Nesirky: Yeah, we will check, Matthew.

 But neither that Tuesday, nor Wednesday February 13, Thursday February 14 or Friday February 15 did the UN answer the question. Then over the weekend in Ramallah there were protests at the UN, of the UN's inaction.

  After the UN's three day weekend at the next noon briefing on Tuesday February 19 Inner City Press asked Nesirky again about the letter. This time he confirmed that it had been received, and said that a response would be forthcoming.

  In the afternoon, Nesirky's office e-mailed out a comment to its mailing list that began, “The Secretary-General is deeply concerned over the rapidly deteriorating condition of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody who are on hunger strike, in particular the critical health condition of one Palestinian detainee, Samer Issawi. The Secretary-General received a letter from Palestinian President Abbas.”

  Why didn't the UN confirm to Inner City Press, in the full week after its public question at the February 12 noon briefing, that the letter had been received?

  By contrast on Saturday, February 16 after a Rwandan diplomat tweeted about a signing in Addis Ababa on February 24 of the Eastern Congo framework agreement, Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office immediately -- in less than two hours -- gave a wire service a confirmation, but did not send the news to other media interested in the Congo and the agreement. 

 Nesirky's office has so far offered this explanation:

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply <[at] un.org
Date: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Subject: Questions
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com

On DRC framework: A member of the Rwandan Permanent Mission tweeted about the agreement on Saturday afternoon, reporters asked and we confirmed.

  What is the difference? The Free UN Coalition for Accessis asking. Watch this site.

Friday, November 16, 2012

On Gaza, UN's Ban Ki-moon Doesn't Speak to Abbas, Heads to Cairo then Ramallah?



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 15 -- While the UN Security Council deliberated on Gaza Wednesday night, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made two calls: to Israel's Netanyahu and Egypt's Morsi.


Inner City Press: calls about Gaza, maybe I missed it, but did he call Mahmoud Abbas or try to call Mahmoud Abbas, the Secretary-General?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: I have given you the conversations that have taken place so far.

Inner City Press: to some it seems, he is the head of the Palestinian Authority, it seems like an obvious call to make, so do you have any reasoning?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Any other suggestions, Matthew?
Inner City Press: I am just asking. Was there a reason? Did you try and you couldn’t reach him or did not try?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I think this goes back to the point that Ms. Malcorra was making in a sense. Of course, and as I just said earlier on, the Secretary-General is monitoring this extremely closely. And, of course, he is going to be reaching out to various individuals at different times. We are not going to say precisely with who and when. When these calls take place, then we will be able to let you know. And of course, you have to recognize that some individuals may be quite busy and cannot immediately take phone calls. It may be as prosaic as that. Any other questions?

But Nesirky did not allow Inner City Press, even when it asked, to pose any more questions. Later on Thursday it was reported from Israel that Ban, canceling planned trips to Mauritius and Mozambique, will next week visit Cairo, Tel Aviv and Ramallah -- but not Gaza.

  Instead, Morsi has dispatched his prime minister and others to go to Gaza in solidarity. 

 Meanwhile, on a White House call ostensibly about President Obama's own trip next week to Thailand, Cambodia and Burma / Myanmar, the Administration pledged full support to Israel's right to self defense, answering that the use of ground troops in Gaza is up to the Israelis. 

 Like Ban Ki-moon, the US prefers de-escalation but says it is entirely or only up to Hamas.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Amid Gaza Blackout, UNRWA's Lights On, Canada Earmarks, Cast Lead's Shadow

UNITED NATIONS, April 22 -- As Hamas and Fatah have bickered over electricity payments, many in Gaza have gone without lights. Not among these are the UN Relief and Works Agency, which has its own generators. Inner City Press asked UNRWA's John Ging about the power plant shutdown, who's to blame and what can be done. Video here, from Minute 36:15.

Ging acknowledged that the dispute is between the "de facto government of Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah," with the former recently agreeing to make payments to the latter. Fatah, as it happens, is accusing Hamas officials themselves of not paying their power bills. Truly, it is a power game.

Inner City Press also asked Ging about on the one hand, executions carried out by Hamas, and on the other deaths killed by bombings by the Israel Defense Forces. Ging was cautious, referring to statistics on UN web sites and Hamas' rocket killing "a migrant worker on an Israeli kibbutz." He said that condemning executions is not within UNRWA's mandate, but that the wider UN system has condemned.

It was at the end of Ging's press conference that spokesman Martin Nesirky called on Inner City Press, when Ging was going to leave. Inner City Press asked Ging about Canada's funding decision on UNRWA. "You ask the big questions right at the end," Ging said.

He went out of his way to express appreciation to Canada, saying it has not decreased but only ear-marked its funding. But in the U.S. House of Representatives, an "UNRWA Humanitarian Accountability Act" has been introduced. Watch this site.

Footnote: Recently the author Normal Finkelstein was invited by the UN Correspondents Association to give a talk at the UN. Inner City Press attended, and asked for Finkelstein's assessment of Ban Ki-moon's performance during Operation Cast Lead. The review was not positive.

After the talk, the New Republic ran a review of not only Finkelstein but UNCA. [Ok, full disclosure of membership in UNCA and appearance in the New Republic piece.] The byline included that the author was an intern at the Inter Press Service, a media closely aligned with the generally pro Palestinian Group of 77 bloc. The affiliation led to some agita. Only at the UN.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/gaza1power042210.html