Showing posts with label svoboda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label svoboda. Show all posts

Monday, November 3, 2014

In Ukraine, Ambassador Sergeyev Tells Inner City Press, Svoboda Got 4.71% But Still Not Final, Still Claims Next IMF Tranche Will Be in December


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 3 -- When Ukraine's Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev re-appeared at the UN on November 3, Inner City Press asked him about the elections, the next International Monetary Fund tranche and gas deal(s).

   Sergeyev had handed out a chart with the Svoboda party getting 4.71%. He said that was a mistake, that any party below 5% cannot be in Parliament. What about Svoboda's protests? Sergeyev said the results are not final yet. He also said that the "Radical Party of Oleg Liashko" is not, in fact, right wing.

  Back on October 3 Sergeyev said the next IMF tranche would be in December. At the last IMF briefing, where Inner City Press asked about Ebola, the IMF spokesperson said

"the policy discussions cannot be completed for the review until the new government is formed, you know that's going to take some time, as we all understand. That mission may not be able to complete the discussions until the new government is in place. And so it's possible that the review would not be brought to the IMF's Board until later this year or even early next year, but it's driven by the formation of the new government."

 And will any IMF money be used for the deal(s) on gas? This wasn't answered - but Inner City Press, and the Free UN Coalition for Access, which thanked Sergeyev for his now-monthly briefing, will continue to pursue this.

  Inner City Press also on November 3 asked about reports of an OSCE drone engaged by radar and shot at. Sergeyev said his information it was was shot down -- which OSCE seems to be denying. On US Vice President Joe Biden's upcoming visit, Sergeyev said he had no information.

  Back on October 3, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about the killing of a Red Cross worker in Donetsk, about the International Monetary Fund and when (or if) Ukraine will pull its heavy weapons back from the line of contact as specified in the Minsk Agreements.
  Sergeyev said the next IMF tranche will be disbursed in December, citing a longer written presentation the first three pages of which Inner City Press has tweeted photos of herehere and here.
  On the shelling of the ICRC in Donetsk -- in territory controlled by the separatists -- Sergeyev insisted that Kyiv's forces are not firing, but said there would be an investigation.
  For its first two questions, Inner City Press did not brand the sparsely attended press conference by offering thanks for the Free UN Coalition for Access. But later, and typically, the old UN Correspondents Association insisted on doing so. So FUNCA followed suit and asked about the pull-back of heavy weapons.
   Sergeyev again alluded to his written presentation, then said it will be up to the OSCE to say when the pull back must take place. We'll have more on this.
  Back on September 12, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about Amnesty International's damning report about the pro-Kyiv Aidar Battalion, and about Point 11 of the Protocol, "Economic Reconstruction of Eastern Ukraine."
  On Aidar, Sergeyev replied that the separatists had been dressing up in the pro-government militia's uniforms. Is that something that Amnesty would have entirely missed? Their report is online here.
  On economic reconstruction, Sergeyev distinguished between regions that were never with the "terrorists," those that had been liberated, and... others, presumably Donetsk and Luhansk. 
 On a second around, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about reports Ukraine is getting sophisticated weapons from a "non-NATO" country. He said there are negotiations that he couldn't get into the details of, since the counter-parties might pull out.
   In past Sergeyev briefings, for example on September 4, the first question has been claimed by UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance. On September 12, there was no UNCA representative present -- an insider briefing elsewhere about which the scribes are not supposed to report. Sergeyev was thanked by the new Free UN Coalition for Access for showing up and answering questions on-the-record, as it should be.
 In that spirit, Inner City Press put online each of the five pages of Sergeyev's opening statement, hereherehere,here and here.
   Back on September 4, Inner City Press asked Sergeyev about challenges from the right to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, for example from Right Sector, AVOZ, and militia commanders like Dmytro Linko and Semen Semenchenko, who has spoken of the need “to establish our own internal command.”
  Sergeyev replied that “naturally, some generals want to be stronger.”
  So are these are generals? Despite talk in Minsk of a ceasefire, Sergeyev insisted that the “law enforcement action” would continue.
  Sergeyev began on September 4 by offering thanks to USg Jeffrey Feltman and to Valerie Amos -- but not John Ging.
  Back on August 24 when Amos visited Eastern Ukraine, her and Ging's agency OCHA put out a press releasesaying that
Amos visited an internally displacement persons' center in Krasnyi Lyman and “met women who had fled the fighting with their families.” The UN OCHA statement on Sunday said that “since March this year, around 200,000 people have fled their homes in search of safety within Ukraine and tens of thousands have fled to neighboring countries.”
  What does "tens of thousands" mean -- and why is it so different from what OCHA official John Ging told the UN Security Council on August 5? In that Council session, Ging said
“since the start of the year 168,677 Ukrainians are registered as having crossed into Russia, with nearly 60,000 of these having applied for refugee status and a further 115,952 having applied for other forms of legal stay.”
 
    Ging on August 5 acknowledged that “this is not the full picture as many Ukrainians that have fled their homes do not register with Ukrainian authorities or officially apply for assistance. The Russian authorities and UNHCR are reporting that 740,000 people have crossed the border since the start of the year.”
  While technically both 740,000 and 168,677 are made up of "tens of thousands," there is a striking disparity between what Ging told the Security Council on August 5, and the OCHA's August 24 press release on Amos' visit to Krasnyi Lyman.  What explains it?
   Back on August 24 just as an emergency but closed-door meeting of the Security Council about Ukraine began, and after the US, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued this statement:
The Secretary-General follows with deep concern reports that a Russian aid convoy has crossed the border into Ukraine without the permission of the Ukrainian authorities. While recognising the deteriorating humanitarian situation, any unilateral action has the potential of exacerbating an already dangerous situation in eastern Ukraine.
Once again, the Secretary-General urges all sides, in particular Ukraine and the Russian Federation, to continue to work together, in coordination with the international community, to ensure that humanitarian assistance reaches the most affected areas. He reiterates that all sides should continue to exercise maximum restraint and avoid escalation.
In this regard, he is encouraged by the announcement from President Petro Poroshenko that Ukraine will do everything possible to prevent more serious consequences as a result of the convoy moving into Ukrainian territory.
 How was this statement formulated? By whom? Inner City Press asked: What is the position of the UN's humanitarian chief Valerie Amos, who has elsewhere called for cross-border aid?
   At the Churkin presser, Inner City Press asked about the draft press statement Russia proposed on August 21.
 Churkin said that the “indefatigable” Lithuanian delegation “sent in amendments” that dropped references to Russia and included references to the European Union and dropped the reference to a ceasefire. Then, Churkin said, the US delegations send in amendments dropping the ceasefire and blaming the separatists.
  Inner City Press also asked about a report by CNN from Eastern Ukraine in which correspondent Diana Magney asked why Russia was sending salt if there are salt mines in Eastern Ukraine.
  Churkin said, "You can mine salt if you are not shelled.  If you are hiding in your cellars, mining salt is problematic."
   Later the Voice of America's correspondent asked about accusations that the convoy was only to support the rebels.
  "With baby food?" Churkin asked.
   "Rebels have babies too," the Voice of America correspondent said. The implication seemed to be that starving children based on the positions taken by their parents would be okay. We'll have more on this - for now, click here.
   Back on July 30 when Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the UN Yuriy Sergeyev held a UN press conference on July 30, Inner City Press asked him about the Human Right Watch report his government is using Grad rockets, killing at least 16 civilians between July 12 and 21 near Donetsk.
  Sergeyev responded first about the UN's (or Ivan Simonovic's) report, then emphasized that Russian media is saying Ukraine is using ballistic missiles.
  Inner City Press repeated the question, emphasizing it concerns Human Rights Watch's report, not the UN's, and not Russian media.  Sergeyev provided essentially the same answer.
  Here is the HRW report, online.
  Inner City Press also asked about the status of the International Monetary Fund program, after the downing of MH17. Sergeyev said Ukraine has met with the IMF's Christine Lagarde and "will" get the next tranche of the program in late August.  But won't there be an Executive Board meeting?
After Russian foreign minister and US Secretary of State John Kerry spoke by phone on July 27, the US State Department issued two read-outs, or a readout in two stages.
  The second, an "additional point" by a Senior State Department Official, was that Kerry "underlined our support for a mutual cease fire verified by the OSCE and reaffirmed our strong support for the international investigation to show the facts of MH17."
  Inner City Press on July 30 asked Sergeyev for Ukraine's position on this. Sergeyev cited as "pre-conditions" the closing of the border with Russia, and the release of all hostages.
  Procedurally, Ukraine set aside the first question at its press conference saying, "Pamela, traditionally you open our session." Using this UN Correspondents Association set-aside, Pam Falk of CBS asked about rebels mining the MH17 site. Her UNCA sidekick asked about "Russian propaganda." 
   And so it went until, fifth, the new Free UN Coalition for Access asked about HRW's report. This is how it's working, with the UN's Censorship Alliance. In this context, the Free UN Coalition for Access is against the automatic setting-aside of questions. 


 
  

Friday, April 25, 2014

Ukraine's Deputy FM Lubkivsky Answers Inner City Press on Weapons & IMF, Says No Extremists in Kyiv Government, But...


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 25 -- When Ukraine's deputy foreign minister Danylo Lubkivsky held a press conference at the UN on April 25, Inner City Press asked him about his statements about wanting weaponry, and about the International Monetary Fund.
  At the IMF's April 24 press briefing, spokesperson Gerry Rice said that Crimea is included in the IMF's Ukraine data, used for the $14-18 billion program slated to be approved on April 30. Inner City Press asked Lubkivsky how this $14-18 billion would impact or help Crimea.
  "It should," Lubkivsky first replied. Then on this he added, "We feel and see good progress in that, hope good results." He added, "We are standing on very thin red line," citing a movie title.
  On Inner City Press' question about the debate on arming Ukraine, Lubkivsky said, "Yes, we are holding talks on military cooperation, absolutely, and this is a quite natural thing, when the sovereignty is threatened, we will look for any possible means to protect... our motherland against any invasion."
  This, this being the UN, he added, "in terms of military cooperation, our main option is to ensure peaceful solution to the conflict."
  It was first said Lubkivsky would be meeting with "Under Secretary General." Which one? Then he told a reported he would meet the "Deputy Secretary General." 
  But a search of DSG Jan Eliasson's schedule did not find him listed. The web page, as of 3 pm, is here. Instead, Moroccan Ambassador Omar Hilale was listed at 3 pm, amid the consideration of the MINURSO mission in Western Sahara and whether it will, as Ban Ki-moon's since changed report said was a goal, have a human rights monitoring mechanism.
  Lubkivsky in his press conference said, "There are no extremists in the Ukrainian government." He was asked about Right Sector and the Svoboda Party, whose leader UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with, as party represented in the Rada, during his visit to Kyiv.
  When asked the identify of Ukraine's' national security adviser, he said Andriy Parubiy. But he was a co-founder of the Social-National Party of Ukraine, a Svoboda precursor. Watch this site.
Footnote: The Ukraine Mission's hard-working spokesman gave the first question to Pamela Falk who thanked him "on behalf of UNCA," the second to Inner City Press, who then offered thanks for the Free UN Coalition for Access. And so it goes.

 
  

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

On Ukraine at UN, Of Svoboda & France's "Virtual Reality" on Eve of Geneva Talks


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 16 -- When the Ukraine report of UN human rights deputy Ivan Simonovic was discussed in the UN Security Council on April 16, Simonovic went beyond his report to mention a candidate for the election slated for May 25 who was beaten up for this political beliefs. 

  Just the day before, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Oleg Tsarev, who beyond being beaten was subject to a call by the Svoboda Party to be taken off the ballot and have his citizenship stripped.

  Since Ban met the leader of the Svoboda Party while in Kyiv, Inner City Press asked Dujarric about the new threat, as well as the beat-up of a TV news executive which is one of only three mentions in Simonovic's report of the Svoboda Party. Video here.
   In the April 16 meeting, French Ambassador Gerard Araud said there was "no" foreign involvement in Maidan in Kyiv; to his prepared speech he added that sanctions are not the path "we" want. Well, yes: France is still selling Mistral warships to Russia.
   Churkin in reply mocked Araud's phrase, "virtual reality." Araud did not ask for a chance to reply. The day before, to the lone critical question allowed during Araud's human rights press conference, Araud said "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." Ah, respect for freedom of the press. Video here, including questions to Dujarric for the Free UN Coalition for Access.
  Churkin said Russia will not discuss Crimea in the Council anymore, at least not under the agenda item "Ukraine." Long time Ukrainian ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev said Crimea must continue to be discussed. But neither he or anyone else spoke at the UNTV stakeout afterward. 
  All eyes turned to the meeting in Geneva slated for April 17. Churkin said Russia proposed for the regions to attended, but it was rejected. The US delegation includes its envoy on Syria, Danial Rubinstein. Why? Watch this site.
   After the Ukraine meeting of the UN Security Council on April 13, Inner City Press asked Ukraine's long-time Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev about the reported visit to Kyiv of US Central Intelligence Agency chief John Brennan.
   Sergeyev replied, "It happened only in some comments from Moscow." Video here.
  Well, not anymore. At the US State Department briefing on April 14, spokesperson Jen Psaki confirmed that CIA's Brennan was in "Kiev this weekend." She also said that Secretary of State John Kerry spoke with Ukraine's acting prime minister Yatsenyuk earlier in April 14 that there was not yet any read-out.
   Also on April 14 Oleksandr Turchynov, acting president 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 ignored that all UN peacekeeping operations require authorization from the Security Council, in which Russia (and China) have veto rights.
  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric to confirm Turchynov's peacekeeping suggestion -- Dujarric declined -- and whether any deployment would require a UN Security Council vote. On the latter, Dujarric said yes, such a vote would be required.
  Turchynov's suggestion and most of the reporting on it also ignored 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. "It happened only in some comments from Moscow," 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.
  

Monday, April 14, 2014

To Censor Twitter, Turkey Turns to Tax Law from Copyright Like Reuters Is Using On Its "For the Record" Anti-Press Complaint to the UN


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 14 -- Now Turkey's Erdogan, after using copyright law to censor, has moved on to tax law. Twitter has been told it is a tax evader in Turkey.

  Tax law was good enough to take down Al Capone, so why not use it in the service of censorship? Likewise, to Google's YouTube Erdoban cited the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, allow for take-down or banning from Search of material that is copyrighted. 

   But can phone calls be copyrighted? As detailed below onReuters' specious claim, can "for the record" complaints to the UN against other media later be called copyrighted, and Banned from Google's search?

  Turkey banned all of YouTube, after its foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu declared, "a cyber attack has been carried out against the Turkish Republic, our state and our valued nation."

  Actually, the leaked call concerned plans to intervene in Syria, ostensibly to protect the tomb of Suleyman Shah, grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire, including the proposed creation of a false rocket incident. 

  Intelligence chief Hakam Fidan says, "if there is to be justification, the justification is, I send four men to the other side. I get them to fire eight missiles into empty land. That's not a problem. Justification can be created."
  The national security argument for banning YouTube, by the country sponsoring the Press-less "Turkish Lounge" right next to the UN Security Council, follows Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan claiming he could copyright his leaked telephone calls, like Reuters at the UN claimed of its e-mail to the UN, sketched below and shown here.
   This use of copyright to try to censor has echoes in the UN -- and in Ukraine, where the Svoboda Party tried to getvideos of its Members of Parliament beating up a news executive taken down as violations of copyright. 
 On the Guardian website on March 21, where the video had been was a notice that "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim."
The New York Times reported that late on March 20, YouTube copies of the video were taken down "for violating the copyright of the Svoboda party spokesman, who seems to be working to erase the evidence from the Internet through legal means."
   This is a growing trend. As set forth below, an anti-Press complaint to the UN's Stephane Dujarric, now Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson, has been banned from Google's Search by an invocation of copyright similar to Erdogan's.
  On March 21, Dujarric from Kyiv told Inner City Press neither he nor, he assuumed, Ban had seen the Svoboda beat-down video. This seems noteworthy, given its prominence in Ukraine. Now we can add: perhaps Ban and Dujarric didn't see it due to the same censorship by copyright that has for now banned an anti Press complaint to them from Google's Search.
  As to Twitter, Dujarric in his previous post in charge of UN Media Accreditation grilled Inner City Press about a tweet mentioning World War Two - the basis for example of France's veto power in the Security Council, which it parlayed into essentially permanent ownership of the top post in UN Peacekeeping, now though Herve Ladsous (coverage of whom Dujarric tried to dictate, or advise, Inner City Press about.)
   Dujarric's now bipolar tweeting has intersected with a recently revived anonymous trolling campaign whichoriginated in the UN Correspondents Association, in support of the Sri Lankan government, alleging that any coverage of the abuse of Tamils must be funded by the now defunct Tamil Tigers. 
  These outright attempts to censor are echoed, more genteelly, even as part of the UN press briefings these days. When Dujarric took eight questions on March 20 on Ban's essentially failed trip to Moscow, fully half went to representatives of UNCA's 15 member executive committee, including state media from Turkey, France and the United States. Other questions -- by Twitter -- were not answered, except those from explicitly pro-UN sources. These are the UN's circles.
  Of this abuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, theElectronic Frontier Foundation's Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry told Inner City Press about the Reuters case:
"Unfortunately, it is all too easy for a copyright holder (assuming that the person that sent this notice actually held copyright in the email) to abuse the DMCA to take down content and stifle legitimate speech. As countries outside the US consider adopting DMCA-like procedures, they must make sure they include strong protections for free speech, such as significant penalties for takedown abuse."
  In this case, copyright is being (mis) claimed for an email from Reuters' Louis Charbonneau to the UN's chief Media Accreditation official Stephane Dujarric -- since March 10 Ban Ki-moon's new spokesperson -- seeking to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.  
  Access to the document has been blocked from Google's search based on a cursory take-down request under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. 
 If this remains precedent, what else could come down?
  Why not an email from Iran, for example, to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency? Why not a sanctions filing by a country? Here is Reuters logic, accepted if only automatically by Google:
The copyrighted material is a private email I wrote in April 2012 and for which I never gave permission to be published. It has been published on a blog and appears in on the first page of search results for my name and the firm I work for, Reuters. It can be seen here: http://www.innercitypress.com/reutersLC3unmalu.pdf
  But this is true of ANY leaked document: it can be said that the entity or person exposed "never gave permission [for it] to be published." Does that mean Google can or should block search access to it?

Reuters' Charbonneau hands to Ban at UNCA: banned from Search?

  Can a complaint to a Media Accreditation official against a competitor legitimately be considered "private"? In any event, the DMCA is not about protecting privacy.
  Iran or North Korea could say a filing or status report they make with the IAEA is "private" and was not intended to be published. Would Google, receiving a DMCA filing, block access to the information on, say, Reuters.com?
  Charbonneau's bad-faith argument says his complaint to the UN was "published on a blog." Is THAT what Reuters claims makes it different that publication in some other media?
  The logic of Reuters' and Charbonneau's August 14, 2013 filing with Google, put online via the ChillingEffects.org project, is profoundly anti free press.
  The fact that Google accepts or didn't check, to remain in the DMCA Safe Harbor, the filing makes it even worse. The request to take-down wasn't made to InnerCityPress.com or its server -- it would have been rejected. But banning a page from Search has the same censoring effect.
  The US has a regime to protect freedom of the press, and against prior restraint. But this is a loophole, exploited cynically by Reuters. What if a media conducted a long investigation of a mayor, fueled by a leaked email. When the story was published, could the Mayor make a Reuters-like filing with Google and get it blocked?
  Here is the text of Charbonneau's communication to the UN's top Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit official Stephane Dujarric and MALU's manager, to which he claimed "copyright" and for now has banned from Google's Search:
Hi Isabelle and Stephane,
I just wanted to pass on for the record that I was just confronted by Matt Lee in the DHL auditorium in very hostile fashion a short while ago (there were several witnesses, including Giampaolo). He's obviously gotten wind that there's a movement afoot to expel him from the UNCA executive committee, though he doesn't know the details yet. But he was going out of his way to be as intimidating and aggressive as possible towards me, told me I "disgust" him, etc.
In all my 20+ years of reporting I've never been approached like that by a follow journalist in any press corps, no matter how stressful things got. He's become someone who's making it very hard for me and others in the UN press to do our jobs. His harassment of fellow reporters is reaching a new fever pitch.
I just thought you should know this.
Cheers,
Lou
Louis Charbonneau
Bureau Chief. United Nations
Reuters News Thomson Reuters reuters. com
This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and information company.
"UNCA" in the for-now banned e-mail is the United Nations Correspondents Association. The story developed here, as to Sri Lankahere is a sample pick-up this past weekend in Italian, to which we link and give full credit, translated into English (NOT for now by Google) --

The fool of Reuters to the UN

by Mahesh - 12/27/2013 -calls for the removal of a letter from the head of his bureau at the United Nations, pursuing a copyright infringement on the part of the competition
Try to make out a small competitor from the UN press room and then, when these publish proof of intrigue, invokes the copyright to release a letter from compromising the network.
MOLESTA-AGENCY  Inner City Press is a small non-profit agency covering the work of the United Nations for years, with an original cut, which become distasteful to many. Unlike other matching its founder master sent never tires of asking account of inconsistencies and contradictions and often refers to unpleasant situations involving colleagues and their reportage, too often twisted to obvious political contingencies.
THE LAST CAVITY – In this case the clutch is born when Matthew Lee, Inner City Press ever since he founded and made famous in the 90 's, challenged the screening of "Lies Agreed Upon" in the auditorium of the United Nations, a filmaccio of propaganda in which the Sri Lankan regime tries to deny the now tested massacres (and destroyed by International Crisis Group)In the piece, in which denounced the incident, Lee also announced that the screening was organized by the President of the United Nations Correspondents (UNCA), Italian Giampaolo Pioli, skipping the normal consultation procedure for this kind of events. Pioli then, was also accused of being in a conflict of interest, given that he rented an apartment in New York an apartment to the Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN in Sri Lanka, named Palitha Kohona and is suspected of war crimes.
TRY WITH THE COPYRIGHT- So he comes to the letter with which Louis Charbonneau, Reuters bureau chief at the United Nations, wrote to the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit (MALU) calling for the ouster of Lee, which the UN being there for years as his colleagues, but we see that this was not done. Lee, however, comes into possession of the letter and publish it, and then writes to Google millantando Charbonneau the copyright on the letter and asking for removal pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright ActThat is a bit like if a company request the removal of a compromising document from a journalistic investigation, in the name of copyright, a claim clearly absurd and disingenuous.
HARASSMENT AND THREATS- In the letter published, Charbonneau complained about the aggressive behavior of Lee and cited among the witnesses to cases where Lee had been "aggressive" towards him even Pioli.Lee with that piece has gained throughout a hail of protests from Sri Lanka and an investigation by the UNCA, along with death threats and other well-known amenities the refugees away from the clutches of the regime, but it is still there. Behold then the brilliant idea of Charbonneau, improperly used copyright law to censor the objectionable publications to a colleague and competitor. Pity that Lee has already resisted successfully in similar cases, in 2008 was the same Google to remove your site from being indexed in the news in its search engines, it is unclear what impetus behind, only to regret it soon after that even Fox News had cried scandal.