At UN, Charges Against Investigative Press Undisclosed, Scoop Stolen by Reuters

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 26 -- It seems that at the UN the publication of articles critical of powerful officials, countries or media organization can be construed as "harassment" and used as the basis to seek to expel the offending journalist.

  This takes place in the context of an Inner City Press investigative scoop, that US official Jeffrey Feltman will come work at the UN being stolen without credit by Reuters (unlike Foreign Policy's The Cable which did give credit), and a stealth complaint of harassment filed by the bylined Reuters correspondent Louis Charbonneau, using his position as Vice President of the UN Correspondents Association.

Reuters' Charbonneau's complaint has been put online here.

  After being informed in writing Friday afternoon that five UNCA Executive Committee members had referred "charges of harassment" against Inner City Press seeking to form a "board of examination" to "expel or impeach" Inner City Press, UNCA's President Giampaulo Pioli has three times refused to disclose who complained, what definition of harassment will be used, and what beyond written articles and the single verbal word "disgust" Inner City Press is charged with.

  Already some other reporters, readers and also diplomats have expressed surprise that a purported correspondents' association would try to censor a member journalist or define critical articles as harassment.

  By this definition, Inner City Press "harasses" Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and for example his head of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous every day: it's called investigative journalism.

   One UN Correspondent, who will for now be nameless to avoid retaliation or charges against him, said

No excuse to steal an exclusive... I think UNCA should have a 'law that "expulsion" is "outlawed". There is not "expulsion" in journalism, we are not Stalin's CPSU...I find great help in reading your blog when I'm not at the UN. Especially I think our job is not "policing" other journalists but watching the UN, especially when they are not doing their job. Something that I think you are doing better than anybody else in all the press corps. I just reported two days ago your questions, crediting that you / innercitypress.com is a must read for all the UN permanent missions.

  This correspondent, like others, credits Inner City Press when using its exclusives. But Reuters' Lou Charbonneau says he has a POLICY of not crediting Inner City Press. It is unclear how this could be consistent with a Reuters-wide policy.

  But despite five days of requests, in the United States and then its headquarters in London, Reuters has yet to provide its policy on crediting -- or on its reporters using their positions in correspondents' associations to seek to have competitors dis-accredited.

  Inner City Press wrote to UNCA President Pioli:

This is a formal request to be informed who are the five people requesting to urgently "examine" me. I am also asking to to be informed immediately of the definition you are using of "harassment" and of any and all alleged acts of "harassment" I am charged with, particularly since the last UNCA meeting on this topic in April, other than material that I have written and published as is my right under freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

  After Pioli reiterated by voice mail his position that the empaneling of a "board of examination" -- which is supposed to be impartial -- will proceed the next day the UN is open, May 29, Inner City Press asked again:

Hi, at least for now I'm just requesting (and believe I have a right to) the names of those who have referred these charges of harassment against me... For your information, the complaint Lou filed with MALU and Dujarric I found outrageous; it was baseless, should not have been filed, and I should have been informed. While he says I am somehow making it hard for him and unnamed others to do their work, he was in essence trying to STOP me from doing my work, as well in my view stealing my work without credit. Please provide the requested information, thanks.

  Pioli this time did reply in writing, but without providing any of the information or charges. And so a third request:

Hi. I am asking that you send me the information -- names of accusers, definitions and description of charges -- in writing by email, in part because Lou's complaint to MALU and Dujarric, cc-ed to you, appears entirely based on something I said to him. You should understand I don't want to subject myself to any more such charges, however spurious. So I ask again: send it to me in writing the names of accusers, definitions and description of charges. Past deadline.

   Still, even the identities of those UNCA Executive Committee filing changes to expel Inner City Press have not been disclosed.  Here's the online list of Executive Committee members. Watch this site.

Amid Syria Failure, UN Demands Deletion of its Official's Name, Questions Sources

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 17 -- Amid charges from all sides that the UN's and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's activities in Syria are a failure, the UN's response on Thursday was to seek to censor press coverage of differing description of an upcoming UN trip to Damascus, then to question its sources.

  As Inner City Press reported yesterday -- and modifies at the UN's request in this version -- on May 16 a Security Council Permanent Representative told the press that

"in the coming days Jean-Marie 'Guehenno and DPKO,' the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, will go to Damascus, on the political track, with it was hoped Kofi Annan to follow. Later on May 16, Inner City Press was informed that the request was made [deleted at UN's request] on the issue of the observers, not the political track."

More than 12 hours later came this from DPKO's spokesman, copying Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky:

Date: Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:46 AM

I have become aware of you[r] web article and tweets naming [individual's name included in DPKO's email, but deleted here] as planning to travel to syria along with dpko colleaugues. Your decision to publish this information in advance of a trip has created a potentially serious security situation for un personnel. I ask that you remove all such references from the inner city press website without delay, for the sake of the safety and security of un peacekeeping personnel.

  For the UN to request post-publication removal from the Internet of information, stated on the record by a Security Council's Permanent Representative, seems to implicate freedom of the press issues which seem not to be the UN's priority under Ban Ki-moon.

  But within minutes of receiving the above, Inner City Press modified the story, removing the name and an included critique of the individual specified in DPKO's removal request, then replied that the Permanent Representative

"yesterday morning on the record stated that Jean Marie Guehenno and DPKO were going to Damascus. Subsequent reporting found that the request was for Mr. Ladsous plus three. If you have a problem with names, you need to speak to Permanent Representatives, including among the Permanent Five members of the Security Council... I'm still waiting for the promised answer beyond Entebbe of DPKO's use of private military and security firms, and for the UN casualty estimate at Pibor. Please advise. I have immediately removed references in this article to Mr. Ladsous, which seems to be your major concern."

   Significantly, DPKO did not request the deletion of Jean-Marie Guehenno's name. The name it requested delation of it gave, obviously, to the Syrian government. So from where does the claimed danger come?

    Even with this change, the UN Peacekeeping spokesman persisted, now inquiring into what Inner City Press' "subsequent reporting" consisted of:

"Thank you for removing the name. However much of the damage has in fact been done already. I am very concerned that Inner City Press seems to wash its hands of responsibility for what it chooses to publish. By Inner City Press's own reporting, [the] Ambassador [misnamed by DPKO] did not appear to have named DPKO names. I do not know what you mean by 'subsequent reporting,' and given the lack of other reports I can only assume you mean your own decision to publish Mr [X's] name. The problem that I have is with the ramifications for UN peacekeeping personnel safety and security, and with Inner City Press's decision to publish in complete disregard for these matters. Your response below indicates a continued blithe recklessness with regard to the safety and security of UN personnel operating in highly volatile circumstances."

  In fact, while Inner City Press immediately made the deletions requested by DPKO despite their seeming basis in removing a single individual from the public eye, DPKO has for six months promised to sign a Status of Forces Agreement for the peacekeepers in Abyei, four of whom bled out and died due to slow med-evac due to the lack of a SOFA. No explanation has been provided, including after another request on Thursday.

  At Thursday's noon briefing, while deliberately as requested not using any individual's name, even that provided on the record by a Security Council Permanent Representative, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon spokesman Martin Nesirky to clarify if this visit to Damascus is about the political track, or only about observers.

  Nesirky refused to answer this, cloaking the entire question in an invocation of safety and accusing the previous publication as being "unacceptable." Inner City Press said it disagrees 100% with the attempt at censorship of information stated on the record by UN member states' Permanent Representatives, then asked on the issue of actual safety the question of why despite the public statement six months ago still no SOFA was in place for the peacekeepers in Abyei. Nesirky said when he has something he will say.

  Notably, under Nesirky the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General was thrown out of the Security Council and lost previous access. Perhaps this is why they cannot control what Council Permanent Representatives say on the record, but then seek to censor the subsequent press coverage.

  The response to censorship is, in this case, a description of the attempt at censorship, while accomodating the stated but not explained pretext for the attempt at censorship. Watch this site.

On Libya Sanctions, 5 UN SC Members Fail to File Reports, P5 Threatens S5

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 10 -- When Libya sanctions were adopted by the UN Security Council, all 193 member states were given until June 26, 2011 to file reports on their implementation.

  Now more than ten months after the deadline, it seems that only 57 countries have filed reports. At least five current Security Council members are not listed among those who have filed reports: Azerbaijan, Guatemala, India, Morocco and Pakistan.

Resolution 1970 provided:

"25. Calls upon all Member States to report to the Committee within 120 days of the adoption of this resolution on the steps they have taken with a view to implementing effectively paragraphs 9, 10, 15 and 17 above [of resolution 1970 (2011)]."

And so all member states have been reminded:

"Accordingly, States that have not yet reported to the Committee on the steps they have taken with a view to implementing effectively the paragraphs cited above, which set out the arms embargo, the travel ban and the assets freeze, are reminded to do so no later than 26 June 2011."

 And still -- five Council members are not listed as filing. The Permanent Representative of one of the N or Non-compliant Five sheepishly told Inner City Press that reporting is not that important. Another said he would go and find out. A Deputy Permanent Representative said "we have better things to do."

  Some wonder how the Security Council members can ask other states to follow its mandates if they themselves do not practice what they preach. Another said "as long as the Permanent Five members file, that's what's important."

   Outside the Council's session on Libya on Thursday afternoon, Inner City Press asked a number of non-filers who are not on the Security Council to explain themselves.

  The Permanent Representatives of a sample European nation, asking that he and it not be identified, said his country is waiting for greater Council transparency on sanctions before filing reports. The reform proposals of the so-called Small Five, which Inner City Press has covered, were cited among the reasons.

  Sanctions and due process are listed in Paragraph 9 of the Small Five's resolution's annex.

  Inner City Press' previous report, that the resolution will be put to a vote this month, appears to remain true. Sources say that the Permanent Five members of the Council have told the Small Five that if they go forward with the resolution, the P5 will still negotiating with them.

  A G4, meanwhile, loves this, and says it is "ready for the kill shot" once this happens. United for Consensus members shake their heads, bemoaning the Small Five's failure to take the time to get two-thirds support of member states, or to wait for a wider reform proposal. Watch this site.

In Myanmar, Ban Ki-Moon Praised & Partnered with Spying Company

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 4 -- While in Myanmar, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon held an event with businesses, praising them for their Burmese engagements.

   Inner City Press asked Ban's Spokesperson, twice, which businesses were in attendance to receive Ban's thanks. After the second request a list was provided, and the delay perhaps became more understandable.

  Invited and thanked was a company which has sold surveillance and spying equipment, including to Gaddafi's Libya: ZTE Corporation. See this link and Wall Street Journal of August 30, 2011.

  With this company in attendance, Ban Ki-moon concluded on the 1st of May, "I wish you strength and success in your important efforts, and I very much welcome your partnership with the United Nations."

  Success for this company, it seems, is selling surveillance equipment, as for example France's Amesys / Bull SA. But a spy company partnering with the UN?

Already Ban's had of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to hold the job, has proposed the UN using surveillance drones. But wiretapping?

  Also in attendance and praised by Ban were, among others, SK Telecom, PTT International, Mitsubishi, GE, Total and Alcatel - Lucent.

In Tripoli as reported by the WSJ,

"on the ground floor of a six-story building here, agents working for Moammar Gadhafi sat in an open room, spying on emails and chat messages with the help of technology Libya acquired from the West. The recently abandoned room is lined with posters and English-language training manuals stamped with the name Amesys, a unit of French technology firm Bull SA, which installed the monitoring center. A warning by the door bears the Amesys logo. The sign reads: 'Help keep our classified business secret. Don't discuss classified information out of the HQ.'"

   This is more than a little ironic, given that outgoing French president Nicolas Sarkozy is now threatening to sue Mediapart for publishing Moussa Koussa's letter to Bachir Saleh. A documentary on the subject, including Sarkozy adviser Jean-David Levitte, is scheduled for broadcast on May 8, two days after Sarkozy's then  expected (and now confirmed) electoral loss despite his plea to National Front supporters.

  This has led to questions of whether not only Alain Juppe but at least some in the French Mission to the UN will also be replaced, by Fabius, Aubrey or whoever.  Watch this site.

From the UN's noon briefing transcript of May 1:

Inner City Press: On Myanmar, Ban Ki-moon gave a speech with the, promoting the Global Compact. But, is there a way to get a list of the businesses he cited? He said, I am here with these businesses, many people think that most of the businesses in the country are affiliated with the, you called it a dictatorship. But, the former military Government. You may not have it, but is it possible to get a list of the businesses in attendance or certainly the ones that he was citing as, you know, the future of a non-military Myanmar?

Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey: We’ll have to check on that, Matthew.

From the UN's noon briefing transcript of May 2:

Inner City Press: were you able to get the businesses that he was referring to when he introduced the Global Compact in Myanmar. Ban's speech definitely says "the businesses here," referring to particular businesses.

Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, we’ll get that for you.

UN Admits Cluster Bombs in Sri Lanka, But Still Spin for Silva, Ban Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 26 -- With news that the UN Development Program in Sri Lanka has found and confirmed via a leaked e-mail cluster sub-munitions, General Shavendra Silva as a UN Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping takes on an even more sinister hue.

  As reported, Allan Poston, the technical adviser for UNDP's mine action group in Sri Lanka, wrote that "after reviewing additional photographs from the investigation teams, I have determined that there are cluster sub-munitions in the area where the children were collecting scrap metal and in the house where the accident [the death of a child] occurred. This is the first time that there has been confirmed unexploded sub-munitions found in Sri Lanka."

  Sri Lanka's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Shavendra Silva, during this conflict commanded the 58th Division, depicted in Ban Ki-moon's report as engaged in war crimes. Now, cluster munition. Still, Ban Ki-moon's position remains that Silva being Ban's adviser is "up to member states."

  The Sri Lankan Ministry of Defense -- and Urban Development -- on the same day as the cluster bomb revelation breathlessly reported that all 54 nations in the Asia and Pacific Group support Silva's continued service. To Inner City Press' knowledge this was not true even prior to the cluster bomb confirmation, and should be even less true now.

  Earlier this month, the Permanent Representative of an Asia Group member told Inner City Press, of Silva,

"the gentleman's appearance is not welcome. They have chosen to escalate, sending public letters, casting doubt on Frechette's integrity. It becomes a big story, and member states in the end will say it's unacceptable... No one knew who Shavendra Silva was. Once you began to publish the stories, we came to know. If we had known from the beginning of course it would never have happened. If they continue to push it, there would be enough delegates in the Asia group to say 'enough.'"

Ban Ki-moon's acquiescence in accepting an alleged war criminal as his adviser becomes ever more troubling. Now Ban is on his way to Myanmar, where he and his adviser Vijay Nambiar have already given their full blessing to the still military dominated government, even as Kachin people weren't allowed to vote and face repression. What will Ban do? Watch this site.

Assad's Shabeeha Urged by Annan to Disarm & "Work With UN," More Mood?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 22 -- Kofi Annan's call to lay down weapons and "work with the UN" extends not only to Syrian governmental and opposition forces, but also to the pro-Assad shabeeha militias, Annan's spokesman Ahmad Fawzi told Inner City Press on Sunday.

  Earlier in the day Annan issued a statement that "I urge all forces whether governmental, opposition or others to put down their weapons and work with the United Nations monitors."

  Inner City Press wondered, and asked Fawzi, what forces with weapons are these "others," neither governmental or opposition?

Some hours later, Fawzi replied answer this (and three other question), starting that

"There are armed groups close to the government (shabeeha). Opposition and uniformed government forces do not have a monopoly on weapons."

The answer is appreciated. Still, it seems strange to also call on these militia mercenaries to "work with the UN monitors." How?

In terms of the now-approved monitoring mission's work, Inner City Press asked Fawzi, "on air assets, is the ideal / idea to use UN system aircraft from other missions?"

Fawzi replied, "The UN prefers to use its own chartered aircraft if and when possible."

Inner City Press also asked Fawzi, "what's the process for (and status of) choosing the force commander?"

Sources in Norway told Inner City Press that Robert Mood, the General who abruptly left Damascus leading Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin to call him unprofessional, appeared on Norwegian TV to say he is awaiting word from the UN and would return to Syria. What would Churkin and Russia say?

Here is what Fawzi said, in response to Inner City Press: "Force Commanders are, I believe, nominated by Member States via DPKO, and appointed by the Secretary General."

So will Norway nominate Mood? Watch this site

Here is Fawzi's response:

From: Ahmad Fawzi
Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: Hi, Press Qs on "other" forces in corrected statement, Friday patrols, aircraft, thanks
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com

Hi.

1) There are armed groups close to the government (shabeeha). Opposition and uniformed government forces do not have a monopoly on weapons.

2) I put the following clarification out on Friday:

"Comments by UN Observer Team Leader Col. Himmiche today were taken out of context. There is no policy not to 'work' Fridays.

Today the UN Observers were regrouping, dealing with administrative and logistical issues, liaising with the UN country team and planning for their patrol (to Homs) tomorrow."

3) Force Commanders are, I believe, nominated by Member States via DPKO, and appointed by the SG.

4) The UN prefers to use its own chartered aircraft if and when possible.

Best,

Ahmad

Inner City Press: The Moroccan colonel who’s leading the UN team there now has been quoted that he’s not going to take his team out on Fridays. He doesn’t want to be used politically. There’s a quote to that effect. And I’m just wondering, since it seems that one of the purposes of the observer mission is to allow people to protest, and that’s a big day they want to protest, what would the U.S. think of that?

MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, I haven’t seen the comments of the Moroccan lead. As I said, all of the modalities for these peacekeepers are being reviewed based on the experience of the initial group, and they have to be worked out through a new Security Council resolution, and obviously, we have to see how it goes on the ground.

  Transcript here. More has been written since, about the Colonel's comments. So Inner City Press has asked Fawzi:

"do you have a comment or gloss on the Moroccan colonel saying the observers would go out on Fridays, to not be used? On Friday I asked the US State Department, particularly in light of Friday being a/the big protest day, but they hadn't yet seen the quote. Can you comment or explain the Colonel's statement?"

  The question was asked answered, and immediately published here. Watch this site.

On Syria, Mysteries of Mood, UK on Transition, Morocco Asked of Free Movement

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 14, updated with transcripts -- After the modified resolution on sending advance monitors passed the UN Security Council 15-0, Inner City Press put questions to the Permanent Representatives of the UK, United States, Morocco, Russia and Syria.

  Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Rice, this month's Council president, about need the approval of the Syrian government for the full observer mission. She said that "consultations" with Syria are required.

 (Inner City Press also asked about South Sudan not pulling out of Heglig; Rice answered that the Council also called on Sudan to stop aerial bombing and that neither side has complied.)

  When UK Ambassador Lyall Grant came to the stakeout, he used the phrase "political transition." Inner City Press asked him if this meant Bashar al-Assad stepping down, if the UK could imagine a political transition in which Assad remains.

  Lyall Grant said that would be hard to imagine, that under the Kofi Annan six point plan Assad is supposed to appoint someone else for political transition talks.

  The resolution speaks of freedom of movement for the advance monitors. So Inner City Press asked Morocco's Permanent Representative Loulichki to square this with the recent UN reports that in Western Sahara, the MINURSO peacekeepers do not have freedom of movement, are monitored and their communications with people impaired.

  Loulichki said this was entirely different, that he would address it after Syria questions. But he left the stakeout without answer the question. The Council meets about Western Sahara and MINURSO on April 17.

  Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, at the stakeout, hearkened back to Inner City Press' question to Ambassador Rice about Syrian government consent, saying that of course this is required for a mission under UN Charter Chapter Six.

  He chided UK Ambassador Lyall Grant for saying he couldn't imagine Assad staying in power, saying that this is dictating or trying to dictate from outside.

  Inner City Press asked Churkin about Kofi Annan's General Mood, who reportedly left Damascus while the Syrian foreign minister and first deputy were briefly away.

  Churkin said this happened and, stranger still, when a Russian diplomat inquired at Kofi Annan's office in Geneva when Mood would return to Syria, he was told that Mood's return "should not be anticipated." Churkin went on to say that professionalism is required and that "there are other people."

  Kofi Annan's spokesman has been asked to confirm this and to explain, as well as the outstanding questions about the Kofi Annan Foundation. We will have more on this, and publish responses on receipt.

   Finally, Inner City Press asked Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari about Mood. He insisted that Syria wants Mood back, and slammed the European Union for imposing unilateral sanctions on Syria's electricity minister. By 1:50 the Security Council stakeout was empty, the advance monitors on their way. Watch this site.

Update: From the US Mission transcript:

Inner City Press: In terms of the second resolution and sending the full team, this idea that it requires the consent of the Syrian government-at least that's what both Churkin said and that's what Syria said and under Chapter 6, it would seem to require that-how do you think that that's going to go? How do you think that-what will that mean in terms of the ability of the Syrian government to either dictate terms or block deployment?

Ambassador Rice: Well, what the resolution says is that the full monitoring mission will come after three things. One, a report by the Secretary-General; two, a sustained cessation of violence; and three, after consultation with the government of Syria. That would be the normal practice for a mission under Chapter 6 of the UN Charter. But the resolution also outlines the conditions that must be precedent for the advance team as well as the monitoring mission to effectively carry out its operations, and those are described in paragraph six.

So it will be important that the advance team get on the ground and then be able to report back as to whether that initial tranche is in effect able to operate freely and move as it must with the freedom to communicate internally as well as with the Syrian people, sufficient to fulfill its mandate. If that is indeed the case, that will provide the necessary assurances to members of the Security Council who must take a decision on authorization of the full mission.

From the UK Mission transcript:

Inner City Press: When you say political transition, is this to be interpreted as meaning Bashar al-Assad leaving power? Is there a political transition you can envision where he remains in power in Syria?
 
Amb. Lyall Grant: Kofi Annan’s plan makes clear that there needs to be the start of a political dialogue that leads to a political transition and the introduction of a democratic, plural political system in Syria. Frankly, it looks to us, the British government, most unlikely that that is going to be possible with President Assad still in office. But the Kofi Annan plan does not call for the president to stand down, it calls on him to appoint an interlocutor to start that political dialogue. So, by definition, that interlocutor would not be Mr Assad.

On Syria, Annan Spokesman Tells ICP Mood Is Out of Game, Colonel In

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 14 -- After the UN Security Council authorized an advance team of observers for Syria in a rare Saturday meeting, Inner City Press asked Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin about envoy Kofi Annan's General Robert Mood, who reportedly left Damascus while the Syrian foreign minister and first deputy were briefly away.

  Churkin said this happened and, stranger still, when a Russian diplomat inquired at Kofi Annan's office in Geneva when Mood would return to Syria, he was told that Mood's return "should not be anticipated." Churkin went on to say that professionalism is required and that "there are other people."

  Inner City Press immediately wrote to Kofi Annan's spokesman Ahmad Fawzi to ask "Why did Mood leave when he did, and more importantly, why has he not gone back since? Is he going back? When? Is he going to be replaced?"

  Now, this answer has been received from Fawzi:

From: Ahmad Fawzi
Date: Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 2:31 PM
Subject: Qs on Gen. Mood, list of 50 violations, & still Kofi Annan Foundation
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com

Its really very simple. Major-General Mood completed his assessment mission and came back to Geneva to report to the JSE, before returning to Norway, mission accomplished. There was never any intention of him going back. The advance team of observers is being led by a Colonel.

The choice of Force Commander for the full observer mission will be made by the Secretary General, once the Security Council passes a resolution authorizing it.

  This will be news to Syria, whose Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari told Inner City Press his government wants Mood to come back and keep negotiating "the protocol." Other diplomats at the UN on Saturday told Inner City Press that Mood was miffed that he wasn't accorded more pomp by the Syrian government; note that now the advance team is being led by a lower level Colonel (not named by Fawzi).

  Fawzi also answered Inner City Press' question on the "fifty violations" mentioned by Syrian Ambassador Ja'afari, and again didn't answer the questions about the Kofi Annan Foundation:

"50 Violations: there will violations by both sides. This is not unusual in this situation, both sides will be testing each other. We hope the arrival of UN observers will encourage the parties to exercise restraint and embark on the political process envisioned in the 6-point plan.

"Fund-raising by the KA Foundation: again, I don't speak for the Foundation. UN activities are funded either through the regular budget, or through extra-budgetary sources. For information on the latter please go to the Controller."

  But the Kofi Annan Foundation referred all questions to Fawzi. This is called a run around. But it is more responsive than the spokesperson team of Ban Ki-moon. Watch this site.

At UN, Quotes of Peacekeepers to Syria Point to DPKO Chief & His Country's PR?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 30 -- Amid complaints that Kofi Annan's mission to the Syria is meant to keep Assad in power, the UN has repeatedly refused to answer Press questions about who is part of Annan's team or whether the UN has any role in selecting or vetting them.

  Now there are quotes from a self-described senior Western Security Council diplomat that the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) is sending an advance team to Syria, with an eye to shifting some 250 observers from its UN Peacekeeping Missions UNIFIL in Lebanon and UNDOF in the Golan.

  Because this seems a strange way for the UN to be communicating, Inner City Press on March 30 asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey to confirm these DPKO moves, and to state whether the chief of DPKO is sharing such information with all 15 Security Council members or other the Permanent Representative of his own country, which has appointed the last four Under Secretaries General for Peacekeeping in a row.

  Del Buey paused and then told Inner City Press to ask the Kofi Annan team: "There are reports that are coming from leaks or reported leaks from the Council... I believe that Mr. Annan is coordinating the efforts in Syria and I would leave it to his spokesman to comment on that. "

  While Annan's spokesman Ahmad Fawzi has for example been willing to confirm that Annan recently gave a six month UN contract to Martin Griffiths, who resigned from his last job in Geneva amid an embezzlement scandal, this is a question about UN DPKO and its chief, Herve "The Drone" Ladsous, so named because he had proposed the use of drones and even the interception of communications, without specifying if the information collected would go to all member states or only his own.

  Ladsous pointedly refuses to answer questions about his drone proposal, or other questions about peacekeeping, in Haiti and South Sudan.

  As first reported by Inner City Press, when Annan conducted meetings at the UN with diplomats from among others Syria, China and Iran, he then met with Ladsous, the only one of the meetings the Press was not allowed to photograph.

  Friday Inner City Press asked Del Buey, what is Ban Ki-moon's role in all this? Has Ban, as reported, lost control?

  Del Buey said that Ban and the Arab League appointed Annan, but Annan takes it from there: "Mr Kofi Annan is managing, is directing, is responsible for the peace process in Syria."

   Pro-Assad media, it should be noted, describe Annan as the "UN" envoy, and as Inner City Press first reported, Annan's Arab League selected deputy Nassar El-Kidwa has not been allow into Syria.

  El-Kidwa is in Istanbul, meeting with the opposition and Friends of Syria. Kofi Annan, not surprisingly, has not gone: his moves are not favorably viewed by the opposition.

  Intrigue and secrecy in mediation is one thing. But from a UN peacekeeping chief and his country's Permanent Representative, they may be quite another. Watch this site.

As UN Proposes Peacekeeping Surveillance, Opposition to DPKO's "Spymaster" Ladsous and His "Drones"

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, March 23 -- In a recent closed door meeting of the UN's Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, the UN's top peacekeeper Herve Ladsous made proposals on "surveillance" that have stirred opposition.

  The opponents say Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to be put atop the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, is moving "to use drones and communications interception," as one well-placed Troop Contributing Country's representative complained to Inner City Press.

  "He can't even handle keeping South Sudan covered by helicopters," the representative said derisively. "And now he wants drones? What commercial interest is being this? And how could we be sure the information collected would stay with the UN?"

  These and other C-34 members' comments reflected a distrust of Ladsous, who last year replaced fellow French bureaucrat Alain Le Roy. Under the two men, the UN Peacekeeping Mission in former French colony Cote d'Ivoire helped turn out and then arrest anti imperialist Ivorian leader Laurent Ggabgo.

  Unlike Le Roy, however, Ladsous refuses to answer even the simplest of questions, such as whether his DPKO now belatedly has military helicopters flying in South Sudan, or why his mission in Haiti has no standing claims commission to handle the complaint it introduced cholera to the island.

   "Who would decide who they would spy on," the skeptic asked, "and who would get the information?"

   Another opined that this would be a way for "Western intelligence services" to drape themselves in UN blue - and immunity. A Secretariat staffer complained of a proposal for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to have his own intelligence service.

  There was opposition from within DPKO itself. One staff member said, "Ladsous already said he is not a visionary, fine. But now he wants to be a spymaster?"

  More sympathetic sources describe DPKO's first drone idea as being in the Congo but failing due to heavy jungle cover, with Ladsous' focus now shifting to where he has been under fire in South Sudan, particularly Jonglei.

  There are other issues slowing down the C-34 process, as Inner City Press reported last Friday. (Since then, Inner City Press has been inquiring into and being contacted about the surveillance issue).

  What's being called "Ladsous' drone" proposal is among the C-34 sticking points. It is not going anywhere soon -- but some wish Ladsous were, for the good of the UN. Watch this site.

As Annan Briefs UN SC, Syria's Six Point Response Put Online by ICP: Discussion in Damascus Sunday

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, March 16, updated -- Syria asked Kofi Annan as Joint Special Envoy of the UN and Arab League  to get guarantees from neighboring states not to arm the opposition, accoring to a translation of Syria's answer obtained by Inner City Press. Only after that could there be monitoring.

  Inner City Press obtained a copy of the "unofficial translation" of the "non-paper answer of the Syrian government," which ICP is now exclusively putting online here.

Update: Inner City Press asked Syrian Ambassador Ja'afari about the "non-paper." He said that this "Syrian answer" is in the nature of an "aide memoire," informal, and will all be discussed as a "comprehensive political process," not as preconditions, "on the technical level" beginning Sunday in Damascus. He did not answer if Arab League selected Deputy Nasser al Kidwa can go. Video here, from Minute 3:10.
 

  In Point 2 Syria stated:

"it is requested from the Special Envoy to provide guarantees to the Syrian government that the armed groups will cease all armed aggressions and give up their weapons to the dedicated authorities in exchange for a full pardon.

"It is also demanded from the Special Envoy that the neighboring countries take necessary measures to control the traffic of armaments through their borders.

"It will be requested from the Special Envoy that the countries who have called publicly to finance and provide weapons to the armed groups to stop from doing so.

"When the Special Envoy could provide the above-mentioned guarantees, the Syrian government can discuss with him the idea of putting in place a neutral monitoring system. Hence it seems at this stage too premature to discuss this mechanism."

  The answer does express a willingness to arrange another visit of the central prison in Allepo.

  Before Kofi Annan briefed the Security Council on Friday morning, German Permanent Representative Peter Wittig stopped and told the press of increased defections of Syrian soldiers who will not kill "for a ruling family."

An Annan press conference which had been expected for Thursday in Geneva was canceled, replaced by selective quotes from former UN communications official Ahmed Fawzi.

Update: When the Security Council session ended Friday morning, Inner City Press asked Council president Mark Lyall Grant about the non-paper answer. He would not comment on it. From the UK transcript:

Inner City Press: this non-paper answer of Syria to Kofi Annan. It says that he will have to get guarantees from neighbouring states that the the opposition wouldn’t be armed before they could even discuss monitoring. I just want to ask you: one, have you seen the document, and two: is that your understanding of what they’ve said to Kofi Annan?

Amb. Lyall Grant: I’m not going to comment on any details, you can ask Mr Annan that question.

 But no one in Geneva did ask Kofi the question. In New York, another Permanent Representative told Inner City Press that the Council members got nothing in writing.

Sources told Inner City Press that Annan had not directly conveyed to Council members Assad's first answer, but rather asked Russia to help with persuading Assad. Inner City Press obtained a copy of the "unofficial translation" of the "non-paper answer of the Syrian governemnt," which ICP is now exclusively putting online here.

UN's Pascoe Admits Failure on #Kony2012, Joins Ocampo in Praise, Ban Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 9 -- While UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his spokespeople have had nothing to say about the #Kony2012 phenomenon, except to belatedly direct Inner City Press to a months-old report, on Friday Ban's outgoing Political Affairs chief Lynn Pascoe praised the video and initiative.

  Inner City Press asked Pascoe to respond to critiques of the 29 minute film including that it misrepresents the conflict in Uganda and now Central Africa. Video here, from Minute 13.

  But Pascoe said that the attention the video is getting will be helpful, after less than successful UN mediation with President Chissano, and ostensible coordination between UN Peacekeeping mission which as Inner City Press reports can barely do their current jobs in South Sudan and the Congo.

Pascoe said, "I watched it, I was impressed with the work that was done. I believe that one of our biggest problems with the LRA has been getting attention to it.... We've been working closely with the African Union, without great success. These are ferocious crimes that need to be finalized."

Also outgoing International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo has also praised the film -- not surprisingly, perhaps, since he is in it. What does his successor think? Watch this site.

Footnote: Pascoe's comments came at a press conference on UN guidelines for mediators on sexual violence. Inner City Press asked why the UN team to Syria includes no women, but includes Congo envoy retread Alan Doss. "He may go in," Pascoe said, while playing up women's essentially back-office role.

  The third panelest Ould Abdullah did not answer, but off camera told Inner City Press of his recent work on the Sahel. The UN's sexual violence in conflict expert Margot Wallstrom spoke more directly, saying that the UN must do better. With this, we agree.

As UK Lyall Grant Regrets UN Envoy Banned from Sierra Leone, Of Meece's Meekness, Frechette in Breeze

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 4 -- After UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon capitulated to the government of Sierra Leone and abruptly removed UN envoy Michael von der Schulenburg from the country, some UN officials close to Ban complained to Inner City Press about "the S-G's weakness."

  "What kind of message does it send," a senior Secretariat official asked Inner City Press, "when Ban sells out his own appointees at at the drop of a hat?"

  On Friday, Inner City Press asked the Security Council president for March Mark Lyall Grant of the UK about Schulenburg's removal. Speaking in his national capacity because the Council won't discuss it until March 22, Lyall Grant did not directly criticize Ban, but said "the ERSG was put in a difficult position by the government of Sierra Leone.... We regret that, he left earlier than originally planned." Video here, from Minute 28:45.

  Lyall Grant went on to list other recent controversies about "host country consent," for example the Democratic Republic of the Congo where, he said, the government threatened that the UN Mission should leave. He added that was "resolved." But how?

  In DRC, Ban's envoy Roger Meece said almost nothing amid Joseph Kabila electoral controversy -- the blocking of opposition candidates, the torching of polling stations. While such meekness may be Meece's personality, Ban is sending the message that this is how to succeed in his UN.

  Notably, Ban has refused to support in any way his own appointee as chair of the Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, Louise Frechette, when she belatedly rule inappropriate the participation of Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva, whose 58th Division is depicted in Ban's own Panel of Experts report as engaged in war crimes.

  While other Permanent Representatives of Permanent Five members of the Security Council make excuses for Ban, intent only on securing top UN management positions from him, Lyall Grant has shown himself willing to speak some truth. Watch this site.

In Asia Group, Sri Lanka Says Stands Behind Silva, Group Letter Not Agreed To

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 24 -- Two days after Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva was ruled "inappropriate" to participate as the Asia-Pacific Group's representative on the UN Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, the Asia Group met Friday behind closed doors about the controversy.

For four weeks, Inner City Press has questioned the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon and diplomats from Asian countries how they could accept Silva as adviser on peacekeeping, given how he appears in Ban's own Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka, as commander of the 58th Division shelling hospitals and killing people trying to surrender.

And so on Friday afternoon Inner City Press stood outside UN Conference Room 4, posing questions to the Ambassadors who went in and out of the meeting. Then and afterward, a picture of the meeting emerged and is exclusively reported here.

  Sri Lanka, represented in the meeting by Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona, Deputy Permanent Representative Shavendra Silva and other staff, wanted the Asia Group to write a letter to SAG chairperson Louise Frechette as well as to Ban Ki-moon. (Sri Lanka may also want to write to another on-the-record UN official; many have off the record condemned Silva's nomination, and Ban Ki-moon's silence.)

  Kohona reportedly said, you have to draw a line or only the small and weak will be targeted. Then he said that he had told "the capital" -- Colombo, the Rajapaksa government -- and the capital determined to stand behind Ambassador Silva.

  Kohona was chided for having "made representations" about solving the embarrassing standoff. But now he said that while those representations had been made, they weren't valid, only the Group could change its endorsement.

  Inner City Press has already reported that there was no vote on Silva, after Sri Lanka talked Saudi Arabia and Nepal, and now some say Fiji, into withdrawing their candidacy.

  Now, Inner City Press has learned that it was "Sri Lanka" that was "endorsed by the Group" on January 19, to participate in the first meeting of the SAG, held January 19 and 20, 2012 -- this according to the Asia Group's own minutes.

  Kohona has argued publicly that it was Silva who was endorsed, personally. Strangely, it was Deputy Permanent Representative Silva who negotiated with the Permanent Representative of Saudi Arabia on January 9 and 18. Still, after that, "Sri Lanka" -- not Silva -- "was endorsed by the Group."

  In the closed door meeting, Inner City Press has learned, Kohona asked for a decision that the Asia Group send a letter to Frechette and Ban Ki-moon.

  This was not agreed to. Rather, the chair of the Group for February, Maldives, said that there was no consensus on a letter, calling the situation a "minefield to maneuver."

Fiji, which has itself chafed when former Secretary General Kofi Annan said it might not be able to keep getting paid for sending UN peacekeepers after the coup d'etat there, spoke up for Sri Lanka, saying that there should be consultations including about sending a letter.

Kohona then shifted back and said there was no rush, there were "two months." Leaving the meeting room he told Inner City Press, "three months."

  Silva left the meeting room talking with Fiji's representative, with whom Inner City Press not infrequently converses. Silva, too, used to speak.

  As Inner City Press has told a Sri Lankan paper which has asked, it was nominating Silva to the SAG which stirred up the recent news here. Inner City Press is reliably told that External Affairs minister G.L Peiris was not in favor of Silva's nomination, but people above him were. Thus we can say: it is the Rajapaksa brothers themselves who have of late put civilians deaths in Sri Lanka back in the news, and brought Sri Lanka into some disrepute, now going back on representations and seeking support playing the "small and weak" card.

  Already, Maldives -- which suffering what is arguably its own coup d'etat during all this and was represented as chair by a junior diplomat who refused to summarize the meeting at its conclusion -- is preparing to "hand off" the issue to the Group's chair for March, the Marshall Islands. The "small and weak" indeed.

   So what of the other states in the Asia Group? We'll have more on this. Watch this site.

Footnote: numerous diplomats told Inner City Press it was "outrageous," as one of them put it, that the Sri Lankan Mission had asked and gotten UN Security to prohibit the Press from covering the February 22 meeting in 380 Madison Avenue as it covered Friday's meeting in the UN North Lawn building.

  The same Sri Lankan mission personnel were present Friday but did not try. (There were no other media organization staking out the meeting, despite some belated and opportunistic pick-ups.)

  Meanwhile Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesman inserted into Thursday briefing transcript a kneejerk defense of the exclusion of the Press, then abuptly ended the briefing. This is Ban's UN. Click here for Inner City Press' February 24 interview with Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar -- and consider how the UN has come to this.

On Silva, Ambassadors Meet With UN Peacekeeping, Rice Says Concerned, Immunity Letter from USUN Surfaces

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 17, updated -- Three weeks ago Inner City Press began asking the UN and then the US Mission to the UN how they could accept as a UN "Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations" General Shavendra Silva, whose Division 58 is repeatedly named in connection with war crimes in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka.

  On February 14, Bangledesh's Permanent Representative told Inner City Press he, India and Pakistan were telling Sri Lanka to "fix it."

  On February 16, Pakistan's Permanent Representative confirmed this and said there was a meeting on February 17 on the topic. That meeting, of ambassadors with the two Under Secretaries General for peacekeeping, Inner City Press understands, took place Friday at 9:45 am.

At 10:30 am Friday, Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Susan Rice about a letter it found that that Russell F. Graham, Minister Counselor for Host Country Affairs at the US Mission to the UN, provided to Silva's lawyers to tell a US Federal Court that Silva, as Sri Lanka's Deputy Permanent Representative, has diplomatic immunity. On that basis, this case against Silva was dismissed.

  Inner City Press is putting the letter online, here.

Ambassador Rice took the question, some from Inner City Press on Sudan, and said, "These are two different things. The State Department has to respond on immunity. He unfortunately or fortunately is an accredited diplomat."

Then, more generally on Silva, Rice told Inner City Press, "it's very concerning that someone with his background would be selected to serve on this advisory group. We have conveyed this to member states, as well as to the Secretariat. There are a lot of efforts underway to address [this], probably best not to be discussed publicly."

Moments later, another Security Council Permanent Representative approached Inner City Press and said, "on the Sri Lankan, you have done well." Inner City Press has sent questions to USGs Malcorra and Ladsous:

"Hello. Asking for an answer before noon: I understand that on the matter of Shavendra Silva, who is named in the S-G's Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka as in charge of Division 48 which is described engaged in war crimes, ambassadors met with UN Peacekeeping today. I am asking you directly to confirm this, and to state the status of Mr. Silva on the Senior Advisory Group, and at this stage, your view."  

  At Friday's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked again, and Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesman Eduardo Del Buey said he had no information, to "ask DPKO's spokesman."

Update of 6:34 pm: DPKO's spokesman has written in to note that in response to the request for a confirmation before the noon briefing, he "visited" and sent a text message. Noted. But the request was clear: confirm, which could be done even in a 160 character text message. The problem here is substantive: a UN Secretary General and Under Secretaries General who "have nothing to say" about an alleged war criminal -- or a commander of a division accused of war crimes - advising them.

  Inner City Press reiterated, it is a question for Ban and his spokespeople, including because Ban's own High Commissioner for Human Rights wrote him on this topic - as she told Inner City Press at the General Assembly stakeout on February 13 -- and because Silva is in Ban's own report.  We are still awaiting an on the record response, which has been re-requested from Ban's office as well as from USG Malcorra and her spokesman.

Update of 2:20 pm, Feb 17: Inner City Press has been sent this by the DPKO spokesman:

"I can confirm that DPKO-DFS leadership today facilitated a meeting with some Member States. As the spokesperson's office has previously said, the selection for this position on the Special Advisory Group is for the Member States. Since the selection has become known to the Secretariat, we have actively facilitated Member States in their discussions to consider this matter. We have nothing to say at this stage on our views of the membership of the Special Advisory Group."

   What does it say about Ban's UN that it "has nothing to say" about the nomination as a "Senior Adviser" on Peacekeeping of a military commander named in Ban's own Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka as engaged in the shelling of hospitals and presumptive execution of those seeking to surrender?

  Prior to these developments, the Sri Lankan Mission's action was to send a letter of complaint to Inner City Press, sending a copy to Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky as well as to some in the UN press corps.

Inner City Press in less than 24 hours published and responded to the letter, citing only some of the many references to Silva's Division 58 in the report.

Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 11 -- For two weeks Inner City Press has covered the selection to the UN "Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations" of Sri Lankan General Shavendra Silva, whose Division 58 is named in UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts' report on alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka.

  Late on February 9, after Inner City Press published brief questions and answers with Silva, Sri Lankan Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona and Ban himself, the Sri Lankan Mission sent a letter to Inner City Press, with copies to Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky and the President of the UN Correspondents' Association.

  These cc's may be as interesting as the letter itself. We publish the letter in full, here, and respond to it below.

   The Sri Lankan mission takes issue with Inner City Press' citation to Ban's Panel of Experts report, writing that

"Ambassador Shavendra Silva pointed out during UNCA's screening of 'Lies agreed upon,' that the POE report had inaccurately represented the facts with regard to the Divisions involved. Nowhere in paragraph 73 and 90 of the Report does it make any reference to his own Division being responsible for shelling the No Zones or the PTK hospital."

  The simplest rebuttal is simply to example the Panel of Experts report itself, online, which we will now quote from:

 In Paragraph 62, Silva appears: "six major battalions were active in the final stages of the war, including... the 58th Division (commanded by Brigadier Shavendra Silva)." That is Silva's Division.

  Here's from Paragraphs 90 through 92 of Ban's Panel of Experts report:

90. Fighting in the area intensified as part of the expressed efforts by the 55th and 58th Divisions to capture PTK by 4 February... in the week between 29 January and 4 February, PTK hospital was hit every day by MBRLs and other artillery, taking at least nine direct hits. A number of patients inside the hospital, most of them already injured, were killed, as were several staff members. Even the operating theatre was hit. Two ICRC international delegates were in the hospital when it was shelled on 4 February 2009. The shelling was coming from SLA positions.

92. The GPS coordinates of PTK hospital were well known to the SLA, and the hospital was clearly marked with emblems easily visible to UAVs. On 1 February 2009, the ICRC issued a public statement emphasizing that "[w]ounded and sick people, medical personnel and medical facilities are all protected by international humanitarian law. Under no circumstance may they be directly attacked."

  That is a war crime, and it is attributed in Ban's Panel of Experts report to Silva's 58th Division, as well as the 55th. That, it seems, is the Sri Lankan mission's defense: that war crimes were committed by other Divisions (too). Fine, then: the reference to Paragraph 90 should be to 90-92, with 62 as the intro to Silva.

  Likewise, the Sri Lankan mission crows that a lawsuit against Silva was dismissed without stating that it was strictly on grounds of diplomatic immunity: that Silva is now an Ambassador to the UN. The decision by Judge Oetken concludes:

"Notwithstanding the gravity of the allegations made by the plaintiffs in this case, the diplomatic immunity mandated by 22 U.S.C. § 254d precludes this Court from considering the merits of their claims against Silva, at least while he is cloaked with immunity as a United Nations representative."

  On the killing of surrenderees, the Sri Lankan mission takes issue with the inference Ban's Panel of Experts draws:

2. The “White Flag” incident

170. Various reports have alleged that the political leadership of the LTTE and their dependants were executed when they surrendered to the SLA.[81] In the very final days of the war, the head of the LTTE political wing, Nadesan, and the head of the Tiger Peace Secretariat, Pulidevan, were in regular communication with various interlocutors to negotiate a surrender. They were reportedly with a group of around 300 civilians. The LTTE political leadership was initially reluctant to agree to an unconditional surrender, but as the SLA closed in on the group in their final hideout, Nadesan and Pulidevan, and possibly Colonel Ramesh, were prepared to surrender unconditionally. This intention was communicated to officials of the United Nations and of the Governments of Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as to representatives of the ICRC and others. It was also conveyed through intermediaries to Mahinda, Gotabaya and Basil Rajapaksa, former Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona and senior officers in the SLA.

171. Both President Rajapaksa and Defence Secretary Basil Rajapaksa provided assurances that their surrender would be accepted. These were conveyed by intermediaries to the LTTE leaders, who were advised to raise a white flag and walk slowly towards the army, following a particular route indicated by Basil Rajapaksa. Requests by the LTTE for a third party to be present at the point of surrender were not granted. Around 6.30 a.m. on 18 May 2009, Nadesan and Pulidevan left their hide-out to walk towards the area held by the 58th Division, accompanied by a large group, including their families. Colonel Ramesh followed behind them, with another group. Shortly afterwards, the BBC and other television stations reported that Nadesan and Pulidevan had been shot dead. Subsequently, the Government gave several different accounts of the incident. While there is little information on the circumstances of their death, the Panel believes that the LTTE leadership intended to surrender.

  The (false) assurances "conveyed by intermediaries" were conveyed through Ban Ki-moon's own chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, who has declined numerous requests from the Press to answer questions about his role. Kohona, too, the head of Sri Lanka's mission, is named in the paragraphs above.

  (Inner City Press was already the first to report that the reference to "Defence Secretary Basil Rajapaksa" was an error by the UN.)

   Now it must be stated, with all due respect but to provide context to the cc's, that it is not disputed that Kohona had a prior financial relationship with the President of UNCA; and that Ban Ki-moon's own chief of staff is at least a witness to the above-described war crime.

  What's strange is that Inner City Press has previously, including in the Q&A after UNCA screened in UN, without the normal approval process the government's "Lies Agreed To" as a rebuttal to a documentary that was NOT screened inside the UN, asked Silva about war crimes, and published all his answers.

   But only now does the Sri Lankan mission, by Waruna Sri Dhanapala the "Counselor to Permanent Representative" Palitha Kohona, write to Ban's spokesman and UNCA, not only the President with whom PR Kohona has a previously financial relationship, but also other UNCA members, who in turn forwarded it more widely.  Is the heat on?

On February 10, after received the above-quoted letter at 11 pm the night before, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky about letters received, as partially recorded in the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: I wish I had been able to follow this up with Mr. Ladsous when asked about this selection of Shavendra Silva, who is inthe Secretary-General’s report on Sri Lanka as the head of a division, said that 'the matter is being considered further.' I wasn’t clear what that meant by the Secretariat, or by the Asia Group or by Sri Lanka. I wanted to know if you can find out what that is, and also I have been at least CCed on a number of letters that have been addressed to the Secretary-General about this issue, of taking what people seem to see as an alleged war criminal and making him an adviser, or selecting him or allowing him to be selected, and I wanted to know how many letters have you received and is it being reconsidered, where does this stand?

Spokesperson Nesirky: The Secretary-General himself told you, as you know, that this is a decision by Member States. At this point, that is the end of the story, okay.

Inner City Press: So there is no effort by the Secretariat, in any way, to speak to the Asia Group or to the country of Sri Lanka?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I also heard what Mr. Ladsous said, the Under-Secretary-General, as I was sitting right next to him..

Amid Move to Switch From Criminal Silva, Ban Dismisses Predecessor Criticism

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 3 -- For a week UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's office has been questioned about accepting alleged war criminal Shavendra Silva as one of Ban's Senior Advisers on Peacekeeping Operations.

  While Ban's Spokesman Martin Nesirky has insisted that Ban is powerless to stop what several member states describe as a travesty or a "new low," some states asked by Inner City Press say they are pushing Sri Lanka to pull Silva back, even if only to replace him with Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona, who also played a role in the White Flag killing of prospective surrenderees, along with Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar.

 Acts of Shavendra Silva's battalion in 2009 are described in the UN's own Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka -- for example in paragraphs 73, 90 and 171, shelling hospitals and the killing those seeking to surrender, in which both Kohona and Nambiar played a role -- and lawsuits have been filed against Silva for war crimes. In September 2011, Inner City Press asked Silva about them, click here for that story.

  Nesirky told Inner City Press to "ask the Asia group" about their vote; Inner City Press did, and found that there was no vote, Sri Lanka convinced Saudi Arabia and Nepal to stand down.

  Nesirky told Inner City Press to look at the General Assembly resolution, and Inner City Press has, finding that nothing in the text says that Ban has to take whomever is referred to him, whatever their record.

 In fact, Susana Malcorra Ban's head of Field Support, and prospectively his new deputy replacing Asha Rose Migiro, met with member states and laid down criteria like "senior" status.

   Why didn't she and Ban say, don't nominate alleged war criminals?

On February 3, after trying to let the issue settle for a bit, Inner City Press again asked Nesirky:

Inner City Press: it has to do with, again, Shavendra Silva, but also something new. There has been an open letter by Edward Mortimer, who used to be the Communications Director for Kofi Annan, saying and stating as a fact that the UN investigating itself under Thoraya Obaid has been disbanded, did not proceed. I wanted you to confirm if that’s true.

Also, the organization that Mr. Mortimer is the chair of, called the Sri Lanka Campaign, has given a quote about Silva saying that it's very surprising that the Secretary-General would accept Mr. Silva given the allegations against him of war crimes in a Secretary-General’s report that hasn’t been acted on. [Response?] You said various things before. I have actually looked at the GA resolution; it doesn’t seem to on its face say that the Secretary-General has to accept it. So I want to ask you again, given that former UN officials are saying it’s a black mark for the UN to have an alleged war criminal as an adviser on peacekeeping, what’s the thinking in the Secretariat? Is there any attempt being made to defuse this, to seek another individual from Sri Lanka, or are you simply saying we have no power, we accept it whatever the consequences?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Matthew, it is not a question of accepting or not accepting. It is a question of the Member States deciding. It is a question for the Asia group among the Member States to decide — and that was their decision. And I suggest that you take it up with them.

Inner City Press: I have, and there was no election in the Asian group, and the reason I think it’s legitimate to ask you is this is that a former UN official is saying it is surprising that Ban Ki-moon accepts this, i.e. he thinks, having had experience in the UN system, that clearly the Secretary-General, he can make calls, he can attempt... I just wanted to know, if in fact there is a switch, which may take place to Mr. Kohona, is the Secretary-General in any way involved in that or entirely [powerless]?

Spokesperson: Well, with great respect to Edward Mortimer, whom I know, he is not in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General any more. And so he cannot be privy to what may or may not take place there, at all.

   So, under Ban the Office of the Secretary-General has gotten so much weaker? That was the question, and this so far is the answer. We will have more on this, and on the Campaign.

Here are on the record quote provided on this to Inner City Press by the director of the Sri Lanka Campaign Fred Carver:

"There are very serious allegations of war crimes leveled against Silva, allegations that the Secretary-General's expert panel has recommended be investigated - something that has not yet happened. There are also incredibly serious allegations leveled against Sri Lankan members of UN peacekeeping forces - over whom Silva would have oversight. This appointment therefore does not speak well for the UN's commitment to investigating atrocities, even when the perpetrators wear blue helmets."

And, after some back and forth, by Edward Mortimer, former Annan communications director:

“It’s disgraceful that someone against whom there are strong and credible charges of war crimes should serve as Deputy Permanent Representative of his country at the UN, and even more disgraceful that the Asian Group has elected him to serve on the Secretary-General’s Special Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations – disgraceful, and insulting to the Secretary-General. I’m surprised that he puts up with it.”

That is giving Ban (too much) benefit of the doubt, and still it raises questions. Watch this site.

In Addis, Ban Spins "Negligence" in S. Sudan As UN Stonewalls, Migiro Out

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- After charges of UN negligence in not ensuring that its Mission in South Sudan had military helicopters from mid November until the bloodshed in Pibor in Jonglei State, Ban Ki-moon on Sunday again put his spin on the issue.

  He told the AU Summit in Addis Ababa

"South Sudan is twice the size of Germany, with less than 100 kilometers of paved roads. Our peacekeepers are doing all they can — with what they have. Despite severe logistical constraints, particularly air transport, the mission succeeded in saving many lives during the recent crisis in Jonglei. Yet clearly: without air assets such as helicopters, we cannot do all that we must do to protect people. Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."

  Meanwhile Ban's spokesman in New York Martin Nesirky after twice refusing to say when Ban knew that UNMISS had no military helicopters and when what Ban's called his "begging" belatedly began on Friday referred Inner City Press on this to UN Peacekeeping, "DPKO and DFS" which he said would provide "the details."

  And so Inner City Press wrote to chiefs Herve Ladsous and Susana Malcorra and agency spokespeople, asking

1) when was the UN told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

2) if different, when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

3) when did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?

4) what does the UN say was the impact on its ability to protect civilians in Pibor of not having military helicopters?

Separately, in her January 23 video briefing, SRSG Hilde Johnson said after being told that Russian helicopters wouldn't fly, she was "subsequently" told that they would. I asked what date, she said she didn't have it with her but it would be provided. It hasn't been; I've asked about it at the UN noon briefing: can that date now be provided?

  But rather than answer these questions, including for information that was already promised to the UN, DPKO's Kieran Dwyer provided more spin, entirely dodging the questions on which Ban's spokesman had publicly referring Inner City Press. Dwyer wrote:

Susana Malcorra has forwarded your email to me (copy below). I have spoken with her; she was on her way to the airport for official travel when she received it. I believe that her briefing to you on the topic of the helicopters earlier in January covered most of these issues.

  Not only wass there still no date provided -- it's that after Malcorra in a "briefing" that she asked be mostly off the record, Ban gave a speech entirely passing the buck, and the UN has since refused to provide the basis of what Ban is saying: what did Ban know, and when did he know it?

  Significantly, the UN didn't even mention its failure to get military helicopters to Pibor until it was exposed, by Inner City Press, in a January 11 story. Then, rather than make disclosure and say how this would be avoided in the future, the spinning and stonewalling began, and has spread.

  So less than an hour after DPKO's Dwyer's response, Inner City Press asked him, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson again:

This is not responsive to the questions asked, nor does it provide the information that Hilde Johnson said at the end of her January 23 video briefing would be provided.

-- WHEN did Ban Ki-moon start "begging," in his words, for helicopters, before the events in Pibor?

-- when was Ban Ki-moon told that the Russian helicopters would not fly in South Sudan?

  In the more than 36 hours and counting since these reiterated questions were sent to DPKO, Ladsous, Malcorra and Johnson, not one of the questions has been answered.

  Meanwhile Ban to the AU in Addis said, "our peacekeepers are doing all they can... Today, I appeal once again to you and to all Member States."

  Ban also said "I have made Africa a priority from day one" - less than a week after he belated confirmed that he is dropping Asha-Rose Migiro of Tanzania as his Deputy Secretary General, as Inner City Press first reported, likely for the aforementioned Susana Malcorra of Argentine.

  Nor despite repeated public requests from the African Group has Ban appoined, as required, a full time Special Adviser on Africa.

  But the claims in Addis, amid continued refusal to take and answer the simple questions about presumptive negligence in South Sudan, is becoming outrageous, and will continue to be pursued. Watch this site.

UN's Ban Knew Had No Copters in South Sudan for 6 Weeks, Now Passes the Buck

By Matthew Russell Lee, Analysis

UNITED NATIONS, January 19 -- When the bloodbath in Pibor in South Sudan began, local people blamed the UN for not arriving fast enough, and not acting to try to stop the attackers.

  On January 18, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, "at the critical moment, I was reduced to begging for replacements from neighboring countries and missions. With limited resources, we tried our best."

  Is this a rare candid statement, or a passing of the buck?

  After asking questions and writing about the UN's slow response in Pibor as early as January 2, Inner City Press on January 11 reported that the UN had known since mid November that the Russian helicopters would not fly anymore in South Sudan.

  Immediately UN officials pushed back, saying that it is customary for helicopters to fly for the UN even after the UN has, as here, allowed the Letter of Assist to expire. But the UN had been told that the Russian helicopters would not fly.

  Inner City Press repeated asked Ban's Office of the Spokesperson about this; lead spokesman Martin Nesirky claimed that the UN would not be discussing its negotiations about helicopters.

  The representative of another large troop contributing country told Inner City Press that under Ban, and his Department of Field Support, paperwork has gotten "sloppy," and the Secretariat has tried to play one member state off against another. "They are just using the UN as a platform, a launching pad," the representative told Inner City Press.

  As Inner City Press quoted in its January 11 story, "Maybe when asked to come and help civilians, [the Russians] should have," one Security Council member told Inner City Press. "But they weren't required to and it's [the UN's] fault that they didn't have an agreement with the Russians. Now they're trying to blame it on them." Click here for Ban's January 18 "Responsibility to Protect" speech.

  In a January 16 interview with Inner City Press, DFS Under Secretary General Susana Malcorra said on the record that she and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had contacted the Russians over Christmas about the issue.

  Malcorra described belated moves to get Bangladeshi helicopters from the UN Mission in the Congo, and Ethiopian helicopters from Abyei in north Sudan.  As Inner City Press put it to her, this seems akin to a City fire commissioner, knowing for six weeks that the city does not have fire truck protection, belatedly casting all blame elsewhere when the fire occurs, and he belatedly contracts for other trucks.  Click here for the interview.

  It remains unanswered: if the UN could get alternate helicopters now, after the bloodbath, why wasn't this possible before, in order to stop the bloodshed?

  Inner City Press has asked. Rather than answer, the Secretariat has written, and Ban delivered, a speech entirely passing the buck. This is why this UN does not improve. Watch this site.

In S. Sudan, Still No UN Count, "Not Smooth" But When Did Ban Take Action?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 20 -- With bloodshed continuing in South Sudan's Jonglei State, Inner City Press on Friday asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky what Ban meant when he said that while "we saw it coming weeks before... At the critical moment, I was reduced to begging."

  Specifically, Inner City Press asked if Ban had started this "begging" in mid November, when the Russians informed the UN they would not fly their helicopters in South Sudan any more, or only at Christmas, when after five weeks without UN military helicopter coverage, the bloodshed started in Pibor? Video here, from Minute 7:17.

  Nesirky didn't directly answer, rather than that it was "not just the Secretary General working the phone." This leads to the question: while Ban in his January 18 speech appears to shift all the blame elsewhere, did he get involved early enough in the critical lack of helicopters to protect civilians in one of the UN's high profile missions?

  Nesirky said, "no one is saying this went as smoothly as we had wanted," and noted that Ban's envoy Hilde Johnson will appear next week by video link and Inner City Press may want to ask her. Fine -- but what about being able to ask Ban Ki-moon about it during his January 25 Q&A?

  Nesirky also said that Johnson's deputy Lise Grande conducted a video briefing after visiting Pibor. She did -- but she didn't mention that the UN had not had military helicopters, and had not brought "lethal assets to dissuade" attacks. The UN only began to speak about that after the Press was informed about the lack, by a member state, and reported it.

  Despite South Sudan elected officials providing numbers, high in Pibor and 80 in Duk County, Nesirky did not answer Inner City Press' question if the UN has its own number(s) in Duk, and if it yet has a casually figure in Pibor.

  The UN goes on issuing casualty figures in places it has little presence on the ground, while not doing so in South Sudan where it has a large peacekeeping mission. There are many outstanding questions, that not only Hilde Johnson but Ban Ki-moon should answer. Watch this site.

As UN Downgrades Pibor Dead to 15, It Stonewalls On Russian Copter Contract Lapse

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 13 -- After the UN was unable to send helicopters from Juba in South Sudan as 6000 fighters descended on Pibor, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous told the press that "dozens" had been killed there.

  After the Commissioner of Pibor County put the number of dead civilians at over 3000, the UN said that it would not make its own count of the dead, but rather focus on its belated humanitarian response.

On January 13, two days after Inner City Press exposed the reason for the UN's slow response -- that since mid November when the Russian helicopter pilots previously under UN contract in North Sudan told the UN Department of Field Support that they would not fly -- Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesman Eduardo Del Buey told Inner City Press that now the UN says that it found only fifteen bodies in and around Pibor town, and no witnesses to more.

  "The UN's cover up is complete," a whistleblowing UN official nearly immediately told Inner City Press. "For now."

  On January 12, after Inner City Press published its first story on what more than one Security Council members called DFS' and the UNMISS mission's "negligence" in continuing to reply on the Russian helicopter they had been told would not fly, Inner City Press asked Ban's main spokesman Martin Nesirky to explain how these UN actions were reasonable.

From the UN's January 12, 2012 transcript:

Inner City Press: I have some follow-up because it is a pretty serious matter, and there are…

Spokesperson: I agree, it is a very serious matter.

Inner City Press: So just the letters of assist; I wanted to say what the Russians say and I want to get your response to it, because otherwise I just have what they say. They say when they agreed to provide the helicopters they’ve never, we’re going to have machine guns on them, and, therefore, that it is not just a matter of a letter of assist not being signed, that there is a substantive change in what they were being asked to do and they made it clear to DFS that until this was approved in Moscow, they would not fly.

And therefore, according to them, DFS knew for since 1 December or at least the 15th until this incident took place in January that they had no helicopters and that’s what, I just, I don’t want to put too fine a point on it, but helicopters may fly in other instances after a signature, but in this case they were told it is too big a change, we won’t fly. And I wanted to know, what did DFS do when they knew that they had no helicopters?

Spokesperson: Well, Matthew, couple of things: one is that, while negotiations are going on, as I have just said, we don’t comment on negotiations between Member States and the Secretariat. I would simply say that there is more to this, and I think that you will be able to learn more about that.

  Inner City Press understood this last comment, that "there is more to this, and I think that you will be able to learn more about that," to mean that either the Department of Field Support or UNMISS, whose chief Inner City Press has in the past e-mailed only to be referred back to Ladsous' office in New York, would be providing the UN's explanation for it mis-reliance on the Russian helicopters from mid-November until the deaths, at least some of them seemingly preventable, in Pibor.

  But a full 24 hours went by with no word from DFS or UNMISS. So at Friday's noon briefing, with Nesirky traveling with Ban in Lebanon, Inner City Press asked Deputy Eduardo Del Buey when the projected explanation would arrive.

  Del Buey focused on another part of what Nesirky said, that the UN doesn't comment on ongoing negotiations with member states. Inner City Press began to ask a factual question about the UN's belated bringing in of Bangladeshi helicopters from MONUSCO in the DR Congo, but Del Buey ignored the question, trying to solicit other questions from other correspondents.

  When Inner City Press followed up, Del Buey asked, "Did you speak with DPKO?" Inner City Press has nearly given up trying to get DPKO chief Herve Ladsous to do what his predecessors did: answer questions from the media at least on the way in and out of Security Council meeting such as the one he attended on January 12.

  But Ms. Malcorra had said she would talk - and has yet to. Del Buey would not say when, but when Pressed about the UN's own count of the dead in Pibor can out with the "fifteen bodies" number, contradicting not only the Commission of Pibor County's 3000 figure, but Associated Press' figure of "hundreds if not thousands."

   And soon after Del Buey ended the wan briefing, a whistleblowing UN official told Inner City Press, "The cover up is complete....for now." Watch this site.

Footnotes: in other questions Del Buey did not answer at Friday's noon briefing, when Inner City Press asked about religious officials in the DRC demanding that the electoral officials there admit their errors or resign, Del Buey said that Nesirky "has explained MONUSCO's position and it remains the same." And what is MONUSCO's position on the legislative elections and what it called "lessons learned, for the future"?

  Inner City Press asked if Roed Larsen attended Ban's meetings in Lebanon and Del Buey wouldn't say. Inner City Press asked if Ban's five years in one position policy applies to the head of the Department of Management Angela Kane -- who Inner City Press has already reported may be headed to the Disarmament post in a form of musical chairs -- and Del Buey said "it applies," but declined to confirm anything else. Most troubling, however, was the UN's self serving minimization of the Pibor dead to fifteen. Watch this site.

At UN, Trip by Ban to Palestine & Lebanon Confirmed, Saleh Speaker, Who Pays Planes?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 6 -- Palestine will get a visit within the month from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Palestinian Observer to the UN Riyad Mansour confirmed to Inner City Press on Friday.

  Mansour said, on camera, that initially Ban was going to visit after Lebanon, Jordan and the [United Arab] Emirates, but now it would be delayed under late January or early February, in connection with Ban's trip to the African Union summit in Ethiopia.

  Earlier this week, when Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky was asked to merely confirm Ban's trip to Lebanon, Nesirky refused. Inner City Press asked him in the alternative to confirm the UN conference in Beirut, ostensibly on democracy, which Ban and others would attend, and to provide the speakers' list.

  You can look for it yourself, Nesirky said. The list is still not on the UN's ESCWA web site, but Inner City Press is told that the speakers include, paradoxically, an adviser to Yemen strongman Ali Saleh. We'll have more on this, once the UN system is able to provide the speakers' list.

  Inner City Press asked Nesirky last month to disclose going forward -- therefore on this trip -- which countries or persons pay for the travel and planes of Ban and his entourage.

  This came after Inner City Press asked the President of the General Assembly about his travel with Ban, and he acknowledged that Qatar provided a plane in connection with their trip to Somalia.

  Who will be paying on these forthcoming trips? It seems like basic transparency that a public figure should disclose who is paying for his travel. We'll see.

Footnotes: After Mansour's stakeout, Inner City Press asked him about its exclusive reporting earlier this week from sources inside the Department of Political Affairs and beyond that nominated to replace Lynn Pascoe as head of DPA is another American, higher profile: Alejandro Wolff. Click here for that exclusive must-credit story by Inner City Press.

(c) UN Photo
Mansour, confirmer of Ban trips, 2007 with Alex Wolff: to be confirmed, for DPA?

Wolff's role as US Deputy Permanent Representative was recalled during the all day Security Council fight about the assault on the flotilla to Gaza. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, August 20 -- For the seven weeks after Inner City Press first reported that Jerome Bonnafont, France's ambassador to India, was being tapped to replace fellow Frenchman Alain Le Roy as chief of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the UN has refused to confirm it.

  Now with Alain Le Roy already gone from the UN, amid charges of covered up negligence by peacekeepers in Southern Kordofan, and a failure to plan in advance for medical evacuation of Ethiopian UN peacekeepers in Abyei in Sudan, the French political establishment has already started congratulating Bonnafont.

  Inner City Press is today putting online a letter of congratulations addressed to Bonnafont at the UN in New York from Jean-Marie Bockel, a former French minister and mayor of Mulhouse, now Senator from Haut-Rhin in northern France.

  Bochel wrote, "I am happy to learn that you have been [named] Under Secretary General of the UN, in charge of peacekeeping operations."

  Previously, Inner City Press quoted diplomats to whom Bonnafont had already bragged that he had the UN job. Now Bonnafont is receiving letters of congratulations.

  There are several questions: why has the UN left the top job in DPKO empty at this time, when they had ample notice that Le Roy would leave on August 10?

  Why hasn't the UN been willing to describe their process for selecting a replacement? (One UN-based Permanent Representative said that besides Bonnafont there were two other candidates -- both French.)

Why does the top Peacekeeping slot essentially belong to France? Inner City Press asked Le Roy in his exit press conference if he didn't think it would make sense that his successor come from a major Troop Contributing Country, like Pakistan or Bangladesh or Nepal or India. Le Roy said, "It is up the Secretary General." Is it?

  Some joke that in naming Bonnafont, Ban Ki-moon is trying to please two countries: France bien sur, but also India since Bonnafont has been ambassador to India and is known there. Cold comfort.

  This is more and more a pattern with Ban Ki-moon. When the top spot at the UN mission in Iraq opened up, when Dutchman Al Merkert said he wanted to leave after two years, there were only three final candidates: all German.

  Inner City Press on June 24 reported that Michael von der Schulenburg, the German atop the UN in Sierra Leone, wanted the Iraq post, perhaps due to its antiquities, and that "Dutch politician Bert Koenders is set to replace UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's ally Choi Young-jin" at the UN in Cote d'Ivoire.

  As it turned out, Ban for Iraq set up a German troika of candidates, just as he's said to have constructed a phantom French troika for DPKO. Ultimately Ban gave the Iraq job to another German, Martin Kobler.

  But for DPKO, Bonnafont is already being congratulated from within the French political establishment, click here and watch this site.

Amid Conflicts in Libya, Syria, Sudan & Kosovo, Horn of Africa Famine, UN Reduces Q&A by 40%, Has "Nothing to Say"

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 12 -- As the Arab Spring turns to a bloody late summer, and according to the UN famine spreads in the Horn of Africa, UN headquarters in New York Friday confirmed it is moving to reduce its availability to the press by 40%.

  With UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon back in his native South Korea, Inner City Press on August 12 asked Ban's acting deputy spokesman Farhan Haq to explain why two of the expected five daily briefings next week, and possible the week after that, are being canceled at this time.

  Haq replied that there would be "nothing to say," and accused Inner City Press of being the only one "worried about this one way or another," claiming to have polled journalists at the UN and gotten their agreement to cancel briefings. (See UN's partial transcription, below).

  Haq refused to provide any details of his polling; at a press-related event hosted by the US Mission to the UN the evening of August 11, there were a number of complaints about Ban's Spokesperson's Office refusing to even do a daily ten minute briefing, as Inner City Press had reported, despite events in the world.

  Even on the questions asked of Haq on August 11, few were answered. Inner City Press asked about the reported "buzzing" of the Zam Zam IDP camp in Darfur by Sudan's air force. Haq had no information on this, and said that "some of these reports have not checked out."

  Three weeks ago, UN official Ivan Simonovic said that the UN's human rights report about Southern Kordofan in Sudan, which includes descriptions of Egyptian UN peacekeepers doing nothing as civilians were kiled, would be formally released "in two weeks."
  
   Inner City Press asked Haq to explain the delay, one week and counting. Haq said it isn't delay, he'll announce when it's released.

   In the Security Council, there are countries dissatisfied by the UN's delay, and trying to get emergency meetings of the Council. The Secretariat's lackadaisical delay and Haq's statement that these weeks there's "nothing to say" sends a message: there is no emergency, or even urgency.

Any response to letters to Ban from municipal officials in Northern Kosovo? No, Haq said, the letters are being "studied."

  For months Ban's Spokesperson's Office claimed that a letter from the New York State AFL-CIO then a group of Congresspeople about UN attacks on the broadcast engineers' union was "being studied." On August 12, Haq confirmed Inner City Press' August 11 report that seven more engineers are being laid off, on top of 17 other posts lost, as a "cost cutting" move.

  Inner City Press asked Haq if the 40% reduction in briefings is a cost cutting move. Haq replied that it's "standard procedure."

  But what about Ban Ki-moon's repeated canned claim to be "deeply concerned" about the loss of civilian lives in a conflict in Libya in which under Security Council resolution 1973 Ban is to have a coordinating role? Because it's August (Haq said Ban's lead spokesman is out to August 29) -- and Ramadan -- will there be "nothing to say" about that?

 In fact, at least in Syria and Libya, it has been said that "every day will be protest Friday during Ramadan." Is this the time for the UN to cancel briefings and press question and answer sessions?

  Inner City Press asked, asks and will continue asking, what is the problem with devoting a ten minute briefing each week day to answering questions? Watch this site.

From the UN's transcription of its August 12, 2011, noon briefing, for video click here:

At UN on Sudan, Darfur in Darkness, Kordofan Report Delayed, Will Pillay Explain?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 12 -- At the UN less and less is done about Sudan, on government abuses in Darfur and Southern Kordofan, regarding which the UN is withholding a damning human right report, which criticizes UN inaction, for well more than a week now.

  Three week ago UN official Ivan Simonovic told the Press that the report, an advance copy of which Inner City Press had already put online, would be released in two weeks. Now it still has not been, but the UN will not explain and instead seeks to further limit questions from the press.

  Simonovic's boss Navi Pillay will brief the Security Council on August 18, along with top UN humanitarian Valerie Amos; the topic as bragged about by the French mission will by Syria, with nothing on Sudan.

   The withheld report, as "leaked," says that UN peacekeepers then under the ultimate control of now departed DPKO chief Alain Le Roy did nothing as civilians were killed. For example:

42. On 8 June, UNMIS Human Rights witnessed the movement of four armed men (two armed civilians and two Central Reserve Police) carrying weapons in and out of the UNMIS Protective Perimeter without any intervention from the UNMIS peacekeepers guarding the premises.

   With the top UN Peacekeeping post now empty at this important time, with another Frenchman, mostly likely Jerome Bonnafont, in waiting, perhaps this explains DPKO blocking-by-edits the report, and Pillay's so far limited August 18 agenda for briefing the Council.

At the UN's noon briefing on August 12, Inner City Press posed several Sudan questions to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's acting deputy spokesman Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: Sudanese armed forces helicopters are buzzing and making hostile movements around the Zamzam refugee camp in Darfur. So I wanted to know, is that something that UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur] is aware of?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: We’d have to check whether it is. As is the case, some of these reports on the ground have not checked out. But we’ll check with UNAMID to see whether this is, whether this holds up.

Inner City Press: And what about the Southern Kordofan human rights report, I think Mr. Simonovic, it was three weeks ago today, was in here and said it would be released in two weeks. What’s the hold up?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: There is no hold up. It’s being finalized, and when we know for sure that it is coming out, we will certainly tell you.

  If there's no hold up, why does it take more than three weeks to "finalize" a completed report about a situation as grave as Southern Kordofan?

  Meanwhile in the Security Council on Southern Kordofan, the US only asked for a press statement, and according to the US Mission's statement given Friday to AP withdrew even that, blaming Russia and China. (For a UNSC Press Statement, any Council member can block it, not only the Permanent veto wielding members.)

  Now one wonders if the US, or France or UK, will at least have Pillay and Amos when they are in the Council give an update on Southern Kordofan, including the UN report that seems to be getting swept under the rug.

At UN on Syria, War of Spin & Briefings, Doubts on SyriaTel Sanctions, Ban's Call

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 10, updated with video -- As the UN Security Council met Wednesday about Syria, sources told Inner City Press from the outset to expect no formal Council Presidential Statement output at the end.

  A Western member's spokesman emerged and said "we just want to keep the pressure on Assad." When asked "how" he said, "through you, the media."

  Which a Council output not even on the table, inside consultations the issue became whether and how soon to get another briefing about Syria. A source told Inner City Press that the UK proposed another briefing in seven days.

  Inner City Press asked Baso Sangqu, the Permanent Representative of South Africa -- which along with India and Brazil has vice ministers in Damascus, click here for IBSA statement, put online by Inner City Press -- "will there be a briefing in seven days?"

  "No, not in seven days," Ambassador Sangqu said. "It's in the hands of the President, ask the President. But there's been a request for a meeting."

  When President of the Council for August Hardeep Singh Puri of India came out, Inner City Press sought to ask him. But US Deputy Permanent Representative Rosemary DiCarlo engaged Puri in a heated discussion for several minutes, in the public hall outside the Security Council.  Click here for YouTube video.

  At the end of the exchange, Inner City Press asked Puri about a briefing. "There will be a briefing," he said, "most likely next week."

  Later the Deputy Permanent Representatives of the Council's four European members clarified that they except top UN humanitarian Valerie Amos and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to do the briefing.

  Wednesday's briefing was done by Assistant Secretary General Oscar Fernandez Taranco, who for some reason did not speak to the press. The Western spokesman who said the media should pressure Assad was asked to have his country urge Taranco to speak to the press. But it did not happen.

  A cynic might say that the four European countries wanted to be seen -- and filmed -- as doing something on Syria; urging a Secretariat official to come and take questions on camera was less important or appealing.

  One also wonders why, after the meeting, the four Europeans and then Syria's Permanent Representative Bashar Ja'afari were the only ones to come speak at the formal UN stakeout. Russia's Vitaly Churkin spoke, on the stairs outside the Council, and said among other things it is disappointing that the Syrian opposition has not responded to reform proposals.

Inner City Press asked UK Deputy Permanent Representative Philip Parham to respond to this, and to complaints that sanctions against SyriaTel, the cell phone company, might make communications in the country more difficult, including for the opposition.

Parham noted his and his colleagues' previous statement that, in essence, violence and crackdowns have to stop to allow for dialogue. He said he could not respond on SyriaTel, not knowing the facts.

Ja'afari told Inner City Press, off camera, that SyriaTel is the regular cell phone company in his country. Inner City Press was going to ask him on camera, expecting him to come to reply to Parham's dismissal of his comparison between the London riots and events in Syria. But Parham was the last on-camera speaker.

Inner City Press asked Ja'afari if Assad would accept an envoy from Ban Ki-moon. Ja'afari replied that Assad's recent call with Ban was very productive. Quiet diplomacy? We'll see - watch this site.

As UNSC Statement on Syria Opposes Attacks on State, Does UN Deem Assad More Legitimate than Gaddafi?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- After the Syria Presidential Statement was adopted by the UN Security Council Wednesday with Lebanon "disassociating" itself, Inner City Press asked Council President Hardeep Singh Puri why the investigation of human rights violations called for in the penultimate drafts had been dropped.

  Ambassador Puri replied that "there was an issue as to whom would do the investigation." Moments later when Inner City Press asked again, UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant acknowledged "there was a concern that Syria would be investigating itself."

  Inner City Press asked Lyall Grant for the UK's understanding of the PRST's call to refrain from "reprisals against state institutions." He said that "we do not expect to see attacks on state institutions, even from the protesters."

  On a second round of questions, Inner City Press asked Lyall Grant and the three European deputies with him, from France, Germany and Portugal, to compare this call with Libya, where they are supporting attacks on Gaddafi regime state institutions.

  Does this mean they -- and their PRST -- are deeming Assad as still fundamentally more legitimate than Gaddafi?

  Lyall Grant referred the question to French deputy Briand, even as he himself was asked to answer it for the UK. Briand said, "there is no comparison." Later a journalist questioned if he meant Assad is much more legitimate than, and cannot be compared to, Gaddafi.

   Later Secretary General Ban Ki-moon came to the stakeout. Inner City Press tried to ask him how he would provide the requested report or "update" to the Security Council in seven day if Assad does not even take his calls. But Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky did not call on Inner City Press for a question, just as he did not following Ban's re-appointment to a second term, preferring then to call on UN Radio for a request for Ban's message to children everywhere.

Beyond dodging questions, one again has to wonder about the wisdom of putting atop the world body an individual who can't even get his calls returned -- and then asking this individuals for reports about the countries concerned. To be continued -- watch this site.

As UN Sits on S. Kordofan Report Until August, Silent on Mass Graves, Sudan Blocks Visas to Abyei for Rights Monitors

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 28 -- The UN's report on war crimes in Southern Kordofan, including inaction by UN peacekeepers, won't be released until “the first days of August,” Inner City Press was told Thursday by Ivan Simonovic, the New York representative of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay.

  Thirteen days ago, Simonovic said it would be released in two weeks. After that, Inner City Press put a copy of it online, here. Still the UN calls it a “leaked” report that is being edited. Will the portions critical of UNMIS peacekeepers be excised?

  Simonovic also told Inner City Press he asked the Security Council for support of visa request for civilian supporters of the new UNISFA force of Ethiopian soldiers in Abyei.

  Meanwhile a Sudanese diplomat praised Simonovic to Inner City Press, quoting Simonovic as saying he "has no mandate" in Southern Kordofan.

  An unresolved question is who in the UN would be held responsible for inaction by UN peacekeepers in Abyei and then Southern Kordofan.

 A day after former UNMIS force commander Moses Obi refused to answer questions referred to him by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the overall UN spokesman Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press “you've made your point on camera” and declined to say who was responsible for the former UNMIS.

  It is often said that armies should hold commanding officers responsible after the fact. But the UN seems to be saying that once a peacekeeping mission expires, no one speaks for it anymore, and by implication, no one is responsible.

  This is a question that Simonovic should answer, as well as a question Inner City Press asked at Thursday's noon briefing with Nesirky, for the UN's response to Southern Kordofan's governor (and ICC indictee) Ahmed Haroun admitting moving and mass-burying corpses. Mr. Simonovic will make himself available and address it, Nesirky said. So we'll be waiting - watch this site.

As South Sudan Celebrates Its Touchdown at UN, Darfur & S. Kordofan Face Deadly Blitz from Al Bashir

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 14 -- At the end of a long day and a much longer process, South Sudan Vice President Riek Machar told Inner City Press that people in Darfur could take hope from his country's admission to the UN on July 14. “It can be done,” he said. “Omar al Bashir needs peace.”

  Inner City Press asked Machar about the plight of Nuba peole in Southern Kordofan. “Bashir needs to abide by what was agreed in Addis,” Machar said. “If he does that, everything can work out.”

  But speaking to the Security Council on July 13, US Ambassador Susan Rice said Khartoum is “wavering” on the June 28 agreement with the SPLM-North. Inner City Press asked her at the Council stakeout, “they've actually kind of totally broken it. They've said that they don't stand behind it. What's your understanding of where it stands?”

  Ambassador Rice reiterated there, “the Government of Sudan did sign an agreement. And it would be most unfortunate if they formally reneged on that agreement.”

  South Africa's mission to the UN, preparing celebrations for the birthday of Nelson Mandela upon whose inauguration a song “Black President” was launched, took a lead in celebrating South Sudan's joining the UN on July 14. They wondered why, for example, the people of Western Sahara have had to wait so long, and those of Palestine.

  But Thursday was a good news day at the UN. Another longtime South Sudan proponent, Lumumba Stanislaus-Kaw Di-Aping, told Inner City Press that South Sudan is looking to rent space in Uganda House, next door to the US Mission.

  His minister Deng Alor, out on First Avenue, invited Inner City Press to visit Juba again, for what would be the third time. Then he got into an entourage of black limousine, the last of which had Virginia license plates.

  Months ago in the General Assembly lobby, Lumumba Stanislaus-Kaw Di-Aping told Inner City Press that the strategy of the SPLM was never to go for the touchdown, but in an NFL football analogy to move the ball ten yards at a time, from first down to first down. This week they scored their touchdown.

  It was day for dancing, most notably by yet another longtime South Sudan proponent, Ezekiel Lol Gatkuoth. But while the song “Signed Sealed Delivered, I'm Yours” had one meaning in Juba, it still rang empty Thursday in Kadugli, and through South Kordofan. These struggles continue -- watch this site.

After UN's Nuclear Meeting on Syria, Russia Calls It History, Damascus a Campaign

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 14 -- Even before the UN Security Council began meeting Thursday afternoon about the Dair Alzour in Syria, China's Deputy Permanent Representative Wang told the Press that “the issue shouldn't be here, it no longer exists.”

A Russian representative called Inner City Press aside and said, “We are only here because we are Council members. The Council is for threats to international peace and security, not for history.”

After Israel bombed Dair Alzour, the facility was destroyed. After the briefing -- and after for example French Ambassador Gerard Araud walked by the media assembled outside without saying anything -- Syria's Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari came out.

First he read to the press from former International Atomic Energy Agency director ElBaradei's book, “The Age of Deception,” about Israel's attack. Then he said that even if there were radiation at the site, it could have come from the bombs Israel had used.

Inner City Press asked Ja'afari if he thought the push to have this debate in the Security Council was related to the stalled draft resolution on the crackdown in Syria. Video here.

  Ja'afari said yes, it is an “orchestrated campaign against my country... They try to mobilize all agencies against Syria.” He spoke on (BlackBerry) camera about the European draft resolution, the attempt to put language about the crackdown into the UNDOF resolution (click here for Inner City Press' story on that) and to this “nucear” issues, adding, “they are so polite, they call it implementation of the safeguard agreement.”

Inner City Press asked him, “What's the next move?”

Amid UN Complaints on Ban's Budget, Pre-Coronation Reported

By Matthew Russell Lee, News Analysis

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- Even before it is decided who should be UN Secretary General from 2012 through 2016, news wire services have predicted with “100%” accuracy that Ban Ki-moon will and should be re-appointed, quoting unnamed “UN diplomats.”

  But why? Beyond questions about silence on human rights issues, and compromising the UN's purported impartiality in Cote d'Ivoire and elsewhere, on June 3 members of the UN's budget advisory committee complained to Inner City Press about Ban's just-made budget proposal.

  “He said it would be a three percent across the board cut,” a member of the UN Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Affairs told Inner City Press. “Then he comes in with three point seven, but implemented very haphazardly. There are no cuts to UN Women, but larger cuts to other departments.”

  Another ACABQ source wondered why member states would move so quickly to rubber stamp Ban for five more years right after he made a controversial but still secret budget proposal.

“This wouldn't happen in any democracy in the world,” the source said. In these fiscal times, how leaders proposal budgets is the major issue to judge them on. "Ban just dropped this one on us, the member states haven't even debated or even heard it -- and they want to give him a second term?”

Beyond this, as Inner City Press has pointed out since the resignation of Dominique Strauss-Kahn as head of the IMF and before, if that now vacant post goes to an Asian or even South Korean, it would change the UN balance, and quite possible bring out another candidate for the top UN spot.

If Ban is preaching democracy, why not at least wait to see if a competing candidate emerges? Watch this site.