UN's
Somali Envoy Says Press Is Accomplice to Genocide, No Info on
Norway's Role
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED
NATIONS, May 29 -- Testifying about Somalia to the U.S. Senate on May
21, a representative of Oxfam said that "the United Nations
Development Program gave direct financial support for police salaries
and some of these police were implicated in serious human rights
abuses." On May 29, Inner City Press asked the Somali
Transitional Federal Government's foreign minister Mohamed Abdullahi
Omaar to respond. "I'm appreciat[ive] of that worry," he
said, saying that the "concern.. speaks on behalf of the
Somalia individuals who suffer." Video here,
from Minute 21:36.
But
when Inner City Press less than an hour later posed the same human
rights question to the UN's envoy to Somalia, Ahmedou Ould Abdallah,
he called the question "irresponsible," the questioner an
"accomplice to.... genocide" and told Inner City Press that
"there will be more killing and anarchy [and] you will be
responsible." Video here,
from Minute 19:44.
Inner
City Press pointed about that it was Oxfam's testimony, and that is
seemed fair to ask how the UN is making sure the funding it gives in
Somalia supports and does not contravene human rights principles.
Ould Abdallah, who previously said that the press should not report
on the killing of civilians by African Union peacekeepers, disagrees.
He said the Somali police should be paid even if some "stole
money money" or committed "abuse." This is not the UN
policy. But the UN has become so out of control that no one dares to
reign Ould Abdallah in, or even tries.
When
Ould Abdallah attacked the media who reported on African Union
peacekeepers firing into a crowd of civilians in Mogadishu, and
compared these media outlets to Radio Milles Colines which stoked
genocide in Rwanda, both Human Rights Watch and press freedom groups
demanded he issue a retraction. Inner City Press asked about it at
the UN in New York, and was later told by senior UN officials that
Ould Abdallah had been told to retract it by headquarters, but had
not do so. So much for accountability.
Emblematic
is the lack of answers on how Ould Abdallah, according to a joint
Somali - Kenyan filing under the Law of Sea's Continental shelf
process, arranged for assistance from Norway and its Petroleum
Directorate. Inner City Press wrote about this and asked the UN and
Ould's spokesperson Suzie Price, but never received an answer.
On
Friday, the question was put to Ould Abdallah and he said he is "no
specialist," that he was unfamiliar with the filing that states
that he prepared it. "Ask Norway," he said. Video here,
from Minute 12:30. Inner City
Press already has -- click here -- but Ould Abdallah's non answers
on May 29 only raise more questions.
UN's Ban, Ould Abdallah at right, human rights not
shown
In
Somalia,
this has become a controversy. As first
reported by Inner
City Press, the filing states
that Ould Abdallah
"initiated
the preparation of preliminary information indicative of the outer
limits of the continental shelf of Somalia beyond 200 nautical
miles... In the preparation of this material the SRSG accepted an
offer of assistance from the Government of Norway... Both the Royal
Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Norwegian Petroleum
Directorate have been involved in the preparation... All of the
expenses related to the preparation of the present submission have
been covered by the Government of Norway."
Norway,
of course, is a major oil producer. Absent safeguards that do not
appear to be in place, it is viewed as a conflict of interest for
Norway to pay for and prepare a filing about drilling rights for an
African country described as having no government. And yet little has
been said, and the UN has accepted the filing. Call them pirates of
the pen.
Inner
City Press asked the UN spokesperson's office, which begrudgingly
sent the question to Ould Abdallah's spokeswoman, who never answered.
She was in the room Friday, and did not purport to answer. Nor would
they answer which countries are funding Somalia's armed forces. The
UN told Inner City Press
Subj:
Question on Somalia at Tuesday's Noon Briefing
From:
unspokesperson-donotreply [at] un.org
To: Inner City Press
Sent:
5/27/2009 10:20:50 A.M. Eastern Standard Time
Find
below the response to your question at yesterday's Noon Briefing on
UN support for police personnel of the Transitional Federal
Government, (TFG): The UN Development Programme has provided
training to civilian police officers in Somalia, under
internationally approved guidelines with emphasis on community-based
policing practices.
So
far, 2,775 police personnel have undergone this internationally
approved training by UNDP for the TFG. These are the only police
personnel who are eligible for the payment of stipends which is paid
according to strict human rights and financial accountability
standards.
Some
donors are supporting payment of stipends to UNDP-trained police.
So
who are the donors? It appears that Ould Abdallah, whenever he
doesn't like or doesn't want to answer a question, particularly a
financial questions, calls the questioner an accomplice to genocide.
And so it goes at the UN.
At
UN, Sri Lanka Sinks Lower than the Basement, Ban Criticized on Human
Rights
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED
NATIONS, May 28 -- The status of interred civilians in Sri Lanka has
sunk so low at the UN that even for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to
be invited to brief the Security Council on his recent fly-over the
conflict zone has resulted in opposition from China, Russia, Viet Nam
and others.
In a closed door Security Council meeting Thursday, these
countries and others suggested that since there is no more conflict,
Ban should not brief the Council but rather the General Assembly. It
was arranged that Ban will meet private with Russia and Turkey, the
Council presidents for May and June. At most, Ban will brief the
Council in the UN's basement, put on par with Sri Lanka's Ambassador
to the UN.
Meanwhile Ban
was lambasted by Human Rights Watch for having offered praise to
Sri Lanka's interment camps, in a way that contributed to the
vote-down of a call for a international investigation yesterday in
the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Inner City Press on Thursday
asked Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe to respond to the Wednesday
press release of Human Rights Watch, which
said
that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had regrettably undercut efforts
to produce a strong resolution with his recent comments in Sri Lanka.
Ban publicly praised the government for "doing its utmost"
and for its "tremendous efforts," while accepting
government assurances, repeatedly broken in the past, that it would
ensure humanitarian access to civilians in need.
Ban
also distanced himself from strong language used in April by the UN
under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, who
warned that the fighting in Sri Lanka could result in a "bloodbath."
Unlike Pillay, Ban also failed to press for an international inquiry.
"Secretary-General
Ban shares the blame for the Human Rights Council's poor showing on
Sri Lanka."
Nearly
24 hours after this press
release went online, Ms. Obake said that
the UN hadn't seen it. Video here,
from Minute 11:50. She said
however that on these issues "the Secretary General has been
very clear in public, perhaps more clear in private." Perhaps.
UN's Ban looking up - toward a Security
Council or GA "informal dialogue"?
After the noon briefing, the following arrived:
Subj:
Your questions on Sri Lanka
From:
unspokesperson-donotreply [at] un.org
To:
Inner City Press
Sent:
5/28/2009 2:17:18 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Just
to add to what we already said at the noon briefing:
The
Secretary-General has repeatedly said wherever serious and credible
allegations are made of grave and persistent violations of
international humanitarian laws, these should be properly
investigated.
In
addition, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, while
noting that the Human Rights Council will not agree to set up such an
inquiry at this point, says that more information will come out, more
evidence will emerge about what did and did not happen. So an
international inquiry could still happen further down the line. The
Office also said that international human rights law is quite robust
-- there are different ways and means to get to the truth and provide
some measure of accountabilty. Sometimes it takes years, but this
Session and this resolution do not close any avenues.
But
Ban's speech upon arrival in Sri Lanka on May 22, and his Joint
Statement with the government exiting the country the next day, speak
for themselves.
In
a briefing primarily about Pakistan, Inner City Press asked the UN's
top humanitarian John Holmes if the doctors who remained in the
conflict zone to offer treatment and casualty figures are still being
detained and interrogated by the government of Sri Lanka. They are,
almost Holmes said they have received ICRC visits. Yesterday the head
of the ICRC said that his Red Cross has no access to some Sri Lankan
"interment" camps. Holmes said that he disagrees. Who is
one to believe? Watch this site.
In
Sri Lanka, Red Cross Barred from "Interment" Camps Despite
UN's Rosy Picture
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED
NATIONS, May 27 -- While the International Committee of the Red Cross went
public Wednesday in Geneva with the fact that the Sri Lankan
government is running interment camps to which Red Cross workers do
not have access, in New York the UN's Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe
said that "since the Secretary General's visit to Sri Lanka, an
interim measure has been agreed" in which aid agency vehicles
including trucks are allowed into all Manik Farm zones, only not in
convoys and not with agency flags. Video here,
from Minute 2:30.
Inner
City Press asked Mr. Okabe to square to the two statements, if there
are camps that the UN has access to that the Red Cross does not. Ms.
Okabe claimed that Inner City Press hadn't heard the statement by the
UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs -- in fact, it
was that very positive report that Inner City Press was questioning
-- and then said that OCHA's John Holmes had spoken about food needs,
to the "follow
up with OCHA." Video here,
from Minute
15:53.
The
question is not whether the UN has and can deliver food. The question
is, even as to the camps it can visit is the UN enabling and blessing
interment camps by providing funds and materiel? And what about the
camps that the Red
Cross has now said publicly it is being blocked
from visiting -- is the UN there? Or does the UN not care, or not
care that the public knows?
From
the phrasing of OCHA's update -- "since the Secretary General's
visit an interim measure has been agreed" -- many infer that UN
OCHA is more concerned about making Ban Ki-moon look good than about
raising the red flag when civilians are being cut off from aid and
monitors. The usually silent Red Cross is complaining, and the UN is
saying the government is going a great job, just needs more
resources. More resources for interment?
Guard in Manik Farm camp, (c) M. Lee May 2009
Also
in Geneva, the Human Rights Council's procedures allowed Sri Lanka to
claim the upper hand in the debate about whether its conduct in its
military offensive in the north should be investigated. Sri Lanka
rushed and was the first to table a draft resolution, congratulating
itself for its conduct and calling for more money. In a move that
left many of the supporters of the US's joining the Human Rights
Council shaking their heads, US diplomat Mark Storella urged the
47-member Council to reach a compromise, saying the United
States
"believes there is a basis for consensus."
The
consensus reached omitted any outside investigation, and calls for
more funding for Sri Lanka. Some wondered, wasn't the US joining the
Human Rights Council supposed to raise human rights standards, not
just demonstrate that the Obama administration calls for consensus
everywhere?
While
Tamils imprisoned in UN-funded camps in Sri Lanka want to be let go,
and to live without threat of ethnic violence or oppression, Obama
wants to be a friend of all the world and the UN's Ban wants so much
to be relevant that he praises the Sri Lankan government efforts and
funds them.
Inner
City Press has heard from local sources of Tamil store owners, for
example, being besieged by Sinhalese demands for money "since
you lost." The UN, which is supposed to be watching for such
dangerous signs and trends, is at least publicly and at the highest
levels blissfully unaware. As one source told Inner City Press, if
this is the way the Sri Lankan government and majority acts while the
world is (half) watching, imagine what they'll go later. Watch this
site.
Back
from Sri Lanka, UN's Holmes Admits NGO Killings and Restrictions Not
Raised
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED
NATIONS, May 26 -- Just back to the United Nations from Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon's surreal tour of Sri Lanka, Inner City Press
asked UK Ambassador John Sawers if the UN paying for interment camps
for Tamils rounded up from throughout northern Sri Lanka compiles
with international humanitarian law.
Ambassador Sawers, rather than
answer, said that there has been a "high level of attention"
to the issue by the UN, by envoy Vijay Nambiar, humanitarian chief
John Holmes and the visit of the Secretary General over the weekend.
There's been not report to the Security Council yet, Sawers said, we
look forward to that and "we'll have to consider steps after
that." Video here,
from Minute 6:15.
Ban
Ki-moon is still out of New York. John Holmes took questions by
phone, since he was outside of the UN (some said in Upstate New
York). Inner City Press asked Holmes about the people looked up in
the camps who were not in the final conflict zone. "I was not
aware of that," Holmes said, arguing that "the whole Vanni"
or jungle area was under Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam control "so
in a sense was the conflict zone." Video here,
from Minute
21:15.
Interviews
in the camps, even under the watchful eyes of Sri Lankan soldiers and
seemingly pro-government UN personnel nevertheless revealed that
people were swept into the camps. The goal, if not to move members of
the Sinhala majority into the now-vacated areas, is to screen anyone
who lived under the LTTE for whether they support Tamil separatism or
autonomy. Should the UN be assisting in such ideological if not
ethnic cleansing?
Holmes
insisted that "there is no question of the UN funding the
sweeping up," the UN is "only providing emergency relief in
the camps." But if the camps are being used, not as a temporary
fix to a natural disaster but to ethnic and ideological screening,
providing food and money -- and in the case of UNOPS, planning the
camps and helping build them -- makes the UN's role more direct, and
problematic.
Inner
City Press asked Holmes if Ban Ki-moon, in his meeting with President
Mahinda Rajapaka, has raised the issue of press freedom, including of
the editor will last year, and other reports who have been harassed,
arrested and disappeared, and of the aid workers, including from Action Contre la Faim,
who have been killed, allegedly by
pro-government militias. No, Holmes said, neither issue was raised
by Ban in his meetings. He did not say, why not?
The
government's proposed Memorandum of Understanding it wants NGOs to
sign would require them to provide information on all their clients,
which these NGOs don't do anywhere in the world. Since a number of NGOs
have told
Inner City Press that they are not in the best position to fight the
proposed MOU, as they are working in Sri Lanka; they would like to see
John Holmes and OCHA take the lead in fighting back the intrusive
NGO. Holmes admitted that the "MOU was not raise by the
Secretary-General," and said that the issue had been set on the
side. He did not say, by whom?
Tamil IDPs in Manik Farm await UN's Ban with baited
breathe, May 23 (c) M.Lee
Since
some NGOs have expressed concern about the publication statements
about what they expect from Holmes' OCHA -- to fight back against the
MOU, for example -- and in light of major NGOs' summary from last
week that John Holmes "had objected to the trip, as many of you
know," Inner City Press asked Holmes about this position, and to
explain it. Holmes replied that "I did not say to the NGOs that
I was against the visit, I simply said that there were some tricky
presentational aspect about which we were very well aware and that we
would be dealing with while there, and which I think we did
successfully."
Apparently,
Holmes was comfortable with the "presentational aspects" of
children in the camps being forced to sing "Ban Ki-moon" to
the Secretary General, and of Ban acceding to Rajapaksa's demand that
they meet not in the capital but in the Buddhist shrine town of
Kandy, which many say was a message to Tamils, we win, you lose. In
fact, there are reports of Tamil shopkeepers in Colombo being
besieged by Sinhala mobs and told to pay money, since "you
lost." The UN should be countering such trends, not covering
them up or, worse, stoking them.
Lynn
Pascoe was also at the briefing, but said less. When Inner City Press
asked about reports that Tamil MPs were barred by the government from
entering the Colombo airport's VIP lounge for the meeting they had
been promised with Bank Ki-moon, Pascoe said he is investigating
those reports and will "pass on to Maria" [Okabe, the
Deputy Spokesperson] what he learns. Inner City Press asked about the
symbolism of the visit to Kandy. Pascoe said it was a misperception
and that "when a government says where, it's their decision."
Inner
City Press asked both Pascoe and Holmes if they thought the forcing
children in the camps to sing to Ban Ki-moon was appropriate. Pascoe
said that he's seen children waiting in the sun for longer than he
could put up with, and not only in camps. Video here,
from Minute
34:34. Holmes did not answer about the appropriateness of the forced
signing and flag waving in the UN-funded camps. Watch this site.
Footnote:
as the Human Rights Council in Geneva takes up the question of Sri
Lanka, not only is there a pro-Rajapaksa resolution, now there is a
Swiss proposed compromise, which would ask the Rajapaksa
administration to investigate itself...
, 
