By
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 5 --
On
ever-elusive
UN Security
Council
reform, today
was supposed
to be the
beginning of a
speeded up
Inter-Governmental
Negotiation
triggered
by
President of
the General
Assembly John
Ashe naming a
Group of Six
advisers.
Ashe's initial
letter did not
go online;
Inner City
Press published
it first.
(His office
said that was
a snafu not to
be repeated.)
Then on
December 2,
Ashe wrote and
put online a
letter naming
December 5 as
the beginning
of the "IGN"
under
Afghanistan Permanent
Representative
Zahir Tanin,
and urging
flexibility
from states,
presumably
those groupings
of states
which
protested the
make-up and
mandate of
Ashe's
advisory group: Belgium,
San Marino,
Liechtenstein,
Sierra Leone,
Brazil and
Papua New
Guinea.
Ashe on
November 6
tried to
assuage the
critics by
saying that,
contrary to
statements by
Brazil and
Germany in the
Security
Council debate
on Working
Methods, the
Group of Six
would neither
negotiate nor
draft.
Still,
France's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
said France
looked forward
to the
Advisory Group
drafting.
Now
Ashe has had
to write and
go online
again,
canceling today's
beginning of
Inter
Governmental Negotiations
and putting it
back a week to
December 12.
Sources
exclusively
tell Inner
City Press
this is due to
even Ashe's
Advisory Group
being divided
after their
December 3
session.
In a General
Assembly
session on
December 4
about
revitalization
the GA's work,
Egypt complained
that the UN
provided
budget for
Ashe's PGA
Office is too
low. This
results in the
Office being
dependent on
outside
support and
secondment. Inner
City Press and
the Free
UN Coalition
for Access
asked for
disclosure and
transparency
in this
regard, and
continue to
await it.
Among the
dozen speakers
on GA
revitalization
were three of
the Security
Council's
Permanent Five
members:
Russia, China
and the US.
Inner City
Press asked
why France and
the UK did not
speak.
The UK
to its credit
responded,
that the
European Union
spoke for both
of them.
Inner City
Press tweet-reported
this, but
asked and asks:
do EU members
agree on the
Security
Council taking
up issues in
the bailiwick
of the General
Assembly? Many
non-P5
countries
protest this.
The
EU statement,
which the EU
tweeted at
Inner City
Press, didn't
directly
address this
issue. Some say:
agreed position
are bland
positions. To
what degree is
the EU
dominated by
its two P5
members? Watch
this site.
, 
