By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
October 9 --
On its action
in the face of
mass killing,
the UN says it
wants to have
the courage to
"speak
out about what
we see" -
but then won't
yet release a
report on just
this about Sri
Lanka.
Since
the UN's
report on its
inaction while
40,000
civilians were
killed in Sri
Lanka in 2009
was completed,
Inner City
Press and now
the Free
UN Coalition
for Access
have asked
that it be
released.
Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson, who
worked on the
report, said
it would be up
to Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon, in
September.
The
report was not
released in
that month,
only alluded
to in Ban's
General
Assembly
speech. On
October 9 at
the Council on
Foreign
Relations, as
Inner City
Press reported
in advance,
Eliasson spoke
more about it.
Video
here and
below.
As
prepared, with
"as delivered"
added in
italics in
brackets:
"With
respect to Sri
Lanka, an
internal
review of UN
action at the
end of the
civil war in
2009 noted a
'systemic'
failure of
different
parts of the
UN. Member
States did no
meet the tasks
they
themselves had
set. The UN
system did not
adapt properly
when the final
brutal stage
of the
conflict put
great pressure
for a broader
UN presence,
which had been
focused on
development.
"A
main lesson we
are to draw
from this is
to ensure that
the UN system
has political
and human
rights
expertise and
resources in
place where
they are
needed.
Equally
important is
to recognize [and
this
is very
important to
me] that
human rights
violations are
our best early
warning
signals in
emerging
crises-- and,
of course,
that we must [have
the
courage to] act
on such
signals and
speak out
about what we
see. On behalf
of the
Secretary
General, I
have led this
internal
scrutiny.
There is
important work
for the Member
States as
well."
An
obvious
question came
to mind, and
was tweeted
even before
Eliasson
finished: will
the report be
released?
Eliasson
said,
not yet. He
said that when
he turned it
over to Ban
Ki-moon, he
suggested that
it not be
released until
the UN had
implemented
it, or part of
it. How much
is UNclear.
Eliasson
also
said he
couldn't say
anything about
responsibility
for cholera in
Haiti, we
have strict
lines on that.
As Deputy
Secretary
General, his
"lines" could
only come from
one place: the
Secretary
General, Ban
Ki-moon. So is
it the case,
that the
withholding of
the report is
due to
Eliasson, that
Ban wants to
release it? It
should be
released -- to
withhold it is
(another)
cover up.
For example,
the spin now
is that the UN
in Sri Lanka
in 2008 and
2009 was all
development,
and so didn't
see human
rights
violations.
But then OCHA
chief John
Holmes WAS
there -- and
OCHA pulled
out. The UN's
failure is not
too much
development --
it is high
officials,
tied to
powerful
member states,
not acting on
what they
preached.
Worse that
Holmes, now,
is Herve
Ladsous. Click
here for
compilation
video.
Footnote:
In
fairness,
Eliasson said
more, citing
Charles Petrie
and Michael
Keating, and
about human
rights as an
early warning
sign. Inner
City Press
chides itself
still, not
having
followed up
enough after
it asked a
question in
2008 about the
Office for the
Coordination
of
Humanitarian
Affairs
pulling out of
Kilinochchi.
It pursued --
see
yesterday's UK
New Statesman,
here --
but, later
than should
have been. But
it says so,
here. Why
would the UN
withhold this
report? For
how long?
Watch this
site.
, 
