Also
on
international
humanitarian
law but not
yet mentioned
by Ban at
least while he
is in Davos,
on January 23
the Office of
the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights spoke
belatedly on
pension and
travel
restrictions
imposed by the
authorities in
Kiev.
On
pension and
benefit
payments,
which Inner
City Press has
reported on
since
November, OHCHR
spoke on
"the
impact on
civilians of
the recent
decision by
the National
Security and
Defence
Council of
Ukraine to
restrict
movement in
and out of the
areas
controlled by
armed groups.
As of 21
January,
people
traveling to
and from these
areas need to
obtain special
passes and
provide
documents to
justify the
need to
travel. These
limitations
are worrying,
especially in
light of the
escalating
hostilities.
It adds to
concerns
created by the
Government
decision in
November 2014
to discontinue
providing
State services
in the
territories
controlled by
armed groups.
The
introduction
of such
restrictions
will likely
have a severe
effect on the
most
vulnerable
groups, such
as older
people,
mothers with
children and
people with
disabilities
who may depend
heavily on
social
benefits. We
urge Ukrainian
authorities to
take immediate
steps to
redress this
situation."
But will they?
UNHCR, the
UN's refugee
agency, added
on January 23
that
“New security
clearance
procedures are
put in place
and specific
documentation
is now
required to
pass through
checkpoints in
the east of
Ukraine. These
new procedures
apply to
Ukrainian
nationals, the
United
Nations, NGOs,
national and
some other
international
humanitarian
organizations.
“These
restrictions
on movements
within Donetsk
and Luhansk
regions in the
east of the
country
further
complicates an
already
difficult
situation for
those forcibly
displaced and
made worse by
the
intensified
fighting we
have seen in
recent days,”
the UNHCR
briefing notes
said. “These
practices
restrict
access to
non-government
controlled
areas and
limit the
delivery of
needed
humanitarian
assistance
into the
conflict
zones. The
Ukrainian
government has
reportedly
adopted this
resolution
which entered
into force
yesterday
(Thursday 22
January)
limiting all
movements in
and out of the
conflict
zones."
So will those
who've
denounced such
restrictions
elsewhere
pursue these,
imposed by
Kiev, with
similar vigor?
Are these the
policies, for
example, that
the
International
Monetary Fund
should be
supporting?
On January 22
UNSG Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman made
a statement as
an "If-Asked,"
in response to
a question, so
that while
longer than
other
statements
made it would
not go on the
UN's website.
Six hours
later, the UN
Security
Council issued
its own Press
Statement,
past six
p.m..
That one will
go on the
Council's web
site (and is
below).
Here is Ban's
"if-asked"
statement:
"The
Secretary
General is
deeply alarmed
by the
unrelenting
violence in
eastern
Ukraine. Lack
as adherence
to the
ceasefire has
resulted again
today in the
loss of dozens
of lives,
including of
at least ten
civilians when
their
trolleybus was
hit be
shelling in
Donetsk city,
in what
appeared to be
a targeted
attack, and
many other
civilians in
the city of
Horlivka.
Targeted
attacks
against
civilians
constitute
grievous
violations of
international
humanitarian
law and must
be
investigated.
"The Secretary
General
welcomes the
meeting of the
Normandy
Format Foreign
Ministers in
Berlin
yesterday
aimed at
finding a way
to halt this
devastating
violence. He
notes that
some progress
in the
discussions
regarding a
demarcation
line and
withdrawal of
heavy weaponry
was made on
this occasion
and appeals to
all concerned
to urgently
translated
this positive
political
development
into tangible
action on the
ground.”
The Secretary
General
reiterates
that the
enforcement of
a sustainable
ceasefire,
which
presently
exists in name
only, is
urgent. Other
elements of
the broader
Minsk
[agreement]
must also be
implemented
without delay
to ensure a
peaceful,
independent
and unified
Ukraine.”
On
January 21 in
the first
Ukraine
meeting of the
UN Security
Council since
last November,
UN official
Jeffrey
Feltman said
“today in
Davos,
President
Poroshenko
stated that
there were
over 9,000
Russia regular
troops in
Ukraine, an
accusation
that Moscow
refutes.”
He didn't
mention, but
the IMF did,
that
Poroshenko
also spoke
with Christine
Lagarde, who
then announced
that "the
Ukrainian
authorities
have requested
a multi-year
arrangement
with the Fund,
supported by
the Extended
Fund Facility,
to replace the
existing
Stand-By
Arrangement."
In US
President
Obama's State
of the Union
speech on
January 20, he
said the US is
"opposing
Russian
aggression,
and supporting
Ukraine’s
democracy, and
reassuring our
NATO allies..
Mr. Putin’s
aggression it
was suggested
was a
masterful
display of
strategy and
strength.
That's what I
heard from
some
folks.
Well, today,
it is America
that stands
strong and
united with
our allies,
while Russia
is isolated
with its
economy in
tatters.
That’s how
America leads
-- not with
bluster, but
with
persistent,
steady
resolve."
Russia's
Ambassador
Vitaly
Churkin,
speaking in
the Security
Council on
January 21,
asked
rhetorically
"after about
thirty times
of discussing
Ukraine here,
the question
arises, how
much are these
declarations
in line with
the situation
in the
country? Are
they given
just for
eloquence's
sake but can
be thrown
aside when
political
suitability
takes
precedent?”
The January 21
session was
going to be
consultations,
where members
speak less
formally
(sometimes).
But then it
was public,
just speeches.
We'll have
more on this.
On the cut off
of pensions,
which we've
covered since
November,
Churkin said
"Kiev is doing
everything so
that in
essence the
South East is
isolated. A
decision has
been made to
move out state
institutions
from that, to
stop budgetary
expenditures
including
welfare and
pensions.”
Back on n
November 12,
UN Assistant
Secretary
General Jens
Toyberg-Frandzen
said, among
other things,
that "on
November 5,
Prime Minister
Yatsenyuk
announced that
pensions would
be halted to
areas under
rebel
control."
Inner City
Press,
covering the
meeting from
just outside
the Council
chamber, spoke
to a range of
passing
diplomats and
was left with
this question:
isn't the
halting of
pensions to
rebel held
areas a form
of collective
punishment?
Once
posed, with
the words
"accrued
pensions," two
defenses of
the practice
came in.
First, that
pensions in
Ukraine are
not accrued
but are based
on taxes
collected and
none are being
collected in
Donbas.
Second, that
trucks with
pension
payments were
being
robbed.
The word
"Western
Union" was
bandied
around.
While
the UN spoke
about the
death of
children on a
playground on
Donetsk on
Novmeber 5,
they didn't
say who did
it. Russia's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
Pankin said it
was Ukraine's
army. Later he
stated that an
adviser to
Poroshenko
said on
October 24
that "the
ceasefire is
going to work
in our favor,
tank factories
working around
the clock."
Ukraine's
Sergeyev
mentioned this
in his reply,
neither
confirming nor
denying the
quote. The
meeting ended;
Sergeyev
headed up the
escalator to
be interviewed
by scribes.
And so it goes
at the UN.
Last
month, Ukraine
was scheduled
to speak at
the UN about
its “Committee
on
Information”
on October 21,
but as UN
speeches
usually go
longer than
allowed, its
turn was
postponed
until October
22.
That
didn't stop
the “UN
Radio” Russian
service from
reporting
on the speech
on October 21
as if it had
in fact been
given that
day. As
translated, UN
Radio on
October 21
reported
“The
representative
of Ukraine
accused Russia
of using the
information
strategy of
the Cold War
“One of
the main
prerequisites
of violence in
Ukraine became
a propaganda
information.
This was
stated by the
representative
of the Mission
of Ukraine to
the United
Nations,
speaking at a
meeting of the
Fourth
Committee of
the UN General
Assembly.”
The
UN's Fourth
Committee did
meet on
October 21 -
but Ukraine
didn't speak.
Instead it was
the first
speaker on the
afternoon of
October 22.
Its speech,
delivered in
perfect French
including the
word “rigolo,”
linked Russia
to Joseph
Goebbels.
In
reply, the
Russian
mission's
spokesman
brought up the
recent Human
Rights Watch
report of the
Ukrainian
government
using cluster
bombs in and
against
Donetsk, and
the lack of
clarity on who
called the
snipers shots
in Maidan
Square.
Later
in the Fourth
Committee
meeting,
Bolivia
slammed
“powers” who
use
information
technology to
intervene and
violate
privacy,
bringing to
mind USAID's
“Cuban
Twitter”
and, of
course, the
NSA.
Then
Jordan said it
was first
among Arab
nations to
enact an
Access to
Information
law, in 2007.
The Free
UN Coalition
for Access
has been pressing
for a Freedom
of Information
Act at the UN,
click here
and
here for that.
FUNCA
covers the
Fourth
Committee,
including on
Decolonization,
and the
Committee on
Information,
where at least
theoretically
the UN's
descent into
censorship
could be
raised and
resolved. The
old UN
Correspondents
Association, a
part of this
trend toward privatization
of
briefings
and even
censorship --
ordering
Press articles
off the
Internet,
getting leaked
copies of
their
complaints to
the UN's MALU
banned from
Google's
search, here
-- was nowhere
to be seen.
We'll have
more on this.
, 
