UNITED
NATIONS, June
7 -- When
Russia offered
troops to
replace the
Austrians
departing from
the UN mission
in the Golan,
there was a
strange
sequence at
the UN in New
York.
First,
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
Office of the
Spokesperson,
through
Associate
Spokesman
Farhan Haq,
unequivocally
said, "The UN
welcomes any
contribution
by the world
community to
peacemaking
efforts in the
Golan Heights,
and the UN
Disengagement
Observer Force
is very
important for
the
maintenance of
peace in the
region."
This
quote moved
Friday morning
from RIA
Novosti to,
among others,
YnetNews
in Israel.
But when it
was asked
again by RIA
Novosti near
the end of the
day's chaotic
noon briefing,
lead spokesman
Martin
Nesirky added
this: "the
Disengagement
Agreement and
its
Protocol,
which is
between Syria
and Israel, do
not allow for
the
participation
of permanent
members of the
Security
Council in
UNDOF."
Inner
City Press,
which often
waits for week
or forever for
a legal ruling
or opinion
requested from
the UN,
immediately
tweeted the
apparent
split or fast
ruling.
Today,
Russian
Gennady
Gatilov tweeted,
hashtag and
all, "It
is not for
the UN
Spokesperson
to decide
which country
may send
troops to
#UNDOF. This
is a UNSC
matter."
What
can be noted
is that the UN
often leaves
legal issues,
particularly
about a 1974
agreement,
without public
answer for
weeks.
Was it
legal
for Romano
Prodi to run
for president
in Italy while
serving as UN
Under
Secretary
General on the
Sahel? What
about Herve
Ladsous'
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations
accepting an
alleged war
criminal as a
senior
adviser?
Here,
the UN quickly
over-ruled the
first
"welcoming"
comment. Who
called the
Spokesperson's
office?
We
also note that
the
Spokesperson's
Office -- for
what it's
worth
through Haq --
on May 23 said
that "on
material
shared by
Anastasia
Popova, we
have the
following to
say: Yes, the
High
Representative's
Office has
received the
material and
are converting
it into a
usable format,
and it is
being sent to
the Head of
the
Team, Ake
Sellstrom."
But
by June 3 when
Inner City
Press asked
the High
Representative,
Angela
Kane, on
camera in the
briefing room
after the
moderator said
to ask her any
pressing
question, video here,
Kane
was dismissive
of this
answer, saying
she wasn't
responsible
for it and
wondering why
they answered
as they did.
She
and her
colleague said
the "material"
was too short,
and "we
never managed,
technically."
When
on June 4
Inner City
Press asked
Nesirky about
this, he
responded
thusly:
Inner
City Press:
yesterday,
speaking to
Ms. [Angela]
Kane, I just
want to
make sure I
understand,
she said there
was some
problems with
the
material, that
it was much
shorter than
she thought it
would be, but
it seemed to
me that it
hadn’t been
given to Mr.
Sellström; do
you, are you
aware whether
it has been or
not and is
there a way to
find out
whether, and
if not, why
not?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
There is a way
to find out,
Matthew; the
footage of
alleged
chemical
weapons use
that was
provided by
Anastasia
Popova has
been
passed on to
the head of
the mission,
Mr. Åke
Sellström.
And, as I
have said, he
continues to
conduct the
mission’s work
outside of
Syria, and to
analyse all
information
made available
to it.
Inner
City Press: I
don’t know the
gentleman’s
name, but the
colleague
that was with
her yesterday
said something
about that
they tried,
but
technically it
wasn’t
feasible;
maybe they,
that he just
mean he
couldn’t, they
couldn’t make
it as good --
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, maybe
you could go
back and look
at the footage
that
you’ve
recorded on
camera
without
actually
telling Ms.
Kane. What’s
your next
question?
And
now we have
another question,
for the UN's
new Press
Briefing Room.
Watch this
site.
, 
