At
UN, Ban Says
Myanmar
Scrutiny
Should Be
Reconsidered,
UNSMIS Was
Targeted?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May 9, updated
-- When the
press asked UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
about Syria
Wednesday at
noon, he
replied that
the press
would hear
more about
this when Ban
addressed the
General
Assembly at 3
pm.
But
there was a
problem: that
session was
listed as
closed to the
media. After
some back and
forth
described
below, Ban
Ki-moon came
in and began
about Syria.
He said, "as
you are aware,
a bomb blast
today near
Deraa targeted
a convoy of UN
observers."
There
is another
problem: other
have said that
the UNSMIS
convoy was NOT
the target; in
fact, the
Permanent
Representative
of a Permanent
Member of the
Security
Council said
that to Inner
City Press
moments before
Ban Ki-moon
came in.
Ban
continued on
to say he'll
create a new
post,
Assistant
Secretary
General for
post 2015
development,
and create a
high level
panel
including the
heads of state
or government
of Indonesia,
Liberia and
the UK, in
that case
David Cameron.
(One wag mused
Ban was lucky
not to have
chosen
France's
Nicolas
Sarkozy.)
Ban
described
speeches he
gave in
Washington,
his trip to
India and then
Myanmar. On
this last, he
did not
mention Good
Offices envoy
Vijay Nambiar
by name
(although
Nambiar was in
the room,
genially
sitting on the
side while new
chief of staff
Susana
Malcorra was
on the podium
with Ban).
Ban
said that the
General
Assembly may
which to
reconsider the
20 year old
Myanmar Good
Offices role.
Some wondered:
would the post
be eliminated,
as a reward to
Myanmar?
Afterward,
an Asian
Permanent
Representative
told Inner
City Press
that yes, the
Good Offices
should be
eliminated
"given the
changes in
Myanmar."
Others said
they hadn't
understood
this, or other
parts, of what
Ban Ki-moon
had said.
The
pre-speech
back and forth
involved a
photographer
described as
"doing a
project with
the UN's DPI"
or Department
of Public
Information
who was let
in, and Inner
City Press
followed. Then
Inner City
Press was told
that it could
not stay.
Asked
why the UN
could cover
itself, but
wouldn't
consent to
outside
independent
coverage, it
was argued
that the
UN-affiliated
person was not
"covering" the
speech -- a
strange
distinction,
or admission.
Ultimately,
Inner City
Press was
allowed to
stay for the
speech, but
not the member
states'
questions and
responses
afterward.
And
that was yet
another
problem, as
for example
the UK wanted
its Permanent
Representative
Mark Lyall
Grant's
response to
David Cameron
being named to
the High Level
Panel to be
webcast. It
was not, by
the UN's
choice --
similar but
presumably for
different
reasons to
when the UN
cut of its web
cast before
Syria spokes,
after Ban,
Kofi Annan and
the President
of the General
Assembly.
[Update:
here
is a link to
Amb. Lyall
Grant's
statement.]
In
this case,
after the
session ended
a source told
Inner City
Press that
"Iran asked a
good question,
what has
actually been
accomplished
in
development."
We hope to
have more on
this - watch
this site.
, 
