As Spain Admits It Used International Cooperation Funds for
UN's $25 Million Dome,
UN Denies and Ban Ignores
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of
Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED NATIONS,
November 18, updated -- With controversy
swirling about the use of Spain's government's international
cooperation funds for the new $25 million
ceiling of the UN's human rights room in Geneva, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on
Tuesday said, "I understand that the construction of
this
magnificent dome involved techniques that were never used before, and
that
materials were used in new combinations. We can see the results. They
are
stunning."
On Monday,
Inner City Press had asked Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe for
the
Secretary General's comment on the use of international
cooperation for the ceiling. Ms.
Okabe responded, as transcribed
by the UN, "Matthew, I don’t know anything about where
funding of donation is coming from. As far as the UN is concerned, the
Spanish
contribution is coming from a Foundation; and that's where the donation
is
coming from."
Later on
Monday, Ms. Okabe's office sent Inner City Press an e-mail about "ur
statement at briefing," that "the cost of the
renovations to the
new Human Rights Council and Alliance of Civilizations (Room XX) at the
Palais
des Nations were entirely funded by ONUART, a foundation in place to
collect
public and private money from Spanish society." Inner City Press published
it.
But then from
Spain's Mission to the UN, Inner City Press obtained two statements,
admitting
that 40% of the costs were paid from Spanish government funds, of which
500,000
euros, over half a million dollars, came from Spain's budget for
international cooperation / development
aid and international organizations.
Click here and here for the
Spanish statements, which specify when government funding was granted
and that on December 28, 2007, Spain's Department for International
Cooperation disbursed 500,000 euros for the ceiling.
This entirely
contradicts the UN's position that only foundation money was used.
UN's Ban and Spain's Zapatero,
use of International Cooperation funds not shown
In fact, Ban's Office has
previously mis-spoken about Spain, claiming for example that a proposed
Peacekeeping information technology which Spain wants in Valencia has
already been approved by the General Assembly's budget committee when
it has not. Click here
for that.
On Tuesday
at the UN's noon briefing in New York, Inner City Press asked UN
Associate
Spokesperson Farhan Haq, now that the use of government money including
from a fund
for development aid and international organizations had been
established,
whether Ban and the UN think this is a appropriate. Video here,
from Minute 12:19.
Haq
said that Ban's
response was contained in his above-quoted speech, which made no
mention of the
funding. Video here,
from Minute 22:40. When Inner City Press asked if Ban's speech should
be read as the UN's
response to the question it asked on Monday, Haq said "that would be
putting
words in [Ban's] mouth." But how to get an answer, beyond his aesthetic
review that the dome is "stunning"?
Stunning
to Inner City Press was that later on Tuesday afternoon, Haq read out a
statement to the UN press corps repeating word for word the e-mail Ms.
Okabe
had sent Inner City Press on Monday afternoon. Apparently Ban's
Spokesperson's
Office did not call the Spanish mission. If they had, they would have
received
the same admissions
that Inner City Press did. In fairness to Spain, it is arguing that
while the 500,000 euro came from the agency for international
cooperation, Spain is not going to list the money as development aid
for OECD purposes. Whatever this argument's merit or lack thereof, the
UN's two-day insistence that only foundation money was used is not
excused, and is indicative. Questions still have to be answered.
Footnote: In fact,
while Ban Ki-moon's statement,
even what he writes by long-hand in guest books, is carefully scripted
for him
by speechwriters, his spokespeople increasing just wing it, saying for example on
Monday and again on Tuesday that the Geneva ceiling was entirely funded
by a
foundation, and saying on Tuesday that there currently are countries not
allowed to vote in the General Assembly due to a failure to pay
dues.Video here.
In fact,
the countries behind on dues are given waivers under the UN's Article
19. If
the General Assembly gives more of these waivers budgets will become
even
tighter, making the use of development aid for a flashy
stalactite-draped
ceiling all the more questionable.
Update of Nov. 18, 6:25 p.m. --
after the Associate
Spokesman as earlier reported above decided to wing it not only about
the
funding of the UN's Geneva dome but about countries denied voting
rights in the
General Assembly, at 6:09 p.m. the following correction went out, that
the
seven " those countries, by General Assembly
resolution
63/4 (and Article 19), have been granted voting rights. So currently
there are
no UN Member States that are without voting rights."
So there's
a correction on a later-arising matter, but continued hair-splitting
and
stonewalling on the issue of where the funds for the UN's Geneva dome
came
from, including Spain's International Cooperation budget. No
correction, no
amplification, but rather continued stonewalling, even in the face of
the
written statement from the Spanish mission, which Inner City Press
provided by
hand to the Associate Spokesman. He had said, "check with the Spanish
mission" to see if where they funds came from different from the UN's
statement, all from a foundation.
This
must
have meant, where the foundation got the funds from, because the UN
already
knew from whence the actually end-stage check came. But once Spain
specified
that the government paid into the foundation, suddenly the UN claimed
that was
consistent with its previous answer. How many of the UN's other answers
are, if
examined, like this?
Click here for Inner City
Press Nov. 7 debate on the war in Congo
Watch this site, and this Oct. 2 debate, on
UN, bailout, MDGs
and this October 17 debate, on
Security Council and Obama and the UN.
* * *
These
reports are
usually also available through Google
News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here
for a Reuters
AlertNet piece by this correspondent
about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army. Click
here
for an earlier Reuters AlertNet piece about the Somali
National
Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's $200,000 contribution from an
undefined trust fund. Video
Analysis here
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A, UN, NY 10017
USA
Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile (and
weekends):
718-716-3540
Other,
earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available
in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright
2006-08 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com -
|