On
Indian
Fishermen
Shot, Ban's
Fear Was
Re-Heated by
Italian Media
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 11,
updated below
-- With the
India trip for
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon announced
on January 6,
there was
another
off-camera comment
by Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
that India's
prosecution of
Italian sailor
who killed
Indian
fishermen is
an unresolved
issued that
requires a
mutual
solution.
While this was
reported in
Italian and
other media as
a new fear, a
new position,
when Inner
City Press
asked on
January 9,
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
confirmed it
was only a
statement from
February 2014,
re-read and
re-heated. Video here.
And
in three UN
read-outs from
India of Ban
Ki-moon,
remarks at
Vibrant Gujurat,
read-out with
PM Modi and a
three
questions
press encounter,
the issue was
not raised. It
was not asked
about at the
press encounter.
From
the UN's
January 9
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
Because of the
Secretary-General's
upcoming trip
to India, I
saw — I know
in this room,
he was asked
about this
ongoing case
of the Italian
sailors who
shot the
Indian
fisherman.
And I thought
it was just
said that his
position
remained the
same, but
after I saw a
story in which
Stéphane was
quoted as
adding that…
that in fact,
Secretary-General
sees this as a
threat to…
affecting
peace and
international
security, that
this issue
could affect
international
peace and
security,
which seemed
something he
often doesn't
say about
cases, so is
this something
that he's
going to raise
in his trip to
India, if it
in fact does
impact peace
and
international
security?
Spokesperson
Haq:
Well, on that,
what I can
tell you is:
Our position
is the same as
what we
articulated in
a piece of
paper I have
here dated 13
February
2014.
And here's
what we said
then and what
we say
today:
The
Secretary-General
is concerned
that this
longstanding
matter between
Italy and
India remains
unresolved and
it is
prompting
tensions
between two
friendly and
important
Member States
of the
organization.
The
Secretary-General
feels it is
important that
both sides
seek to come
to a
reasonable and
mutually
acceptable
resolution.
He's concerned
that the
matter may
have
implications
for wider
common efforts
and
collaboration
around matters
of
international
peace and
security,
including
anti-piracy
operations.
Inner City
Press:
So, basically,
it would be
incorrect to
say the quotes
that Stéphane
gave on,
whether it was
the 5th or the
6th,
represented
sort of a new
focus on the
case. It
was simply
reheated…
Spokesperson
Haq: No,
no. It
was something
consistent
that we pulled
up in this
document from
February.
Inner City
Press:
And will he
raise it on
this trip,
that's the
last — does he
anticipate
raising it or
intend to
raise it?
Spokesperson
Haq:
It's always
difficult to
say what's
going to come
up in a trip
until the trip
has
happened.
What we'll try
to do is
provide
readouts of
discussions he
has while he
is on the
trip.
Have a good
weekend,
everyone.
On
January 5,
past and now
returned
president of
the UN's
Censorship
Alliance
Giampaolo
Pioli, "on
behalf of
United Nations
Correspondents
Association,"
asked
Dujarric,
"does the
Secretary-General
has any recent
involvement in
the dispute
between the…
Italy and…
Italy and
India about
the two
soldiers
accused of
killing the
fisherman or
it considers
this still a
bilateral
dispute?"
Dujarric said,
"I have
nothing to add
to what he's
already said
on the
issue."
Video
here.
But then on
January 6,
Dujarric
apparently
gave a new
quote on the
case, and Pioli told
those who pay
his UNCA money
for dues about
a visit by Ban
on January 7
to the
clubhouse the
UN gives UN,
complete with
"remarks" from
Ban, not
listed in the
UN's Media
Alert.
Here's the
new quote
Dujarric gave
to Italian
media ANSA:
"United
Nations
Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon is
concerned at
an ongoing
dispute
between India
and Italy over
two Italian
marines, UN
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric told
ANSA on
Tuesday. '(He)
is concerned
that the issue
remains
unresolved
thus
sharpening
tensions
between two
important
member
States,'
Dujarric said.
It is
'important for
both parties
to try to
reach a
reasonable and
mutually
acceptable
solution,'
Dujarric said.
Ban 'fears the
issue could
affect common
efforts for
peace and
international
security.'"
If on January
5 Dujarric had
"nothing to
add" on the
issue, why
provide all
this on
January 6? Why
partner with
one segment of
UN
correspondents,
one which
actively tried
to get the
investigative
Press thrown
out of the UN?
It's the UN
Censorship
Alliance. And
now Ban heads
to India -
will he
actually be
raising this
case Dujarric
says Ban is so
concerned and
afraid about?
Here was
Dujarric's
January 6
confirmation
of Ban's trip
to India,
about which
Inner City
Press
previously
asked
Dujarric:
"The
Secretary-General
will travel to
India later
this week to
visit Gujarat
and New
Delhi.
This will be
his fourth
trip to the
country as the
UN
Secretary-General.
He will travel
to Ahmedabad,
capital of
Gujarat, on
Saturday, 10
January, and
deliver a
keynote speech
at the
Inaugural
Session of the
seventh
Vibrant
Gujarat Summit
the following
day.
Addressing
world leaders,
policymakers
and
representatives
from the
business
community and
academia, the
Secretary-General
will stress
the need to
promote
inclusive and
sustainable
development in
India and
globally.
"While in
Gujarat, the
Secretary-General
is also
expected to
visit Mahatma
Gandhi’s
Sabarmati
Ashram.
And he will
also visit a
solar power
plant to see
for himself
national
efforts in
India to
promote
sustainable
development.
In Gujarat and
Delhi, the
Secretary-General
is scheduled
to meet with
key Indian
leaders,
including
President
Pranab
Mukherjee,
Prime Minister
Narendra Modi
and Minister
for External
Affairs Sushma
Swaraj.
The
Secretary-General
will also meet
Nobel Laureate
Kailash
Satyarthi and
UN Goodwill
Ambassadors in
India."
Back on March
17, 2014, when
Italian
interior
minister
Angelino
Alfano visited
the UN and
President of
the General
Assembly John
Ashe and Ban,
Ban's
spokesman
Dujarric
didn't even
issue a
read-out.
By contrast,
PGA Ashe's
office did
issue a
read-out, and
mentioned the
obvious the
Italian
marines in
detention in
India for
killing,
saying Alfano
"briefed
the
President of
the General
Assembly on...
the situation
of the
two-year old
case of two
Italian
marines in
India. In
response,
President Ashe
informed the
Minister that
in the course
of his
imminent State
visit to
India, he will
be alert for
whatever
opportunity
presents
itself to
raise the
issue."
But now Ashe's
188 word read
out of his
meeting with
Manmohan Singh
does not even
mention the
issue of
sailors or
marines.
Was there no
opportunity?
Is Ban's
decidedly
"quiet
diplomacy"
with major
powers -- to
an increasing
number of
people, this
is a euphemism
-- spreading
throughout the
UN system? And
is it abetted
by Ban's
spokesperson's
Dujarric's
diplomatic
dance with
some in the UN
press corps? Here
is an article
in Italian,
here
a view of
yesterday.
On
March 18,
Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric for a
read-out of
Ban's meeting
with the
Italian
interior
minister, and
if the marines
or sailors
were
discussed.
Dujarric said
he had no
information.
But after the
briefing, his
office sent
this to Inner
City Press:
Subject:
Your
question on
the
Secretary-General's
meeting on 17
March with
Italian
Minister of
Interior
From: UN
Spokesperson -
Do Not Reply
[at] un.org
Date: Tue, Mar
18, 2014 at
1:43 PM
To:
Matthew.Lee
[at]
innercitypress.com
"The
Secretary-General
called on
Italy to
ensure that
refugees
crossing the
Mediterranean
are treated
with dignity
and that the
principle of
non-refoulement
is respected.
He expressed
concern about
reports of
severe
treatment of
migrants,
especially
women, at
reception
camps and
underscored
the need to
ensure their
human rights.
The
Secretary-General
praised Italy
for its
contribution
to
peacekeeping,
the fight
against
organised
crime and
counterterrorism
efforts,
especially in
North Africa,
the Sahel and
the Horn. He
thanked Italy
for accepting
another group
of residents
from Camp
Hurriya."
So how in
these 86 words
is there no
mention of the
marines?
On March 19,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
you again
about the
meeting with
the
Secretary-General
with the
Italian
Interior
Minister. Your
Office emailed
a readout
yesterday, and
I appreciate
that. The
readout
doesn’t seem
to mention at
all the issue
of the Marines
being held in
India, and I
know that
that’s
something that
Italy has said
that it came
to the UN to
raise. The
PGA’s
[President of
the General
Assembly]
readout
mentions it
and says they
will raise it
to India, so…
was it raised
by Italy but
didn’t make
the readout
because the
Secretary-General
didn’t speak
about it? Or
was it not
raised in the
meeting?
Deputy
Spokesman: As
you know, the
format of our
readouts is
that we tend
to put in the
readouts the
points raised
by the
Secretary-General.
It’s up to the
other
participant in
those
discussions to
mention the
points that
they
specifically
have brought
up.
Inner
City Press:
So, since the
PGA says… his
readout of the
meeting says
that this was
raised by
Italy and he
intends to
raise it to
India, is it
fair to infer
that his
position in
terms of
taking up the
cause of these
Marines is
different than
that of the
Secretary-General,
since it’s not
in his thing?
Deputy
Spokesman:
That’s not at
all a fair
interpretation.
That’s a very
bizarre
inference. As
a rule, the
things we put
in the readout
are the topics
raised by the
Secretary-General.
That’s all
there is about
that.
Inner
City Press:
Does that rule
apply to this
readout, i.e.
inferring
[inaudible]
Deputy
Spokesman:
Yes, it
applies to
readouts as a
general rule.
So it wasn't
raised or
mentioned by
Ban Ki-moon?
As the Italian
delegation
left the UN,
Inner City
Press tweeted
a photograph
marveling at
the convoy
(which was
larger that
that for the
President of
Madagascar
earlier in the
day).
While it was
pointed out
that several
of the
vehicles were
US security,
it was the
Maserati Inner
City Press was
particularly
pointing at...
Back on
February 13
Inner City
Press asked:
what does it
take to get UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon, some
have asked, to
change his
position?
Apparently a
call from
Italy's
foreign
minister Emma
Bonino, they
say, and an
impending
meeting with
the European
Union's Cathy
Ashton.
Earlier this
week the UN
characterized
as a
"bilateral
issue" the
detention of
two Italian
marines in
India, for
shooting two
fishermen they
mistook for
pirates.
This gave rise
to a flurry of
outrage and
activity in
Italy. In New
York, Italy's
Mission to the
UN tweeted on
February 12
that at the EU
coordination
meeting, Italy
got support.
At the
February 13 UN
noon briefing,
three separate
Italian
correspondents
asked about
the issue.
(One wondered
if one of them
had also
raised the
issue in Ban's
"secret"
Q&A
session with
insider
scribes, click
here for that.)
Ban's
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
had a written
statement, now
expressing
concern and
saying the
issue could
have wider
import: no
longer
bilateral. So
that is what
it takes.
(By contrast,
on February 12
a
demonstration
of Tamils
protested Ban
Ki-moon's (in)
action on
killings in
Sri Lanka.
Inner City
Press
tweeted photo
here. UN
security
officers, one
a Sinhalese
Sri Lankan,
stared across
First Avenue
at them. There
was no
meeting, no
change of
position.
Inner City
Press
continues and
will continue
to cover the UN's post
Sri Lanka
failure
"Rights Up
Front"
initiative.
Some
also note that
the UN stayed
away from the
issue of the
Indian
diplomat
Khobragade
whom the US
arrested,
strip searched
and says it
will re-arrest
is she
returns, on a
dispute about
payment to her
housekeeper.
Did India make
enough calls
to the UN?
There are other
comparisons.
There's
also this
Italy - UN -
US Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act
censorship
related news,
with old Sri
Lanka related
photo, here,
in Italian.
In other
Italian news,
alongside
foreign
minister
Bonino's
calls, prime
minister Letta
is reportedly
set to resign.
Back in
September, as
reported by
Inner City
Press, Letta
gallivanted
around New
York. From
Media Alerts
sent out by
the Italian
Mission to the
UN:
September
24:
"We are
pleased to
confirm that
the Italian
Prime
Minister,
Enrico Letta,
will hold a
stakeout in
the UN Rose
Garden, TODAY,
Tuesday
September 24,
following the
address of the
President of
the United
States of
America."
The
connection to
Obama's speech
was unclear.
Also September
24:
"We
are
glad to inform
that the
Italian Prime
Minister,
Enrico Letta,
will meet the
press TODAY AT
12:15 PM
outside the
New York Times
building
located at 242
West 41st
between 7th
and 8th
Avenues."
The
next day,
Letta was back
in the UN Rose
Garden,
apparently
looking
through
rose-colored
glasses:
"Please
be
advised that
the Italian
Prime
Minister,
Enrico Letta,
will hold a
possible
stakeout in
the Rose
Garden of the
UN, tomorrow,
Wednesday,
September 25,
following his
address to the
UN General
Assembly, at
approximately
1 pm."
Also
on September
25 Letta
Occupied Wall
Street, in his
way, with the
so-called (and
once
self-described)
Money Honey:
"8.20-10.15
Meeting
at the New
York Stock
Exchange with
NYSE
delegation
headed by CEO
Niederaurer
(Statement,
Opening Bell,
visit to the
trading floor,
interview with
Ms. Maria
Bartiromo for
'Closing Bell'
show) (2 Broad
Street)"
And
then it all
wrapped up:
"The
concluding
press
conference of
Prime
Minister, Hon.
Enrico Letta
will be held,
as scheduled,
tomorrow
Thursday 26
September at
1:20 pm at the
Italian
Academy,
Columbia
University
(1161
Amsterdam
Avenue)."
While
Letta was up
to this in New
York, also
meeting with
Hassan
Rouhani, his
support at
home was
falling apart
even then. And
now, he's
about to
resign. What
about the
sailors? Watch
this site.
* * *
These
reports
are
usually also available through Google
News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here
for Sept 26, 2011 New Yorker on Inner City
Press at UN
Click
for
BloggingHeads.tv re Libya, Sri Lanka, UN
Corruption
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
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 2006-2013 Inner City Press,
Inc. To request reprint or other permission,
e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
|