On
Bangladesh,
ICP Asks UN
Why Ban's Jan
30 Letter
Lost, No
Answer
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 18 --
Amid the
violence in
Bangladesh, UN
official Oscar
Fernandez
Taranco
appeared on
the schedule
of US
Assistant
Secretary of
State Nisha
Biswal on
February 11,
to meet at
3:45 pm. Inner
City Press
surmised,
since Taranco
was previously
sent to Dhaka
for the UN,
that it was
about
Bangladesh.
While Taranco
has been
Banned from
going, it has
emerged that
Ban Ki-moon
sent January
30 letter(s)
to the
country, even
thought the
government
there says
they only got
the letter
much letter.
What explains
the delay? On
February 18,
Inner City
Press asked
UN Spokesman
Stephane
Duajrric:
Inner
City Press: I
asked about
Bangladesh
yesterday and
there was some
response.
Now, it's been
confirmed by
the Government
there that
they received
a letter from
the
Secretary-General.
They said they
received it
two days ago,
but in other
accounts, it
was dated 30
January, and
the Government
there is
saying they're
asking the UN
Resident
Representative
why it was
lost in the
mail for two
weeks.
But one, can
you confirm
the
letter?
Can you say a
little bit
what's… what
you can,
what's in
it? And
also is it
true that it
took two weeks
for Ban
Ki-moon's
letter to
reach Sheikh
Hasina?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I can check on
the letter and
see what we
can tell you
about the
letter.
The standard
procedure for
these letters
is, if there
was such a
letter, is
that the
letter is
transmitted
through the
Permanent
Mission here
and then the
Permanent
Mission
transmits it
back to
capital.
Question:
Right. They
quote from the
letter that
the
Secretary-General
is thanking
Sheikh Hasina
for the
country's
contributions
for
peacekeeping.
Some people
think it puts
the UN kind of
in a tough
spot.
Like, what's
the balance
between
thanking for
much-needed
peacekeepers
and also
trying to hold
somebody
accountable
for violence
in the
streets?
Spokesman:
Well, I think
you could do
both, but I
will look at
the letter for
you.
Inner
City Press:
there was a
report that
Mr. [Oscar
Fernández-]Taranco
is going there
on a visit,
and this was
denied by the
Permanent
Mission here,
Ambassador
[Abdul] Momen,
who said he
has not spoken
to him.
Can you… is
Mr. Taranco
seeking to go
to the
country, and
why hasn't he
spoken with
the Permanent
Representative
here in New
York?
Deputy
Spokesman
Haq:
Well, right
now on the
first
question:
There's
currently no
plan at this
point for Mr.
Fernández-Taranco
to travel back
to
Bangladesh.
He has been
there
before.
He has been
tasked by the
Secretary-General
to be in
contact with
the Government
and the
opposition and
he will
continue with
those
efforts.
But, at this
point, like I
said, there's
no travel to
announce.
Back on
February 12,
Inner City
Press asked UN
Department of
Political
Affairs chief
Jeffrey
Feltman if
Taranco in
Washington had
been
addressing
Bangladesh.
Feltman
genially
replied, yes,
that among
other issues.
Even though
Taranco, as a
product of the
UN's so-called
Five Year
Rule, moved to
the
Peacebuilding
Department, he
is still the
UNHQ's man on
Bangladesh.
Later
at the
February 12
noon briefing,
UN spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
saying he was
answering
Inner City
Press'
questions from
the day
before,
confirmed that
Taranco's
meeting with
the US State
Department's
Biswal had
addressed
Bangladesh.
Was that so
hard?
On
February 11,
Inner City
Press had
asked
Dujarric: UN
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric on
February 11
said:
Inner
City Press: Mr.
Taranco is
still involved
in this
issue. I
notice that
he's meeting
this afternoon
with Nisha
Biswal, the US
Assistant
Secretary of
State for
South and
Central
Asia. Is
it fair to
assume that
that's what
that meeting
is
about?
And how would
you
characterize
it?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I think it's
not fair to
assume
anything.
I'll now see
if I can
actually get
you some
facts, as
opposed to
assumptions.
But
seven hours
later, there
was nothing.
Then on
February 12,
Feltman then
Dujarric.
When
on February 5
Inner City
Press asked
the UN,
which uses
Bangladesh
soldiers as
peacekeepers,
this ensued:
Inner
City Press: In
Bangladesh,
the… things
seem to be
getting
worse.
Former Prime
Minister has
been charged
with arson
and… which she
says she
doesn't
do. The
power's been
turned off to
the opposition
party and
basically the
authorities
are using
violence on
protestors.
So, I'm
wondering,
what's the
response of
the
Secretary-General?
Is there any
[Department of
Political
Affairs] or
other UN
involvement in
trying to
mediate
it? And
with senior
military
officials
making
statements
about what
they'll do to
civilians,
what's the
impact on
Bangladesh as
a peacekeeping
contributing
country?
Deputy
Spokesman
Farhan
Haq:
Well, the
political
process is
separate and
apart from the
issue of
peacekeepers
in UN
missions, who
are under the
control
ultimately of
the
mission.
Regarding the
situation in
Bangladesh,
we've made our
concerns
known.
As you know,
officials,
including the
senior
officials from
our Department
for Political
Affairs, have
repeatedly
visited
Bangladesh,
trying to meet
with the
leaders there
and make sure
that the
crisis can be
resolved
peacefully.
As you know,
we continue to
have our
concerns that
that hasn't
happened and
that there has
been
violence.
We have
continually
encouraged and
continue to
encourage the
authorities to
allow for
peaceful
protest and
for the right
to peaceful
assembly.
And beyond
that, we'll
continue to be
in touch with
the leaders of
the two main
parties,
trying to make
sure that they
can resolve
their
differences.
So what if
anything is
the UN doing?
Watch this
site.
, 
