Ban
Ki-moon Was
Angered His N
Korea Plan
Published by
ICP,
Accomplished
Little
By
Matthew
Russell Lee, Fifteenth
in a Series
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 31 --
In the final
days of Ban
Ki-moon's
decade as UN
Secretary
General,
covering up
genocides in Sri
Lanka, Burundi
and Yemen
and evicting
the Press
which asked
about (t)his
corruption,
Inner City
Press is
reviewing
Ban's end,
year by year.
See also this
Twitter
Moment.
In
2009, Ban
misspoke about
his history in
Sri Lanka, the
mass killing
in which he
ignored to
attend his son
Woo-hyun's
wedding, and
where his
son in law
Siddharth
Chatterjee had
previously
played an
active,
killing role.
While
Ban would
later evict
and still
restrict Inner
City Press,
in 2009 his
strategy was
to get it
removed from
Google News -
and it
happened
(though it was
later
reversed).
Here's Inner
City Press' report from
June 3, 2009.
And
now Ban threatens
to sue, for
ambition.
It's
that Ban wants
to be
president of
South Korea.
But what has
he
accomplished
at the UN,
even on North
Korea?
All the way
back in 2007,
in the time
frame in which
South Korean
media report
Ban took
$30,000 in
cash in a New
York City
restaurant
(Ban's
spokesman
denies, and
denies he's
issued any
threat, but
won't disclose
his letter to
Inner City
Press, or
Ban's net
worth in 2007
and now),
Inner City
Press obtained
and published
a leak of
Ban's “policy”
review of the
UN's role on
the Korean
Peninsula.
From Inner City Press'
June 4, 2007
exclusive,
linking to the
memo
Inner City
Press
published:
"UNITED
NATIONS, June
4 -- As
questions
mount about
the UN's
no-visit audit
of programs in
North Korea,
on Monday Ban
Ki-moon's
deputy
spokesperson
refused to
confirm or
comment on a UN
memo to Mr.
Ban which
recommended,
more than a
month before
the North
Korea audit
report was
released, that
the UN
Development
Program resume
operations
there. Also on
Monday other
audited
agencies did
not come
forward with
responses to
the report.
Inner City
Press obtained
a copy of the
"Korea
Peninsula UN
Policy and
Strategy
Submission to
the Policy
Committee"
memo on
Thursday and
in a story on
the eve of the
audit's
release quoted the
memo's
recommendation
that "Unless
it is
reversed, the
UNDP program
risks being
terminated.
Rather than
being able to
support the
six-party
talks process
and
international
engagement
with North
Korea at this
critical
juncture, the
UN will lose
its unique
comparative
advantage in
that area
altogether."
On
Monday, Inner
City Press asked
spokesperson
Marie Okabe:
Inner
City Press: On
the Department
of Political
Affairs,
there’s this
memo from DPA
called Korean
peninsula: UN
policy and
strategy.
It's dated
April 25th and
it proposed to
Ban Ki-moon
three
proposals
about how to
deal with
North Korea,
one of which
is to get the
United Nations
Development
Program (UNDP)
back
involved.
Do you confirm
that this
document is
what it is and
what
happened?
What happened
with the
policy
committee?
What did they
decide after
this
presentation?
And how does
it relate to
the UNDP
audit?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
It doesn't
relate.
First of all,
you're talking
about reports
of a paper
that was
circulated in
some news
media. I
can tell you
that it has
nothing to do
with the
Democratic
People’s
Republic of
Korea (DPRK)
audit, which
you had
extensive
briefings on
on
Friday.
But what I can
tell you about
what you read
about in these
reports is
that the
United Nations
is constantly
reviewing its
work in all
the countries
in which it is
engaged and a
normal part of
the process
involves
preparing
options for
the
consideration
of the
Secretary-General.
The United
Nations does
not comment on
internal
documents
developed as
part of its
ongoing
work.
And that's my
response on
that.
Question:
And there is a
policy
committee?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
There is a
policy
committee that
meets
frequently.
As the
Secretary-General
is a new
Secretary-General,
obviously, he
is reviewing
all the
policies of
the United
Nations.
Question:
Do you know
who is on the
policy
committee?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
It's an
internal
setup.
I'm sure I can
find out for
you. But
it's composed
of his senior
advisers.
I think I'll
leave it at
that.
[The
Deputy
Spokesperson
later drew the
correspondent’s
attention to
the
Secretary-General’s
bulletin
(ST/SGB/2005/16)
that set up
the policy
committee and
lists its
membership.]
First, Inner
City Press did
not base its
question on media reports about
the memo, but
rather on the
memo itself,
which it now
in the
interest of
transparency
makes
available to
all, click here to
view in PDF
format.
UN
group photo --
how many of the
memo's
authors are
pictured?
So what has
Ban accomplished
on North
Korea?
In
2006 after Ban
was given the
job since he
was NOT “God's
gift to
humanity,”
even then he
was criticized
for close
business links
with Myanmar,
by Djoko
Susilo
among others.
As it
turned out,
Ban Ki-moon's
brother Ban
Ki-ho would do
mining and
other business
in Myanmar,
after being on
a “UN
delegation.”
Ban Ki-moon's
nephew Dennis
Bahn is said
to have used
his uncle's
name and
position while
trying to sell
real estate in
Vietnam.
The Bans have
yet to answer
these
questions. Here's
the
December 26 round-up
story by Inner
City Press.
Now the South
Korean media
have picked up
on Ban
Ki-moon's
nepotism as
well,
reporting
that just
after Ban
Ki-moon
"visited Korea
at the
invitation of
the United
Nations Global
Compact Korea
Association...
his son Ban
Woo-hyun was
recruited by
SK Telecom's
New York
office."
Inner
City Press has
been asking
and reporting
since 2009
about SK's
Chey Tae-won
being in the
UN Global
Compact, for
example here.
It was
in 2009 that
mass killing
by the Sri
Lankan army
against Tamils
in the North
was occurring.
Inner City
Press exposed
how Ban's
Secretariat
was hiding the
death figures;
then amid
pressure for
him to visit
Sri Lanka, Ban
declined in
order to
attend the
wedding of his
son Ban
Woo-hyun. See,
Inner
City Press of
May 11, 2009.
On the
morning of
December 28,
2016, Inner
City Press
asked Ban
Ki-moon's top
three
spokespeople
questions
including
"Please
state the date
and separately
content of the
Secretary
General's last
three
communications
with Chey
Tae-won or any
other official
or employee of
SK Telecom, SK
or any of
their
affiliates.
Please confirm
or deny that
the Secretary
General's son
Ban Woo-hyun
was hired at
SK Telecom."
Five hours
later, the
fully paid
spokespeople
closed their
office without
answering a
single
question, and
while trying
to keep
"closed press"
Ban's meeting
with New York
and US
officials.
This
is entirely
consistent
with what
Inner City
Press has
witnessed and
reported on,
leading to and
after Ban
Ki-moon's
ouster and
eviction of
Inner City
Press and
restrictions
since:
nepotism. Like
getting his
son in law
Siddharth
Chatterjee
hired in
Copenhagen
then giving
him the top UN
job in Kenya.
Add to it -
not (yet)
noticed by the
South Korean
media, that SK
Telecom's Chey
Tae-won, who
invited Ban,
was previously
convicted of
fraud, NY
Times here.
Another
NY Times, on
Ban's UN
censorship.
Here's
Chey Tae-won,
whose SKT
hired Ban
Ki-moon's son,
on UN TV,
here.
Ban
Ki-moon's son
Ban Woo-hyun
has worked for
"a Middle East
branch of a
New York-based
financial
company."
We'll have
more on this.
On
December 26 it
was reported
in South Korea
that even
while Ban
Ki-moon was UN
Secretary
General, he
received
$30,000 from a
businessman,
in a
restaurant. See here,
including Park
Yeon-cha (as
well as
Vietnamese
minister
Nguyen Dy
Nien) with
this quote:
""It
would have
been early
2007, shortly
after Ban took
office as
Secretary
General of the
United
Nations. New
York has a
restaurant
owner who
knows him
well. Park
called the
owner of the
restaurant and
said, "If Ban
comes to eat,
give me $
30,000 as a
gift to
celebrate the
inauguration
of the
secretary
general." In
fact, we know
that money was
handed to Ban.
""
Did
the UN's
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services ever
look into
this? We're
still waiting
to hear from
them. As to
Ban Ki-moon's
spokespeople,
they have
refused to
answer Inner
City Press'
written
questions back
to November 25
about Ban
Ki-ho, etc.
Ban
Ki-moon has
largely been
immune from
accountability
for ten years,
due to a
mixture of
sycophantry
and, when seen
as necessary
in 2016,
censorship,
eviction and
restriction of
the
investigative
Press.
But in
2017...
It is
reported that
Ban Ki-moon
will push the
button to drop
the Times
Square ball on
New Years Eve,
seemingly
arranged by
NYC Mayor Bill
de Blasio's
relentlessly
pro UN Office
of
International
Affairs (which
never
answered
Inner City
Press about
any de Blasio
position on
Ban Ki-moon
having shirked
accountability
for his UN
bringing
deadly cholera
to Haiti.)
But the moment
that ball
drops, Ban
Ki-moon's
legal immunity
is over. We'll
have more on
this.
In
his first
year, 2007,
Ban Ki-moon bought in
numerous South
Korean
staffers.
Inner City
Press asked
and was told
there was only
one, then that
there were
five,
including
Kweon Ki-hwan.
Then
Ban's
spokespeople
including Choi
Soung-ha
chastised
Inner City
Press for
asking, and
demanded that
the names of
51 South Korea
staffers of
the
Secretariat be
removed from
Inner City
Press'
reporting.
Ban's
early
censorship,
which
culminated in
2016 with Ban
evicting Inner
City Press
through
Cristina
Gallach, audio
here, and
Inner
City Press'
camera being
smashed.
Inner City
Press even
before Ban's
Day 1 asked
about
financial
transparency.
It would end,
a decade
later, with
Ban refusing
to say who
paid for his
travel, even
what “carbon
offsets” he
supposed
bought.
On Ban's first
day at work,
after walking
in with Vijay
Nambiar who
would go on to
cover up
genocide in
Myanmar after
participating
in it in Sri
Lanka in the
White Flag
Killings, Ban
was asked
about the
death penalty
(for Saddam
Hussein) and
replied that
it is “up to
member
states.” His
first
spokesperson
Michele Montas
tried to
repair the
damage.
In
late 2016
Inner City
Press saw
Montas in the
UN, from the
“focus booth”
where it does
what work it
can after Ban
and his Under
Secretary
General for
Public
Information
Cristina
Gallach evicted
it from its
long time UN
office.
Meanwhile
Kofi Annan's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, who
played
a role in the
eviction,
is bragging
that he will
remain.
We'll have
more on this.