After
Ban Ki-moon
Met Tyahnybok
of Svoboda,
Feltman
Returns, No
Press
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, March
25 --
Two days after
the UN
confirmed to
Inner City
Press that in
Kyiv UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon met
with
controversial
Svoboda Party
leader Oleh
Tyahnybok,
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
said former
US, now UN
official
Jeffrey
Feltman is now
returning from
Ukraine.
Haq said
Feltman will
share what he
learned in
Ukraine with
people at UN
headquarters.
Would that
include
answering any
Press
questions?
Apparently
not. From the
UN's
transcript,
video
here:
Inner
City Press: on
Ukraine, a
couple things.
The Defense
Minister was
forced to
stand down,
apparently for
having ordered
the troops out
of Crimea. And
also, a right
sector leader
named
Oleksandr
Muzychko has
been killed
and there are
some
allegations
that some of
the Government
were involved.
I wanted to
know, does the
UN have any
sense of
either of
those two
things, and
also, what’s
Mr. [Jeffrey]
Feltman, is he
back from
there? I know
that he stayed
behind, but
what’s going
to be his
ongoing
day-to-day
role on this
situation and
where is he
now?
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq:
Mr. Feltman is
returning to
New York. Yes,
he has been in
Ukraine and
he’ll be able
to come back
here and share
some of his
experiences
and
information
from the last
several days
with people
here at
Headquarters.
Inner
City Press:
With the
Press, as
well?
Deputy
Spokesperson
Haq: I don’t
believe he
intends to go
to the press,
no.
Who else did
Feltman meet
while in
Ukraine? On
March 25, by
comparison,
the UN issued
a list of
people its
Syria envoy
Lakhdar
Brahimi met in
Kuwait,
including
now-protested
opposition
head Ahmed al
Jarba.
But on March
24, Haq
refused to say
if Ban knew in
advance that
Tyahnybok
would be
present.
Video
here.
Tyahnybok, the
leader of
All-Ukrainian
Union
'Svoboda,' has
repeatedly
been quoted
that the
country was
led by a
"Moscow-Jewish
mafia." In the
last week,
parliamentarians
from his party
beat up a
television
news executive
to make him
resign.
(Dujarric on
March 21 told
Inner City
Press neither
he nor, he
thought, Ban
had watched
this widely
available
video.)
Did Ban know
in advance
that Tyahnybok
would be
present? What
would Ban
Ki-moon as UN
Secretary
General have
to say to
Svoboda's
Tyahnybok, he
of the
"Moscow-Jewish
mafia"?
Dujarric's
e-mail to
Inner City
Press did not
say.
So Inner City
Press went to
the March 24
UN noon
briefing and
asked
Dujarric's
deputy Farhan
Haq, transcript
here:
Inner
City Press:
...the
Secretary-General,
among the
parliamentarians
he met with,
was the head
of the Svoboda
party, Oleh
Tyahnybok.
But, I wanted
to know, I saw
that he
mentioned in
the readout
some
discussion of,
you know,
dialogue, sort
of. I wanted
you to address
the following:
Mr. Tyahnybok
has been
quoted in the
past as saying
that Ukraine
was run by a,
quote, Moscow
Jewish Mafia.
And more
recently the
Svoboda party
filmed itself
beating up TV
news
executives and
put the video
online. So,
many people
see them as an
extremist, and
I wonder, does
the
Secretary-General
have any… what
can we read
into this
meeting? Was
he given the
list in
advance? Does
he with that
he hadn’t met
with them? Was
he happy to
have met with
them? What can
you say about
this?
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq: I
wouldn’t have
anything to
add to the
information
that we
provided over
the weekend.
Basically, as
we pointed
out, the
Secretary-General
met with a
list of
people. We are
capable of
proving that
list to those
of you who are
interested.
But this was a
general
meeting with a
wide range of
interlocutors.
We don’t have
anything
further
beyond, like I
said, what
we’ve already
provided.
Inner
City Press:
Did he know
who he was
going to be
meeting with
in advance?
That’s one
question that
I wanted to
know? Did he
know? That’s a
factual
question.
Deputy
Spokesperson
Haq: The
phrase “I
don’t have
anything to
what I’ve
said” is
exactly what
it is. I have
nothing to
add.
Asking
what Ban knew,
and when he
knew it, is
not a request
for an
opinion: it is
a simple
factual
question one
might assume
the UN would
answer.
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
you about
sanctions. I
know that in
his opening
remarks, the
Secretary-General
talked about
provocative
actions and
counter-reactions
and obviously
there have
been, the US
announced
sanctions on a
slew of
individuals
and one bank,
and another
bank, SMP, has
been cut off
from the Visa
and Mastercard
system. Russia
has its own
sanctions. Was
this
discussed, was
this discussed
while he was
in Moscow?
Does the
Secretary-General
think that
sanctions
should be done
through the
UN? And will
he meet with
representatives
of the Svoboda
party while
he’s there, if
they were to
request it?
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
There was a —
I will share
with you as
soon as I get
it — the list
of party
leaders that
attended the
meeting with
the
Secretary-General.
So we will see
who exactly
was there and,
you know, I’m
not going to
get into
detailed
reactions to
sanctions and
counter-sanctions
and so forth.
But what I
will say is
that, you
know,
everybody
needs to kind
of focus on
finding a
peaceful,
diplomatic
solution and
lowering the
tensions.
Inner
City Press:
Has he or you
seen the video
of the Svoboda
party MPs
beating up the
television
executive?
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric: I
have not and I
doubt that he
has.
But more than
50 hours
later, the
"list of party
members" who
met with Ban
had still not
been provided
or shared, nor
was an
explanation
provided.
Inner City
Press asked,
what should
one infer from
that?
Then on the
evening of
Sunday, March
23 at 6:50 pm
in New York,
hours later in
The Hague,
Dujarric sent
Inner City
Press this
e-mail:
From:
Stephane
Dujarric [at]
un.org
Date: Sun, Mar
23, 2014 at
6:53 PM
Subject: Re:
Press Qs
A/RES/67/255,
still Media
Alert, Reed
& Roed
Larsen, thank
you in advance
To: Matthew R.
Lee [at]
InnerCityPress.com
Cc: FUNCA [at]
funca.info
Matthew,
I
think you had
a question
about the
parliamentarians
the SG met.
During
his time in
Kyiv the
Secretary-General
had a number
of meetings
with senior
leaders,
including the
Acting
President, the
Prime Minister
and the Acting
Defence
Minister.
Right
after his
meeting with
the Acting
President met
with Caucus
leaders of the
Rada,
representing
some of the
major parties.
They included:
·
Oleksander
Doniy of the
Sovreign
European
Ukraine Group
·
Anatoliy
Kinakh, head
of the
Parliamentary
Group
· Adam
Martyniuk,
Deputy head of
the Communist
faction
·
Viktor
Pynzenyk,
Vitaliy
Klytchko Party
“UDAR”
·
Sergit
Sobolev,
Acting Head of
the
Parliamentary
Faction of the
All-Ukraine
Union
Batkivshcyna
· Oleh
Tyahnybok,
Leader of
All-Ukrainian
Union
“Svoboda”
In his
meeting he
reiterated his
message for
the need to
find a
peaceful
diplomatic
solution to
the current
crisis and for
the need for
Moscow and
Kyiv.
Moreover, he
put a special
emphasis on
the need for
Ukrainian
politicians to
engage in an
inclusive
political
dialogue. He
called for an
end to
inflammatory
rhetoric that
can lead to
further
tensions and
possible
miscalculations,
as well as
dangerous
counter-reactions.
Intimidation
by radical
elements has
to be firmly
prevented, he
added. He told
the
parliamentarians
counted on all
parties in
Ukraine to
ensure that
this is the
case.
best
steph
While there's
more to be
said of Ban's
other
interlocutors,
Svoboda's
Tyannybok
stands
out. Did
Ban have any
input into
with whom he
met?
Also on March
21, on the new
US sanctions
on Russia
described on
March 20 by
four Senior
Administration
Officials,
including on
Bank Rossiya,
Dujarric had
no comment
when Inner
City Press was
able to ask
him.
Notably a bank
NOT on the US
sanctions
list, SMP
Bank, has been
cut off from
payments
services by
Visa and
MasterCard.
Apparently
Visa and
MasterCard are
part of US
foreign policy
On March 20,
another US
Senior
Administration
Official spoke
of
restrictions
on goods from
Ukraine and
said this
might violate
Russia's World
Trade
Organization
obligations.
But what about
the unilateral
sanctions?
The US said it
wants the
International
Monetary Fund
to move fast,
and during the
background
call the IMF
put out a
press release,
that its
review is
going well and
its mission
will wrap up
on March 25.
On March 19
after US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
said Russia's
Vitaly Churkin
was creative
like Tolstoy
or Chekhov,
Churkin asked
for a right of
reply or
additional
statement at
the end of the
March 19 UN
Security
Council
meeting on
Ukraine.
Churkin said
that from
these two
literary
references,
Power has
stooped to
tabloids, and
that this
should change
if the US
expected
Russian
cooperation.
The reference,
it seemed, was
to Syria and
Iran, and
other UN
issues.
One wanted to
explore this
at the
stakeout, but
neither Power
nor Churkin
spoke there.
In fact, no
one did: even
Ukraine's
Yuriy Sergeyev
left, down the
long hallways
with his
leather coat
and
spokesperson.
One wondered
why.
There were
many questions
to ask. Why
did Ivan
Simonovic's UN
human rights
report not
mention the
Svoboda Party
MPs beating up
the head of
Ukrainian
national
television?
Will France, despite
its Gerard
Araud's
speech,
continue
selling
Mistral
warships to
Russia?
What of
France's role
in the earlier
referendum
splitting
Mayotte from
the Comoros
Islands?
Araud
exchanged a
few words with
those
media he
answers to
while on the
stairs, then
left. The UK's
Mark Lyall
Grant spoke
longer, but
still left.
Why didn't
Simonovic at
least come and
answer
questions?
Perhaps he
will, later
this week,
including on
Svoboda.
It's worth
remembering
Moscow's anger
at who called
Ban's tune on
Kosovo. What
will be
different now?
After Russia,
Ban will head
to Kyiv to
meet Yatsenyuk
and the UN
human rights
monitors.
But no
announcement
by Ban's
Office of the
Spokesperson,
which has
repeatedly
refused to
confirm Ban
trips even
when the
country
visited has
already
disclosed it.
"Will
you confirm
what BBC says
UN Moscow told
it, that the
Secretary
General is
traveling to
Russia
tomorrow to
meet President
Putin and FM
Lavrov -- and
is so, can you
explain why
and how this
UN news was
distributed in
that way
first, and not
through your
office, to all
correspondents
at once? The
latter part of
the question
is on behalf
of the Free UN
Coalition for
Access as
well."
Forty five
minutes later,
after a mass
e-mail,
Dujarric
replied:
"Matthew,
The
official
announcement
was just made.
The UN office
in moscow did
not announce
anything
before we did.
I did see some
leaked reports
this morning
from various
sources but
nothing is
official until
it's announced
by this
office."
But it wasn't
a "leaked
report" -- BBC
said that UN
Moscow had CONFIRMED
it. We'll have
more on this.
For now it's
worth
reviewing Ban
Ki-moon's
response to
Abkhazia and
South Ossetia
in 2008...
The day after
the Crimea
referendum,
the US White
House
announced new
sanctions and
Russia said
Ukraine should
adopt a
federal
constitution.
Inner City
Press asked UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesperson
Stephane
Dujarric for
Ban's or the
UN's comment
on either, if
Ban thinks
sanctions
should ideally
be imposed
through the UN
and not
unilaterally,
and if this
might lead to
a tit for tat.
Dujarric said
Ban's focus is
on encouraging
the parties to
"not add
tensions;" on
Russia's
federal
constitution
proposal he
said the UN is
"not going to
get into
judging every
step." Video here.
With Serry
gone from
Crimea and
Simonovic
called
unbalanced by
Russia, what
is the UN's
role? Is it
UNrelevant?
While in
Washington,
Yatsenyuk said
he knows the
International
Monetary Fund
program is
"not the sweet
candy." Inner
City Press
covers the IMF
and can only
say: ask
Greece.
Asked about
allowing any
referendum in
Crimea,
Yatsenyuk said
the
legislature in
Kyiv would
have to permit
it; he said
there could be
dialogue about
increased
autonomy from
Crimea, on
taxes and
language
rights.
He was asked
about Jihadis
going to
Crimea and he
answered about
the Tatars. He
bragged that a
deputy prime
minister in
the new
government
"represents
the Jewish
community."
But what about
Right Sector?
The US State
Department
announced for
example that
the Department
of Defense
will be giving
Meals Ready to
Eat or MREs to
the Ukrainian
Armed Forces.
Over on
Capitol Hill,
the US Senate
Foreign
Relations
Committee
marked-up the
"Support for
the
Sovereignty,
Integrity,
Democracy, and
Economic
Stability of
Ukraine Act of
2014."
Absent on jury
duty, Senator
Marco Rubio
had a proposed
amendment
about the G8
and not
invading your
neighbor read
out; it was
agreed to.
Senator Rand
Paul proposed
an amendment
to remove loan
guarantees and
the
International
Monetary Fund
from the bill.
He said the
loans would go
to back Russia
back and noted
that the
proposed IMF
reforms would
raise Russia's
power in the
IMF from 2.5%
to 2.71%
Senator Bob
Menendez
replied that
the IMF
wouldn't give
a dime unlesss
Ukraine
commits to
changes. Can
you say,
austerity? Watch
this site.
, 
