UN
Ban's
Capitulation
of Policy to
Feltman
Unanswered,
Sri
Lanka Q Not
Taken
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May 22 -- With
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon on the
verge
of handing
over the UN's
Middle East
policy to US
Assistant
Secretary
of State for
Near East
Affairs
Jeffrey
Feltman,
as exclusively
reported
by Inner City
Press on March
28, on Tuesday
Ban's
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
refused to
respond to
Press
questions
about whether
this
conflation
harms or helps
the UN.
When
we have
something to
say, we will,
Nesirky said,
apparently
meaning
after Feltman
is officially
named. After
Inner City
Press ran
the
scoop in March,
many diplomats
and senior UN
officials
responded with
criticism of
Ban's plan.
One even on
Tuesday said,
there was some
wobbling (or
re-consideration
of if Feltman
was right.)
On
May 21 Reuters
then some others
ran the
Feltman story
as if it were
theirs,
with no credit
or analysis.
Even Lynn
Pascoe, whose
retirement
triggers
Obama's
election year
appointment of
Feltman, said
they
should have
given credit.
But Reuters
has blocked
even a comment
on
its story to
this effect,
pointing to
the omission.
Inner City
Press first
wrote to one
of the three
reporters on
Reuters story,
so far without
response.
By contrast,
appropriate
credit was
given by Josh
Rogin of FP's
The Cable, here.
Ban's
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
used
to work at
Reuters, as
he's at times
proudly said.
But on
Tuesday he
functioned as
a blocker of
press
questions.
First during a
so-called
question and
answer session
with Ban's
Congo envoy
Roger
Meece, when
Inner City
Press asked a
follow
up question
about its
April
story of
corruption in
Meece's "Quick
Impact
Project"
in Walikale,
Nesirky cut in
and said there
was no more
time, but he
would take the
question
later.
Then
in what is
supposed to be
the UN noon
briefing at
which
questions of
the day can be
asked, Nesirky
allowed Inner
City Press
only one
question --
the Feltman
question he
declined to
answer -- and
then
refused even
the factual
question of
whether Sri
Lankan General
and
alleged war
criminal
Shavendra
Silva was told
not to attend
that
morning's
meeting of
Ban's Senior
Advisory Group
on
Peacekeeping
Operations.
As
a third
question, not
permitted,
Inner City
Press had
planned to ask
about the Rio
+20 conference
about which
Ban speaks so
much: did Ban
agree with
Monday's move
to push
through a
53-33 vote the
accreditation
of NGOs
bragging of
going business
in occupied
territories,
even if it
blocks
consensus in
Rio?
This
is how Ban
Ki-moon is
operating:
openly turning
over the UN's
Middle East
policy to the
US in a way
that many of
his own
officials say
undermines the
perceived
independence
of the UN,
doing the same
with
Rio + 20 and
accepting
advice from
alleged war
criminals -
then not
answering
questions....
, 
