By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
September 17
-- With UN
Peacekeepers
in the Golan Heights
having first
surrendered to
the Al Nusra
Front, then
left weapons,
vehicles and
uniforms for
them, the UN
Security
Council met
behind closed
doors on September
17.
Outside at the
Council
stakeout with
two other
journalists,
Inner City
Press obtained
a copy of a
draft UNSC
Presidential
Statement
which did not
even name the
Al Nusra
Front.
The
draft called
for the return
of
peacekeepers'
vehicles,
weapons and
other
equipment -- by
an UNnamed
group.
At the day's
noon briefing
Inner City
Press asked if
UN Peacekeeping
boss Herve
Ladsous
ordered the
surrender --
if he had
spoken with
the UNDOF
Force
Commander
before the
order to
surrender.
UN deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
wouldn't say,
citing
security. But
who is responsible
for the
decision.
It was not
Ladsous but
his deputy
Edmond Mulet
who briefed
the Council
behind closed
doors. Haq was
asked if Mulet
would take
questions
after the
meeting. No,
he said. Later
during this
meeting his
office advertised
a reception in
the clubhouse
the UN gives
to its
Censorship Alliance.
Access to
information?
No. Bread and
circuses.
Inner
City Press on
September 16
asked
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon:
Inner
City Press:
Matthew Lee,
Inner City
Press. On
behalf of the
Free UN
Coalition for
Access, thanks
for taking
questions and
I hope in the
next two weeks
we have as
much access as
possible.
I want to ask
about the
Golan
Heights.
There is a lot
of controversy
about what has
taken place
there, with
apparently an
order to
surrender and
Al-Nusra is
now running
around with UN
trucks and
vehicles.
And it was
said at the
stakeout this
morning that
the equipment
was given over
and basically
that the
mission is no
longer
completing
what its
mission is,
which is to
monitor both
sides of the
ceasefire
line.
So I wonder
what are you
going to do in
terms of
getting to the
bottom of if a
surrender was
ordered, who
ordered the
surrender and
what can you
say to the
troop
contributing
countries who
say that this
is kind of a
disarray and
people need to
know what the
role of
peacekeepers
is, stand and
fight or
surrender and
run?
SG Ban: For
that issue I
understand
that Mr.
[Hervé]
Ladsous,
Under-Secretary-General
for
Peacekeeping
Operations,
has explained
to you in
detail what
had
happened.
And, as you
know, the
security
situation was
very, very
urgent and
dangerous at
that
time.
Therefore, you
should also
appreciate the
peacekeepers
were and still
are working on
the very
difficult and
dangerous
situation.
That is why,
as was briefed
by the
spokesperson
yesterday, we
had to
relocate this
UNDOF [United
Nations
Disengagement
Observer
Force]
peacekeepers
to a safer and
more secure
place.
This is a part
of and
continuing
efforts to
make sure that
our
peacekeepers
and UN staff's
security and
safety are
ensured.
While
the change to
put the question
to Ban was
appreciated,
things are
arranged for
DPKO chief
Herve Ladsous
to avoid the
tough
questions,
just as he has
announced he
will not
respond to
questions of
media whose
questions he
doesn't like.
Video
here and here and here.
While
respecting
safety of
peacekeepers,
how does this
relate to the
Office for
Internal
Oversight
Services'
critique of
Ladsous' DPKO
has not
protecting
civilians? If
they cannot
protect themselves,
how can they
protect
civilians?
Inner
City Press on
September 2 asked
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
Inner
City
Press: the
Philippines
military has
complained
that the
military force
commander of
UNDOF asked or
ordered the
Filipino
peacekeepers
to lay down
their weapons
in some sort
of in relation
to the Fijians
and they
refused to do
so and has
asked, as they
say, for an
investigation
of the
commander.
Could you
explain under
what
circumstances
the UN central
peacekeeping
or force
commander
would ask
peacekeepers
to lay down
their weapons
in the face of
a hostile
group and why?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Again, as the
situation is
ongoing and
the situation
in the
Filipinos and
Fijians are
obviously
linked, I'm
not getting
into the
detail of it.
What I will
say is that we
will respond
to any formal
request made
by Member
State. Its
normal
procedure of
review of
action being
taken and
after review
action be
taken by
mission once
the situation
has concluded.
So, I think we
have to get
through this
is extremely
volatile
situation. The
safety of all
our
peacekeepers
here is
foremost on
our mind. It's
at risk. We
have seen the
kind of area
they are
operating on
and I think we
need to let
this — we need
to let all of
this conclude
and then we
can address it
more formally.
Inner
City
Press: for
troop-contributing
countries, are
you aware of
any other case
in which
peacekeeping
has asked
peacekeepers
to essentially
surrender and
are they
supposed to
obey those
orders?
Usually they
complain the
other way and
they are
ordered to
fight and they
won't fight.
Are you aware
of any other
case when they
are ordered to
surrender?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
And I think
every
situation is
different, and
as I said what
is foremost on
our mind is
the safety of
our soldiers.
Back on
September 3, Inner
City Press
asked about
the
black-flagged
UN vehicles,
and about
public and
widely
reported
comments by
Ireland's
minister of
defense that
no more Irish
troops will be
send to the
UNDOF mission
until it is
reviewed.
Dujarric said
no formal
communication
has been
received from
the Irish
government.
Earlier
on September 3
the first, set-aside
UNCA soft ball
question,
unpressed, was
about Filipino
Colonel Ezra
James
Enriquez.
Ladsous said
he has
“tendered his
resignation”
but that “is a
matter for
them.” For
whom? It was
then reported
that Ezra
James Enriquez
has “left his
post.”
There
is more to be
said. Watch
this site.
, 
