To
Speak or Not with Taliban, Behind Karzai's UN Expulsion, Its Don't Ask, Don't
Tell Policy
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED NATIONS,
December 27 -- Afghan president Hamid Karzai has ordered the expulsion of Mervyn
Patterson,
described as the third-highest UN official
in the country, and Michael
Semple, said to be with the European Union, for allegedly talking with the
Taliban. Wednesday the UN denied that Patterson spoke with the Taliban. But Tom
Koenigs the highest UN official in Kabul ten weeks ago
told Inner City Press
that the UN does not ask who is Taliban and who is not. Video
here,
from Minute 4:28. Press accounts link this with reports of Britain's MI6 also
speaking with the Taliban, contrary to UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown's
statements two weeks ago. In Afghanistan, the issue seems to be that President
Karzai does not want it perceived that foreigners, including the UN, are working
around him and speaking to the Taliban.
Mervyn
Patterson is included in the UN's official "List of Staff," a document the UN
considers confidential -- but of June 30, 2006 (and 2005 and 2003) Patterson is
designated as "on special leave without pay." In 2002 he was quoted by wire
services as mediating between warlords in northern Afghanistan, for example
between Abdel Rashid Dostum and Atta Mohammad of Jamiat-e-Islami party, and
between Abdul Saboor and Ahmed Khan. A UN insider who worked with Patterson in
2002 describes him as a consummate negotiator, and also says that Michael Semple
worked with the UN. (Semple is not listed at all in the UN's List of Staff.) As
of 5 p.m. Wednesday at UN Headquarters in New York, the spokesperson's office
said Mr. Patterson had not yet left Afghanistan, but that more would be known by
morning. The following day, the office confirmed that Patterson had left. Inner City Press asked this office a series of questions, and the
response was that
"We can confirm that a UN official had
been asked to leave the country on the grounds that their presence is
detrimental to national security. This followed a visit to Helmand province to
discuss stabilization efforts with local authorities and community
representatives in the province. We believe that there is no basis for such a
decision and that this is a result of a misunderstanding with the Afghan
authorities. Discussions are currently ongoing with the Afghan authorities to
rectify this situation so that we can continue with the vital efforts to secure
peace, stability and progress for the people of Helmand province.... Was he
talking to the Taliban? No. We have been talking to the local authorities and
community representatives, we are not talking to the Taliban."
First, if
the UN's Tom Koenigs has
said that the UN "keeps contact with everybody without asking him or her if
they are Taliban," how would the UN so quickly know? Second and more
fundamentally, how can one make "efforts to secure peace" without talking
to the insurgency?
Hamid Karzai and Ban Ki-moon: who can talk with Taliban?
One week ago, upon
his return to New York from visiting survivors of the bombing of the UN building
in Algiers, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
said:
"We must do even better in explaining to
the public and the media the role of the United Nations, wherever we operate --
why we are there, what we do, what we stand for and what we don't. We must make
clear we are not there to represent the interests of any one group of nations
over another."
While
currently this public explaining is lacking, for example here and in
Sri Lanka where the
UN has remained silent as the government accuses UNICEF of supporting the
Tamil Tigers, back on October 15 the UN's outgoing Special Representative to
Afghanistan Tom Koenigs said that the UN "keeps contact with everyone, without
asking him or her if they are Taliban or not." He also specified, as is relevant
here, that ultimate authority for negotiation must rest with the government of
Afghanistan. Video
here,
from Minute 4:28. (Inner City Press had asked, at the televised stakeout in
front of the Security Council chamber, about
Iran's chiding of the
UK and others reaching out to the Taliban.")
News analysis: If, as
Mr. Koenigs said in October, the UN does not ask who is Taliban and who is not,
this would be the time to explain what the UN is doing, and why. That the UK
would desire secrecy, particularly after Gordon Brown's categorical statement
two weeks ago, is understandable. But the UN, as called for by Ban Ki-moon,
should do "better in explaining." Watch this site.* * *
Click
here for a
Reuters
AlertNet piece by this correspondent about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army.
Click
here
for an earlier
Reuters AlertNet
piece about the Somali National Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's
$200,000 contribution from an undefined trust fund.
Video
Analysis here
Because a number of Inner City Press'
UN sources go out of their way to express commitment to serving the poor, and
while it should be unnecessary, Inner City Press is compelled to conclude this
installment in a necessarily-ongoing series by saluting the stated goals of the
UN agencies and many of their staff. Keep those cards, letters and emails
coming, and phone calls too, we apologize for any phone tag, but please continue
trying, and keep the information flowing.
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here, and
some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-07 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com -
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540