ICRC
and Consent in
Iraq and
Ukraine, Biden's
Poroshenko
Call
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
August 9 -- On
Ukraine four
days after the
UN Security
Council heard
the UN's John
Ging rattle
off UN
estimate of
those fleeing
into Russia (168,
677 this year),
US Vice President
Joe Biden
spoke with
Ukraine's
Petro
Poroshenko.
According to
the White
House's
read-out,
"Poroshenko
informed the
Vice President
of his
communication
with the
International
Committee of
the Red Cross
regarding
ICRC’s ongoing
efforts to
distribute
multilateral
humanitarian
aid --
including
assistance
from the
United States
– to the
vulnerable
populations in
eastern
Ukraine."
Some wonder,
what about for
example Sinjar
in Iraq, and
the ICRC? Has
the ICRC
actually
gotten aid
into Donetsky
and Lugansk or
are its
efforts being
read-out for another
purpose?
Earlier
on August 9,
US Secretary
of State John
Kerry spoke
with Russia's
Sergey Lavrov.
According
to a Senior
State
Department
official,
"During a call
with Foreign
Minister
Lavrov
Saturday
evening (Burma
time),
Secretary
Kerry made
clear that the
best way to
get additional
humanitarian
assistance to
eastern
Ukraine is for
all parties to
work through
international
organizations,
many of which
are already on
the ground,
and that
assistance
should only be
delivered with
the consent of
the Ukrainian
government.
Secretary
Kerry conveyed
that Russia
should not
intervene in
Ukraine under
the guise of
humanitarian
convoys or any
other pretext
of
'peacekeeping.'"
This jibed
with a
statement (the
US and others
apparently
made) Ban
Ki-moon put
out on August
9, that
"the
situation is
being handled
appropriately
by the
Government of
Ukraine."
Some ask, how
could the same
Government of
Ukraine which
is bombing
Lugansk and
Donetsk be
appropriately
handling the
humanitarian
situation
there? But
this is Ban
Ki-moon,
similar to his
uncorrected
August 1
statement that
the Israeli
Defense Forces
soldier was
captive of
Hamas, when
even the IDF
quickly said
he was killed
in action.
Inner City
Press asked;
no correction
by Ban Ki-moon
or the UN.
According to
the Senior US
State
Department
Official,
Kerry and
Lavrov also
discussed Iraq
and the
humanitarian
entry the US
had made
there:
"They
also discussed
Iraq and
ISIL’s
campaign of
terror against
innocent
people as well
as President
Obama’s
decision to
authorize
targeted
military
action and
provide
significant
humanitarian
assistance.
They agreed on
the need to
support the
Iraqi Security
Forces and the
Kurdish forces
in the fight
against ISIL
and to stay in
touch over the
coming days as
the situation
on the ground
continues to
develop."
Certainly,
being invited
by a
government
makes some
difference.
But many,
including in
the Permanent
Three in the
Security
Council, have
argued the
Responsibility
to Protect can
override the
consent of a
government (for
example after
Cyclone Nargis
in Myanmar,
where Kerry
was during
this call with
Lavrov).
That's where
Ban Ki-moon's
statement
comes in. But
given other
failure to
answer, on
matters from
Afghanistan to
free travel on
private jets,
how much water
does it hold?
Inner City Press
has a simple
question
pending with
Ban's "weekend
duty"
spokesperson,
about Libya:
watch this
site.
Back on July
30 when
Ukraine's
Permanent
Representative
to the UN
Yuriy Sergeyev
held a UN
press
conference,
Inner City
Press asked
him about the
Human Right
Watch report
his government
is using Grad
rockets,
killing at
least 16
civilians
between July
12 and 21 near
Donetsk.
Sergeyev
responded
first about
the UN's (or
Ivan
Simonovic's)
report, then
emphasized
that Russian
media is
saying Ukraine
is using
ballistic
missiles.
Inner City
Press repeated
the question,
emphasizing it
concerns Human
Rights Watch's
report, not
the UN's, and
not Russian
media.
Sergeyev
provided
essentially
the same
answer.
Here
is the HRW
report, online.
Inner City
Press also
asked about
the status of
the
International
Monetary Fund
program, after
the downing of
MH17. Sergeyev
said Ukraine
has met with
the IMF's
Christine
Lagarde and
"will" get the
next tranche
of the program
in late
August.
But won't
there be an
Executive
Board meeting?
After
Russian
foreign
minister and
US Secretary
of State John
Kerry spoke by
phone on July
27, the US
State
Department
issued two
read-outs, or
a readout in
two stages.
The second, an
"additional
point" by a
Senior State
Department
Official, was
that Kerry
"underlined
our support
for a mutual
cease fire
verified by
the OSCE and
reaffirmed our
strong support
for the
international
investigation
to show the
facts of
MH17."
Inner City
Press on July
30 asked
Sergeyev for
Ukraine's
position on
this. Sergeyev
cited as
"pre-conditions"
the closing of
the border
with Russia,
and the
release of all
hostages.
Back on July
28 Inner City
Press asked
Russia's
Ambassador to
the UN Vitaly
Churkin about
this read-out:
does the US
support a
ceasefire?
“I
supposed he
said they
did,” Churkin
replied. “What
their message
is in private
to the
Ukrainians is
a different
story... There
was a phone
converation
between Vice
President
Biden and
President
Poroshenko
[then] they
went up
another stage
in escalating
the conflict
after that and
immediately.”
Procedurally,
Ukraine set
aside the
first question
at its press
conference
saying,
"Pamela,
traditionally
you open our
session."
Using this UN
Correspondents
Association
set-aside, Pam
Falk of CBS
asked about
rebels mining
the MH17 site.
Her UNCA
sidekick asked
about "Russian
propaganda."
And so it went
until, fifth,
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
asked about
HRW's report.
This is how
it's working,
with the UN's
Censorship
Alliance. In
this context,
the Free UN
Coalition for
Access is
against the
automatic
setting-aside
of questions.
Watch
this site.