UNclarity
On New Head of
UNHCR, Refugee
Run-Around,
Danish Irony
or Grandi?
By Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive
series
UNITED
NATIONS,
September 23
-- While UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
declined to
confirm to
Inner City
Press on
September 8
that Denmark
has nominated
its former
Prime Minister
Helle
Thorning-Schmidt
to replace
Antonio
Guterres as UN
High
Commissioner
for Refugees,
the country
has said it,
even as it
tries to
dissuade
refugees from
coming. (Inner
City Press
asked the UN
Spokesman
about that
irony as well,
transcript
below.)
On
September 22,
Inner City
Press again
asked Dujarric
about the
process, on
which the call
for
nominations
closed on
September 14.
Despite calls
in the UN
General
Assembly for
increased
transparency
(Inner City
Press asked
the "ACT"
group about
it, here),
the UN
Secretariat is
leaving this
murky. From
the UN's
transcript:
Inner City
Press: There
was a press
conference
here earlier
today
about the next
Secretary-General
process, but
what I glean
from it and
wanted to ask
you is, on
this currently
I guess the
nominations
are closed to
head UNHCR,
but it seems
like, with the
resolution
that was
passed in the
GA about
transparency
and process,
I'm wondering
if you can say
anything at
all about, is
it entirely
the
Secretary-General's
decision?
Is he
conferring
with
people?
The PGA
[President of
the General
Assembly] says
he plays no
role.
How does the
selection of
this…
Spokesman
Dujarric: I
would
encourage you
to read a note
the
Secretary-General
sent to the
General
Assembly in, I
think, 2012
which outlines
how he intends
to manage the
nomination of
senior
officials in
which there is
— he balances
transparency,
you know, with
the need to
protect
confidentiality
and it clearly
outlines his
consultations
with Member
States and
with regional
groups as a
critical way
of increasing
the
transparency
of the
selection
process.
I think we
have seen how
for senior,
heads of
senior
agencies,
often a letter
is sent out
asking for
nominations.
So I would
encourage you
to read that
which really
outlines the
process and
the thinking
behind the
process.
Inner City
Press:
Specifically
on this post,
can you say
whether
there's any
finalist that
comes from a
country from
which refugees
predominantly
come rather
than a host
country…
Spokesman:
I think
Matthew…
Inner City
Press:
Would that be
important?
Spokesman:
The date for…
the date for,
the closing
date for
nominations, I
think, was
less than a
week
ago.
While we do
not share the
short list, I
can be pretty
sure that
there is no
short list as
of yet and the
Secretary-General
and his team
will be
looking for
the best
possible
candidate to
lead what is a
critical
agency,
especially at
this
time.
Well,
the Danish
candidate had
policies
criticized by
UNHCR itself.
On
September 9, a
Senior US
State
Department
Official told
the press that
the US' goal
last year was
to resettle
70,000
refugees and
it came within
13 of that
number. The
goal is to
increase, but
the official
declined to
say by how
much.
While
the US
official
several times
cited UNHCR -
the US as
largest donor,
an upcoming
meeting after
the UN General
Assembly week
- the official
was not asked,
and did not
say, what the
US would be
looking for in
the new head
of UNHCR.
On
September 9,
Inner City
Press asked UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq if
the former
Danish Prime
Minister's
record,
already
criticized by
UNHCR, should
not disqualify
her. Haq would
not directly
address this,
but did say
that a
candidate with
a good record
on refugees
would be
sought. Inner
City Press
(and the Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
as on
UNOCHA)
asked what Ban
will do for
transparency
of the
selection
process. We'll
see -- or not.
There
is another
nominee Inner
City Press has
reported,
Filippo Grandi
of Italy, from
2010 to 2014
the head of
UNRWA. Sources
complain to
Inner City
Press that
Thorning-Schmidt
should be
disqualified
by UNHCR's
criticism of
Denmark during
her tenure,
and the Grandi
is among other
things not
"high profile"
enough.
(The same can
be said of
some of those
asking their
countries'
support to run
to replace Ban
Ki-moon as
Secretary
General, but
more on this
anon.)
The US
always owned,
and recently
re-upped for,
the UNHCR
Deputy spot.
So why not a
more migrant-
or
refugee-side
nominee? We
hope to have
more on this.
Inner City
Press: I want
to ask you, it
is reported
that the
former Prime
Minister of
Denmark, Ms.
Thorning-Schmidt,
has been
raised to the
Secretary-General
by the current
Government as
a candidate to
replace Mr.
Guterres.
Can you
confirm that?
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
No, I mean,
I've seen the
reports.
There is a
mechanism
through which
the next UNHCR
Head will be
selected.
Once there is
a new Head to
be named, one
will be named.
Inner City
Press: because
some people
are saying
it's ironic
given
Denmark's
position on
accepting
refugees.
Spokesman:
People see
irony in a lot
of the places.
Inner City
Press:
Let's see if
we can
generate
irony.
Does the
Secretary-General
have any view
of Arab Gulf
States who are
quite involved
in the
conflict in
Syria in terms
of having
supported
rebel groups
etcetera, the
number of
refugees
they've
taken?
What has… is
he calling
them on the
phone?
Spokesman: I
would —
gentlemen… you
know, my
podium is your
podium, but it
comes with
certain risks
and irony. I
think I would
encourage you
to read what
the
Secretary-General's
Special
Representative
on migration,
Mr.
Sutherland,
said today in
Geneva, where
he talked
about
responsibility,
about global
responsibility
towards
refugees, and
that that
responsibility
doesn't mean
just giving
financial
support.
It means
taking people
in. And
that
responsibility
needs to be
shared
While many
have noted
that Saudi
Arabia and
Gulf Arab
countries that
have poured
funding into
the war in
Syria have not
taken a single
refugee, when
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon made a
round of calls
on September 6
to (unnamed)
leaders, these
were only in
Europe.
As on
sexual abuse
by
peacekeepers,
"name and
shame" is the
opposite of
Ban Ki-moon's
approach. He
didn't name
the European
leaders he
spoke to, and
didn't call
Saudi Arabia,
the UAE, Qatar
or Bahrain,
much less the
US, Canada or
Australia.
Former UK
foreign
secretary
David Miliband
appeared on
both ABC This
Week and NBC
Meet the Press
on September
6, talking
about refugee
flows from
Syria only in
term of Assad,
with no
mention at all
of ISIS. Even
when Miliband
cited Aylan
Kurdi fleeing
from Kobane,
he blamed it
on barrel
bombs.
Looking
back to
Miliband's
time as UK
foreign
secretary, one
couldn't help
noting for
example that
if he'd put
even deployed
even half of
this advocacy
during the
slaughter in
Sri Lanka in
2009, lives
might have
been
saved.
The argument
that he, and
Kouchner for
example, were
constrained on
Sri Lanka due
to terrorism
is put to the
lie but
Miliband's
airbrushing of
ISIS now.
ABC
This Week did
not asked
Miliband about
Gulf states
taken no
refugees, nor
about the UK's
policies under
David "Swarm"
Cameron;
neither US
Sunday show
asked about
Corbyn and the
UK Labor race.
Last
month on the
UN Security
Council's
Syria
Presidential
Statement,
adopted
“unanimously”
with Venezuela
disassociating
itself as
Lebanon when
it was a
member of the
Council did on
Syria, an
issue still
unaddressed is
the exclusion
of Elected Ten
members from
negotiations.
Inner
City Press
asked
Nigeria's
Ambassador Joy
Ogwu about
this on August
14, if the
Elected Ten
members of the
Security
Council
should
be brought
into
negotiating
documents
earlier, Video
here, from
2:43.
Ambassador
Ogwu said, on
UNTV camera,
“That’s an
aspiration of
the ten
elected
members. There
should be more
participation.”
In this
case, until
Venezuela
objected, they
were given a
mere 18 hours.
What is the
point of
running for a
seat on the
Security
Council if
rubber
stamping is
all that's
expected of
you?
This
paragraph, and
its compliance
or
non-compliance
with Syria's
constitution,
was and is at
issue:
“10. The
Security
Council
demands that
all parties
work urgently
towards the
comprehensive
implementation
of the Geneva
Communiqué,
aimed at
bringing an
end to all
violence,
violations and
abuses of
human rights
and violations
of
international
humanitarian
law and the
launching of a
Syrian-led
political
process
leading to a
political
transition
that meets the
legitimate
aspirations of
the Syrian
people and
enables them
independently
and
democratically
to determine
their future,
including
through the
establishment
of an
inclusive
transitional
governing body
with full
executive
powers, which
shall be
formed on the
basis of
mutual consent
while ensuring
continuity of
governmental
institutions.”
Disassociation,
allowing it to
be adopted as
unanimous
while a member
can disavow
it, may solve
a problem for
this
particular
text. But
other ongoing
dysfunctions
of the
Security
Council
continue.
Watch this
site.
Back on August
7 the Security
Council on
August 7 a
resolution to
establish a
so-called
accountability
mechanism for
the use of
chemical
weapons in
Syria. Outside
the Council
before and
after the
unanimous vote
on August 7,
Russia's
ambassador
Vitaly Churkin
referred to a
Presidential
Statement he
said may be
adopted early
next week, to
support UN
envoy Staffan
de Mistura's
work.
Inside
the Council
after the
vote, Syria's
Ambassador
Bashar
Ja'afari began
his speech
with a
reference to
the 70th
anniversary of
the US
dropping the
atomic bomb on
Hiroshima. He
went to to say
the UN never
investigated
the use of
chemical
weapons, by
rebels he
said, in Khan
al Asal.
In its
resolution the
Security
Council
“recalls that
in its
resolution
2118, it
decided that
the Syrian
Arab Republic
and all
parties in
Syria shall
cooperate
fully with the
OPCW and the
United
Nations.” It
seems doubtful
that ISIS will
cooperate.
Churkin in his
post-vote
speech inside
the Council
said that “the
existing
mechanics of
the UN and
OPCW do not
have a mandate
to identify
those
participating
in such acts.
Moreover, we
became
witnesses of
the many
politicized
statements in
this regard,
which were
clearly meant
to be
propaganda. It
was necessary
to eliminate
this gap,
which was done
with the
adoption of
today’s
resolution...
Any efforts in
the Syrian
area must be
in line with
assisting a
search for a
political
solution to
the conflict.”
Inside the
Council, US
Samantha Power
delivered this
speech. At the
stakeout,
questions were
given to
Reuters, Al
Hurra (really,
France 24, by
mistake), and
Voice of
America.
(We'll have a
separate piece
on Power's
response to
the Press'
final question
about Burundi.
For now,
here's previous
stakeout, sit-down.
After the
meeting ended,
on the steps
leading out
from the UNSC
stakeout,
Churkin said
“I hope it
will translate
into our
continued
joint work on
the political
front. We are
working, I
think very
well, on a
PRST
[Presidential
Statement] in
support of
Staffan de
Mistura’s
efforts. I
hope it will
be adopted...”
More on InnerCityPro.com. Follow @innercitypressFollow @FUNCA_info
, 
