By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
August 17 --
The South
Sudan visit of
the UN
Security Council
is over; fighting
has escalated,
in Bentiu and
in Ayod, Jonglei
State and
elsewhere.
Authorities
in Juba have
shut down a
radio station
for reporting
about the
fighting, as
raised
yesterday by the
Free
UN Coalition
for Access.
Now comes
news of
even more
targeted censorship:
"Officials
held a meeting
recently with
Weer Bei FM at
which they
made it 'very
clear' that
the station
was to report
only what was
favorable to
the
government,
according to
an informed
source.The
authorities
took issue
with several
reports,
including a
report that
the European
Union has
added
SPLA-Juba
faction
commander
Santino Deng
Wol to a list
of targeted
sanctions that
ban him from
traveling to
European
countries and
from keeping
money in
European
banks.
Authorities
did not want
this news to
be broadcast
in the Dinka
language, the
main language
spoken in
Northern Bahr
al Ghazal,
which is the
state from
which the
general
hails."
New UN envoy
Ellen Loj
accompanied
the Security
Council's
trip, but it
is not clear
what if
anything she
has said yet.
Of the above,
at least one
Permanent Representative
on the
Security Council
is aware. But
what will the
Council do?
South Sudan's
National
Security
Service has closed
Bakhita Radio
and arrested
journalist
Ochan David
Nicholas.
According to
Radio Tamazuj,
"Presidential
Spokesman
Ateny Wek
explained that
the radio
station had
failed to
report on the
fighting
yesterday
according to
the statement
given by the
army, which
said that
rebels
attacked their
positions
yesterday.
Instead, he
alleged, they
reported that
the army was
responsible
for the
aggression."
So if one doesn't
report
"according to
the statement
given by the
army," there
is censorship,
closure and
arrest. What
does the UN
say about this?
(In Somalia,
the UN has yet
to speak on
the raid on
Radio Shabelle
by the AMISOM
force the UN
supports, as
the Free
UN Coalition
for Access
has raised,
here.)
Back on August
6 after six
Nuer aid
workers were
killed in
Maban County,
South Sudan,
the UN
Security
Council, as
well as Ban
Ki-moon and
the US State
Department,
issued
statements of
outrage.
The
Security
Council's
statement,
issued at 9 pm
on August 6,
called on "the
Government of
South Sudan to
immediately
take steps to
ensure the
safety of all
civilians, to
swiftly
investigate
these
incidents, and
to effectively
bring the
perpetrators
of these
heinous acts
to justice,
and to fully
respect
international
human rights
law and
international
humanitarian
law."
Meanwhile
South Sudan
president
Salva Kiir was
in Washington
at the US'
Africa Summit.
At the
Security
Council Inner
City Press
asked Council
president Mark
Lyall Grant if
the Council
will meet Riek
Machar during
its now
disclosed trip
to South Sudan
and the
region. Lyall
Grant said
both sides
will be talked
to, but did
not want to
give details.
Nor did the
UN. When Inner
City Press
asked Ban's
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq to
confirm that
the aid
workers needed
to be
evacuated were
all Nuer, Haq
refused. Who
does this
serve?
Hilde
Johnson has
left left as
UN envoy to
South Sudan.
On June 30
when Johnson
gave her last
UN press
briefing on
June 30, Inner
City Press
asked her who
used cluster
bombs in this
stage of the
conflict,
and about
having in 2012
told Inner
City Press
that militia
leader Peter
Gadet leading
“disarmament”
was OK. Gadet
is now under
US sanctions.
Johnson
dodged
on the cluster
bombs,
that UN
Peacekeeping's
UNMAS had made
a report “to
New York” --
still
confidential
-- and that
she couldn't
go beyond what
UNMAS has said
publicly:
nothing.
UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous
routinely
refuses Press
questions and
refuses to
provide the
most basic
answers, such
as about
flying
sanctioned
FDLR leader
Rumuli in the
DR Congo. It
seems to have
spread to
Hilde Johnson,
even as she
leaves.
On Gadet,
Johnson
recounted that
he was a
militia leader
brought in by
Salva Kiir's
“Big Tent”
strategy,
which she said
was
“unavoidable”
and brought
peace. Well,
it didn't
bring peace:
was it
unavoidable?
Doesn't the UN
usually
pretend to
speak for
accountability?
Or not any
more, under
Ladsous?
Inner
City Press had
hand raised to
ask another
question,
about press
freedom.
But Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman gave
some media but
not other a
second round.
For this
reason,
setting aside
the first
question to
UNCA, in this
case Pamela
Falk, is
UNacceptable.
When all
questions
can't be
asked, no one
should
automatically
get the first
question. Will
it even be
reported on?
Watch this
site.