On
Syria, de
Mistura
Doesn't Take
"No Sane
Opposition" Q,
Vienna Bound
By Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
November 10 --
The UN's Envoy
on Syria
Staffan de
Mistura is a
man in a hurry
-- or a man
who doesn't
want to answer
questions.
When de
Mistura
emerged from
UN Security
Council
consultations
on November
10, UN deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
said he would
only take a
few questions,
he had to get
back to
Vienna.
Haq
went on to
call on three
media: Saudi,
Qatari and (at
least)
Kurdish.
Still, no much
balance, and
not many
answers.
November's
Security
Council
president
Matthew
Rycroft of the
UK provided
more
explanation.
Inner City
Press asked
him about a
quote
attributed to
UN Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson, that
“it is
especially
important to
avoid the
destruction of
power
institutions
in Syria due
to the fact
that in
contrast with
2012 the
country
doesn’t have
any sane
opposition to
negotiate
with.”
(This
was reported
said while
Eliasson was
in Washington;
the UN has not
transcribed
this Q&A,
which the Free UN Coalition for Access believes
the UN should
do.)
Rycroft
responded that
those fleeing
the recent
urging in
militarization
in Syria are
precisely
those who will
be needed for
the Vienna
process.
(Inner City
Press also
asked Rycroft
about the
day's North
Korea or DPRK
consultation).
Rycroft said
UN Disarmament
acting
director Kim
Won-soo said
his “JIM”
mechanism will
be operational
this Friday
and will
investigate
new uses of
chemical
weapons.
Then China's
Liu Jieyi came
out. It could
have been
foretold:
Xinhua's
representative
on UNCA had
been camped
out at the
stakeout since
mid-afternoon
and was handed
the first
question. But
then Reuters
took not one,
but two
questions of
the half dozen
Liu Jieyi
answered.
Paraphrasing
“one country,
two systems,”
FUNCA believes
one media, one
question.
We'll have
more on this.
Back
on April 24
when Mistura
came to the UN
Security
Council
stakeout,
Inner City
Press asked
him about
criticism of
how he has run
his office to
date. De
Mistura
declined to
respond. But
see below.
On
May 30, the UN
Spokesperson's
Office
issued a
statement for
de Mistura,
condemning
"the death of
at least 70
civilians in
Syria's
northern
Aleppo
province by
barrel bombs
dropped from
government
helicopters."
The statement,
full
text here,
said that "all
evidence shows
that the
overwhelming
majority of
the civilian
victims in the
Syrian
conflict have
been caused by
the use of
such
indiscriminate
aerial
weapons." Some
were sure to
wonder, what
about ISIS?
But as
de Mistura
holds a new round
on
consultations
in Geneva,
with all press
coverage
Banned, he
is belatedly
replacing his
principal
political
affairs
officer with
one Stephanie
Koury, Inner
City Press is
informed, who
in
Iraq headed
the UN's
Kirkuk office,
as well as a
stint in
another of the
UN's failed
(or
turned-over)
mediation
missions,
in Yemen, see
below.
Previously,
Inner City
Press reported
on how de
Mistura
ingratiated
himself to Ban
Ki-moon by
hiring and
promoting
Ban's son in
law Siddharth
Chatterjee
while serving
as envoy in
Iraq. (Some of
that reported
was censored,
but not on
Inner City
Press.) This
led to push-back
from the UN,
which continues
to the day
- something
that the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
opposes.
Last week the
UN said of de
Mistura's
upcoming five
to six weeks
of talks on
Syria in
Geneva that
there will be
no interviews
or stakeouts,
nor even any
photo-sprays,
during all
that time.
FUNCA opposes
this
closing-down
of the UN as
well.
A picture has
emerged of de
Mistura's
running of the
UN's Syria
office, in
which
"cronies" from
his time in
Iraq and after
that
Afghanistan
have been
favored in
jobs, with
very little to
show for it.
De Mistura's
functional
political
affairs chief,
for example,
has been
Elpida Rouka,
who was de
Mistura's "Special
Assistant"
in Iraq.
Her i-Phone
composed
political
memos have
been
exclusively
mocked to
Inner City
Press by close
associates of
de Mistura,
but de Mistura
declared her
the only
authorized
channel of
"substantive"
information to
UN
Headquarters
in New York.
At
a key moment
in de
Mistura's
doomed push
for a "freeze"
in Aleppo,
Inner City
Presss is
exclusively
informed that
de Mistura
went with,
over ceasefire
expert Julian
Hottinger, one
Matt Waldman,
listed as an
adviser not
only of de
Mistura on
Syria but also
of the
European
Institute for
Peace, which
as Inner City
Press has
reported de
Mistura remains
president of
the Board of
Governors.
(Back
in September
2014, Inner
City Press
asked the UN
Office of the
Spokesperson,
"please
confirm or
deny that Mr.
de Mistura
will be
(allowed to
be) based in
Brussels, and
separate state
his contract
status: When
Actually
Employed? Paid
at USG level?
Is he being
allowed to
continue
working with /
for any non-UN
organization,
if so which,
and what
review of
possible
conflicts of
interest was
made, and by
whom?")
One might
think that the
UN's Syria
envoy position
is or should
be a full time
job, without
outside second
positions like
continuing as
president of
the board of a
group like the
European
Institute for
Peace. But
this is the
UN, where the
special
representative
on
Cyprus
Alexander
Downer was
allowed to
work full time
at an
investment
bank or
consultancy
Bespoke
Approach,
Tony Blair
as Middle East
Quartet
representative
and
businessman,
and now a
similar
UNdisclosed
arrangement in
Yemen.
(Inner
City Press has
four
times asked
simple public
financial
disclosure
questions
about Ban's
new Yemen
envoy Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed, without
answer.)
All of the
above said, de
Mistura is a
pleasant man;
while in
Afghanistan he
pledged
to get to the
bottom of the
murder of UN
staffer Louis
Maxwell
there although
he never did
(nor did
others in
today's
UN). But
Inner City
Press - and
FUNCA - are
committed to a
closely-covered
and open UN,
and the trend,
from the top
down, is in
quite the
opposite
direction.
Here was the
UN's "Note to
Correspondents"
-
The
Geneva
Consultations
on Syria will
begin next
week Monday, 4
May, at the
Palais des
Nations and
last for an
initial period
of five to six
weeks.
The Special
Envoy of the
Secretary-General
Staffan de
Mistura has
invited as
many of the
parties as
possible,
primarily the
Syrian parties
(government,
opposition and
civil
society), as
well as the
regional and
international
stakeholders,
to discuss
with the
Special Envoy,
the dire
situation in
Syria today
and to provide
their candid
views on where
we stand
vis-a-vis
implementation
of the Geneva
Communiqué
almost three
years since it
was adopted.
The Special
Envoy and the
Deputy Special
Envoy, Ramzy
Ezzeldine
Ramzy, will
conduct closed
and separate
consultations
with each
party.
There will be
no photo
opportunities,
no stakeouts,
and no
interviews
while the
consultations
are being
conducted at
the Palais.
However,
periodic photo
and video
feeds will be
provided by UN
Photo and UN
Television.
The UNOG
Spokesman and
Director,
a.i., of the
UN Information
Service in
Geneva, and
the Office of
the Special
Envoy's Public
Information
Officer, will
provide
periodic
updates to the
Geneva Press
Corps and
others, as and
when
appropriate
and necessary.
No major
public
announcements
are expected
during, or at
the conclusion
of, these
Consultations.
The Special
Envoy will
assess the
progress of
his
stock-taking
at the end of
the process
and report to
the
Secretary-General
with his
findings and
recommendations.
Thank you for
understanding.
Thank you
indeed.
Back
on April 24,
Inner City
Press asked de
Mistura if the
Saudi-led
airstrikes on
Yemen changed
any of the
dynamics on
Syria.
In reply, de
Mistura told
Inner City
Press that
"everything in
the region
these days is
connected." He
added that he
is focused on
Syria.
Inner
City Press
also asked de
Mistura about
criticism made
by his former
adviser Mouin
Rabbani on
Qatar's Al
Jazeera TV,
that Mistura
is out of his
depth and not
up for the
task.
De
Mistura
replied, I
will not
respond, you
would do the
same, if one
of your
ex-colleagues...
Inner City
Press asked
the question
because it
hadn't been
asked,
tellingly.
Dina
Kawar said
Mistura
“mentioned
what he will
do next month
in Geneva,
holding
separate
meetings with
the Syrian
parties,
representatives
of the civil
society and
regional and
international
actors. He
will provide
his assessment
to the
Secretary
General and
keep the
Security
Council
informed,”
Kawar said,
taking no
questions.
Staffan de
Mistura
emerged,
saying he
would take two
or three
questions. He
said, “the
only way is to
test, a stress
test,” a
phrase like
his previous
“freeze.” He
said, “by end
of June we
should be in
the position
to reassess
whether any
convergence on
substance and
report to the
Secretary
General.”
De Mistura
said, “This is
not Geneva
Three, this is
a series of
consultation,
one to one. We
can convene
and ask
everyone to
come and not
exclude
anyone.. Iran
is a member
country of the
UN, it is a
major play in
the region, it
has influence
in Syria. The
UN has the
right, and
will be
inviting
everyone.”
Unlike
Montreux, it
was observed
by... one wag.
Back on April
16, that the
Syrian
chemical
weapons victim
and doctor who
briefed the UN
Security
Council did so
behind closed
doors, with no
UN Television
coverage, was
a product of
the Council's
rules.
It was an
“Arria
formula”
meeting, which
was not be
listed in the
UN Journal or
even on the
blue
electronic
signs outside
it. (The sign
said the
meeting was
about
"nutrition.")
Afterward
chemical
weapons victim
Qusai Zakarya
took some
questions in
the hall,
before again
going behind
closed doors
of the UN
Censorship
Alliance, see
below.
Inner City
Press in this
public space
asked Qusai
Zakarya what
he thought of
UN envoy on
Syria Staffan
de Mistura.
Qusai
Zakarya said
replied to
Inner City
Press, "I
think Staffan
de Mistura is
a hypocrite. I
think his very
disgusting
attempt to
shine up the
image of the
regime is
exposed to the
Syrian people
and to a nlot
of members of
the
international
community. His
offer on
freezes was a
joke. If he
really cared
about saving
lives he would
have convinced
the regime to
stop using its
fire power. We
have a lot of
outrage
against his
attempts, the
deal he was
trying to
offer, it's
just another
false attempt
to shine up
the image of
the regime."
Inner City
Press asked
him if he
would meet
with any UN
official. “I
can't answer
that questio
right now,” he
said. Then the
convoy went to
the clubhouse
of the UN
Censorship
Alliance,
which had sent
notice only to
those who pay
it money:
"They will
have just
presented
their accounts
in front of
the UN
Security
Council at an
Arria-formula
meeting on
Syria Chemical
Weapons."
But why would
the doctors,
in holding a
supposed press
conference
afterward, not
do so in the
UN Press
Briefing Room
on UNTV, as
can be done by
any NGO or
individual as
long as
sponsored by a
member state?
Instead, the
sequel
show was also
behind closed
door, in the
UN Censorship
Alliance
(UNCA), not on
UNTV. This is
the same UNCA
which hosted
former Syrian
Coalition head
Ahmad al
Jarba,
allowing him
to claim he
had a “UN
press
briefing.”
It is a scam.
And so on
April 24 Inner
City Press
asked UN
spokesman
Dujarric if
Jarba's
successor,
after Hadi al
Bahra, Khaled
Khoja will
hold a Q&A
session in the
open UN Press
Briefing Room.
We'll see.
UNCA
and its board
members have,
for example,
sought to get
other
journalists
thrown out of
the UN, for
reporting on
the financial
relationship
of UNCA's then
and now
president
Giampaolo
Pioli with an
alleged war
criminal,
accepting rent
money from him
and later
agree to
screen his war
crimes denial
film inside
the UN, under
the UNCA
banner.
If one has a
case to make,
this is not
the place to
make it.
Even since its
outright
censorship
bid, the way
UNCA is run
gives less and
less
confidence. On
April 10, the
UN
Spokesperson's
Office
announced over
its public
address system
that "in a few
short moments
in the UNCA
room there
will be a
press
conference by
a State
Department
official."
But as Inner
City Press
immediately
reported, it
wasn't any
"press
conference" --
it was off the
record spin,
typical of
this UNCA now
known as the
UN's
Censorship
Alliance (the
invitation
they send to
those who pay
UNCA money is
below.)
Just
before 5 pm,
the UN
Spokesperson's
Office made a
second public
address system
announcement:
it was NOT a
press
conference,
but rather an
off the record
presentation
by the US
State
Department.
All
this in the
big room the
UN gives to
UNCA, its
Censorship
Alliance. Why
is the UN
involved in
this in any
way at all?
The
announcement
by UNCA
president
Giampaolo
Pioli, sent
only to those
who pay UNCA
money (then
forwarded to
Inner City
Press along
with messages
of shock and
disgust) said
"For
correspondents
interested in
an informal
off-the-record
meeting with
[the] Deputy
Director,
Media Hub of
the Americas,
U.S.
Department of
State Bureau
of Public
Affairs,
please join us
in the UNCA
Meeting Room,
Friday, April
10th at
3:30pm.
"The meeting
will be to
explain the
work of the
State
Department
Public Affairs
bureau that
works with
international
media, to
provide
assistance in
gaining better
access to
State
Department
officials and
information,
in addition to
presenting the
work done in
the Media Hub
of the
Americas where
the Director
is the State
Department
spokesperson
in Spanish and
Portuguese for
regional media
and Spain and
Portugal.
Thank you,
Giampaolo
Pioli
UNCA
President"
Pioli's
invite linked
to a
self-description
of this US
Bureau of
Public
Affairs, that
“PA/IME works
in close
collaboration
with State
Department and
interagency
colleagues to
create and
manage tools
to ensure
accurate
coverage of
U.S. foreign
policy by
major
international
media.”
UNCA
represents
only part of
the UN press
corps. This
writer, for
example, quit
the group
after
2012.
UNCA is said
by UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric to receive
the first
question in
the UN Press
Briefing Room
“by tradition,”
even after UNCA's
Executive
Board
tried to get
the
investigative
Press thrown
out of the UN
for its reporting
about Sri
Lanka, UN
Peacekeeping
and
colonialism
(Herve Ladsous)
among other
topics.
UNCA
did nothing
when Ladsous
adopted the
policy of
refusing to
answer any
questions from
the
investigative
Press, and
having his
spokespeople
physically
grab the UNTV
microphone to
try to avoid
the questions
being heard.
Now UNCA wants
to facilitate
“accurate
coverage of
U.S. foreign
policy.” Does
it perform
this service
for other
countries?
Inner City
Press, like
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access which
it co-founded
after quitting
UNCA, is not
against
"accurate
coverage of US
foreign
policy." Last
month, Inner
City Press
asked the US
State
Department
about Yemen
(including
the decision not to
evacuate
Yemeni
Americans from
the country),
Cuba
(the US
restrictions
on its
diplomats at
the UN),
the Maldives,
Middle
East and
the Democratic
Republic of
the Congo.
In each case,
Inner City
Press reported
the answers in
full, where
possible with
video.
But why
provide this
platform for
one country
and not
others?
Earlier on
April 10 UNCA
will have a
presentation
by a former US
CIA employee
who served in
Saipan, Korea,
Vietnam and
"Burma," as
the UNCA
notice puts
it.
What has happened
to this UNCA
under Pioli
and presumably
current
Executive
Committee
members from Reuters,
the US
Broadcast
Board of
Governors
and ANSA? And
how now can
the UN
continue to
“partner” with
UNCA,
exclusively,
using this
partial group
as a proxy for
the wider
press corps?
Earlier
on April 9,
when the UN
with little
notice
canceled its
question and
answer noon
briefing in
deference to a
"press
encounter"
with Ban
Ki-moon at
which Dujarric
handpicked the
questioners
and Ban
notably did
not call for a
halt or even
pause in
airstrikes on
Yemen, UNCA
said nothing.
(They will,
however, have
a "Prosecco
toast" with
Ban later in
the month.)
The
Free
UN Coalition
spoke up in criticism,
as here. We'll
have more on
and of this.
, 
