By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
September 16
-- That Ban
Ki-moon serves
the US as
Secretary
General of the
UN has
been UNdoubted
from his first
day on the
job. But now
the US repays
the favor,
crediting Ban
--
anonymously,
of
course -- with
bringing about
a shift in
Russia
position, how
ever
small, on
Syria.
Today's
Washington
Post reports:
"As
Kerry appealed
to Lavrov, he
mentioned a
breaking story
in the media.
U.N. Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon,
meeting with a
women’s group
in
New York, had
been quoted as
saying that
U.N.
inspectors who
had
investigated
an alleged
Aug. 21
chemical
attack outside
Damascus had
significant
evidence that
it had taken
place and that
it was
massive,
and would
report their
findings to
the Security
Council on
Monday.
The Americans
'sensed a
small shift on
the Russian
side,' the
official said,
and Lavrov
left the
meeting,
saying he was
going to
the nearby
Russian
embassy for
consultations
with Moscow.
He returned
and said he
would stay for
an additional
meeting the
next day."
There's
a
problem,
however, with
this
revisionist
tale. As Inner
City Press
first
reported,
watching the
closed session
of the Women's
International
Forum on
Friday, Ban's
comments on
the Sellstrom
report
that he had
not yet seen
were only in
response to a
question from
the
floor.
That
is to say, Ban
would not have
called the
report he had
not seen
"overwhelming"
unless the
question was
asked. So who
did
the questioner
work for? Or,
shouldn't the
questioner be
credited?
The
question to
Ban was, why
don't you
strip Assad of
Syria's seat
as
Gaddafi was
stripped of
Libya's UN
seat? The
answer, not
given by
Ban, is that
Ban had
nothing to do
with that: it
is the
Credentials
Committee of
the UN General
Assembly.
In
the case of
Libya, deputy
Dabbashi and
then Perm Rep
Shalgam jumped
ship and
renounced
Gaddafi whom
they had for
years worked
for.
In
the case of
Syria, Bashar
Ja'afari has
not similarly
jumped ship.
No
shift of seat
is on the
horizon. But
the Washington
Post reports
none of this,
just the US'
post deal
spin. We'll
have more on
this.
, 
