By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 21 --
The morning
after UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesperson
read out a
statement that
Ban had
decided that
the Montreux
talks will
proceed
without Iran's
participation,
Inner City
Press spoke
with Russia's
Permanent
Representative
to the UN Vitaly
Churkin about
it.
Churkin told
Inner City
Press,
exclusively,
"some people
let him down,
and not
necessarily
the Iranians."
Others have analogized
Ban to the American
Charlie Brown,
kicking at
empty space
when the football
is taken away
at the last
second. Was
Ban Ki-moon
set up?
Since the
Geneva I
Communique
requires a
commitment to
a sustained
cessation of
armed violence
in all its
forms, how for
example are
Qatar and
Saudi Arabia,
both of which
provide
weapons and
more to armed
groups in
Syria, invited
to Montreux?
Also, where
are the
Kurds?
Those who
actually
control
territory in
the north,
Rojava, are
not part of
Ahmad al
Jarba's
turkey-based
Syrian
Coalition, and
were not
separately
invited to the
talks. What
about their
dismay?
We'll have
more on this.
On January 20,
Inner City
Press asked
Iran's
Ambassador
about Ban's
dismay or
disappointment.
Video
here.
Outside
the UN
Security
Council later
on January 20,
Inner City
Press asked
Iranian
Permanent
Representative
to the UN
Khazaee about
Ban having
been
"dismayed" by
the Iranian
foreign
ministry's
spokesperson's
comments.
Kazaee
replied, "I
think all of
you are very
well aware
about the
consistency in
our position
about G2, so
the high
political
officials are
expected to
act based on
realities."
Yes,
realities:
minutes after
Ban's
spokesperson's
disinvitation
announcement,
Jarba's Syrian
Opposition
Coalition
returned to
the position
voted on with
44 members
absent: they
will attend
the talks in
Switzerland.
Earlier, after
Ban's
spokesperson's
statement
Iran's Khazaee
said (and his
spokesperson
sent to Inner
City Press) --
"The
Islamic
Republic of
Iran
appreciates
the efforts of
the UN
Secretary
General and
his special
envoy, Mr.
Brahimi in
finding a
political
solution for
Syrian crisis.
Iran has
always been
supportive of
finding a
political
solution for
this
crisis.
"However
the Islamic
Republic of
Iran does not
accept any
preconditions
for its
participation
in Geneva II
conference. If
the
participation
of Iran is
conditioned to
accept Geneva
I communique,
Iran will not
participate in
Geneva II
conference."
After that
arrived, Inner
City Press
asked Syrian
Permanent
Representative
Bashar
Ja'afari about
Iran's
statement. He
replied, "My
sincere
advice, don't
waste your
time on this
issue -- they
will be
there."
Then he went
into the
Security
Council, where
Syria is
listed as the
35th of 47
speakers on
the Middle
East, with
Iran
39th.
What will they
say? Watch
this site.
At
12:30 pm on
January 20,
Inner City
Press asked
Nesirky if Ban
is equally
dismayed at
the Syrian
National
Coalition's
spokesperson
calling Ban's
bait and
switch invite
"immoral, even
in
politics."
Nesirky
declined to
specifically
express dismay
at this
comment, only
saying that a
number of
comments have
been
disappointing.
"This one?"
Nesirky would
not answer.
Given the
SNC's 2 pm
ultimatum on
Ban to
disinvite
Iran, Inner
City Press
asked Nesirky
if the
invitation to
the SNC was
the only one
to non-Assad
Syrians, or if
for example
Kurds could be
invited.
Nesirky said:
one unified
delegation.
Hardly -- 44
members of the
SNC already
dropped out
before the
vote to
attend. What
would the vote
count be now?
Before
the Middle
East meeting
of the UN
Security
Council on
January 20,
the Permanent
Representatives
of France, the
UK and Russia
spoke to the
press about
Iran being
invited to the
Syria talks
beginning in
Montreux
January 22.
Ambassador
Gerard Araud
of France,
which Bashar
Assad called a
proxy state of
Qatar and
Saudi Arabia,
said the ball
is in the
court of Iran,
to explicitly
accept Geneva
I. The UK's
Mark Lyall
Grant said the
UK position is
that Iran must
clarify,
publicly, that
it accepts
Geneva I.
Others ask why
should Iran
accept a
communique of
Geneva I to
which it was
not invited.
Others say
Iran does in
its way accept
the communique
- it just
interprets it
differently.
Russian
Permanent
Representative
Vitaly Churkin
said "of
course" the US
had been
consulted
before Iran
was invited.
If the SNC now
does not
attend,
Churkin said,
it would be a
"big mistake."
Ban Ki-moon
went into the
Security
Council suite
with a big
entourage;
there was a
time he was
not on UNTV in
the chamber.
Inner City
Press can
report that
UNTV
technicians
were asked to
pipe in a feed
of the public
meeting into a
side room.
There was talk
of Ban's
selective
meetings,
using the code
name EU P2.
The Istanbul
based Syrian
National
Coalition set
a deadline of
2 pm in New
York on
January 20 for
the invitation
to be
rescinded.
Soner Ahmed,
an SNC
spokesman,
said Ban
"waited to
invite Iran
until after
the
coalition’s
decision to
attend the
conference.
That is
immoral, even
in politics."
Ban
previously met
with the SNC's
Ahmad al Jarba
in Ban's UN
provided
residence;
when the Free
UN Coalition
for Access
asked
why it had not
been on his
schedule, the
meeting was
called
personal.
Now, things
have really
gotten
personal.
Among
UNanswered
questions is
whether the
SNC would or
would have
brought any
Kurdish
representatives,
and why or
whether the
Kurds will not
now be
invited.
Saudi Arabia
shot back at
the invitation
of Iran by
saying they
should not
attend because
it "has
military
forces in
Syria." But
doesn't Uganda
have fighting
forces in
South Sudan,
while being a
member of
"mediator"
IGAD?
UN-consistency.
Ban made his
Iran
invitation
announcement
in a hastily
thrown
together press
conference
held Sunday
evening in an
nearly empty
UN building,
on barely an
hour's notice.
Nevertheless,
Ban's
spokesperson
automatically
gave the first
question to
the United
Nations
Correspondents
Association, a
partisan group
which for
example held a
faux "UN
briefing" for
Ahmad al Jarba
of the
Turkey-based
Syrian
Coalition.
Click here
for Inner City
Press story
on
that.
Ban
Ki-moon dodged
and did not
answer on the
weakness
of Jarba's
Coalition,
from which
over 40
members
decided not to
attend the
vote approving
attended at
the talks in
Switzerland.
Nor until the
end of this
press
conference did
Ban mention
the inclusion
of women.
Has he asked
Jarba about
that?
Ban
said he spoke
with Iranian
foreign
minister Javad
Zarif, who
"committed to
play a
constructive
and positive
role." Ban
repeated this
line when
asked about
the litmus
test of
accepting that
Geneva II is
about Geneva I
which was
about
"establishing
a transitional
governing body
with full
executive
powers" -- on
mutual
consent,
whatever that
means.
Ban
also announced
supplemental
invitations to
Montreux for,
among others,
Australia,
Bahrain,
Belgium,
Greece,
Luxembourg,
Mexico, the
Netherlands
and, yes,
South Korea.
It was
at 4:21 pm
that the UN
sent out an
email that Ban
would appear
for a "brief
and important
statement" in
the UN at 5:30
pm. When that
time arrived,
the so-called
UNCA chair (or
"Holy Seat")
on which the
UN has affixed
a metal tag
was filled --
and from that
seat a
complaint was
made to try to
get another
correspondent
moved.
UNCA's
president
Pamela Falk of
CBS was not
there; nor was
her first vice
president, who
nonetheless
was heard to
call into the
room. It is
time to end
the practice
of the UN
automatically
giving the
first question
to
UNCA - a group
of which
executive
committee
members tried
to get the
investigative
Press thrown
out of
the UN
(and to get leaked
documents
removed from
Google's
search under a
specious DMCA
filing by
Reuters'
bureau chief)
and which has
not reformed
in any way
since then.
The Free UN Coalition for Access
additionally
asks why this
announcement
was made this
way. There is
more and more
staging at the
UN, faux
Q&A and
UNTV footage
put out hoping
it will be
used as B
roll. The UN
should be more
transparent,
less of a
scam. We'll
have more on
this.