By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 4 --
News from
Eastern
Ukraine on
February 4
included the shelling
of a hospital
in rebel-held
Donetsk, as
well as
fighting
around
Debaltseve,
not held by
rebels.
But
when UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon issued
a statement on
the evening of
February 4, it
concerned ONLY
Debaltseve. Click here to
view. Not
a word on the
shelling of a
hospital --
just as the UN
was silent,
for example,
as hospitals
were being
shelled by the
government of
Sri
Lanka in
2009.
In
this case,
ICRC spoke out
about the
shelling of
the
Hospital
N27 in Donetsk
city's
Textilschiki
district,
calling it
appalling. But
not Ban
Ki-moon.
Earlier on February
4 Ban Ki-moon
held
an apparently
confidential sit-down
with a partial
group of
correspondents;
no transcript
has been
released. The
Free
UN Coalition
for Access
is challenging
this.
Back on
January 26 in
the second
Ukraine
meeting of the
UN Security
Council since
last November,
Ban's
political
adviser - and
former US
official --
Jeffrey
Feltman said
“Mariupol lies
outside the
immediate
conflict zone.
The conclusion
can thus be
drawn that the
entity which
fired these
rockets
knowingly
targeted a
civilian
population.
This would
constitute a
violation of
international
humanitarian
law.”
Feltman also
said that “on
January 22,
over a dozen
civilians died
when rockets
hit their
trolleybus in
Donetsk City.”
He did not say
if this, too,
might violate
international
law.
Quoting
statements
from Donetsk,
Feltman on
Monday said
that “on
January 23,
the leader of
the so-called
'Donetsk
People's
Republic'
announced a
boycott of
future
'consultations'
with the
Trilateral
Contact Group,
a unilateral
withdrawal
from the
cease-fire and
threatened to
seize further
territory,
with a
plan that
includes
pushing the
front line all
the way to the
borders of
Donetsk
oblast.”
Feltman said,
“We also urge
the leadership
of the Russian
Federation to
use their
influence to
call on the
rebels to
cease
hostilities
immediately.”
As Inner City
Press reported
on January 24,
the Russian
mission
already issued
a statement
about the
focus on the
DPR leader's
quote (report
here.)
Russia's
Vitaly
Churkin,
speaking after
Feltman on
January 26,
was more
specific,
asking where
the
condemnation
was of Kiev
statements
about punching
Donbas in the
nose to
"Ukrainize"
it, and
Poroshenko
having
announced a
resumption of
military
operations.
The
meeting began
at 1:30 pm,
with the UN
set to close
down at 2:30
pm for an
impending snow
storm. And so
it goes at the
UN.
US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
said that “at
the same time
as Russia was
flouting its
Minsk
agreements,
President
Putin was
putting the
finishing
touches on
another set of
agreements –
the so-called
'treaties of
alliance' –
with de facto
authorities in
Abkhazia and
South
Ossetia.”
In right of
reply, Russian
Ambassador
Vitaly Churkin
said, “the
representative
of the United
States went
beyond the
Ukrainian
topic and made
a number of
inappropriate
insinuations
regarding
Russia's
policies. And
that's the
reason we're
going to have
to talk about
the US
policy.”
The day after
President
Barack Obama's
State of the
Union address,
upbeat on
foreign
policy,
Churkin on
Wednesday said
“wherever
Washington
looks - Iraq,
Libya, Syria,
Ukraine -
everywhere we
see
destabilization,
blood, crisis.
Maybe the
United States
thinks that
Europe doesn't
have enough
problems and
that in the
east of the
continent
there is to be
a long drawn
out crisis. It
would seem
some European
capitals have
started to
understand
where things
are going. But
not all,
hardly all, as
demonstrated
by today's
discussion.”
On Ukraine,
Churkin said
“over the
whole of the
Ukrainian
crisis the
United States
has been
playing a
destructive
role. But
actually to
call a spade a
spade, they've
been
provocative.
After every
visit of high
ranking US
officials to
Ukraine, the
Kiev
government has
stepped up the
confrontational
nature of its
activities.
The current
military
escalation
horrifically
coincides with
the visit of
the commander
of the
American
forces in
Europe.”
UN official
Jeffrey
Feltman
didn't
mention, but
the IMF did,
that
Poroshenko
also spoke
with Christine
Lagarde, who
then announced
that "the
Ukrainian
authorities
have requested
a multi-year
arrangement
with the Fund,
supported by
the Extended
Fund Facility,
to replace the
existing
Stand-By
Arrangement."
In US
President
Obama's State
of the Union
speech on
January 20, he
said the US is
"opposing
Russian
aggression,
and supporting
Ukraine’s
democracy, and
reassuring our
NATO allies..
Mr. Putin’s
aggression it
was suggested
was a
masterful
display of
strategy and
strength.
That's what I
heard from
some
folks.
Well, today,
it is America
that stands
strong and
united with
our allies,
while Russia
is isolated
with its
economy in
tatters.
That’s how
America leads
-- not with
bluster, but
with
persistent,
steady
resolve."
Russia's
Ambassador
Vitaly
Churkin,
speaking in
the Security
Council on
January 21,
asked
rhetorically
"after about
thirty times
of discussing
Ukraine here,
the question
arises, how
much are these
declarations
in line with
the situation
in the
country? Are
they given
just for
eloquence's
sake but can
be thrown
aside when
political
suitability
takes
precedent?”
The January 21
session was
going to be
consultations,
where members
speak less
formally
(sometimes).
But then it
was public,
just speeches.
We'll have
more on this.
On the cut off
of pensions,
which we've
covered since
November,
Churkin said
"Kiev is doing
everything so
that in
essence the
South East is
isolated. A
decision has
been made to
move out state
institutions
from that, to
stop budgetary
expenditures
including
welfare and
pensions.”
Back on n
November 12,
UN Assistant
Secretary
General Jens
Toyberg-Frandzen
said, among
other things,
that "on
November 5,
Prime Minister
Yatsenyuk
announced that
pensions would
be halted to
areas under
rebel
control."
Inner City
Press,
covering the
meeting from
just outside
the Council
chamber, spoke
to a range of
passing
diplomats and
was left with
this question:
isn't the
halting of
pensions to
rebel held
areas a form
of collective
punishment?
Once
posed, with
the words
"accrued
pensions," two
defenses of
the practice
came in.
First, that
pensions in
Ukraine are
not accrued
but are based
on taxes
collected and
none are being
collected in
Donbas.
Second, that
trucks with
pension
payments were
being
robbed.
The word
"Western
Union" was
bandied
around.
While
the UN spoke
about the
death of
children on a
playground on
Donetsk on
Novmeber 5,
they didn't
say who did
it. Russia's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
Pankin said it
was Ukraine's
army. Later he
stated that an
adviser to
Poroshenko
said on
October 24
that "the
ceasefire is
going to work
in our favor,
tank factories
working around
the clock."
Ukraine's
Sergeyev
mentioned this
in his reply,
neither
confirming nor
denying the
quote. The
meeting ended;
Sergeyev
headed up the
escalator to
be interviewed
by scribes.
And so it goes
at the UN.
Last
month, Ukraine
was scheduled
to speak at
the UN about
its “Committee
on
Information”
on October 21,
but as UN
speeches
usually go
longer than
allowed, its
turn was
postponed
until October
22.
That
didn't stop
the “UN
Radio” Russian
service from
reporting
on the speech
on October 21
as if it had
in fact been
given that
day. As
translated, UN
Radio on
October 21
reported
“The
representative
of Ukraine
accused Russia
of using the
information
strategy of
the Cold War
“One of
the main
prerequisites
of violence in
Ukraine became
a propaganda
information.
This was
stated by the
representative
of the Mission
of Ukraine to
the United
Nations,
speaking at a
meeting of the
Fourth
Committee of
the UN General
Assembly.”
The
UN's Fourth
Committee did
meet on
October 21 -
but Ukraine
didn't speak.
Instead it was
the first
speaker on the
afternoon of
October 22.
Its speech,
delivered in
perfect French
including the
word “rigolo,”
linked Russia
to Joseph
Goebbels.
In
reply, the
Russian
mission's
spokesman
brought up the
recent Human
Rights Watch
report of the
Ukrainian
government
using cluster
bombs in and
against
Donetsk, and
the lack of
clarity on who
called the
snipers shots
in Maidan
Square.
Later
in the Fourth
Committee
meeting,
Bolivia
slammed
“powers” who
use
information
technology to
intervene and
violate
privacy,
bringing to
mind USAID's
“Cuban
Twitter”
and, of
course, the
NSA.
Then
Jordan said it
was first
among Arab
nations to
enact an
Access to
Information
law, in 2007.
The Free
UN Coalition
for Access
has been pressing
for a Freedom
of Information
Act at the UN,
click here
and
here for that.
FUNCA
covers the
Fourth
Committee,
including on
Decolonization,
and the
Committee on
Information,
where at least
theoretically
the UN's
descent into
censorship
could be
raised and
resolved. The
old UN
Correspondents
Association, a
part of this
trend toward privatization
of
briefings
and even
censorship --
ordering
Press articles
off the
Internet,
getting leaked
copies of
their
complaints to
the UN's MALU
banned from
Google's
search, here
-- was nowhere
to be seen.
We'll have
more on this.