On
Ukraine, UK
Wants to Hear
from Eliasson
of Serry, Feckless
French PR
By
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Inner City
Press Follow
Up
UNITED
NATIONS, March
6 -- As the
fourth Ukraine
meeting of the
UN Security
Council in a
week convened
on March 6 at
2:30 pm, UK
Ambassador
Mark Lyall
Grant stopped
and spoke to
the media.
Lyall Grant
said the purpose
of the
meeting, which
the UK had
requested, was
to hear from
UN Deputy
Secretary
General Jan Eliasson,
and about what
happened to UN
envoy Robert
Serry in
Crimea. Video
here.
Moments later,
French
Ambassador
Gerard Araud
passed by,
also on his
way into the
Security
Council. But
no one asked
him anything.
Less than an
hour before,
on UNTV at the
stakeout,
Araud denied
that UN High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights Navi
Pillay made a
report on January
20 that France's
selective disarmament
in the Central
African Republic
put Muslims at
risk of
attack.
To some it
seems the
French
government
cites human
rights against
others, but
dodges and
denies human
rights issues
as to itself
or its allies,
as
with Morocco
and Western
Sahara, on
which Araud
has been
quoted by
Javier Bardem,
click here for
that.
Four
hours after
the US
announced Ukraine
related
sanctions,
Inner City
Press asked UN
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
if the UN had
any comment on
what some of
its member
states,
including
Russia, call
unhelpful and
even illegal
"unilateral"
sanctions.
No, Nesirky
said, no
comment on the
actions of
individual
countries in
this regard.
But of course,
the UN
Secretariat
does have comments
on actions by
Russia.
Nesirky
was asked if
the UN
considers
Crimea under
occupation. He
replied that
UN envoy
Robert Serry
felt a certain
presence
there. One wag
- this
one -
asked, poltergeist?
Pressed,
Nesirky referred
the press to
Serry's
interview with
"Wolf Blitzer
on CNN." To
some it seemed,
while the UN
said Serry would
have no press
availability
today, the UN
was proud to
get Serry - on
CNN.
Inner City
Press asked
Nesirky to confirm
Serry's quotes
to UAA, that
he probably
wouldn't go
back to Crimea
and would
leave Ukraine
on Saturday.
Nesirky said
he'd check.
The UN's Jan
Eliasson is
slated to
brief the
Security Council
by video at
2:30, in a
meeting Inner
City Press, as
early at 7 am,
was told was
requested by
the UK. We'll
be there.
It was before
8 am in
Washington on
March 6 when
the White
House
announced an
"Executive
Order that
authorizes
sanctions on
individuals
and entities
responsible
for activities
undermining
democratic
processes or
institutions
in Ukraine;
threatening
the peace,
security,
stability,
sovereignty,
or territorial
integrity of
Ukraine;
contributing
to the
misappropriation
of state
assets of
Ukraine; or
purporting to
assert
governmental
authority over
any part of
Ukraine
without
authorization
from the
Ukrainian
government in
Kyiv."
How this last
criterion
would have applied,
say, to South
Sudan or Kosovo
is not clear.
The White
House held a
background
call at 8:30
am, on which a
Senior
Administration
Official said
they can also
target
"derivatives"
- those
providing
material
support.
Another added
the "OSCE team
is on the
ground" (see
below).
Meanwhile the
UN on the
morning of
March 6
announced that
while its
envoy Robert
Serry,
threatened in
Crimea the day
before, will
be in Kyiv,
but no press
availabilities.
On March 5,
the Organization
for Security
and
Co-operation
in Europe
announced it
is sending 40
unarmed
military
personnel to
Ukraine, from
twenty one
countries.
Inner City
Press asked
the OSCE to
update, beyond
the 18
countries in
its press
release, which
were the three
"new" contributors
of personnel.
The
answer came:
Austria,
Iceland and
Italy.
Based on a
quote from
Paris, Inner
City Press has
asked the OSCE
if it has any
comment on
Russian
foreign
minister Sergey
Lavrov saying
its steps "do
not help
create an
atmosphere of
dialogue"?
As of this
writing an
hour after the
question, no
reply.
The other 18
OSCE contributors
are: Canada,
Czech
Republic,
Denmark,
Estonia,
Finland,
France,
Germany,
Hungary,
Ireland,
Latvia,
Lithuania,
Norway,
Poland,
Slovakia,
Sweden,
Turkey, United
Kingdom, and
the United
States.
On Estonia
(and Ukraine)
more leaked
audio has
emerged on
YouTube, in
what we're
calling
Kwikileaks, of
the EU's
Catherine
Ashton and
Estonia's
Foreign
Minister Urmas
Paet. Click
here for audio,
particularly
from Minute
8:30.
After both
speak of a
prospective
new Ukrainian
Health
Minister,
Olga, Paet
says:
"Olga
said
all evidence
shows the
people killed
by snipers,
among police
and people
from the
streets, that
they were the
same snipers
killing people
from both
sides."
Paet says the
new coalition
does not want
to
investigate;
Ashton says
"We do want to
investigate"
-- but where
is the
investigation?
In Freetown,
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon said:
"let
me add one
[thing] which
I had
forgotten to
mention about
the situation
in Ukraine. I
have decided
to dispatch
the Assistant
Secretary-General
for Human
Rights, Mr.
Ivan
Simonovic, to
Ukraine to
visit Kiev and
the eastern
part of
Ukraine,
including
Crimea, to see
and monitor
the human
rights
situation
there. This is
what I wanted
to add to the
AP
correspondent."
Crimea is in
the south --
but will
Simonovic
investigate
what Estonia's
foreign
minister told
Ashton about
the same
snipers killed
police and the
people in the
street?
In New York
the UN
announced that
its Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson will
call into a
briefing late
Wednesday
morning. Inner
City Press
asks, why not
Robert Serry,
who's gone to
Crimea, and
who features
in the last
set of leaked
audio?
Tuesday night at a
$32,000 a
plate DSCC
fundraiser at
the Virginia
home of former
US Senator
Chuck Robb,
Barack Obama
said
"I’ll
be happy to
give you more
details of
what’s
happening in
Ukraine. The
essence of it
is, is we have
a country that
has been in a
difficult
situation for
quite some
time, that had
a President
that was
closely
associated
with the
Russians, who
a large
segment of the
Ukrainian
population did
not feel was
representing
them well, although
he had been
democratically
elected.
You had a
crisis inside
of Ukraine as
a consequence
of his
decision not
to sign an
agreement that
would have
oriented their
economy a
little more
towards the
West. That got
out of control
and we got
involved only
to prevent
initially from
bloodshed
occurring
inside the
country and
succeeded in
doing that.
But,
ultimately, a
deal that was
brokered for a
power-sharing
arrangement in
an election
led to him
fleeing and we
now have a
situation in
which the
Russians I
think are
engaging in a
fundamental
breach of
international
law in sending
troops into
the country to
try to force
the hands of
the Ukrainian
people. We may
be able to
deescalate
over the next
several days
and weeks, but
it’s a serious
situation and
we’re spending
a lot of time
on it."
One key phrase
was, "he had
been
democratically
elected."
At the UN on
March 3 after
the third
Ukraine
meeting of the
UN Security
Council in
four days, at
which US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
said OSCE
monitors are
heading to
Kyiv tonight,
Read Admiral
John Kirby,
the US
Pentagon's
Press
Secretary, put
out this
statement:
"Although
the
Department of
Defense finds
value in the
military-to-military
relationship
with the
Russian
Federation we
have developed
over the past
few years to
increase
transparency,
build
understanding,
and reduce the
risk of
military
miscalculation
we have, in
light of
recent events
in Ukraine,
put on hold
all
military-to-military
engagements
between the
United States
and Russia.
This includes
exercises,
bilateral
meetings, port
visits and
planning
conferences.
The
Defense
Department is
closely
monitoring the
situation and
remains in
close contact
with the State
Department and
interagency,
along with our
Allies,
Partners and
NATO. We call
on Russia to
deescalate the
crisis in
Ukraine and
for Russian
forces in
Crimea to
return to
their bases,
as required
under the
agreements
governing the
Russia Black
Sea Fleet.
Some
media outlets
are
speculating on
possible ship
movements in
the region.
There has been
no change to
our military
posture in
Europe or the
Mediterranean;
our Navy units
continue to
conduct
routine,
previously
planned
operations and
exercises with
allies and
partners in
the region."
Earlier on
Monday,
Russia's
Vitaly Churkin
came out to
answer
questions.
Inner City
Press asked
him of
supporting the
mission to
Ukraine by UN
Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson, a
former Swedish
foreign
minster, while
questioning
that of Robert
Serry.
Churkin
replied that
he had spoken
with Eliasson
before he left
for Kyev. It
is unclear if
Eliasson will
get to Crimea.
But some note
that unlike
Serry, who
appears in
leaked audio
with former US
now UN
official Jeff
Feltman
"getting" Ban
to send him to
Ukraine,
Eliasson
strives to
bridge various
gaps.
UK Ambassador
Lyall Grant
came out, and
Inner City
Press asked
him if the UK
is moving
toward
sanctions as
the US says it
is. He
politely
declined to
answer this
non-UN
question.
From
the UK Mission
transcript:
Inner
City Press: G8
and sanctions?
There’s a lot
of talk from
the US side of
looking at
financial
sanctions on
individuals in
Russia and
there’s talk
of not only
not going to
this
preparatory
meeting for
the Sochi G8
but to have
Russia
essentially
excluded from
the G8 and to
go back to a
G7. What’s the
UK position on
that and at
what point
would that
become
something that
you would be
looking at?
Amb
Lyall Grant:
Those issues
are being
discussed
elsewhere. I
want to focus
today on the
UN aspects of
this.
Ukraine's
Yuriy Sergeyev
held a long
and surreal
stakeout.
Inner City
Press asked
him to explain
the dispute
about how many
troops Russia
can have in
Crimea. He
said 11,000
including
2,000 marines,
that Russia
had reiterated
this again in
December and
was now
committing
"aggression."
France's
Gerard Araud,
as has become
his pattern,
took only two
questions: one
in French, the
second from
France 24.
After four and
a half years
at the UN -
his figure, in
the Council --
he is becoming
more each day
like Herve
Ladsous, the
fourth
Frenchman in a
row atop UN
Peacekeeping.
The
stakeouts
ended with the
Moldovan
Permanent
Representative.
Inner City
Press asked
him about US
Secretary of
State John
Kerry's
statement that
Russia is
pressuring
Moldova. He
spoke of
troops on high
alert, and
another
autonomous
region now
threatening
not to
participate in
elections.
Inner City
Press asked
him about the
size of the
OSCE mission
Samanatha
Power referred
to. He said
he's
participated
in three OSCE
mission; he
mentioned
sizes between
10 and two or
three
thousand. So
what is being
referred to
here? We'll
have more on
this.
Earlier in the
Council
chamber,
Churkin
unveiled a
letter from
Viktor
Yanukovych
requesting
Russian help.
US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
snarked that
it sounded
like Russia is
the
enforcement
arm of the UN
Human Rights
High
Commissioner,
Navi Pillay.
She announced
that "tonight
the OSCE will
begin"
deploying
monitors.
But will these
OSCE monitors
get into
Crimea? Will
UN Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson? At
the day's UN
noon briefing,
Inner City
Press asked
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
what the role
of Robert
Serry is now.
Nesirky said
his main job
is the Middle
East. But then
in the
Security
Council
meeting, UN
official Oscar
Fernandez
Taranco said
that Serry is
going BACK to
Ukraine.
Earlier, it
was leaked
that former US
now UN
official Jeff
Feltman "got"
Ban Ki-moon to
send Serry to
Ukraine. And
now?
On Sunday, the
day after
Saturday's inconclusive
Ukraine
meeting at the
UN Security
Council,
three US
Senior
Administration
Officials held
a background
press call to
describe the
US' next
moves.
Secretary of
State John
Kerry will be
in Kyev on
Tuesday.
Assistant
Secretary of
State Victoria
Nuland is
heading to
Vienna; the US
wants to
explore
monitors from
the OSCE (UN
monitors were
mentioned, but
it's difficult
to see
veto-wielding
Russia
agreeing to
them at this
point).
Senior
Administration
Official 2
said Russia is
in an
occupation
position in
Crimea and
moving more
troops in. The
three were
asked, doesn't
this show
weakness of
the Obama
administration,
at least with
respect to
Russia's
Vladimir
Putin?
Senior
Administration
Official 1
quickly
brought up
that Putin
didn't listen
on Georgia --
which was in
2008, under
Republican
George W. Bush
(the question
was from Fox
News).
All three said
that Putin is
not operating
from a
position of
strength, with
Senior
Administration
Official 2
saying that
when it comes
to soft power,
Vladimir Putin
has no game.
Asked about
Russian money
in London, the
official said
the US is
looking at
Russian banks.
On the 1994
Budapest
Memorandum
(see below),
the US is
moving to call
a meeting
under the
Memo's terms
and will see
if Russia
shows up.
At the UN on
March 1, after
the Ukraine
open meeting
then
consultations
of the UN
Security
Council took
place, Council
president for
March Sylvie
Lucas of
Luxembourg
came out and
read a short
statement.
Inner City
Press asked
her if this
was a mere
"elements to
the press,"
not even an
agreed Press
Statement.
This seems to
be the case.
She politely
answered, but
not why China
and the ten
elected
members did
not speak in
the open
meeting.
Inner City
Press asked UK
Ambassador
Lyall Grant
about the
Budapest
Memorandum --
has it already
been violated,
including by
the Western
IMF side, in
terms of
economic
coercion? Is
it just a
superseded
document
summoned up
for pragmatic
reasons now?
Lyall Grant
acknowledged
that some time
has passed.
From the UK
Mission
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
The Budapest
memorandum.
There’s been a
lot of talk
about it. It
requires the
UK, Russia and
France to seek
immediate
Security
Council action
if there’s a
threat of
force, so is
this the end
of your
duties, or do
you have a
duty to defend
Ukraine? And
it also seems
to commit the
UK and others
to refrain
from economic
coercion, so
some people
have been
saying that on
both sides,
the economic
coercion
factor has
been played.
Has this
memorandum
been complied
with since
‘94, or is it
just pulled
out at this
time as a
convenient
document?
Amb
Lyall Grant:
Clearly, this
document has
become very
relevant in
the last few
days. We
believe that
the first step
should be a
meeting of the
signatories of
the Budapest
memorandum, as
Ukraine
government has
suggested
should take
place.
Proposals have
been made for
a meeting of
the three
signatories as
early as
Monday, but so
far Russia has
not agreed to
that meeting.
Lyall Grant
also said his
prime minister
David Cameron
spoke with
Vladimir Putin
and his
foreign
secretary
William Hague
will be in
Ukraine on
Sunday.
Inner City
Press asked
Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson of
Russia's
critique of
envoy Robert
Serry "getting
played," and
of the leaked
(US) audio
about former
US now UN
official
Jeffrey
Feltman
"getting" Ban
to send Serry
to Ukraine.
Eliasson said
Serry is an
international
civil servant,
but that the
UN is not
mediating, he
is only a
go-between for
now. Will that
change?
US Samantha
Power came
out, saying
another things
that President
Obama is
suspending
participation
in the
preparation
for the G8 in
Sochi. She
took only two
questions; it
was not
possible to
ask her about
movement on
loan
guarantees, or
her view of
the US' duties
under the
Budapest
Memorandum. So
it goes at the
UN.
When the open
meeting
happened,
after two
hours of
wrangling
about format,
not all 15
members of the
Council -- not
even all five
Permanent
members --
spoke. (China
didn't).
Instead, UN
Deputy
Secretary
General
Eliasson led
off, saying
that Ban
Ki-moon would
speak with
Vladimir
Putin. That
had already
taken place,
but even an
hour later, no
read-out.
Update:
after
publication of
this story,
the UN
e-mailed out
Ban Ki-moon's
"remarks"
after he spoke
with Putin.
Remarks to
whom? And how
long was Ban's
call?
US President
Barack Obama
spoke with
Putin for 90
minutes,
citing as
Samantha Power
did OSCE
observers --
and the
International
Monetary Fund
(see below).
Russia's
Vitaly Churkin
said that EU
officials has
stoked up the
protests, and
violated the
February 21
agreement.
France's Gerard
Araud, in the
midst of a
scandal about
a quote Javier
Barden
attributed to
him, Morocco
as France's
mistress, said
it was Russia
which hadn't
supported the
February 21
agreement.
Following US
Samantha Power
and UK Mark
Lyall Grant,
whose foreign
secretary
William Hague
is headed to
Ukraine, Araud
was the last
speaker in the
open meeting.
Strange and
telling
compromise.
As the Council
went back
behind closed
doors for
consultations,
Inner City
Press asked
Ukraine's
Ambassador
Yuriy Sergeyev
about
"economic
coercion"
prohibited in
the 1994
Budapest
Memorandum he
kept citing.
Sergeyev
replied that
Russia tried
to use
economic
coercion. But
what about the
IMF?
Earlier on his
way in
Sergeyev
stopped and
told the press
it is now a
Russian
"aggression"
and that the
UN Charter has
been
"brutally"
violated. Video here.
He
said an appeal
is being made
to the US,
France, UK and
China, under
the rubric of
non-proliferation;
he said there
is still time,
before Russian
president
Vladimir Putin
signs the
order for
military moves
in Crimea.
Then the
Security
Council
"suspended"
for ten
minutes;
Russian
ambassador
Vitaly Churkin
emerged and
said some
members of the
Council are
trying to
change the
format of the
meeting, that
Russia agrees
with the
format
proposed by
Luxembourg,
which took
over today as
Council
president.
After
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
envoy Robert
Serry spun the
contents of a
closed door
Security
Council
consultation
on Ukraine on
which there
was no agreed
outcome, Ban
himself did
the same on
Saturday.
Ban's
spokesperson
announced at
1:20 am he
would speak
and "take a
few questions"
-- at 1:30
pm. Lo
and behold,
after Ban's
statement that
there was
agreement in
the Security
Council on
Friday --
there wasn't
-- was read,
the first
question was
given to
Pamela Falk of
CBS.
This is as
president of
the UN
Correspondents
Association,
whose board
held an
hour-long
Q&A with
Ban in
February in
which Ukraine
wasn't even
asked out.
So why now?
In order to
ask, Could
Serry go to
Crimea?
Hours before
Serry through
the
spokesperson
had said no.
But the
purpose of
this UN TV
theater is to
get this spin
"on camera" -
that's the
role Falk's
UNCA is
playing.
Also Ban said
he is going to
speak with
Putin soon.
Will his
spokesperson
take question,
this time with
notice, on
that?
On February
28, Serry's
impartiality
as "UN" envoy
on Ukraine was
called into
question, on
camera, in
front of the
UN Security
Council by
Russian
Ambassador
Vitaly
Churkin.
A "Note
to
Correspondents"
was put out
Saturday
morning by the
UN
Spokesperson's
Office in
which Serry
put his spin
on the
Security
Council
consultations
at which he
was not
present, and
at which not
even a Press
Statement was
agreed:
Note
to
correspondents:
Statement by
Mr. Robert
Serry, Senior
Advisor to the
Secretary-General,
at the end of
his mission to
Ukraine
Kyiv,
1 March 2014
Following
the
consultations
in the United
Nations
Security
Council
yesterday, the
Secretary-General
requested me
to go to
Crimea as part
of my
fact-finding
mission. I
have since
been in touch
with the
authorities of
the Autonomous
Republic of
Crimea and
have come to
the conclusion
that a visit
to Crimea
today is not
possible. I
will therefore
proceed to
Geneva, where
I will
tomorrow brief
the
Secretary-General
on my mission
and consult
with him on
next steps.
In
Crimea, I
would have
conveyed, also
on behalf of
the
Secretary-General,
a message for
all to calm
the situation
down and to
refrain from
any actions
that could
further
escalate an
already-tense
environment.
It
became very
clear from
yesterday’s
Council
consultations
that the unity
and
territorial
integrity of
Ukraine is not
to be called
into question.
This is a time
for dialogue
and to engage
with each
other
constructively.
Recipients of
previous
"Notes to
Correspondents"
were
surprised,
because Serry
in his "other"
apparently not
time intensive
enough job as
Ban Ki-moon's
Middle East
Coordinator
does not
characterize
Security
Council
processes that
do not result
in a legal
outcome.
This comes a
day after the
UN's
incoming
spokesperson
Stephane
Dujarric
praised a
10-tweet
"analysis" of
Crimean
involving,
predictably,
the assumption
of Chinese and
Russian
vetoes, and
more
problematically
that Argentina
and Nigeria
abstained "for
some reason."
To this view,
Africa and
Latin America
are
unknowable.
But is this
appropriate
for an
incoming UN
Spokesperson?
For somehow
whose been in
charge of UN
Media
Accreditation?
This UN is
increasingly
used by
officials for
their own
countries.
Former US now
UN official
Feltman "got"
Ban Ki-moon to
send Serry to
Ukraine.
With
French
ambassador
Gerard Araud
having been
quoted by
Javier Bardem
that Morocco
is France's
mistress,
Herve Ladsous
the fourth
Frenchman in a
row to head UN
Peacekeeping
on February 26
lavished "UN"
praise on
Morocco
through the
Magreb Arab
Press. There's
more to be
said on this.
The day before
on February 28
after US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
emerged from
the Security
Council and
spoke to the
press about a
mediation
mission to
Ukraine
involving
Robert Serry,
Russia's
Vitaly Churkin
raised
questions
about the
plan.
He noted that
Serry on
February 22
was quoted as
supporting the
process --
that is, the
violation even
then of the
February 21
agreement.
The
subtext, still
audible, was
the leaked
audio about
former US now
UN official
Jeffrey
Feltman
"getting" Ban
Ki-moon to
send Serry to
Ukraine. This
may resonate
for some time.
Inner City
Press asked
Churkin of
reports Russia
would
participate
closely in the
accelerating
International
Monetary Fund
process.
Churkin said
Russia is open
to helping,
but only when
more is known
about what
kind of
government
Ukraine's will
be. One might
think the IMF
would be
similarly
cautious. But
one might be
wrong.
Nearly
simultaneous
with Samantha
Power at the
UN, President
Barack Obama
spoke at the
White House.
As sent out,
he said, "It
would be a
clear violence
of Russia’s
commitment to
respect the
independence
and
sovereignty
and borders of
Ukraine, and
of
international
laws." Seems
"violation"
was meant -- a
Freudian slip?
When UK
Ambassador
Mark Lyall
Grant came to
the stakeout,
Inner City
Press asked
him too about
the IMF, which
which his
foreign
secretary
William Hague
met this week.
Lyall Grant
distinguished
between the
financial and
the political
mediation
process. But
some say they
are intimately
connected.
From the UK
Mission
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
Your Foreign
Secretary was
in Washington
and met, among
other people,
with the
International
Monetary Fund.
What’s the
relationship
between that
process and
either the
mediation
process that’s
proposed, or
trying to
address issues
in the Crimea.
Amb
Lyall Grant:
There are a
number of
challenges
facing the new
government in
Kyiv. One of
them is the
economy. My
Foreign
Secretary, as
you said, went
to see the IMF
in Washington,
because we
believe the
IMF needs to
take the lead
in putting
together a
financial
package to
help the
Ukrainian
government to
recover from
the economic
crisis that
it’s in and to
help the
Ukrainian
government
take the
necessary
tough
decisions for
the structural
reforms that
are required
to put the
economy back
on track. So
this is not
directly
linked to any
political
mediation, but
it is to
address one of
the key
challenges
that the new
government in
Kyiv faces.
Lithuania's
Permanent
Representative
Raimonda
Murmokaite,
who as we
noted
yesterday had
yet to do a
question and
answer
stakeout after
Council
consultations
during her
month as
Council
president,
finally did.
Inner City
Press asked
her of the
mediation
mission cited
by Samantha
Power would
require a
Security
Council
resolution or
other action.
Raimonda
Murmokaite
said that a
proposal had
just been
made. But
moments later,
Lyall Grant
said he didn't
think any UNSC
approval was
needed for
Serry to go to
Crimea.
Churkin, on
the other
hand, said
only if the
Crimeans want
him, no
imposed
mediation.
That leaked
audio
resonates
still.
Earlier
Ukraine's
Ambassador to
the UN Yuriy
Sergeyev came
to the
Security
Council
stakeout after
briefing the
Council. Inner
City Press
asked him
three rounds
of questions,
ranging from
the
International
Monetary Fund
to the
International
Criminal
Court,
military
presence to
Viktor
Yanukovych's
press
conference
earlier in the
day.
Sergeyev
called the
press
conference
"comedy,"
emphasizing
the Yanukovych
left the
country (and
arguing more
seriously that
he thereby
violated the
February 21
deal.)
On the IMF,
Sergeyev said
the Fund's
team will be
"on the
ground" early
next week. He
was asked
about
austerity but
dodged it; he
said that the
key is that
money doesn't
"disappear" as
he said that
from Russia
did.
While standing
at the
stakeout, a
supporter of
the ICC
tweeted at
Inner City
Press if
Sergeyev
raised it in
the Council.
Inner City
Press asked
about the ICC
and the
extradition
request to
Russia.
Sergeyev said
the ICC is
complex and
that he favors
a Ukrainian
process first.
On the IMF,
how fast could
post
Yanukovych
Ukraine get US
money or loan
guarantees?
Back on the
afternoon of
February 26
came this on
the record
statement by
State
Department
Spokesperson
Jen Psaki:
"The
United States
is continuing
to consider a
range of
options,
including loan
guarantees, to
support
Ukraine
economically.
But no
decision has
been made and
the next step
is the
formation of a
multi-party,
technical
government.
Once that
government is
formed we will
begin to take
immediate
steps, in
coordination
with
multilateral
and bilateral
partners, that
could
compliment an
IMF package,
to support
Ukraine."
There was a
lot of chatter
about a $1
billion US
loan
guarantee,
including from
a roundtable
by Secretary
of State John
Kerry held
after he did
an interview
with Andrea
Mitchell. Oh,
This Town or
#ThisTown. So
which is it?
On February
27, the IMF's
Christine
Lagarde
announced that
the new
Ukraine has
asked for an
IMF program;
her spokesperson
Gerry Rice
said an IMF
team on be 'on
the ground'
next week.
On February 25
the shift in
Ukraine was
echoed on the
US Eastern
seaboard. At
the UN in New
York, Ukraine's
Yanukovych-era
Ambassador
Yuriy Sergeyev
canceled his
11 am press
conference -
though we can
now link
to this video
of his "I am
with you"
moment with
demonstrators
outside the
Ukrainian
mission in New
York.
Two hours
after his
February 25
cancellation,
in Washington,
journalists
Inner City
Press knows
from covering
the
International
Monetary Fund
took the short
walk to the US
State
Department's
briefing to
ask about
pre-conditions.
Follow the
money.
Back at the
UN, Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
said he didn't
know how long
Ban's Middle
East
coordinator
Robert Serry
will stay in
Ukraine. (He
was still
there on
February 26.)
Just how high
profile there
does Serry's
past stint as
Dutch
Ambassador in
Kyiv make him?
What similar
former
ambassador
might Ban
Ki-moon have
to offer in
Thailand? Just
how (un)
relevant has
the UN become?
Back on Sunday
morning US
John Kerry
spoke with
Russia's
Sergey Lavrov
and, according
to a senior
State
Department
official,
expressed hope
"that
the
Russian
Federation
will join with
us, the
European Union
and its member
states, and
other
concerned
countries to
help Ukraine
turn the page
and emerge
from this
crisis
stronger... He
also
underscored
the United
States'
expectation
that Ukraine's
sovereignty,
territorial
integrity and
democratic
freedom of
choice will be
respected by
all states."
Later
@JohnKerry
himself
tweeted kudos
to previous
Secretary of
State nominee
Susan Rice,
how well she
had done on
Ukraine NBC's
Meet the
Press. (As
noted, David
Gregory said
one million
have died in
Syria, click
here for that.)
There, Rice
mentioned
working with
the EU and the
International
Monetary Fund.
Yes, it's the
IMF that's
meant by
"appropriate
international
organization,"
and not the
United
Nations.
What David
Gregory
gleaned from
the leaked
call to Geoff
Pyatt was that
Russia leaked
it -- no
mention of the
plan, at least
at that time,
to use the UN
to F- the EU.
How much has
change since
then -
including the
UN being back
on the
margins.
And so it
occurs to ask:
could Russia
benefit from
Ukraine being
raised in the
UN Security
Council, where
it has a veto,
as it doesn't
(but the US
does) at the
IMF? Could the
UN oversee a
deal, on which
Russia says
the opposition
has already
reneged?
Then again, if
Russia were to
"pull an
Abkhazia" (or
South Ossetia)
in Crimea and
eastern
Ukraine, it
could be the
Westerners
trying to get
the UN to
condemn it.
But in the
Security
Council,
Russia has a
veto. Again:
UNrelevant.
As
with the State
Department's
February 22
Kerry - Lavrov
readout, it
might be
surprising to
some that
Sunday's does
not include
anything on
Syria, on
which the UN
Security
Council passed
a resolution
on February
22. But left
unmentioned
even as to
Ukraine is the
East / West
split,
particularly
with regard
the Crimea,
Donetsk and
the wider
Donbass. Could
Ukraine's
"territorial
integrity,"
the mantra at
the UN, be in
jeopardy?
Back on Friday
February 21,
Presidents
Obama and
Putin had a
phone
conversation
which a Senior
US State
Department
Official
called
"positive" and
at the US'
initiative.
The official
said that Yanukovych
has gone on a
trip to
Kharkiv in his
eastern base
in the
country, "for
some kind of
meeting that's
taking place
out there,"
and recounted
a rumor that
the deposed
interior
minister has
fled to
Belarus.
US State
Department
official
William Burns
will be
heading to
Ukraine; Vice
President Joe
Biden has
spoken nine
times with Yanukovych:
twice in
November, once
in December,
three times in
January and on
February 4, 18
and 20. Even
Defense
Secretary
Chuck Hagel
finally got
through to his
Ukraine's
counterpart,
Lebedev.
Amid the
self-congratulation,
the United
Nations was
once again on
the margins.
The UN has
made much of
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's talk
with Yanukovych
at the Sochi
Olympics, and
another phone
call today.
But tellingly,
the Senior US
State
Department
Official while
citing a "good
offices" role
for "the
international
community" did
not mention
the UN once,
in opening
remarks nor in
response to
the eight
questions
taken. (Two
were from the
New York
Times, the
second of
which referred
to Putin's
call with
"President
Bush.")
An overly long
question from
Le Figaro was
cut off.
Back
on February 19
when
Lithuania's
foreign
minister Linas
Linkevieius
came to the UN
Security
Council
stakeout, that
country seemed
to be the one
to ask him
about. Inner
City Press
asked
Linkevieius
about his
visit to
Washington; he
replied among
other things
that there is
a need for
"more
coordination."
Video
here.
Later
on February 19
a US Senior
State
Department
Official told
the press that
"Russia has
not been
transparent
about what
they are doing
in Ukraine,"
citing that
Russia for
example does
not provide
read-outs of
its contacts
in Ukraine.
The US' own
high level
contacts have
gotten more
difficult:
"they are not
picking up the
phone," the
official said,
adding that
three European
Union foreign
ministers are
on their way.
Of the
four questions
Linkevieius
took at his UN
stakeout, one
was on the
UN's North
Korea report,
another on
Venezuela. A
Russian
reporter
waiting at the
stakeout with
his hand
raised was not
given a
question. This
is the UN.
Moments
later
at the UN's
February 19
noon briefing,
outgoing UN
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
was asked
about a
perceived
double
standards in
responses to
Bosnia and
Ukraine. (The
question was
echoed on
February 20,
comparing
Ukraine with
Bahrain).
Nesirky said
every
situation is
different --
of course --
and also said
the UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon had
met for 90
minutes in
Sochi with
President
Yanukovych.
Ironically
the
US Senior
State
Department
Official on
February 19
was asked
about
Yanukovych
becoming more
hardline after
his visit to
Sochi. From
Foggy Bottom
to Turtle Bay,
the view is
different --
in the case of
the UN, often
marginal and
self-serving.
For example,
Ban Ki-moon
gave no
read-out of
his beginning
of the year
call with the
president of
his native
South Korea.
Ah,
transparency.
Watch this
site.
Footnote: On
the Obama -
Putin
"positive"
call, Inner
City Press
mused it would
signal a 15-0
vote in the UN
Security
Council on the
Syria
humanitarian
resolution
about which
Inner City
Press asked
State
Department
deputy
spokesperson
Marie Harf
earlier on
February 21,
click here for
that.
* * *
These
reports
are
usually also available through Google
News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here
for Sept 26, 2011 New Yorker on Inner City
Press at UN
Click
for
BloggingHeads.tv re Libya, Sri Lanka, UN
Corruption
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest service,
and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2014 Inner City Press,
Inc. To request reprint or other permission,
e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
|