At
UN, Ban Says Holbrooke's Public Blog Talk of de Mistura Is Not Proper,
But Unlike Galbraith, Jurisdiction Questioned
By
Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, January 12 -- Two weeks ago, Inner City Press reported that
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon would name as his envoy to
Afghanistan Staffan
de Mistura, who hired Mr. Ban's son in law in
Iraq. A week ago, Inner City Press asked Mr. Ban about it. Ban
replied that the choice is his "prerogative."
Last
Friday, U.S.
envoy Richard
Holbrooke told Foreign Policy's The Cable that de
Mistura told him he has been offered the post.
With
the cat entirely
out of the bag, Inner City Press on January 11 asked Mr. Ban, in his
first stakeout interview in the UN's new North Lawn Conference
Building, "Richard Holbrooke is
being quoted as saying that you
have offered the top UN post in Kabul to Staffan de Mistura. I
wonder, is he right in saying that?" Video here,
from Minute 15:18.
The
premise of the
question was, while Ban's talking points last week involved
questioning why the New York Times would chime on on his prerogative,
it would be more difficult to say Holbrooke was wrong.
But
Ban's answer
was almost identical, that "I don't think it is proper to
discuss detailed matters on appointment procedures publicly."
But it seems clear that Ban has offered the job to de Mistura, who in
turn told Holbrooke -- to nail the job down, some say -- and
Holbrooke intentionally went public.
When
Ban says this
is not "proper," does he mean that de Mistura should not
have told Holbrooke that he's been offered the job? Since, as Inner
City Press exclusively reported,
Ban's choice as Darfur envoy of
Ibrahim Gambari leaked because Gambari asked some UN staff to sign up
to work for him in El Fasher, Ban could have told de Mistura to
keep
it under raps.
Or,
as his
comments seem to point, is Ban calling Holbrooke's public statement
to The Cable improper? Previously, Ban fired Peter Galbraith, whom
Holbrooke has pushed for the UN's deputy post in Kabul, for going
public with his critic of Kai Eide covering up Hamid Karzai electoral
fraud.
Ban
can and does
crack down on UN staff for speaking publicly or blowing the whistle.
One wonders if Ban's implicit rebuke of Holbrooke leaves any mark at
all. Ultimately, it traces back to de Mistura. But he has ingratiated
himself with Ban's Turtle Bay. Between now and the conference on
Afghanistan in London on January 28, what could go wrong? Watch this
site.
Holbrooke lets it all hang out, Ban's critique not shown
From
the UN's
January 11 transcript:
Inner
City Press: On Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke is being quoted as
saying that you have offered the top UN post in Kabul to Staffan de
Mistura. I wonder, is he right in saying that?
SG:
First of all, this appointment of a new Special Representative of the
Secretary-General is still under consideration. Of course, I don't
think it is proper to discuss detailed matters on appointment
procedures publicly, but as soon as the decision is made I will let
you know. I have been discussing this matter with President [Hamid]
Karzai and other concerned major parties who could be the best
candidate who can really work together with all major parties to have
a very harmonious and coordinated role as SRSG of the United Nations.
As
we've noted,
just as Hamid Karzai vetoed Paddy Ashdown for the post, he may try
the same with de Mistura, even more so after Holbrooke's staged
endorsement.
* * *
Holbrooke
Scoops UN's Ban as de Mistura Brags, Nepotism by Proxy
By
Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, January 9 -- With the UN still desperately claiming no
decision has been made to name Staffan de Mistura as its envoy to
Kabul, de Mistura bragged to the U.S.' Richard Holbrooke that the job
is his. Holbrooke in turn told Foreign Policy's nimble Cable,
which
published it late Friday, to the Web
and yes, to Inner City Press,
which earlier
in the week had predicted de Mistura and asked Ban
Ki-moon about it.
This
UN is the
gang that can't shoot straight. By Saturday, Ban's spokesman Martin
Nesirky was insisting
to AFP's Washington bureau that no decision had been made, that Ban
was the only one who could make it. But the moment for him to have
done so was, at latest, on January 6, when he briefed the Security
Council on Afghanistan.
Afterwards
Ban read
notes to the Press and took some questions. Inner City Press asked
about the New York
Times' editorial, which plugged Jean Marie
Guehenno over de Mistura, who it called a low key bureaucrat. The
choice is "my prerogative," Ban told Inner City Press, not
for the NYT to make. This telegraphed the choice. But still Ban let
his choice and Richard Holbrooke scoop him.
Why
would de
Mistura brag? Perhaps to nail it down, and not wait until the January
28 conference in London. Anything could happen, between now and then.
Inner
City Press
and the Washington Post (and Friday's Foreign Policy, which Ban and
the South
Korean press have previously been quick to point out is
owned by the Washington Post) have already noted
that de
Mistura's
stock rose with Ban when he hired Ban's son in law Siddarth
Chatterjee as his chief of staff while serving in Iraq.
(This pattern
of nepotism by proxy, or by Chatterjee, has continued
in Copenhagen,
where Jan Mattsson of UNOPS in turn hired Chatterjee, for a D-1 post
in the process of being upgraded to D-2, another leap).
But
de Mistura
whole rise has been fueled by "suck-up hires," as one long
time observer put it. Under Kofi Annan, de Mistura hired the son of
Annan's chief of staff Iqbal Riza. Since as Ban's Congo
envoy Alan
Doss knew and worked around, parent and child can't both work for the
UN, Riza's son got his paychecks through another name. But the
effect
was the name: rise by hiring the close relatives of Turtle Bay's
powerful.
UN's Ban and Holbrooke, knife (or Cable)
in back not shown
Just
as Hamid
Karzai previously vetoed Paddy Ashdown, Inner City Press is told he'd
like to veto de Mistura, probably even more so now that Holbrooke has
endorsed him. But he'll likely lack the leverage to do so at the
January 28 conference. So what can happen, between now and then?
Watch this site.
Footnote:
late Friday in the UN's new three story building on its East River
fronting Norht Lawn, Inner City Press informed three well placed
officials about Holbrooke's use of The Cable. One who said Holbrooke
was behind the NYT editorial shook his head and called it deft and even
devious, while asking, "What has Holbrooke accomplished, in either Af
or Pak?"
Another said the puppet master behind the NYT editorial wasn't
Holbrooke but rather the U.S.' Permanent Representative to the UN.
(She was in DC Friday, among other things meeting with Hilary
Clinton.) The third mused that Guehenno, something of a dandy and man
about town, might have met the retired NYT editorial writer Unger at
some expensive restaurant. The rest, as they say, is history.
* * *
At
UN, Kai Eide's Swansong and Ban's Prerogative, Afhgan Veto in Wings
By
Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, January 6, updated Jan. 7
-- As outgoing UN envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide
spoke in the Security Council Wednesday morning, Russian Ambassador
Vitaly Churkin slumped next to him, non-plussed. Eide fell under fire
not only for allegedly covering up President Hamid Karzai's election
fraud in 2009, but also from Russia and others for being, in their
view, too willing to talk with the Taliban.
The
question
of
who will replace Eide has already been decided by Secretary General
Ban Ki-moon, a senior Ban advisor told Inner City Press on the
evening of January 5. Publicly, it's between Staffan de Mistura,
favored by the U.S. and Ban, and Jean-Marie Guehenno, favored by
France (and pronounced by the Russian mission as "Gavno,"
or excrement.)
The
self-styled Paper of
Record slammed both Kai Eide and de Mistura's "low key
style" and "bureaucratic instincts." The UN's
response, seeming decided on at a meeting Monday morning and
crystallized in talking points, was to question why the paper chimed
in with an editorial at this time.
As
the Security Council's gabfest on Afghanistan came to an end, Inner
City Press asked Ban Ki-moon what he made of the New York Times
editorial. He said he had read it, but that choosing the replacement
of Kai Eide is his "prerogative." But what about Hamid
Karzai's veto?
As
to the origins
of the Gray
Lady's editorial, while the U.S. State Department is
pushing de Mistura, there are other views in Foggy Bottom, with direct
access to Times Square. The finger points at Richard Holbrooke,
and as the
actual author the retired op-ed writing Robert Unger. Last time,
Holbrooke lobbied Ban to get Peter Galbraith appointed. Given how that
worked out, the theory goes, Holbrooke couldn't lobby Ban directly, but
rather had to
work through the Times. But Ban has in essence shot it down.
UN's Ban, Kai Eide moving out of focus, Karzai veto
Left
unanswered
for a week now are questioned posed to spokesman Martin Nesirky about Ban
Ki-moon's son in law Siddarth Chatterjee, hired by de Mistura in
Iraq, later promoted by Jan Mattsson at UNOPS in Copenhagen, in both
cases reportedly to gain favor with Mr. Ban. On January 6, Nesirky
for the first time cut off questions, saying at 12:30 that Ban was
about to speak at the Security Council stakeout. But up to 12:50, Ban
had still not appeared.
Others
muse that
Ban Ki-moon's call for NATO to name a civilian / humanitarian czar is
a fall back position. If de Mistura is vetoed by Karzai, he could go
for the UN-urged NATO position. It would be nice to get more of these
questions answered, but at this UN it is not happening. Watch this
site.
Footnote: as the
Council meeting broke up Mona Jul, Norwegian Deputy Ambassador, and
lambaster of Mr. Ban, waited and greeted Kai Eide. In her anti-Ban
memo, the only SRSG she praised was... her paisan Kai Eide. Eide will
hold a press conference at the UN on January 7. We'll be there.
Update
January 7, 8:21 a.m. -- And then it was canceled:
Please
note that the press briefing that had been scheduled for 10:00 am on
Thursday by the Secretary-General's Special Representative for
Afghanistan, Kai Eide, has been cancelled. Mr. Eide is traveling to
Washington, D.C. today and is unavailable for the briefing.
And
so Kai Eide
goes out as he came in. Al Kai Eide, we hardly knew ye...
Click
here
for an Inner City Press YouTube channel video, mostly UN Headquarters
footage, about civilian
deaths
in Sri Lanka.
Click here for Inner City
Press' March 27 UN debate
Click here for Inner City
Press March 12 UN (and AIG
bailout) debate
Click here for Inner City
Press' Feb 26 UN debate
Click
here
for Feb.
12 debate on Sri Lanka http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/17772?in=11:33&out=32:56
Click here for Inner City Press' Jan.
16, 2009 debate about Gaza
Click here for Inner City Press'
review-of-2008 UN Top Ten debate
Click here for Inner
City Press' December 24 debate on UN budget, Niger
Click here from Inner City Press'
December 12 debate on UN double standards
Click here for Inner
City Press' November 25 debate on Somalia, politics
and this October 17 debate, on
Security Council and Obama and the UN.
* * *
These
reports are
usually also available through Google
News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here
for a Reuters
AlertNet piece by this correspondent
about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army. Click
here
for an earlier Reuters AlertNet piece about the Somali
National
Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's $200,000 contribution from an
undefined trust fund. Video
Analysis here
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN
Office: S-453A, UN, NY 10017
USA
Tel: 212-963-1439
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
2006-08 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com -
|