In W.
Sahara,
Double-Dipping
With Hotel
Charges &
UN Allowance,
UN Failing
By Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, April
8 -- UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon,
tellingly
though his
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
issued a
non-apology
apology to
Morocco on
March 28,
“regretting
misunderstandings.”
Now
Inner City
Press has
informed by
well-placed
sources that
UN mission
staff who were
staying in
hotel rooms
paid for by
the $3 million
contribution
Morocco has
now cut were
also receiving
Mission
Sustenance
Allowance
funds as if
they were
paying their
own hotel
costs.
"They were
double
dipping," as
one source put
it.
Does
this take
place is other
UN
Peacekeeping
missions under
Herve Ladsous?
We'll have
more on this.
Inner
City Press on
the evening of
April 6
learned from
multiple
sources that
there would be
a UN Security
Council
session about
Western
Sahara, at the
request of
Venezuela and
Uruguay, on
April 7; it
published the
news at 6 am
on April 7. At
10 am, Inner
City Press
asked French
Ambassador
Francois
Delattre,
Periscope
video here,
French Mission
transcript
here:
Inner City
Press: On
Western Sahara
what´s the
[Any Other]
Business?
Amb Delattre:
Following that
there will be
an AOB on
Western
Sahara, it
will be an
opportunity
for the
Secretariat -I
believe it
will be Herve
Ladsous - to
brief us about
the progress
and the state
of affairs and
the
perspectives
of the
dialogue.
(Inner City
Press question
if UN official
Jeff Feltman,
and not
Ladsous, is
leading talks
with Morocco,
and Delattre's
answer of Yes,
was not
transcribed -
but something
is better than
nothing.)
Strangely,
when Inner
City Press at
the day's noon
briefing to
among other
things confirm
that Ladsous
would brief
the Security
Council about
Western Sahara
under Any
Other
Business,
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
would not
confirm it,
nor that
Feltman is
meeting with
Morocco in
Geneva, as he
did in a
Washington DC
transit hub.
We'll have
more on this.
Update:
shortly after
UN
spokesperson
Haq declined
to confirm
that Ladsous
would brief
the Council
about Western
Sahara, Ladsous
came out of
the Council
after doing
just that.
Asked for
comment he
said, Non.
If the UN
Secretariat is
standing up
for MINURSO,
why won't its
briefer
Ladsous, the
fourth
Frenchman in a
row atop DPKO,
talk? The
question may
answer itself
- since basic
questions are
being left
unanswered.
The UN's head
of Political
Affairs, past
and seemingly
future US
State
Department
figure Jeffrey
Feltman, is
said to head
up the UN
Secretariat's
“dialogue”
with those who
ousted
MINURSO. This
as for example
Sudan on April
6 echoed those
arguments for
ouster, after
UN DPKO boss
Ladsous'
droning speech
about Darfur.
How long
before the
echo reaches
South Sudan,
no matter how
much UNMISS
and UN
agencies try
to ingratiate
themselves to
Salva Kiir? Or
DR Congo, same
with Joseph
Kabila?
While
Banned from
the Security
Council
stakeout but
not yet from
the UN Press
Briefing Room,
at least not
during the
increasingly
thuggish noon
briefings,
Inner City
Press on April
1 asked Ban's
Dujarric about
Western Sahara
and then
censorship,
and Dujarric
just walked
out, saying,
"I'm done."
On
March 31,
Inner City
Press asked
Morocco's
Ambassador
Hilale if you
would show the
proof he was
alluding to,
to a group of
invited
Moroccan and
French
journalists
(Inner City
Press was not
invited, but
present) and
Hilale said
no, saying he
would show
Dujarric.
Inner
City Press
also asked
Hilale if
those from
MINURSO in Las
Palmas should
stay; Hilale
replied, "For
us, it's
over." Video
here.
On April 6,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about Sudan's
ambassador
also flashing
a smart phone,
and if Ban or
his spokesman
Dujarric had
followed up on
Hillale's
offer. From
the UN
transcript:
Inner City
Press: in the
Security
Council this
morning, the
ambassador of
Sudan, in the
middle of
saying a
number of
things about
hidden agendas
of UNAMID,
held up his
cell phone and
said we have
video
evidence,
which he
didn't show in
the meeting,
but what I'm
wondering is,
the same thing
happened at
the stakeout
with the
Moroccan
ambassador,
saying he had
evidence that
he wanted to
show Stéphane
[Dujarric] to
disprove what
he was saying
about Western
Sahara and
MINURSO.
So, I wanted
to know, in
each of these
two cases,
what does the
UN do when a
Permanent
Representative
of a Member
State says
publicly, “I
have the
evidence”?
Did Stéphane
ever contact
Omar Hilale
and ask to see
the evidence
about Western
Sahara?
And is Mr.
Ladsous going
to contact the
Sudanese
ambassador to
prove or
disprove what
he's holding
up as his
phone?
Deputy
Spokesman:
We do follow
up with the
relevant
people, and in
the case of
the Moroccans,
I'm aware that
we have been
in touch with
Mr. Hilale.
Inner City
Press:
Did you see
the evidence
that he was
talking
about?
Did he
characterize
it?
Deputy
Spokesman:
I have not.
"You"
meant this
deputy's
Office, not he
himself. We'll
have more on
this.
Inner City
Press: I
wanted to know
whether even
in its current
status,
MINURSO
[United
Nations
Mission for
the Referendum
in Western
Sahara] can
confirm a
buildup of
troops and
tanks in an
area called
Mahbas, which
is about an
hour from…
near the wall
and near
Tindouf.
And I also
wanted to ask,
I’ve listened
more closely
to what
Ambassador
Hilale said
yesterday.
He said that
the people
that were in
Dakhla were
not
officially…
this was an
unofficial
post without
an official
building.
He wasn’t sure
if they were
in the budget
of the Fifth
Committee, he
made a lot of
administrative
arguments also
saying that…
that the
Mission should
have told
Morocco that
11 people
listed has
being there
had already
left.
So, I wanted
to know, have
you seen the
footage of
what he said
and do you
have any
response to
it? And
is it the case
this Dakhla
outpost was,
in fact,
authorized or
official part
of the Fifth
Committee?
And can you
confirm these
tanks building
up?
Spokesman:
I don't have
an update from
the mission
about the
buildup around
Mahbas. I can
check. I
am not going
to get into
it… the
Mission was
operating
under its
mandate, under
its approved
budget.
I have not
seen what the
ambassador
said.
And there is
really nothing
more I can
tell you on
that.
Iner City
Press:
Overall what
he was trying
to say, and I
mean there are
a number of
parts of the
Mission which
he says were,
were done sort
of at the, by
the good
graces of
Morocco.
That they
weren’t really
approved by
the mandate…
Spokesman:
All I can tell
you… again, I
don’t know
what the
Ambassador
exactly said;
what I can
tell you is
that the
Mission has
been operating
under its
Security
Council
mandate and
with the
appropriate
budget.
Mr. …
Charbonneau.
Inner
City Press
asked Duajrric
on March 31,
before his
April 1
walk-out, UN transcript.
Meanwhile
Ban's head of
Communications
Cristina
Gallach had
Inner City
Press Banned
from covering
the UN
Security
Council
meeting on
Western Sahara
on March 21,
and in a
Kafka-esque
show required
a UN minder
for Inner City
Press on March
24, then
misrepresented
it to Western
Sahara
supporters in
New Zealand,
see below.
When to
respond to
Morocco's
ouster of the
MINURSO
mission from
Western Sahara
the UN
Security
Council met at
8:30 am on
March 21,
Inner City
Press arrived
to cover the
meeting, as it
has Council
meetings on
the topic each
April and
October.
But this
time, it was
unable to
access the
Security
Council
stakeout in
order to speak
with diplomats
for its
reporting. Video here. Any reporter with a
Resident
Correspondent
pass, as Inner
City Press had
for eight
years, could
go to the
stakeout. But
not Inner City
Press, not
anymore.
The reason
Inner City
Press was
Banned from
stakeout out
the Western
Sahara meeting
was UN Under
Secretary
General
Cristina
Gallach's
February 19
letter telling
it, on two
hours notice,
to leave the
UN after ten
years of
coverage. Letter here.
Gallach never
once spoke to
Inner City
Press before
issuing the
order.
The results of
Gallach's
order, which
remains in
place as of
March 26, is
systemic
exclusion from
covering and
staking out
events ranging
from Sri Lanka
counter-terrorism
to the process
for selecting
Ban Ki-moon's
successor,
from UN
Security
Council reform
to an
event about
slavery,
the UN's
memorial to
which has
funded since
indicted and
pleaded guilty
to bribery at
the UN.
After the
March 24 UN
Security
Council
consultations
on Western
Sahara, just
after the
reading out o
the Council's
“Press
Elements,”
things hit a
new low. UN
Department of
Public
Information
staff, working
for Gallach,
told Inner
City Press it
had to leave
the Security
Council
stakeout even
as other
pro-Morocco
journalists
were
conducting
interviews
with
diplomats.
After Inner
City Press
stated this
was censorship
attributable
to Gallach,
her staff's
“solution” was
even more
Kafka-esque:
Inner City
Press would require
an escort, or
minder, as it
conducted
interviews.
Obviously,
diplomats
desiring to
speak on
background
about Ban's
performance on
Western Sahara
would not do
so in the
presence of a
minder working
for Ban's
Secretariat.
What has led
to this
censorship or
Banning of the
Press at the
UN, on Western
Sahara, Yemen,
Sri Lanka,
Burundi and
other topics?
While
Gallach's
February 19
letter is
vague, in the
“incident” she
alludes to
Inner City
Press sought
to report on
an event,
nowhere listed
as closed,
held in the UN
Press Briefing
Room on
January 29.
It was a
meeting of the
UN
Correspondents
Association,
and Inner City
Press wanted
to cover it to
see if the
group's having
under Giampaolo
Pioli
taken money
from thhe
South South
News of now
indicted Ng
Lap Seng's and
Vivian Wang's
(and Frank
Lorenzo, who
has pleaded
guilty) would
be discussed.
UNCA's Pioli
demanded that
UN
Spokesperson
Stephane
Dujarric ask
Inner City
Press to
leave.
When
despite no
showing that
it was a
“Closed
Meeting” a
single UN
Security
officer told
Inner City
Press that
Dujarric
wanted Inner
City Press to
leave, it did.
But the
disagreement
about the
right to
exclude the
press from the
UN Press
Briefing Room
was used by
Gallach -- and
it seems UNCA
“leaders”
including
Giampaolo
Pioli and at
least two news
services which
now operate
anonymous
troll social
media accounts
-- to three
weeks later,
on two hours
notice and
with no due
process, order
Inner City
Press out.
Because the
UNCA trolls,
which are
followed by
and echo
Gallach,
repetitively
tell anyone
they can that
Inner City
Press is not
restricted in
any way in
covering the
UN -- which is
a lie -- Inner
City Press
notes not only
the obvious -
that Gallach
is Spain's
highest UN
official - but
also the
following:
After the
March 24
Western Sahara
meeting of the
UN Security
Council,
Gallach
tweeted to a
questioner
from New
Zealand who
asked, “why
did you remove
the
accreditation
of Inner City
Press?”
Gallach
replied, photo
here, that “I
did not! ICP
is fully
accredited!
Can report
from UN.?His
privilege to
use office was
taken out, due
to
misbehavior.”
Photo
of Gallach's
tweet here.
This is
false. On
March 21,
Inner City
Press was
unable to
reach the
stakeout of
the UN
Security
Council on
Western Sahara
as it had been
able, until
Gallach's
decision of
February 19.
And on March
25, the moment
Security
Council
president
Gaspar Martins
finished
reading out
the elements
to the press -
and Inner City
Press but not
the swearing
UNCA boss
Pioli asked
him a question
-- UN DPI
staff told
Inner City
Press to leave
the stakeout,
even as
diplomats
remain.
Inner
City Press
said that to
report on the
meeting, it
need to speak
to the
diplomats,
many of whom
has in the
past spoken
with in on
background.
But now with
its
Gallach-reduced
pass, DPI
staff said
Inner City
Press required
an “escort” or
minder to
remain on the
second floor.
What
diplomat
desiring to
speak on
background
about Ban
Ki-moon's
questionable
performance on
Western Sahara
would do so in
view of a
minder from
Ban's
Secretariat?
It is FALSE
that Inner
City Press is
fully
accredited.
And it is
significant
that, well
before March
25, Gallach
has been
multiply
informed of
the impact of
the
restrictions
she imposed
without due
process. As to
Western
Sahara, for
example, the
impacts -and
intent? - are
clear.
Furthermore,
the
“misbehavior”
repeatedly
citing by
Gallach
illusory. UNCA
should have
have been
trying to hold
a “closed”
meeting in the
UN Press
Briefing Room
- even
Francois
Hollande could
not do that -
and the event
was nowhere
listed as
closed. Inner
City Press
live tweeted
and live
streamed it
openly, from
the booth in
the back to
avoid the
heckling of
Pioli's gang.
Dispositively,
on March 23 UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq did
nothing when
two non
interpreters
were in the
interpretation
booth during
the noon
briefing.
There is no
clear rule, at
least none
that is
enforced.
But
compared to
this
disagreement,
isn't coming
to the UN
Security
Council
stakeout to
loudly call
another
reporter “an
asshole”
misbehavior?UNCA
chief
Giampaolo
Pioli, who
lobbied
Gallach to
throw Inner
City Press
out, came to
the UN
Security
Council
stakeout on
Western Sahara
and loudly and
repeatedly
called Inner
City Press “an
asshole.”
Audio here.
Gallach's
February 19
letter citing
some rule
about
civility. Will
she enforce it
on Pioli?
Gallach's
ruling must be
reversed.
Watch this
site.
The day after
the UN
Security
Council issued
mere Elements
to the Press
on Morocco's
ouster of much
of the UN's
MINURSO
mission,
Moroccan media
stole a
photograph
taken by Inner
City Press and
false said it
was Ambassador
Omar Hilale
flashing the
victory sign
on the way
into a lunch
with Ban
Ki-moon, here.
In
fact, Inner
City Press
took and tweeted
the photo
as Hilale and
his team
gathered in
the Turkish
Lounge outside
the Security
Council during
one of this
week's closed
door
consultations,
on March 21.
Notably, the
Moroccan
publication
not only uses
the Inner City
Press photo
without credit
- it claims
credit itself.
Why didn't UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon go to
El Aaiun in
Western
Sahara, even
to visit the
headquarters
of the UN
Mission for
the Referendum
in Western
Sahara?
And why on
March 21 did Ban
say, "We
had a good
meeting in the
Security
Council today"
when his
deputy spokesperson
Farhan Haq
told Inner
City Press it
was fine it
was excluded
between there
were no
Secretariat
staff
involved? Who
is Ban's "we"?
On
March 24,
after three
hours of
consultations,
the UN
Security
Council
emerged with
so-called
"Press
Elements" read
by the
Council's
President for
March,
Angola's
Ambassador
Gaspar
Martins. Periscope
video here.
Fast
transcript by
InnerCityPro.com
here.
After
these Elements
were read out,
Inner City
Press asked if
they meant
all15 members
would like to
see MINURSO
returned to
Western
Sahara, and if
some thought
Ban Ki-moon
should, as
demanded,
apologize.
Inner City
Press also
asked about
Morocco's
foreign
minister's
comment that
the country's
recent moves
are
"irreversible."
Still
later, while
UN minders
were telling
Inner City
Press it had
to leave the
second floor
even as other
UN
correspondents
on UNCA's
board remained
doing
interviews,
Inner City
Press managed
to get a
read-out, that
in the
Security
Council
consultations
members had
not been sure
of, or agreed
on, what
Morocco's
minister had
said, and so
would have to
meet again
soon. Watch
this site.
Strangely,
while Ban's
Secretariat
saying it is
strongly
opposing
Morocco's note
verbale
its civilian
staff leave
"the territory
of the Kingdom
of Morocco,"
on March 23 to
Reuters and
AFP it was an
anonymous UN
official who
made the
argument.
On March 24,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about this
incongruity:
why ostensibly
speak truth to
(Moroccan)
power...
anonymously?
Instead
of explaining,
Haq said to
Inner City
Press, For a
journalist you
seem to have a
problem with
officials
speaking to
the media.
Well, no: why
only to
pro-Ladsous
scribes, and
anonymously?
Inner City
Press asked if
Herve Ladsous
as head of UN
Peacekeeping
will finally
hold a press
conference,
which it seems
he hasn't
since
September 11,
2015 when on
camera he
linked
peacekeeper
rapes to
"R&R." Haq
did not
respond.
As the
UN Security
Council had
another round
of closed door
consultations
about MINURSO
on March 23,
Inner City
Press' sources
tell it that a
mild draft
Press
Statement is
being "shot
down" by
Egypt, for the
Arab Group or
League - with
France once
again able to
hide its
imminent veto
on the issue.
As to
Spain, whose
foreign
ministry has
yet to answer
- and in full
disclosure
whose highest
UN official
Cristina
Gallach
ordered Inner
City Press out
of the UN on
two hours'
notice and it
still trying
to seize its
office,
restrict its
ability even
to cover the
Security
Council on
Western
Sahara, video
here --
sources says
it is
"blackmailed."
What
does that
mean? Morocco
can turn on
migration, act
on the small
territories,
has many
Spanish
companies on
its territory
and at sea.
"Unless a
larger power
tells Spain to
be decisive on
this, Spain
will just
drivft," was
the verdict.
We await the
ministry's
comment.
Cristina
Gallach, with
Qatar's ex-PR,
Spain sign,
credit UN
Photo/Evan
Schneider
UN DPKO
boss Herve
Ladsous went
into the
Security
Council on the
afternoon of
March 23
without a word
or answer. On
his way out at
4:30 pm, Inner
City Press
asked him, Any
progress on
MINURSO? No
answer. Any
response to
the Tony
Banbury op-ed?
One in his
entourage
laughed. Would
retaliation
follow? For
Inner City
Press, it
already has.
Watch this
site.
From:Matthew
Russell Lee[at]
innercitypress.com
Date: Mon, Mar
21, 2016 at
9:15 AM
Subject: Press
Q on Spain's
position on
Morocco
ordering out
83 UN/AU staff
from MINURSO,
and UN doing
it, on
deadline,
thanks
To:
cecilia.yuste
[at] maec.es
Hello
-
This
is a Press
request to
know Spain's
position on
Morocco
ordering 83 UN
(and AU) staff
to leave “the
territory of
the Kingdom of
Morocco,” as
they referred
to Western
Sahara - and,
separately, to
UNSG Ban
Ki-moon and/or
DPKO chief
Herve Ladsous
deciding to in
fact evacuate
these staff to
Las Palmas.
We
have not heard
Spain's
position from
the Mission
here - there
areother issues-
and so put
this question
to you, on
deadline.
Please
acknowledge
receipt and
provide
substantive
response asap.
But still no
answers at all
- other than a
continued push
for eviction
of Inner City
Press, despite
or because of
what is in the
OIOS audit
Inner City
Press has
published.
As the 8:30 am
meeting took
place, Inner
City Press
once it got
about the
retaliatory
Ban imposed by
UN official
Cristina
Gallach heard
from its
sources that this
photograph
of troops and
missiles -
note the
flag(s) - was
circulating
among the
highest UN
officials
including DPKO
chief Herve
Ladsous, and
that Morocco
was moving to
oust even
MINURSO
military
personnel from
Dakhla. There
were still no
other media
present at
9:30 am.
Inner
City Press
arrived at the
UN at 8:20 am
and as passing
through the
now required
(by UN
censorship and
retaliation)
metal
detectors saw
a convoy
diplomats from
the Morocco
mission going
in.
But up
at the
Security
Council, the
door for
"non-resident
correspondents"
was locked;
Inner City
Press' current
pass
downgraded in
retaliation by
the UN doesn't
work on the
turnstiles and
there was no
guard present.
Inner
City Press set
up in the
hall, but from
there was
unable to put
questions --
as it
has
right to -- to
the Permanent
Representatives
going in.
Seen,
through glass,
were the Perm
Reps of France
and Spain
chatting
amiably; PRs
of New Zealand
and Ukraine
and Russia;
American
Deputy David
Pressman.
At the
noon briefing,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq, Vine here (video still not
provided)
Later on
March 21,
along with
telling Ban
(again) that
his Under
Secretary
General for
"Communications"
Cristina
Gallach and
Security had
thrown Inner
City Press out
of its office
and the UN as
a whole on
February 19,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban what he
was doing on
Western
Sahara.
Ban
said, "We had
a good meeting
in the
Security
Council
today." Audio
embedded here.
But didn't Haq
say it was
fine to Ban
Inner City
Press because
there were no
Secretariat
staff
involved?
Beyond who is
Ban's we, does
the
justification
for censorship
stand up?
Inner City
Press had
heard of the
Monday 8:30 am
meeting from
sources in the
region on
Sunday
evening.
Moroccan
state media
MAP reported
on March 20
that
“significant
number” of UN
staffers had
left El Aaiun
airport in UN
aircraft and
commercial
flights to Las
Palmas in
Spain, that 73
U.N. staffers
had left and
10 would leave
in the
afternoon.
Why did
Ban (or the
head of UN
Peacekeeping,
Frenchman
Herve Ladsous)
give in? If,
in the most
positive
light, it was
for staff
safety -- which was
ignored for
example in Sri
Lanka --
why has Ban
not come out
and said that?
This is a new
low.
On
March 16,
Inner City
Press asked
the US State
Department
about Western
Sahara and
then (from the
State
Department
briefing room)
published
this, emailed
to Inner City
Press from
Deputy
Spokesperson
Mark Toner:
"The United
States
continues to
support the
UN-led process
designed to
bring about a
peaceful,
sustainable,
and
mutually-agreed
solution to
the conflict
in the Western
Sahara, one in
which the
human rights
of all
individuals
are respected.
We support the
work of the UN
Secretary
General’s
Personal Envoy
for the
Western Sahara
and the
mandate of the
UN Mission for
the Referendum
on Western
Sahara
(MINURSO).
We encourage
all of the
parties to
remain fully
and actively
engaged in
pushing the
process toward
an effective
resolution."
But on
March 19, a
strongly
rumored UN
Security
Council
meeting about
Western Sahara
did not
happen, at
least by 3 pm.
It seems
friends of
Morocco -
read, France -
argued that
the meeting
was not
needed. But
what of
Morocco's
"note verbale"
telling 84
people to
leave "the
territory of
the Kingdom of
Morocco"?
That's
the rub -
under
international
law, Western
Sahara is NOT
"the territory
of the Kingdom
of Morocco."
So how can 84
people be
ordered out
this way?
Contrary
to the
analogies UN
and DPKO
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric used,
Eritrea
kicking out
UNMEE for not
enforcing its
legal right to
Badme, or Chad
kicking out
MINURCAT,
Morocco is not
the host
country of
MINURSO.
So the note
verbale, which
in any event
should have
been sent to
the Security
Council, is
not effective.
But what
is the role of
Herve Ladsous,
the fourth
Frenchman in a
row atop UN
Peacekeeping,
in this - and
in the ouster
of Inner City
Press on
February 19,
ostensibly by
his fellow
Frenchman
Stephane
Dujarric and
Cristina
Gallach, the
highest
official of
Spain in UN
System? We'll
have more on
this.
Meanwhile two
tweets from
the account of
the acting
spokesperson
for the US
Mission to the
UN got a lot
of play, on
both sides of
the issue, click
here to view.
But Inner City
Press has
already asked
three at the
US Mission
about the GAP
letter.
After the
Security
Council met on
March 18 about
Western
Sahara, the
Council's
President for
March,
Ambassador
Gaspar Martins
of Angola,
said the
members had
agreed to work
both
bilaterally
and as
Council. Which
is it? Left
solo, France
reflexively
defends
Morocco.
French
Ambassador
Delattre on
his way in
said:
"With respect
to Western
Sahara, we, as
France, but
also as member
of the
Security
Council, are
having one
clear
objective,
which is to
appease the
tensions. And
that is why we
believe that,
at this stage,
an important
thing in order
to appease the
tensions, is
for Morocco
and the UN to
have a serene,
respectful,
and in-depth
dialogue. We
believe this
is absolutely
important in
order to,
again, appease
the tensions.
This is our
number one
priority, and
we will
continue on
this path."
Sounds
bilateral...
Watch this
site.
On March 14,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric about
an upcoming
meeting it had
heard from
other sources
about. From
the UN
transcript:
Inner City
Press: Has
there been a
request by
Morocco's
Foreign
Minister to
meet with the
Secretary-General
this week?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Yes.
Inner City
Press:
And will that
be an open
photo op?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
The meeting is
still… we're
still working
on the
scheduling of
the
meeting.
Obviously, it
will be a
photo op, as
it is usually
with every
Foreign
Minister that
comes to
town. Vine here.
And
then, despite
Inner City
Press'
question,
Dujarric's
office waited
until four
minutes before
the deadline
to go up to
photograph the
meeting to
announce it.
Some photo op.
On
March 7, Inner
City Press
asked Dujarric
if Ban had
even tried to
get to
MINURSO's
headquarters
in El Aaiun --
Dujarric
didn't answer
that -- and if
Ban hadn't in
his comment
distributed on
March 6 given
Morocco a veto
over the
referendum
promises even
in the name of
the MINURSO
mission.
Back on March
2, Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric's
deputy Farhan
Haq why Ban is
not going,
while wanly
claiming he
has the right
to do. UN
transcript
here.
Ban was
supposed to go
in November
2015 but he
canceled it,
thinking he
could get more
political -
read, South
Korea
electoral --
play by going
to North
Korea. But
then North
Korea turned
him down.
On
February 25,
Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric about
issues
including
Western
Sahara, after
three days
reporting on
the UN from
outside after
Ban's head of
Communications
Cristina
Gallach threw
Inner City
Press out
without due
process: petition
here; weird
pro Morocco
spin on the
ouster, here.
Ahead
of Ban's March
1 stop in
Spain there
was pick
up of the
fact that
Gallach is
Spain's
highest UN
official, and
that she
ousted the
Press from the
UN.
In defense of
Ban and
Gallach,
anonymous
troll account
has taken to
tweeting, now
at Spanish
journalists,
that Gallach
is fine and
didn't throw
Inner City
Press out of
the UN on two
hours notice
without once
speaking to
it. But those
are the facts.
Among the new
troll
account's
followers are
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric and
four UNCA
board members,
plus Reuters
bureau chief
Louis
Charbonneau,
who has a
history with
this, see
here.
, 
