On
Yemen, IOM
Brags of Work
for IDPs,
Funded By Those
Supporting Bombing
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, March
29 --
Marking the
one year
anniversay of
the Saudi-led,
US-supported
Coalition's
air strikea on
Yemen, the
International
Organization
for Migration
on March 29
bragged of its
work in the
country,
adding that it
is funded by,
among others,
the US
government.
But doesn't
the US
government
support the
Saudi air
strikes
causing most
of the
displacement,
even gassing
up the Saudi
war planes?
IOM says:
“Many
cities have
been engulfed
by armed
clashes; 2.4
million
civilians have
been
displaced;
basic goods
are in short
supply due to
air and sea
blockades; and
millions of
people are
facing severe
shortages of
food, water,
medical
services, fuel
and
electricity.
Some 6,400
people have
been killed,
half of them
civilians, and
more than
30,000 have
been injured,
according to
the World
Health
Organization
(WHO).
“In
response, IOM
has provided
non-food (NFI)
relief and
shelter items
to 48,000
people;
primary and
secondary
medical care
for over
173,000
people; and 15
litres of
water a day
for over
586,000
people. IOM
aid has
targeted half
of Yemen’s
governorates,
including
Aden, Taiz and
Sa’ada, all of
which were
conflict
frontlines at
some point.
“On 23
March Special
Envoy of the
UN Secretary
General for
Yemen Ismail
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed
announced that
parties to the
conflict have
agreed to
cease
hostilities by
10 April and
hold a round
of peace talks
on 18 April in
Kuwait.
After a year
of intense
conflict, this
encouraging
news indicates
that peace may
be a step
closer, with
more focus on
dialogue and a
political
solution to
this complex
crisis, which
has affected
the lives of
some 21
million of
Yemen’s 25
million
people.
IOM’s
activities in
Yemen have
made possible
by the support
of donors
including
DFID, ECHO,
the US State
Department,
OFDA, Japan,
Sida, Finland,
UN-CERF,
UN-HPF and
USAIM.”
Below, we
review the
dubious role
of UN envoy
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed.
On the
one year
anniversary of
the Saudi-led
Coalition's
campaign of
airstrikes on
Yemen, the
Houthis and
Saleh's GPC
held separate
rallies in
Sana'a on
March 26,
photos below.
At
Saleh's rally,
the first time
he'd addresses
people in
public place
in the past
year according
to Inner City
Press' sources
he said that
the UN
Security
Council - and
by implication
its envoy --
will do
nothing to
resolve the
conflict and
that he would
"ignore it".
If it's a real
Security
Council
speaking for
the peoples,
Saleh said, it
should stop
the war.
On
March 28,
Inner City
Press asked UN
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, UN transcript
here:
Inner
City Press:
about Yemen,
on the
one-year
anniversary of
the Saudi-led
coalition’s
bombing, which
was held on
the 26th,
there were two
big rallies in
Sana’a.
One was by the
Houthis, but
another one
was by
followers of
former
President
Saleh.
It was a
pretty large
one.
There are
photographs of
it. And
at this rally,
he said he has
no more
interest in
working with
the UN
Security
Council or its
envoy, Ismail
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed, that
only to deal
directly with
the
Saudis.
And that if
the UN had
meant
business, they
would have
stopped these
air strikes
long
ago. So
I wanted to
know, given
that this is
sort of a
third element
in the Yemen
situation,
what are
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed’s
comments,
relations with
the Saleh side
and this
massive rally?
Spokesman:
Mr. Ould
Cheikh Ahmed
is continuing
to speak to
all sides in
the
region.
That has not
changed.
And it is not,
it’s not the
Secretary-General
that can stop
the
fighting.
It is those
who have their
fingers on the
trigger or on
the bomb doors
that can
actually stop
the fighting.
Inner City
Press:
Right. I
think their
critique was
just that it’s
not an
even-handed
mediation...
Note:
Inner City
Press is
informed that
after its
recent
exclusive
report on
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed's
email to
Feltman, not
only did
Dujarric's
deputy Haq in
retaliation
deny Inner
City Press any
question --
also,
Department of
Political
Affairs were
questioned
about their
possible
leaking
And
then, UN
lawyer Miguel
de Serpa
Soares made an
eviction
threat to
Inner City
Press, here.
Saleh's
rally, March
26, 2016
Saleh
reiterated
calls for
direct talks
with the
Saudis, which
the Houthis
are already
doing, and
said that his
party is
coordinating
with other
Yemeni groups
including
Houthi to end
the conflict.
This came
after Saleh's
seeming
exclusion from
the direct
talks between
Houthis and
Saudis which
led to a
lessening of
border
fighting and
exchange of
prisoners. h/t
Shuaib
Almosawa
Houthis'
rally, March
26, 2016
When
Inner City
Press asked US
State
Department
spokesperson
John Kirby
about Yemen on
March 15,
Kirby said "we
welcome the
fact that
there is a
cessation of
hostilities."
On March 23 at
the UN, Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq did
not even allow
Inner City
Press a
question to UN
envoy Ismail
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed.
On
March 24,
Inner City
Press asked
Farhan Haq, UN transcript
here;
on March 23,
Inner City
Press asked at
the end about
Saleh leaving
the country,
if any
Permanent Five
member of the
Security
Council is
asking for
that. I
haven't heard
that, the
fishy envoy
said, leaving
without answer
about his
blocking
practices on
Twitter.
On
March 24 Inner
City Press
asked UK
Ambassador
Matthew
Rycroft about
the Yemen
talks going on
outside of
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed's
track --
Rycroft said
it's a good
question, the
various talks
should all
come together
-- and if the
UK thinks
Saleh should
leave Yemen. Video here.
That's up to
the Yemeni
people,
Rycroft said.
Another Press
question is,
whither Hadi?
Has he lost
legitimacy?
Does the UAE
support Bahah?
On the UAE,
where is the
UN's former
Libya envoy --
and former top
Spanish
official in
the UN system,
a title now in
the news --
Bernardino
Leon? We'll
have more on
this.
Ismail
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed
announced a
cessation of
hostilities -
but not under
April 10 - and
talks on April
18 in Kuwait.
Inner City
Press is told
that despite
how pro-Saudi
he (and the
UN's question
selection) is,
there is still
anger at
things the
envoy said. Here a link to
his opening
remarks.
We'll have
more on this.
On March 16,
Inner City
Press returned
to the State
Department and
asked Kirby's
deputy Mark
Toner about
the Saudi
airstrikes in
Hajjah which
killed, it
asked, 41 or
107 people;
Toner replied
in part that
the US could
not verify the
specifics, see
below.
On
March 19, amid
yet MORE Saudi
airstrikes on
Sana'a, the
UN's fishy
envoy Ismail
Ould Cheick
Ahmed said
something
pubicly, on
Twitter - but
it was not
about the
bombing and
suffering.
Instead it
was:
"Important
meetings in
Sana'a today
in order to
prepare for
the next round
of peace talks
for #Yemen."
So Inner City
Press asked
him, "Press
question for
@OSESGY: I see
you saying you
have important
meetings in
Sana'a; any
comment on
#Saudi
airstrikes
there?"
While some
predicted
blocking --
the approach
taken by
Burundi's
current
Ambassador to
the UN, and a
former of a P5
-- we will
await a
response and
explanation,
watch this
site.
On
March 18,
Inner City
Press asked
Kirby again:
Inner
City Press: On
Yemen, I see
that you
answered
yesterday and
you said you
didn’t have
the details
yet about this
airstrike in
Hajjah
province, but
now the UN’s
human rights
commissioner
has said that
his team got
there on
Wednesday.
They put the
death count at
106.
UNICEF Yemen
puts it at
118. So
I’m just
wondering, do
you accept
that as kind
of – as – is
that enough
information to
– for the U.S.
to say this
did happen and
that’s the
death count?
MR
KIRBY:
We’re aware
and deeply
concerned by
reports that a
significant
number of
civilians may
have been
killed or
injured during
a strike near
a market in
northern
Yemen.
I’m unable
today to
verify any of
the specifics
of what
happened.
I would note,
though, that
the coalition
has stated
that it will
conduct an
investigation
of the
incident, and
we encourage
them to
conduct a
prompt,
transparent
investigation
and publicly
release the
results.
It’s vital
that the
investigation
provide a
thorough and
objective
accounting of
the facts and
circumstances
of the
incident and,
if
appropriate,
to address any
factors that
led to it so
that we can
prevent
reoccurrence,
of course.
As we’ve said
previously,
we’re deeply
concerned by
the effects of
the crisis in
Yemen, both in
terms of
civilian
casualties and
the dire
humanitarian
situation
which still
exists.
Okay?
On
March 18, the
UN High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights put the
civilian death
toll at 106; UNICEF
in Yemen puts
the figure at
118 dead
including 22
children.
On
March 16,
Inner City
Press returned
and asked
Kirby's deputy
Mark Toner
about the
Saudi
airstrike in
Hajjah, full
video here
from Minute
56:28; Vine
here, US
transcript
here:
QUESTION:
Inner City
Press. I want
to ask about
Yemen and
something
about the UN.
MR TONER:
Sure.
Inner City
Press: On
Yemen,
yesterday, Mr.
Kirby said
that we
welcome the
fact that
there’s a
cessation of
hostilities.
And then, as
I’m sure you
know, there
was a big
airstrike in
Haja province
– some people
say 41 killed
--
MR TONER:
Yeah.
Inner City
Press: -- some
say 107. What
do you say to
that? And
related back
to the
genocide
question, also
still on
Yemen, Sudan
is part of the
coalition.
Sudan has
troops in
Yemen with the
U.S.-supported
coalition. And
I’m wondering,
how is that –
does that –
does the
genocide
finding as to
Omar al-Bashir
in Darfur have
any
implication
for the U.S.
not being part
of a coalition
or militarily
cooperating
with a
government
whose head of
state is
charged with
genocide by
the ICC and
was found by
Colin Powell
to --
MR TONER: So
to your first
question,
we’re
certainly
aware of the
reports that
civilians may
have been
killed or
injured during
a strike, I
believe, near
a market in
Haja province.
I can’t at
this time –
cannot verify
the specifics.
We remain
deeply
concerned by
the
devastating
toll of the
crisis in
Yemen, both in
terms of
civilian
casualties,
but also,
obviously, in
terms of the
humanitarian
situation that
Yemen faces.
We urge all
sides to
comply with
obligations
under
international
humanitarian
law.
Speaking to
the broader
peace process,
as you know,
Secretary
Kerry was just
there. I was
with him over
the weekend,
as was poor
Dave here. And
we were on a
trip to Saudi
Arabia. But
one of the
things that we
discussed – he
discussed,
rather, with
both the Saudi
– His Royal
Highness King
Salman, also
the crown
prince, and
the deputy
crown prince
as well as
Saudi Foreign
Minister
al-Jubeir –
they talked
about the need
for a
political
solution to
the situation
in Yemen. And
so we support
the UN efforts
to that end.
In terms of
your second
question, I’m
actually – I
just don’t
know the
specifics
about that or
what prohibits
us – you’re
saying why we
would not have
been part of
this, are we
prohibited
from taking
part in that?
Inner City
Press: No, no,
I guess I was
saying – you
were saying
that there –
or people were
saying in this
first round
that there
were some
legal
implications
if you make a
finding of
genocide. And
I don't know
if those
include not
working with
--
MR TONER: But
I’m not sure
whether they
pertain to --
Inner City
Press: -- the
government who
--
MR TONER: I’d
have to –
yeah, I can
take that
question. I
don't know.
QUESTION:
Okay. And do
you know –
just one other
– because I
think the
question was
taken
yesterday.
MR TONER:
Yeah.
QUESTION: I
wanted to ask
about this
corruption
case about the
UN. Today, in
the Southern
District of
New York, the
former deputy
permanent
representative
of the
Dominican
Republic pled
guilty and has
pledged to
cooperate
against the
former
president of
the General
Assembly, John
Ashe. I wanted
to know the
State
Department’s
position on
it, and also
on the
Government
Accountability
Project. They
wrote a letter
– a public
letter to the
U.S. Mission
to the UN
urging them to
get involved
in opposing
retaliation by
the UN against
the press that
has been
reporting on
the corruption
scandal. I
think that
some members
of Congress
are actually
now – but I
haven’t seen
anything from
the State –
from the U.S.
mission. So
I’m wondering,
is the State
Department
aware of the
corruption
case, and also
separately of
this GAP
letter, and
what’s their
response to
it?
MR TONER: I
would imagine
we’re aware.
I’m not,
unfortunately.
I apologize we
haven’t gotten
back to you on
that. We’ll
take it.
On
March 15,
Inner City
Press asked US
State
Department
spokesperson
John Kirby,
from the US
transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
want to ask
about
Yemen. I
saw the
Secretary’s
comments when
he was in
Saudi Arabia
about
possibility of
a ceasefire
similar to
Syria and
something
about having
teams on the
ground working
on that.
So I wanted to
know – it
seems like
there’s talks
between the
Houthis and
the Saudis
that don’t
involve Saleh
or even
Hadi. It
seems – what’s
the U.S.’s –
like, what was
he referring
to? Is
it – does he
view direct
negotiations
between the
Houthis and
Saudi Arabia
as a positive
thing?
Is that the
ceasefire he’s
talking
about?
And what’s the
role of the UN
envoy, who
seems not to
be part of
those talks,
and of Mr.
Hadi going
forward?
Is he the
future
president of
Yemen or is he
– has time
passed him by?
MR
KIRBY:
So there’s a
lot
there.
There – we
still continue
to support the
UN special
envoy and his
efforts.
That’s not
going to
change.
And when the
Secretary was
in the region
over the
weekend, Yemen
was – as he
said, was a
significant
point of
discussion
with Saudi
leaders.
Nothing has
changed about
our support
for the UN
special envoy
and his
efforts to get
a political
process going
and move
forward.
And the United
States is
going to
remain firmly
behind that
effort.
He also said
that we
welcome
reports that
there is a
reduction in
violence
between
Houthis and
the coalition
forces led by
Saudi
Arabia.
We welcome the
fact that
there is a
cessation of
hostilities,
quite frankly,
that appears
to also be
holding.
That’s a good
thing, because
we’ve long
said that
there needs to
be an
increased
effort by the
international
community to
get
humanitarian
aid and
assistance to
so many Yemeni
citizens who
are in need,
and that’s
hard to do
when there is
still violence
going on
between both
sides.
So we welcome
this – that
development,
and we welcome
the news that
there are
discussions
between the
two
sides.
If those
discussions
can lead to a
resolution of
the conflict
and to a
continuation
of the
reduction of
violence, that
too is a
healthy
thing.
But it doesn’t
mean that we
aren’t also
going to
continue to
support the UN
track here,
because we
still believe
that that is
an important
part of
putting in
place a
sustainable
governing
structure, one
that the
Yemeni people
clearly
deserve going
forward.
So it’s both,
it’s
both.
And he’s very
much focused
on both tracks
and I think
you’re going
to continue to
see that be
the case going
forward."
On
March 15, a
Saudi
airstrike
killed at
least 106
civilians in
northern
Yemen...
On
March 14,
Inner City
Press had
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
Inner
City Press: on
Yemen, there
are obviously
a lot of
reports now
that the
Saudis are
negotiating
directly with
the
Houthis.
This was
referred to by
some degree by
John Kerry in
his visit to
Saudi Arabia
over the
weekend.
Where is the
envoy?
Is the envoy
part of
this? Is
this outside
the envoy…
Spokesman:
We referred to
it, as well,
on Thursday or
Friday where
this is
something that
the envoy
welcomes and
has been
encouraging
for some time.
But
is he
involved?
On March 5
Inner City
Press
published
another
exclusive: UN
envoy Ismail
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed's email
to UN Under
Secretary
General for
Political
Affairs
Jeffrey
Feltman, which
contradicts
what envoy
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed most
recently told
the Security
Council. The
email
exclusively
published by
Inner City
Press shows
flexibility on
the Houthi
side, with the
prospects of
meeting in
Jordan or
Morocco, while
the Saudis
insist on
sending low
level
representation.
The email is
published in
full, below.
On
March 7, two
days after
exclusively
publishing
Envoy IOCA's
email to
Feltman, Inner
City Press
asked UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about it. He
did not deny
the email,
instead saying
that the envoy
is working
hard.
But
on March 8,
when lead UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric gave
a read-out of
whom the Envoy
met in Riyahd,
there were no
Houthis
mentioned.
Inner
City Press
then asked
Dujarric of
the
multiply-sourced
Houthi - Saudi
meetings: was
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed
not even
involved? If
he was, why
were the
Houthis not
included in
Dujarric's
litany of the
Envoy's
meetings? Vine here. From
the UN
transcript:
Inner
City Press: On
Yemen, you'd
said that the
envoy had been
in
Riyadh.
Yesterday, I'd
asked Farhan
[Haq] about
this email
that the envoy
had written to
Jeff Feltman
about his
discussions
with the
Houthis.
And now
there's a
report that
the Houthis
are, in fact,
now in Riyadh
and met at
some level
with the
Saudis.
So, since the
Houthis
weren't listed
in your
readout of
interlocutors,
does he have
anything to do
with that, or
is that a
track outside
of mediation--
Spokesman
Dujarric:
We've seen
these
reports.
This is
something that
the Special
Envoy has been
encouraging
for quite some
time.
What's your
second
question?
An
hour later in
the UN Lobby
Inner City
Press asked UN
OCHA's Stephen
O'Brien about
what Saudi
Arabia's
ambassador
said March 4,
that OCHA does
not want a
humanitarian
access UNSC
resolution for
Yemen.
I hadn't seen
that, O'Brien
politely
replied. Inner
City Press
encouraged
him, then, to
check it out -
the video's on
YouTube. Watch
this site.
And
dissembling to
the Security
Council?
Likewise,
Inner City
Press asked
Haq about the
Saudi
Permanent
Representative
to the UN
saying that
Ismail Ould
Cheikh Ahmed,
and senior
leadership of
Stephen
O'Brien's
OCHA,
privately said
no
humanitarian
access
resolution by
the Security
Council is
needed.
Haq insisted
to Inner City
Press that
what O'Brien
said in the
open session
was his
position. But
Inner City
Press pointed
out, O'Brien
said the
"humanitarian
IT equipment"
the Saudis
seized would
be delivered
to Aden by
March 6 -
whereas Haq on
March 7 said
"later this
week."
Inner City
Press asked
Haq to confirm
or deny at
least the
delivery of
the
humanitarian
IT equipment,
by email since
Haq's
"squawks" over
the press
floor public
address system
don't reach
it, with UN
DPI Banning
ICP from its
longtime
office (petition
here).
We'll see.
Here
is the email:
"Dear
Jeff, I just
completed a
2-day visit in
Riyadh and
wanted to give
you a quick
update on how
things have
developed
since my
discussions
with H/Mohamed
AbdelSalam
last week in
Muscat.
I had
a private
discussion
with both
State Minister
Mussaeed Al
Ayban and Abu
Ali where I
briefed them
on the
readiness of
the Houthis to
resume
discrete
face-to-face
meetings with
KSA
representatives.
While they
welcomed the
progress made
and expressed
their
commitment to
go ahead with
this track,
they also
emphasized
that:
i) in
light of the
progress the
Coalition has
been making on
the ground and
their advance
toward Sanaa,
the Houthis
should seize
this
opportunity
and discuss in
good faith as
they are in a
weaker
position on
the ground and
their options
are narrowing;
ii)
KSA will not
consider
elevating the
level of their
representation
in the KSA-H
talks, as
Mohamed
AbdelSalam had
requested. KSA
considers that
the 2
representatives
they are
sending are at
the level of
Mohammed
AbdelSalam and
the Houthis
should not
expect a
higher
representation
at this point;
iii)
KSA accepted
the proposal
of Mohamed
AbdelSalam to
meet in a
third country
(Jordan).
Mohamed Abe
Assalem has
suggested to
me either
Morocco or
Jordan as the
venue.
I
immediately
called Mohemad
AbdelSalam
from Riyadh to
share the
outcomes of
the meeting.
He was going
to talk to his
leadership and
revert to me
with a
confirmation.
If the Houthis
accept, the
Houthi - KSA
meeting could
go ahead as
early as next
week, in
Jordan. We of
course would
not
participate
nor be
present. I
have however
already
started
coordination
with the
Jordan
Ambassador to
Yemen, as
needed.
Although
we still do
not have an
agreement for
a new
cessation of
hostilities,
we have
continued to
press for
commitment to
the
De-Escalation
and
Coordination
Committee
(DCC), and a
range of
economic
initiatives
(especially in
relation to
the Central
Bank's
independence
and the
reactivation
of the Social
Welfare Fund).
In my
meeting with
the GoY
delegation, I
continued to
impress upon
them the
importance of
participation
of the GoY in
the DCC, and
to training
which we are
planning to
organize in
Amman during
the coming
weeks. The UK
Ambassador
informed me
that Foreign
Minister and
Head of GoY
delegation
AbdelMalik El
Mikhalfi today
had responded
positively to
his
suggestion.
There
are been
positive
developments
on economic
initiatives
which I have
supported as
well. Foreign
Minister
Mikhalfi
participated
in the Central
Bank board
meeting last
week in Amman
together with
the Minister
for Finance
and the CB
Governor.
DPM/MoFA
Mikhalfi
acknowledged
that
significance
of the
Governor's
attendance
from Sanaa and
was very
grateful for
my personal
efforts to
secure his
participation
with the
Houthis, which
was seen by
the GoY as an
important
confidence
building
measure.
Mikhalfi
agreed on the
necessity of
developing
further
economic
initiatives
including the
support for
the SWF and
SFD. My office
is working
with the UNCT,
World Bank and
IMF in order
to ensure a
sufficient
level of
technical
support for
these
proposals.
I
am now in
Nouakchott for
4 days where I
need to renew
my G4 visa and
will proceed
to New York on
16 February
ahead of the
SC briefing. I
intend to
remain in NYC
until 22
February in
order to meet
with key
Member States
and HQ
officials. I
plan to also
travel to
Washington DC
19 February
and hold
meetings
there. I look
forward to
seeing you in
New York in a
few days.
Best regards,
Ismail."
The above
email was sent
on February 11
and
contradicts
what Ould
Cheikh Ahmed
told the
Security
Council;
meanwhile
Saudi Arabia's
Ambassador to
the UN told
the press on
March 4 that
envoy IOCA
does NOT want
a humanitarian
access
resolution.
In
the UN
Security
Council on the
Yemen
sanctions
resolution
adopted on
February 24,
language was
added to try
to discourage
the Panel of
Experts from
looking into
the act of the
Saudi-led
Coalition.
Concessions
were made, of
a kind not
made for or
about other
countries
under
sanctions.
(Inner City
Press had to
follow the
process from
outside the
UN, literally,
the park on
43rd Street
across First
Avenue,
because only
days after
Inner City
Press asked
why the UN was
so quiet about
false
claims of
Iranian
military
equipment
in a UN WFP
aid ship,
Inner City
Press was
summarily
thrown out of
the UN for
seeking three
weeks earlier
to cover an
event in the
UN Press
Briefing Room,
and Banned,
without due
process. Petition
here.)
On March 4 in
the same UN
Press Briefing
Room, Saudi
Ambassador to
the UN
Abdallah Y.
Al-Mouallimi
held an
unscheduled
press
conference to
announce that
OCHA, whose
Yemen pick up
the pieces
campaign Saudi
Arabia largely
funds, does
not think
there's a need
for a
humanitarian
access
resolution. If
true, some
will say that
OCHA has been
bought.
Inner
City Press
asked
al-Mouallimi
why his Yemeni
counterpart
had claimed to
Inner City
Press, on the
record, that
the WFP ship
the Saudis
seized
contained
"Iranian
military
equipment"?
Al-Mouallimi
said, among
other things,
the ship DID
come from
Iran... and
the equipment
wasn't on the
manifest and
was "hidden."
Inner
City Press
asked him
about cluster
bomb use; he
denied it and
many media
printed that
quote, without
more. Inner
City Press
asked him, if
opposed to the
UN Panel of
Experts
looking into
the impacts of
the Saudi
Coalition, who
should do it?
This was not
answered,
except to
again
emphasize how
tied the PoE
is to the
underlying,
one-sided
resolution.
At
the end, Inner
City Press
asked
Mouallimi to
encourage the
Yemen / Hadi
delegation to
hold its press
session in
this same UN
Press Briefing
Room, and not
for Gulf and
Western UNCA
scribes only,
a spoonfed
breakfast,
see below.
Al-Mouallimi
said he would
convey the
request. We'll
see.
On
March 1, back
in on a
reduced access
pass, Inner
City Press
asked UN OCHA
official John
Ging about
taking "aid"
money from
Saudi Arabia
while it
blasts away at
Yemen. Video
here.
Ging
said these two
are "ring
fenced," and
that the UN
doesn't allow
Saudi Arabia
to put
conditions on
aid or where
it is
delivered.
Inner
City Press
asked, what
about the
Saudi threat
that aid
workers should
leave
Houthi-controlled
areas? Ging
said the UN
had pushed
back.
But
quietly, as
was the case
with the Saudi
diversion of
the WFP ship.
Does money
talk?
Apparently
yes.
, 
