| On
Yemen Sanctions, UK's Draft
Vetoed by Russia, China
Abstains, Then Russia's 15-0
Adopted
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Video,
1st
Person
UNITED NATIONS,
February 26 – Amid the
continued killing of civilians
in Yemen the UN Security
Council on February 26 at 10
am was slated to extended its
Yemen sanctions. But no
agreement was reached, and
Russia issued its own draft.
When the votes happened at 3
pm, the UK version was vetoed
by Russia, with Bolivia also
voting no and China and
Kazazhstan abstaining. Alamy
photo here.
Then Russia's draft, here,
was approved 15-0. Earlier,
Inner City Press observed the
US Mission team going up to
the third floor hallways where
the UK has its clubhouse, then
going up again with UK Deputy
and charge d'affaires Jonathan
Allen. Earlier, Allen took
questions about his UK draft:
We’ll be going in this morning
to vote on the Yemen
resolution, the rollover of
the sanctions regime on Yemen.
That’s really important and we
have worked very hard to come
up with a text which reflects
the very serious concerns set
out by the UN Panel of
Experts, which found Iran to
be in non-compliance of the
sanctions regime set up under
Resolution 2216. So our text
both makes clear Iranian
non-compliance and also
focuses on the crucial
question of ballistic missiles
in the light of the outrageous
attacks, attempted attacks on
civilian areas by the Houthis
against Saudi Arabia and the
Emirates, and we will be
urging all of our colleagues
to vote in favour of those
texts today. Q: If you get
vetoed by the Russians, will
you veto the Russian version
of the text? What’s your
objection to that? A: I will
just simply say I call on all
Council members to vote on our
text. That will be the text
that’s voted on first, and
we’ll see where we are at the
end of that. Q: Since the
Russians are proposing one of
their own, they’re likely not
in favor of yours.A: So the
Russian text does not address
the central issues that have
come from the Panel of Experts
report. Now we as the United
Nations have these independent
experts, we rely on them to do
the work of the United
Nations, we rely on them for
the work of the multilateral
system. Russia doesn’t like
the outcome of certain expert
Panel reports. Just because
they don’t like the messages
doesn’t mean they can
undermine everything they say.
So we’ll be urging our
colleagues for the good of the
United Nations system to vote
in favor of our resolution. Q:
But your text doesn’t reflect
everything in the Panel of
Experts reports. You’re
focusing on parts of what the
Panel of Experts said? A: "Our
text has the support of the
Council and that’s what
matters." Then why the delay
and two 3rd floor meetings?
Even after the noon briefing,
UN Security was saying, "They
not going into the chamber to
vote." Watch this site. The
Council will meet on February
27, with outgoing envoy IOCA.
In advance, penholder the UK
has proposed a draft which
would condemn what it calls
Iran's failure to stop
short-range ballistic
missiles. Meanwhile outgoing
envoy IOCA met with the US'
Tom Shannon (why?) and
Griffiths waits in the wings.
In the run-up, Dutch minister
Sigrid Kaag, a former UN
official, met with Hadi. In
Dutch her tweet said Hadi has
been staying in Riyadh since
2015, but this was not in her
English tweet, photos here.
Meanwhile Inner City Press is
exclusively informed that the
new UN envoy on Yemen, Martin
Griffiths, had a try-out of
sorts with the Saudis before
UN Secretary General Antonio
Guterres rubber stamped him,
and that this try-out involved
a trip to Saudi Arabia and a
sort of interview. Inner City
Press asked Guterres'
spokesman Stephane Dujarric
about the process, whether
penholder the UK (which has
denied in full Inner City
Press' Freedom of Information
Act request about Yemen and
Cameroon after 170 days, see
below) nominated its national
Griffiths. While Dujarric
typically did not answer, the
better question it seems is
whether Saudi Arabia, despite
some obfuscation about wanting
an Arab envoy, nominated or
co-nominated him. We'll have
more on this. The United
Kingdom's murky role in the
killings in Yemen persist even
in the face of a Freedom of
Information Act request from
Inner City Press.
More than five
months ago on 15 August 2017
Inner City Press asked the UK
government for records
concerning Yemen. The UK sells
weapons to Saudi Arabia, and
has now implanted a UK citizen
as UN envoy on Yemen in the
person of Martin Griffiths
(Inner City Press story and
questions here.)
After repeatedly extending the
time to response, now the UK
has denied access to all
responsive records, letter here,
saying that "the release of
information relating to the
UK’s discussion on UN business
could harm our relations and
other member states of the
United Nations (UN)." And on
February 16, the UN belatedly
confirmed that British Martin
Griffiths is the man, and UK
Boris Johnson immediately
applauded (while withholding
all documents). Johnson said,
“I welcome the appointment of
Martin Griffiths to the role
of UN Special Envoy for Yemen.
Mr Griffiths brings a wealth
of experience from several
high profile UN positions in
the region, and is a leading
expert on international
mediation and conflict
resolution." At the UN noon
briefing on February 16 Inner
City Press asked about this
record, UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: on Yemen now
that you've said that… that
Mr. Griffiths is the
one. I had asked you
before something about vetting
about his previous position at
the Centre for Humanitarian
Dialogue, where it's reported
at least that there was sort
of some fraud… missing money
at the end of his tenure and I
wanted to know two
things. One, whether
this was looked at, and two,
whether you can say, given
that the penholder now also
has… is… is the nationality of
the… of the… of the envoy, and
I ask this because
having… having FOIA-ed
[Freedom of Information Act]
the UK and been denied in
full, what was the role of the
penholder in… in nominating
Mr. Griffiths as the… as the
envoy? Spokesman: Mr.
Griffiths will serve as United
Nations staff member with all
the duties of independence
that that will… that brings
with it. So, Mr.
Griffiths is not there to
serve the purposes of the
United Kingdom or anyone
else. He's there to
represent the
Secretary-General and serve
the United Nations. The
nomination proposing Mr.
Griffiths to the Security
Council was made by the
Secretary-General. As
far as the first part of your
question, I think what you
raised, everybody was aware
of, and as far as I know, Mr.
Griffiths was never accused of
any wrongdoing personally, and
I know he will serve the
United Nations well, with
honour and with integrity."
We'll see.
Here
on Patreon is the full UK
denial letter, from which
Inner City Press is preparing
an appeal, on Cameroon as well
- it has 40 working days.
This is shameful
- the UK is also exiting
transparency.
As
Inner City
Press pursues
these
questions at
the UN, it
remains restricted
to minders by
the head of
the UN
Department of
Public
Information
Alison Smale,
who it is
noted is
British - and
functionally a
censor. A
retaliator,
too? Smale has
not explained
why Inner City
Press' long
time work
space is
assigned to
no-show,
no-question
Egyptian state
media Akhbar
al Youm.
On Cameroon
and Yemen, UK Denies Inner
City Press FOIA Request
After 170 Days, Preparing
to Appeal, 40 Work...
by Matthew
Russell Lee on Scribd
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Past
(and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047,
Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
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 2006-2018 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|
,
