On
Yemen, Will
Aid Be
Coordinated by
the King
Salman Center
or UN?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, May
12 -- Just as
the Yemen
"humanitarian
pause" was to
go into
effect, the
UN's outgoing
Emergency
Relief Coordinator
Valerie Amos
put out a
statement on
May 12 that "I
request that
humanitarian
assistance to
Yemen be
routed through
existing UN
and
international
humanitarian
organization
channels. It
is essential
that
humanitarian
assistance is
not
politicized."
The UN's erstwhile
mediation role
has been
entirely
politicized,
as in,
dominated by
the US whose
Secretary of
State John
Kerry told the
UN's Ban
Ki-moon to NOT
hold Yemen
talks in
Geneva on May
11 but rather
defer to Saudi
Arabia. See
Inner City
Press' May
6 exclusive
story, here.
But Amos, on
her way out,
is not
deferring to
Saudi Arabia,
instead urging
that the UN
and not the
"King Salman
Center"
coordinate the
aid.
Inner City
Press tweeted
Amos' comments
(after
the UN Security
Council's and
Secretariat's
statement).
A hard-working
(Budget
Committee)
staffer of the
Saudi Mission
replied, that
the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia
"fully funded
the 274
million dollar
humanitarian
appeal showing
their grave
concern."
But Amos was
speaking of
who will
coordinate the
aid, Inner
City Press replied.
What about
that King
Salman Center?
As Inner City
Press first
reported on
May 6, the
UN's bungling
of Yemen
mediation has
become ever
more clear,
according to
multiple
sources and
documents
exclusively
seen by Inner
City Press.
On April 29,
Inner City
Press asked
the UN's
deputy
spokesperson
to confirm
that the UN
was
considering
Geneva as a
venue to
continue Yemen
talks, after
its previous
envoy Jamal
Benomar
resigned in
protest of
Saudi
airstrikes and
was replaced
by a more
amenable
envoy, Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed.
UN deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
replied that
“we do not
officially
have a venue
yet.
Geneva is
certainly one
of the venues
that is being
considered,
and that may
very well be
where it's
taking place.”
After that,
Inner City
Press has
learned,
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon spoke
with US
Secretary of
State John
Kerry, who
discourage --
rejected, in
essence -- the
date of May 11
in Geneva
which the UN
had put in
writing, in
multiple
documents
since seen by
Inner City
Press.
The UN's
argument,
tellingly, was
the May 11
would work
well for Ban
Ki-moon's
schedule (he
would be
returning from
his May 9
attendance of
Victory Day in
Moscow) and
that the
Houthis were
more likely,
but not
certain, to
attend in
Geneva rather
a Saudi
selected
venue.
In an echo of
the UN's
failing
mediation on
Syria, the UN
acknowledged
that while
Iran should
attend in
Geneva, Saudi
Arabia might
refuse to
attend in Iran
did.
And
so the UN's
idea was a
Yemeni-only
event in
Geneva, with
Ban Ki-moon to
speak and then
leave. New
enovy Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed would
then conduct
consultations
-- like Staffan
de Mistura is
doing on Syria,
the UN
analogized
without
apparent irony
-- and perhaps
move the
ongoing talks
to Muscat,
Oman.
(Involved in
all this
planning, not
surprisingly,
has been
American
Jeffrey
Feltman,
previously of
the US State
Department.
While a nice
enough guy,
this combined
with France's
even more open
domination of
UN
Peacekeeping
through USG
Herve Ladsous,
has also
caused the UN
to
increasingly
be viewed as
partial. The
UK controls
Humanitarian
Affairs
through
incoming
Stephen
O'Brien as
exclusively
reported by
Inner City
Press,
credited by UK
Channel 4
and the Telegraph.)
As to the UN's
idea of May 11
talks in
Geneva, Kerry
said no, that
the UN should
wait until
after the
Saudi convened
event, now set
for May 17 in
Riyadh. The
Houthis, of
course, will
not attend
that. Ban
Ki-moon is
invited, but
might see it
smells of
failure or
partiality.
In any event,
while the UN
has not
announced it
South Korean
sources say
Ban will be in
South Korea
for four whole
days around
May 20. (Some
say he has an
interest in
running for
office there.)
But if Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Amhed attends
the Riyadh
meeting and is
put on display
on the podium,
what possible
credibility
with or access
to the Houthis
could he have?
Tellingly,
while others
have reported
the Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed is going
to Paris
before visting
Riyadh, they
have not said
why. Inner
City Press is
informed the
Paris stop
over is at the
request or
demand of the
head of the
Gulf
Cooperation
Council, who
is on vacation
in Paris. This
is today's UN.
(SPA
subsequently
reported or
bragged that
Ismael "Wild"
Cheikh Ahmed
met in Paris
with GCC
Secretary
General
Abdullatif bin
Rashed
Al-Zayani.)
Tellingly,
while Ismael
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed rushed
to Washington
DC to meet at
the US State
Department on
May 1, as of
the late
afternoon of
May 5 the
president of
the UN
Security
Council had
yet to meet
Ismael Ould
Cheikh Ahmed.
On
April 25, UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon on
April 25 named
Ismael Ould
Cheikh Ahmed
to replace
Jamal Benomar
as envoy on
Yemen.
Three times
Inner City
Press had
asked the
Office of the
UN
Spokesperson
why Ould
Cheikh Ahmed
is not listed
on Ban's
webpage of
public
financial
discloure and
to say, yes or
no, if he has
an interest in
a business
which received
funding from
the Gulf.
Three times
the Office of
Spokesperson
promised to
look into and
give an
answer, but
never did.
This is Ban's
UN.
On April 28,
Inner City
Press asked
again:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
on the new
Yemen Special
Adviser, Mr.
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed, there
was this
understanding
of why on the
page of the
Secretary-General
there's no
public
financial
disclosure.
Deputy
Spokesman
Farhan
Haq:
Regarding
that, we did
check with the
ethics office,
and he has
made available
his disclosure
in line with
the existing
rules and
procedures,
and so he is
up to date on
those.
There are
times when
for… for a
variety of
different
reasons
people's
disclosures
may not be on
the website.
Inner City
Press:
But is he one
of the
officials
that's decided
to not make
even the
summary
public?
I want…
because when
the name is
listed,
there’s a
checkbox…
Deputy
Spokesman
Haq:
I've said what
I have to say
on that, but
he has made
his
disclosures in
line with the
appropriate
rules and
regulations.
Inner City
Press:
And also
Stéphane had
said that he
would check
whether a
letter was
received by
the Office of
the
Secretary-General
from a number
of parties in
Yemen
concerning the
appointment of
this new
envoy.
Did he do
that?
Have you
received that
letter?
Deputy
Spokesman:
I don't
know.
This was when?
Inner City
Press:
It was on
Friday, I
believe, that
I asked him
and he said he
would
check.
The reports
are that the…
a variety of
the parties in
Yemen wrote a
letter about
the process of
replacing Mr.
Benomar.
And I wanted
to obviously
just to know
if you got it…
Deputy
Spokesman:
Certainly… In
the day after
you asked, we
announced the
appointment,
so that is
part of our
answer. And
with that, let
me bring our
guest.
So,
none of the
public
financial
disclosure
which Ban
talked so much
about. Why
not?
On
April 24,
Inner City
Press had
asked Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
Question:
Okay.
I'm also
informed of a
letter from
political
parties in
Yemen,
including
those
representing
Houthis and
others,
directed at
the
Secretary-General
making two
requests.
One, that Mr.
Ould Cheikh
Ahmed not be
named as a
replacement to
Mr. [Jamal]
Benomar and
that someone
be appointed
or retained
who actually
they will
speak
with.
And I wanted
to know… you
may not know
of this letter
yet, but I'm
reliably
informed it is
either there
or on its way…
Spokesman:
All
right. I
will look for
the letter.
Question:
And I guess my
question would
be, do you…
has the
Secretary-General…
since we've
already… we've
heard from
some of the
ambassadors
from the
Security
Council that
he's put
forward a
name.
Did he put any
effort to
speak to the
parties on the
ground in
Yemen, the
actual
Yemenis?
Spokesman:
I think the…
when we're
ready to
announce the
person, we
will.
Obviously, for
a… an
appointment as
delicate as
this… as this
ongoing… to
represent the
Secretary-General
in this
ongoing
crisis, it is
normal to have
as broad of a
consultation
as possible,
and what is
obviously
extremely
important is
that once that
envoy is
named, that
adviser is
named, that
all the
parties give
him access and
engage with
him.
Question:
If you get the
letter, will
you squawk
it? Does
it mean that
these parties
that wrote…
Spokesman:
I think…
Question:
…once
consulted…
Spokesman:
It's an
ongoing
humanitarian
crisis.
It's an
ongoing
conflict.
And we are
trying to get
the political
process back
on
track.
So we'd like
to have a
special envoy
as soon as… a
Special
Adviser as
soon as
possible, and
again hope
that all the
parties engage
with him.
Question:
Didn't you
have one?
That's my
question.
Didn't you
actually have
a Special
Adviser?
Spokesman:
Yes, we have
Mr. Benomar…
Question:
Is it your
understanding
that he's
entirely
unwilling to
continue in
the post?
Spokesman:
Well, I think
he's… he's…
he's expressed
his desire to
move on and,
as we said, we
are… we're in
the process of
naming
somebody
shortly.
No response
about the
letter,
either. This
does not bode
well.
After
Saudi Arabia
was allowed to
oust UN
mediator Jamal
Benomar for
being
insufficiently
supportive of
its
airstrikes,
the UN is
being
promoted,
again, as an
honest
broker.
How so, when
the UN has
UNtransparently
named as a
replacement
mediator an
individual who
previously
failed in
Yemen,
refusing to
make public
financial
disclosure?
How weak and
untransparent
is today's
UN?
, 
