By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 19 -- On Sri Lanka, with the UN Secretariat in seeming paralysis holding back the war crimes Panel of Experts' report five full days after portions were leaked, presumptively by the government, to The Island newspaper, sources have described the process to Inner City Press.
The report, they say, is 196 pages long. On April 11, Inner City Press learned that it would be handed to Ban Ki-moon on April 12. After it was, it was also provided -- on hard copy only -- to Sri Lanka's Deputy Permanent Representative, General Shavendra Silva, who is himself implicated in war crimes in the final stages of the conflict.
The UN told Shavendra Silva that Ban would be releasing the report in 24 hours, sources tell Inner City Press. Silva responded that the Sri Lankan government wanted or needed “a little more time.” The UN replied that it would give 36 hours, tops.
But the 36 hours came and went. And by then a scan of the hard copy had been provided to The Island, a newspapers with agrees with President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The Island ran it, with typos as identified by Inner City Press.
Inexplicable to many, Ban and the UN Secretariat even then did not release the report. They held it over the weekend, and did not release it either Monday or Tuesday. They have, many say, undermined the report.
Ban, with Kohona looking on, with Silva, 196 pages & 36 hours not shown
The Experts, too, have done their part. Their report as excerpted says that all international staff left an area, then has international staff witnessing the shelling of a medical facility. This will be fodder for the government's response. But the government of Rajapaksa has already responded, with a call for mass protests against the UN report on May 1.
Why did Ban do this? Why did he never call for a ceasefire? Why did he send Nambiar as his envoy, and still allow him to be involved after his role in the so-called white flag killings of surrenderees? What will Ban discuss with Russia on his upcoming visit? How might this all be used to assure a second term as Secretary General? Watch this site.
Footnote: beyond misleading about the meeting of Attorney General Mohan Peiris with Ban's now invisible panel, it's reported that during that secret session, the UN agreed to give Sri Lanka some extra weeks before the filing of the report. It was extended to April 12, the day before the New Year in Sri Lanka, when all of the above then happened. One couldn't have done more to undermine a war crimes report.
As UN Still Withholds Sri Lanka War Crimes Report, Confirms Nambiar Reviews It, No Russia Read Out Until Later
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 19 -- The UN Secretariat still did not release the Sri Lanka Panel of Experts war crimes report at its noon briefing on April 19, five full days after portions began appearing in The Island newspaper, presumptively leaked by the government itself.
UN Department of Political Affairs chief Lynn Pascoe did raise the Sri Lanka report in the Security Council on Monday, but only briefly, and Russia again raised procedural objections that participants said supported the Mahinda Rajapaksa government, accused of war crimes.
Inner City Press asked Ban's acting Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq if Ban will be discussion Sri Lanka and the report during his upcoming visit to Russia. All Haq would say is there will be a read-out at that time.
But several human rights groups now indicate they agree with the question raised here yesterday: if Ban will further trade off Sri Lanka accountability, to assure a second term as Secretary General which Russia could veto.
Ban depicted in camp with gun, full report and 2d term as S-G still not shown
Inner City Press also asked Haq to confirm that the “senior advisers” that Haq on April 18 said would review the Sri Lanka report include Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, whose role in the so called white flag killings of surrenderees at the end of the conflict have been described in a filing with the International Criminal Court.
Haq indicated that yes, Nambiar is a senior adviser. But what about the apparent conflict of interest?
A wire service reporter told Inner City Press on Tuesday in front of the Security Council that his organization has already “moved on” to stories about reactions to the Sri Lanka report, and will have little interest when Ban belated makes the UN release of the report and “analysis.”
One couldn't have done a better job of undermining this report, it is opined. Watch this site.
As UN Security Council Hears of Sri Lanka Report, Russia Objects, Ban Ki-moon to Moscow, Sacrifice for 2d Term?
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 19 -- Sri Lanka and the UN Panel of Experts' report were listed in advance as topics of the Security Council briefing on the afternoon of April 18 by UN Department of Political Affairs chief Lynn Pascoe. Click here for that exclusive Inner City Press report.
The issues had been so listed even before the leak, presumptively by the government of Mahinda Rajapaksa, of a summary of the report to The Island newspaper.
But after the leak, that was the main topic inside the Council, multiple sources told Inner City Press afterwards. It was said, inside the Council, that the government was the likely leaker. But a range of Council members said it made no sense to have a discussion of a partial leak rather than the whole report.
Just as Russia opposed any Council discussion of Sri Lanka during the final, bloody stages of the conflict in 2009, on April 18, 2011 in the Council Russia raised a number of “procedural” objections, sources told Inner City Press afterward.
It should be noted that in the cases of Ivory Coast, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon took action, even military action, over Russian objections. Now, Ban is on his way to Russia, seemingly to try to smooth that over and seek to protect his chances at a second term as Secretary General, which Russia could veto.
Will meaningful action on the UN Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka be sacrificed to Ban's drive for a second term? Watch this site.
Even as leaked, the report says that
“During the final stages of the war, the United Nations political organs and bodies failed to take actions that might have protected civilians. Moreover, although senior international officials advocated in public and in private with the Government that it protect civilians and stop the shelling of hospitals and United Nations or ICRC locations, in the Panel’s view, the public use of casualty figures would have strengthened the call for the protection of civilians while those events in the Vanni were unfolding....
“Considering the response of the United Nations to the plight of civilians in the Vanni during the final stages of the war in Sri Lanka and the aftermath.. The Secretary-General should conduct a comprehensive review of actions by the United Nations system during the war in Sri Lanka and the aftermath, regarding the implementation of its humanitarian and protection mandates.”
But how is this Secretary General, with a chief of staff whose role in the so called white flag killings in Sri Lanka, and who withheld his own Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs casualty figures which were subsequently leaked to and published by Inner City Press, to credibly “conduct of comprehensive review” of his own behavior, and that of his senior advisers?
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