As UN Humanitarian Ging Raises Ethiopia, Displacement, Comms Issues
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, July 24, 2014 -- When the UN's John Ging took questions on
July 23 about South Sudanese refugees in Ethiopia's Gambella region, Inner
City Press asked him about the spike in people fleeing since April, and
about reported "villagization" and displacement there for commercial
agriculture.
Ging noted the temporarily decrease in refugees in April, and the
increase since. He agreed that the renewed fighting in Nasir may lead to
more refugees.
Later, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs provided
this quote from Ging: "'I applaud the generosity of the people and
Government of Ethiopia, who are now hosting almost 600,000 refugees from the
region. Despite not being a rich country, they have consistently kept their
borders open, and are an example of international standard for the treatment
of refugees in practice. It is now the international community's turn to
step up and shoulder its responsibilities to share the burden with
Ethiopia.' So far, of the 193 member states of the United Nations, only 18
are funding the appeal."
That part of OCHA's communications works well. Less well, last time
Valerie Amos spoke -- on the Sudans -- Kieran Dwyer insisted it was normal
to withhold the statement for hours.
Later in the week he was seen
<
https://twitter.com/innercitypress/status/491246106446405633> spinning
member states about World Humanitarian Day. But this is the same guy who,
contrary to Ging's - and Amos' -- approach defended the stonewalling of
Herve "The Drone" Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN
Peacekeeping, video here <
http://youtu.be/rm1V-cY9u40> . Will this approach
infect the UN's humanitarian arm?
Are there unexplained double standards at the UN on humanitarian access?
On July 16 in "elements to the press," the Security Council on the
"humanitarian situation in Sudanese states of Southern Kordofan and Blue
Nile... urged warring parties to allow humanitarian access in accordance
with Resolution 2046" adopted by the Security Council, more than two years
ago.
(Inner City Press has put the full "elements to the press" below.)
Inner City Press asked UN Humanitarian chief Valerie Amos, and the
Council's Rwandan presidency for July, if the newly adopted Syria model for
humanitarian access
<
http://www.innercitypress.com/syria1aidmeasures071414.html> would be
applied to Southern Kordofan.
Amos did not answer that part of the question -- perhaps because she said
she was only answering on Sudan and South Sudan -- and the Rwandan
presidency said that no member of the Council had suggested even circulating
a resolution as was done on Syria.
OCHA and many Security Council members have bemoaned the lack of access to
Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile. But why have no steps been taken, as on
Syria? Reports under Resolution 2046 are not, as those on Syria are, put out
in advance in the UN Spokesperson's office.
<
http://www.innercitypress.com/syria5humspin062014.html>
And a request by the Free UN Coalition for Access <
http://www.funca.info>
to OCHA's head of communications, previously in the same position for UN
Peacekeeping boss Herve Ladsous <
http://youtu.be/rm1V-cY9u40> , for a copy
of Amos' clearly prepared opening remarks at the stakeout on Sudan and South
Sudan (or "if not, why not") was not responded to, whereas Amos' statements
on Syria can be disseminated.
Update: an hour after FUNCA's request he replied, "The written statement
will be delivered to media soon, once the text is aligned with what was
delivered. This is standard practice. I'm not sure why the 'if not why not'
question."
It was more than four hours after that, and long after filing of this and
other stories
<
http://www.innercitypress.com/ladsous1carfdlrcholera071614.html> , that
OCHA belatedly sent Amos' Sudan remarks - after OCHA had sent a number of
other statements.
In fact, OCHA has provided to the media near real-time summaries of
information given in closed consultations to the Security Council on Syria,
for example on the morning of May 29. Why the difference with Southern
Kordofan?
Inner City Press also asked Amos about a critique of Ladsous' UNMISS
mission in South Sudan, as undermining humanitarian independence. Amos gave
a thoughtful answer about the need for escorts and security, given the
logistics challenges. But how will this be received at the upcoming
humanitarian summit?
After the Rwandan presidency read out the "elements to the press," Inner
City Press asked about the status of Rwanda's June 26 complaint that
Ladsous' MONUSCO mission had flown the FDLR militia's leader from Eastern
Congo to Kinshasa
<
https://www.beaconreader.com/matthew-russell-lee/after-un-flew-fdlr-leader-
un-spokesman-said-not-aware-then-withheld-information-why> before any
decision by the 1533 Sanctions committee on giving a travel ban waiver (it
was denied).
Ladsous' DPKO has not even responded to the complaint, was the answer. On
July 15, UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inner City Press that the
FDLR leader was escorted back to Eastern Congo - but then insisted he hadn't
said that the UN did the escorting
<
http://www.innercitypress.com/banspox4ladsousfdlr071514.html> . Who did,
then? Watch this site..
Received on Thu Jul 24 2014 - 14:33:58 EDT