UN ended up making Syria issue a unilateral affair
23 Jan 2014 12:21 AM GMT
A year in the making, an international peace conference aimed at ending Syria’s civil war, which has killed well over 100,000 people, was almost undone in less than 24 hours by Ban.
With prospects of the so-called Geneva-2 talks bringing peace to Syria appearing dim, on Sunday Ban invited the most controversial potential participant - Iran, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s staunch ally and military supplier.
A chaotic day later, with talks on the edge of collapse, before they had even begun, Ban rescinded the invitation.
Diplomats say the UN chief believed he had a commitment from Iran to agree to the West’s terms for talks - but he didn’t.
The diplomats are still debating whether Ban misunderstood Iran or was misled, and why he made the hasty invitation in the face of clear skepticism from Washington.
There were some signs of difficulty from the beginning - the UN chose to hold the Geneva talks on 22 January - when an annual watchmakers convention would be taking over much of the Swiss city - so the opening events of the Geneva-2 conference had to be moved 93 km away to the Alpine city of Montreux.
At the same time, the potential guest list was becoming crowded - with the wrong people.
‘We had countries that have nothing to do with the Syrian conflict begging us to attend,’ a diplomatic source said on condition of anonymity.
‘Whether Geneva succeeds or not is almost secondary to who’s invited and who’s not invited,’ a senior UN Security Council diplomat said last week.
By late last week, the United States, Russia, Assad’s government and the main Syrian political opposition were all ready to attend, but the question of Iran was still not resolved - the United Nations had long insisted that Tehran should attend because of its importance for the region and the Syria conflict, a view supported by Russia.
Then Ban’s press office convened a news conference on Sunday evening, with just over an hour’s notice, and announced that he had decided to invite the Islamic Republic.
MISUNDERSTANDING?
Ban thought he had received assurances from Iran that it had reversed course and now supported a June 2012 plan for the creation of a transitional government for Syria.
Washington had consistently said Iran must first embrace the June 2012 plan for a political transition - the so-called Geneva communique - if it was to come to Geneva-2. It repeated that position to the United Nations after Ban told the United States on Sunday that it planned to invite Iran.
‘We were very clear both publicly and privately with the UN from Secretary (of State John) Kerry and Ambassador (to the United Nations Samantha) Power on down that in order for Iran to attend they needed to publicly endorse the Geneva 1 communique,’ State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters in a conference call on Tuesday.
And Ban was confident he had Iran on board, his spokesman said. After speaking with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and other senior Iranian officials, Ban assumed that Iran was now ready to accept the 2012 Geneva communique - thereby removing the main obstacle to its attending Geneva-2.
UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said Zarif and other Iranian officials told Ban that ‘Iran understood and supported the basis and goal of the conference, including the Geneva communique.’
But after Ban’s announcement, Tehran disagreed. According to one Iranian source, Zarif never told Ban that Tehran would accept the Geneva communique but used typically vague diplomatic language, ‘which might be the source of the misunderstanding.’
With prospects of the so-called Geneva-2 talks bringing peace to Syria appearing dim, on Sunday Ban invited the most controversial potential participant - Iran, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s staunch ally and military supplier.
A chaotic day later, with talks on the edge of collapse, before they had even begun, Ban rescinded the invitation.
Diplomats say the UN chief believed he had a commitment from Iran to agree to the West’s terms for talks - but he didn’t.
The diplomats are still debating whether Ban misunderstood Iran or was misled, and why he made the hasty invitation in the face of clear skepticism from Washington.
There were some signs of difficulty from the beginning - the UN chose to hold the Geneva talks on 22 January - when an annual watchmakers convention would be taking over much of the Swiss city - so the opening events of the Geneva-2 conference had to be moved 93 km away to the Alpine city of Montreux.
At the same time, the potential guest list was becoming crowded - with the wrong people.
‘We had countries that have nothing to do with the Syrian conflict begging us to attend,’ a diplomatic source said on condition of anonymity.
‘Whether Geneva succeeds or not is almost secondary to who’s invited and who’s not invited,’ a senior UN Security Council diplomat said last week.
By late last week, the United States, Russia, Assad’s government and the main Syrian political opposition were all ready to attend, but the question of Iran was still not resolved - the United Nations had long insisted that Tehran should attend because of its importance for the region and the Syria conflict, a view supported by Russia.
Then Ban’s press office convened a news conference on Sunday evening, with just over an hour’s notice, and announced that he had decided to invite the Islamic Republic.
MISUNDERSTANDING?
Ban thought he had received assurances from Iran that it had reversed course and now supported a June 2012 plan for the creation of a transitional government for Syria.
Washington had consistently said Iran must first embrace the June 2012 plan for a political transition - the so-called Geneva communique - if it was to come to Geneva-2. It repeated that position to the United Nations after Ban told the United States on Sunday that it planned to invite Iran.
‘We were very clear both publicly and privately with the UN from Secretary (of State John) Kerry and Ambassador (to the United Nations Samantha) Power on down that in order for Iran to attend they needed to publicly endorse the Geneva 1 communique,’ State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters in a conference call on Tuesday.
And Ban was confident he had Iran on board, his spokesman said. After speaking with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and other senior Iranian officials, Ban assumed that Iran was now ready to accept the 2012 Geneva communique - thereby removing the main obstacle to its attending Geneva-2.
UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said Zarif and other Iranian officials told Ban that ‘Iran understood and supported the basis and goal of the conference, including the Geneva communique.’
But after Ban’s announcement, Tehran disagreed. According to one Iranian source, Zarif never told Ban that Tehran would accept the Geneva communique but used typically vague diplomatic language, ‘which might be the source of the misunderstanding.’
Next Story
