ROME GENEVA GROUP:POST WFS5YL AND TERM LIMITS

UNCLAS ROME 003477

SIPDIS

STATE FOR IO/EDA SURA JOHNSON

FROM FODAG

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AORC EAGR FAO
SUBJECT: ROME GENEVA GROUP:POST WFS5YL AND TERM LIMITS

REFTEL: ROME 3214


1. SUMMARY. ROME GENEVA GROUP (MAJOR DONORS) MEMBERS
CHARACTERIZED THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED WORLD FOOD SUMMIT:FIVE
YEARS LATER (WFS5YL) AS NEITHER A SUCCESS NOR A FAILURE.
MEMBERS DISCUSSED WAYS TO REVITALIZE THE WFS5YL FOLLOW-UP
MECHANISM IN ORDER TO AVOID HOLDING ANOTHER SUMMIT-LEVEL
MEETING IN 2006 (THE YEAR ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED FOR HOLDING
THE "MID-TERM REVIEW" OF THE FIRST WORLD FOOD SUMMIT.) EU
MEMBERS OF THE GROUP ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WOULD BE STARTING
CONSULTATIONS ON A TERM LIMIT INITIATIVE SHORTLY. END
SUMMARY.


2. THE ROME-BASED GENEVA GROUP MET JUNE 25, 2002 TO REVIEW
THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED WORLD FOOD SUMMIT: FIVE YEARS LATER
(WFS5YL) AND DISCUSS OTHER GENEVA GROUP BUSINESS.

WFS5YL POST MORTEM - LIVING UP TO (LOW) EXPECTATIONS
-------------- --------------


3. ON BALANCE, GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS FELT THAT THE WFS5YL
WAS "NOT A SUCCESS, BUT NOT A FAILURE." FRANCE FELT THAT
PRESS COVERAGE HAD HELPED FOCUS ATTENTION ON THE ISSUE, BUT
WAS DISAPPOINTED WITH THE NGO/CSO REACTION TO THE SUMMIT
(SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY FELT THEY WERE "NOT LISTENED TO.")
WHILE DIRECTOR GENERAL (DG) DIOUF HAD REPORTEDLY TOLD THE
NGO FORUM THAT "THE ABSENCE OF OECD LEADERS IS AN INDICATION
OF THE LEVEL OF PRIORITY THEY ATTACH TO HUNGER," GENEVA
GROUP MEMBERS AGREED WITH THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE THAT THIS
WAS 1) IRRESPONSIBLE AND 2) NOT TRUE. THE OVERALL LEVEL OF
ATTENDANCE MATCHED THEIR EXPECTATIONS; AND GENEVA GROUP
MEMBERS WERE SATISFIED THAT THEIR GOVERNMENTS HAD BEEN
REPRESENTED AT SUFFICIENTLY SENIOR LEVELS.


4. GERMANY EXPRESSED SATISFACTION THAT THE EVENT DIDN'T
"TAKE ANY STEPS BACK." SWEDEN OPINED THAT THE NEW FOCUS ON
AGRICULTURE AS AN ENGINE OF DEVELOPMENT WAS POSITIVE, BUT
NOTED HIS COUNTRY'S DISAPPOINTMENT THAT PARTICIPATION OF
OTHER UN AGENCIES HAD NOT BEEN AS BROAD AS IT COULD HAVE
BEEN. THE BELGIAN AND SWISS REPRESENTATIVES NOTED THAT
THEIR NATIONAL PRESSES HAD BEEN CRITICAL OF THE SUMMIT FOR
WASTING MONEY (SWITZERLAND) AND FOR NOT HAVING HIGHER-LEVEL
OECD REPRESENTATION (BELGIUM). THE SWISS REPRESENTATIVES
INFORMED THAT GROUP THAT HE WOULD ASK FOR A FULL ACCOUNTING
OF WFS5YL COSTS AT THE SEPTEMBER FINANCE COMMITTEE SESSION.


5. THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE STATED THAT THE WFS5YL HAD ALL
ALONG BEEN A "PERSONAL PROJECT" FOR DIOUF: IT HAD BEEN "NON-
INCLUSIVE" OF MEMBERS AND OF OTHER UN AGENCIES (INCLUDING
UNDP, THE "SCORE-KEEPER FOR THE MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT
GOALS.") HE NOTED IN THIS REGARD THAT THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM
AND THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT HAD
BEEN DENIED PERMISSION TO HOST EVENTS. THE U.K.
REPRESENTATIVE CALLED THE WORLD BANK'S 2002 RURAL
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A "MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT FOCUS ON
AGRICULTURE" AND CONCLUDED THAT AGRICULTURE HAD MOVED UP
"THE AGENDA" BECAUSE OF THE WORLD BANK AND THE UPCOMING
WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WSSD) -- NOT
BECAUSE OF THE FAO.


6. U.S. DEL GAVE A MORE POSITIVE IMPRESSION OF THE SUMMIT,
REFLECTING THE FACT THAT THE UNITED STATES CAME TO THE
WFS5YL WITH NEW INITIATIVES AND A RENEWED FOCUS ON
AGRICULTURE AND WAS THUS ABLE TO STAGE SUCCESSFUL SIDE-
EVENTS AND ENGAGE IN PRODUCTIVE BILATERAL MEETINGS.


7. GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS EXCHANGED VIEWS ON THE SIDE EVENTS
(GENERALLY CONSIDERED POORLY ORGANIZED) AND THE ROUNDTABLES
(GIVEN A "B" GRADE FOR EFFORT). THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER
DIALOGUE WAS NOT CONSIDERED PRODUCTIVE, ALTHOUGH THE U.K.
SPECIFICALLY PRAISED THE U.S. INTERVENTION. FAO'S EFFORTS
ON BEHALF OF AGRICULTURE FOR NEPAD (MUCH OF IT A PLUG FOR
THE FAO'S SPECIAL PROGRAM FOR FOOD SECURITY) WERE
CHARACTERIZED BY THE U.K. AS "OLD-THINKING."

WHITHER THE DIRECTOR GENERAL?
--------------

8. GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS AGREED THAT THE DG'S STANDING HAD
PROBABLY BEEN WEAKENED WITH THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES,
PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE WFS5YL HAD NOT
BEEN ABLE TO GENERATE NEW RESOURCES (ALTHOUGH DONORS HAD
LONG WARNED DIOUF THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE A "PLEDGING
CONFERENCE.") ON G-77 VIEWS OF THE SUMMIT AS A WHOLE, GENEVA
GROUP MEMBERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD HEARD VIEWS RANGING
FROM "WASTE OF TIME" TO "FIASCO" FROM G-77 COLLEAGUES.


9. GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS NOTED THAT THE DG'S USD 100 MILLION
TRUST FUND SEEMED PRETTY MUCH A MORIBUND ISSUE (THE ONLY
COUNTRY OTHER THAN ITALY THAT HAS PLEDGED IS NIGERIA) AND
THAT THE DG IS NOW PUSHING HARD ON CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE
SPECIAL PROGRAM FOR FOOD SECURITY (SPFS). THIS SEEMED
INFELICITOUS TO GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS, PARTICULARLY IN VIEW
OF THE POOR MARKS THAT THE SPFS EARNED IN A RECENTLY
CONCLUDED EVOLUTION.

WFS5YL DECLARATION -- THE ALLIANCE AGAINST HUNGER -- ROLE OF
CFS
-------------- --------------


10. GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS AGREED WITH SWEDEN THAT THE
NEGOTIATIONS OF THE DECLARATION HAD NOT BEEN PARTICULARLY
CONFRONTATIONAL. THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE RECALLED THAT
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES HAD SHOWN NO INTEREST IN INDICATING
THE LEVEL OF RESOURCES THEY THEMSELVES SOUGHT TO DEVOTE TO
AGRICULTURE AND THAT THIS RELUCTANCE HAD FATALLY WEAKENED
THE G-77'S EFFORTS TO HAVE THE DONORS COMMIT TO A SPECIFIC
LEVEL FOR AGRICULTURAL ODA. THE U.S. NOTED ITS RESERVATION
ON THE NEGOTIATION OF VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES ON THE RIGHT TO
FOOD. (COMMENT: WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE UNITED STATES, NO
GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS SPOKE ON OR ALLUDED TO THE RIGHT TO
FOOD DISCUSSIONS. END COMMENT).


11. MEMBERS WERE PLEASED THAT THERE WAS NO NEW STRUCTURE OR
BODY UNDERLYING THE "ALLIANCE AGAINST HUNGER" AND WERE
SATISFIED WITH THE ALLIANCE'S FOCUS ON BRINGING IN THE
PRIVATE SECTOR AND NGO'S. THEY AGREED THAT FAO'S COMMITTEE
ON WORLD FOOD SECURITY (CFS) NEEDED TO BE STRENGTHENED TO
FOLLOW UP ON THE WFS5YL.


12. ITALY LINKED THE NEW ALLIANCE WITH THE OLDER "POLO
ROMANO" IDEA (WHICH SOUGHT TO LINK INSTITUTIONALLY THE THREE
ROME AGENCIES DEALING WITH FOOD AND AGRICULTURE). HE STATED
THAT THE CFS WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO WORK ON THE "SYNERGY
BETWEEN THE AGENCIES." THE U.K. AGREED THAT MORE "OOMPH"
NEEDED TO BE GIVEN TO THE CFS AND NOTED THAT THE CURRENT CFS
"DOESN'T WORK," NOT LEAST OF ALL BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF
REPORTING (PARTICULARLY FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES) ON THE
WORLD FOOD SUMMIT PLAN OF ACTION. THE U.K. NOTED THAT CFS
HAD A NUMBER BUILT-IN ADVANTAGES: IT WAS OPEN TO ALL UN
MEMBERS, IT HAD A STANDING BUREAU: IT COULD BE TURNED INTO A
BODY WHERE THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY MET ONCE A YEAR TO
FOCUS GOOD ATTENTION ON THE ISSUES. EXPANDING THE BUREAU
WAS DISCUSSED (THE BUREAU DOES NOT HAVE REPRESENTATIVES OF
ALL REGIONAL GROUPS) ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS WOULD
CREATE MORE G-77 POSITIONS THAN OECD POSITIONS.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN 2006
--------------

13. MEMBERS RECALLED THAT THE FIRST WORLD FOOD SUMMIT CALLED
FOR A MID-TERM REVIEW IN 2006. GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS SPOKE
WITH CONCERN ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE DG WOULD CALL
FOR A "WORLD FOOD SUMMIT: 10 YEARS LATER" TO COMMEMORATE THE
OCCASION, AND DISCUSSED WAYS TO ENSURE THAT A "REINVIGORATED
CFS" MIGHT FORESTALL SUCH A POSSIBILITY. THE POSSIBILITY OF
WORKING THROUGH THE CFS BUREAU (FRANCE AND THE REPUBLIC OF
KOREA ARE THE OECD MEMBERS ON THE BUREAU FOR THE NEXT TWO
YEARS) WAS RAISED, AS WELL AS WORKING THROUGH INFORMAL
CONTACTS AND REPRESENTATIONAL EVENTS. THE U.K. NOTED THAT
PART OF THE CFS REVITALIZATION WOULD INVOLVE KEEPING CLOSE
CONTACT WITH WHAT WAS HAPPENING AT THE UN IN NEW YORK WITH
THE MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (FAO HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR
FOOD AVAILABILITY -- A SUB-SECTOR OF POVERTY) SO AS "NOT TO
FALL INTO ISOLATION."

EU INITIATIVE ON DG TERM LIMITS
--------------


14. THE U.K. STATED THAT THE EU WAS EXPECTING CLEARANCE
SHORTLY IN ORDER TO INITIATE CONSULTATIONS WITH OTHER GROUPS
ON REINSTATING FAO DIRECTOR GENERAL TERM LIMITS BEFORE THE
SUMMER HOLIDAYS. U.S. (ACTING PERM REP) AND NEW ZEALAND
NOTED THAT THIS WAS AN EXISTING GENEVA GROUP ISSUE AND
REMINDED THE EU REPS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSULTING WITH
OTHER GROUPS BEFORE DELIVERING A "FAIT ACCOMPLI." THE U.K.
TOOK NOTE OF THE COMMENTS. HEILEMAN