Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
03BRUSSELS4424
2003-09-16 10:12:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Brussels
Cable title:  

EC ON UN: A COMMITMENT TO "MILITANT

Tags:  PREL UNGA UN EUN USEU BRUSSELS 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 004424 

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/ERA, IO/UNP

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/15/2013
TAGS: PREL UNGA UN EUN USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: EC ON UN: A COMMITMENT TO "MILITANT
MULTILATERALISM"

REF: A. A) BRUSSELS 4143


B. B) BRUSSELS 3263

C. C) BRUSSELS 3210

Classified By: USEU POLOFF TODD HUIZINGA, FOR REASONS 1.5 (B) AND (D)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 004424

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/ERA, IO/UNP

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/15/2013
TAGS: PREL UNGA UN EUN USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: EC ON UN: A COMMITMENT TO "MILITANT
MULTILATERALISM"

REF: A. A) BRUSSELS 4143


B. B) BRUSSELS 3263

C. C) BRUSSELS 3210

Classified By: USEU POLOFF TODD HUIZINGA, FOR REASONS 1.5 (B) AND (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY: On September 10, the EC issued a policy
paper on the "European Union and the United Nations: The
Choice of Multilateralism." The paper is meant to "catalyze"
debate within the EU, and to dovetail with the European
Security Strategy (reftels) now being developed. Full of
genuflection to "global governance" and projects such as the
International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Kyoto Protocol,
the EC paper advocates what it terms "militant
multilateralism." EC officials confirm that one of the
Commission's ultimate, but long-term, objectives is to become
a full, voting member of all UN bodies that handle issues
over which the Commission has jurisdiction within the EU. We
see little new in the paper that would have immediate effect
on U.S. interests, although it confirms European support for
a concept of multilateralism that could ultimately be a
hindrance to the pursuit of U.S. foreign-policy interests if
the UN system fails to act. END SUMMARY.

--------------
MULTILATERALISM IS THE KEY
--------------


2. (U) On September 12, Poloff met with three officials from
the European Commission's External Relations
Directorate-General, Office of UN Affairs: Willy Kempel,
Klas Nyman and Thomas Huyghebaert, to discuss the
Commission's Policy Paper, or "Communication." These
officials affirmed that the purpose of the paper was twofold:
not only to enhance the EU's role in the United Nations, but
also to strengthen the UN and thereby the "multilateral
system." They pointed to passages to that effect from the
paper's introduction: "The European Union's commitment to
multilateralism is a defining principle of its external
policy.... The EU has a clear interest in supporting the
continuous evolution and improvement of the tools of global
governance.... Europe's attachment to multilateralism - and
to the United Nations, as the pivot of the multilateral
system - will help determine whether, and how, the
institutional architecture (of multilateralism)...can

continue to serve as the bedrock of the international
system.... An active commitment to an effective
multilateralism means...promoting a forward-looking agenda
that is not limited to a narrow defense of national
interests."

--------------
PAPER REFLECTS EU CONSENSUS
--------------


3. (C) Although the prerogative of formulating the EU's
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) lies with the
member states and the Council -- not with the Commission --
our interlocutors predicted that the member states would not
criticize the Commission for overstepping the bounds of its
authority in this paper. The ideas expressed, they said,
reflect a widely held consensus in the EU on the importance
of the UN, the multilateralist approach, and of the EU's role
in strengthening multilateral institutions. They said that
member states had not been consulted during the more than
year-long process of drafting the paper, but added that, by
definition, a Commission Communication is an internal
Commission paper. Member states, they said, are never
consulted during the drafting of a communication.

--------------
PAPER MEANT TO SPARK DEBATE...
--------------


4. (C) The ideas in the paper are meant to stimulate debate,
not to be the final word, according to our Commission
interlocutors. Now that the communication has been released,
they said, the Commission wants the member states and the
European Parliament to bring their views into the mix. Our
interlocutors said various EU working groups (which are made
up of member-state and Commission officials and meet monthly
to provide input on foreign-policy issues) would discuss the
paper and provide input in the period from October to
December. Then, they said, EU Foreign Ministers or heads of
government were expected to release formal conclusions at the
end of the Italian EU presidency in December.

--------------
AND FEED INTO ESS PROCESS
--------------


5. (C) Our interlocutors added that the paper is also meant
to support the European Security Strategy (ESS),which is
currently being drafted and may be approved at the EU Summit
capping the Italian EU Presidency in December. They noted
that one of the three strategic objectives of the ESS is
"building an international order based on effective
multilateralism." This policy paper, they said, contains the
Commission's thoughts on how to build that order.

--------------
GOOD OR BAD NEWS FOR U.S.?
--------------


6. (C) Some of the language in the paper gives rise to
concern regarding its possible ramifications for U.S.
interests in the UN. The promotion of the Kyoto Protocol and
the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC),for
example, are highlighted as examples of important EU
accomplishments in the multilateral system, and the paper
claims to aim at adoption of a "militant multilateral poise"
for the EU. The paper states that "the role of the UN and in
particular the UNSC as a final arbiter on the consequences of
non-compliance as foreseen in multilateral regimes - needs to
be effectively strengthened." In this sense, the Commission
paper is somewhat in conflict with the ESS drafted by
Solana's staff in the Council. The latter document suggests
there may be times when action is needed when the UN fails to
face up to a problem. The Commission's document, which is
replete with loosely defined terms such as "global
governance," implies a greater commitment to action only
through the UN system -- and may define more correctly the
prevailing view among EU member states.


7. (C) Our contacts asserted that the paper should be good
news for the U.S. They said that the paper aimed at: (1) an
effective, efficient UN, which would be good for all of the
UN's members; (2) a unified EU voice in the UN, which would
make the EU a more reliable and efficient partner of the
U.S.; and (3) early and transparent coordination with the
EU's partners in the UN (above all, with the U.S., they said)
on key issues. They said that, in order for the strategy to
work, the EU would have to be zealous at getting U.S. ideas
early on and bringing them into EU deliberations.

--------------
ADDITIONALITY LONG-TERM EC GOAL
--------------


8. (C) The paper also refers to the desirability of pursuing
full EC membership in UN-system agencies dealing with areas
for which the EC has responsibilities within the EU (such as
the FAO and the Codex Alimentarius, in which the EC,
respectively, has or soon will have full membership). Our
contacts responded that "the long-term objective" was to
achieve full voting membership for the Commission in all such
UN agencies, apart from the question of whether EU member
states would also retain voting membership in the same
agencies. They hastened to add, however, that additional
voting rights for the Commission were not a principal
near-term objective of Commission UN policy.


9. (C) COMMENT: We do not expect this policy paper to have
much effect in the near term. The ideas and recommendations
in the paper reflect a well-known consensus within the EU on
the importance of the UN and the multilateral approach, and
the desire within the EU to strengthen the EU's role in the
UN. Member-state views on the specifics of the paper are not
yet clear, but we suspect it will receive broad support.
What the paper illustrates is that an important EU
institution, the European Commission, is committed to a
multilateralist approach that often tends to assert UN
primacy over "narrow" national interests or unilateral (read
"U.S.") actions. Also, the Communication's timing to
coincide with the EU debate on the ESS may bolster the aspect
of the ESS that, while coming to an assessment of global
security threats similar to that of the USG and stressing the
importance of the transatlantic alliance, pays homage to a
concept of "international order based on...multilateralism"
that many in the EU have interpreted as an effort to broaden
and strengthen binding international agreements, such as
Kyoto and the ICC. The EC desire to enhance its status in
certain UN organizations is one we need to follow closely.
There may be organizations where EC funding is crucial to
achieving our objectives (UNHCR comes to mind) in which a
status above simple observer might be in our interest, but in
other organizations a stronger EC role would be inappropriate
-- and even harm our ability to work bilaterally with one or
more EU member states to achieve our objectives. END
COMMENT.

FOSTER