EU ON UNGA PRIORITIES, ATTENDEES

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 003190 SIPDIS IO/UNP (NARANJO) E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/22/2014 TAGS: PREL ECON PHUM KDEM AORC KSEP OVIP OTRA UN UNGA EUN USEU BRUSSELS SUBJECT: EU ON UNGA PRIORITIES, ATTENDEES REF: A. STATE 152009 ¶B. STATE 132748 Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Kyle Scott for reasons 1.4 (b/d). ¶1. (C) Summary: EU officials welcomed early consultation on UNGA priorities and highlighted shared interest in combating human trafficking and reducing the number of Middle East resolutions -- although they underscored several times that this would be best achieved by resolving the underlying regional crisis. The EU is unlikely to agree on a common approach on human cloning, leaving delegations to follow national policies; the same will probably apply to any discussion of UN Security Council reform. Neither the Council nor the Commission has decided who will attend the UNGA but will let us know when their delegations are set, probably in early September. End Summary. ¶2. (C) We met July 19 with Jim Cloos, Council Secretariat Director for Transatlantic Relations, the United Nations, and Human Rights, to discuss ref A and B demarches on UNGA preparations. Cloos was joined by Council UN experts Paulo Oliveira and Morten Knudsen as well as Transatlantic Relations administrator Margarita Comamala. Cloos thanked us for providing our points and said the EU looked forward to further discussion in New York. He noted that the UNGA would also include important political issues -- particularly the Middle East but also elements of Iraq policy, terrorism, and crisis management -- which, although not part of the formal UNGA agenda, the EU would want to discuss on the margins. Asked for clarification on crisis management, Cloos said that this meant peacekeeping rather than humanitarian issues -- the EU wanted to work with the UN on coordinating operations in Congo as well as response to the Darfur crisis in Sudan, and sought to move beyond case-by-case decisions to make coordination "systemic." -------------- -------------- Advancing Economic Freedom; Trafficking in Persons -------------- -------------- ¶3. (C) Regarding the specific priorities listed in the U.S. nonpaper, the EU had no substantive comment on economic development and our proposed focus on emphasizing in UN resolutions the need for improved investment conditions. On trafficking, Oliveira thought the U.S. and EU could probably work together given our broad areas of agreement. We noted that the U.S. has had problems with the Dutch on trafficking, although this was based on differences with regard to prostitution laws rather than the involvement of minors. Cloos agreed, saying that the Dutch delegation had been firm on the need to implement UN protocols, including those relating to the age of consent. -------------- Hesitation on Democracy Caucus -------------- ¶4. (C) The EU responded cautiously to our points on the proposed Democracy Caucus. Asked for more detail about U.S. ideas, we explained that we envisioned a broad-based approach to support common ideas and to encourage more effective efforts -- from a greater number of countries -- on human rights. It should not always be the Cubans pushing human rights resolutions, we remarked. Cloos replied that the EU was hesitant about creating new groupings; use of the term "caucus" -- which was even more definitive than a "group" -- would be problematic for the EU. He said that this was a purely institutional issue, however -- there was no difficulty with the concept's substance. His second concern was about how membership would be determined, pointing to the liberal criteria applied to invitations for participation in the Community of Democracies. Who would say which countries qualified as members of such a caucus at the UN? The important thing for the EU, Cloos continued, was working for "effective multilateralism," which he described as a "worthy and important objective." -------------- EU Still Divided on Human Cloning Ban -------------- ¶5. (C) Noting continued U.S. support for a ban on all human cloning, we asked what effect the apparent lack of EU consensus would have on the European position on this issue. Cloos said he did not know how internal EU disagreements would play out; no one expected the issue to be settled, and he thought that member states would probably end up following their own policies at the UN. -------------- -------------- Middle East Resolutions Require Political Solution -------------- -------------- ¶6. (C) Cloos said that the EU was looking into how to reduce the number of Middle East-related resolutions while retaining their substance. He pointedly noted that resolving the Arab-Israeli crisis would put an end to the problem but acknowledged the difficulties involved. According to Oliveira, the number of Middle East-related resolutions had been reduced in at least the last two UNGAs relative to previous sessions. He said that the point in the EU's UNGA priority paper stressing the need for UNGA revitalization tied into U.S. efforts to reduce the number of resolutions dealing with the Middle East. The EU agreed with the U.S. on the need to cut back, he said, but re-emphasized Cloos' point that the issue was linked to the situation on the ground -- easing regional tensions would, he said, result in fewer UN resolutions. Reviewing more specific elements of our points, Oliveira questioned the proposal to abolish organizations the U.S. considers biased against Israel, noting that some of the organizations listed did useful work. On the proposed anti-Semitism resolution, Cloos said that the EU was willing to promote a general resolution on religious intolerance provided it was "balanced" but did not want a separate resolution dealing solely with anti-Semitism. -------------- EU Priorities Paper -------------- ¶7. (C) Oliveira reviewed key points in the EU's paper, which he said presented the EU's major objectives within the overall UN framework. Cloos, pointing to the paper's reference to EU interest in encouraging universal participation in the International Criminal Court, said that EU found "worrisome" Congress' push to strengthen sanctions against Rome Treaty signatories who had not signed Article 98 agreements with the U.S. Oliveira thought the U.S. and EU were in agreement on the EU goal of reforming UN staff recruitment and assignment of posts. He also pointed to the final point, in which the EU pledged to "support appropriate improvements in security for the UN, including the allocation of the necessary resources," as another area where the U.S. and EU could work together. Asked whether this meant increased budgets, Cloos and Oliveira replied that the idea was to reallocate resources within the current budget rather than increasing the total. Noting the reference to UN reform in the EU's paper, we asked if there was an EU position on UNSC reform. Cloos said that he could not discuss this with third countries due to internal EU disagreement and the position of "one country" in particular. Given the lack of EU consensus, this -- like human cloning -- remains an issue for national governments. -------------- UNGA Attendees TBD -------------- ¶8. (U) We asked our Council contacts as well as Kristin de Peyron of the Commission's UN office for information about likely UNGA attendees (ref B). Both told us that European participants would not be determined until after the August break.