C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 004323

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/07/2015
TAGS: KDEM PREL ECON EAID PINR XG XF EUN USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: EU, OTHERS FRUSTRATED WITH IRAN HUMAN RIGHTS
DIALOGUES

CLASSIFIED BY USEU POL MINCOUNS LEE LITZENBERGER, FOR REASONS
1.4 (B) AND (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY EU, Swiss, and Australian participants took
the lead at a Berne Process meeting on Iran on November 29 in
Brussels, agreeing that Iran was stonewalling their bilateral
human rights dialogues, but Norway was optimistic that its
recent exchange might yield an invitation to Iran for further
discussion on human rights issues. Suggested strategies for
2006 included continued Western public and government
pressure on Tehran, responses such as joint and collective
statements to human rights abuses, coordinated action in
international organizations, and outreach to non-aligned
countries to avoid no-action motions in the UN. All agreed
that while sanctions were becoming a an increasingly
realistic option, third country "spoilers" -- like China --
could derail Western efforts by stepping in with political
and economic support. END SUMMARY

--------------
EU: Frustrated But Trying
--------------


2. (C) On November 29, the Swiss mission in Brussels hosted
a dinner on the Berne Process on Iran. Participants included
representatives from Australia, Finland, Norway, Canada, the
U.S., and the EU -- including the current UK presidency, the
incoming Austrian presidency, and EU Commission members.
They discussed the state of their bilateral human rights
dialogues with Iran and brainstormed next steps. The UK EU
presidency representative, Alexandra Hall Hall, said the EU's
human rights dialogue with Iran has been stalled for 18
months, but the EU was funding the UNDP and other
international organizations that are engaging civil society
in Iran.


3. (C) Hall said Ireland in June 2004 was the last EU
presidency to hold a human rights dialogue with Iran. The
next presidency-- the Netherlands --after reviewing the

EU-Iran human rights dialogue, recommended that Brussels
needed to register its displeasure with Tehran and identify
concrete areas for progress. During Luxembourg's presidency
in the first half of 2005, EU troika representatives visited
Iran in April and pushed for a resumption of the dialogue;
they received some impractical suggestions and a polished
response designed to stonewall the EU. The UK presidency has
since pushed for dates to meet with Iran, but to no avail.


4. (C) Nevertheless, Hall said a human rights dialogue was
still valuable because it was a way to register concerns; it
was worth pursuing if both sides were committed. Hall said
the EU would not give Iran the satisfaction of saying that
"it was the EU that walked away" and emphasized that direct
aid contributions from Western countries should complement,
not replace, human rights dialogues.

--------------
Switzerland: The Ball's in Iran's Court
--------------


5. (C) The Swiss representative, Guillaume Scheurer, said
Switzerland's bilateral human rights dialogue with Iran, held
in Berne in early June, took place in a "constructive
atmosphere" but was short on substance. The Swiss focused on
torture, freedom of expression, corporal punishment --
including juvenile execution -- political prisoners, judicial
reform, and gender issues --including violence against women.
Iran was not prepared to answer any of the questions raised,
but only responded with condemnation of Switzerland's
discrimination against Muslims. The dialogue included a
visit to a center in Basel that focused on issues concerning
violence against women, and concluded in "a positive spirit"
of follow-up and exploring the potential for reform.


6. (C) Following the June dialogue, Switzerland established
a position in the Swiss mission in Tehran focusing
exclusively on human rights issues and projects with Iran's
civil society. Switzerland also drafted a proposal for human
rights cooperation with Iran's Ministry of Justice -- the key
ministry for any substantive progress on human rights,
according to the Swiss representative -- including projects
on judicial reform and violence against women. Calling the
Iranian response to these project proposals a "benchmark" for
Iran's willingness to follow through, the Swiss
representative said there has been no response from Tehran
since the proposal was delivered in early October.

--------------
Australia: Keeping a Foot in the Door
--------------


7. (C) Sarah Storey, the Australian representative, said
Australia has only had one human rights dialogue with Iran,
in December 2002. Since then, Canberra has fruitlessly been
requesting follow-on meetings and has implemented a direct
aid program -- mainly, funding for drug addiction
rehabilitation -- to try to keep a foot in the door. Storey
observed that the new regime in Iran does not appear likely
to be easily influenced by the international community.

--------------
Norway: Potential for Progress
--------------


8. (C) Inger-Marie Bjonness, the Norwegian representative,
said that Iranian Vice Foreign Minister Jalili attended the
November 22 bilateral human rights dialogue in Norway and
expressed concern about democracy and human rights issues in
Iran. She said Jalili invited the Norwegian Foreign Ministry
to visit Iran and suggested that should this happen, it would
be an opportunity for coordinated effort.

--------------
Strategies for 2006: Demarches to Sanctions
--------------


9. (C) The representatives discussed various means to
cooperate on Iran's human rights situation, such as
publicizing demarches and increasing public pressure on Iran,
which the Swiss and the UK both praised as having been
effective in some juvenile execution cases. Other
suggestions included support for Iranian civil society, human
rights activists, and those university professors that have
not yet been replaced with hardline ideologues. Canadian
representative Catherine Boucher said that Ottawa supported
continued UN pressure and obtaining permission for UN human
rights officials to evaluate the situation in Iran on the
basis of international regulations -- "a far better
alternative to journalists."


10. (C) Richard Lee-Smith from the UK Foreign and
Commonwealth Office suggested that the deterioration of the
nuclear track might call further engagement into question,
and suggested sanctions don't seem "so far away" as they
might have two years ago. However, the Austrian
representative pushed for an informed approach to further
steps and cautioned against the threat of "third-country
spoilers" -- like China -- that could derail Western efforts
by stepping in with political and economic support.


11. (C) All agreed, however, on the need to "up the game" as
Iran toughens its stance and consider initial, burden-sharing
measures such as collective statements, joint or aligned
demarches, coordinated action in the UN and other
international organizations, and increasing outreach to
developing countries in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin
America to thwart Iranian attempts to foster voting blocs to
support Iranian-led no-action motions. Scheuer said
Switzerland would be willing to use its human rights officer
in Tehran as a coordinator for future efforts. There was
general agreement hold another round of the Berne Process on
Iran in February or March 2006.

MCKINLEY
.