Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05PARIS1959
2005-03-24 10:57:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Paris
Cable title:  

FRENCH RESPONSE ON ISRAEL'S MEMBERSHIP IN GROUPS

Tags:  AORC ELAB KIPR IS FR WIPO ILO 
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 02 PARIS 001959 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/08/2006
TAGS: AORC ELAB KIPR IS FR WIPO ILO
SUBJECT: FRENCH RESPONSE ON ISRAEL'S MEMBERSHIP IN GROUPS
AT WIPO, ILO, UNEP, UN-HABITAT AND CND

REF: STATE 35846

Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 001959

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/08/2006
TAGS: AORC ELAB KIPR IS FR WIPO ILO
SUBJECT: FRENCH RESPONSE ON ISRAEL'S MEMBERSHIP IN GROUPS
AT WIPO, ILO, UNEP, UN-HABITAT AND CND

REF: STATE 35846

Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: France is resistant to Israel's
participation in political consultation groups in UN bodies
outside New York, believing that there is no automatic right
of participation outside of natural geographic groupings, and
is reluctant to establish such a precedent. (Israel's
"temporary" participation in WEOG in New York did not serve
as a precedent, since it was for electoral, not political
consultation purposes.) While asserting that France is
willing to find pragmatic solutions to address issues of
Israeli participation, the only concrete solution suggested
to us by MFA officials, was for Israel to participate in a
"group of one." END SUMMARY.


2. (C) Poloff met March 4 with MFA IO DAS-equivalent
Jean-Pierre Lacroix and on March 21 with MFA desk officer
Didier Gonzalez to discuss Israel's participation in various
UN organizations. Both told us that France believed that
Israel had a right to participate in elections and the
organizational work of UN bodies. However, they said,
participation in political consultation groupings was not
automatic. The situation in each organization was different,
and needed to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

WIPO


2. (C) Lacroix told us that France had suggested that Israel
adopt the "Chinese solution" whereby Israel would participate
in the WIPO as a "group of one." Israel, he said, was not
interested in this solution and wanted to be part of the
WEOG. As a political consultation group, membership in the
WEOG, he continued, was not necessarily a right, but France
was ready to continue to discuss how Israel should
participate in the WIPO.

ILO


3. (C) Repeating that membership was not a right, Lacroix
said that the IMEC group at the ILO was also a political
consultation group.

CND


4. (C) Lacroix said that France had not excluded the
possibility of considering Israel's participation in the WEOG
as Israel was unable to participate in any other regional
group. Lacroix offered no explanation for the apparent
greater flexibility in the French position on the CND.

UNEP AND UN-HABITAT


5. (C) Lacroix said that Israel's participation as part of
the WEOG was not satisfactory, again saying that there was no
automatic right to participate in political consultation
groups.


6. (C) In closing, Lacroix said that France had assured
Israel of its willingness to help to find pragmatic solutions
to address Israel's participation in international
organizations on a case-by-case basis.


7. (C) On March 21, we pursued the issue of France's attitude
to Israeli participation in groups in international
organizations with MFA/IO desk officer Didier Gonzalez, who
reports to Lacroix. Gonzalez offered what he asked us to
treat as an unofficial response. He repeated the French view
that there was no "right" for Israel to participate in
political consultation groups, or even electoral groups
outside Israel's "natural" geographic group. Gonzalez noted
that the arrangement for Israel's participation in the WEOG
in New York was temporary, and subject to conditions. Since
2000, Gonzalez continued, it had been clear that this
arrangement in New York did not create a precedent for other
situations.


8. (C) Gonzalez informed us that if Israel had an effective
right, it was to be able to participate in elections and in
procedures necessary for the work of the organizations of
which Israel was a member. The New York arrangement, he
said, was designed precisely to address this issue. There
was no reason, according to Gonzalez, for that arrangement to
be expanded to informal political consultation groups as
Israel's absence did not deprive it of any "right."


9. (C) In response to our pressing for French solutions,
Gonzalez told us that France's policy was to maintain the
existing situation as a matter of principle. Like Lacroix,
Gonzalez suggested that the Chinese "group of one" solution
appeared to offer a satisfactory solution, adding that he did
not understand why Israel rejected this formula. Gonzalez
closed by reiterating that the issue needed to be addressed
on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the
circumstances of each situation.


10. COMMENT: The responses of Lacroix and Gonzalez were
consistent with previously-expressed French opposition to
Israeli participation in WEOG groupings outside New York and
reflect a desire to avoid creating a precedent. We note that
despite conciliatory expressions of willingness to search for
solutions, the MFA officials offered no specifics beyond the
"group of one" formula. END COMMENT.
Leach