UNESCO: CULTURAL DIVERSITY CONVENTION UPDATE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004528

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
STATE PLS PASS TO USTR BALASSA
GENEVA PLS PASS TO USTR GREENIDGE


E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OTRA AORC SCUL CA FR UNESCO USTR
SUBJECT: UNESCO: CULTURAL DIVERSITY CONVENTION UPDATE

REF: PARIS 04145


1. (U) This is an action request. See para. 13


2. (U) This will be the first of periodic updates on the
current state of play at UNESCO of the draft cultural
diversity convention.


3. (U) The secretariat is preparing its final report that
will accompany the draft convention. We have seen a draft
of the report, and it accurately reflects US formal
objections raised during negotiations. It also reflects the
objections of other countries and notes that Argentina has
withdrawn its objections.


4. (SBU) We have been told that the French, Swiss and
Luxembourg ambassadors separately met with the Director
General to discuss the DG's comments that an attempt must be
made to reach consensus. We are told the Swiss ambassador
informed the DG that Switzerland fully supports the draft
convention, contrary to reports we heard from Geneva that
the Swiss cultural expert went beyond his instructions.


5. (SBU) We also received a report that the French
ambassador told the DG that France was strongly opposed to
reopening the convention as only one country had not joined
the consensus. (Note: Obviously there can be no "consensus"
if one country disagrees). The French ambassador also told
the DG that the US would always have formal objections.
(Note: Our contact in the secretariat indicated that France
is anxious to avoid reopening the convention because it
feels that it had already given too much during the
negotiations.)


6. (U) Embassy Madrid passed on an informal read-out of a
culture ministers' meeting there the weekend of June 11-12.
They report it was celebratory and that 70 participants,
including 45 culture ministers signed a petition urging that
the current text be passed by the General Conference.


7. (U) We heard subsequently that Jaime Nualart Sanchez_ the
Mexican vice minister of culture also attended the meeting.
Sanchez_ is the chair of the UNESCO General Conference fourth
commission which deals with cultural matters and will take
the draft convention under consideration this fall. We are
told Sanchez_ said that he agreed with Canada that formal
debate on the convention should not be reopened but that
there should be intensive informal discussions and
consultations in the corridors.


8. (U) There is a lot of boosterism for the draft convention
at UNESCO. In remarks to a forum on the future of UNESCO,
former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali spoke
enthusiastically about the draft convention and the
reception it had received in Madrid. When asked by a member
of the US Mission what role governments and international
law actually have in promoting cultural diversity, whether
governments should pick the cultural products their citizens
consume and whether this convention contravened UNESCO's
constitutional mandate to promote the free flow of
information, Boutros-Ghali was unable to answer. We have
had positive feedback about the content of the question
from the Lebanese, Japanese and Iranian ambassadors.
(Comment: This may be a fruitful line of discussion as we
reach out to other states.)


9. (SBU) Delegates from friendly EU countries shared a draft
letter with us that was to be sent to Ambassador Oliver by
the Luxembourg ambassador and head of the EU observer
delegation taking issue with a sentence in our final
intervention that stated, "In fact, the trade agenda was so
compelling that we even had to bend UNESCO's long-
established rules to accommodate the participation of the
European Commission, which has competency for trade, not
culture." While cooler heads prevailed and the letter was
not sent, it did not prevent Hans-Heinrich Wrede the German
ambassador and president of the Executive Board from sending
a letter on June 23 that he also copied to the DG and all
national delegations taking us to task for using the word
"bend" to describe the decide to grant the EC "enhanced"
observer status.


10. (SBU) During a visit to Portugal June 16-19 with other
UNESCO ambassadors, Ambassador Oliver was asked numerous
times what the US plans to do next. (Comment: We interpret
this to reflect anxiety among certain delegations that the
US was pushed too far during the negotiations.) Most who
spoke with the Ambassador asked to be briefed as soon as the
US settles on what steps to take next.


11. (SBU) The Senegalese deputy told the DCM that Dakar
would be open to our entreaties about fixing the convention
but warned that just asking for the convention to be killed
would not work. We had to have solid suggestions. He also
mentioned that the Francophonie gives a lot of money to
Senegal for film production but there is no distribution
mechanism so the films seldom come to market. When asked
what Senegal had gained from the convention, he answered,
"nothing."


12. (SBU) In a separate conversation, the Beninese deputy
told the DCM that the hostility to the US during the
negotiations was a way to punish the US for its 19-year
absence from UNESCO. (Note: This is the first time we have
heard this.) He also emphasized that support for changing
the convention has to come from capitals and that the USG
has to make strong demarches. He also expressed disgust
that the Francophonie and France had taken Francophone
Africa's support for granted, implying that the US should
not write off Francophone countries.


13. (U) Action requested: Please provide instructions and
talking points for engagement with other delegations and
UNESCO's secretariat.

OLIVER