HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL PRESIDENT DISCUSSES ISRAEL'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 GENEVA 002170

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

IO FOR DAS LAGON, DRL FOR DAS BARKS-RUGGLES

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/03/2016
TAGS: PHUM UNHRC
SUBJECT: HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL PRESIDENT DISCUSSES ISRAEL'S
LACK OF RESPONSE AND PLANS FOR THE COUNCIL

REF: A. GENEVA 2030 B. GENEVA 1954 C. GENEVA 1675 D.
GENEVA 1673

Classified By: PolCouns Velia M. De Pirro. For Reason: E.O. 12958, 1.4
(d)

Summary
--------------


1. (C) In an open and friendly meeting August 31 with DRL
DAS Erica Barks-Ruggles, Mexican Permanent Representative and
Human Rights Council (HRC) President Luis Alfonso de Alba
explained his interactions with the Israeli and Lebanese
missions in the aftermath of three resolutions calling for
investigation into Israeli actions in the Middle East. He
focused attention on Israel's failure to respond to his
overtures. De Alba briefly outlined proposals for managing
the next regular session of the HRC (Sept. 18 - Oct. 6),
calling for more strategic thinking as decisions are made
which will affect the long-term prospects of the Council,
e.g. mandate review, Universal Periodic Review (UPR),and
working methods of the HRC. DAS Barks-Ruggles highlighted
U.S. intentions to remain engaged in the Council and efforts
to build a strong, efficient body. She warned that continued
focus on Israel bashing and lack of proof that the Council
could and would deal with serious human rights situations
elsewhere, would weigh heavily in a U.S. decision on whether
or not to run for election to the Council next year. End
Summary.

Israel at the Human Rights Council
--------------


2. (C) De Alba said he tried to avoid one-sided
anti-Israeli resolutions in the first regular session of the
Council and the two subsequent special sessions (refs). His
efforts failed, however, due to states' unwillingness to
negotiate and Israel's failure to reply to any of his
communications. De Alba lauded, however, the Swiss attempt
to amend the anti-Israel resolution during
the first regular session. He believes that the amendments
opened the way for a visit to the OPT as well as southern
Israel by a group of special rapporteurs, not just Special
Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the
Palestinian Territories Occupied Since 1967 John Dugard, with
whom Israel has an extremely contentious relationship. Faced
by Israel's non-response to his contacts (letters and calls
with the Israeli PermRep in Geneva) as he tried to organize
the rapporteurs' visit, de Alba offered to try to keep Dugard
from taking part in the visit. He never received a response.
Almost simultaneously, the situation in Gaza resulted in a
call by members of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference, (OIC) for a special session to address Israeli
actions there. According to de Alba, the lack of response by
Israel on the resolution from the first special session
hindered his ability to convince the sponsors of the second
special session and the resolution on Lebanon that Israel was
willing to cooperate and should be offered the opportunity to
work with the Council. He has yet to receive a response from
Israel to his efforts
to organize the investigative mission called for in the Gaza
resolution. (This is confusing ) I thought that the Israeli
non-cooperation was on the call by the first special session
for an investigation team, and that the Israeli lack of
response fed into the Second Special Session ) on Lebanon.
I made the change and then realized I could be wrog. But
the sequencing n this otherwise does not make sense to me.)


3. (C) De Alba stressed thatin view of Israel's
unwillingness to cooperate with him and the Council, it was
impossible for him to stop the call for a second special
session when Israel attacked Lebanon in response to
Hezbollah's provocation. De Alba said that it was important
to put pressure on Israel to answer his requests, and noted
that for the credibility of the Council it was important for
the United States and the United Kingdom to support
implementation of all resolutions, even if we opposed them.
De Alba added that he is working with the Lebanese PermRep in
Geneva to arrange for the visit of the investigative mission
to Lebanon mandated by the resolution of the second special
session. He recounted the difficulty in putting together a
mission of highly respected and recognized international
figures, including Lebanon's rejection of Costa Rican jurist
Sonia Picado because Costa Rica's embassy was in Jerusalem

GENEVA 00002170 002 OF 003


not Tel Aviv. (Note: A case of lack of information, since
Costa Rica had moved its embassy to Tel Aviv, a move
applauded in an OIC press release circulated to Geneva
missions September 1). Septel will be sent regarding final
agreement on the membership of the mission.

Improving The Council's Credibility
--------------


4. (C) DAS Barks-Ruggles reiterated the U.S. commitment to
work with the Council in an effort to create an effective
body to promote and protect human rights. She pointed to her
visit to Geneva and the work of the U.S. Mission.
Barks-Ruggles warned, however, that if the Council continued
to focus exclusively on Israel in an unbalanced and unhelpful
way, it would be difficult to make the case that the HRC was
any better than the Commission had been or an entity the
United States should join. Grave human rights situations in
North Korea (DPRK),Burma, and Sudan/Darfur, to name a few,
were being ignored. Barks-Ruggles said the HRC needed to take
up cases like these to prove its credibility. She stressed
that the United States saw condemnatory country resolutions
as a key tool for the Council. While the enticements of
technical assistance, dialogue and cooperation would serve to
get some countries to cooperate with the Council, certain
hardcore violators, such as DPRK and Burma, only focused when
threatened by a condemnatory resolution.


5. (C) Regretting the U.S. absence from the Council, de Alba
said that to ensure that the Council dealt with other
difficult situations countries needed to work together. He
was pessimistic regarding the EU's ability to work
effectively, noting that serious divisions ("they have huge
fights") result in a lowest-common-denominator approach that
weakens them in the Council. The Latin American and
Caribbean Group (GRULAC) is also divided, with Brazil
pressuring Argentina, Uruguay, Peru and Ecuador to follow its
lead. Only Guatemala appears prepared to act independently
and on principle, although Chile remains influential even
though not on the Council and should be approached as well.
Nonetheless, de Alba said he has spoken to High Commissioner
for Human Rights Louise Arbour and British Ambassador Nick
Thorne regarding Sudan/Darfur. (Septel reports on Amb.
Thorne's views.)

Plans for Next Session
--------------


6. (U) De Alba called for a balanced, short and flexible
agenda for the Council, one more coherent than the agenda of
the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). For now, he said it
would be best if resolutions were not presented at the
September session of the Council. The HRC is expected to
deal with over one hundred reports (closer to 190) from the
special procedures -- special rapporteurs, independent
experts, and working groups. Rather than have each dealt
with via a resolution, de Alba proposed either a President's
statement or one omnibus resolution focusing on one action
item or recommendation from each of the reports.
Alternatively, he was also considering bundling reporting on
reports by theme. Barks-Ruggles noted the danger of this
approach in putting all the country-specific rapporteurs
together and urged de Alba to consider review by alphabet )
while arbitrary, it would be seen as fair and help protect
the country-specific rapporteurs. De Alba stressed that any
omnibus statement or bundling of statements would in no way
diminish the standing of the special procedures since each
mandate holder would participate in an hour-long inter-active
dialogue with Council members, observers, and NGO's. (Note:
Septel reporting on September 1 informals expands the
proposal and includes some reactions to it. End note) De
Alba noted that the report of the Sub-Commission on Human
Rights would not be part of this proposal. He admitted that
the Sub-Commission in its just-concluded session had exceeded
its mandate by adopting resolutions that sought to extend its
mandate and commit to actions with budgetary implications.
(Note: Mission Geneva provided de Alba with a copy of the
letter from U.S. Sub-Commission member David Rivkin objecting
to the Sub-Commission's actions. End note.) He added that
the confidential complaints mechanism of the Sub-Commission
(1503's),was not particularly useful in its present form. It
should be taken over by the Council, but a better way of
filtering complaints needed to be developed.


GENEVA 00002170 003 OF 003



7. (U) Although reports from the working groups on mandate
review and Universal Periodic Review (UPR) are included in
the program of work for the next session, de Alba said the
substantive reports and work on them will begin in earnest in
January/February. For UPR, the Mexican government is
proposing the creation of a standing body of experts,
appointed by governments, whose expenses would be covered by
the states, to review states' records and make
recommendations to the plenary. He derided the idea that
states could conduct an honest "peer" review, saying it would
be "protocolary" at best. Barks-Ruggles presented USG,s
suggested structure and noted the problems of including
experts in the review.

Lack of Support and Request for Help
--------------


8. (SBU) De Alba spent time noting the difficulties of
presiding over the newly established Human Rights Council.
He complained that he was not receiving the support he had
expected from foreign delegations in Geneva or from the
Council's Secretariat, which is staffed and supported by the
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Although OHCHR supported the Commission for years, the new
and evolving structures of the Council appear to be more than
the Secretariat could handle. To address this gap, de Alba
has moved to establish a Secretariat for the HRC presidency
to be staffed by diplomats detailed from UN states.
Switzerland has already detailed one officer, previously
assigned to the Swiss Mission in Geneva. De Alba has asked
the Mexican government to do the same. He asked whether the
United States would be willing to either fund a third country
diplomat and/or detail someone to work with him.

Comment
--------------


9. (C) De Alba was in an expansive and talkative mood,
witness his blunt criticism of divisions within the EU and
GRULAC. His admission that he was disappointed by the lack of
support from delegations and OHCHR was also unusual. Both
could, at least in part, be reflections of how much he has
riding on this first year of the Council -- his personal
ambition, higher aspirations in the Secretariat of Foreign
Relations, as well as Mexico's image in the world stage. End
comment.

This cable has been cleared by DRL/DAS Erica Barks-Ruggles.
TICHENOR