Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06PARIS1007
2006-02-16 15:49:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Paris
Cable title:  

FOLLOW-UP ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TUNIS AGENDA

Tags:  KPAO ECPS ETRD ECON EINT ETTC UNESCO 
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.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 001007 

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KPAO ECPS ETRD ECON EINT ETTC UNESCO
SUBJECT: FOLLOW-UP ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TUNIS AGENDA
FOR UNESCO

REF: PARIS 431

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 001007

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KPAO ECPS ETRD ECON EINT ETTC UNESCO
SUBJECT: FOLLOW-UP ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TUNIS AGENDA
FOR UNESCO

REF: PARIS 431


1. (SBU) SUMMARY: On February 2, 2006 the UNESCO Director
General (DG),Koichiro Matsuura, and Assistant Director
General (ADG) for Communication and Information, Khan, held
an information session for UNESCO's permanent delegations to
outline the implications for UNESCO of the World Information
Summit on the Information Society's (WSIS) Tunis Agenda.
UNESCO's strategy at WSIS featured four key principles: 1)
Freedom of expression, 2) Universal access to information
and knowledge, 3) Respect for cultural and linguistic
diversity, 4) Quality education for all. According to the
DG, UNESCO's delegation to Tunis clarified which action
lines it would work on, distanced itself from the Internet
governance debate, did not rule out the creation of new
normative instruments, and reiterated its commitment to
private sector partnerships. END SUMMARY.

--------------
IMPLICATIONS OF THE TUNIS AGENDA FOR UNESCO
--------------


2. (SBU) The Tunis Agenda designates UNESCO as a
moderator/facilitator for 7 Action Lines: 1) Access to
information and knowledge, 2)E-learning, 3)E-science, 4)
Cultural diversity and identity, linguistic diversity and
local content, 5) Media, 6) Ethical dimensions of
Information Society, 7) International and regional
cooperation. The DG stressed that UNESCO expects to actively
participate along with ITU and UNDP in the overall
coordination of multi-stakeholder implementation of the WSIS
outcomes.

--------------
INTERNET GOVERNANCE
--------------


3. (SBU) UNESCO will participate in the Internet Governance
Forum (IGF) as established by the Tunis Agenda. Any
preference that UNESCO had for the location of the IGF
Secretariat was not discussed. The Brazilian Ambassador

SIPDIS
asked how "enhanced cooperation," as mentioned in the Tunis
Agenda, would be addressed, noting that the language was
deliberately imprecise. The DG stated that UNESCO would
play a role in identifying what was meant by enhanced
cooperation, so that all parties are involved. (COMMENT:

He did not offer specifics. END COMMENT.) He also affirmed
that UNESCO would be engaged in three aspects of Internet
governance: 1) Openness, 2) Linguistic diversity, 3) Access
(meaning interoperability).

--------------
CALL FOR INSTRUMENTS
--------------


4. (SBU) The Japanese DCM asked if the DG saw scope for
normative instruments in the area of Internet governance.
The DG responded that at the moment he does not envisage any
normative instruments in the Communication and Information
sector, but UNESCO's important mission is to formulate
normative instruments in key areas. If there is further
need for instruments in Communication and Information, he
added, UNESCO should not shy away. ADG Khan noted that the
IGF could advance areas of concern with member state
support. The Communication and Information sector did not,
he said, need normative instruments today, but since
technology was changing so fast, he could not say that
UNESCO would not consider them in the future. (COMMENT:
World Press Freedom Committee Representative Rony Koven's
reaction to this comment was, "We'll worry about the future
when we get there. The main thing is that he sees no need
for instruments now." Koven is a thirty-year advocate of
media freedom at UNESCO, an active WSIS stakeholder, and
seasoned observer of the UNESCO scene, who will participate
as a stakeholder in the Internet Governance Forum. END
COMMENT.)

--------------
UNESCO'S ROLE INADEQUATE?
--------------


5. (SBU) Delegates from Brazil, India, and Japan questioned
whether UNESCO had been given its "due" role in the process.
The Indian Ambassador stated that, according to the Indian
delegate at WSIS, UNESCO was not allowed to play the role it
wanted to have because of "certain key delegations."
(COMMENT: Is this the same Indian Delegate to WSIS that the
USG worked well with? We wonder if the Indian Ambassador is
articulating her own version of WSIS events here. END
COMMENT.) This echoed concerns that UNESCO ambassadors,
including the Indian Ambassador, raised with Ambassador
Gross on January 18, 2006 (reftel). The DG responded that
while he shared this concern, it was useless to complain.
UNESCO, he stated, had wanted to represent member states in
the WSIS process and its only ambition was to fulfill its
mandate.

--------------
CRITICISM OF PUBLIC SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS
--------------


6. (SBU) The Indian Ambassador criticized UNESCO for
signing a software agreement with Microsoft, stating that
such an agreement had resulted in UNESCO abandoning efforts
to develop open-source software. (COMMENT: It is not clear
whether the Indian Ambassador is motivated by anti-
globalization ideals, as she might like to suggest, or
national interest, though we suspect the latter. The UNESCO
open-source software project "Enrich" is being developed, in
large part, by Indian software engineers. END COMMENT.)
ADG Khan defended this partnership by stating that
developing software is vital for capacity building, and
added that UNESCO continues to work on open-source software.
The Tunis Agenda, he reminded the audience, calls for
private sector partnerships in this area, and UNESCO plans
to increase them. The DG stated that UNESCO must maintain
momentum in building partnerships with the private sector in
areas covered by WSIS. The agreement with Microsoft does
not mean that UNESCO will stop pursuing the idea of free and
open software.


7. (SBU) COMMENT: While it is disturbing that the DG
stated that the Communication and Information sector "should
not shy away" from new instruments, we note that some
Communication and Information junkies at UNESCO find little
evidence that this will happen in the next biennium. The
Mission will remain vigilant in its efforts to promote media
freedom and Internet status quo at UNESCO. END COMMENT.
Oliver