MFA GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF U.S. POINTS ON

C O N F I D E N T I A L PARIS 001224

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 1/20/2016
TAGS: PREL SY LE KJUS FR
SUBJECT: MFA GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF U.S. POINTS ON
INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR UNIIIC SUSPECTS

REF: STATE 27125

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


1. (C) Poloff reviewed reftel points on considerations for
an international tribunal for UNIIIC suspects with MFA UN
action officer for Middle East issues Selina Grenet February

23. Throughout the discussion, Grenet stressed GoF support
for an international tribunal, while emphasizing the need to
preserve Lebanese sovereignty throughout the process. In the
GoF view, the UN-GOL agreement should reflect the greatest
possible consensus in Lebanon, and the UN should be given
opportunity to "explore all options" to reach such an accord
by June. At the same time, the GoF would keep pressure on
the Secretariat not to waste time and to meet the June
time-frame. Grenet said the GoF was encouraged by UN Legal
Counsel Nicolas Michel's recent visit to Beirut, and the
timely follow-up visit of a GOL judicial team to New York.
Grenet added that the GoF did not see the need to send P-3
experts from capitals to New York for the time being, though
it would be willing to send experts at a later stage, if
necessary.


2. (C) Commenting specifically on reftel points, Grenet noted
that the GoF shared U.S. cost concerns and that the GoL
should be able to bear a certain level of financial
responsibility, though international support would clearly be
necessary. She agreed that the costly precedents of the ICTY
or ICTR should be avoided, and cautioned that the GOL might
seek to finance the tribunal via the Core Group process.
Grenet offered to discuss the cost issue further with MFA
legal experts, from whom she would seek ideas on "least
costly" scenarios. On other reftel points, Grenet generally
stressed the need to take GOL concerns into consideration.
In the case of Lebanese versus foreign judges, she stressed
that GOL concerns of threats/intimidation were valid, and
suggested that a possible solution might be a majority
Lebanese tribunal giving foreign judges veto authority,
similar to the UN tribunal for Cambodia.


3. (C) On next steps, Grenet described two possible options
for Secretariat activity on the tribunal: 1) giving the
Secretariat until June to conclude the UN-GOL agreement, or

SIPDIS
2)having the Secretariat make an interim report in mid-March
reporting on the progress of its discussions with the GOL and
the likely outlines of a GOL-UN agreement, which in turn
could be affirmed by the UNSC, in the possible form of a
presidential press statement or PRST. Such a UNSC
pronouncement, in Grenet's view, should be sufficiently
general (and not "overly directive") in order to avoid
provoking opposition within Lebanon. Grenet added that
having the Secretariat issue a progress report on the
tribunal in mid-March could reinforce the perception of
continued UNSC momentum on Lebanon, with the expected
issuance of a "purely technical" report by UNIIIC Chief
Brammertz in mid-March likely to disappoint many within
Lebanon. She concluded, though, that the GoF had not taken a
position in support of either option, and would likely
address the prospects for the tribunal, as well as possible
replacements for Brammertz, during a President Chirac-SYG
Annan meeting to take place in Paris February 28.

Please visit Paris' Classified Website at:
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/paris/index.c fm

Stapleton