UNESCO: THE WAY AHEAD

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 PARIS 001344

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS

SENSITIVE

FOR IO/UNESCO

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: SCUL KPAO AORC UNESCO
SUBJECT: UNESCO: THE WAY AHEAD



1. (SBU) My staff and I held an off-site meeting February 14
to review the past two years of our engagement with UNESCO
and to offer suggestions for the path ahead. We all agreed
that we need to achieve tangible results for the USG by the
October 2007 General Conference. That requires a realistic
assessment of the problems and opportunities at UNESCO for
the USG. The following will discuss what we face on the
ground at UNESCO, USG re-engagement for the past two years,
and Mission ideas on three possible scenarios for USG future
engagement at UNESCO.

What We Face on the Ground at UNESCO
--------------


2. (SBU) One problem we face is the misguided idea held by
many in the Secretariat that the way to increase UNESCO's
influence in the international community is ever-more new
initiatives and programs, when there are other agencies
responsible for those issues within the UN system. That
leads to UNESCO's desire to enlarge its role in issues like
sustainable development, climate, health, human rights,
human security, migration, and potentially WSIS issues. It
also means that UNESCO accepts all proposed extra-budgetary
projects, regardless of whether or not they are related to
its priorities, in order to expand its activities without
having to pay for them. The same thing is true for UNESCO
prizes, affiliated institutes, and centers, an increasing
number of which use the UNESCO name without UNESCO financing
or significant oversight. The result has been a
proliferation of unfocused, ineffective, poor quality UNESCO
programs, and the creation of various national institutes
that try to increase their prestige by loosely associating
themselves with UNESCO.


3. (SBU) A second problem within the Secretariat is the
presence of a certain number of long-term staffers who are
clearly anti-American, and who orchestrate such things as
giving UNESCO's Marti prize to Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
Many of these individuals work in the Social and Human
Science Sector, but there are some in the other sectors as
well. Other UNESCO staffers may not be explicitly anti-
American, but they are anti-globalization, anti-free trade,
pro-environmental regulations, pro-international law, and
pro-resource transfer in the name of equity and fairness.
The cultural diversity convention got a great deal of
internal support from these individuals who believe that
UNESCO's normative instruments can help constrain U.S. power
and influence, particularly in the area of trade.


4. (SBU) The USG also has to deal with the multiple agendas
of UNESCO's member states, many of which use UNESCO as a
strategic tool to advance their own national interests
through a combination of extra-budgetary support and
sympathetic members of the staff. Japan and China use it to
enhance their international credentials (a Japanese DG and a
Chinese Chairman of the Executive Board). The UK uses it to
promote its development agenda, particularly in Africa (its
delegation is primarily responsible to the Department for
International Development (DFID). Italy gives large extra-
budgetary contributions for culture, the Nordic countries
for education, and the French for cultural protectionism.
Brazil wants to protect biodiversity, Hungary to promote
ethics, and India to develop a UNESCO convention on
broadcasting. Groups of countries also have their own
agendas, such as the desire of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference (OIC) to use UNESCO to deal with the so-
called cartoon issue. Although much of UNESCO's work is done
at the technical and expert level, it is in fact a highly
political organization, thanks to the activities and
interests of its member states.



5. (SBU) Politics also drives many of the decisions of the
DG. Funds are often allocated to field offices on the basis
of where they are located, frequently before any work plan
has been agreed on. This was true of the 11 countries
chosen for the first phase of the LIFE program, the 23
countries chosen for the teacher-training program, and the
countries chosen for the US-funded endangered movable
objects program. Although the DG tries to be sensitive to
the concerns of the U.S., he is equally sensitive to the
political concerns of other countries and is therefore
reluctant to exert strong leadership or take public stands
that might become controversial. That problem may become
worse as the DG approaches the end of his term and starts to
think about his legacy.

U.S. Re-engagement for the Past two Years
--------------


6. (SBU) When I left DC in March 2004, my primary
instructions were that UNESCO should "do no harm".
Unfortunately, we had to negotiate three normative
instruments during our first two years at UNESCO. Despite
being a young Mission with no on-site lawyer, the bioethics
declaration and the anti-doping convention did no harm. We
also had one major failure, the cultural diversity
convention, partly because it was a top foreign policy goal
for a number of UNESCO's most active member states,
especially the EU led by France, and not a high priority for
the USG.


7. (SBU) Since the USG's re-engagement with UNESCO, the
Mission has also actively promoted our reform agenda. We
have promoted key concepts such as programmatic coherence,
and institutional transparency and accountability with both
the Secretariat and Member States. We've also tried to
persuade Member States that the way to gain influence and
respect is not through adding new initiatives or passing
conventions, but by strengthening the quality of UNESCO's
programs. In addition, we've talked about the need to
identify UNESCO's comparative advantage, and to avoid
unintended consequences that may result from poorly thought-
out programs or controversial initiatives that do not enjoy
broad-based support from member states.


8. (SBU) Despite all the problems and challenges that exist
at UNESCO, there have been some positive results during the
past two years. These include an increased focus on long
term sustainable results through capacity building, a mother-
child focused program in literacy, cultural preservation in
endangered movable objects, and leadership in the expansion
of the tsunami warning system. It also includes holding the
line on a zero nominal budget, positive input on the next
medium term strategy, preventing normative instruments in
cross-border education guidelines and traditional games and
sports, and establishing an appropriate framework for
UNESCO's ongoing involvement in the WSIS implementation. In
addition, the USG has played a key role in enabling UNESCO
to expand its programmatic work in the Middle East by
brokering consensus resolutions on education and culture for
Jerusalem and the Occupied Territories.


9. (SBU) Additional positive results include the USG's
election to the World Heritage Committee, its reelection to
the IOC Inter-governmental Council, and its election as the
Vice-President of the Executive Board. Also, more American
citizens are being hired, with Peter Smith and Jim
Kukilowski in key full-time positions. USG experts involved
with UNESCO programs include Midge Decter on COMEST, Benita
Somerfield on the Literacy Advisory Board, John Moore on the
IBSP board, and Kathie Olsen on the Science Review panel.
Marta de la Torre has been hired as a consultant to help
provide oversight to the endangered movable objects program.


10. (SBU) A more detailed report has been prepared on the
first two years of the USG's re-engagement with UNESCO.
Additional papers are being prepared on other issues
involving the USG and UNESCO. These documents should provide
the background for strategic decisions that should be made
as soon as possible regarding the USG's priorities for the
next two years.

Possible Scenarios for Future U.S. Engagement at UNESCO
-------------- --------------


11. (SBU) One option might be to build on what has been
accomplished since the USG's return to UNESCO. That would
include a continued focus on damage control, with a
particular emphasis on trying to prevent the development of
new instruments, continued attempts to promote
administrative and management reform, and continued efforts
to strengthen selected programs, focusing on education,
particularly literacy, and the opportunities that may come
from the review of the two science sectors. Even with the
Mission's limited resources, we could have some successes,
though they would probably not significantly advance the
Secretary's goal of transformational diplomacy.

SIPDIS


12. (SBU) Another option might be to expand UNESCO's efforts
in education in the Arab world, particularly in the BMENA
countries. For example, UNESCO's current program in teacher
training is entirely directed to sub-Saharan African
countries. Yet not only is teacher training critical for
post-conflict countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, it could
also be the mechanism to deal with the resistance in the
Arab world to efforts to change curriculum. Given the
sensitivities in the Arab world on curriculum, working
through UNESCO might be more effective then expanding
existing bi-lateral programs in this area, especially since
we have a supportive ADG for Education. The same argument
could be made for programs that promote gender parity. In
order to be successful with this option, the Mission would
have to work closely with both the BMENA and MEPI
initiatives.


13. (SBU) A bolder and more aggressive approach to UNESCO
should also be considered, which would be to use UNESCO as a
vehicle to explicitly promote a pro-democracy agenda. This
strategy would tie together democracy and development,
similar to what has been done with the President's
Millennium Challenge initiative. We hear little about
democracy at UNESCO, but much about development. By linking
the two ideas, we could create a cross-cutting initiative
that would encompass all sectors. It would involve reviving
the education for democracy section in the education Sector,
with a particular focus on curriculum, and revamping the
democracy section in SHS, assuming that the Sector still
exists after the Science review and that it has new
leadership. It would also include incorporating the basic
democracy-building work of communications and information
into this democratic framework with an emphasis on programs
like the International Program for the Development of
Communication (IPDC). Perhaps there could also be a focus on
democracy in some of the culture sector's programs that
promote inter-cultural dialogue. By stressing the positive
role that democracy plays in promoting development, we might
be able to change the discussion at UNESCO away from its
current anti-globalization, anti-free market, and implicitly
anti-American rhetoric. It could appeal to the self-
interests of many of UNESCO's member states, such as the
G77, and take advantage of UNESCO's leadership role in
education which is fundamental to building strong
democracies and strong economies.


14. (SBU) If there is support for this idea, we would
propose the following actions:

a. Use the weeks leading up to the Executive Board to shape
this idea and find allies

b. Establish a Community of Democracies group at UNESCO by
identifying an enthusiastic member of that group who could
convene a meeting

c. Introduce a resolution at the Ex Board calling for a
cross-cutting initiative in democracy and development,
similar to what was done last year in capacity building

d. Work in the coming months to give this initiative a
central place in the next medium-term strategy

e. Develop reinforcing projects, such as a major UNESCO
conference on Education, Democracy, and Development, or
making the International Centre for Democratic transition in
Budapest into a UNESCO Institute

f. Work closely with the National Commission to take
advantage of the expertise and contacts of many of the
Commissioners


15. (SBU) It is important that this not be seen as a
strictly U.S. initiative, and we would thus propose to use
the Community of Democracies (CoD) as a vehicle, possibly
even asking the Malian Ambassador to take the lead since
Mali has just hosted the 2006 Ministerial meeting for the
CoD. Some of the other active CoD participants with strong
Ambassadors at UNESCO include Hungary, Poland, and
Lithuania. India is a very strong presence at UNESCO and
might be willing to play a role, particularly after the
President's trip. Although a CoD group at UNESCO could play
a critical role in helping to advance a USG pro-democracy
agenda, it should not be seen as a substitute for active USG
leadership in this area.


16. (SBU) Though we recognize that UNESCO is still a
somewhat dysfunctional organization, and that there is
always the possibility of serious unexpected problems, we
think that now would be a good time to consider a more
robust USG engagement at UNESCO. There is a lot of concern
at UNESCO, both in the Secretariat and among member states,
that USG enthusiasm and support for UNESCO may have been
hurt by the unpleasant atmosphere resulting from the
negotiation of the cultural diversity convention, and by the
more recent Marti prize. Therefore, there seems to be a
desire to find ways to work constructively with the U.S.
Although one never knows how serious the expressions of good
will are, there is no reason not to test the depth of the
many expressions of support that we have received over the
past several months. Moreover, although the DG may not be
as strong and supportive as we would like, we do have a very
good relationship with him, and we do not know who will
replace him in less than four years. Finally, if we are
going to want to do anything serious at UNESCO in the
foreseeable future, it must be done now so that we can get
our ideas and initiatives incorporated into the next medium
term strategy.


17. (SBU) If it is decided that the USG should try to use
UNESCO as a strategic tool for transformational diplomacy,
it will require a close working relationship between Paris
and Washington, as well as additional resources,
particularly in the area of targeted extra-budgetary
funding. Possible USG secondments to UNESCO staff should
also be considered, along with consultants and interns. A
pro-democracy agenda would also imply a more aggressive
reaction to UNESCO statements, publications, and conferences
that undermine democratic principles. A more active and
effective UNESCO is only a positive achievement if the
organization promotes programs and ideas that can be
supported by the USG. It is said that the best defense is a
good offense. If we do not promote our ideas, values, and
principles more aggressively at UNESCO, we will continue to
find ourselves playing defense most of the time, and sooner
or later, USG patience with UNESCO will end.


18. (SBU) We do understand that there are serious budget
issues in the U.S., and that there are other compelling
priorities that must be dealt with by the USG. If it is not
possible to strengthen USG engagement at UNESCO at this
time, we will continue to do as much as we can to advance
USG strategic interests at UNESCO. If that is the case,
however, we should be realistic about what we can and cannot
achieve at this organization.
Oliver