UNESCO AMBASSADORS ON POST WSIS SCENE

UNCLAS PARIS 000431

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KPAO ECPS ETRD ECON EINT ETTC UNESCO
SUBJECT: UNESCO AMBASSADORS ON POST WSIS SCENE

1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Ambassador David A. Gross, U.S.
Coordinator for International Communication and
Information Policy and U.S. Ambassador to UNESCO Louise

V. Oliver met with a select group of UNESCO
Ambassadors, including members of the Information for

All Programme Council, to exchange views on Internet
Governance and WSIS outcomes at Ambassador Oliver's
residence on January 19, 2006. In a discussion of what
UNESCO's role might be, UNESCO Ambassadors expressed
frustration at the low level of acceptance for UNESCO
initiatives within the UN family and the difficulty of
asserting UNESCO's core competencies within the UN
system. With regard to WSIS, they also asked about the
image of UNESCO at the Tunis Summit, the EU position on
the process towards "enhanced cooperation", the Athens
meeting of the Internet Governance Forum, and the
disappointing treatment of journalists and NGO leaders
by the Tunisian government in November 2005. The
Belgian Ambassador to UNESCO, Philippe Kridelka, noted
the importance of standard setting at UNESCO in order
to "rein in globalization" and expressed hope that the
UNESCO Director General would soon permit discussion of
new instruments. A list of Ambassadors in attendance
is included at the end of this cable.
-------------- -
UNESCO: FOREVER A WEAK LINK IN THE UN SYSTEM?
-------------- -

2. (SBU) The Austrian Ambassador, Harald Wiesner
noting his country's current EU Presidency, stated that
whenever a hot issue emerges within the UN system, the
UN in New York often assumes the lead, leaving UNESCO
and others out of the picture. He then asked
Ambassador Gross what his opinion was of overlapping
jurisdictions in the UN system. The Czech Republic
Ambassador Irena Moozova and Indian Ambassador Bhaswati
Mukherjee also posed similar questions. The Czech
Republic noted that UNESCO had responsibility for 8
WSIS action lines, but asked how labor would be divided
since UNESCO shared these responsibilities with others.
For example, the Czech Ambassador stated, UNESCO should
have the lead in implementing the Education for All
Programme but it often appeared to hesitate. India,
referring to its long attempts to drag a WIPO debate on
copyright issues into UNESCO, (The Rome Convention for
the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms
and Broadcasting Organizations) stated flatly that
certain mandates of UNESCO are poached upon by other UN
organizations. Ambassador Jean Gueguinou of France
pointed out that Secretary General Annan was near the
end of his second term, and speculated that he would
not be inclined to make hard decisions on turf battles
pertaining to WSIS follow up, or otherwise. The Dutch
Ambassador, Charlotte van Schaik-Zaaijer, bluntly
stated that the real question was a lack of acceptance
within the UN family for UNESCO-led initiatives.

3. (SBU) Ambassador Gross acknowledged that there is a
"contest" within the UN family for issues and then
introduced the question of how the Internet Governance
Forum (IGF) might take shape, noting that Canada
supported Markus Kumar. In a nod to the Hungarian
Ambassador in attendance, he cited Budapest's proposal
on the table, and also mentioned past industry-driven
initiatives to house the IGF in Paris.

4. (SBU) In response to inquiries about other UN
bodies poaching on UNESCO territory, Ambassador Gross
clarified that with respect to WSIS, negotiators on the
final document gave UN member states an important tool
by being clear that they were not looking to any
specific organization to expand its mandate and by
clarifying which agencies had a role to play in each
WSIS Action line. The Tunis agenda did not order
anyone to do anything, he stated. He noted that the
document also called on high-level negotiators to
coordinate in order to avoid duplication among UN
bodies. He reminded the group that working out core
competencies and applying pressure to avoid duplication
was ultimately up to member states, acknowledging that
each member state has its own favorite member of the UN
family. At the same time, he cautioned that UNESCO
should be careful not to overreach and end up with even
less than it wanted. (COMMENT: It appears that
between the lines, UNESCO Ambassadors might have been
suggesting that the United States put its trust back
into UNESCO and defend its core mandates vis-a-vis
other UN bodies. This step seems unlikely, given our
recent battles over cultural diversity. During our 20
year absence, many issues that might have been
addressed at UNESCO were addressed elsewhere, perhaps
to the dissatisfaction of some member states. END
COMMENT.)

5. (SBU) Ambassador Zhang Xuezhong of China inquired
about the image of UNESCO at Tunis, noting that he had
heard that it had not been a very visible actor.
Ambassador Gross responded that it was not, but that no
specific member of the UN family was. WSIS, he stated,
was very member state driven. The exception to this
was the European Commission as a single actor
representing its 25 members, he noted. The private
sector also did not play a large role, he added,
because WSIS was viewed as an intergovernmental
negotiation process. He stated that it now was time
for member states to focus on UNESCO's core
competencies - education and the free flow of
information - as UNESCO claimed its role. Ambassador
Oliver suggested that UNESCO's role might encourage
deeper cross-sectoral cooperation, especially with
regard to ICTs and education.
--------------
EU: MESSAGE ON ENHANCED COOPERATION
--------------

6. (SBU) The Ambassador of the Netherlands to UNESCO
asked how Gross' latest talks with the European Union
proceeded. Ambassador Gross explained to the audience,
which included 8 EU member states, that there were
differences in how the term "enhanced cooperation",
referring to the language of the Tunis Agenda adopted
at WSIS, was interpreted. Some in the European
Commission, he noted, saw this as a need for a new
intergovernmental mechanism to address Internet
governance issues. The U.S., he added, strongly
disagreed and interpreted the language as referring to
the use of existing organizations. Nobody wants to
renegotiate the agreements from WSIS, he said, so it is
time to look to existing organizations and their
mandates. This was, he noted, a reason why UNESCO was
so important.
--------------
INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM
--------------

7. The French Ambassador to UNESCO asked whether all
questions raised at Tunis would be discussed at the
first meeting of the IGF in Athens in the fall of 2006,
or just the question of Internet governance.
Ambassador Gross responded that once the forum's
secretariat is established and a bureau is selected,

SIPDIS
then the multi-stakeholder bureau would set the agenda.
He noted that there was a general sense that it would
not be worthwhile to re-hash WSIS battles, and
emphasized that the IGF was not a decision making or
oversight body, but a place to exchange information.
--------------
REPRESSION IN TUNIS
--------------

8. Ambassador Hans Heinrich Wrede of Germany expressed
concern at the Tunisian treatment of NGO activists and
journalists during the WSIS summit, and regretted that
media coverage of this overshadowed reporting on the
event itself, especially in the European press. At
the very least, many agreed, it had been useful to
shine a light on the practices of the Tunisian
government. However, the Ambassadors acknowledged that
is a privilege for a country to host a UN event, and
accordingly, basic principles of the UN, such as human
rights, should be respected. Ambassador Gross noted
that the U.S. had been outspoken on these issues at the
Summit, including a statement during the plenary
speech.
--------------
UNESCO: A STANDARD SETTER AGAIN?
--------------

9. (SBU) The Belgian Ambassador noted that his
government shared in the success at WSIS. While ICANN
was doing a good job, he said, a forum was needed to
discuss views and identify social aspects and
principles. The recent Convention on Cultural
Diversity, he stated, showed that standard setting at
UNESCO in order to "rein in globalization" was
important. He expressed hope that the Director General
would soon allow further work on standard setting and
regretted his current call for a moratorium on new
instruments. Ambassador Gross responded that he hoped
it would be years before UNESCO even considered new
instruments. (COMMENT: The subtext of the Belgian
Ambassador's comments here suggests a view that the
only way to get UNESCO to matter in the international
system is through setting standards and creating new
instruments. END COMMENT.) He then asked how UNESCO
could link its mandate on education to WSIS, and
expressed concern on whether UNESCO's Assistant
Director General for Education, Peter Smith (Amcit)
would be able to reform the education sector.

10. (SBU) COMMENT: The discussion, intended to cover
Internet Governance and WSIS implementation, revealed a
surprising level of frustration among UNESCO
Ambassadors with the organization's role and its
reputation within the UN system. At the same time, the
Ambassadors expressed hope that UNESCO could claim a
role on education and media freedom in post-WSIS
implementation. We observed that there were no
questions on how UNESCO would follow up with the WSIS
Action line on ethical dimensions of the information
society, as Ambassadors appeared more focused on the
IGF and the role of UNESCO in the UN system.
Ambassador Gross's emphasis on a more activist role for
member states in promoting the core competencies of UN
bodies and better coordination within the UN family to
avoid duplication was well received, and Mission looks
forward to hosting more events for senior USG officials
to demonstrate to our UNESCO audience that the USG is
in listening mode and genuinely wants to exchange views
on UNESCO issues. END COMMENT.

11. (SBU) The guest list is as follows:
Ambassador Harald Wiesner, Austria
Ambassador Philippe Kridelka, Belgium
Ambassador Jean Gueguinou, France
Ambassador Hector Gros Espiel, Uruguay
Mrs. Maria Clemencia Lopez-Jimenez, Venezuelan National
Commission
Mr. Carlos Herrera, Charge d'Affaires, Peru
Ms. Linda Te Puni, New Zealand
Ambassador Yvon Charbonneau, Canada
Ambassador Hans Heinrich Wrede, Germany
Ambassador. Maria Wodzynska-Walicka, Poland
Ambassador Zhang Xuezhong, China
Ambassador Dr. Sharifah Maimunah Syed Zin, Malaysia
Ambassador Dr. Shadia Kenawy, Egypt
Ambassador Bhaswati Mukherjee, India
Ambassador Numan Hazar, Turkey
Ambassador Luiz Felipe de Macedo Soares, Brazil
Mrs. Jane Madden, Australian Deputy Chief of Mission to
France
Ambassador Charlotte van Schaik-Zaaijer, Netherlands
Ambassador Andras Lakatos, Hungary
Ambassador Irena Moozva, Czech Republic