MEDIUM TERM STRATEGY ISSUE AT UNESCO 175TH EXECUTIVE BOARD

UNCLAS PARIS 007095

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: UNESCO SCUL PO IS BR LE CU EU
SUBJECT: MEDIUM TERM STRATEGY ISSUE AT UNESCO 175TH EXECUTIVE BOARD
(FALL 2006)



1. (U) MEDIUM TERM STRATEGY The Medium Term Strategy (MTS) for
2008-2013 (34 C/4) was the source of hours of discussion and a major
"thematic" debate on UNESCO's role in the world. (Comment: we know
of no other organization that is as self-absorbed as UNESCO and
wastes as much time discussing its raison d'etre.) The next MTS,
which is to be adopted by the General Conference in the fall of 2007
will serve as the basis for UNESCO's overall program strategy for
2008-2013.


2. (U) A consistent theme in all the Member State's interventions
on the MTS is that UNESCO must do less and do it better. Programs
must be reviewed for their usefulness and sunset clauses need to be
built into every new program. The reality is that numerous
countries continued to press their pet projects. One of the most
egregious was a Russian proposal to have UNESCO become the 15th UN
agency to get involved in renewable energy. (Comment: The irony of
this was clearly lost on the Russians as UNESCO did have a renewable
energy section until the late 90's directed by a Russian, but it was
closed down due to corruption.) The introduction of an expanded
program to study migration was also a new topic of discussion.


3. (U) The Secretariat's first draft (175 EX/21) of the MTS, based
on input from member states and national commissions) was not
especially well received. The French Ambassador was particularly
critical of this document. There was also much discussion about the
fact that the science review, potentially reforming the Natural and
Social Science Sectors, is still underway. The U.S. and others
emphasized that it was not realistic to include these sectors in any
MTS planning before the report is finished. The same logic was
cited for the Cultural Sector, with a potential restructuring
following the arrival of the new ADG for Culture, Francoise Riviere.
Another reason given was the need to wait for a management audit in
the World Heritage Center to be completed before there could be any
talk about how this flagship program fits into the Medium Term
Strategy. There was also some concern about the fact that the
ongoing discussions in New York on UN reform must also be integrated
into the MTS and must not be pre-judged. There were many complaints
that the document was too heavily Secretariat inspired, and did not
take sufficient direction from the Member States.


4. (U) A working group, with three representatives from each
Electoral Group (including the U.S.),was formed to help guide the
Secretariat's next version of the MTS. The first sign of trouble

SIPDIS
was the inability to select a chairman for the group. As neither
the Indian Ambassador nor the Nigerian Ambassador was willing to
withdraw from consideration, a decision was taken to have them serve
as co-chairs.


5. (U) Despite a marathon effort to deliver something to the
Executive Board before it finished, the informal working group's
output was a wish list of programs with no sacred cows, such as
UNESCO's dubious philosophy program or the Russian energy project,
spared. Cultural diversity also figured prominently in the final
document with a number of countries led by Canada, Switzerland,
Brazil and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (normally a non-entity at
UNESCO) pushing for mention of the as yet unratified convention as a
guiding principle for the next medium term strategy. (Comment:
other UNESCO members are aware of U.S. concerns about this
convention; their efforts to highlight it can only be read as a poke
in the eye of the US. Here the Indian chair, who realized the
divisiveness of the issue, did her best to keep this item out of the
final document, though it was added at the final plenary meeting.)


6. (SBU) The United Kingdom, well aware of U.S. concerns, was also
particularly insistent on including mention of UNESCO's normative
function in the draft document. (Comment: The UK Ambassador,
showing increased sensitivity to US concerns, has raised this issue
for discussion several times in the past week, adding, "when there
is consensus support." End comment.) Other troublesome points that
emerged over U.S. objections were language that talked of "sharing"
of knowledge rather than "transmission," an emphasis on a "culture
of peace," the highlighting of UNESCO's foresight function,
promoting cultural industries and the continued need for the ethics
program. (Comment: With no U.S. presence for 19 years, UNESCO has
adopted a lot of meaningless buzz words and meaningless programs
that other member states have not care to challenge. End comment.)

OLIVER