UNESCO GENEVA GROUP UPDATE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 007450 SIPDIS FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: UNESCO SCUL UNGA EUN SUBJECT: UNESCO GENEVA GROUP UPDATE ¶1. UNESCO's Geneva Group met November 15, and was briefed by two senior UNESCO staff members on the status of the drafting of the 34 C/4 Medium Term Strategy (MTS) and 34 C/5 Program and Budget documents which will provide the foundations for the direction and funding of the organization during the period 2008-2013. The briefing also gave delegations some first reactions to the just published High Level Panel report from UN New York on UN System-Wide Coherence, and fears regarding UNESCO's seemingly marginalized role in the "one UN" concept. ¶2. Liz Longworth, the Director General's Chief of Staff, and Hans D'Orville, Director of UNESCO's Bureau of Strategic Planning made it clear that the calendar has been driving the MTS drafting process, and that they are still working to scale back and focus the paper. They said that if the Geneva Group wants to add any further input, it must be done in the next two weeks, so that a "discussable" draft will be ready in early December. An informal Geneva Group meeting will be held on November 28 to provide a last opportunity to share ideas. The British ambassador also mentioned that an EU paper with some new ideas for the C/4 and C/5 would be ready in the next few days. ¶3. The Medium Term Strategy drafting exercise has been ongoing since spring 2006, with UNESCO headquarters personnel, field offices, delegations, national commissions and NGO's, among others, all providing input for what was planned to be a clear, brief, yet comprehensive document explaining UNESCO's mission and objectives for the coming years. The result, however, has been a Christmas tree, onto which almost no one passed on the chance to hang new concepts, rather than help reduce and streamline the paper. The finished documents are to be presented to the spring 2007 Executive Board, and ultimately to the General Conference next fall for approval. ¶4. During the recent fall Executive Board, a drafting committee (on which the U.S. sat) was tasked to review the first draft of the MTS and sent Mr. D'Orville and company back to the drawing board, saying the document was "bones without any meat." Since then, the Secretariat has been on relative radio silence, attempting to put SIPDIS together a tighter document that will pass muster with the critics on the Executive Board and SP committee. ¶5. The Canadians delegation told D'Orville that it was disappointed that the current draft did not seem to deviate much from the last MTS, and that it did not include the kind of "radical changes" it expected to see, and that UNESCO requires for the future. Several delegations raised the idea of "sunset clauses", which had been mentioned several times during the Executive Board, and suggested that we take up the issue seriously, identifying specific criteria. Two delegations noted that the concept had been suggested for years, but had never been taken up by the Secretariat. Others noted that the Science sector review and Cultural sector reforms are still in the works, making it impossible to advance too far on Medium Term Strategy with key pieces of the puzzle still missing. ¶6. Another point of discussion was the High Level Panel Report on UN System-wide Coherence, and its place in the MTS. The Italians said that UNESCO must define its role in terms of the wider process of UN reform. Several delegations pushed the Secretariat representatives to have the Director General present the UN System Coherence Report here in Paris. Longworth and D'Orville, both expressed reluctance, saying that since the report was not the DG's, he would not likely wish to present it. ¶7. DCM Koss, speaking for the US delegation, reminded the group that the report is still a draft, and that we should not get too far ahead of ourselves in anticipating problems for or action by UNESCO at this point. He said that it will likely be reworked extensively by the Secretary General before it is presented to the General Assembly for approval. He also added that the G-77 had already indicated that it has some problems with elements of the report. The Canadian ambassador said that it was highly unlikely that the incoming Secretary General would risk putting something on the table that would be shot down by Member States in New York as one of his first actions. Several other delegations suggested that we read the HLP Report carefully to identify potential problems that could weaken UNESCO and communicate them to the Director General. ¶8. Commenting on the "one UN" concept on the country level, D'Orville mentioned that simple things like the idea to house all UN offices in country together don't necessarily make sense for UNESCO. He explained that in probably half of the countries where UNESCO has a field office, the buildings are provided at no cost to UNESCO. Moving to a single UN complex would, he said, oblige UNESCO to pay rent, security, etc., potentially offsetting any savings. D'Orville, however, noted that the Director General has already agreed to participate in pilot "one UN" programs in five countries. ¶9. Several speakers, including the Secretariat officials, expressed concern that UNESCO's core missions could be marginalized within a "one UN" system. They view the challenge ahead as to ensure that specific concerns, like carrying out UNESCO's cultural mandate, are not muscled to the side or diminished. D'Orville mentioned that the Director General will be meeting in February or March with Secretary General-designate Ban Ki-Moon, and heads of other UN specialized agencies to discuss the "one UN" proposals. ¶10. The next major deadline in the C/4, C/5 is January 19, when the Director General will host an information meeting to get last comments from Member State representatives before the paper is given its final massage before it is readied for the spring 2007 Executive Board. ¶11. Comment: Despite the great pressures at work to finalize the C/4 and C/5 documents, questions remain as to whether the Secretariat can make a diamond from what is currently regarded by SIPDIS many as a lump of coal. End comment. KOSS